USAians: What are you doing on this loooong MLK weekend?

[Ben Kenobi]

And I think people from other states should have the right to point out moral objections to practices other states are doing.

We're getting all mixed up.

Sorry Imran.

I agree with you that people should have the right to criticise what other states do.

But I am questioning whether they OUGHT to exercise that right. People are free to do plenty of things that they OUGHT not to do.

Ben, step back for a minute. Should the Northern states and the citizens in those states have said NOTHING about the slavery going on in the Southern states? Was the abolitionist movement wrong to you because they were telling other states how to act?

Good question. I think the situation is different in this case. I agree with the abolitionist's point that a person is a person no matter where you live. Crossing state lines from the north to the south shouldn't change the legal status of the person involved.

In this case, I think that it's very important for states to be able to celebrate local holidays and people who wouldn't get acclaim nationally, or people who were very important to the history of the state.

Whether you agree with the positions of Jackson or Lee, they are two of the most significant people to come from that state in their history. For me to say that the people of Virginia should not be able to celebrate them would be wrong ESPECIALLY because I disagree with it.

We should tolerate celebrations that we disagree with all the time.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


You do it by throwing everything you have as hard as you can at one place that you think most vunerable. He didn't have a choice. If the war continued it was only a matter of time.

Again, how does this indicate he wanted to lose? It was his only shot at success.

Ok. Here's the deal. He fought Lee to a draw in Antietem, and managed to capture Lee's plans for the assault.

When he realised that Lee was throwing everything he had for this one chance, he didn't pursue him immediately.

Lincoln, because he wanted Lee to be pursued when he was in Union territory, heard of McClellan's lack of pursuit, and sacked him.

Yes, I know the history of Antietam. A year before Gettysburg with a different commander. So what?

[Ben Kenobi]

Of course you can. George Washington? He was and remains a traitor to the British Empire.

Then Lee is a patriot of Virginia.

[Geronimo]

Ben if some jerk in another state says in public "Adolf Hitler was a great man! He did great things for Germany." Is it appropriate for me to criticize him publicly? If this same wanker then manages to get "Adolf Hitler day" established in that state is it no longer appropriate to criticize?

So you can be free from valid criticism for any outrageous statement so long as you make the statement by working it into a new local holiday? (oh that's right "local" confuses you, "state" holiday then). Oh sure you agree government can't stop outsiders from critisizing "Adolf Hitler day" but shame on them for judging other people for what holidays they choose to celebrate.

[Ben Kenobi]

Again, how does this indicate he wanted to lose? It was his only shot at success.

I said he wanted to end the war, success or no success, Gettysburg was his last ditch effort to end it here and there.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ben if some jerk in another state says in public "Adolf Hitler was a great man! He did great things for Germany." Can I criticize him publicly? If this same wanker then manages to get "Adolf Hitler day" established in that state am I no longer free to criticize?

Neither you or Imran are getting it. Yes you should be free to do plenty of things you ought not to do.

So you can be free from criticism for any outrageous statement so long as you make the statement by working it into a new local holiday? (oh that's right "local" confuses you, "state" holiday then).

No, I didn't say that. I questioned why people in other states should complain. I never said that they shouldn't be free to criticise all they want.

[Wezil]

Ben - You are backtracking. I asked you point blank if Lee wanted to lose at Gettysburg to hasten the end off the war and your clear answer was:

Yep, it was the last major push he did to convince the North that the war couldn't be won without major cost and sacrifice. He wanted to break the spirit of the north by showing them how vunerable they were in 1863 after 2 years of war. He did the same a year later with Early's raids on Washington.

Why the change of position? I quite clearly said "lose" not win as you are now arguing.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Neither you or Imran are getting it. Yes you should be free to do plenty of things you ought not to do.



No, I didn't say that. I questioned why people in other states should complain. I never said that they shouldn't be free to criticise all they want.

I got it I just didn't edit the ambiguous wording fast enough.

try this.

Ben if some jerk in another state says in public "Adolf Hitler was a great man! He did great things for Germany." Is it appropriate for me to criticize him publicly? If this same wanker then manages to get "Adolf Hitler day" established in that state is it no longer appropriate to criticize?

So you can be free from valid criticism for any outrageous statement so long as you make the statement by working it into a new local holiday? (oh that's right "local" confuses you, "state" holiday then). By all means, you agree government can't stop outsiders from criticizing "Adolf Hitler day" but shame on them for judging other people for what holidays they choose to celebrate.

[Geronimo]

Here's another angle on this issue. Suppose we had Salman Rushdie day here in MN. Are you saying that it would be inappropriate for muslims to boycott or otherwise peacefully express their dissatisfaction with our choice of holiday if they didn't actually live in MN?

[Ben Kenobi]

I got mixed up with what you are asking.

I thought you were asking if Lee wanted to extend or hasten the end of the war.

My apologies.

I don't know. He did a terrible job at Gettysburg and made some uncharacteristic mistakes. He failed to scout the ground. He let Meade choose the battle field, he led a charge even when he knew it would result in unnecessary casulties.

We know he wanted the war to end, that was his preference. He didn't want to fight the war in the first place, but his honour would demand that he fight for Virginia, and he fight as long and as hard as he could.

He knew, given the course of the war, that his time was running out if he wanted to win. I think he was willing to risk it all then because he believed if he succeeded, the war would end. He also knew he had to try. I think he was also comfortable with either outcome win or lose which is why he was willing to risk it all.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ben if some jerk in another state says in public "Adolf Hitler was a great man! He did great things for Germany." Is it appropriate for me to criticize him publicly? If this same wanker then manages to get "Adolf Hitler day" established in that state is it no longer appropriate to criticize?

I'd be right there with you.

So you can be free from valid criticism for any outrageous statement so long as you make the statement by working it into a new local holiday? (oh that's right "local" confuses you, "state" holiday then). By all means, you agree government can't stop outsiders from criticizing "Adolf Hitler day" but shame on them for judging other people for what holidays they choose to celebrate.

Some people do believe that though. They think that by establishing a MLK day that it does in fact free him from criticism.

I'd like to salvage the thread by heading it back to it's orginal topic.

I think it's an important principle that people learn to respect holidays and celebrations that they don't personally agree with. By the same token the people who do have the celebrations should be prepared to expect criticism. That's the balancing of rights there, you are free to criticise, but you should consider very carefully why you are doing so.

My question for you, do you equate Lee with Hitler?

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi



My question for you, do you equate Lee with Hitler?

I'd equate him with Erwin rommel except that Erwin Rommel wasn't in any sense a traitor. Traitor is a relatively neutral term to me. However if you honor someone who is a traitor you dishonor whatever they betrayed. Honoring George Washington is disrespectful to the british empire and honoring Lee is disrespectful to the US. From the traitor side of things any US state honoring Lee is about as odd as any part of the british empire honoring Washington.

But really my beef with Lee is that he didn't either sit the war out (probably the best option for him personally) or help oppose the side that openly espoused entrenchment of slavery. Erwin Rommel likewise should have sat the war out even to the point of being imprisoned rather than fight for a government that was giving him orders (like those concerning the treatment of jewish prisoners) which left no doubt as to it's evil nature. So Lee seems to have little in common with Hitler but a few things in common with Rommel and is probably even less appropriate to honor than rommel would be due to the fact that the places honoring him are part of a country he betrayed.

[Ben Kenobi]

Here's another angle on this issue. Suppose we had Salman Rushdie day here in MN. Are you saying that it would be inappropriate for muslims to boycott or otherwise peacefully express their dissatisfaction with our choice of holiday if they didn't actually live in MN?

Key word, peaceful.

Considering there is a Fatwa on him, it would be imperative that it wouldn't turn into a riot.

They would have to be on their best behaviour that's for sure.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Key word, peaceful.

Considering there is a Fatwa on him, it would be imperative that it wouldn't turn into a riot.

They would have to be on their best behaviour that's for sure.

well lo and behold, myself, imran, mr fun, che and everybody else who has expressed their contempt for Lee-Jackson day have done so remarkably peacefully.

[Ben Kenobi]

I'd equate him with Erwin rommel except that Erwin Rommel wasn't in any sense a traitor. Traitor is a relatively neutral term to me. However if you honor someone who is a traitor you dishonor whatever they betrayed. Honoring George Washington is disrespectful to the british empire and honoring Lee is disrespectful to the US. From the traitor side of things any US state honoring Lee is about as odd as any part of the british empire honoring Washington.

Actually, I don't think there is much animosity towards Washington. Most of the former Empire had similar situations with Britain, including Canada. For many of us, it was easier for Britain to let us go then to fight, and that's the lesson they learned from the US.

Washington had cause to do what he did, and they won a war they had no business winning.

But really my beef with Lee is that he didn't either sit the war out (probably the best option for him personally) or help oppose the side that openly espoused entrenchment of slavery.

Wasn't an option to sit out. If he sat out he would be exposing his family in Virginia to harm. He was a very skilled General who had fought in the Mexican war. He had to make a choice one side or another.

I don't think it was an easy decision for him, even when he fought he refused to wear the stars and bars, and kept his union army stars. It was his symbol that where his allegiance truly stood.

Erwin Rommel likewise should have sat the war out even to the point of being imprisoned rather than fight for a government that was giving him orders (like those concerning the treatment of jewish prisoners) which left no doubt as to it's evil nature.

Like Lee, neither he nor Rommel had that option. There were a number of conscientious objectors in both wars that were commissioned. Famous story of Lee, and his army of men who refused to shoot, and when they shot, refused to hit.

So Lee seems to have little in common with Hitler but a few things in common with Rommel and is probably even less appropriate to honor than rommel would be due to the fact that the places honoring him are part of a country he betrayed.

Rommel was a good and honourable man even given his decision. I could see them doing so in Germany and maybe when things have changed it will happen.

It took nearly 50 years after the civil war before Virginia deciding to set up their Lee-Jackson day.

I see his decision to fight for the south as probably the most difficult one in his life. But he redeemed himself and showed his true colours after the war when he encouraged the South to quit, and that they were better off without slavery. That to me seems more an indication of where he truly stood.