Current Events > Why do people slurp Robert E Lee's nuts?

(+) Yeah! (+)

He was a terrible human being and does not deserve any praise let alone nut slurping.
---

Learn 2 History.
---

I know this group is a minority, but people like historians and Civil War enthusiasts will argue that there is a difference between praising Confederate people and not caring if their history is on display.

While there would be no problem to have, say, a Robert E Lee statue in a museum, there would also be nothing wrong with having history planted in the center of a town that was an important Confederate territory.

I grew up in the NE United States, and I learned from childhood how evil the Confederate leaders were, but they were still part of history regardless. Human beings that were important. If a statue was there since then, it is doing no harm and people really shouldn't get triggered by marble. Now, as for people that actually defend Lee and his actions, yeah they can go eat rotten eggs.
---

As the Confederate defense force likes to remind us, removing statues does not erase history. So I don't really see any harm in removing those statues whatsoever.
---

The_Weird_Gamer posted...

If a statue was there since then, it is doing no harm

How can you honestly say the statue was doing no harm?
---

Coolppl Owns posted...

He was a terrible human being

If I got my history from unemployed losers on the Internet, I'd probably also have an opinion like this.
---

eston posted...

As the Confederate defense force likes to remind us, removing statues does not erase history. So I don't really see any harm in removing those statues whatsoever.

I agree with this as well. It would be just as effective as a monument in a Civil War museum. I am not partial to keeling them at their original locations. Just defending the viewpoints of reasonable history people. And I mean the ones that aren't rednecks cause those are pathetic
---

the story is that he worked very hard after the war to reconcile the north and the south or smoething like that
---

Lee only joined the Confederacy because he had more pride for his state than for his country.
---

I don't see why people who fought for evil deserve any positive recognition at all. You don't see statues of Nazi generals in Germany.
---

Rommel is remembered fairly respectably by history and he was literally fighting for the Nazis. Sometimes it's possible to separate a person from whatever "side" they happened to have been on.
---

The Admiral posted...

Coolppl Owns posted...

He was a terrible human being

If I got my history from unemployed losers on the Internet, I'd probably also have an opinion like this.

So a white supremacist slave owner was a good human bean?
---

Coolppl Owns posted...

The Admiral posted...

Coolppl Owns posted...

He was a terrible human being

If I got my history from unemployed losers on the Internet, I'd probably also have an opinion like this.

So a white supremacist slave owner was a good human bean?

Cannibal
---

Crazy to think they didn't have the benefit of hindsight back when slavery was an a social norm.

Or there are other factors to consider with Robert E Lee.
---

kewldude475 posted...

LOL @ supporting people who supported and fought for slavery. I was wondering the same thing, TC

IKR?

but apparently admiral thinks he was a good person. you're better than this man.
---

Removing monuments doesn't erase the past, it's meant to show that as a society we don't hold those values collectively any longer and that what it represents has no place in the modern age.

Though they shouldn't be destroyed after removal. That would be trying to erase the past. It should just be somewhere that actually caters to those things (like a cemetary or a museum honoring the Civil War).
---

ChromaticAngel posted...

The_Weird_Gamer posted...

If a statue was there since then, it is doing no harm

How can you honestly say the statue was doing no harm?

because it is an inanimate object?
---

Balrog0 posted...

the story is that he worked very hard after the war to reconcile the north and the south or smoething like that

And hasn't it been shown that it's pretty much a false narrative?
---

its a backwards way people in the south try to justify waving their racist flags around. "we're not racist we just respect our historic war vets!"

emblem boy posted...

Balrog0 posted...

the story is that he worked very hard after the war to reconcile the north and the south or smoething like that

And hasn't it been shown that it's pretty much a false narrative?

I honestly don't know because there's nothing he could do to make me feel he deserved to be memorialized in statue form so I've never looked into it
---

Robert E. Lee actually didn't care for the practice of slavery. Lee would have rathered the matter have been solved peacefully. He joined the Confederate Army because he couldn't fight against his family, friends, and home state. People actually had a sense of loyalty back then. Not all practioners of slavery were evil people. People comparing plantation owners to Nazis have their heads stuck in their own asses if they think executing 6 million people based on ethnicity is the same as American slavery.
---

what are all of you talking about, I guess that you got your history from unemployed losers on the Internet, so you have opinions like these
---

emblem boy posted...

Balrog0 posted...

the story is that he worked very hard after the war to reconcile the north and the south or smoething like that

And hasn't it been shown that it's pretty much a false narrative?

It's more like he worked really hard to stop the south from starting a second civil war 5 minutes after he surrendered.

He lived predominantly in isolation after the war, but his opinion of the confederacy was overall extremely negative. No one was allowed to attend his funeral while wearing a CSA uniform by his order. He seemed a lot more conscious than everyone else that the symbol he stood for was evil. He would be very unhappy to learn that people were shouting shit like "The South Will Rise Again!" and flying his flag in 2017.
---

scorpion41 posted...

People actually had a sense of loyalty back then

he committed treason in the name of owning people tho

scorpion41 posted...

Robert E. Lee actually didn't care for the practice of slavery. Lee would have rathered the matter have been solved peacefully. He joined the Confederate Army because he couldn't fight against his family, friends, and home state. People actually had a sense of loyalty back then. Not all practioners of slavery were evil people. People comparing plantation owners to Nazis have their heads stuck in their own asses if they think executing 6 million people based on ethnicity is the same as American slavery.

He himself had slaves and there are reports that he treated them badly.

This is what he wrote in a letter

I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence. Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild & melting influence of Christianity, than the storms & tempests of fiery Controversy.
---

He was a traitor to his country, and a loser.

If these people are all pulling the "muh heritage" BS, they're literally calling themselves traitors and losers.
---

slavery apologists on CE

should I be surprised?
---

TheVipaGTS posted...

its a backwards way people in the south try to justify waving their racist flags around. "we're not racist we just respect our historic war vets!"

There's actually plenty of black people that display confederate flags on their homes, cars, etc. Would you call them backwards?
---

The Admiral posted...

Coolppl Owns posted...

He was a terrible human being

If I got my history from unemployed losers on the Internet, I'd probably also have an opinion like this.

No surprise that you also seem to be unaware of the existence of this new fancy thing called books, just like how supremacists act like removing something honoring some shitbag means "we're erasing American history"

DifferentialEquation posted...

Would you call them backwards?

I wouldn't stop just at that
---

Topic title made me lol
---

scorpion41 posted...

Robert E. Lee actually didn't care for the practice of slavery. Lee would have rathered the matter have been solved peacefully. He joined the Confederate Army because he couldn't fight against his family, friends, and home state. People actually had a sense of loyalty back then. Not all practioners of slavery were evil people. People comparing plantation owners to Nazis have their heads stuck in their own asses if they think executing 6 million people based on ethnicity is the same as American slavery.

There is such a thing as being complicit. A sense of loyalty isn't enough to justify doing evil things. A lot of Nazis were Nazis out of a sense of loyalty too. Doesn't make them any less atrocious.
---

I mean, not all Nazis were awful people at heart either I'm sure
---

Lot of traitors to this country itt

I don't think symbols to slavery should be out in the open, but they do remain a part of history. Put them in a museum, which is intended to hold such things so it still yet exists and isn't just "hidden away" as destroying it might come across.
---

BootyGif posted...

Lot of traitors to this country itt

---

emblem boy posted...

scorpion41 posted...

Robert E. Lee actually didn't care for the practice of slavery. Lee would have rathered the matter have been solved peacefully. He joined the Confederate Army because he couldn't fight against his family, friends, and home state. People actually had a sense of loyalty back then. Not all practioners of slavery were evil people. People comparing plantation owners to Nazis have their heads stuck in their own asses if they think executing 6 million people based on ethnicity is the same as American slavery.

He himself had slaves and there are reports that he treated them badly.

This is what he wrote in a letter

I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence. Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild & melting influence of Christianity, than the storms & tempests of fiery Controversy.

So he held mainstream--and in some ways progressive--views for a man of his time.

People need to stop acting like the Civil War was black and white, good vs. evil.

Also back then state loyalty was a much bigger thing that it is now. Now the federal government is much more powerful, and people care more about patriotism towards their country.
---

ITT: People who couldn't even get a 2 in an AP history exam
---

emblem boy posted...

scorpion41 posted...

Robert E. Lee actually didn't care for the practice of slavery. Lee would have rathered the matter have been solved peacefully. He joined the Confederate Army because he couldn't fight against his family, friends, and home state. People actually had a sense of loyalty back then. Not all practioners of slavery were evil people. People comparing plantation owners to Nazis have their heads stuck in their own asses if they think executing 6 million people based on ethnicity is the same as American slavery.

He himself had slaves and there are reports that he treated them badly.

This is what he wrote in a letter

I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence. Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild & melting influence of Christianity, than the storms & tempests of fiery Controversy.

That is a reasonable viewpoint.

I don't mean to offend anyone, but some of the slaves came from societies that practiced cannibalism and lived like stone age people. You can't just make them adapt to modern life in five minutes.

Certainly there were people who treated their slaves like cattle and I believe they have found their places in Hell for their disgusting and atrocious behaviour.

But you can't tell me everyone mistreated their labourers. And you can't tell me they were better off in Africa where they got sold off into slavery to begin with (not by white people, either!).
---

thompsontalker7 posted...

ITT: People who couldn't even get a 2 in an AP history exam

I got a 4 dawg
---

Ilishe posted...

But you can't tell me everyone mistreated their labourers. And you can't tell me they were better off in Africa where they got sold off into slavery to begin with (not by white people, either!).

did you really just refer to slaves as laborers
---

DreadedWave posted...

Rommel is remembered fairly respectably by history and he was literally fighting for the Nazis. Sometimes it's possible to separate a person from whatever "side" they happened to have been on.

Rommel is a very special case though. Not only did he fight with honor(something the British who fought him in Africa valued almost above all else), but he actively and vocally disobeyed orders to murder P.O.W.s and any Jews he came across. He was allowed to get away with this because he was highly respected by Hitler himself, but he was also a National Hero. There's even some(albeit, spotty and uncorroborated) evidence that Hitler actually entertained the idea of pardoning him after Valkyrie.

That would be akin to Robert E Lee freeing slaves and openly running an underground railroad during the civil war.
---

Ilishe posted...

And you can't tell me they were better off in Africa where they got sold off into slavery to begin with (not by white people, either!).

Yes I can. Freedom in a bad situation >>>>>>>>>> generational slavery
---

Caution999 posted...

Learn 2 History.

This. And I find topics like this stem from ignorance. He has a history other than the civil war. Fun fact: He was actually offered command of the Union army.
---

It's always painful watching CE try to discuss history
---

emblem boy posted...

scorpion41 posted...

Robert E. Lee actually didn't care for the practice of slavery. Lee would have rathered the matter have been solved peacefully. He joined the Confederate Army because he couldn't fight against his family, friends, and home state. People actually had a sense of loyalty back then. Not all practioners of slavery were evil people. People comparing plantation owners to Nazis have their heads stuck in their own asses if they think executing 6 million people based on ethnicity is the same as American slavery.

He himself had slaves and there are reports that he treated them badly.

This is what he wrote in a letter

I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence. Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild & melting influence of Christianity, than the storms & tempests of fiery Controversy.

How do you read this as treating them badly? This is about as progressive a poisition as anyone in the south had during that period.
---

Ilishe posted...

But you can't tell me everyone mistreated their labourers.

Liberty and freedom are two of the most important things in existence. If you deny those to someone by treating them as your own property then that is absolutely mistreatment.
---

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Also back then state loyalty was a much bigger thing that it is now.

Over 100,000 southerners fought for the Union. The South should be dotted with memorials to them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Unionist
---

Ilishe posted...

But you can't tell me everyone mistreated their labourers.

By virtue of being enslaved, they were mistreated.
---