Virginia apologizes for slavery

Checkmite · 25th February 2007, 08:01 AM

Quote:

RICHMOND, Va. - Meeting on the grounds of the former Confederate Capitol, the Virginia General Assembly voted unanimously Saturday to express "profound regret" for the state's role in slavery.

Sponsors of the resolution say they know of no other state that has apologized for slavery, although Missouri lawmakers are considering such a measure. The resolution does not carry the weight of law but sends an important symbolic message, supporters said.

...

The measure also expressed regret for "the exploitation of Native Americans."

I, for one, happen to think this is a Good Thing.

I've saved you the searching - the full text of the resolution can be found right around here. It is quite inclusive and unambiguous. It makes me happy.

Alt+F4 · 25th February 2007, 08:03 AM

I can understand how it might make people feel better, but how can someone apologize for something they didn't do in the first place?

Checkmite · 25th February 2007, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by Alt+F4

I can understand how it might make people feel better, but how can someone apologize for something they didn't do in the first place?

Not sure I understand...

Alt+F4 · 25th February 2007, 08:51 AM

No one in the state of Virginia today ever owned a slave, so why are they apologizing? I don't see how it's possible to apologize for someone else's crimes.

Lonewulf · 25th February 2007, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by Alt+F4

No one in the state of Virginia today ever owned a slave, so why are they apologizing? I don't see how it's possible to apologize for someone else's crimes.

I agree with this. People of the present are not guilty of the crimes of their ancestors.

However, if the State of Virginia apologizes officially, as in a government-type apology, then you could say that it's apologizing as a government body moreso than it is as a group of people. Thus, it's apologizing as an institution, which is a bit longer-lasting than the individuals that run it.

Checkmite · 25th February 2007, 09:42 AM

Originally Posted by Lonewulf

However, if the State of Virginia apologizes officially, as in a government-type apology, then you could say that it's apologizing as a government body moreso than it is as a group of people. Thus, it's apologizing as an institution, which is a bit longer-lasting than the individuals that run it.

This is the point. Those specific people never owned slaves; however, they are acting as representatives of the government of Virginia, which was indeed around back then, and was somewhat culpable. So think of this not as a statement on behalf of this set of individuals, but on behalf of the government - which is still the same entity, though different people now represent it.

shanek · 25th February 2007, 09:42 AM

Uh-huh. And does anyone think this is anything but a political move? I mean, it's not like any white people alive today enslaved any black people alive today, so there's no one left from whom an apology would matter.

So, what's next, Brits apologizing for George III and Oliver Cromwell? Italians apologizing for the destruction of the Library at Alexandria? Men apologizing to women for cavemen hitting them on the head and dragging them home by their hair?

Lonewulf · 25th February 2007, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by shanek

Uh-huh. And does anyone think this is anything but a political move? I mean, it's not like any white people alive today enslaved any black people alive today, so there's no one left from whom an apology would matter.

So, what's next, Brits apologizing for George III and Oliver Cromwell? Italians apologizing for the destruction of the Library at Alexandria? Men apologizing to women for cavemen hitting them on the head and dragging them home by their hair?

...Why not?

Though I admit that if my tax dollars went into it (or Virginian's tax dollars went into it), and there was actual expenditure behind the apology (such as a meeting for it), it is silly.

shanek · 25th February 2007, 09:48 AM

Nah, it's a non-binding resolution, which means that it didn't cost Virginians anything (other than the time their reps spend debating it etc.) but it also means that it doesn't make the first frakkin' bit of difference. It doesn't achieve anything, it's just something the politicians can feel good about and mention come campaign time.

Checkmite · 25th February 2007, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by shanek

Nah, it's a non-binding resolution, which means that it didn't cost Virginians anything (other than the time their reps spend debating it etc.) but it also means that it doesn't make the first frakkin' bit of difference. It doesn't achieve anything, it's just something the politicians can feel good about and mention come campaign time.

Kind of like the things we post in this forum. But I've read some things here that make me happy, too. It's all gravy.

Alt+F4 · 25th February 2007, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by shanek

It doesn't achieve anything, it's just something the politicians can feel good about and mention come campaign time.

Well politicians do love telling us how great they are. I wonder how those same great Virginian politicians would feel about a resolution condeming the actions of Robert E. Lee.

shanek · 25th February 2007, 10:08 AM

What actions would that be?

The Central Scrutinizer · 25th February 2007, 10:48 AM

Is this the same Virginia who questioned the existence of Santa Claus in 1897?

Lonewulf · 25th February 2007, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by Alt+F4

Well politicians do love telling us how great they are. I wonder how those same great Virginian politicians would feel about a resolution condeming the actions of Robert E. Lee.

Why should they? The civil war was fought over far more than simply slavery (though slavery was an important issue).

Almost all of soldiers in the conflict were not slave owners, however.

latent aaaack · 25th February 2007, 11:43 AM

Virginia to black people: "There, there..."

It's so funny the way headlines like "Virginia 'sorry' about slavery" look so insincere and absurdly insufficient and weird.

Checkmite · 25th February 2007, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by Lonewulf

Why should they? The civil war was fought over far more than simply slavery (though slavery was an important issue).

A very important issue. Very, very, very important, that issue.

Roadtoad · 25th February 2007, 11:55 AM

Just a few things to consider:

My family left Virginia back in either the 1830's or 1840's. As I've frequently joked about this, my earliest ancestor in California was invited to late night party in his home state, which he declined to attend as he didn't own a tie. (This was partially in regards to his habit of borrowing horses which he frequently forgot to return, usually after selling them.) No problem, his neighbors said, one would be provided for him, though as an economic measure, my ancestor's tie would be made of sisal, rather than silk.

We owned no slaves in our past. Our participation in the Civil War was limited. We derived little immediate benefit from slavery.

Except that there were times when my grandfather hired migrant workers to tend to his orchards near Wheatland, CA. And we stood silently as there were those of African ancestry who were being hanged for nothing more than a few spurious accusations by bigots and cowards. We did nothing to better the lives of those who suffered simply because they had dark skin. There was a lot of damage done because we chose to take no action when it came to those who differed from us.

Slavery would not have endured for as long as it did, nor would we have delayed so long in apologizing for it, had it not been for the fact that it was so profitable to so many. We may not have benefitted directly, but we still gained from the blood of someone living a continent away from us. That I had as much as I did over the years can still be traced with a heavy chain to the neck of a man I will never know, suffering in a field which has long since been converted to tract housing.

We bear some collective guilt here. It may be diluted, but it remains. Failing to acknowledge this guilt has led to some genuinely frightening things in our past, not the least of which was the racism which allowed a monster like Juan Corona to run loose here in Northern California. The rot set in long ago, and it's only been now that we've been willing to acknowledge that it exists. Contrast that with the actions of Germany, and it's painful recognition of the nightmare it permitted under the leadership of an Austrian-born xenophobe, and you have to wonder how we can continue to claim moral leadership.

Joshua's right on this one, dead right. This is a good thing. Overdue, but very good.

shanek · 25th February 2007, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by Lonewulf

Why should they? The civil war was fought over far more than simply slavery (though slavery was an important issue).

Almost all of soldiers in the conflict were not slave owners, however.

In fact, Lee was an abolitionist.

latent aaaack · 25th February 2007, 12:02 PM

This just in from Georgia: "Oh no! We just realized something!"
Breaking news from N. Carolina: "Oooh! So did we!"

This reminds me of proposals to ban Holocaust denial in Europe, it's like solving the problems of half a century ago are the only thing policy leaders are good at. All while anti-semetic attacks continue to rise dramatically and any number of other important and real problems loom now and aren't being addressed. I'm sure a century or two from now we'll have an official admission from the American Islands government to the effect of "OK so maybe we're not that bright and..."

The Central Scrutinizer · 25th February 2007, 12:09 PM

Originally Posted by shanek

In fact, Lee was an abolitionist.

False.

RandFan · 25th February 2007, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by shanek

Men apologizing to women for cavemen hitting them on the head and dragging them home by their hair?

So this is inapropriate behavior then? Damn.

RandFan · 25th February 2007, 12:19 PM

On a more serious note. I'm torn on the issue. I've always been against such apologies but I'm not so sure anymore. So long as the statement is one in which the regret is simply one of an official capacity and that is simply on behalf of the state and isn't construed to apply to anyone living. Is that possible?

Alt+F4 · 25th February 2007, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by shanek

In fact, Lee was an abolitionist.

Lee is a complicated person. He felt slavery was sinful, but he also felt it necessary in the "white man's burden" sort of argument. He was not however, an abolitionist.

My original point was that everyone is against slavery today, that's a no-brainer. It would be a brave (yet suicidal) political move to question the motives and actions of someone like Lee, who is still considered by many in Virginia, a hero.

Skeptic · 25th February 2007, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by Alt+F4

No one in the state of Virginia today ever owned a slave, so why are they apologizing? I don't see how it's possible to apologize for someone else's crimes.

It isn't the individuals here that are apologizing. It is the state of Virginia that is (officially) apologizing.

shanek · 25th February 2007, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by latent aaaack

This just in from Georgia: "Oh no! We just realized something!"
Breaking news from N. Carolina: "Oooh! So did we!"

Oh, oh, I'm startin' to get a clue!

http://images.southparkstudios.com/m...nvestigate.jpg

Skeptic · 25th February 2007, 01:51 PM

I have no reason at all to doubt your word that your family didn't own slaves, roadtoad, but just for once it would have been cool to meet someone who admitted their family (a) owned slaves and (b) were nasty to them.

If all the incidents told as "true stories" about how "we were nice to our slaves" by southerners were true, history would have to be re-written, since apparently black slaves more or less owned the entire south and their every whim was catered to by their nominal owners.

Alt+F4 · 25th February 2007, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by shanek

Oh, oh, I'm startin' to get a clue!

Yikes Linus, that's one big pic!

Roadtoad · 25th February 2007, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic

I have no reason at all to doubt your word that your family didn't own slaves, roadtoad, but just for once it would have been cool to meet someone who admitted their family (a) owned slaves and (b) were nasty to them.

If all the incidents told as "true stories" about how "we were nice to our slaves" by southerners were true, history would have to be re-written, since apparently black slaves more or less owned the entire south and their every whim was catered to by their nominal owners.

Interesting point. I've often wondered about this, how there could have been so many slaves in the South, but there could have been so few slave owners or slave masters. And for that matter, when you visit the old plantations, you wonder how the main house could have stood for so long, yet many of the slave's quarters have eroded into oblivion in such a short time. You look at the exhibits at the Virginia Museum, then examine what remains at old plantations, and then ask yourself if you would have chosen to live under such conditions. I've yet to see anyone provide a very effective refutation to Fredrick Douglass' writings.

Alt+F4 · 25th February 2007, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic

It isn't the individuals here that are apologizing. It is the state of Virginia that is (officially) apologizing.

The state is the collective will of the individuals.

shanek · 25th February 2007, 02:00 PM

Actually, slaves were considered valuable property, so there was an incentive to treat them nicely. Most of the mistreatment, and certainly the nastiest instances, came when they thought for some reason that they could, you know, escape and live freely or something. Then they were tortured, abused, or even killed as an "example." As a result, most of the slaves behaved, and thus were treated comparatively well, and this is also how the "Uncle Toms" come about--they didn't want to be any worse off than they were, so they cooperated and even participated in the punishment of slaves who acted up.

I always thought there was a moral in that. If all or even most of the slaves had decided they didn't want to go along with it, there wouldn't have been thing one the slaveowners could do about it. As it is, they were kept in line by fear.

shanek · 25th February 2007, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by Alt+F4

Yikes Linus, that's one big pic!

Yeah, and I tried several times to size it down and it wouldn't cooperate. So I replaced it with a link. Sorry 'bout that.

Sir Robin Goodfellow · 25th February 2007, 02:07 PM

I'd like to officially apologise for burning down the White House during the War of 1812.

Skibum · 25th February 2007, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by Sir Robin Goodfellow

I'd like to officially apologize for burning down the White House during the War of 1812.

Well, I suppose we could apologize for dumping your tea. Sorry bout that.

On topic- There is also a National Slavery Museum being built locally here in Va.

shanek · 25th February 2007, 02:19 PM

I'm feeling a lot of love in this room!

As a North Carolinian, I'd like to personally apologize for Clay Aiken. Sorry, guys!

RandFan · 25th February 2007, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by shanek

I always thought there was a moral in that. If all or even most of the slaves had decided they didn't want to go along with it, there wouldn't have been thing one the slaveowners could do about it. As it is, they were kept in line by fear.

Which turns out, AIU, is part of the human condition. Humans can be made to be compliant with minimum control. It is, to some extent, in our nature. There is also the point about perception. What does it mean to be free? Freedom is a relative concept. Please, don't misconstrue my point. Slavery is pernicious. I could not conceive of an argument to suppose that it is not so. It's just that it seems to me possible to create an environment where humans accept their condition and don't see the shackles. I don't mean to be flip and minimize slavery, as I said, it is a pernicious thing but aren't those who go to church each and every Sunday, to some extent, slaves? Or those of us who work, especially at dead end jobs, slaves? Again, my only point is one of perception. Many slaves perhaps did not have a basis for seeing their plight as slaves.

"If I could have convinced more slaves that they were slaves, I could have freed thousands more." --Harriet Tubman

shanek · 25th February 2007, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

It's just that it seems to me possible to create an environment where humans accept their condition and don't see the shackles.

And that, to at least some degree, is what's happening now.

Quote:

"If I could have convinced more slaves that they were slaves, I could have freed thousands more." --Harriet Tubman

The Editor: Is a slave a slave if he doesn't know he's been enslaved?

The Doctor: Yes.

The Editor: Oh, I was hoping for a philosophical debate. Is that all I'm gonna get? "Yes"?

The Doctor: Yes.

RandFan · 25th February 2007, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by shanek

And that, to at least some degree, is what's happening now.

Agreed.

Quote:

The Editor: Is a slave a slave if he doesn't know he's been enslaved?

The Doctor: Yes.

The Editor: Oh, I was hoping for a philosophical debate. Is that all I'm gonna get? "Yes"?

The Doctor: Yes.

Which raises the question, how do any of us know that we are free, or not free?

ConspiRaider · 25th February 2007, 03:10 PM

A complete, utterly meaningless waste of time. Isn't this the same state where, a scant 6 months ago, then Senator George Allen referred to a man as "macaca"?

He apologized, as well he should have. But should we have expected the entire state to make an "official" apology? No, we should not have. And that happened just last summer. Slavery ended in this country more than 140 years ago. Hey I know! My dad (since passed on) had a heckuva hard time getting a job back there in the late 40s early 50s because he was Catholic - and you had to put down your religion on applications. America is WASPworld, as we know. Therefore, ALL of corporate America must apologize to me and my entire family!

Someone said this was a political stunt and I agree. What, exactly, was this supposed to accomplish? Was it supposed to make black people feel better? I don't see how. "Yes, the public schools in our neighborhoods are definitely sub-standard as compared to white neighborhoods - but at LEAST the state of Virginia apologized to us for slavery!!!". I don't think so. Black people in this country don't need hollow, meaningless apologies. They need equal access to education, health care, the job market, the real estate market and so forth.

The Atheist · 25th February 2007, 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by ConspiRaider

A complete, utterly meaningless waste of time.
...snip...

Someone said this was a political stunt and I agree. What, exactly, was this supposed to accomplish? Was it supposed to make black people feel better? I don't see how. "Yes, the public schools in our neighborhoods are definitely sub-standard as compared to white neighborhoods - but at LEAST the state of Virginia apologized to us for slavery!!!". I don't think so. Black people in this country don't need hollow, meaningless apologies. They need equal access to education, health care, the job market, the real estate market and so forth.

Hear, hear!

Living in a country where apologising for transgressions of past generations has reached an art form, I can relate to this.

The New Zealand Government has issued apologies for all sorts of transgressions of over a century ago. We recently apologised to a soldier who was shot for cowardice in World War I.

Yes, it is recorded that the original sin was indeed a mistake, but it's ridiculous. As has been pointed out, it's infinite regression at its very worst. Who's going to apologise to Neanderthal? And who's to listen?

Until every woman in the world collectively apologise for that stupid bitch Eve for talking to snakes, I NEVER want to hear another apology by a dead culture to another dead culture.

TragicMonkey · 25th February 2007, 04:28 PM

Well, for all those who don't think Virginia needed to apologize for slavery, I ask you: honestly, now, how do you feel about Japan's take on the Rape of Nanking? They're still calling it an "incident". Do they owe an apology? Should they issue one, whether owed or not? How about a statement of regret? Or even an acknowledgment of what happened?

25th February 2007, 08:01 AM	#1
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,898	Virginia apologizes for slavery Resolution Passes Unanimously Quote: RICHMOND, Va. - Meeting on the grounds of the former Confederate Capitol, the Virginia General Assembly voted unanimously Saturday to express "profound regret" for the state's role in slavery. Sponsors of the resolution say they know of no other state that has apologized for slavery, although Missouri lawmakers are considering such a measure. The resolution does not carry the weight of law but sends an important symbolic message, supporters said. ... The measure also expressed regret for "the exploitation of Native Americans." I, for one, happen to think this is a Good Thing. I've saved you the searching - the full text of the resolution can be found right around here. It is quite inclusive and unambiguous. It makes me happy.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

25th February 2007, 08:03 AM	#2
Alt+F4 diabolical globalist Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Department of Abandoned Places Posts: 9,780	I can understand how it might make people feel better, but how can someone apologize for something they didn't do in the first place?
	__________________ "My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky

25th February 2007, 08:08 AM	#3
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,898	Originally Posted by Alt+F4 I can understand how it might make people feel better, but how can someone apologize for something they didn't do in the first place? Not sure I understand...
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

25th February 2007, 08:51 AM	#4
Alt+F4 diabolical globalist Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Department of Abandoned Places Posts: 9,780	No one in the state of Virginia today ever owned a slave, so why are they apologizing? I don't see how it's possible to apologize for someone else's crimes.
	__________________ "My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky

25th February 2007, 09:42 AM	#6
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,898	Originally Posted by Lonewulf However, if the State of Virginia apologizes officially, as in a government-type apology, then you could say that it's apologizing as a government body moreso than it is as a group of people. Thus, it's apologizing as an institution, which is a bit longer-lasting than the individuals that run it. This is the point. Those specific people never owned slaves; however, they are acting as representatives of the government of Virginia, which was indeed around back then, and was somewhat culpable. So think of this not as a statement on behalf of this set of individuals, but on behalf of the government - which is still the same entity, though different people now represent it.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

25th February 2007, 09:37 AM	#5
Lonewulf Humanistic Cyborg Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: San Antonio, Texas Posts: 10,380	Originally Posted by Alt+F4 No one in the state of Virginia today ever owned a slave, so why are they apologizing? I don't see how it's possible to apologize for someone else's crimes. I agree with this. People of the present are not guilty of the crimes of their ancestors. However, if the State of Virginia apologizes officially, as in a government-type apology, then you could say that it's apologizing as a government body moreso than it is as a group of people. Thus, it's apologizing as an institution, which is a bit longer-lasting than the individuals that run it.

25th February 2007, 09:42 AM	#7
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	Uh-huh. And does anyone think this is anything but a political move? I mean, it's not like any white people alive today enslaved any black people alive today, so there's no one left from whom an apology would matter. So, what's next, Brits apologizing for George III and Oliver Cromwell? Italians apologizing for the destruction of the Library at Alexandria? Men apologizing to women for cavemen hitting them on the head and dragging them home by their hair?
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.

25th February 2007, 09:44 AM	#8
Lonewulf Humanistic Cyborg Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: San Antonio, Texas Posts: 10,380	Originally Posted by shanek Uh-huh. And does anyone think this is anything but a political move? I mean, it's not like any white people alive today enslaved any black people alive today, so there's no one left from whom an apology would matter. So, what's next, Brits apologizing for George III and Oliver Cromwell? Italians apologizing for the destruction of the Library at Alexandria? Men apologizing to women for cavemen hitting them on the head and dragging them home by their hair? ...Why not? Though I admit that if my tax dollars went into it (or Virginian's tax dollars went into it), and there was actual expenditure behind the apology (such as a meeting for it), it is silly.

25th February 2007, 09:48 AM	#9
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	Nah, it's a non-binding resolution, which means that it didn't cost Virginians anything (other than the time their reps spend debating it etc.) but it also means that it doesn't make the first frakkin' bit of difference. It doesn't achieve anything, it's just something the politicians can feel good about and mention come campaign time.
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.

25th February 2007, 09:55 AM	#10
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,898	Originally Posted by shanek Nah, it's a non-binding resolution, which means that it didn't cost Virginians anything (other than the time their reps spend debating it etc.) but it also means that it doesn't make the first frakkin' bit of difference. It doesn't achieve anything, it's just something the politicians can feel good about and mention come campaign time. Kind of like the things we post in this forum. But I've read some things here that make me happy, too. It's all gravy.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

25th February 2007, 09:55 AM	#11
Alt+F4 diabolical globalist Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Department of Abandoned Places Posts: 9,780	Originally Posted by shanek It doesn't achieve anything, it's just something the politicians can feel good about and mention come campaign time. Well politicians do love telling us how great they are. I wonder how those same great Virginian politicians would feel about a resolution condeming the actions of Robert E. Lee.
	__________________ "My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky

25th February 2007, 10:08 AM	#12
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	What actions would that be?
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.

25th February 2007, 10:48 AM	#13
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,278	Is this the same Virginia who questioned the existence of Santa Claus in 1897?
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

25th February 2007, 10:57 AM	#14
Lonewulf Humanistic Cyborg Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: San Antonio, Texas Posts: 10,380	Originally Posted by Alt+F4 Well politicians do love telling us how great they are. I wonder how those same great Virginian politicians would feel about a resolution condeming the actions of Robert E. Lee. Why should they? The civil war was fought over far more than simply slavery (though slavery was an important issue). Almost all of soldiers in the conflict were not slave owners, however.

25th February 2007, 11:43 AM	#15
latent aaaack Muse Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: 98229 Posts: 928	Virginia to black people: "There, there..." It's so funny the way headlines like "Virginia 'sorry' about slavery" look so insincere and absurdly insufficient and weird.

25th February 2007, 11:45 AM	#16
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,898	Originally Posted by Lonewulf Why should they? The civil war was fought over far more than simply slavery (though slavery was an important issue). A very important issue. Very, very, very important, that issue.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

25th February 2007, 11:55 AM	#17
Roadtoad Bufo Caminus Inedibilis Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Gone. Posts: 15,738	Just a few things to consider: My family left Virginia back in either the 1830's or 1840's. As I've frequently joked about this, my earliest ancestor in California was invited to late night party in his home state, which he declined to attend as he didn't own a tie. (This was partially in regards to his habit of borrowing horses which he frequently forgot to return, usually after selling them.) No problem, his neighbors said, one would be provided for him, though as an economic measure, my ancestor's tie would be made of sisal, rather than silk. We owned no slaves in our past. Our participation in the Civil War was limited. We derived little immediate benefit from slavery. Except that there were times when my grandfather hired migrant workers to tend to his orchards near Wheatland, CA. And we stood silently as there were those of African ancestry who were being hanged for nothing more than a few spurious accusations by bigots and cowards. We did nothing to better the lives of those who suffered simply because they had dark skin. There was a lot of damage done because we chose to take no action when it came to those who differed from us. Slavery would not have endured for as long as it did, nor would we have delayed so long in apologizing for it, had it not been for the fact that it was so profitable to so many. We may not have benefitted directly, but we still gained from the blood of someone living a continent away from us. That I had as much as I did over the years can still be traced with a heavy chain to the neck of a man I will never know, suffering in a field which has long since been converted to tract housing. We bear some collective guilt here. It may be diluted, but it remains. Failing to acknowledge this guilt has led to some genuinely frightening things in our past, not the least of which was the racism which allowed a monster like Juan Corona to run loose here in Northern California. The rot set in long ago, and it's only been now that we've been willing to acknowledge that it exists. Contrast that with the actions of Germany, and it's painful recognition of the nightmare it permitted under the leadership of an Austrian-born xenophobe, and you have to wonder how we can continue to claim moral leadership. Joshua's right on this one, dead right. This is a good thing. Overdue, but very good.

25th February 2007, 12:02 PM	#18
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	Originally Posted by Lonewulf Why should they? The civil war was fought over far more than simply slavery (though slavery was an important issue). Almost all of soldiers in the conflict were not slave owners, however. In fact, Lee was an abolitionist.
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.

25th February 2007, 12:09 PM	#20
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,278	Originally Posted by shanek In fact, Lee was an abolitionist. False.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

25th February 2007, 12:16 PM	#21
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,417	Originally Posted by shanek Men apologizing to women for cavemen hitting them on the head and dragging them home by their hair? So this is inapropriate behavior then? Damn.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

25th February 2007, 12:19 PM	#22
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,417	On a more serious note. I'm torn on the issue. I've always been against such apologies but I'm not so sure anymore. So long as the statement is one in which the regret is simply one of an official capacity and that is simply on behalf of the state and isn't construed to apply to anyone living. Is that possible?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

25th February 2007, 12:52 PM	#23
Alt+F4 diabolical globalist Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Department of Abandoned Places Posts: 9,780	Originally Posted by shanek In fact, Lee was an abolitionist. Lee is a complicated person. He felt slavery was sinful, but he also felt it necessary in the "white man's burden" sort of argument. He was not however, an abolitionist. My original point was that everyone is against slavery today, that's a no-brainer. It would be a brave (yet suicidal) political move to question the motives and actions of someone like Lee, who is still considered by many in Virginia, a hero.
	__________________ "My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky

25th February 2007, 01:46 PM	#24
Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Behind the chessboard Posts: 18,361	Originally Posted by Alt+F4 No one in the state of Virginia today ever owned a slave, so why are they apologizing? I don't see how it's possible to apologize for someone else's crimes. It isn't the individuals here that are apologizing. It is the state of Virginia that is (officially) apologizing.

25th February 2007, 01:50 PM	#25
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	Originally Posted by latent aaaack This just in from Georgia: "Oh no! We just realized something!" Breaking news from N. Carolina: "Oooh! So did we!" Oh, oh, I'm startin' to get a clue! http://images.southparkstudios.com/m...nvestigate.jpg
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is. Last edited by shanek; 25th February 2007 at 01:57 PM.

25th February 2007, 01:51 PM	#26
Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Behind the chessboard Posts: 18,361	I have no reason at all to doubt your word that your family didn't own slaves, roadtoad, but just for once it would have been cool to meet someone who admitted their family (a) owned slaves and (b) were nasty to them. If all the incidents told as "true stories" about how "we were nice to our slaves" by southerners were true, history would have to be re-written, since apparently black slaves more or less owned the entire south and their every whim was catered to by their nominal owners.

25th February 2007, 01:57 PM	#27
Alt+F4 diabolical globalist Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Department of Abandoned Places Posts: 9,780	Originally Posted by shanek Oh, oh, I'm startin' to get a clue! Yikes Linus, that's one big pic!
	__________________ "My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky

25th February 2007, 01:58 PM	#28
Roadtoad Bufo Caminus Inedibilis Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Gone. Posts: 15,738	Originally Posted by Skeptic I have no reason at all to doubt your word that your family didn't own slaves, roadtoad, but just for once it would have been cool to meet someone who admitted their family (a) owned slaves and (b) were nasty to them. If all the incidents told as "true stories" about how "we were nice to our slaves" by southerners were true, history would have to be re-written, since apparently black slaves more or less owned the entire south and their every whim was catered to by their nominal owners. Interesting point. I've often wondered about this, how there could have been so many slaves in the South, but there could have been so few slave owners or slave masters. And for that matter, when you visit the old plantations, you wonder how the main house could have stood for so long, yet many of the slave's quarters have eroded into oblivion in such a short time. You look at the exhibits at the Virginia Museum, then examine what remains at old plantations, and then ask yourself if you would have chosen to live under such conditions. I've yet to see anyone provide a very effective refutation to Fredrick Douglass' writings.

25th February 2007, 01:59 PM	#29
Alt+F4 diabolical globalist Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Department of Abandoned Places Posts: 9,780	Originally Posted by Skeptic It isn't the individuals here that are apologizing. It is the state of Virginia that is (officially) apologizing. The state is the collective will of the individuals.
	__________________ "My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky

25th February 2007, 02:00 PM	#30
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	Actually, slaves were considered valuable property, so there was an incentive to treat them nicely. Most of the mistreatment, and certainly the nastiest instances, came when they thought for some reason that they could, you know, escape and live freely or something. Then they were tortured, abused, or even killed as an "example." As a result, most of the slaves behaved, and thus were treated comparatively well, and this is also how the "Uncle Toms" come about--they didn't want to be any worse off than they were, so they cooperated and even participated in the punishment of slaves who acted up. I always thought there was a moral in that. If all or even most of the slaves had decided they didn't want to go along with it, there wouldn't have been thing one the slaveowners could do about it. As it is, they were kept in line by fear.
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.

25th February 2007, 02:01 PM	#31
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	Originally Posted by Alt+F4 Yikes Linus, that's one big pic! Yeah, and I tried several times to size it down and it wouldn't cooperate. So I replaced it with a link. Sorry 'bout that.
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.

25th February 2007, 02:07 PM	#32
Sir Robin Goodfellow Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Estevan (wear da fox hat) Posts: 2,751	I'd like to officially apologise for burning down the White House during the War of 1812.

25th February 2007, 02:10 PM	#33
Skibum Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Fredericksburg, Virginia Posts: 1,189	Originally Posted by Sir Robin Goodfellow I'd like to officially apologize for burning down the White House during the War of 1812. Well, I suppose we could apologize for dumping your tea. Sorry bout that. On topic- There is also a National Slavery Museum being built locally here in Va.
	Last edited by Skibum; 25th February 2007 at 02:14 PM.

25th February 2007, 02:19 PM	#34
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	I'm feeling a lot of love in this room! As a North Carolinian, I'd like to personally apologize for Clay Aiken. Sorry, guys!
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.

25th February 2007, 02:25 PM	#35
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,417	Originally Posted by shanek I always thought there was a moral in that. If all or even most of the slaves had decided they didn't want to go along with it, there wouldn't have been thing one the slaveowners could do about it. As it is, they were kept in line by fear. Which turns out, AIU, is part of the human condition. Humans can be made to be compliant with minimum control. It is, to some extent, in our nature. There is also the point about perception. What does it mean to be free? Freedom is a relative concept. Please, don't misconstrue my point. Slavery is pernicious. I could not conceive of an argument to suppose that it is not so. It's just that it seems to me possible to create an environment where humans accept their condition and don't see the shackles. I don't mean to be flip and minimize slavery, as I said, it is a pernicious thing but aren't those who go to church each and every Sunday, to some extent, slaves? Or those of us who work, especially at dead end jobs, slaves? Again, my only point is one of perception. Many slaves perhaps did not have a basis for seeing their plight as slaves. "If I could have convinced more slaves that they were slaves, I could have freed thousands more." --Harriet Tubman
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

25th February 2007, 02:34 PM	#36
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	Originally Posted by RandFan It's just that it seems to me possible to create an environment where humans accept their condition and don't see the shackles. And that, to at least some degree, is what's happening now. Quote: "If I could have convinced more slaves that they were slaves, I could have freed thousands more." --Harriet Tubman The Editor: Is a slave a slave if he doesn't know he's been enslaved? The Doctor: Yes. The Editor: Oh, I was hoping for a philosophical debate. Is that all I'm gonna get? "Yes"? The Doctor: Yes.
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.