Reply to Why is ante bellum racist?

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Why is ante bellum racist?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The South has so many great virtues that deserve to be celebrated.  Lots of jealous people here.[/quote]
Find something better to celebrate than how great life was when you could own other people to do all the work. No one is jealous of this.[/quote]

For instance, Derby Days.  The same dresses and the same mint juleps but without the treason and slavery.[/quote].You mean it's actually okay to make a drink associated with slavery?   Thank you for kindness and understanding.    [/quote]

Mint juleps aren't really associated with slavery or the deep south. They are associated with the Kentucky Derby and Virginia though.  That's kind of my point.  There is no reason to hold an antebellum party other than to thumb your nose at people.  Fancy clothes and mint juleps are a Kentucky Derby/Virginia Squire thing not an antebellum Gone With the Wind thing.[/quote]
This is really funny considering that you noted yourself they are drunk at antebellum parties, Virginia and Kentucky are in the South, they originated in Virginia when it was the largest slave holding state, and predate the Kentucky Derby by about 100 years.  Also, have you not heard of the trope of black slave bartenders making mint juleps?  If people don't realize how mint juleps were intertwined with slavery, they really need to study more history.[/quote]

No, you need to study more hostory.  The trope is of a black person serving iced drinks, including leonade and iced tea.  Juleps were invented as a medicinal concoction in the 17th century.p
[/quote]
Juleps too.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-lost-african-american-bartenders-who-created-the-cocktail

If there was any drink-mixing going on at those stately Virginia homes, it was black hands doing it. As the English traveler John Davis, who in 1800 spent some months teaching school on a Virginia plantation, put it, where others might set their hands to the plow, “the Virginian only inspects the work of his farm.” And in fact, “Old Dick,” one of the enslaved people on that plantation, told Davis that in the years before the Revolution one of his responsibilities had been “mixing and tasting” his young enslaver’s Juleps when he called for them first thing in the morning (“he was for a short life and a merry one,” as Dick put it).[/quote]

Every drink and food item was made that way.  Barbecue was created by slaves that were given the worst cuts of meat at the time.  The Virginia squire silliness was a replication of the english country lord lifestyle, complete with serfs/slaves.  That then evolved into the antebellum era tropes, which took things even further.  History, around the world, is pretty much horrible to everyone except the 0.0001% if you keep going back.  [b]Therefore in practical terms a line needs to be drawn somewhere.[/b]  I'm going with the Missouri Compromise.  What are you going with?[/quote]
Read the debate on this or any other similar issue, including this thread.  The line is always shifting, subjective, retroactively applied and people get incredibly angry and insulting if you disagree with their assessments.  This is not a practical way to combat way to racism.   [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics