115
Southern Honor, the Duel, and the Politics of Forum Debate : Swingers Discussion 98168
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsSouthern Honor, the Duel, and the Politics of Forum Debate
TOPIC: Southern Honor, the Duel, and the Politics of Forum Debate
Created by: sappholovers
Original Starting post for this thread:
As the debate over the Civil War reveals, exchanges in the this political forum can easily turn into dueling with words, which is a sublimated form of swordfighting and cockfighting.

The South in antebellum America had a particular association with codes of honor and dueling, and the debate between North and South has been read as verbal duel, fought in the forums of democracy or the Congress and in election campaigns. The verbal dueling turned into the brutal assault on Senator Charles Sumner, of Mass., by Sen. Preston Brooks, of South Carolina, when Brooks felt that Sumner had impugned the honor of the South. Brooks responded by caning Sumner. (There is no report that Brooks also called Sumner a fudge packer and a maroon.)

Betram Wyatt-Brown is an award winning historian who has studied the connections between Southern Honor and Violence and the debate over slavery and civil rights in the South. I will cite Amazon reviews of two of his books. I recommend them as reading for anyone who desires to virtually cane me with their words for insulting Southern honor by continually exposing a defense of slavery as the key issue that led the South into secession.

Brown, "Honor and Violence in the Old South"

This eloquent and richly textured study first demonstrates the psychological complexity of race relations, drawing new and provocative comparisons between American slave oppression and the Nazi concentration camp experience. The author then reveals how the rhetoric and rituals of honor affected the Revolutionary generation and--through a study of Andrew Jackson, dueling, and other demonstrations of manhood--how early American politicians won or lost popularity. In perhaps the most subtle and intriguing section of the book, he discloses the interconnections of honor and religious belief and practice. Finally, exploring the effects of war and defeat on former Confederates, Wyatt-Brown suggests that the rise of violent racism following the Civil War had significant links to the shame of military defeat and the spurious invocation of religious convictions.

GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4
 1 to 10 of 33   End
User Details are only visible to members.
Scotty2:

I'm sure it does not feel like a turkey shoot when you are fighting in a war.

The American press described what the destruction of Iraqis on the major highway to and from Kuwait as a "turkey shoot."

Turkey shoot is not my word, but those of the press. I don't know if anyone in the military used that word.

I supported Gulf War I. It was the model of how to bring togethr a multinational force to fight an enemy with U.N. approval.

You are kidding about dropping nukes on the Mideast, right?

Did you serve in the army under Brig. General Jack Ripper (an allusion to "Dr. Strangelove")?

Los Angeles CA
Username hidden
(4376 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Scotty: "War is hell, but I hate the thought of americans killing americans over economic and farming issues."

I maintain that the tyranny and terrorism of slavery in the South from the origins of slavery through its abolishment thanks to the Civil War was a far worse terror and tyranny than that imposed on the Iraqi people by Saddam.

The Civil War was a war over slavery, and Jefferson Davis himself calls slavery the issue of "transcendent magnitude."

Slavery was a form of dehumanization. The Southern economy depended too much on the dehumanization of people from Africa.

Slavery was an axis of evil in my book, and in Lincoln's judgment.

Scotty: Please show me where Jefferson Davis says that the key reason for seceding was to defend economic and farming issues, unless you mean by economic issues the political economy of slavery.

It's so sad to see people still deluded by Confederate myth and pride.....

Even Jefferson Davis knew the secession and war was about slavery.

Check out his words in his 1861 speech to the Confederate Congress.

Or cite me a reputable contemporary historian who says the South primarily fought on the basis of economic and farming issues unrelated to their defense of slavery.

Los Angeles CA
Username hidden
(4376 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
If it helps me sleep I am all for it.

Saint Louis MO
Username hidden
(12441 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
LOL yup its you alright LOLshakes his head and goes to bed.

Saint Louis MO
Username hidden
(12441 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
No? But i see the LSD is better LOL

Saint Louis MO
Username hidden
(12441 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Why did Charlie Manson's Helter Skelter family use knives to kill innocent women and children?

Welcome oh foolish one: Dont know but I am sure you will tell us LOL

How you been man?

Saint Louis MO
Username hidden
(12441 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Tell'em Scotty, sappy is just another jnm, same poster I think.

Destin FL
Username hidden
(14562 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Sapp,

The differnce is in the civil war we were killing americans. dropping the nukes on japan was completely justified and was done by a democrat. You also leave out he march 14th fire bombing of toyko that killed almost one million people in a firestorm.

War is hell, but I hate the thought of americans killing americans over economic and farming issues. I have no problems with americans killing forigners.

Would I nuke iraq, iran and afghanistan if given the opportunity.... YUP!!! and would lose no sleep over it. Hell if i had the chance to nuke those 3 i'd throw in mecca and medina to.

As posted in another thread.... Genocide can be an effective tool of war. if we chose to engage in war we should win.

I also take umbridge at your reference to the first gulf war. I was in that war. WE may have won but when bullets are flying at you it certainly doesn't feel like a turkey shoot. ANother liberal that's never lifted a finger to defend his country telling others that have how easy it is. GO fornicate yourself.

Lake Worth FL
Username hidden
(7207 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
LOL twofer LOL

Good post Scotty. and thanks for Opining.

Saint Louis MO
Username hidden
(12441 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I didn't read luckies posts about lincoln. But freeing the slaves was an after thought to him. The civil war started in 1861, Lincoln did not emancipate the slaves until 1863. The only reason he did it at all was that the union populace was war weary from a long war. He need to keep them united. THere were several times that the union was on the verge of loosing the war. While slavery was a sub-issue. The civil war was started over traiffs and trade which would've had a negative effect on the southern states economy. There has never been a war fought that wasn't over money, the civil war was no different.

Slavery would've ended itself with the advent of new farming equipment in less than 30 years anyway. Lincoln had some writings and I'm to lazy to find them now but basically said paraphrasing "if i could keep the union untied and not end slavery I'd do it, if i could keep the union united and end slavery I'd do that to." That in itself shows lincoln was conflicted at the very least on the issue of slavery. At worst he simply didn't care. I believe lincoln realized that the slaves were rapidly becoming antiquated farm equipment also. (by the way i'm a born and raised yankee)

On to dueling. The south had no monopoly on dueling. most notably hamilton and burr July 11, 1804 were burr killed hamilton at weehawken heights in new jersey.

There are othe famous duels in the american north. Back then people didn't settle their differences with lawyers, they defended their honor or their spouses honor with dueling pistols or swords. Personally I don't htink it's a bad idea. Would make people think before they talk if they knew they'd have to defend their words with a pistol.

Sapp personally I think you need to get back on the lithium. You come up with these topics just to piss people off. Maybe you should put your computer away and see your shrink.

Lake Worth FL
Username hidden
(7207 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4
 1 to 10 of 33   End
TOPIC: Southern Honor, the Duel, and the Politics of Forum Debate