Happy Native American day

[Core Shot]

Wow.
https://www.onlyinyourstate.com/minn...ation-park-mn/

I didn’t realize the Lakota were that far east.
Not to mention they were hung. 38 souls
RIP

Fuckkkk.
Yankees gonna yank.

[MultiVerse]

Doris Kearns Goodwin. Most well known historian regarding Lincoln

I think you’re arguing more against Coreshot than about civil war history. Understandable lol. I’m not pushing any kook civil war revisionism of which there is plenty in the racist south, but your position on Lincoln and the North in regards to why they were fighting is just not accurate. Slavery was certainly a primary cause of the war, but not the only one, and not what was most important to Lincoln

Well, that explains it. You're relying on a post-modern historian (she's hardly the definitive Lincoln historian) who chose to reframe slavery in terms of identity. In this case lumping everyone together in terms of their respective race.

In her falsification, which is wrong, slavery in the South was about identity politics and not a race based economic system. So according to her for Northerners the Civil War couldn't involve social issues over the immorality of slavery, only preserving the Union. And in the South slavery was mainly about oppression, not economics. According to her the war happened because both side failed to reach a compromise rather than their intractable positions over slavery.

It's two sides of awful coin. White nationalists want to focus on race and exclude the idea that we're all Americans regardless of skin color, religion, or sexual orientation; and left-wing identity politics want the same except to emphasize victim versus oppressor.

Identity politics is a horrible way to think about history because it relies on repeating the same tropes rather than seeing the diverse and dynamic processes driving the human experience. And as you've observed it makes for strange bedfellows. In this instance, it creates a narrative racist neo-confederates approve of.

[MultiVerse]

Wow.
I didn’t realize the Lakota were that far east.

A person might think you were trolling, what with knowing so little about your own topic and all. The Lakotas went from being a small hunter gatherer tribe in the East coast forests to expanding hundreds of miles westward and ruling the great planes for generations. Despite never numbering even twenty thousand people, they dominated the Great Plains to the mountains all the way north into Canada. It was a combined force of Lakota, Cheyenne & Arapaho who defeated the 7th Cavalry of the U.S. army at Little Bighorn.

The Comanche also commanded vast territory despite never numbering more than forty thousand people. Both tribes kept the Westerward European expansion frontier at bay for hundreds of miles until the railroads ended their advantage gained form mastery of horseback warfare.

[mcski]

Well, that explains it. You're relying on a post-modern historian (she's hardly the definitive Lincoln historian) who chose to reframe slavery in terms of identity. In this case lumping everyone together in terms of their respective race.

In her falsification, which is wrong, slavery in the South was about identity politics and not a race based economic system. So according to her for Northerners the Civil War couldn't involve social issues over the immorality of slavery, only preserving the Union. And in the South slavery was mainly about oppression, not economics. According to her the war happened because both side failed to reach a compromise rather than their intractable positions over slavery.

It's two sides of awful coin. White nationalists want to focus on race and exclude the idea that we're all Americans regardless of skin color, religion, or sexual orientation; and left-wing identity politics want the same except to emphasize victim versus oppressor.

Identity politics is a horrible way to think about history because it relies on repeating the same tropes rather than seeing the diverse and dynamic processes driving the human experience. And as you've observed it makes for strange bedfellows. In this instance, it creates a narrative racist neo-confederates approve of.

A minute ago you didn’t know who she is and now youre critiquing her work? Lmao ok. You can try Herbert, Meechum, or Sandburg. There’s lots. I read there are 15k Lincoln biographies! Have a good nite.

[MakersTeleMark]

If you think slavery would make a shitton of white people kill each other then I want your drugs.

Take a lap.

[MultiVerse]

A minute ago you didn’t know who she is and now youre critiquing her work?

Well, you only used her bad arguments and her first name so what do you expect?

If you think slavery would make a shitton of white people kill each other then I want your drugs.

And yet that's what happened. There was a constant white abolitionist movement in America from the very beginning. There were also a shitton of white Northerners like the Copperheads who opposed going to war over slavery and wanted instead to allow it. A shitton of white people also spent several decades occupying the South fighting another shitton of white terrorism before finally giving up on the project.

Some people love prepackaged bullshit narratives. Whereas one of the reasons why people despise horseshit identity politics is because they love all Americans and American culture.

[Core Shot]

One of my best friends is full Lakota.
He taught me a lot.
Skiing.
Circle of life.
The hoop.
Etc.

I feel bad for natives. Someone stole their land. It wasn’t me or my ancestors. I’m just a wash ashore.

[MultiVerse]

Someone stole their land. It wasn’t me or my ancestors. I’m just a wash ashore.

What a stupid self-absorbed argument. If you believe all the land in America was stolen then by definition you're living on stolen land. If you want to do something about it, then read the article from the previous page and support Native American property rights.

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/...he-white-tape/

[Core Shot]

What a stupid self-absorbed argument. If you believe all the land in America was stolen then by definition you're living on stolen land.

Well yes. Duh.

And others will argue that native tribes stole land from each other. So the Honkeys stole from them. Oooo rah. Let’s go Merica. Fuck yeah.

Honestly I appreciate and respect native spirituality.
Ymmv.

[yeahman]

Seems to me that all wars have multiple causations including luck and stupidity.

Looking at the state current world affairs. As the Native Americans have possessed territories in N and S America for 1000's of years, shouldn't they be entitled to take back control of their land?

No, because most tribes used to steal land and take control of hunting grounds from other tribes at every opportunity. And they would never give it back without a fight to the death.

Most tribes were also slave owners. They enslaved captives from other tribes the same way white people enslaved black people and one race has enslaved another race all over the world since the beginning of human history. They traded slaves. It always seems odd to me that America is viewed as this awful outlier that enslaved a race of people when in fact that is far from the truth. I read a book about the history of human enslavement and it was pretty eye opening. Obviously doesn't mean it isn't an awful practice, just universal and not limited to the southern U.S.

[Meadow Skipper]

No, because most tribes used to steal land and take control of hunting grounds from other tribes at every opportunity. And they would never give it back without a fight to the death.

Most tribes were also slave owners. They enslaved captives from other tribes the same way white people enslaved black people and one race has enslaved another race all over the world since the beginning of human history. They traded slaves.

Well, no wonder we worked so hard at wiping them out. Fuckers.

[Meadow Skipper]

If you think slavery would make a shitton of white people kill each other then I want your drugs.

Take a lap.

If you’re serious, I want your drugs.

[mcski]

Well, you only used her bad arguments and her first name so what do you expect?



And yet that's what happened. There was a constant white abolitionist movement in America from the very beginning. There were also a shitton of white Northerners like the Copperheads who opposed going to war over slavery and wanted instead to allow it. A shitton of white people also spent several decades occupying the South fighting another shitton of white terrorism before finally giving up on the project.

Some people love prepackaged bullshit narratives. Whereas one of the reasons why people despise horseshit identity politics is because they love all Americans and American culture.

I don’t think you’ve read any of her work, regardless your red herring about slavery identity politics which is irrelevant to Lincoln’s war motivations and not in any argument that I was making. And Doris KG is a name that Id think anyone w a passing interest in Lincoln would recognized - whether you like her work or not

Do you think states have a right to secede? Lincoln didn’t. That’s why the war was fought. My great grandfathers were both in the Union army. Neither would have lifted a finger to help a brother out. Slavery was one on the causes for sure, but Lincoln was a Unionist first. Thinking the north wad motivated to fight just to free slaves is delusional Disney revisionism

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I don’t think you’ve read any of her work, regardless your red herring in slavery identity politics that is irrelevant to Lincoln’s war motivations and not in any argument I was making. And Doris KG is a name that should be know you anyone w a passing interest in Lincoln whether you like her work or not

Do you think states have a right to secede? Lincoln didn’t. That’s why the war was fought. My great grandfathers were both in the Union army. Neither would have lifted a finger to help a brother out. Slavery was one on the causes for sure, but Lincoln was a Unionist first. Thinking the north wad motivated to fight just to free slaves is delusional Disney revisionism

Okay, Lincoln wanted to save the Union. Why did the south secede? You really haven’t said anything other than “the South wanted to secede and Lincoln didn’t want that”.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[plugboots]

Why are you guys arguing with multiVerse? I didn’t even know this was arguable anymore. The dude is right.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums