<<<Alpha-6 News>>>

[Hangar18]

On 5/11/2020 at 1:10 PM, Aceituna said:

Correct me if i am wrong (because i am not american) i thought they dont just ,,want it'' but they actually started doing it (removing statues etc.)

It's kind of hard to explain. Like Mutsu, I'm also from Virginia, and you cant throw a brick around here without hitting part of a battlefield. There are three main groups as far as this whole thing is concerned.

1- Remove anything CSA

2- Remove statues/name sakes/memorials that are used in non historical context.

3- Leave it all up

In many places yes we have removed statues. However they are not in historical places ( for the most part ). 

John Oliver explains the whole thing very well

 

[Shaftoe]

23 minutes ago, Hangar18 said:

It's kind of hard to explain. Like Mutsu, I'm also from Virginia, and you cant throw a brick around here without hitting part of a battlefield. There are three main groups as far as this whole thing is concerned.

1- Remove anything CSA

2- Remove statues/name sakes/memorials that are used in non historical context.

3- Leave it all up

In many places yes we have removed statues. However they are not in historical places ( for the most part ). 

John Oliver explains the whole thing very well

 

Rewriting history, and equally removing historical information and objects of heritage, is wrong and immoral, for it leads to repeat of the events we abhor today.

"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it". Therefore, all such notions should be ignored.

[NoamChomskyIsHotsky]

58 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:

Rewriting history, and equally removing historical information and objects of heritage, is wrong and immoral, for it leads to repeat of the events we abhor today.

"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it". Therefore, all such notions should be ignored.

The issue isn't so much that people are trying to "rewrite" history as they are trying to remove the honored status of the Confederacy. I'm a Texan, my family's been here since before the revolution and I'm proud of that, but I know entirely too many people who glorify what was, at its core, an act of treason against an elected government in the interest of preserving slavery. I'm fine with Confederate paraphernalia in museums, with proper context, so we can teach that history but it shouldn't be glorified or honored in public. That's what removing statues, etc is about.

Edited May 12, 2020 by NoamChomskyIsHotsky

[Dirlinger]

36 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:

Rewriting history, and equally removing historical information and objects of heritage, is wrong and immoral, for it leads to repeat of the events we abhor today.

"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it". Therefore, all such notions should be ignored.

nice principle but totally unrelated to CSS monuments built 100 years after the civil war and of people who even were skeptic against building them (I am thinking specially of Lee here).

And if monument is divisive then they are not serving against repeating the history but reinforcing the conflicts of the past. My 2 cents about that.

 

 

 

[Aceituna]

1 minute ago, Dirlinger said:

And if monument is divisive then they are not serving against repeating the history but reinforcing the conflicts of the past. My 2 cents about that.

If we should act by this logic, we would have to remove every statue And monument that is somehow related to history...

[Shaftoe]

3 minutes ago, Dirlinger said:

nice principle but totally unrelated to CSS monuments built 100 years after the civil war and of people who even were skeptic against building them (I am thinking specially of Lee here).

And if monument is divisive then they are not serving against repeating the history but reinforcing the conflicts of the past. My 2 cents about that.

Ugh, who has given the few moral or - more importantly - legal authority to determine what is divisive and what's not? The very idea that you can "reinforce [extinguished] conflicts of the past" by building memorials to either side of a conflict is absurd.

What matters is the angle from which you present the past. For example, if you're building a memorial to what happened in Nazi death camps, you need to make it clear how horrible those were, and what absurd dogma they served. You need to present history's ugly side and convey why this particular lesson needs to be remembered, regardless of how unpleasant it may be, or how "divisive" those few insist it allegedly is. Future generations should learn the history and ask the tough questions, even if those may yield divisive answers. This is why our species needs its inherent intelligence - to differentiate and make logical conclusions, to learn - not simply judge and persecute those who disagree.

Eventually, it comes down to how you choose to see it. You can be wise and preserve history, or you can be dumb and try to force pink glasses on as many people as possible, hoping that future generations will have easier time understanding the past. But by taking the latter approach you risk to enable future generations to repeat mistakes of the past.

Even when it comes to small cases, such as this, should you choose to enter the argument - you will find yourself supporting either side. The only 3rd way there is to abstain from arguing and see which side prevails. 

[madham82]

Can we stick to the subject, because there are plenty of problems in the world. We could spend all day discussing the rewriting of history for political correctness and flat out lies in many countries. 

[Hangar18]

2 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:

You need to present history's ugly side and convey why this particular lesson needs to be remembered,

I really don't want to get into this convo...but lets be honest thats not how any of the CSA statues are presented. Not a single one shows any sort of ugly side. They all glorify them. personally I don't think i'd want a monument to slavery. No one needs a daily reminder, if someone wants to learn about it we have schools books, and the internet.

If it was actually about history, then there would not be an overwhelming amount of people who don't know the war was about slavery. Obviously thousands of these statues is not helping anyone's historical knowledge.

[Hangar18]

6 minutes ago, madham82 said:

Can we stick to the subject, because there are plenty of problems in the world. We could spend all day discussing the rewriting of history for political correctness and flat out lies in many countries. 

Everyone has secrets. No exceptions.

but yeah, this is way off track. I regret bringing up the video, but i thought it was a good way to inform someone who has heard a part of a story, when it really is one that you need to completely understand if you're ever going to talk about it.

[Shaftoe]

8 minutes ago, Hangar18 said:

I really don't want to get into this convo...but lets be honest thats not how any of the CSA statues are presented. Not a single one shows any sort of ugly side. They all glorify them.

Perhaps that's because CSA also had heroes on their side who deserve some recognition and respect? Perhaps because not all in CSA military fought only to enforce slavery and racial biggotry? Perhaps because history is a complicated subject and cannot be oversimplified, since that would inevitably play in favor of either side, both of which were wrong and right on different accounts, as you may know. Perhaps, at least those who fought, as opposed to those who started it all, deserve to be remembered for their sacrifices?

But if you don't want to discuss it - that's fine. Keep glorifying the Union instead. Surely, they were all heroes, deserving nothing but praises...

Edited May 12, 2020 by Shaftoe

[Hangar18]

5 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:

But if you don't want to discuss it

What if i told you this forum is not in fact about the civil war...

[akd]

1 hour ago, Shaftoe said:

Rewriting history, and equally removing historical information and objects of heritage, is wrong and immoral, for it leads to repeat of the events we abhor today.

"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it". Therefore, all such notions should be ignored.

Rewriting history is why many of those objects were erected in the first place.

[NoamChomskyIsHotsky]

3 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:

Perhaps that's because CSA also had heroes on their side who deserve some recognition and respect? Perhaps because not all in CSA military fought only to enforce slavery and racial biggotry? Perhaps because history is a complicated subject and cannot be oversimplified, since that would inevitably play in favor of either side, both of which were wrong and right on different accounts, as you may know. Perhaps, at least those who fought, as opposed to those who started it all, deserve to be remembered for their sacrifices?

But if you don't want to discuss it - that's fine. Keep glorifying the Union instead. Surely, they were all heroes to be praised...

And yet the so-called CSA existed precisely because the wealthy and the powerful of Southern society wanted to preserve slavery. There are shades of gray in any historical event, but the Confederacy is not to be glorified. I myself have ancestors who fought for the Confederacy. No matter their *intentions*, materially they betrayed an elected government and served the interests of slaveowners. That will always be a black mark. Put the statues in museums, with proper context, sure, but not in honored public positions.

[Shaftoe]

10 minutes ago, Hangar18 said:

What if i told you this forum is not in fact about the civil war...

I have a better question. What if I told you that you started it, and I only replied? Forbidding others to answer to you seems unfair to me. Lol

 

Edited May 12, 2020 by Shaftoe

[Cdodders]

This topic is for discussing the Alpha 6 patch. If you want to conduct verbal warfare, please take it elsewhere

[Shaftoe]

1 minute ago, Cdodders said:

This topic is for discussing the Alpha 6 patch. If you want to conduct verbal warfare, please take it elsewhere

At this point, this topic is a waiting room, where we all chill and wait for @Nick Thomadis to get his stuff together and finally deliver the patch which was expected, first on Monday, then on Tuesday, and now apparently - on Wednesday. Until that happens, expect stuff to get off the rails from time to time, for a while. Lol. 

Because that's what usually happens. That being said, personally I would be happy to finally get muh destroyers and be on my way.

[DerRichtigeArzt]

17 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:

At this point, this topic is a waiting room, where we all chill and wait for @Nick Thomadis to get his stuff together and finally deliver the patch which was expected, first on Monday, then on Tuesday, and now apparently - on Wednesday. Until that happens, expect stuff to get off the rails from time to time, for a while. Lol. 

Because that's what usually happens. That being said, personally I would be happy to finally get muh destroyers and be on my way.

Ye I come here before going to sleep and Wim like the fuq? Why are we talking about slavery now? Devs I don't want to hurry you because I know that making stuff work ain't easy but you might want to step in. Lest pitchforks and torches might be drawn. We really don't need a civil war here, we are all here to do one thing! Sink the Russians at tsushima. So lets all focus on that ay? 

[BobRoss0902]

40 minutes ago, Cdodders said:

This topic is for discussing the Alpha 6 patch. If you want to conduct verbal warfare, please take it elsewhere

I'm pretty sure this thread went to anarchy as soon as the update got delayed...

[Skeksis]

Déjà vu!......... no wait, this actually did happen last patch, yep!

[Shaftoe]

2 minutes ago, Skeksis said:

Déjà vu!......... no wait, this actually did happen last patch, yep!

Just like Battlestar Galactica. "All of this has happened before, and will happen again"...

[DarkTerren]

well to be fair this is the creator of  UG Civil war and Gettysburg

Edited May 12, 2020 by DarkTerren

[BuckleUpBones]

28 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:

Just like Battlestar Galactica. "All of this has happened before, and will happen again"...

“hmm, difficult to see. Always in motion the future is.”

[Danvanthevacuumman]

Where is update

[RAMJB]

6 hours ago, Hangar18 said:

I really don't want to get into this convo...but lets be honest thats not how any of the CSA statues are presented. Not a single one shows any sort of ugly side.

by that standard, neither is any of the (slavist) founding fathers of the USA. So by that standard of "removing stuff that doesn't show the ugly side", and by order of historical events, you should begin by changing your nation capital's name (and a state. And literally thousands of school names) for something else, as is named after a well known historical slave owner yet your federal capital and one of your states doesn't mention that fact about Washington..

Doesn't sound  that enticing now, does it?. Of course it doesn't, because there's virtually no historical figure without a side that by today standards would be judged repulsive or at the very least highly questionable. If we were to erase, raze, change the name, and generally delete from existance any memorial, monument, or name honoring a figure of the past that had an "ugly side", then you would end in a nation with no statues nor public monuments at all. Which of course, means a nation without any memory of it's history at all. A terrifying prospect.

Selectively purging the memorials belonging to only some of them is a massive double standard and a show of hipocresy of the highest order. You either raze'em all, or raze none of them. The obvious answer is: raze none.

Judging the past by the compass of modern morals is downright stupid. Because people of the past were men of their era, and the standards and morals of their eras were different from today's. Most of the giants of humankind we revere from the past were racist, sexist, xenophobes, etc (or a combination of them all) according to modern standards. Yet we (rightly) honor them because of their good deeds, not because of those who were the result of what was normal at their time, but that now we perceive as inadequate or just awfully wrong.

Thankfully we've evolved in the sense that nowadays there's a much higher awareness of the freedom of the individual, human rights, equality of sexes, etc. Today's morals are much more evolved (and of course, better) than anytime in the past. 
Not so thankfully we still haven't learned the value of learning lessons of the past, and properly remembering them without trying to rewrite them to suit our tastes, and not what happened in reality. And by destroying memorials, statues, or changing names of things because "they had an ugly side" then you're erasing the very past you should never forget.

My 0.02$.

Edited May 13, 2020 by RAMJB

[BobRoss0902]

8 minutes ago, RAMJB said:

by that standard, neither is any of the (slavist) founding fathers of the USA. So by that standard of "removing stuff that doesn't show the ugly side", and by order of historical events, you should begin by changing your nation capital's name (and a state. And literally thousands of school names) for something else, as is named after a well known historical slave owner yet your federal capital and one of your states doesn't mention that fact about Washington..

Doesn't sound  that enticing now, does it?. Of course it doesn't, because there's virtually no historical figure without a side that by today standards would be judged repulsive or at the very least highly questionable. If we were to erase, raze, change the name, and generally delete from existance any memorial, monument, or name honoring a figure of the past that had an "ugly side", then you would end in a nation with no statues nor public monuments at all.

Selectively purging the memorials belonging to only some of them is a massive double standard and a show of hipocresy of the highest order. You either raze'em all, or raze none of them. The obvious answer is: raze none.

Judging the past by the compass of modern morals is downright stupid. Because people of the past were men of their era, and the standards and morals of their eras was different from today's. Most of the giants of humankind we revere from the past were racist, sexist, xenophobes, etc (or a combination of them all) according to modern standards. Yet we (rightly) honor them because of their good deeds, not because of those who were the result of what was normal at their time, but that now we perceive as inadequate or just awfully wrong.

Thankfully we've evolved in the sense that nowadays there's a much higher awareness of the freedom of the individual, human rights, equality of sexes, etc. Today's morals are much more evolved (and of course, better) than anytime in the past. 
Not so thankfully we still haven't learned the value of learning lessons of the past, and properly remembering them without trying to rewrite them to suit our tastes, and not hat happened in reality. And by destroying memorials, statues, or changing names of things because "they had an ugly side" then you're erasing the very past you should never forget.

My 0.02$.

Hey man no need to start that conversation back up as we just had it wrapped up.