Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Tradition? These things tend to be passed down from one generation to the next.

 

The Northeast is where the anti-slavery movement started. Those people tended to pass on their more tolerant views.

 

The Midwestern settlers were too busy trying to survive harsh winters, droughts and loneliness (most settlers had to drive miles and miles and MILES in order to see their nearest "neighbor". To them, ANY human being was a welcome change from the monotony of seeing only family members.

 

Those who settled in the far West and Northwest were the adventurers who left family and tradition behind in their quest for gold and land and a better life.

 

But those in the South have been there for generations and generations. And SOME of them (not all) have passed their intolerant views down to their children, grandchildren, etc.

 

Just a guess, but it makes sense to me.

 

 

The map was created by liberals.  We have seen in the past week that liberals/homosexuals despise free speech unless it is them doing the talking.  Free speech is not going to someone's place of business and harassing/bullying them while video taping it.  It simply means you can freely state what you believe and not expect to be attacked by a hate group.  I believe the largest hate group in America now is the liberal/homosexual community.

Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:

The map was created by liberals.  We have seen in the past week that liberals/homosexuals despise free speech unless it is them doing the talking.  Free speech is not going to someone's place of business and harassing/bullying them while video taping it.  It simply means you can freely state what you believe and not expect to be attacked by a hate group.  I believe the largest hate group in America now is the liberal/homosexual community.

Hoob-

Eight of the entries for Alabama are local units of the "League of the South." That group appears prominently in other states as well.  Here is more information on these neo-Confederate racists, whose group originated in Killen:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-i.../league-of-the-south

The link mentions Jack Kershaw, who was a Nashville building contractor and lawyer (degree from YMCA night school) and an active member of this group. He lived about 3/4 mile from my home in Nashville in the 1950s through at least the 1980s and was correctly regarded as a die-hard racist.  He built a house at the corner of Caldwell Lane and Lealand Lane that was a knockoff on the Frank Lloyd Wright style.  Here is a bio on this bigot, who died a couple of years ago at age 96:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/24/us/24kershaw.html

More:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kershaw

 

These racists have all the free speech they want, but that does not in any way excuse them from qualifying as a hate group. By their speech, they demonstrate their hatred and bigotry. I trust you would find their listing as a hate group to be on target.

 

I have my own complaint regarding the SPLC.  They have amassed an inordinately huge endowment fund, but continue to aggressively raise funds.  Their activities in this regard and in other respects were microscopically scrutinized several years ago by Dan Morse, then a reporter for the Montgomery Advertiser.  His multi-part series of articles put him in second place in the standings for the Pulitzer Prize that year. He is now with the Wall Street Journal.  SPLC threatened to sue the Advertiser if the articles were not revised, but the paper stood its ground and the SPLC backed off--obviously because their bluff had been called and they had no case.

-

Last edited by Contendah
Originally Posted by interventor1212:

Instead of a group with an agenda, why not use FBI hate crime statistics to map out hate crimes.

 

bigotry-map-2-0608-lg

 

Quite a different picture, isn't it!

 

http://www.esquire.com/features/hate-crime-0608

 

To me this just shows that the northeast and CA are more likely to prosecute hate crimes. Things that would be considered hate crimes everywhere else is just business as usual here in the south.

From Wikipedia
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is an American nonprofit civil rights organization noted for its legal victories against white supremacist groups; its legal representation for victims of hate groups; its monitoring of alleged hate groups, militias and extremist organizations; and its educational programs that promote tolerance.[3][4][5] The SPLC classifies as hate groups organizations that denigrate or assault entire groups of people, typically for attributes that are beyond their control.[6] The SPLC is named as a resource by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the Bureau's fight against hate crimes.[7][8]

After years of reading post made in the politics and religion section here at TD I wonder if some posters are members of CCC. Some of their rhetoric could be taken straight from the CCC's website and statement of principles.

 

There is a chapter here in Florence. Anyone here want to admit they are part of that group?

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by interventor1212:

Instead of a group with an agenda, why not use FBI hate crime statistics to map out hate crimes.

 

bigotry-map-2-0608-lg

 

Quite a different picture, isn't it!

 

http://www.esquire.com/features/hate-crime-0608

 

To me this just shows that the northeast and CA are more likely to prosecute hate crimes. Things that would be considered hate crimes everywhere else is just business as usual here in the south.

____________

That's very interesting.  Combine this with the SPLC map, and it seems that organizing "hate" at least serves as an outlet that may reduce actual violence.  Maybe not.  One thing that I know for a fact is that "hate" knows no bounds, and is quite universal. 

What O No!, ;left out of the Wiki website comments:

 

"The SPLC has received criticism for perceived disproportionate endowment reserves and misleading fundraising practices. In 1994 the Montgomery Advertiser ran a series saying that the SPLC was financially mismanaged and employed misleading fundraising practices.[108][109] In response Joe Levin stated: "The Advertiser's lack of interest in the center's programs and its obsessive interest in the center's financial affairs and Mr. Dees' personal life makes it obvious to me that the Advertiser simply wants to smear the center and Mr. Dees."[110] The series was a finalist for but did not win a 1995 Pulitzer Prize in Explanatory Journalism.[111] In 1996 USA Today called the SPLC "the nation's richest civil rights organization", with $68 million in assets at the time.[112][113] Commentators Alexander Cockburn writing in The Nation and Ken Silverstein writing in Harper's Magazine have been sharply critical of the SPLC's fundraising appeals and finances.[114][115][116]

The SPLC stated that during 2008 it spent about 69% of total expenses on program services, and that at the end of 2008 the endowment stood at $156.2 million.[117] According to Charity Navigator, SPLC's 2009 outlays fell into the following categories: program expenses of 67.5%, administrative expenses of 13.4%, and fundraising expenses of 18.9%.[118] In October 2010 the SPLC reported its endowment at $216.2 million.[1]""

 

SPLC is a money maker for Morris Dees, hyping the number of hate groups to encourage their fund raising and feathering the nests of its leadership.

And it was not the North who first spoke out against slavery, at least not for humanitarian reasons. Their only concern was that the industrious South would fare better in the markets with the use of slavery. They did not want to see the industries of the South become stronger than those of the North.  It had little to do with humanitarian issues, it was pure jealousy and envy on the part of the businesses of the North.

Ironically the the treatment of the South after the war by the occupying force probably did more to create the hate and disdain that bred most of these so called "hate groups".  It is a legacy that is still alive 150 years after the fact.

Contendah says, "Free speech is not going to someone's place of business and harassing/bullying them while video taping it.  It simply means you can freely state what you believe and not expect to be attacked by a hate group. "

THAT IS STUPID!  NO ONE is attacking or denying anyone their right to free speech. 

Our right to "free speech" has absolutely nothing, zero, to do with individuals preventing others from saying whatever they want.  Our right to free speech means the GOVERNMENT cannot take that right away. GOVERNMENT.

 Free speech DOES mean a hate group can attack your views with vehemence with glee -- and free of government intervention.

Originally Posted by teyates:

And it was not the North who first spoke out against slavery, at least not for humanitarian reasons. Their only concern was that the industrious South would fare better in the markets with the use of slavery. They did not want to see the industries of the South become stronger than those of the North.  It had little to do with humanitarian issues, it was pure jealousy and envy on the part of the businesses of the North.

Ironically the the treatment of the South after the war by the occupying force probably did more to create the hate and disdain that bred most of these so called "hate groups".  It is a legacy that is still alive 150 years after the fact.


Very good points! I agree entirely!

Originally Posted by unclegus:
Originally Posted by teyates:

And it was not the North who first spoke out against slavery, at least not for humanitarian reasons. Their only concern was that the industrious South would fare better in the markets with the use of slavery. They did not want to see the industries of the South become stronger than those of the North.  It had little to do with humanitarian issues, it was pure jealousy and envy on the part of the businesses of the North.

Ironically the the treatment of the South after the war by the occupying force probably did more to create the hate and disdain that bred most of these so called "hate groups".  It is a legacy that is still alive 150 years after the fact.


Very good points! I agree entirely!

***************************************************I AGREE!!!!!!!

The North was always more than a bit hypocritical about slavery.  Their shipping companies brought the slaves to our s****s.  Then, had pangs of guilt when they built industries.  Anti-slavery groups were numerous in the South and the North.  

 

Lee, while accepting that slavery was the southern norm, was anti-slavery.  He never bought a slave during his lifetime.  During the Civil War, he inherited slaves from his father-in-law.  Because the estate was entailed, rather than sell some of the slaves to pay off the debt, he kept them for 18 months, using their labor to pay off the debt.  Then, he took leave from the Petersburg line, traveled to Richmond and ensured all were freed.

 

Grant was a slave owner and approved of the practice.  He continued to hold slaves until the passage of the 13th amendment.  History is usually more complicated, than you think it is.

I posted the bit from Wiki to highlight this sentence: "The SPLC is named as a resource by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the Bureau's fight against hate crimes."

 

And if the North is so full of hate, why is it that in the North, interracial marriages are EXTREMELY common? And why is it that gay marriage is legal in so many Northern states?

 

I know that as an admitted Yankee, you will hate me for this, but I see that SOME posting here are still hanging on to the civil war. It was a long time ago folks, and if the rest of us can let go of our animosity toward the Japanese, the Germans, the Vietnamese, and so many others from more recent wars, why do you hang onto the hate from a war that happened 150 years ago? Could it be that you are just using it as an excuse to be hateful?

I am not hanging on to the Civil War O No.  I was simply pointing out that the statement about anit-slavery movements in the Northeast was a bit misleading.  They had a personal agenda for their protests, and it was not as many believe, to be one of pure humanism.  The Southern states were treated very unfairly after the war, and the hate that grew out of that was reflected in the racial turmoil that followed. As someone, of what I observe to be, high intelligence you can appreciate that resistance to change will bring this type of reaction. I do beleive that "southerners" are more passionate about their concerns, whether they be right or wrong. The northeastern states, as well as the northwestern state tend to be far more left oriented.

One can look at the development of military bases following the Civil War to see that the US government did not trust the South, which is probably one reason so many bases ended up here. The South is definitely a different place, and they probably do hold on to their "religion" and their "guns" a little stronger than their northern brethren, but then again when you look at crime statistics we must be doing something right.

O no, just as the general consensus knows that slavery is not right. I feel like it is only proper that we converse about the atrocity's exacted on the South from the North after the civil war in order to prevent history repeating itself. whether you realize it or not, we in this area are still living with consequences from so long ago.

 I personally do not have any tolerance of hate, although I did find out a couple years ago that I am racist  but I don't hate any group because of color ethnicity or beliefs. I do think there is a place for everyone to live the way they wish to on this planet. If I choose to exclude myself then that is my right.

 

Like I said before, the thing we fear the most is what we do not understand.  That is where hate originates!

No hatred of any ethnic group.  My late wife was French-Viet Namese. I would have married a Japanese lady, if her family weren't so prejudiced against gaijins. I do remain suspicious of Germans older than 75, which I inherited from my father, for good reason.  

 

I mentioned the South and Civil War to counter certain claims by another post.

Originally Posted by interventor1212:

The North was always more than a bit hypocritical about slavery.  Their shipping companies brought the slaves to our s****s.  Then, had pangs of guilt when they built industries.  Anti-slavery groups were numerous in the South and the North.  

 

Lee, while accepting that slavery was the southern norm, was anti-slavery.  He never bought a slave during his lifetime.  During the Civil War, he inherited slaves from his father-in-law.  Because the estate was entailed, rather than sell some of the slaves to pay off the debt, he kept them for 18 months, using their labor to pay off the debt.  Then, he took leave from the Petersburg line, traveled to Richmond and ensured all were freed.

 

Grant was a slave owner and approved of the practice.  He continued to hold slaves until the passage of the 13th amendment.  History is usually more complicated, than you think it is.

*******************************************************THANK YOU!!!!!!

Regardless of how you want to slice it, the south is well known and well documented for its racism and segregation. We can try and say that the north was no better but that is not really true. Abolishionists in the north risked their lives to save slaves and the underground railroad saved many more. We can't take credit for those things here in the south and its a shame that our ancestors (of course not ALL OF THEM) used other humans for their own gain. Treating them as animals. Sometimes worse than they did animals.

 

Trying to gloss over it or point our fingers at those in the north who were not against slavery does not excuse or erase what was done here in the south. Nor does what happened after the war excuse or justify the racism and hate that exist here now.

 

So, do any of you belong to the CCC or support it?

Jank sez "

Regardless of how you want to slice it, the south is well known and well documented for its racism and segregation. We can try and say that the north was no better but that is not really true. Abolishionists in the north risked their lives to save slaves and the underground railroad saved many more. We can't take credit for those things here in the south and its a shame that our ancestors (of course not ALL OF THEM) used other humans for their own gain. Treating them as animals. Sometimes worse than they did animals.

 

Trying to gloss over it or point our fingers at those in the north who were not against slavery does not excuse or erase what was done here in the south. Nor does what happened after the war excuse or justify the racism and hate that exist here now.

 

So, do any of you belong to the CCC or support it?"

 

Just because you were "taught" something different and because "someone is known for something" does not make it true. Unless you are willing to truly look at the history and see what it was, you are no better than the "hate groups" labeled by the original poster.

Yes, there was cruelty in the South, and it was present in the North as well. The truth is that there were no "clean hands" in the whole affair, and the "genorosity" supposedly displayed by the North to gain freedom for the slaves was an ill conceived method to thwart the growth of the South, it had nothing to do with compassion.  There were as many people in the South who helped the slaves and took care of them as there were in the North. Regardless of that issue, however the premise is this...one of the main reasons for the so called hate groups being more prominent in the South is a reaction to the way the South was treated AFTER the Civil War.

As to your assertion that any of us belong to the CCC, or the KKK, or another other hate group is a far stretch.  Just because we see, or have learned, the history differently does not make us hate nor demonstrate prejustice against someone of another race. There is good and bad in every race, it is not the skin that determines how one acts or behaves, it is the heart. I have friends of every race, and I love them all not for the way they look, but for who they are. I am not justifying racism nor slavery, but simply telling you that just because you perceive one section of the country as more "civilized" because you think they were not guilty of crimes against humanity, you need to think again, and actually learn the real facts.

Teyates,

 

I am not sure how you got all that from my post. I didn't accuse anyone of being members of CCC or KKK. I ask were any of you members of CCC. Several office holding Republicans are and have been recent members. They sell themselves as conservatives. I am curious if anyone here is a member. If not then, ok. It was a legitimate question. Not an accusation.

 

Also, I don't care how many people in the North were for slavery it does not take away from what was done here in the South. Why would anyone try and make it seem less offensive? Wrong is wrong, and slavery was very wrong. Trying to say that what happened after the war is to blame for the hate groups in the South today is also just making excuses for those that do not deserve any excuses at all.

 

I'm just surprised that any of you would try and downplay what went on here in the South. I don't think anyone (not me at least) has tried to say that there were NO slave owners in the north or that some did not profit from the slave trade. However, you are the one fooling yourself if you think all things were equal when it came to slavery in the North vs the South. Are you suggesting that Harriat Tubman was only trying to "thwart growth in the south" when she helped slaves escape through the underground railroad?

 

Even when you get to the 50's and 60's the south was still very much segregated and racist. The north had moved forward and blacks were not treated with the kind of hate and bigotry that you found here at that same time. How many blacks were still being hung or beaten in Chicago in the 50's, 60's? The south is and was a very racist section of this country. To try and say its not our fault because to the mean old north's treatment of us after a war that has been over for more than 150 years is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

 

 

Even when you get to the 50's and 60's the south was still very much segregated and racist. The north had moved forward and blacks were not treated with the kind of hate and bigotry that you found here at that same time. How many blacks were still being hung or beaten in Chicago in the 50's, 60's? The south is and was a very racist section of this country. To try and say its not our fault because to the mean old north's treatment of us after a war that has been over for more than 150 years is ridiculous.

-------------------------------------

It continued well into the 70's, too.

Saw it firsthand before I left here the last time. 

 

 

Noice.  

So Jank its OK for you to live in the past (lynching in the 50's and 60's) and for you to assume that just because people are from the South they are more evil and prejusticed? All I did was try to offer you an explanation for why things are the way they are, but instead you had rather hold on to the assumption that people are more evil because of the region they are from....who is demonstrating prejustice in that argument?  Like I said, much of that anomosity and hate came from actions demonstrated after the Civil War. 

I grew up in what many would call a hateful atmosphere. The three civil rights workers killed in the early 60's were killed not more than three miles from where I lived. There were hateful, prejusticed a-holes living there. Many of whom I would have been afraid to pick up at night along a dark road, BUT there were also loving caring people there. An elderly black couple that lived in my community was as respected and loved as many of the elderly whites. Their family was a treasure and my dad would have done anything to help them out in times of need. They would have done the same for him.

Hate does not come with a region. I have seen as many hateful and bigoted Yankees as I have rednecks. Labeling them by where they live in a tool for the weak minded who want to practice that which they are trying to stomp out, and that is prejustice.

 

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×