George Washington statue hidden at the MLK rally in Columbia , SC

[puppetmaster]

Don't see this posted so I thought it was worth posting.
This represents the typical NAACP thought process.

George Washington statue is hidden at the MLK rally in Columbia , SC
The annual MLK observance at the state house in Columbia SC had an
interesting twist this year. The event is held on the north side steps
of the statehouse. Prominent at that location is a large bronze statue
of George Washington. This year, the NAACP constructed a “box” to
conceal the Father of His Country from view so that participants would
not be offended by his presence.

http://www.thestate.com/2011/01/18/1652083/no-insult-to-washington-intended.html

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

What the fuck?

[puppetmaster]

imagine the uproar if on presidents day (or any day) someone encapsulated the MLK monument.....

[Anti Federalist]

Yah, you know what, I'm officially sick of hearing about how "you all" (meaning the black grievance class) have suffered.

No level of atonement will ever be enough.

[dbill27]

Things like this make me lose all faith in people

[demolama]

White guilt strikes again

[Cowlesy]

Sounds about right.

[Legend1104]

Ya know, somehow I am starting to become desensatized or something because I am not really that suprised anymore.

[HOLLYWOOD]

“What we had constructed was a background with a graphic to be placed on it,” James said. “We weren’t trying to obstruct anything.”

What a load of bullshit... take a look at the pictures. Background graphics?

http://i533.photobucket.com/albums/ee332/McLieberman/NAACP_Boxes_Washington.png

http://i533.photobucket.com/albums/ee332/McLieberman/NAACP_Phony_Box_To_Cover_Washington.png

[Aratus]

the backdop was for the tv cameras?
it was the front of george's person
that was being obscured, judging from
the photos above, not the rear at all...

[HOLLYWOOD]

http://i533.photobucket.com/albums/ee332/McLieberman/George_Washington.png

[MikeStanart]

I call BS! Look how flush the unit sits with the statue. That was custom constructed for this!

http://i52.tinypic.com/fc7gbd.jpg

[Aratus]

george gets to peak over the top? sorta
like the neighbor in "home improvement"?

[HOLLYWOOD]

Here's a clean shot before:
http://i533.photobucket.com/albums/ee332/McLieberman/Capitol_Building_Columbia_SC.jpg
http://bp1.blogger.com/_1YoRyntjFLA/SATS-REOZqI/AAAAAAAAAwg/2sIVfxdotvI/s1600-h/Capitol+SC.jpghttp://bp1.blogger.com/_1YoRyntjFLA/SATS-REOZqI/AAAAAAAAAwg/2sIVfxdotvI/s1600-h/Capitol+SC.jpg

[Rothbardian Girl]

This is sadly hilarious. I'm no big fan of Washington myself, but hiding the guy won't make him go away.
Also, LOL @ how just George's head is peeking over the top like Aratus said.

[nobody's_hero]

george gets to peak over the top? sorta
like the neighbor in "home improvement"?

lmao.

"Hey neighbor! Just thought I'd come over here to let you know y'all are still slaves. You think you're free but you're really not. Oh, and tell all the white people, that goes for them to."

[Aratus]

sadly, under our current tax codes, when we ACTUALLY DO HAVE a job,
we are uncle sam's obediantly loyal serfs for 1/3rd to one half the year...


had they truely wanted a "tv video bite" in addition to a rally, hense the backdrop,
were the NAACP perhaps more into an asymmetry, the area below the steps to the
left of the statue looks ample and wide. that would have placed our first president
to the right of many of the speakers. it would have had the crowd focus to the left.
i thought they had placed the wall around an equestrian statue at first and then
i looked closer. he is standing aloofly alone in front of the steps, and i am jogging
weary braincells as to how often he visted south carolina, i do think his last visit
was during his presidency, so the statue was a nice act of homage to a virginian...

[wormyguy]

TBF, Washington was a slaveowner, so one can see why they wouldn't be big fans of him.

[Sola_Fide]

“What we had constructed was a background with a graphic to be placed on it,” James said. “We weren’t trying to obstruct anything.”

What a load of bullshit... take a look at the pictures. Background graphics?

http://i533.photobucket.com/albums/ee332/McLieberman/NAACP_Boxes_Washington.png

http://i533.photobucket.com/albums/ee332/McLieberman/NAACP_Phony_Box_To_Cover_Washington.png





Ungrateful...

[Aratus]

for what it's worth... http://www.sctrails.net/Trails/MISC/Historic.html he did visit...
the NAACP could have worked into the event historic lore, as well as the wording of
our Declaration of Independence, happily emphasising how all are equal under the law...

[Sola_Fide]

lmao.

"Hey neighbor! Just thought I'd come over here to let you know y'all are still slaves. You think you're free but you're really not. Oh, and tell all the white people, that goes for them to."

Washington freed his slaves, and other patriots like Sam Adams fought against slavery from the beginning.

Ask yourself why William Wilberforce was able to end slavery peacefully in Great Britian...actually every country ended it peacefully...while Lincoln fought a bloody war of conquest that centralized and changed our country forever.

[Anti Federalist]

Washington freed his slaves, and other patriots like Sam Adams fought against slavery from the beginning.

Ask yourself why William Wilberforce was able to end slavery peacefully in Great Britian...actually every country ended it peacefully...while Lincoln fought a bloody war of conquest that centralized and changed our country forever.

I was just coming back into this thread to say something very similar.

If that had been a statue of Sam Adams, it would have been covered up as well.

[Aratus]

i've sat recently in Faneuil Hall twice during our TEA PARTY RALLY events,
the better speakers tap into our Revolutionary War lore as well as local lore from
the 1800s in that historic building, i do know there are creative & inventive ways to stage rallies...

[HOLLYWOOD]

george gets to peak over the top? sorta
like the neighbor in "home improvement"?


Looking closely, that's more of a Camera angle that gives the appearance Washington's head is higher than the box. Pairing his sholders to the sides reinforces the dimensions of the box are just as high as the top of the monument.

[Aratus]

John Adams's statue has eyes that follow one, irreguardless of where you sit in the hall...
nobody at the TEA PARTY events has tried to cover up Sam Adams's cousin John... at all!

[Aratus]

george washington visited S.C when he was president just
so S.C's people would feel that they are a vital part of our union...



(edit)
the statue was a bronze copy of a houdon marble, it was erected in
front of the steps of the S.C state house before the Civil War and
a plaque on the statue makes a comment about an act of vandalism
done to the walking cane whereupon the end section may have been
broken off by a brick thrown by one of the troops of gen'l sherman...
the bronze was never repaired, and this all is part of the local lore.
the state house took from the late 1850s to about 1905 or 1906 to be
completed, i saw this on the WWW after a net search earlier today...

[Southron]

It's sad that they take such an adversarial approach to the founders. One need not agree 100% with someone to acknowledge good ideas.

[Cowlesy]

For most of human history there have been slaves, and since the NAACP is a racial group, that white slaveowner they covered up has done more to advance their ethnic group's interest (and ALSO for white people) than probably most any other human since the enlightenment. What, if they weren't sold from African slaveholders to American slaveholders, Africa would be a bustling industrial european-style economy? Give me a break and stuff the whole "well he owned slaves" BS.

So even a modicum of respect would be well received instead of their blatant disrespect.

People think the way things are today, are the way things have been since the dawn of civilization. Wrong sir, wrong.

[doodle]

This has Michael Steele written all over it.

[Aratus]

john adams and george washington were FEDERALISTs! thusly covering up potus george washington
semi-encourages the seperatists! i feel the NAACP staffers should keep in mind that in the 1800s
it would have been very easy to have a statue to john c. calhoun being where washington's is.

[Southron]

For most of human history there have been slaves, and since the NAACP is a racial group, that white slaveowner they covered up has done more to advance their ethnic group's interest (and ALSO for white people) than probably most any other human since the enlightenment. What, if they weren't sold from African slaveholders to American slaveholders, Africa would be a bustling industrial european-style economy? Give me a break and stuff the whole "well he owned slaves" BS.

So even a modicum of respect would be well received instead of their blatant disrespect.

People think the way things are today, are the way things have been since the dawn of civilization. Wrong sir, wrong.

I'm sure most people are descendants of slaves. The Jews were slaves in Egypt. Poor Anglo-Saxons in the 10th century would sell themselves into slavery if it kept them from starving.

[Cowlesy]

This has Michael Steele written all over it.

Dumbest comment of the day.

[eduardo89]

White guilt strikes again

Doesn't that happen ever single day?

[Sola_Fide]

This has Michael Steele written all over it.

Uh....

huh?

[Aratus]

feb 19th some 150 years ago was
when confederate prez jeff davis
was sworn in... part of the reason
for the local NAACP rally was to
highlight the achievements since
the surrender of gen'l lee to grant.
the NAACP wanted to bring attention
to the local history. somehow hiding
poor bronze george managed to backfire...

[JK/SEA]

This has Michael Steele written all over it.

I would think more like Obama...but no..more closer to the leaders of the NAACP.

A disgrace either way.

[Aratus]

barack obama would have delved into the local lore
around the statue before setting up the wall thingie.
michael steele LIKES george washington + abe lincoln.
i hate to ask if jack hunter is going to chime in on this.
is someone going to ask lindsey graham to take a stance?

[Aratus]

could someone ask pore sen. lindsey graham a very public question
about this all if only just to see if it is already on his internal polysci radar?
if he has an adroit staffer, maybe senator graham has quite a response to this!

[Aratus]

some 150 years ago, the confederacy was a week into its existance...
the NAACP rally was about saying what gains have been made in S.C!
ironically enough, alvin greene's candidacy was a major step forward...

[puppetmaster]

Did this make any other news..? Seems like it would have.

[JK/SEA]

Did this make any other news..? Seems like it would have.

Rachel Maddow will be doing an hour special on this monday...


j/k..with a large dose of sarcasm.

[aGameOfThrones]

How many people had 1 dollar bills in their pockets that day?

[squarepusher]

TBF, Washington was a slaveowner, so one can see why they wouldn't be big fans of him.

+1

[BlackTerrel]

imagine the uproar if on presidents day (or any day) someone encapsulated the MLK monument.....

Why would people celebrating President's Day be offended by MLK?

[BlackTerrel]

For most of human history there have been slaves, and since the NAACP is a racial group, that white slaveowner they covered up has done more to advance their ethnic group's interest (and ALSO for white people) than probably most any other human since the enlightenment. What, if they weren't sold from African slaveholders to American slaveholders, Africa would be a bustling industrial european-style economy?

You mean if people hadn't intervened in Africa for hundreds of years - would they be Europe? Maybe not. But they'd probably be better off than they are now.

[erowe1]

If I had attended that rally, I bet I would have heard a thousand things that I'd find more objectionable than the idea that we shouldn't be revering graven images of George Washington.

[Freedom 4 all]

TBF, Washington was a slaveowner, so one can see why they wouldn't be big fans of him.

True, but that was a product of his times and he was better than most in those days. The scientific community don't begrudge Gallileo for being a YEC, do they?

[puppetmaster]

+1

These people attending this rally were as much a slave as I am......

[BlackTerrel]

True, but that was a product of his times and he was better than most in those days. The scientific community don't begrudge Gallileo for being a YEC, do they?

Sure you can make the case, and honestly I don't care if they cover it up or not but the "extreme offense" some posters here have to it is laughable.

So if there was an Obama statue and a Ron Paul meetup covered it up would that be extremely offensive too?

[puppetmaster]

Sure you can make the case, and honestly I don't care if they cover it up or not but the "extreme offense" some posters here have to it is laughable.

So if there was an Obama statue and a Ron Paul meetup covered it up would that be extremely offensive too?

It would be as stupid. (Meetups and a gov supported NAACP are two different animals)

I do believe that blacks or any race for that matter would have been much better off today if people like G. Washington or other founding fathers would have kept control of our Government through current date. They should be pushing for more people like him and not acting like
G. Washington is the reason for their current situation. The folks that run the NAACP have their heads up their asses.

[Humanae Libertas]

It's sad that they take such an adversarial approach to the founders. One need not agree 100% with someone to acknowledge good ideas.

But the question is: should the 'founders' get a free-ride, simply because they are considered to be the founders' of this country. Personally, I don't like Washington; even if he did free his slaves, he is still a scumbag, regardless if he was our first President, General, and founder. That shouldn't give anyone a special pass from anything.

[MaxPower]

But the question is: should the 'founders' get a free-ride, simply because they are considered to be the founders' of this country. Personally, I don't like Washington; even if he did free his slaves, he is still a scumbag, regardless if he was our first President, General, and founder. That shouldn't give anyone a special pass from anything.
Washington a scumbag? I think he was flawed in many ways, but I have tremendous respect for the man; the old anecdote about George III hearing that Washington would relinquish power and return to his farm, and responding "If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world" chokes me up most every time. As much as we may (rightly) deplore the state of government and politics in the United States today, it is true that we have never had to face true, long-term, unadulterated totalitarianism (ala Soviet Russia, China, Nazi Germany, etc.), as nearly all other countries have at some point in their histories, and we have George Washington to thank for that- it was Washington who actively turned down a golden opportunity to seize military dictatorship after the revolution, and Washington who pointedly set precedent for the two-term limit and "non-royalty" (for example, he rejected the titles "His Excellency," "Your Majesty," etc., for the plain "Mr. President") status of the presidency. These actions not only kept America relatively free in his own time, but also made it nigh-impossible for his more power-hungry successors to pervert the office into tyranny, for Washington's shadow was ever hanging over them.

Most any other great military leader would have readily given in to the siren song of power, but Washington, it seems, was incorruptible. This is the style of leader I can admire- one who becomes great by foregoing power, rather than seizing it. Were any of the men who have held the presidency in recent decades in Washington's position, I have little doubt we would see an absolute despotism in short order; imagine what a Franklin Roosevelt, Richard Nixon, George W. Bush or Barack Obama would do with a situation such as that which Washington confronted!

[BlackTerrel]

It would be as stupid. (Meetups and a gov supported NAACP are two different animals)

I do believe that blacks or any race for that matter would have been much better off today if people like G. Washington or other founding fathers would have kept control of our Government through current date.

Well that's one opinion. Blacks had it MUCH worse when George Washington and people like him did run the country.

As far as this act - I wouldn't have done it. But the "righteous indignation" because some people don't worship at the feet of this guy who died 200 years ago? Spare me.

They didn't deface it. They covered it up for a couple hours. So what? Is it a crime?

[college4life]

Well that's one opinion. Blacks had it MUCH worse when George Washington and people like him did run the country.

As far as this act - I wouldn't have done it. But the "righteous indignation" because some people don't worship at the feet of this guy who died 200 years ago? Spare me.

They didn't deface it. They covered it up for a couple hours. So what? Is it a crime?

I'm guessing you wouldn't be a happy camper if I covered up an MLK shrine in the A for a few hours?

[Anti Federalist]

Why would people celebrating President's Day be offended by MLK?

C'mon BT, you're being deliberately obtuse.

If a bunch of white folks, especially if they were "right wing" white folks, held a rally where there was a prominent statue of MLK, and they covered it up for the rally, you and I both know the howls of protest would be heard from coast to coast.

[Southron]

But the question is: should the 'founders' get a free-ride, simply because they are considered to be the founders' of this country. Personally, I don't like Washington; even if he did free his slaves, he is still a scumbag, regardless if he was our first President, General, and founder. That shouldn't give anyone a special pass from anything.

Well, I've never heard Washington called that, even on RPF. Please elaborate.

[BlackTerrel]

I'm guessing you wouldn't be a happy camper if I covered up an MLK shrine in the A for a few hours?


C'mon BT, you're being deliberately obtuse.

If a bunch of white folks, especially if they were "right wing" white folks, held a rally where there was a prominent statue of MLK, and they covered it up for the rally, you and I both know the howls of protest would be heard from coast to coast.

Well I guess the question would be why? I can at least understand why descendants of slaves wouldn't want a slave owner statue at their rally. I wouldn't have done it - I wouldn't care - but at least I get it.

Why would a rally of "right-wing white folks" want to cover up a statue of MLK?

[college4life]

Well I guess the question would be why? I can at least understand why descendants of slaves wouldn't want a slave owner statue at their rally. I wouldn't have done it - I wouldn't care - but at least I get it.

Why would a rally of "right-wing white folks" want to cover up a statue of MLK?

MLK was a communist and adulterer. Just as we have the myth of Abe Lincoln, there is a myth perpetuated that MLK was some sort of noble individual. His actions were certainly more heinous than anything you can construe for GW.

[MaxPower]

Well I guess the question would be why? I can at least understand why descendants of slaves wouldn't want a slave owner statue at their rally. I wouldn't have done it - I wouldn't care - but at least I get it.

Why would a rally of "right-wing white folks" want to cover up a statue of MLK?
Because he was a socialist? Not that I would cover up a statue of King (I wouldn't), but much of his political philosophy was certainly abhorrent to people of a libertarian persuasion.

[MaxPower]

Well that's one opinion. Blacks had it MUCH worse when George Washington and people like him did run the country.
They had it worse because of circumstances which long, long preceded Washington, and which he did not make worse than they already were.



As far as this act - I wouldn't have done it. But the "righteous indignation" because some people don't worship at the feet of this guy who died 200 years ago? Spare me.

They didn't deface it. They covered it up for a couple hours. So what? Is it a crime?
No, but it is galling, particularly in a country wherein there is a holiday for the man and his face appears on two of the most common items of currency; do these folk avert their gaze whenever they deal with quarters and one-dollar bills? We speak not of a matter of "not worshipping at his feet," but of actively covering him up like an obscenity. The annoyance is understandable, though I do think some of the reactions in this thread are over-the-top.

[EndDaFed]

I nominated this thread for the right wing nontroversy of the week award.

[00_Pete]

MLK = Tool of the Illuminatus and corrupt scumbag
Malcolm X = One of the greatest Man that ever lived

"They [the top liberals] just want to use us as a football to throw against the conservatives" - Malcolm X

[the_strand]

White guilt strikes again

Or marxist control.

[the_strand]

double post.

[Stary Hickory]

Washington a scumbag? I think he was flawed in many ways, but I have tremendous respect for the man; the old anecdote about George III hearing that Washington would relinquish power and return to his farm, and responding "If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world" chokes me up most every time. As much as we may (rightly) deplore the state of government and politics in the United States today, it is true that we have never had to face true, long-term, unadulterated totalitarianism (ala Soviet Russia, China, Nazi Germany, etc.), as nearly all other countries have at some point in their histories, and we have George Washington to thank for that- it was Washington who actively turned down a golden opportunity to seize military dictatorship after the revolution, and Washington who pointedly set precedent for the two-term limit and "non-royalty" (for example, he rejected the titles "His Excellency," "Your Majesty," etc., for the plain "Mr. President") status of the presidency. These actions not only kept America relatively free in his own time, but also made it nigh-impossible for his more power-hungry successors to pervert the office into tyranny, for Washington's shadow was ever hanging over them.

Most any other great military leader would have readily given in to the siren song of power, but Washington, it seems, was incorruptible. This is the style of leader I can admire- one who becomes great by foregoing power, rather than seizing it. Were any of the men who have held the presidency in recent decades in Washington's position, I have little doubt we would see an absolute despotism in short order; imagine what a Franklin Roosevelt, Richard Nixon, George W. Bush or Barack Obama would do with a situation such as that which Washington confronted!

For sure Washington was a great one, he had imperfections, but he actually served reluctantly and actually did sacrifice for his country. These days career politicians make significant financial gain from engaging in politics. Washington turned it all down.

[demolama]

Everyone today is reaping the rewards of slavery---white, black, brown, red. Slavery was a form of labor in this country that helped to make the U.S. very prosperous. These people who protest those dead white guys for owning slaves do not understand the ramifications of force freeing the slaves would have had economically on not just the south but the north as well. Both Free and Slave states benefited off of slave labor even if they did not directly own any. To protest this country's founding based upon the notion that all white men were racist and therefore unworthy of any praise is based upon nothing more than ignorance and political agenda. As I said white men are supposed to feel guilty and therefore submissive to minorities because of what happened 150 years ago--- which neither you nor I were around to deal with. Anyone who justifies this action of hiding Washington because he owned slaves is just as guilty of ignorance and hate as those who covered him up

[AuH20]

MLK was a communist and adulterer. Just as we have the myth of Abe Lincoln, there is a myth perpetuated that MLK was some sort of noble individual. His actions were certainly more heinous than anything you can construe for GW.

MLK was a scumbag. Can't disagree there. And this is coming from someone who respects Malcolm X.

[the_strand]

Why did Malcolm X support such an oppressor/murderer like Khadafi???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25yNeAXNrbo

In a 242 interview about the song they said they wanted to make a song to show how out of control khadafi was.

[scottditzen]

You seem to be posing an "ends justify the means" take here.

I truly cannot think of anything more abhorrent than having my freedom taken; to be owned as property by someone else.

So for me personally, arguments that ending slavery would've hurt the country economically- even if true- just don't cut it imho.

Like abortion, this "race" issue is so important that we need to have honest, thoughtful discussion. But it's so easy to fly off the handle emotionally.




Everyone today is reaping the rewards of slavery---white, black, brown, red. Slavery was a form of labor in this country that helped to make the U.S. very prosperous. These people who protest those dead white guys for owning slaves do not understand the ramifications of force freeing the slaves would have had economically on not just the south but the north as well. Both Free and Slave states benefited off of slave labor even if they did not directly own any. To protest this country's founding based upon the notion that all white men were racist and therefore unworthy of any praise is based upon nothing more than ignorance and political agenda. As I said white men are supposed to feel guilty and therefore submissive to minorities because of what happened 150 years ago--- which neither you nor I were around to deal with. Anyone who justifies this action of hiding Washington because he owned slaves is just as guilty of ignorance and hate as those who covered him up

[erowe1]

Everyone today is reaping the rewards of slavery---white, black, brown, red. Slavery was a form of labor in this country that helped to make the U.S. very prosperous.

That's ridiculous.

The road to prosperity is through free markets. All Americans--white, black, brown, red, and yellow--are less prosperous today than we would be if there had not been slavery.

[demolama]

That's ridiculous.

The road to prosperity is through free markets. All Americans--white, black, brown, red, and yellow--are less prosperous today than we would be if there had not been slavery.

How then would have 17th century farmers found the labor they needed to farm products? European indentured servants fizzled out because there weren't many willing to risk the trip. There wasn't a lot of money in the colonies so the ability to pay for labor was almost non-existent

[brandon]

We shouldn't be building statues of politicians in the first place.

[brandon]

That's ridiculous.

The road to prosperity is through free markets. All Americans--white, black, brown, red, and yellow--are less prosperous today than we would be if there had not been slavery.

I don't know. If the black slaves remained in Africa they would probably be a bit worse off nowadays.

[demolama]

You seem to be posing an "ends justify the means" take here.

I truly cannot think of anything more abhorrent than having my freedom taken; to be owned as property by someone else.

So for me personally, arguments that ending slavery would've hurt the country economically- even if true- just don't cut it imho.

Like abortion, this "race" issue is so important that we need to have honest, thoughtful discussion. But it's so easy to fly off the handle emotionally.

So says the person who will probably live longer than any person in the 19th century, who is now typing on a computer which was founded upon technology that was fueled by the industrial revolution. The same industrial revolution that spurred America to be technologically more advanced than any country in the world.

Its not about the ends justify the means, it is just the past is what it is and you and I can not change it. We as Americans--- white, brown, black, red--- live a much better life today in part due to that cheap labor force.

I'm not trying to defend slavery... it is what it is.. it was this country's early labor force when demand for labor was at a critical high with no means to fill it.

[jmdrake]

“What we had constructed was a background with a graphic to be placed on it,” James said. “We weren’t trying to obstruct anything.”

What a load of bullshit... take a look at the pictures. Background graphics?

http://i533.photobucket.com/albums/ee332/McLieberman/NAACP_Boxes_Washington.png

http://i533.photobucket.com/albums/ee332/McLieberman/NAACP_Phony_Box_To_Cover_Washington.png





Don't ya know? He's standing in front of a blue screen. After the video editing is done James Brown will be performing in the background with Michael Jackson. ;)

[scottditzen]

So says the person who will probably live longer than any person in the 19th century, who is now typing on a computer which was founded upon technology that was fueled by the industrial revolution. The same industrial revolution that spurred America to be technologically more advanced than any country in the world.

Its not about the ends justify the means, it is just the past is what it is and you and I can not change it. We as Americans--- white, brown, black, red--- live a much better life today in part due to that cheap labor force.

I'm not trying to defend slavery... it is what it is.. it was this country's early labor force when demand for labor was at a critical high with no means to fill it.

Thanks for pointing out my utter hypocrisy!

In the mean time, I will continue to take my gifts of extraordinary hindsight and apply them appropriately.

p.s. for the record, I find your assertion that I'm somehow against technology quite a bit off topic.

[demolama]

Thanks for pointing out my utter hypocrisy!

In the mean time, I will continue to take my gifts of extraordinary hindsight and apply them appropriately.

p.s. for the record, I find your assertion that I'm somehow against the industrial revolution? quite a bit off topic.

I think you are missing my point... the U.S. as we know it would be completely different without the slave labor. The need for labor drove the African-slave trade. We'd actually be looking at a much smaller and probably still English ruled America. The 17th century as a whole would have been nothing but yeoman farms or very few large scale farms because the plants that required the most labor intensive to cultivate would have not been as heavily produced here. Tobacco, the cash crop of the middle colonial economy, would not have made the early middle colonies prosperous. Rice and indigo cultivated in the south would not have been as abundant. Hell with no cash crop meant no one with any capital would have been willing to invest to send people over. America prospered off these early desires for labor. We quickly rose in prosperity as a colonial power because of it.

It's not a defense of slavery but an observation that we as Americans today are where we are as a whole because some people in the 17th century needed to create capital and they needed a labor force to create it.

Was the 19th century version of slavery horrid? absolutely! But like anything when there is so much money invested in a product, how can you simply walk away? Should the south be allowed to go bankrupt while the north prospered? We in the 21st century can sit back and easily say that slavery was wrong and that our ancestors should have done X, Y, or Z to stop it. But history doesn't work that way.

Had slavery ended who would take up the slack in labor? Immigrants who came to the U.S. landed in the North. Unskilled and without money how could they migrate to the south? How could the south make up for the economic shortfalls without a heavy stream of immigrants?

I completely agree that slave labor is abhorrent and that the free market and free labor was the right thing to do. But, you also have to take into consideration that for most of the antebellum period the white labor force was often absent from their work and drunk. They were heavily unreliable.

Again, it's real easy to point the finger at those in the past by casting enlightened philosophy of the present upon them. All these posts were trying to say is that the cards gave us the America we have today and everyone is here living a prosperous life because of it.

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

The NAACP has done this at many other events. I remember posting some links a long time ago to other events they had pulled this at. i will see if I can drag some of them up.

For what it's worth if they really wanted to cover up someone who did them no favors than they should have found a statue of Lincoln and covered that up.. In fact they would be well served to take a wrecking ball to the Lincoln Memorial and if they ever come to their senses enough to do it than I will support a federal mandate to make that spot the property of the NAACP and they can make it their own damn park if they want.

They would also be well served to remember (as would several people in this thread) that whites do not have a monopoly on a history of enslaving. In fact some of the largest slave owners in the history of our own nation were black men themselves.

[TruckinMike]

They wanted their own background --- looks pretty cut and dry to me. Some may have gotten a bit of a thrill for covering up that slave owner. But in all reality, I bet that's not the first time that George has been covered.

...squabblin' about nothing.

TMike

[Aratus]

gov. nikki haley had a very excellent interview with three other
governors on ABC this sunday and was not asked about this at
all! she laid out her sincere opinion on the situation in wisconsin.

[jmdrake]

Why did Malcolm X support such an oppressor/murderer like Khadafi???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25yNeAXNrbo

In a 242 interview about the song they said they wanted to make a song to show how out of control khadafi was.

What are you talking about? Malcolm X was assassinated in 1965. Khadafi didn't come to power until 1969. And I'm pretty sure that Louis Farrakhan's voice in that video, not Malcolm X.

[Aratus]

good point. i remember in the late 60s and early 70s when the NEW LEFT thought Colonel Khadafi was
a hyper~cool idealistic dude who could move mountains with nearly his total life all ahead of him to do so

[Aratus]

i think i would have forgiven the NAACP's slighting of wise auld Gen'l George Washington
had they erected the partition to highlight ALVIN GREENE most totally at the gathering
if only for how he up~ended the traditional yellowDawg/blueDawg Democratic machine...

[BlackTerrel]

Everyone today is reaping the rewards of slavery---white, black, brown, red. Slavery was a form of labor in this country that helped to make the U.S. very prosperous. These people who protest those dead white guys for owning slaves do not understand the ramifications of force freeing the slaves would have had economically on not just the south but the north as well. Both Free and Slave states benefited off of slave labor even if they did not directly own any. To protest this country's founding based upon the notion that all white men were racist and therefore unworthy of any praise is based upon nothing more than ignorance and political agenda. As I said white men are supposed to feel guilty and therefore submissive to minorities because of what happened 150 years ago--- which neither you nor I were around to deal with. Anyone who justifies this action of hiding Washington because he owned slaves is just as guilty of ignorance and hate as those who covered him up

Why are the descendants of slaves so worse off than the descendants of slave owners (as a group). To say that everyone benefited by it is a joke.

[demolama]

left over racism from the mid 19th century to well into the 20th century... but that had nothing to do with slavery in the 17th century who saw slavery as a means to fill an economic void rather than a need to dominate and control a particular race

[ds21089]

I'm tired of the reverse racism in this country. Nothing is racist if done to white people, only any other race. If a white person commits a crime against any other race, clearly it's just a hate crime, right? Jeez. Just like how Kanye was like "Bush hates black people". Then he goes and makes fun of Taylor Swift and disses her in front of a ton of people. What do the media call him? An asshole, jackass, moron, and many other things..but OF COURSE not a RACIST, right? Love it...

[erowe1]

How then would have 17th century farmers found the labor they needed to farm products?

By offering to pay wages for labor at the market rate. If the wages were high enough, it would have provided the incentive for immigration. Perhaps they could have even recruited labor from Africa. If it were to turn out that the amount of labor provided in the free market were to be less than what they had via slavery, forcing the cost of farming higher and fewer people to farm, with less resulting supply of cotton and tobacco and such, so that the prices of those goods would have been higher, and those who otherwise would have farmed instead would have applied their labor to other endeavors that rewarded them more highly in the free market, then the result would have been a division of labor and an allocation of resources that would have been more beneficial to more people than what existed under slavery, along with a more appropriate distribution of financial reward. America would be wealthier today had it embraced more free markets in the past.

[CaliforniaMom]

When I look at the photos, it seems that they really could've intended the structure as a back drop for the people making speeches. They probably want the speeches to be held in the center, and that happens to also be where the statue is.

[Travlyr]

Why are the descendants of slaves so worse off than the descendants of slave owners (as a group). To say that everyone benefited by it is a joke.

Excellent question. Unlike today, yesteryear's slavery was not a black and white issue. Both blacks and whites were slaves and slave owners. In America, blacks were predominately slaves which conveniently divides us. The powers-that-be (who dominate by using 'divide and conquer' techniques) continuously promote racism.

My response to your question is that blacks, and natives, have been 'helped" by government programs which have kept them dependent on others. Those programs have done more harm than good. Slaves were not allowed to own land, so they were less able to prosper early on. The solution is for the feds to give-up their massive landholdings to homesteaders who wish to prosper based on a lottery system.

[demolama]

By offering to pay wages for labor at the market rate. If the wages were high enough, it would have provided the incentive for immigration. Perhaps they could have even recruited labor from Africa. If it were to turn out that the amount of labor provided in the free market were to be less than what they had via slavery, forcing the cost of farming higher and fewer people to farm, with less resulting supply of cotton and tobacco and such, so that the prices of those goods would have been higher, and those who otherwise would have farmed instead would have applied their labor to other endeavors that rewarded them more highly in the free market, then the result would have been a division of labor and an allocation of resources that would have been more beneficial to more people than what existed under slavery, along with a more appropriate distribution of financial reward. America would be wealthier today had it embraced more free markets in the past.

What wages? they were a colony that sent most of their specie back to the mother country because that's what merchantilist economies do. They didn't produce anything of value only imported because of the Navigation Acts. When all you can legally make is raw materials such as pig iron... you don't produce wealth

Hard to embrace free market ideas when lawfully they weren't allowed

[Aratus]

mercantilism, colonialism, feudalism and slavery had to cease
for there to be free trade and the rise of modern capitalism

[TheeJoeGlass]

How did this go without any msm coverage.

[erowe1]

Hard to embrace free market ideas when lawfully they weren't allowed

The law was precisely the problem. I don't see how you could have inferred that I thought otherwise.

The fact remains that we are poorer today, not richer, thanks to slavery.

[demolama]

Well being colonists to Britain the Americans didn't have much of a choice. They brought with them ideologies from the mother country and were forced to live by them. Hell, serfdom just came to an end right after the discovery of America.

Ideas of wealth creation via capitalism would not even be considered until nearly 200 years after the first settlers in Roanoke Island.


The fact remains that we are poorer today, not richer, thanks to slavery. it may be a fact today that slavery is weaker for society's prosperity but early America lived without wealth to pay for labor so they had to settle for a cheaper source--- not necessarily better

[eOs]

I don't mind them covering George Washington up. They identify with slaves and slavery, George Washington was probably the master slave owner of a couple of their relatives. As far as they see it: fuck George Washington, and how can anyone blame them?

[BlackTerrel]

I'm tired of the reverse racism in this country. Nothing is racist if done to white people, only any other race. If a white person commits a crime against any other race, clearly it's just a hate crime, right? Jeez. Just like how Kanye was like "Bush hates black people". Then he goes and makes fun of Taylor Swift and disses her in front of a ton of people. What do the media call him? An asshole, jackass, moron, and many other things..but OF COURSE not a RACIST, right? Love it...

This is one of the stupidest arguments I ever heard. A lot of people make fun on Taylor Swift. Most of them aren't racist.

[BlackTerrel]

How did this go without any msm coverage.

What do you expect - national coverage that a statue was covered up for a few hours? So what?