John Brown: Hero or villain?

[madengr]

Just a simple poll. Having grown up in VA, close to Harper's Ferry, and taking a few field trips to Harper's Ferry, there could be no worse person than John Brown. Of course this was sort of drilled into us, going to a private, non parochial school, yet very conservative. Charge and hanged for treason against VA, and labeled a domestic terrorist.

Fast forward many years, and now I live in KS, spending a few years in Lawrence, and reading up on borders wars, Jayhwakers, Free-Staters, etc. Different outlook now.

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/johnbrown/tragicprelude.jpg

[Aratus]

this poll should have been multiple choise.
his fervor helped bring on our tragic civil war.
i may reluctantly vote 'hero' due to the apt
fact that john brown did not invent slavery...

[Cowlesy]

Just a simple poll. Having grown up in VA, close to Harper's Ferry, and taking a few field trips to Harper's Ferry, there could be no worse person than John Brown. Of course this was sort of drilled into us, going to a private, non parochial school, yet very conservative. Charge and hanged for treason against VA, and labeled a domestic terrorist.

Fast forward many years, and now I live in KS, spending a few years in Lawrence, and reading up on borders wars, Jayhwakers, Free-Staters, etc. Different outlook now.

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/johnbrown/tragicprelude.jpg

You should read Michael Scheuer's magnum opus "Through Our Enemies Eyes" where he gives a solid account of John Brown's religious fanaticism.

[acptulsa]

Couldn't vote in the poll. There was no 'yes' choice. There was no way to say, 'no'.

Ghandi he wasn't.

[Aratus]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------




we have another thread here where "seccess" talk is being hotly again debated.

the U.k's john locke wrote an essay praising the romans and slavery upon thinking

ethnic cleansing is morally worse than letting a few captives live and almost thrive.

of course monsieur taney is an idiot for how he ruled on dred scott's inalienable rights.

i am now trying not to think too often of raymond massey in an old black&white flic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-JxArcSyYg&feature=relmfu KY's RPL had written about

John Brown and took an intelligent stance that is a unique though biased take on his actions.

[pcosmar]

Both. Neither.
Just a man who followed his conscience in a time of conflict.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QWARRZU5tI

[Aratus]

preston brooks : hero or villian (a poll idea!)

my home state's senator had his desk pulled

up from how it was attached to the floor during

the horrific beating he sadly abruptly experianced.

[jmdrake]

John Brown. The abolitionist who wanted to secede from Virginia. Says it all.

[Sam I am]

I just did a quick read about John Brown on Wikipedia, so pardon me if I don't understand the history all too well

Imagine

You're an activist for stance X on issue A, and you get shot for it. In retrospect, stance X was a horrible stance.

Is the shooter a hero? or is he a villain?

[fisharmor]

Didn't the tyrants use him as a partial excuse for their invasion of the South?

[Kludge]

Heroic cause, lots of passion, arguably villainous means. If those he killed were responsible for enslaving Blacks, I'd call him a hero. However, those he killed were merely protecting government assets used to enslave Blacks, and draining resources from the gov't for their actions. Yet, those protecting the armory didn't surrender, which I would've considered the noble act, and also would've saved a few lives (at least at the time), so.... Idunno. His acts also could have saved lives (potentially... depending on the ultimate outcome of the slaves being armed).

I'd say he's more heroic than Joe Stack, less heroic than the man whose murder he tried to avenge. Less villainous than Lincoln, but more than Booth. Wherever that puts him.

[TroySmith]

A villain. This guy butchered political opponents with axes in Kansas and then attempted to start a VIOLENT uprising. I noticed when I was in college that J Brown was loved among Marxist...there is a reason why.

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

The guy was a religious zealot who probably belonged in a mental institution (with most of the rest of his inbred family). He brutally murdered people who did nothing wrong except for disagree with his philosophy. Of course history books try to tell us that he did all of this for the liberation of black men and women yet they somehow choose to ignore the fact that he openly declared his intention to instigate bloodshed and that his first target during his raid upon the arsenal in Virginia was a black man who worked on the railroad in Harper's Ferry.

[Gumba of Liberty]

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure."

The enforcement of Natural Rights does not only apply to one race as most Southerners believed. John Brown was not the Federal Government. He did not invade the Sovereign States of the South like the Lincoln Administration. He wanted to commence an insurrection where Africans reasserted their Natural Rights, including the Right to rebellion. I say Bravo! No man is free where others are oppressed.

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

The guy was a religious zealot who probably belonged in a mental institution (with most of the rest of his inbred family). He brutally murdered people who did nothing wrong except for disagree with his philosophy. Of course history books try to tell us that he did all of this for the liberation of black men and women yet they somehow choose to ignore the fact that he openly declared his intention to instigate bloodshed and that his first target during his raid upon the arsenal in Virginia was a black man who worked on the railroad in Harper's Ferry.

Yep, a man trying to defend passengers on the railroad.

I got to know a bit about John Brown when I did my thesis paper for my International Terrorism class at USF back in the mid-90s. I purposely chose him instead of going the more traditional route of groups like Islamic Jihad et al. He most certainly fit into the model of what the CIA (at that time) taught was the 4 Rs of Terrorism: Religious, Rebels, Reds, Revolutionaries.

[jmdrake]

A villain. This guy butchered political opponents with axes in Kansas and then attempted to start a VIOLENT uprising. I noticed when I was in college that J Brown was loved among Marxist...there is a reason why.

The pro slavery forces started the killing in Kansas, not John Brown. The brutality of the pro-slavery forces literally made its way to the floor of the U.S. senate.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleeding_Kansas

In October 1855, John Brown came to Kansas Territory to fight slavery. On November 21, 1855 the (relatively bloodless) "Wakarusa War" began when a Free-Stater named Charles Dow was shot by a pro-slavery settler. The only fatal casualty occurring during the siege was one Free-State man named Thomas Barber. He was shot and killed on December 6, 1855 where the main body of the invaders were encamped, some 6mi.(9.656km} from Lawrence. A few months later, on May 21, 1856, a group of Border Ruffians entered the Free-State stronghold of Lawrence, where they burned the Free State Hotel, destroyed two newspaper offices and their printing presses, and ransacked homes and stores.

The following day, on the afternoon of May 22, 1856, Preston Smith Brooks (a Democratic Congressman from South Carolina) physically attacked Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts in the Senate chambers, hitting him on the head with his thick cane. Sumner was blinded by his own blood, and staggered away until he collapsed, lapsing into unconsciousness. Brooks continued to beat Sumner until he broke his cane. Several other senators attempted to help Sumner, but were blocked by Rep. Laurence Keitt, who was holding a pistol and shouting "Let them be!" This was in retaliation for insulting language Sumner used against Brooks's relative in a speech Sumner made that denounced Southerners for proslavery violence in Kansas. Sumner was beaten severely and did not return to his Senate desk for three years as a result of his injuries to the head and neck area; he became regarded as an antislavery martyr.
Preston Brooks attacking Charles Sumner in the U.S. Senate in 1856

These acts in turn inspired John Brown to lead a group of men in Kansas Territory on an attack at a proslavery settlement at Pottawatomie Creek. During the night of May 24, the group, which included four of Brown's sons, led seven pro-slavery men from their homes and hacked them to death with broadswords. Brown's men let Jerome Glanville and James Harris return home to the cabin of Harris.

[jmdrake]

I just did a quick read about John Brown on Wikipedia, so pardon me if I don't understand the history all too well

Imagine

You're an activist for stance X on issue A, and you get shot for it. In retrospect, stance X was a horrible stance.

Is the shooter a hero? or is he a villain?

You mean like Aaron Burr shooting Alexander Hamilton in part over the first central bank of the U.S.?

[TroySmith]

The pro slavery forces started the killing in Kansas, not John Brown. The brutality of the pro-slavery forces literally made its way to the floor of the U.S. senate.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleeding_Kansas

In October 1855, John Brown came to Kansas Territory to fight slavery. On November 21, 1855 the (relatively bloodless) "Wakarusa War" began when a Free-Stater named Charles Dow was shot by a pro-slavery settler. The only fatal casualty occurring during the siege was one Free-State man named Thomas Barber. He was shot and killed on December 6, 1855 where the main body of the invaders were encamped, some 6mi.(9.656km} from Lawrence. A few months later, on May 21, 1856, a group of Border Ruffians entered the Free-State stronghold of Lawrence, where they burned the Free State Hotel, destroyed two newspaper offices and their printing presses, and ransacked homes and stores.

The following day, on the afternoon of May 22, 1856, Preston Smith Brooks (a Democratic Congressman from South Carolina) physically attacked Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts in the Senate chambers, hitting him on the head with his thick cane. Sumner was blinded by his own blood, and staggered away until he collapsed, lapsing into unconsciousness. Brooks continued to beat Sumner until he broke his cane. Several other senators attempted to help Sumner, but were blocked by Rep. Laurence Keitt, who was holding a pistol and shouting "Let them be!" This was in retaliation for insulting language Sumner used against Brooks's relative in a speech Sumner made that denounced Southerners for proslavery violence in Kansas. Sumner was beaten severely and did not return to his Senate desk for three years as a result of his injuries to the head and neck area; he became regarded as an antislavery martyr.
Preston Brooks attacking Charles Sumner in the U.S. Senate in 1856

These acts in turn inspired John Brown to lead a group of men in Kansas Territory on an attack at a proslavery settlement at Pottawatomie Creek. During the night of May 24, the group, which included four of Brown's sons, led seven pro-slavery men from their homes and hacked them to death with broadswords. Brown's men let Jerome Glanville and James Harris return home to the cabin of Harris.


Saying "they started it first" doesn't justify cold murder. Brown advocated PREEMPTIVE VIOLENT revolution, something which we should all be against.

[sparebulb]

The replies to this topic are frightening. I would have expected much, much more from RPF members than to recite State-controlled public school versions of history. That includes Wikipedia.

It is a no-brainer. John Brown was a freak and a cold-blooded killer with no allegiance to the Constitution except for his own narrow interpretation. May that guy rot in Hell.

[erowe1]

A villain. This guy butchered political opponents with axes in Kansas and then attempted to start a VIOLENT uprising.

Aside from their use of different kinds of weapons, isn't that also true of those who fought in the Revolutionary War?

[erowe1]

The replies to this topic are frightening. I would have expected much, much more from RPF members than to recite State-controlled public school versions of history. That includes Wikipedia.

It is a no-brainer. John Brown was a freak and a cold-blooded killer with no allegiance to the Constitution except for his own narrow interpretation. May that guy rot in Hell.

Why should he have had any allegiance to the Constitution? Did he take an oath to uphold it?

[erowe1]

PREEMPTIVE VIOLENT revolution, something which we should all be against.

I definitely agree that we should all be against that.

[TroySmith]

Aside from their use of different kinds of weapons, isn't that also true of those who fought in the Revolutionary War?


No. The leaders in the revolutionary war sought peace and reform through the political process first. After that, they seceded from Britain, but did not declare war on them until the British decided to use force to keep the empire intact.

[Kludge]

No. The leaders in the revolutionary war sought peace and reform through the political process first. After that, they seceded from Britain, but did not declare war on them until the British decided to use force to keep the empire intact.
Didn't Quakers & other abolitionists follow a similar route (less secession)? The South & those who "compromised" refused to give up slavery, using force against Blacks and those who aided (via Fugitive Slave Act). Obviously, this wasn't going to be handled by politicians. The man Brown claimed to want to avenge was just a political dissident who slavery supporters murdered. Next came violence those who aggressed against the enslaved and those who opposed slavery.

[raiha]

He was mentally ill. Probably bi-polar.