Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Why do people still fly the Confederate flag?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The South didn't secede "explicitly to retain slavery".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
The South didn't secede "explicitly to retain slavery".

It didn't? Why did it secede?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ratmonkey
n00b
n00b


Joined: 13 Aug 2006
Posts: 14

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Queue the three favorite bullshit myths about why the South Seceeded:

1. It was states rights!
2. It was about taxes and tariffs!
3. Most whites didn't own slaves!
_________________
dmitchell wrote:
Note: I am also a tax feeder
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'll preempt:

Georgia' Declaration starts with:
Quote:
The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic. This hostile policy of our confederates has been pursued with every circumstance of aggravation which could arouse the passions and excite the hatred of our people, and has placed the two sections of the Union for many years past in the condition of virtual civil war. Our people, still attached to the Union from habit and national traditions, and averse to change, hoped that time, reason, and argument would bring, if not redress, at least exemption from further insults, injuries, and dangers. Recent events have fully dissipated all such hopes and demonstrated the necessity of separation. Our Northern confederates, after a full and calm hearing of all the facts, after a fair warning of our purpose not to submit to the rule of the authors of all these wrongs and injuries, have by a large majority committed the Government of the United States into their hands. The people of Georgia, after an equally full and fair and deliberate hearing of the case, have declared with equal firmness that they shall not rule over them. A brief history of the rise, progress, and policy of anti-slavery and the political organization into whose hands the administration of the Federal Government has been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict of the people of Georgia. The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. While it attracts to itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political heresies, of condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in the administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose. By anti-slavery it is made a power in the state.


Mississippi's declaration starts with:
Quote:
In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.


From South Carolina's declaration:
Quote:
In the present case, that fact is established with certainty. We assert that fourteen of the States have deliberately refused, for years past, to fulfill their constitutional obligations, and we refer to their own Statutes for the proof.

The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

This stipulation was so material to the compact, that without it that compact would not have been made. The greater number of the contracting parties held slaves, and they had previously evinced their estimate of the value of such a stipulation by making it a condition in the Ordinance for the government of the territory ceded by Virginia, which now composes the States north of the Ohio River.

The same article of the Constitution stipulates also for rendition by the several States of fugitives from justice from the other States.

The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.

The ends for which the Constitution was framed are declared by itself to be "to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the *forms* [emphasis in the original] of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.

This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.


From Texas's declaration:
Quote:
When we advert to the course of individual non-slave-holding States, and that a majority of their citizens, our grievances assume far greater magnitude.

The States of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan and Iowa, by solemn legislative enactments, have deliberately, directly or indirectly violated the 3rd clause of the 2nd section of the 4th article [the fugitive slave clause] of the federal constitution, and laws passed in pursuance thereof; thereby annulling a material provision of the compact, designed by its framers to perpetuate the amity between the members of the confederacy and to secure the rights of the slave-holding States in their domestic institutions-- a provision founded in justice and wisdom, and without the enforcement of which the compact fails to accomplish the object of its creation. Some of those States have imposed high fines and degrading penalties upon any of their citizens or officers who may carry out in good faith that provision of the compact, or the federal laws enacted in accordance therewith.

In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color-- a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States.

For years past this abolition organization has been actively sowing the seeds of discord through the Union, and has rendered the federal congress the arena for spreading firebrands and hatred between the slave-holding and non-slave-holding States.

By consolidating their strength, they have placed the slave-holding States in a hopeless minority in the federal congress, and rendered representation of no avail in protecting Southern rights against their exactions and encroachments.

They have proclaimed, and at the ballot box sustained, the revolutionary doctrine that there is a 'higher law' than the constitution and laws of our Federal Union, and virtually that they will disregard their oaths and trample upon our rights.

They have for years past encouraged and sustained lawless organizations to steal our slaves and prevent their recapture, and have repeatedly murdered Southern citizens while lawfully seeking their rendition.

...

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government *all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights* [emphasis in the original]; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.

By the secession of six of the slave-holding States, and the certainty that others will speedily do likewise, Texas has no alternative but to remain in an isolated connection with the North, or unite her destinies with the South.


Last edited by richk449 on Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:27 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
The South didn't secede "explicitly to retain slavery".

It didn't? Why did it secede?

No. How about you show me where they unambiguously articulated this as their reason for secession. You're the one who said this was "explicit", and I assume you know what the word means.

Above you cite a few states making such a declaration, but how many states were there in the Confederacy, and did they never speak with one voice under this Confederate Flag we are discussing?


Last edited by Bones McCracker on Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:30 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
richk449 wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
The South didn't secede "explicitly to retain slavery".

It didn't? Why did it secede?

No. How about you show me where they unambiguously articulated this as their reason for secession. You're the one who said this was "explicit", and I assume you know what the word means.

Okay, read my post above.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok read my post above.

I added a paragraph after seeing your "preemption".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darth Marley
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 105

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It wasn't explicitly about slavery, but the war was about slavery.
Towards the end when the south was offering freedom to slaves who served in their army, the question "If they are good enough to fight along side us, then why are we fighting?" came up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 757
Location: EU

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you look at the alabama and virginia declarations, they mention common cause with the other slave owning states too. as to BK question of what percentage of the total this brings us too, the answer is a lot. there were 7ish states in the confederacy with a handful more recognised.

I don't really understand this new movement trying to paint secession and being mostly about states rights. this seems to be coming mainly from the new libertarians. slavery seems to be the major issue.
_________________
wswartzendruber wrote:
Well, every group has its nutjobs, and the Second Amendment crowd is no exception.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3313

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muso wrote:
cokehabit wrote:
Muso wrote:
cokehabit wrote:
I just see it as a symbol of white trash and ignorance


Just like the Union Jack, and people still fly that.
You're thinking of the cross of St George. That was appropriated by the skinheads. That has been reclaimed over the past decade and it's no longer a sign of racism


No, I'm thinking of the Union Jack. The flag that was planted all over the planet to take over lands of "brown people" by white trash.
Yup :D It was planted over a quarter of the globe
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3313

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
I'll preempt:

Georgia' Declaration starts with:...
Owch. If it's possible to be butt-raped by facts then this has to be it. Nicely played.
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 145

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

juniper wrote:
this seems to be coming mainly from the new libertarians. slavery seems to be the major issue.


Liberty for the states - but not for slaves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cokehabit wrote:
richk449 wrote:
I'll preempt:

Georgia' Declaration starts with:...
Owch. If it's possible to be butt-raped by facts then this has to be it. Nicely played.

Yes, I will own up to it. I flapped my lips and I got butt-raped by facts. I was more wrong than right. They were indeed largely explicit, in those declarations, about slavery being the central issue.

However, I do think it's important to understand that, for the South, the issue was at its core one of economics and self-determination and not some contest of moral philosophies.

While Abolition was a populist cause in the North, it was not universal. Only so many shits were given. The populist drums that were beat the loudest were "to preserve the Union" (i.e., to keep the Nation intact) and to combat the upstart rebels who had raped Kansas and were threatening the National capital.

In the South, the populist drums being beat had little to do with slavery. They were free people being interfered with -- being invaded -- being fucked with by some tyrannical higher government that was expressly forbidden by the Constitution to do such things.

There is no record of troops at a Civil War battle charging the enemy with a battle cry of "For the Negroes!" or "For Slavery!" The cried "For the Union!" or "For Virginia!" (etc.).

While slavery was indeed a pivotal issue in the causes of the war, it's importance and centrality has been magnified by historical revisionists and political activists. There was a lot more to it.

But I do admit I was wrong that it wasn't explicitly called out as a primary reason for secession.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Old School
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 234
Location: The Covered Bridge Capital of Oregon

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 2:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

juniper wrote:
If you look at the alabama and virginia declarations, they mention common cause with the other slave owning states too. as to BK question of what percentage of the total this brings us too, the answer is a lot. there were 7ish states in the confederacy with a handful more recognised.

I don't really understand this new movement trying to paint secession and being mostly about states rights. this seems to be coming mainly from the new libertarians. slavery seems to be the major issue.

The only reason Virginia seceded was because Lincoln authorized the states to raise militia to attack the states that were trying to form their own nation. Until then, the Virginia Legislature had been disdainful of the idea of leaving the United States. Lincoln had even asked Robert Lee to command the US Army! Yet there was no way they were going to raise an army and attack their neighbors in what the Virginians thought was an illegal and unwarranted war; which were the same thoughts as many in the North.

The South's motivation for secession was motivated by shifting political winds. The US was not, at that time going to outlaw slavery, but what was happening was the limitation of slavery to the western territories and states. The pretty much even split of northern to southern states in Washington power politics was about to end. Slavery was already a dying institution, for economic reasons more than anything. Race relations today would be much better if the end of slavery hadn't come after the bloodiest war in our history, with the abhorrent way civilians in the South were victimized during and after the conflict.

It was not US government policy to abolish slavery. There were those that wanted abolition as official policy, but it was never the case during Lincoln's Administration. As a matter of fact, the biggest riots in US history occurred in New York City, when the idea was first stated. Instead, the Lincoln Administration just outlawed slavery in the states that seceded as a punitive measure, and to keep the European powers from siding with the South; Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Washington DC were still slave states until after the war.
_________________
I am not young enough to know everything.
- Oscar Wilde


Last edited by Old School on Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:29 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In understanding the importance of what Old School just said, it's important to know that Virginia was, in many ways, the heart and soul of the United States. One must read history to understand why, but just note that in the context above, Virginia is not just "some state".

As to the Confederate Flag, if there are people afraid of it, I think everybody should switch to the Gadsden Flag, which has absolutely zero racial connotations.

Oh, wait -- the leftists have already started to propagandize that as racist too, to make the ignorant afraid of it. I guess anything that's not authoritarian-collectivist is destined to be declared "racist". :roll:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prenj
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
However, I do think it's important to understand that, for the South, the issue was at its core one of economics and self-determination and not some contest of moral philosophies.

Well, duh, of course, it was never about morals for slavers, slaves are not humans. They were doing them a favour! Sort of like how capitalism is doing us a favour right now!
:lol:
_________________
“If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 4076
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

just use a white flag like the french
_________________
A free press is the unsleeping guardian of every other right that free men prize; it is the most dangerous foe of tyranny. Where men have the habit of liberty, the Press will continue to be the vigilant guardian of the rights of the ordinary citizen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3313

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
In understanding the importance of what Old School just said, it's important to know that Virginia was, in many ways, the heart and soul of the United States. One must read history to understand why, but just note that in the context above, Virginia is not just "some state".

As to the Confederate Flag, if there are people afraid of it, I think everybody should switch to the Gadsden Flag, which has absolutely zero racial connotations.

Oh, wait -- the leftists have already started to propagandize that as racist too, to make the ignorant afraid of it. I guess anything that's not authoritarian-collectivist is destined to be declared "racist". :roll:
They should switch to this. It portrays them more accurately.
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16090
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
They were indeed largely explicit, in those declarations, about slavery being the central issue.

However, I do think it's important to understand that, for the South, the issue was at its core one of economics and self-determination and not some contest of moral philosophies.


BoneKracker wrote:
While slavery was indeed a pivotal issue in the causes of the war, it's importance and centrality has been magnified by historical revisionists and political activists. There was a lot more to it.

But I do admit I was wrong that it wasn't explicitly called out as a primary reason for secession.
The fact that slavery was explicitly mentioned is an excuse to overlook the underlying reasons, which were in fact economics and state's rights. This is clearly stated in several of richk449's references. But people see the word slavery and stop thinking. "They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic.", etc.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prenj
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
They were indeed largely explicit, in those declarations, about slavery being the central issue.

However, I do think it's important to understand that, for the South, the issue was at its core one of economics and self-determination and not some contest of moral philosophies.


BoneKracker wrote:
While slavery was indeed a pivotal issue in the causes of the war, it's importance and centrality has been magnified by historical revisionists and political activists. There was a lot more to it.

But I do admit I was wrong that it wasn't explicitly called out as a primary reason for secession.
The fact that slavery was explicitly mentioned is an excuse to overlook the underlying reasons, which were in fact economics and state's rights. This is clearly stated in several of richk449's references. But people see the word slavery and stop thinking. "They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic.", etc.

The white people see the world economics and ignore everything else.
See what I did there?
Slavery = Economic. Slaves were oil of that age. And morals apply to everything, in the same way it applies to oil wars of today.
Nothing has changed. It is still the powerful exploiting less so, and those among the powerful for whom it goes over the easily digestible line, and are looking for a less savage way.

It is exactly the same as Sgt. Barnes vs Sgt. Elias. The two existing on the same plane, but go on about it differently.
_________________
“If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him”


Last edited by Prenj on Sun Sep 01, 2013 6:19 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The least savage way of all is self-destruction.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prenj
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
The least savage way of all is self-destruction.

Did I buzz too close? :lol:
_________________
“If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 6:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Prenj wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
The least savage way of all is self-destruction.

Did I buzz too close? :lol:

I don't know what you mean. I'm just pointing out a logical flaw. If you chose a path through life simply based on minimization of the harm you do to others, you'd quickly arrive at the conclusion you should just make yourself vanish. So, I question whether "finding a less savage way", in isolation, is admirable or a valid objective. It's probably the part of that phrase that's missing which is more important -- a less savage way to what -- and if the "what" were a decent ideal to begin with, we wouldn't need to find a less savage way to do it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prenj
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
Prenj wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
The least savage way of all is self-destruction.

Did I buzz too close? :lol:

I don't know what you mean. I'm just pointing out a logical flaw. If you chose a path through life simply based on minimization of the harm you do to others, you'd quickly arrive at the conclusion you should just make yourself vanish. So, I question whether "finding a less savage way", in isolation, is admirable or a valid objective. It's probably the part of that phrase that's missing which is more important -- a less savage way to what -- and if the "what" were a decent ideal to begin with, we wouldn't need to find a less savage way to do it.

All life on this planet grows out of solar energy, and for the most part by recycling the material that is already here. It's a mechanically closed loop system. The species within support each other, not by choice but by mechanics of their evolutionary path. Among those species we are aware. We can attempt to do differently, or just be monkeys and fuck it all up. We are currently riding the "fuck it" train, and results are thus.
It becomes savage and regressive when we frolic in it, being the one who has the power for the day, and not even attempt to do better. All you are giving me are excuses. I know that. Why don't you do as Tesla did, priviledged and educated as you apparently are? :)

Here is some more:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMDu3JdQ8Ow

Peace out, Sgt. Barnes :wink:
_________________
“If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16090
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 8:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Prenj wrote:
See what I did there?
Yes, you're ignoring history. I'm not arguing in favor of slavery, I'm arguing in favor of understanding what actually happened.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum