Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Sprightly

Why Are So Many Fascist Monuments Still Standing in Italy?

308 posts in this topic

30 minutes ago, karlydee2 said:

Then why did every single state that seceded list protection of SLAVERY as a/the reason?

And I blew away your western expansion BS -- The Missouri Compromise would have created 4 new slave sates and 14 new free states

 

If Lincoln did nothing there would have been 31-19 free to Slave

 

Well 29 -19 because HI and AK were late to the game

 

At the time a lot of those territories were not part of the US and owned by other countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, karlydee2 said:

Now ask yourself this:

 

If Lincoln was such a staunch UNION PRESERVATIONIST -- why did he issue the EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION in the middle of the WAR?

Without the EP -- there could have been a chance to re-unify

 

One he issued that -- it was war to the end.

He wanted to weaken the southern states. It freed the slaves only in states that seceded. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VOSA said:

Nor are there likely to be any if discussion of the subject is suppressed as you apparently want to do.

What part of that post states or implies wanting the discussion suppressed?  Best I can tell it just says that the discussion has gotten boring because it goes on over and over again and there's never anything new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

19 minutes ago, karlydee2 said:

Now ask yourself this:

 

If Lincoln was such a staunch UNION PRESERVATIONIST -- why did he issue the EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION in the middle of the WAR?

Without the EP -- there could have been a chance to re-unify

 

One he issued that -- it was war to the end.

Because, like he stated in his letter to Greeley, he saw the EP as a strategic move to keep England and France from recognizing and supporting the CSA.  I don't think there was much of a chance for a peaceful re-unification and I don't think he did either.  There is no question Lincoln hated slavery and wanted to have it abolished but he wanted union more.

Edited by Smokey 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, banner1124 said:

What part of that post states or implies wanting the discussion suppressed?  Best I can tell it just says that the discussion has gotten boring because it goes on over and over again and there's never anything new.

Not one person on this thread was threatened with a musket to the head to post to this thread. :)  Those who don't wish to participate are free to leave and forever ignore it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sprightly said:

Not one person on this thread was threatened with a musket to the head to post to this thread. :)  Those who don't wish to participate are free to leave and forever ignore it.

And they are just as free to chime in about how boring the constant Civil War stuff has gotten.  We, are in turn, not threatened with a musket to the head to read that post or respond to it :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, banner1124 said:

And they are just as free to chime in about how boring the constant Civil War stuff has gotten.  We, are in turn, not threatened with a musket to the head to read that post or respond to it :)

Same posters fighting the Civil War over and over again like they are going to change any one's opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Guido2 said:

Can we also tear down Marshall's statues and MLK's ....I am sure they scare some people....the one in DC looks pretty imposing. ;)

Ohhh and while at it.....lets take down the Washington monument....my wife is offended.....she feels it is phallic.

Get where I am going with this?

No. The CSA fought the USA. As in killed US soldiers. Honoring them seems odd to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

12 minutes ago, banner1124 said:

And they are just as free to chime in about how boring the constant Civil War stuff has gotten.  We, are in turn, not threatened with a musket to the head to read that post or respond to it :)

Okay. It's boring to you. So leave it! :)  I don't post on threads that bore me (most of them). Same stuff; different day. I simply ignore them. Just saying.

Edited by Sprightly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, banner1124 said:

And they are just as free to chime in about how boring the constant Civil War stuff has gotten.  We, are in turn, not threatened with a musket to the head to read that post or respond to it :)

Sure but what is the point?  It sounds as though they don't want anyone to discuss it on this board and that is just weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sprightly said:

Is that what I said? Interesting. 

Yes,  <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stevez51 said:

So when did Francis Scott Key become a confederate ..???

Where did I mention Francis Scott Key?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, EgyptKang said:

Yes,  <_<

If not for being wrong; you would be right. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 hours ago, stevez51 said:

So when did Francis Scott Key become a confederate ..???

Interesting fact about him.  His grandson was arrested and locked up in Fort McHenry by federal troops during the Civil War because he was suspected of having southern sympathies.  Only in the "land of the free". 

Edited by Smokey 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Smokey 1 said:

Sure but what is the point?  It sounds as though they don't want anyone to discuss it on this board and that is just weird.

C'mon Smokey...really? You almost sound as if you believe I have some ulterior motive in commenting how boring this thread is. Lol 

But, I will admit that I was wrong in making the comment in the first place. Even though find it a snooze-fest, many of you seem to enjoy it immensely. I suppose Civil War debates will continue to take place in this country for a long, long time. 

Carry on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Smokey 1 said:

Interesting fact about him.  His grandson was arrested and locked up in Fort McHenry by federal troops during the Civil War because he was suspected of having southern sympathies.  Only in the "land of the free". 

I love the irony of people who defend the CSA implying the union didn't value "freedom". There's being imprisoned for a couple years and there's generations of slavery. Let's be serious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EgyptKang said:

Where did I mention Francis Scott Key?

It was a statue defaced just like the civil war ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Smokey 1 said:

Interesting fact about him.  His grandson was arrested and locked up in Fort McHenry by federal troops during the Civil War because he was suspected of having southern sympathies.  Only in the "land of the free". 

They arrested most of the Md govt. Maybe that's why the confederate statues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, stevez51 said:

They arrested most of the Md govt. Maybe that's why the confederate statues.

Yes, and the song, and the flag.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are "a lot" of fascist monuments in Italy and especially Rome, but these are STILL a small fraction in number when compared to monuments of the Roman empire going back to the bronze age.

The thing about fascist monument is that they're huge and are typically entire buildings rather than just one statue. You can't really "pull them out." In fact the EUR neighborhood (https://goo.gl/maps/rWCfjoBhkjx) is the centerpiece of fascist architecture in Rome-- it's more of a layout of wide streets and imposing buildings than anything that specifically denotes fascism. My extended family actually lives there.

On the other hand the "confederate monuments" that are raising hell lately are, from what I've read, relatively recent works (from the 1920's through the 1960's) that deliberately convey a political intent which is still very much active.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, dogstarman said:

There are "a lot" of fascist monuments in Italy and especially Rome, but these are STILL a small fraction in number when compared to monuments of the Roman empire going back to the bronze age.

The thing about fascist monument is that they're huge and are typically entire buildings rather than just one statue. You can't really "pull them out." In fact the EUR neighborhood (https://goo.gl/maps/rWCfjoBhkjx) is the centerpiece of fascist architecture in Rome-- it's more of a layout of wide streets and imposing buildings than anything that specifically denotes fascism. My extended family actually lives there.

On the other hand the "confederate monuments" that are raising hell lately are, from what I've read, relatively recent works (from the 1920's through the 1960's) that deliberately convey a political intent which is still very much active.

 

The article is really about the recurring popularity of fascism in Italian politics. Which is manifestly more significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, dogstarman said:

There are "a lot" of fascist monuments in Italy and especially Rome, but these are STILL a small fraction in number when compared to monuments of the Roman empire going back to the bronze age.

The thing about fascist monument is that they're huge and are typically entire buildings rather than just one statue. You can't really "pull them out." In fact the EUR neighborhood (https://goo.gl/maps/rWCfjoBhkjx) is the centerpiece of fascist architecture in Rome-- it's more of a layout of wide streets and imposing buildings than anything that specifically denotes fascism. My extended family actually lives there.

On the other hand the "confederate monuments" that are raising hell lately are, from what I've read, relatively recent works (from the 1920's through the 1960's) that deliberately convey a political intent which is still very much active.

 

Exactly!!!! Used as tools of intimidation. Those statues have absolutely nothing to do with history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

4 hours ago, EgyptKang said:

Exactly!!!! Used as tools of intimidation. Those statues have absolutely nothing to do with history.

You are intimidated by a statue?  :lol: Hilarious.

Anyone intimidated by a statue has mental problems.  

 

Edited by Smokey 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

5 hours ago, dogstarman said:

There are "a lot" of fascist monuments in Italy and especially Rome, but these are STILL a small fraction in number when compared to monuments of the Roman empire going back to the bronze age.

The thing about fascist monument is that they're huge and are typically entire buildings rather than just one statue. You can't really "pull them out." In fact the EUR neighborhood (https://goo.gl/maps/rWCfjoBhkjx) is the centerpiece of fascist architecture in Rome-- it's more of a layout of wide streets and imposing buildings than anything that specifically denotes fascism. My extended family actually lives there.

On the other hand the "confederate monuments" that are raising hell lately are, from what I've read, relatively recent works (from the 1920's through the 1960's) that deliberately convey a political intent which is still very much active.

 

Is that right?  Do you think the statues being vandalized on battlefields are put there to convey a political intent?  Do you think historical heritage groups like the SCV are really just racist political groups?

Edited by Smokey 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Smokey 1 said:

If California seceded from the US would you consider them traitors?

California would need the consent of the rest of the country AND you should know, by now, that treason is defined in the Constitution:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

Now you know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0