|
 that is great. Also yikes at that inscription.
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 09:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 15:21 |
|
|
I did a paper on Cleburne ages ago and his story is sad as hell. He was an insanely brave, honorable guy who loved his new home because he'd come there and made a great life as a pharmacist and local politician, got elected militia leader, turned out to be a good commander, and became a war hero. He finally found love and got married, then basically got told the cause he thought he was fighting for was bullshit to his face and then shortly after was ordered into an insane frontal charge for the reasons of 'My CO is missing 2 limbs, is out of his mind with chronic pain, and is hopped up on laudanum' and then got shot in the heart. Like, if there was a guy who had an actual excuse for not getting that it was all about slavery it was the guy who wasn't from the South originally and who really thought he was fighting to defend his new home until he died pointlessly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:I did a paper on Cleburne ages ago and his story is sad as hell. He was an insanely brave, honorable guy who loved his new home because he'd come there and made a great life as a pharmacist and local politician, got elected militia leader, turned out to be a good commander, and became a war hero. He finally found love and got married, then basically got told the cause he thought he was fighting for was bullshit to his face and then shortly after was ordered into an insane frontal charge for the reasons of 'My CO is missing 2 limbs, is out of his mind with chronic pain, and is hopped up on laudanum' and then got shot in the heart. Like, if there was a guy who had an actual excuse for not getting that it was all about slavery it was the guy who wasn't from the South originally and who really thought he was fighting to defend his new home until he died pointlessly. That's a loving Greek tragedy. 
Keeshhound fucked around with this message at 14:26 on Apr 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
Like, the fact that there WERE decent people who got snookered into defending turbo-racist aristocrats economic dominance of the southern US through selling and exploiting human lives is one of the many reasons all monuments to the shitshow that was the confederacy should be put to the torch.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 14:34
|
|
|
Fathis Munk posted:
Wikipedia's article on him mentions that his suggestion to free slaves was met with "polite silence" before everyone moved on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 14:57
|
|
|
Here is the text of a letter outlining his proposal.Patrick Cleburne posted:The slaves are dangerous now, but armed, trained, and collected in an army they would be a thousand fold more dangerous: therefore when we make soldiers of them we must make free men of them beyond all question, and thus enlist their sympathies also. We can do this more effectually than the North can now do, for we can give the negro not only his own freedom, but that of his wife and child, and can secure it to him in his old home. To do this, we must immediately make his marriage and parental relations sacred in the eyes of the law and forbid their sale. The past legislation of the South concedes that large free middle class of negro blood, between the master and slave, must sooner or later destroy the institution. If, then, we touch the institution at all, we would do best to make the most of it, and by emancipating the whole race upon reasonable terms, and within such reasonable time as will prepare both races for the change, secure to ourselves all the advantages, and to our enemies all the disadvantages that can arise, both at home and abroad, from such a sacrifice. Satisfy the negro that if he faithfully adheres to our standard during the war he shall receive his freedom and that of his race. Give him as an earnest of our intentions such immediate immunities as will impress him with our sincerity and be in keeping with his new condition, enroll a portion of his class as soldiers of the Confederacy, and we change the race from a dreaded weakness to a position of strength. And this is why everybody pretended he hadn't said that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 15:18
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Patrick Cleburne, one of their Western generals and an Irish immigrant who'd made it good in America, legitimately bought the whole 'states rights, defend our region' thing so much that he proposed to the rest of the general staff that they free and arm any slave who would fight for them, since States' Rights was obviously the real cause. Right! Him too. Forgot about Cleburne, largely as he didn't survive the war to be vilified by other ex-Confederates for being honest. Keeshhound posted:That's a loving Greek tragedy. Hood should never had been put in command of anything greater than a division, and frankly should've been invalided out after Gettysburg. I mean, I'm not complaining that the traitors put an unhinged crazy guy in command of their second largest army just as Sherman's closing the ring on their most important transit hub, but still.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
Hood still bears the blame for losing them Gettysburg because he didn't keep the pressure on the north while they reformed on the heights. Of course the north had it's share of idiots there too like Sickles who was willing to cost the battle for some extra notch It's kind of amazing in a way looking back on it. Both sides had their chucklefucks. The Union kept them in the eastern theater while that is where the South had it's best. The Union's best tended to be out west while that's where the South had it's fuckups.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
quote:Isaac Newton, who was merely an average student, worked on translating the Bible and that gave him the inspiration and insight for inventing calculus, developing mechanics, and discovering gravity. Yeah . . .
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:Hood still bears the blame for losing them Gettysburg because he didn't keep the pressure on the north while they reformed on the heights. Of course the north had it's share of idiots there too like Sickles who was willing to cost the battle for some extra notch There's anedotes of war observers from Europe actually laughing at how bad we were at war at Bull Run, to the same people being nauseated at the Carnage of Gettysburg. No one is ever prepared for war but we know how to dramatically not know what to do going into a war.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:Hood still bears the blame for losing them Gettysburg because he didn't keep the pressure on the north while they reformed on the heights. Of course the north had it's share of idiots there too like Sickles who was willing to cost the battle for some extra notch Isn't Sickles the guy who had a leg blown off and then used the literal mummified leg as a prop during his political career? And also the first guy to get off on Temporary Insanity when he shot a dude who was cheating with his wife (while Sickles himself was cheating on his wife with prostitutes)? Daniel Sickles: Yet another lesser known crazy fucker of the American Civil War.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Isn't Sickles the guy who had a leg blown off and then used the literal mummified leg as a prop during his political career? And also the first guy to get off on Temporary Insanity when he shot a dude who was cheating with his wife (while Sickles himself was cheating on his wife with prostitutes)? He was in fact the first person to ever successfully use the Temporary Insanity defense in America, as I recall.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Isn't Sickles the guy who had a leg blown off and then used the literal mummified leg as a prop during his political career? And also the first guy to get off on Temporary Insanity when he shot a dude who was cheating with his wife (while Sickles himself was cheating on his wife with prostitutes)? Yup. Hit in that battle and carried off the field on a stretcher smoking a cigar to have it amputated. I think he ended up giving the leg to the Smithsonian or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 08:50
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:Yup. Hit in that battle and carried off the field on a stretcher smoking a cigar to have it amputated. I think he ended up giving the leg to the Smithsonian or something. It's at some health/medical museum in DC, I think. He also visited his leg on the anniversary of the severing for several years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 13:10
|
|
|
Trump: 'Democrats Want To Shut Government' Over Puerto Rico, ObamaCare Democrats!   quote:To: Helicondelta quote:To: Helicondelta "Everyone know that Puerto Ricans are really a type of Mexican!" quote:
quote:To: Helicondelta It's not like Republicans control all three branches of government and set policy or anything. quote:To: headstamp 2 quote:To: Helicondelta I love that Freepers are starting to surreptitiously demand that Trump stop being such a bitch. quote:To: Helicondelta That is some autocorrect... quote:To: Helicondelta Art of the Deal! quote:To: Rashputin quote:To: Helicondelta My favorite part of this is that he apparently did this tweetstorm in the middle of a Take Your Children to Work Day event at the White House. quote:To: Helicondelta Psh,  Conventional Wisdom.quote:To: Dustoff45 Jagged Jim fucked around with this message at 17:42 on Apr 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
quote:To: Rashputin LO-loving-L at Trump getting results and not bluffing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
^ In reality, the "art of the deal" actually requires you to bluff at timesJagged Jim posted:To: Helicondelta loving morons. Why aren't you bitching about the idiocy of your own party. They have all majorities, you should be able to just do what you want
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
I still don't get what's in it for the democrats to do anything other than laugh hysterically and not even consider any deal that isn't super favorable to them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
Feinne posted:I still don't get what's in it for the democrats to do anything other than laugh hysterically and not even consider any deal that isn't super favorable to them. Not having their constituents suffer under a government shutdown trying to achieve goals they can't reach anyway pretty much. Being purely obstructionist is not that helpful, and they would most likely get punished in future polls for it, even by a lot of people who in principle support the agenda they were ostensibly obstructing to try to enact.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
Feinne posted:I still don't get what's in it for the democrats to do anything other than laugh hysterically and not even consider any deal that isn't super favorable to them. The democratic negotiation strategy should just be to reply to every deal by the GOP with a video clip from the latest Chappelle special of him saying "Could you suck my dick? Not all the way, just enough so that I can say you did it."
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:Not having their constituents suffer under a government shutdown trying to achieve goals they can't reach anyway pretty much. Being purely obstructionist is not that helpful, and they would most likely get punished in future polls for it, even by a lot of people who in principle support the agenda they were ostensibly obstructing to try to enact. The republicans weren't. At all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:Not having their constituents suffer under a government shutdown trying to achieve goals they can't reach anyway pretty much. Being purely obstructionist is not that helpful, and they would most likely get punished in future polls for it, even by a lot of people who in principle support the agenda they were ostensibly obstructing to try to enact. I mean on paper the republicans don't need them to do whatever they want and it's not the democrats' fault part of the republican party demands poo poo that is politically toxic and won't support anything that doesn't meet their purity test. On one hand it hurts everyone if the democrats don't agree to be the loving adults in the room and clean up the republicans' lovely messes but every time they do that it hands the republicans a win because on paper they control everything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
There are times when I wish I was not a pacifist 
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
If Freep hears about this will they call it a False False Flag, a Flag False, a False Flag False Flag or some other combination of the two words?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
trickybiscuits posted:Yeah . . . Newton's was directly inspired by God! In the sense that God sicced a plague on his city, which forced him to retreat to his family farm and work on physics and calculus... Newton was deeply religious, of course, but I'm not aware of any direct connection between his religious and scientific work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
Newton was also a bit of a nutcase in many ways, we just choose to remember the important accomplishments. One of which turned out to be a major tool in (somewhat, his laws of gravitation and orbits remain extremely good at predicting stuff on the scale he observed) disproving the other but hey, that's scientific progress 
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
Jurgan posted:... Newton was way the gently caress into alchemy, iirc; does that count?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
Jurgan posted:Newton was deeply religious, of course, but I'm not aware of any direct connection between his religious and scientific work. If I recall the reason he wanted there to be 7 colours (ROYGBIV) was because of the mystical nature of the number 7. But all this is down to the strange authority-based view of science that doesn't match the actual reason scientists use Newton's work: it's because his theories enlightened current knowledge and predicted new things correctly. It's not because Newton was Newton, and just because he said something does not make it something scientists will or should believe. See, for instance, the (fake) stories about Darwin recanting on his deathbed, as if that would make any difference to the theory of evolution.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
SatansOnion posted:Newton was way the gently caress into alchemy, iirc; does that count? He was, but it doesn't. His alchemical nuttery kinda sidelined him getting any serious work done for any number of years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:He was, but it doesn't. His alchemical nuttery kinda sidelined him getting any serious work done for any number of years. Wasn't that also basically the standard science thing at the time? As much as people now go "lol alchemy is dumb" at the time nobody was really entirely sure it was stupid. I mean Newton was born in 1642. That wasn't exactly a century known for supercolliders, brilliant advances in quantum physics, and plastic. Shugojin posted:Newton was also a bit of a nutcase in many ways, we just choose to remember the important accomplishments. Same thing, really; yeah we remember the big stuff but a lot of science at the time wasn't science as we know it. Chemistry as we know it today didn't start until like a century later. Far as anybody knew at the time it was totes possible to turn lead into gold nobody just figured it out yet! Which I guess is still theoretically possible in that lead and gold are made of the same poo poo but it'd take a poo poo load of energy to actually do it. No way was alchemy the way they wanted actually doable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
A lot of the people at the time who you might call a scientist now, they knew that the main goals of alchemy (lead into gold with a process that wouldn't cost you more than the output would make up for, other mundane metals into valuable ones, elixirs of youth and eternal life yadda yadda) were ludicrous or likely impossible. Some believed that while they might not be impossible, they would be sinful or immoral to go for. They would avoid that sort of research (Newton didn't) and instead stick to things we'd classify as standard chemistry or other topics now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Wasn't that also basically the standard science thing at the time? As much as people now go "lol alchemy is dumb" at the time nobody was really entirely sure it was stupid. I mean Newton was born in 1642. That wasn't exactly a century known for supercolliders, brilliant advances in quantum physics, and plastic. Those guys existed, Boyle being most notable and a contemporary, but Newton really wasn't swimming in that end of the pool (and didn't follow Boyle's model, indeed thinking him a bit of a chump). For him, alchemical study wasn't "let's try to figure out the physical mechanisms of how poo poo interacts," so much as, "rediscover how to make philosopher's stone so I can crack God's secret code of the universe." quote:Which I guess is still theoretically possible in that lead and gold are made of the same poo poo but it'd take a poo poo load of energy to actually do it. No way was alchemy the way they wanted actually doable. Going from what little I remember from chemistry back in high school and college, there are ways via nuclear bombardment by which lead can be transmuted into gold, but no one bothers because it's ridiculously expensive and energy dependent and there's no point in doing it at all. Captain_Maclaine fucked around with this message at 03:04 on Apr 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Going from what little I remember from chemistry back in high school and college, there are ways via nuclear bombardment by which lead can be transmuted into gold, but no one bothers because it's ridiculously expensive and energy dependent and there's no point in doing it at all. Also you wind up with gold that's highly radioactive.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 07:36
|
|
|
Eyespy posted:Also you wind up with gold that's highly radioactive. Finally, gold no one can steal and live, muahahahaha
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 11:02
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:Finally, gold no one can steal I'm just hearing "ring that might give you superpowers".
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 14:09
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:Finally, gold no one can steal There's a movie in which a certain Mr. Goldfinger concocts a scheme. Of course, it doesn't actually involve stealing it, but...
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 14:38
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:Finally, gold no one can steal "Here's the secret investment opportunity libtards DON'T want you to know..."
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 15:06
|
|
|
Really wish the freepers would see that AP article where Trump talks to the reporters and and basically says he didn't think being President would be this hard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 15:57
|
|
|
Bobulus posted:Really wish the freepers would see that AP article where Trump talks to the reporters and and basically says he didn't think being President would be this hard. There's literally no way the vast majority won't just type FAKE NEWS
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 15:21 |
|
|
Bobulus posted:Really wish the freepers would see that AP article where Trump talks to the reporters and and basically says he didn't think being President would be this hard. Is that the same one where he claims to be a globalist? Their heads will pop
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 17:53
|
|
