Tuesday, February 5, 2013

What's Goin' On ... In Memphis

(Post and comment edited from Facebook)   When the civil rights movement was just getting underway, people said blacks in America just wanted to take their rightful place in society and culture, to take a place at the table that they'd always been denied. Because Americans are basically a fair-minded people, the country agreed that black folks (and women and other minorities) had been denied and it was time to include them.

(The "massive resistance" to desegregation during this period that you sometimes hear about from flogger types and others appears massive when it's the only thing in their camera frame. In most schools, in most counties and municipalities in the South, there was minor to zero resistance and trouble from white students and their parents. You didn't see this on TV at the time, or see it repeated over and over to this day, a la Little Rock, because it is of limited to no use in demonizing white Southerners.)

Well, we saw almost immediately that it wasn't really about adding a leaf to make more room at the table, and pulling up another chair and adding some new dishes to the existing menu. For leftist leaders and culture changers, the civil rights movement was an opportunity to do what they'd always wanted -- to get rid of what was already there and replace it with something else. Not just the food, but the china and silverware ... and the people. They hated what was already there, and the people who had put it there. For them, it was about force... about using the power of government and the courts and the media to force people already at the table get up, give up their chair and their meal...

What's going on in Memphis is NOT about honoring Ida B. Wells -- they could name a new park for her; a new school, a new street, a new anything, if honoring her was the genuine motivation. But it isn't. Getting rid of Nathan Bedford Forrest is the genuine motivation.

In the early 2000s, the campaign to eradicate the Confederate battle flag from public property (starting in South Carolina) included the rhetoric, "We don't care what you do on private property; it is the putting the flag on public property that we object to." So, down the flag came from state houses and other public buildings and from historic flag displays like the one in my town. And up it went on private property.

Well, just listen to the teeth-gnashing and the howls and screeches of protest when large Confederate flags go up on private property beside interstate highways in the South. Look at the treatment that Annie Caddell in S.C. got for putting up a flag **in her own yard.** "We don't care what you do on private property," was obviously yet another Big Lie.

But the privatization of very visible Confederate commemoration has to be done --  massively. If the park is renamed in Memphis, a very large, visible and beautiful new park must be created on private property to honor Forrest. His remains should be moved there and given a magnificent memorial.

And then, Memphis needs to be put under a microscope and monitored constantly, to see how changing the name of the park  "improves" the "quality of life" in that city.

Very, very visible positive reminders of the Confederacy -- and many more of them - must be maintained on private property to counter and neutralize, as much as possible, the ongoing efforts to dishonor and remove reminders of it from publicly owned places. The effort to erase all reminders of the Confederacy from the national consciousness, and all artifacts of it from the Southern landscape must not be allowed to succeed.

See a Facebook responder's comment below videos.

Memphis, Tennessee Elvis Presley
Walking In Memphis Marc Cohn

Communists founded and ran (and still run) the so-called civil rights movement. They did it because they knew that the black community was a perfect lever to "divide and conquer" in this country.

Now, having said that, I believe we must recognize that there was plenty wrong prior to the movement and that if good men of all colors could have come together and worked to do the right thing, the commies never would have had their opportunity -- but we didn't and they did.

Again, having said that, the time has come to stop the eternal effort to use the past as a means of a minority (not just in race but in political ideology) to destroy the rights of the majority (and not just in race). Yes, things were wrong and yes, we failed to act to make them right thus giving an opportunity to our enemies -- who, by the way, are as much an enemy of the black man -- to create what we now have in this country, rule by political correctness. But, sadly, it would seem as if the commies have won. 
So it would appear.

After World War II, when victorious GIs returned home, using technology, methods and inventions developed during the war, they built a new peacetime prosperity for the common folk never before seen in history. They built entire neighborhoods in the suburbs filled with little ranch houses with backyard barbecues and two car garages (with two cars in them) and network of streets and roads connecting them to suburban shopping centers and jobs in the cities. The San Fernando Valley epitomizes that culture.

But there were people who hated the prosperity and optimism of the era and began the job of tearing it down. They would love nothing more than to see the San Fernando Valley and its mirrors across the country turn into third world hell holes. In no small part due to their efforts, the Fabulous Fifties gave way to the Sick Sixties, and the country's and culture's decline has been steady ever since.  The civil rights movement was right in the middle of the decline because, as we now know, a great many blacks have not benefited from that effort, because it was as much about tearing down the "white man's world" as it was about elevating blacks. Ditto the feminism movement, which was less about helping and protecting women and more about hating and getting even with men.

The logical conclusion of the civil rights movement sits in the White House in Washington, D.C.  Barack Hussein Obama's economic jihad on the U.S. economy will finish off the country...  But nobody is going to like what results, not even the people who think that's what they want.  We'll all feel the regret GloZell felt after Obama's first election -- but for very different reasons.

Goodbye, Memphis. Goodbye, America.


___________________________
Image Credits: Columbia and Pensacola photos by C. Ward. Forrest Memorial photo by Thomas R. Machnitzki, Creative Common License. Confederate Flag in Tampa  photo found online unattributed.

10 comments:

  1. What is it with Southern Heritage nuts and communism...have you read Brooks latest post from some nut bag calling Lincoln a communists?

    Do you really want to go down that road?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I dunno, Corey. I don't know any Southern heritage nuts.

    Show some respect or you will find yourself banned from my blog comments.

    "...calling Lincoln a communists?" Better watch it. Al Mackey, self-appointed spelling cop, will be on your behind like white on ri-- oh, wait. Y'all are on the same side. Never mind....

    I don't know whether the evil that Lincoln perpetrated was inspired by an admiration for communism or a desire to implement it in the USA. And frankly, it doesn't matter to me whether he had commie leanings or not.

    But in the 20th Century, destruction of the United States was a fevered goal communists inside and outside the country. In the 1960s, the radical counter-culture, the anti-war left, the campus sit-in types, radical feminists, and civil right activists were strongly influenced by communists and communism.

    The Students for a Democratic Society, Bill Ayers, terrorist and murderer (and Obama's good friend), Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden, Angela Davis... these folks and many, many others -- all communists themselves or heavily influenced by communist.

    I've seen things online that purport to prove that MLK was a communist... Again, it is like Lincoln. I don't know, or care, whether he was or not.

    I do know there's plenty of evidence that people working for civil rights (and women's rights, and against the Vietnam war and so on) were guided and influenced by people who wanted to use those movements to tear down America and bring an end to the country's culture and prosperity, and replace it with communism, or at least socialism.

    You wanna try to dispute that? Go right ahead. Have at it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. More of your heritage crap and not history...ban me...please so I can stop having to message you and keep trying to explain you nuttiness.

    ReplyDelete
  4. With us it's not history, it's heritage?

    With you and your fellow floggers, it's not history, either -- it's a craving to insult and hurt people ... an unquenchable thirst to denigrate others ... an insatiable hunger for the put-down. It's about alleviating your doubts about your own questionable beliefs by lying about others. It's about inflating your own questionable and sagging moral authority by fabricating somebody "worse" than you are. Hardly anything you write is about history, Corey.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The name change of the park is such a crazy situation. It seems like the Memphis city council changed the names as quickly as possibly last night, so that they would not resemble "military Parks." This way, they (the council) could focus on the real name change at a later date.

    Like Levin, I'm not in favor OF tearing down/stripping the names off of monuments and parks. I would accept (easy to say since I don't live there) a hyphen name (ex. Forrest - Bell Park).

    ReplyDelete
  6. Wonder what the Memphis City Council finds objectionable about "military parks." What an insult to the armed forces of this country...

    I predict dead, ringing silence from most of the floggers over this. It's much preferable, in their view, to zero in on pretending "neo-Confederatse" celebrate the death of U.S. soldiers.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm not convinced it's a negative sentiment against military parks. If anything, I think it is a local government maintaining their domain against state government laws. But that's beside the point. I think the city council had some serious name changes in the works and did not want that to be interfered with by state policy. I'm interested to see how this progresses

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's not a genuine sentiment against military parks, that's for sure. That is a made-up excuse for continuing the Stalin-like "cleansing" of the Southern landscape of anything Confederate.

    Confederate heritage advocates and activists have been predicting this for years -- that the crusade of besmirching the Confederate flag, to justify its removal from public view, would be followed by renaming streets, parks, schools, etc., named for Confederate heroes, which would be accompanied by, or followed by, the removal or destruction of memorials.

    Eventually, the war itself will disappear from American memory. I mean, once the Confederacy is obliterated, how are you going to explain the yankee army's invasion of the South? What did they do down here, shoot trees?

    ReplyDelete
  9. "followed by, the removal or destruction of memorials"

    No one has removed or destroyed the memorial. The granite stones with the name were only recently installed...Forrest's statue and grave are still intact and not being destroyed.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Corey. Read what I said. Maybe it'll come to you.

    ReplyDelete

Okay, Mr. and/or Ms. Anonymous. Consider yourself thwarted.

Commenting policy: I will let through what I want to, and block what I want to based on whatever criteria or standards or whim I choose.