NY Times Editor wants American soil forts names changed.... (1 Viewer)

lancer said:
Brad, quite right about that ox.:wink2: To me it is just a matter of leaving the past be. I get real tired of all this back and forth about trying to hide history from 150 years ago. -- Al
Click to expand...

Al,

I don't think it's a question of hiding the past but in some cases the past has not been fully known and when people are learning about it, things are seen in a bit of a different light.
 
Phantom Warrior said:
Things change over time. Some of the old names become remembered for the wrong reasons or not remembered at all as the person named turns out to be not historically important. Others, like Lee, become even more revered in time.

But can you imagine the nonsense that will take place in selecting a new PC name {eek3} I'm all for changing a name for a good reason, as long as I get to pick the new name. {sm3}^&grin^&grin

Terry
Click to expand...

Camp Eric Ken Shinseki?
 
jazzeum said:
Al,

I don't think it's a question of hiding the past but in some cases the past has not been fully known and when people are learning about it, things are seen in a bit of a different light.
Click to expand...
Again Brad, quite right. But the light is being cast in different times and with different sensibilities. Now that we are all more sensitive and 150 years smarter, should we then change the name of Washington, DC.? As everyone knows, George Washington made a good living off slavery. -- Al
 
Last thing the military needs is more political hacks and morons telling them what they need to do, people that hide behind a keyboard and never ever served have no clue. The Units stationed at those Forts wrote their own history and are still writing it to this very day. I don't think they are in anyway haunted by ghost from the past so let the history they wrote stand. Funny thing about history it seems to change with a big revelation every time someone wants to sell a book, and distance plus time from an event dang sure don't add any more accuracy to the information. If it did the police would wait for years before doing an investigation.
 
To be honest Al, I never thought of changing the names of the forts as Malinowski suggested and I thought the article a little silly. I was never a big fan of his when he was doing the Disunion series.

There is a limit to everything.
 
jazzeum said:
To be honest Al, I never thought of changing the names of the forts as Malinowski suggested and I thought the article a little silly. I was never a big fan of his when he was doing the Disunion series.

There is a limit to everything.
Click to expand...
As the kids say today, "True dat." I certainly don't advocate changing the names, either. Just trying to make a point about all the revisionist stuff flying through the air. -- Al
 
This whole things strikes me as someone "advocating" for something which most of the "offended" people likely don't care about at all. Perhaps instead of creating issues like this, Malinowski should try to be helpful with solving other problems which are actually real. Maybe he has some potential solutions about the sexual assault problem which has been in the news recently.

Nah, that would require a lot more thought......^&grin

Noah
 
I don't see it as revisionist but reinterpretation especially in the context of coming to grips with the aftermath of slavery and the role of black people in American society.

The prevailing trend post war was reconciliationist and the dominant issue of what the war had been about was ignored. It was almost as if there had been no slavery issue. In the 1960 Centennial, it wasn't even mentioned. A competing trend was what had the war been about. This was sublimated just as the role of blacks in Southern political life was suppressed in the Jim Crow era. However, this competing trend never fully disappeared and is now the dominant trend.



It's all about coming to grips with the Civil War, which is never far away.
 
This debate becomes more laughable every day. I figure in about 50 years, the Confederacy will have never existed and they will erase Lee, Jackson and the rest from the rolls at West Point. What a joke.

Maybe I can rename my driveway "Nathan Bedford Forrest Lane" and my house "The Critter Company Ranch". Wonder if I could garner any protest demonstrations????? What rubbish.

TD
 
jazzeum said:
Here's the take by Kevin Levin on the Malinowski piece, http://cwmemory.com/2013/05/25/misplaced-memory-on-memorial-day-weekend/#more-20594

Kevin, who has one of the best Civil War blogs around, Civil War Memory, is generally dismissive of the piece, and suggests you'd be better off going to a cemetery tomorrow and paying respects.
Click to expand...
Read the comments after the article, interesting. And by the way, I took basic training at Ft. Jackson, 1966 and advanced training at Ft. Gordon, 1967...
 
tdubel said:
Could not agree more. What the heck is this country coming to?????????
Click to expand...

You are entitiled to your opinion if it is based on some knowledge and research not parroting Fox pundits I hope. Have you ever read the NY Times on a regular basis?
founded in 1851, winning 112 Pulitzer prizes and having the most popular US news site recieving more than 30 million unique visitors a month. Did you mean to insult
30 million Americans?
Did you mean to insult the tens of millions of Americans who are better off not to mention alive with your comments? Yes, that's right the NY Times investigative reporting
on the Tobacco industry and the dangers of smoking helped motivate tens of millions of smokers to quit and millions more to never start. The Surgeon General stated that
investigative journalists from papers like the NY Times not only saved millions of lives but trillions of dollars lost to caring for smoking related diseases. the list goes on and
on from helping to create safer work places to exposing pollution, unsafe food and medicines. Today the NY Times is leading the fight to convince our government to take
action on global warming, something most scientists have been warning us for years.
I subscribe to 11 newspapers (digitally) and read articles from a half dozen more each week. The NY Times is one of many places I get my news and I certainly don't insult
the other publications even if I don't agree with them. Try looking at both sides of a debate before you make irresponsible statements.
 
While I hate that article, the NY Times is my go-to paper. I certainly don't agree with all the opinions, but I respect the paper.
 
tdubel said:
This debate becomes more laughable every day. I figure in about 50 years, the Confederacy will have never existed and they will erase Lee, Jackson and the rest from the rolls at West Point. What a joke.

Maybe I can rename my driveway "Nathan Bedford Forrest Lane" and my house "The Critter Company Ranch". Wonder if I could garner any protest demonstrations????? What rubbish.

TD
Click to expand...

I don't think so. I would like to see the history of the Confederacy relegated to museums and libraries, something buffs and scholars study as interesting but no longer troubling to Americans 50 year in the future.
 
Scott said:
I don't think so. I would like to see the history of the Confederacy relegated to museums and libraries, something buffs and scholars study as interesting but no longer troubling to Americans 50 year in the future.
Click to expand...
The average American doesn't think about the Civil War now anyways nor much else to do with history and when we get rid of the Civil War, what next the holocaust or the treatment of the American Indians maybe the internment of the Japanese Americans? There is a lot to be learned from this era and it's not all is as nice and neat as most would have us believe, everything the Confederacy stood for was not evil and everything the Union did was not good or even legal. If you don't want to study the Civil War then don't, simple as that.
 
nysoldiers said:
You are entitiled to your opinion if it is based on some knowledge and research not parroting Fox pundits I hope. Have you ever read the NY Times on a regular basis?
founded in 1851, winning 112 Pulitzer prizes and having the most popular US news site recieving more than 30 million unique visitors a month. Did you mean to insult
30 million Americans?
Did you mean to insult the tens of millions of Americans who are better off not to mention alive with your comments? Yes, that's right the NY Times investigative reporting
on the Tobacco industry and the dangers of smoking helped motivate tens of millions of smokers to quit and millions more to never start. The Surgeon General stated that
investigative journalists from papers like the NY Times not only saved millions of lives but trillions of dollars lost to caring for smoking related diseases. the list goes on and
on from helping to create safer work places to exposing pollution, unsafe food and medicines. Today the NY Times is leading the fight to convince our government to take
action on global warming, something most scientists have been warning us for years.
I subscribe to 11 newspapers (digitally) and read articles from a half dozen more each week. The NY Times is one of many places I get my news and I certainly don't insult
the other publications even if I don't agree with them. Try looking at both sides of a debate before you make irresponsible statements.
Click to expand...

Rich,
we have met and talked in person and it was enjoyable.

As for me agreeing with a comment someone else made, I stand by it. As for what news I do like, you could not be more off based and I think you make a lot of assumptions above about my viewpoints. My comment has to do with this issue in this thread and I find it downright stupid, hence my comment. Now, if you feel better with your above diatribe, then by all means, go with it.

End of day, as I said in another thread, I will continue to fly my flag, by all means, enjoy yours. That statment is just that, I have my opinions, you have yours. The above is just absolutely so off based on my viewpoints, your post is laughable. And by the way, the last time I checked, I still live in a free country and can have ANY opinion I want to on anything, I didn't know it had to be qualified, researched, vetted, etc.

TD
 
Scott said:
I don't think so. I would like to see the history of the Confederacy relegated to museums and libraries, something buffs and scholars study as interesting but no longer troubling to Americans 50 year in the future.
Click to expand...

So, what you are saying is, let's just teach our kids to ignore part of US history and only have access through research in a museum or library? I don't find history "troubling", I find it as history, interesting, etc. Really, it is whatever you want to make of it, interpret it, etc. I believe, in good/bad/indifferent, people should understand their history. The whole doomed to repeat it statement is quite accurate in my opinion.

I would hope most people don't want to relegate history to museums. Last time I checked, kids are still studying Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan, Adolf Hitler, Tojo and many other brutal events. That's a good thing as again, I think it is important to understand and be exposed rather than just sweep it away to a museum.

TD
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top