Remnant of "Red Scare" repealed.

[Fading Fast]

Sadly it's far more common than you realize in the South. The "Lost Cause" ideology is not on the fringe, it's a dominant attitude for large swaths of the population.

I was quite serious in asking what the number is as I know of no mainstream or even minor political party that advocates for slavery. I do know that there are some very fringe groups that advocate some horribly racists ideas. And I know that the Northeast (and my small part of it) is not a scientific sample, so greatly appreciate your color. But I do get some hope from the fact that no politician has - in my life -ever had a shot at any office by advocating for slavery.

Just making up a number, a hundred thousand people can make a lot of noise, but in a country of 300+million they aren't a political force at the national level. But I close where I open - I do not know the number who advocate for slavery, but as noted, based on every political party I'm aware of that has any following of note - I've never heard that advocated as a policy. If there are any though, I'll join anyone in the political / intellectual fight against it.

 

[BlueTrain]

Don't confuse believing that slaves were better off, if not necessarily happier, with advocating slavery. They'll probably be the first to tell you that their family never owned slaves, which was probably true. In most Southern states, about 25% of families owned slaves. But in Mississippi and South Carolina (the most Southern of all Southern states), almost half of all families owned slaves. Also, in those two states, over half the population were slaves. It may have been possible that black people were better off as slaves but just like you, they believed freedom was more important.

There's more than one thing operating here. One is slavery itself. The other thing is the generally held belief that it was natural for only black people to be slaves. It was clearly racist. So the operating assumption ever since 1619 when the first slaves were brought in, is that there is a certain hierarchy in society and that black people were on the bottom. That was their "place." Many people ignored that, of course, but for those who depended on either slavery or cheap labor, that idea was important. They were the serving class. It was also important for those who were themselves not so far from the bottom and who wanted someone underneath them. Actual relations between the races were and still are far more complicated than that, of course, but you get the general idea. It was not seen the same everywhere. When other racial groups began arriving, which happened early on or in some places, were already there, the issues became confused.

 

[ChiTownScion]

And that little American flag sticker on the back of your Toyota won't get you into heaven, either.

And I'll always tip my hat in tribute to a John Prine reference.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I don't know as I'd say I'm "proud" to be an American. I have a long heritage here, going back to the 1600s thru at least one branch of the family. But one of my earliest ancestors here was killed by a band of wild-eyed delusional religious fanatics in Massachusetts, people who came here not in the name of "religious freedom for all," as the polished mythology would have us believe, but only for the freedom to practice the narrow beliefs of their own twisted, murderous cult without consequences. I'm not proud of that, or to be descended from that. At all. They were not good people or people to be admired or celebrated in any way. But like it or not, that's part of my heritage. I'm not proud of it, but there it is.

What I *am* proud of is certain things America has done -- I'm very proud of what we tried to do here in the 1930s, I'm proud of what those accomplishments made possible, and I'm proud of the role we played in battling Fascism, even though we clearly didn't manage to eradicate it, nor were all of us even all that convinced that we should. But as Stephen Vincent Benet once wrote, "As a nation, I think we try." He wrote that in 1940, when we were still trying. I don't think he would have written it in 1950, though, had he lived until then, because he would have been blacklisted.

 

[BlueTrain]

Whether or not being American is something I should be proud of just because I was born here, I can't imagine being anything else. It's even pointless to try. As far as the Pilgrims and Puritans in Massachusetts, they came only for their own freedom and not just their religious freedom. Just like other groups in America who have been hounded from the beginning, they wanted the freedom to be themselves and the freedom to be left alone. As a group, though, they had very controlling leaders, which most of those other groups had, too. The New England village arranged around the village green was part of the controlling arrangement, although the village as an institution they brought with them. It wasn't invented here.

None of that was true for settlers in Virginia.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I think the whole system of the Puritans in Massachusetts had all the trappings of what we would define today as a dangerous religious cult -- a high-control, prescribed-belief system meting out unilateral penalties against violators of any fine point of doctrine, and enforcing disfellowshipment, shunning, or death against apostates. The brand of vicious Calvinism they preached and practiced was found nowhere in the New Testament. It was a theology founded not on love or compassion but on hate and fear.

They left us a lot, though, aside from a tendency toward maniacal Bible-thumping. The American tendency to equate wealth with virtue came straight from their cult -- if you had, it was a sign of God's favor and your superior virtue. If you had not, you obviously deserved nothing, and were bound for the flaming pits of Hell. It's a doctrine that infects the American character right down to the present day.

 

[BlueTrain]

Fair enough but don't apply 21st century sensibilities and values to the early 17th century. You'll get bad answers every time.

Just the same, I agree with you, although I'm more inclined to think that moral and doctrinal purity equaling wealth is from a later period. That was the age of religious wars, you know. The idea of wealth coming from religious belief may have been true in New England, I doubt there were parallels in the South. Not then, anyway. But I certainly realize that it's true today most everywhere in the megachurches that preach that God wants you to have a Cadillac. It's a religion of bounty. The church has been sliding downhill ever since it became legal. Is there another religion that worships wealth so much? I suspect that question could have been asked a thousand years ago.

 

[tonyb]

I can understand how those the larger culture has deemed inferior might embrace "pride" as an antidote. But even that points to it being the flip side of shame.

My understanding is that in many cultures the sense of self is very much tied into family relationships. Your brother doing well shines favorably on you, too. I'm relieved that such is not so true in my world, as I have close relatives who have quite publicly done some pretty darned sleazy things -- front page, above the fold sleazy things. My sense of self is such that anyone who would think less of me on account of my sharing ancestry with these sleazebags is a person whose opinion matters not at all.

I believe that my Regular Joe grandfather was a fine fellow. His neighbors and co-workers thought well of him too, I suppose. They had no reason not to, as far as I know. But I doubt that his passing left them in tears. So no, I'm not proud to be descended from him, and I wouldn't be had he been a Nobel laureate. But I was lucky to have had his guidance and counsel for as long as I did.

 

[HudsonHawk]

I was quite serious in asking what the number is as I know of no mainstream or even minor political party that advocates for slavery. I do know that there are some very fringe groups that advocate some horribly racists ideas. And I know that the Northeast (and my small part of it) is not a scientific sample, so greatly appreciate your color. But I do get some hope from the fact that no politician has - in my life -ever had a shot at any office by advocating for slavery.

Just making up a number, a hundred thousand people can make a lot of noise, but in a country of 300+million they aren't a political force at the national level. But I close where I open - I do not know the number who advocate for slavery, but as noted, based on every political party I'm aware of that has any following of note -I've never heard that advocated as a policy. If there are any though, I'll join anyone in the political / intellectual fight against it.

Well I don't know an exact number off the top of my head, but it's far more than 100,000. More like 10 million. And when they control the state legislatures in 8 or 10 states, it's far more than a nuisance. And they're not actively advocating for a return to slavery. They put forth this theory that things were better off during slavery, for both whites and blacks, as well as for the economy. That slavery was more benevolent than evil and cruel. I don't think they could get elected suggesting a return to slavery. They have to be more subtle in their racism. But it's still vile racism.

 

[tonyb]

There's a lovely irony in those who fancy themselves self-reliant individualists simultaneously professing pride in things that are in no way their doing, provided being born doesn't count as an achievement.

 

[BlueTrain]

Actually being born might be seen as something of an accomplishment. The real problem is you don't get to choose the circumstances.

 

[LizzieMaine]

To paraphrase Ecclesiastes, "The day of one's death is better than one's birth." What you've managed to do with your life on behalf of your fellow creatures is something more to feel satisfaction in than in the mere circumstances under which you happened to plop into the world. I was born in a dirty industrial town, the child of an unemployed shipping clerk and a bad-tempered telephone operator. Someone else born on the same day was born into a gated estate as the child of an industrial giant and a blue-nosed heiress. Neither one of us had any control over those circumstances, so what's the point of feeling any pride in them? The shipping clerk and the telephone operator and the industrial giant and the heiress both did precisely the same act to initiate the proceedings, which is the same act being done simultaneously by the alley cats outside. "Pride?" Hah.

I think most every child is raised to be proud of wherever it is that they were born, but I don't think there's a whole lot of sense in that, really. It's simply the start of indoctrination into whatever particularly ideology prevails on that particular patch of dirt. "I was born a snake handler, and I'll die a snake handler." Big whoop for you.

 

[tonyb]

...

I think most every child is raised to be proud of wherever it is that they were born, but I don't think there's a whole lot of sense in that, really. It's simply the start of indoctrination into whatever particularly ideology prevails on that particular patch of dirt. "I was born a snake handler, and I'll die a snake handler." Big whoop for you.

It has been the source of more human misery than any other thing, I do believe.

It's not that I don't understand what certainly appears to be a natural affinity for, and identity with, one's kith and kin and the piece of the Earth they occupy.

Like most every young child, I suppose, I thought my mother was the most perfect of God's creations. Chalk that up to biology. But I would hope that adults would have a more sophisticated (and realistic) take on such things. No, we aren't the best because we are us. No, we aren't "exceptional," and those who would suggest otherwise are peddling a deadly snake oil.

 

[vitanola]

I was quite serious in asking what the number is as I know of no mainstream or even minor political party that advocates for slavery. I do know that there are some very fringe groups that advocate some horribly racists ideas. And I know that the Northeast (and my small part of it) is not a scientific sample, so greatly appreciate your color. But I do get some hope from the fact that no politician has - in my life -ever had a shot at any office by advocating for slavery.

Just making up a number, a hundred thousand people can make a lot of noise, but in a country of 300+million they aren't a political force at the national level. But I close where I open - I do not know the number who advocate for slavery, but as noted, based on every political party I'm aware of that has any following of note - I've never heard that advocated as a policy. If there are any though, I'll join anyone in the political / intellectual fight against it.

I named a number of well-known current politicians who had in recent times espoused this view, but the post disappeared without a trace, as is doubtless meet and proper, for it touches too closely current politics.

 

[Edward]

Belt buckles during the Nazi period displayed the motto "Gott mit uns." God with us.

They did indeed, though its use as a German military motto goes back as far as seventeenth century Prussia. It originated as a warcry, among other usages, and spread to the rest of Germany during the Imperial period, from 1871. Some tropps at least wore itg on their helmets during the Great War. Its association with the Nazi is coincidental, really -much like the Stahlhelm, which was first issued in 1916.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I always used to wonder how the Almighty managed to keep track of all the nations, tribes, armies, parties, denominations, and contradictory ideologies he was supposed to be incontrovertably backing. And then I realized that he really didn't have anything to do with any of them, and undoubtedly found them all painfully trivial and limiting. A god so petty as to put his imprimatur on any political party is a god unworthy of anybody's worship.

 

[ChiTownScion]

I always used to wonder how the Almighty managed to keep track of all the nations, tribes, armies, parties, denominations, and contradictory ideologies he was supposed to be incontrovertably backing. And then I realized that he really didn't have anything to do with any of them, and undoubtedly found them all painfully trivial and limiting. A god so petty as to put his imprimatur on any political party is a god unworthy of anybody's worship.

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. “

Lucius Annaeus Seneca

 

[Edward]

Of all people, it was Oliver Cromwell who said "Every man says 'God is on my side.' God must say 'Who is on my side?'"

 

[KILO NOVEMBER]

They did indeed, though its use as a German military motto goes back as far as seventeenth century Prussia. It originated as a warcry, among other usages, and spread to the rest of Germany during the Imperial period, from 1871. Some tropps at least wore itg on their helmets during the Great War. Its association with the Nazi is coincidental, really -much like the Stahlhelm, which was first issued in 1916.

Here's another 18th Century Prussian item, resurrected by the Third Reich:

 

[Haversack]

T'wasn't just 18th C. Prussians who used the Death's Head.

17th Light Dragoons used it in memory of General Wolfe.