Juneteenth

The people are informed that in accordance with a Proclamation from the Executive of the United States, all slaves are free. This involves an absolute equality of personal rights and rights of property, between former masters and slaves, and the connection heretofore existing between them, become that between employer and hired labor. The freed are advised to remain at their present homes, and work for wages. They are informed that they will not be allowed to collect at military posts; and that they will not be supported in idleness either there or elsewhere.

That's the text of General Order #3 issued by General Gordon Granger on June 19, 1865 as he took military control of Texas following the end of the U.S. Civil War. This order essentially enforced the Emancipation Proclamation on the last part of the former Confederacy to come under Union control. This freed the last slaves in the former Confederacy (though slavery was still legal in two of the four "border states" that remained loyal to the United States, a situation rectified by the ratification of the 13th Amendment). June 19th ("Juneteenth") almost immediately became a holiday observed by African-Americans in Texas celebrating the end of their enslavement and has slowly spread in popularity and geographic reach ever since. Newsweek has a primer on the holiday.

I bring this up to note that the U.S. has no official, nationally recognized holiday commemorating the end of slavery. Despite the fact that ending slavery was a major turning point in the country's history and most Americans now recognize it as an overall good thing, there is no celebration of this on a national level, largely because until recently a significant number of white American didn't see ending slavery as a net positive. As I have in the past I'm using Juneteenth to suggest that the U.S. should have such a holiday. The U.S. already has a holiday to celebrate its independence from British rule (July 4), its presidents (third Monday in February), its flag (June 14), two holidays for its military; one for living veterans (November 11) and one for the dead (last Monday in May). Why not a holiday to commemorate "a new birth of freedom" in a nation that supposedly dedicates itself to freedom?

Some suggested dates:

Juneteenth (June 19, or possibly the third Monday in June): A personal favorite due to being the most widespread observance at present and being at a time of year conducive to celebrations. Already a state holiday in Texas.

13th Amendment Day (December 6): This was the date on which the 13th Amendment was ratified. At the time of ratification legal slavery still existed only in Kentucky and Delaware. A terrible date, wedged in between Thanksgiving and Christmas at a time of year already over-heavy with holidays.

Emancipation Day, national version (September 22 / January 1): This was the date on which the Emancipation Proclamation was signed / went into effect. January 1 is already a holiday, New Year's Day, so that's out. September 22 is a possibility though.

Emancipation Day, DC version (April 16): The District of Columbia already observes "Emancipation Day" on the anniversary of the date on which Abraham Lincoln signed the Compensated Emancipation Act. Another already-existing holiday at a convenient time of year. Advantage: celebrates a jurisdiction ending slavery without bloodshed. Disadvantage: because slaveowners were paid for their human property it implies that they had a legitimate claim to being able to own other human beings as property. Also one day after the traditional filing deadline for federal income tax returns, which I'm not sure counts as an advantage or a disadvantage.

What do you all think?
«13

Comments

  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    Juneteenth. It's got that 'Yorl' thang. Insouciant. Courageous. Understated. Jim Brown in The Dirty Dozen. What amazes me is there's no rage.
  • RuthRuth Shipmate
    Huh? There's no rage? Seriously?
  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    Tonight many American movie theaters (maybe a few elsewhere) will be showing Emmanuel, about the shooting of Emmanuel American Methodist Church in Charleston SC. It is about the aftermath of the time when the people of the church invited a young white man (Dylan Roof) into their Bible study and as they were saying their final prayers, Roof stood up and killed 9 of the people there.

    Thing of it is Mr. Roof had been baptized and confirmed in a Lutheran Church. About the time he was confirmed, his parents had divorced. It was an ugly divorce from all reports. I have always wondered if a youth minister or the pastor had given the boy emotional support that the whole tragedy could have been prevented.

    A moving part of the story is when members of Emmanuel were given the chance to speak to Dylan in the court they all forgave him--and called on him to repent.

    With JuneNineteenth there are increased calls for reparations for the black community. The average wealth of a white family in America is around $800,000 (this includes housing and investments minus debt) whereas the wealth of black families is around $100,000. Four of the Democratric candidates have made proposals on how to do his.

    All I have to say is it is a tall order.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    With JuneNineteenth there are increased calls for reparations for the black community. The average wealth of a white family in America is around $800,000 (this includes housing and investments minus debt) whereas the wealth of black families is around $100,000. Four of the Democratric candidates have made proposals on how to do his.

    All I have to say is it is a tall order.
    It is indeed a tall order. What the advocates of reparations need to make clear is that it does not necessarily mean the writing of cheques to black people.
    From the New York Times:
    Rather, they say, the government could engage in a wide array of assistance — zero-interest loans for black prospective homeowners, free college tuition, community development plans to spur the growth of black-owned businesses in black neighborhoods — to address the social and economic fallout of slavery and racially discriminatory federal policies that have resulted in a huge wealth gap between whites and blacks in America. It would be up to the commission to explore such options and others.
    It still will be a tall order, but accurately presentation would be beneficial.
  • KyzylKyzyl Shipmate Posts: 29
    As a former resident of Texas from age 7 to 42 I am predisposed to Juneteenth.
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    Ruth wrote: »
    Huh? There's no rage? Seriously?

    Violent manifestations of it are extremely rare. Edwin Corley's superb 'Siege' from 50 years ago remains fiction.
  • LeRocLeRoc Shipmate
    The thing about which day to choose is a bit of an issue in Brazil also. The official date is 13 May, which remembers when Princess Isabel signed the Abolishment declaration. This was in the latter days of the Empire, when it was already going down. Many cities (including mine) have a Princess Isabel Avenue or a 13 May Park. I think in some States it is a public holiday.

    Most of my black friends refuse to recognise this date though, treating it as an ordinary day instead. They argue that the Princess signed the Declaration under pressure, against her wishes. Many people state that it was signed as a compromise, to stave off land reforms. A refusal to recognise a white person as the most important Abolishment hero may also have to do with it.

    My friends celebrate 20 November, Black Consciousness Day, with lots of ceremonies, music and dancing. I'm usually involved in these celebrations when I'm in Brazil. It remembers the day Zumbi died, leader of the Quilombo dos Palmares community of escaped slaves in the 17th Century.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    What about Martin Luther King day? I know it covers equal rights. Does it also celebrate the ending of slavery.
  • sionisaissionisais Shipmate
    Hugal wrote: »
    What about Martin Luther King day? I know it covers equal rights. Does it also celebrate the ending of slavery.

    That might create the impression that once slavery ended, civil rights followed as a matter of course, but we all know (I hope) that was not so. Martin Luther King was at the height of his activity a hundred years after General Order #3. I believe these events should be commemorated separately.
  • I'd be fine with Juneteenth as a national holiday. I would be even finer with a national celebration of the start of Sherman's March to the Sea, on November 15th.
  • jbohnjbohn Shipmate
    I think it's a capital idea. In my part of the world, it's already a major unofficial one.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    edited June 2019
    One more suggested date I forgot to include:

    Freeman Day (August 22): This is the date in 1781 when Elizabeth Freeman, a.k.a. Mum Bett, won a lawsuit freeing her from slavery on the basis that the new (1780) Massachusetts state constitution guaranteed freedom for everyone and that meant everyone. This case was used as a precedent for a later court ruling that effectively ended slavery in Massachusetts in 1783, the first of the original states to do so. Aside from the really cool name which communicates the spirit of the holiday, August is a month largely devoid of holidays on the American calendar.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    I'd be fine with Juneteenth as a national holiday. I would be even finer with a national celebration of the start of Sherman's March to the Sea, on November 15th.
    yes! Celebrate black people by commemorating a white guy
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    Juneteenth seems the most reasonable as it has a broader base of celebration.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    I'd be fine with Juneteenth as a national holiday. I would be even finer with a national celebration of the start of Sherman's March to the Sea, on November 15th.
    yes! Celebrate black people by commemorating a white guy

    This may be one of the reasons the end of slavery doesn't have a national holiday. Instead of seeing slavery as a stain on the national character whose removal was an overall good for all Americans it's seen as solely about the "black people" who were slavery's primary victims. I admit that the boon of ending slavery was biggest to the enslaved population, but I wouldn't go so far as to claim that other Americans were completely external to the slave system or that its end wasn't good for them too.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    Crœsos wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    I'd be fine with Juneteenth as a national holiday. I would be even finer with a national celebration of the start of Sherman's March to the Sea, on November 15th.
    yes! Celebrate black people by commemorating a white guy

    This may be one of the reasons the end of slavery doesn't have a national holiday. Instead of seeing slavery as a stain on the national character whose removal was an overall good for all Americans it's seen as solely about the "black people" who were slavery's primary victims. I admit that the boon of ending slavery was biggest to the enslaved population, but I wouldn't go so far as to claim that other Americans were completely external to the slave system or that its end wasn't good for them too.
    All the proposed days involve white people and a celebration including their part in the process is fine. My objection to SirPalomides suggestion was that his suggested day is that the primary recognition would be about the white guy.
    A white guy who:
    was not an abolitionist before the war and, like others of his time and background, he did not believe in "Negro equality".[86][87] Before the war, Sherman at times even expressed some sympathy with the view of Southern whites that the black race was benefiting from slavery, although he opposed breaking up slave families and advocated teaching slaves to read and write.
    If one is going to supplant back people in the celebration of black people, surely there must be a less problematic white person to use.
  • Hey, if you want a Nat Turner day I'd be fine with that too.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    A failed rebellion that led to even harsher treatment of slaves and free black people?
    Colour me shocked at your suggestion😒
  • Of course failed rebellions invite harsh reprisals... that doesn't stop, say, the Irish from celebrating and making tons of songs about them. But by all means appoint yourself curator of black people worthy of commemoration. It's not racist at all.
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    Neither. For bloody bloody bloody obvious reasons.
  • amyboamybo Shipmate
    Of course failed rebellions invite harsh reprisals... that doesn't stop, say, the Irish from celebrating and making tons of songs about them. But by all means appoint yourself curator of black people worthy of commemoration. It's not racist at all.

    What is wrong with wanting a Black-led celebration of the (quasi-official) end of enslavement of Black people in the US? Why should Black people be like your description of Irish people instead of, say, whomever they want too be?
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    Of course failed rebellions invite harsh reprisals... that doesn't stop, say, the Irish from celebrating and making tons of songs about them. But by all means appoint yourself curator of black people worthy of commemoration. It's not racist at all.
    I didn’t say it was racist. Though, your Sherman suggestion is certainly questionable.
    Whilst I respect standing against oppression, the killing of children makes the case for Turner a little more complicated.
    I’m hardly appointing myself anything, just voicing opinion.


  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    I know! Americans can be like the Italians and have a holiday every day, After all, we have such an amalgamation of cultures we can think of something to celebrate on every day.

    In truth, Juneteenth was only the release of slaves in Texas, the last Confederate state to surrender. It is good we remember our history, but does it rise to the level a national holiday? I think not.
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    A million Americans died in a war that developed - not started - to stop an 'institution' that killed six times that at least. Easily SIXTY times over 300 years in its utterly catastrophic effects on Africa. The effects of monsters like Genghis Khan, Stalin, Hitler, Mao are nothing by comparison. I can't think of a greater or anywhere near as great a holocaust in all history.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    I know! Americans can be like the Italians and have a holiday every day, After all, we have such an amalgamation of cultures we can think of something to celebrate on every day.

    In truth, Juneteenth was only the release of slaves in Texas, the last Confederate state to surrender. It is good we remember our history, but does it rise to the level a national holiday? I think not.
    And yet Texas is far from the only place it is celebrated. I don’t think there is a completely right answer to which day, but Black Americans should have the larger voice as to when.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    Martin54 wrote: »
    A million Americans died in a war that developed - not started - to stop an 'institution' that killed six times that at least
    The American Civil War was started to preserve that ‘institution’.
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    A million Americans died in a war that developed - not started - to stop an 'institution' that killed six times that at least
    The American Civil War was started to preserve that ‘institution’.

    As a function of part of the Union, yes.
  • Martin54 wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    A million Americans died in a war that developed - not started - to stop an 'institution' that killed six times that at least
    The American Civil War was started to preserve that ‘institution’.

    As a function of part of the Union, yes.
    Huh?

  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    Martin54 wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    A million Americans died in a war that developed - not started - to stop an 'institution' that killed six times that at least
    The American Civil War was started to preserve that ‘institution’.

    As a function of part of the Union, yes.
    The Southern states initiated the hostilities. That is generally considered the start of a war.

  • RossweisseRossweisse Hell Host, 8th Day Host
    edited June 2019
    I'd be fine with Juneteenth as a national holiday. I would be even finer with a national celebration of the start of Sherman's March to the Sea, on November 15th.
    I would not; the infamous March to the Sea was an extravaganza of rape, murder, looting, burning, and more, virtually all of it visited on defenseless women and children. Juneteenth is far more appropriate, and it's centered on African-Americans rather than white people. I would support that.

  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    A million Americans died in a war that developed - not started - to stop an 'institution' that killed six times that at least
    The American Civil War was started to preserve that ‘institution’.

    As a function of part of the Union, yes.
    The Southern states initiated the hostilities. That is generally considered the start of a war.

    Indeed, as political means had failed to prevent secession by slave states and the North could not budge from forts in the de facto Confederacy. Disunion over slavery was the ultimate cause and the end of slavery. in reunion, became the cause.
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    A million Americans died in a war that developed - not started - to stop an 'institution' that killed six times that at least
    The American Civil War was started to preserve that ‘institution’.

    As a function of part of the Union, yes.
    Huh?

    "The problem for Americans who, in the age of Lincoln, wanted slaves to be free was not simply that southerners wanted the opposite, but that they themselves cherished a conflicting value: they wanted the Constitution, which protected slavery, to be honored, and the Union, which had fellowship with slaveholders, to be preserved. Thus they were committed to values that could not logically be reconciled."

    David Potter, The Impending Crisis, page 45 - Pulitzer Prize for History
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    In truth, Juneteenth was only the release of slaves in Texas, the last Confederate state to surrender. It is good we remember our history, but does it rise to the level a national holiday? I think not.

    Functional independence from British rule was achieved at different times in different colonies, and yet Americans still seem to be able to settle on a single day (July 4) to celebrate this turning point in their history. I'm not sure why a national holiday celebrating the end of slavery should have to satisfy an arbitrary standard met by very few other American holidays.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    I love the idea of celebrating this, and on June 19th, but predict that if instituted as described, two fates will promptly befall it to obscure its significance:

    1. It will become yet another Shopping Extravaganza Day
    2. It will become the day on which public school ends for the academic year, releasing millions of children to "freedom" from school.
  • Rossweisse wrote: »
    I'd be fine with Juneteenth as a national holiday. I would be even finer with a national celebration of the start of Sherman's March to the Sea, on November 15th.
    I would not; the infamous March to the Sea was an extravaganza of rape, murder, looting, burning, and more, virtually all of it visited on defenseless women and children.

    Um, I think you have that confused with Columbus' "discovery of America"... which is a public holiday. The March to the Sea has to be ranked as one of the most light-handed invasions/ counter-insurgency operations in history. In most wars, if a hostile army (or, sometimes, even a friendly army) was marching through your land, you were as good as dead, from famine and plague if nothing else.

    And the point of commemorating the March to the Sea isn't to glorify Sherman but to irritate the hell out of all the whining neo-Confederate Gone with the Wind fetishists.
  • Martin54 wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    A million Americans died in a war that developed - not started - to stop an 'institution' that killed six times that at least
    The American Civil War was started to preserve that ‘institution’.

    As a function of part of the Union, yes.
    Huh?

    "The problem for Americans who, in the age of Lincoln, wanted slaves to be free was not simply that southerners wanted the opposite, but that they themselves cherished a conflicting value: they wanted the Constitution, which protected slavery, to be honored, and the Union, which had fellowship with slaveholders, to be preserved. Thus they were committed to values that could not logically be reconciled."

    David Potter, The Impending Crisis, page 45 - Pulitzer Prize for History

    The explicit rationale for the rebellion, laid out in the articles of secession of many of the states, was the preservation of slavery. They did not merely regard it as a constitutional issue but as a matter of eternal, divinely ordained principle. This is also laid out clearly in the Confederate VP's "Cornerstone Speech" (the cornerstone being the principle of white supremacy). Any attempt to obfuscate this fact under a question of abstract legalism is abhorrent, Pulitzer Prize or no.

  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    Martin54 wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    A million Americans died in a war that developed - not started - to stop an 'institution' that killed six times that at least
    The American Civil War was started to preserve that ‘institution’.

    As a function of part of the Union, yes.
    Huh?

    "The problem for Americans who, in the age of Lincoln, wanted slaves to be free was not simply that southerners wanted the opposite, but that they themselves cherished a conflicting value: they wanted the Constitution, which protected slavery, to be honored, and the Union, which had fellowship with slaveholders, to be preserved. Thus they were committed to values that could not logically be reconciled."

    David Potter, The Impending Crisis, page 45 - Pulitzer Prize for History

    The explicit rationale for the rebellion, laid out in the articles of secession of many of the states, was the preservation of slavery. They did not merely regard it as a constitutional issue but as a matter of eternal, divinely ordained principle. This is also laid out clearly in the Confederate VP's "Cornerstone Speech" (the cornerstone being the principle of white supremacy). Any attempt to obfuscate this fact under a question of abstract legalism is abhorrent, Pulitzer Prize or no.

    I'm glad you agree.
  • amyboamybo Shipmate
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    I know! Americans can be like the Italians and have a holiday every day, After all, we have such an amalgamation of cultures we can think of something to celebrate on every day.

    In truth, Juneteenth was only the release of slaves in Texas, the last Confederate state to surrender. It is good we remember our history, but does it rise to the level a national holiday? I think not.
    And yet Texas is far from the only place it is celebrated. I don’t think there is a completely right answer to which day, but Black Americans should have the larger voice as to when.
    Very much so. I'm all the way up in Minnesota, and Juneteenth is a BIG DEAL amongst the Black communities here. St. Paul's first Black mayor even declared it a city holiday. We'd love for it to be an even bigger holiday!
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    Martin54 wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    A million Americans died in a war that developed - not started - to stop an 'institution' that killed six times that at least
    The American Civil War was started to preserve that ‘institution’.

    As a function of part of the Union, yes.
    Huh?

    "The problem for Americans who, in the age of Lincoln, wanted slaves to be free was not simply that southerners wanted the opposite, but that they themselves cherished a conflicting value: they wanted the Constitution, which protected slavery, to be honored, and the Union, which had fellowship with slaveholders, to be preserved. Thus they were committed to values that could not logically be reconciled."

    David Potter, The Impending Crisis, page 45 - Pulitzer Prize for History

    The explicit rationale for the rebellion, laid out in the articles of secession of many of the states, was the preservation of slavery. They did not merely regard it as a constitutional issue but as a matter of eternal, divinely ordained principle. This is also laid out clearly in the Confederate VP's "Cornerstone Speech" (the cornerstone being the principle of white supremacy). Any attempt to obfuscate this fact under a question of abstract legalism is abhorrent, Pulitzer Prize or no.

    I'm glad you agree.
    Dude. Your posts are playing silly buggers.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    Rossweisse wrote: »
    I'd be fine with Juneteenth as a national holiday. I would be even finer with a national celebration of the start of Sherman's March to the Sea, on November 15th.
    I would not; the infamous March to the Sea was an extravaganza of rape, murder, looting, burning, and more, virtually all of it visited on defenseless women and children.

    Um, I think you have that confused with Columbus' "discovery of America"... which is a public holiday. The March to the Sea has to be ranked as one of the most light-handed invasions/ counter-insurgency operations in history. In most wars, if a hostile army (or, sometimes, even a friendly army) was marching through your land, you were as good as dead, from famine and plague if nothing else.
    Sherman's march was brutal and destructive, just not as brutal and destructive as it could have been. It had an economic impact for decades to follow, one that affected black people as well as white. Arguing that it was a necessity and less harsh than it could have been is reasonable. Presenting it as light-handed is not. It is not for nothing that it is used as an example of Total War.
    And the point of commemorating the March to the Sea isn't to glorify Sherman but to irritate the hell out of all the whining neo-Confederate Gone with the Wind fetishists.
    Any celebration of black history will irritate them. It would serve Black Americans better to pick an event that is more focused on black people.


  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Sherman's march was brutal and destructive, just not as brutal and destructive as it could have been. It had an economic impact for decades to follow, one that affected black people as well as white.

    Yes, I suppose no longer being enslaved would have "an economic impact".
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    Crœsos wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Sherman's march was brutal and destructive, just not as brutal and destructive as it could have been. It had an economic impact for decades to follow, one that affected black people as well as white.

    Yes, I suppose no longer being enslaved would have "an economic impact".
    Yea! Binary bullshit! The northern victory was a better thing than a southern one or letting the south secede. This does not mean that the war had no negative effect on southern black people. The area was economically repressed afterwards and that had a massive impact on people in the region, especially in the lower income brackets where almost all black southerner's were.
    Scorched earth affects the liberated as much as anyone else living in the aftermath. Even if the case for it is stronger than a less destructive path would have been, it does not change the negative effects.
    A life-saving amputation might be preferable to death, but it does not mean it is an unmitigated positive.
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    edited June 2019
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    A million Americans died in a war that developed - not started - to stop an 'institution' that killed six times that at least
    The American Civil War was started to preserve that ‘institution’.

    As a function of part of the Union, yes.
    Huh?

    "The problem for Americans who, in the age of Lincoln, wanted slaves to be free was not simply that southerners wanted the opposite, but that they themselves cherished a conflicting value: they wanted the Constitution, which protected slavery, to be honored, and the Union, which had fellowship with slaveholders, to be preserved. Thus they were committed to values that could not logically be reconciled."

    David Potter, The Impending Crisis, page 45 - Pulitzer Prize for History

    The explicit rationale for the rebellion, laid out in the articles of secession of many of the states, was the preservation of slavery. They did not merely regard it as a constitutional issue but as a matter of eternal, divinely ordained principle. This is also laid out clearly in the Confederate VP's "Cornerstone Speech" (the cornerstone being the principle of white supremacy). Any attempt to obfuscate this fact under a question of abstract legalism is abhorrent, Pulitzer Prize or no.

    I'm glad you agree.
    Dude. Your posts are playing silly buggers.

    No! Never. Surely not?
  • RossweisseRossweisse Hell Host, 8th Day Host
    ...And the point of commemorating the March to the Sea isn't to glorify Sherman but to irritate the hell out of all the whining neo-Confederate Gone with the Wind fetishists.
    No. It's to glorify the horrible suffering of thousands of defenseless noncombatants, if you choose to celebrate that dark and bloody event. Merely being born in the South was not rock-ribbed evidence of inborn evil; some of the invaders thereof, however, exhibited something of that in their treatment of the helpless.



  • RossweisseRossweisse Hell Host, 8th Day Host
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    The northern victory was a better thing than a southern one or letting the south secede. This does not mean that the war had no negative effect on southern black people. The area was economically repressed afterwards and that had a massive impact on people in the region, especially in the lower income brackets where almost all black southerner's were.
    Scorched earth affects the liberated as much as anyone else living in the aftermath. Even if the case for it is stronger than a less destructive path would have been, it does not change the negative effects.
    A life-saving amputation might be preferable to death, but it does not mean it is an unmitigated positive.
    Absolutely. Everyone living there suffered horribly. Babies died, or were stillborn, because of their mothers' malnourishment; the invaders killed livestock because they could, and carried it off, leaving everyone, black and white, to starve, uncaring about the fellow human beings they were condemning to death. It was a horror that has been largely ignored because the Union triumphed, but it was a horror for all who lived there nevertheless.

  • RuthRuth Shipmate
    Quoth SirPalomides:
    Um, I think you have that confused with Columbus' "discovery of America"... which is a public holiday.

    Not throughout the country. Here in southern California the day goes by unmarked. Schools don't close, and I don't know anyone who gets the day off.
  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    There are other alternatives to Juneteenth. How about the day that Abraham Lincoln sighed the Emancipation Proclamation or the Day the Civil War Ended. The Civil War caused more deaths on both sides than any other War American has been involved in. Or the day the 13th Amendment which abolished slavery in all of the United States.

    Remember, the Emancipation Proclamation only ended slavery in the states that had rebelled against the union. There were still other places that continued to have slavery even until the final state (Georgia) ratified the 14th amendment on December 18, 1865. Slaves still held in Tennessee, Kentucky, Kansas, New Jersey, Delaware, West Virginia, Maryland, Missouri, Washington, D.C., and twelve parishes of Louisiana also became legally free on this date.

    This is not the only date of national significance that has been passed over officially. For instance, the Civil War officially ended on August 20, 1865, eighteen months after the surrender of General Lee on April 9, 1964. We have no official celebration of those dates.

    Yes, we need to remember June 19th for what it was. But as I pointed out there were still slaves in some parts of the country. Should we ignore those slaves?
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    Juneteenth doesn't ignore those slaves. It is symbolic of freedom and the day that seems to be chosen by Black Americans. Also, see Crœsos about the semi-arbitrary nature of chosen days of celebration.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    Rossweisse wrote: »
    ...And the point of commemorating the March to the Sea isn't to glorify Sherman but to irritate the hell out of all the whining neo-Confederate Gone with the Wind fetishists.
    No. It's to glorify the horrible suffering of thousands of defenseless noncombatants, if you choose to celebrate that dark and bloody event. Merely being born in the South was not rock-ribbed evidence of inborn evil; some of the invaders thereof, however, exhibited something of that in their treatment of the helpless.
    It is somewhere between a glorious march and the trampling of the innocent. War sucks and the innocent do die. However, save the children, the white people suffering were complicit in the reason for the war and do not exactly qualify as innocent.
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    Ruth wrote: »
    Quoth SirPalomides:
    Um, I think you have that confused with Columbus' "discovery of America"... which is a public holiday.

    Not throughout the country. Here in southern California the day goes by unmarked. Schools don't close, and I don't know anyone who gets the day off.

    Good, it celebrates a holocaust second only to the slave trade and inextricably mixed with it from the start.
Sign In or Register to comment.