If I made a video debunking every moonbat bumper sticker …
Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 07:00am 18 Comments
… I would not have any time left for doing really important things, like responding to pretentious numbskulls who object to me spiking the football.
Thanks to reader Helen for forwarding this video by Andrew Klavan regarding the “war is not the answer” bumper sticker. I think the same thing goes for the Coexist bumper sticker.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Couple of problems with Klavan’s essay. Though the American South certainly seceded to preserve slavery, the North fought for Union, and ending slavery was a tangential issue, at least until the Emancipation Proclamation. As for stopping genocide in WWII, it was to defeat conquering empires, not to stop genocide.
As for the larger point, “War is Not the Answer, “the belief that people can be changed by non-violent means dates at least to Jesus. Also, the person may only be applying it to today’s world. Nor should a bumper sticker be considered a complete statement of someone’s political or philosophical position.
Couple of problems with Zachriel’s comment.
“The American South certainly seceded to preserve slavery…”
Based on that misapprehension, you probably think the Confederate flag represents support for slavery, too.
Where did you learn your history?
Actually, the large majority of the ranks of the Confederate Army were filled with non-slaveholders. The War Between the States (the Southern title of the war) was fought over the Tenth Amendment principle of States’ Rights.
Also termed “The War of Northern Aggression”
Years ago, I was rooting through a booksellers collection in an “antique mall” some place in VA. He had numerous books on the Civil War period, and when I expressed an interest in a few of his, as I put it, “Civil War books,” he obviously recognized by my accent that I was likely a Yankee. So he shot back that, “Down here, we call it the ‘The War of Northern Aggression.'”
Therefore, I said something like, “Well, okay. But for the purposes of negotiating a possible sale beneficial to us both, how about we split the difference and refer to it as “The War Between the States?”
He smiled and agreed, and I not only bought several books I wanted, I also ended up getting a few pretty good First Editions amongst them.
“ending slavery was a tangential issue” (to the North)
Preserving slavery was an irrelevant issue to the South.
Oh bunk. Can we please stop with the revisionist history? In 1861, slaves were the single most valuable thing in North America. The value of southern slaves was greater than the value of all of the railroads, factories and infrastructure on the entire continent combined. I know it’s been fashionable in recent years to ignore this fact (I got my history degree in the 80s and 90s when this was the coming thing), but you might as well claim that a bank robber “isn’t in it for the money”.
Tell ya what. If you’re so sure that slavery wasn’t THE factor in the Civil War, make the case for the war absent slavery. Pretend it’s 1861, there isn’t and never has been a single slave in America. Now, tell me WHY the southern states are seceding.
I’m waiting. Take all the time you want, I’ll be here.
Nor should a bumper sticker be considered a complete statement of someone’s political or philosophical position.
So why put an incomplete and easily misinterpreted bumper sticker on your car then? Klaven is spot on about it being a self-proclamation of their intellectual superiority. Which is ironic given that Klaven pointed out that the statement alone is incomplete and nonsensical, and now you are doing exactly the same thing but in defense of the sticker. Either way Klaven is right, the bumper sticker will not make people think the driver is more enlightened or intellectual.
How deliciously apt.
boudicca: Preserving slavery was an irrelevant issue to the South.
The Confederates happened to made clear their reasons: slavery and white supremacy.
Mississippi Declaration of Secession: Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery.
Speech of Confederate Vice President Alexander H. Stephens: Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition.
And we have this perversion of the Declaration of Independence:
Texas Declaration of Secession: We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.
boudicca: Where did you learn your history?
From source documents.
VetHusbandFather: So why put an incomplete and easily misinterpreted bumper sticker on your car then?
Heh. Humans are funny that way.
Nicely done, zachriel.
I am always amazed at the claim that secession had nothing to do with slavery, when it was the election of Lincoln – who favored not abolition but non-expansion, which meant at most that slavery would die of natural causes over the decades – that triggered the decision to leave the union.
My brother used to travel about putting little stickers of a “wood screw” over all those “hearts” on bumper stickers.
Zachriel: “the belief that people can be changed by non-violent means dates at least to Jesus”
“CAN” be, yes. CAN ALWAYS be, no. Additionally, the need for war in instances where people refuse to be changed or presented a threat to God’s people dates back long before Jesus (though doesn’t end with Jesus). 1 Samuel 5:13, Numbers 21:1-3, Joshua 4:13, Numbers 31:2, Deut 20:16-17, and the list goes on. Some may argue that the God of the Old Testament is not applicable to Jesus or the way Jesus interacted with people, however Jesus states that “He and God are one” (John 10:30), and if you believe that Jesus is worth listening to (as you seem to demonstrate with your comments), it is important to note that His emphasis on forgiveness and peace does not repudiate the fact the God is just and does call for war in threatening instances of impenitence. If there had been NO war, even in the last hundred years, do you imagine that the Jewish people would still exist? Let alone our country and its freedoms?
Those pasting those ridiculously stupid “coexist” bumper stickers on their cars ought to recall (or be gently reminded) that the whole notion of “coexistence”, or perhaps more fully “peaceful coexistence” was an invention of the Soviet communists back during the days of the Cold War. It was not being promoted by them as a form of permanent “truce,” but instead as a new form of “continuation of the class struggle.”
Hence, it was never intended as a Rodney King form of permanent cessation of hostilities . . . like “Can’t we all just get along?
Thus, it did not mean that all different forms of government could and should happily thrive together . . . it meant that communism would come to prevail through means other than through openly hostile and antagonistic ideological confrontation between socialist societies and capitalist societies.
In that context, the religious “coexist” bumper stickers are exposed as the really meaningless drivel that they are . . . that is, unless they are intended to promote a period of religious tolerance until such day as one or another of the world’s religions comes to dominate our spiritual lives!
In which case, I say, “No thanks!” They can take their stupid bumper stickers and paste ’em where . . . well, you know the rest!
If today is the first day of the rest of my life, what was yesterday?
I really hate the stupidity of the coexist bumper sticker. How can you coexist with someone (Islamists) that wants to kill you. Well, you can’t.
The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy.
South carolinsa, the first state to secede concludes it’s declaration
Sectional interest and animosity will deepen the irritation, and all hope of remedy is rendered vain, by the fact that public opinion at the North has invested a great political error with the sanction of more erroneous religious belief.
We, therefore, the People of South Carolina, by our delegates in Convention assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, have solemnly declared that the Union heretofore existing between this State and the other States of North America, is dissolved, and that the State of South Carolina has resumed her position among the nations of the world, as a separate and independent State; with full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent States may of right do.
boudicca: South carolinsa, the first state to secede
Yes, another good example. Reading South Carolina’s Declaration of Causes, it was all about slavery.
“they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery”