quote:

Originally posted by kush paintings Systematically attempting to wipe people off the face of the earth is not in the same league as owning slaves. Also, in Jefferson's time he was raised to think nothing of owning a slave, just as you are raised to know that owning slaves is wrong. Hindsight again, looking back at that time and saying oh well a real man/ hero would have done this is ridiculous. You cannot speak objectively of such matters. Give me a response on my last post. I believe Jefferson's stance on slave owning is not exaclty what you think.

Yes, I agree, except fot the Jefferon part thought. (No, I'm not automatically disagreeing eighter, just waiting to re-evaluate it based on results I get after researching the credibility of the information you posted about his views on slavery)

What I was pointing out was the logic alot of people on this thread are using "Well, it was ok by their standards, eventhough it's completely deplorable by ours, so, looking at it in that context, it was ok."

Ok, now that I've made my point, let me also point out that I was also deliberitly playing devils advocate, not to piss people off but to hopefully give them a better understanding of the "school name change" issue from a different perspective. Yeah, I agree that it's sort of trivial, but I can understand how some people would be offended by it and demand renaming. And I think they had a valid point. I just agree with them in priciple.

Plus, one thing I've hated about almost every(if not every) culture/nation/religion (and when I say religion, I don't mean the actual religious text itself, but its history and what the people who claim to be its followers have done)/ideology/whatever is how they gloss over all the negative aspects of their history and hisotrical figures (i.e. huge bias IMO) and make thier country/religion/etc appear alot nicer than it actually is and glorify people by emphasizing alot the positives (if not completely leaving out the negatives in several cases, or atleast, not putting an equal emphasis on it).

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

Well thank you for the clarification, and my source is PBS, so unless PBS isn't credible than I think it's a good source. Here is the link . I agree that sometimes we do gloss over our history, afterall the old saying goes history is written by the winners, therefore there is an inherit bias. However, removing his name from a school because he was a slave owner chaffes my nuts in a manner that is most frustrating. HA. In all seriousness though, to say the man was not a hero or to take away anything for that matter that he did for our country is just down right liberal nonsense. Yeah I'm going to say it liberal nonsense. No I don't hate liberals, but when they go on these politically correct moral rightiousness paths I want to puke my guts out. While they are at it, lets just name another highway after a mediocre recent president so no one is offended. They just named a highway after Reagan in Illinois, where I live. Come on, Reagan! Not Washington Highway, not Lincoln Highway, not even Arnold Schwarzenager Highway. From now on when I go down the Reagan I will tell people I am going down the Jefferson in honor of his name being removed from the school, not like he doesn't have enough alredy though.

___________________
Lost Souls

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z What I was pointing out was the logic alot of people on this thread are using "Well, it was ok by their standards, eventhough it's completely deplorable by ours, so, looking at it in that context, it was ok."

I think you're mistaken, no one is saying that slavery is currently or was ever "okay." However, we are saying that at the time it was a legal, accepted and common practice. We have no reason to punish Jefferson because he did something that in his time was not seen the way we see it today. We can think that what he did was wrong in light of today's standards, but he did not live with that set of standards.

Close the post its done good discussion.

___________________
Lost Souls

All I will add is that Shaolin's way of rationalizing his argument accomplishes little more than turning heroes or our past into villains. It's almost a cheap attempt to rewrite history.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka All I will add is that Shaolin's way of rationalizing his argument accomplishes little more than turning heroes or our past into villains. It's almost a cheap attempt to rewrite history.

If you pay attention to my last few post, I made it clear I wasn't trying to demonize or glorify anyone.

EDIT: Hopefully this is the end of discussion.

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

quote:

Originally posted by kush paintings However, removing his name from a school because he was a slave owner chaffes my nuts in a manner that is most frustrating.

I love the way you worded that.

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Once again, I'm not disagreeing with the fact that women sex slavery exists and that it's really fucked up. That is NOT what I was referring to AT ALL, BUT, women not enjoying the same rights as men. And that is not equivilant to black people being owned, sold , tortured, and persecuted. I think I made this clear in my last post. I seriously don't know what the hell you're talking about now as I was NOT refering to the women sex slave issue, which is, yes, comparable to slavery (it is slavery, just a different form of it.) So for the last time, I was never arguing about that. Yes, women's rights are universal. I'm not so sure if they're been "understood" in the same fasion we understand them now (equality). And I'm, by no means, saying that they're not. First of all, I didn't say anythig about Lincoln, positive or negative, for all I care, yeah, go ahead and take him off the $5 bill. Stop putting words in mouth. Just so you don't go jumping to conlusions again, YES, I BELIEVE IN WOMEN BEING ENTITLED TO EQUAL RIGHTS. Now, not having equal rights simply isn't comparable to slavery, where you have no rights at all, you're property, you're sold, owned, and tortured. Jesus Occ, am I not getting through to you at all? For the last time, I'm NOT refering to women sex slaves.

Sorry to bring this up again. Not trying to stir the pot again, just one final response to your response.

And I'm afraid you missed my point, or perhaps I didn't apprpriately communicate it. I wasn't really trying to get into a pissing contest of who suffered more, women or black people, my point was more along the lines of saying that if we abandon historical context when we regard figures in history, we can legitimately criticize nearly every figure on the basis of what is not acceptable according to our current societal standards as opposed what was acceptable in the context of society in the past. Lincoln was a great man for spearheading the abolitionist movement at a time when society was ready to address that issue one way or another. Should he be faulted for ignoring the suffrage movement because it was still in its infancy and society was unready for such change? Similarly Jefferson was a great man for spearheading the individual rights and liberties of man. Should he be faulted because the abolitionist movement was still in its infancy and a foreign concept to much of society? We can continue this line of reasoning as far back in the past as we want to.

Anyway, I understand the point you are making however, if we ignore context historical context our selection of leaders who we can rightfully praise are going to be remarkably limited to the latter half of the 20th century.

___________________
Retro ...

Oh boy, but then you can narrow down those guys for character flaws. Bill Clinton, an excellent president and truly an embodiment of the American dream was nearly impeached because he had an affair! Shaolin has a good point that we tend to gloss over our history and our past heroes, but there is a fine line between searching for truth and being a tabloid journalist wanabee. Context people, context.

___________________
Lost Souls

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z I'm not. You have to be non-white to understand. He did own slaves afterall. And if I we're black, I probably wouldn't be too fond of any of the founding fathers.

uhoh, sounds like you're about to pull out the slavery card without even being a descendant of one.

get a life.

>JM<

omg, just give up, your getting severly pwned here...

___________________
BA-DUM-TSS

quote:

ALFI - BOHICA - DJ MIX (Stream+Dropbox)