Primetime is adding their voice to these crazy times. They have a new limited series coming on firebrand abolitionist John Brown. Ethan Hawke plays John Brown.
John Brown - hero or terrorist?
- Thread starter Insidious Von
- Start date
I don't know that much about John Brown except that he took up arms to stop Missouri from becoming a Slave State.
In a related vein, was Nat Turner a freedom fighter or terrorist?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_Turner's_slave_rebellion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_Turner's_slave_rebellion
Who in his fair mind would even ask if this guy
was a terrorist? He was fighting and killing those
who committed the most heinous crime against
humanity.
"The rebellion did not discriminate by age or sex, and members killed white men, women, and children."
Dartsy, justice was served to the whites.
John Brown merely hanged, Nat Turner went out like William Wallace.
Did Lincoln, Grant and Sherman kill only those
who owned slaves? Slaves were enslaved by
the wealthy. I suspect that many of
those lives ruined by General Sherman were
not affluent slave owners like Scarlett O'Hara.
True. His quote: "make Georgia howl". Sherman felt the entire south should feel the consequences of its actions, or the actions taken on its behalf. Was this right? I don't know. But that was the logic.
Tear down the General Sherman statute. That guy was a bloody butcher. Burnt down Atlanta among other atrocities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_William_Tecumseh_Sherman_Monument
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_William_Tecumseh_Sherman_Monument
https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1261347120847572992
#Showtime has a new series about #slavery & the John Brown rebellion. Brown’s sidekick is a completely fictional character who never existed. It’s is a Black boy named “Onion” who wears a dress in the entire series
#BuckBreaking
Buck Breaking
This form of sexual abuse was very popular in the Carribean and it involved white supremacist and slave owners as well as merchants raping a male slave in front of the public to embarrass him and make him feel less of a man. Buck Breaking became very popular when slave rebellions had increased. Enslaved men were first stripped naked and flogged in front of a crowd after which they were raped by a white man to serve as a warning to other slaves.
https://face2faceafrica.com/article...exploited-and-abused-by-their-white-masters/3
nope not watching a show where a black boy is forced to wear a dress
No less than how the Confederates treated Union prisoners. You have a point, his battles against native Indians were no less merciless. This is a face you don't want to mess with.
The March through Georgia allowed the South to start a propaganda campaign portraying the Rebel Leaders as heroes. They were fighting to retain slavery, they were anything but.
The Civil War played out like the Second Punic War. After Antietam, General Lee expected the Union to negotiate a separation. Just like Lee, Hannibal expected Rome to negotiated for peace after Cannae, it didn't happen. Both won one more battle: Lee at Chancellorsville and Hannibal at Capua and that was it. The Union started cutting his supply lines, General Grant won at Vicksburg in Mississipi. Scipio invaded Spain and defeated Hasdrubal at Seguntum (Hannibla's brother). It helped that after Cannae, Rome granted citizenship to all Italians. When Scipio sailed to Spain he had 30,000 Italians under his command.
I can't wait to watch it. We'll find out if the boy was abused or it was his natural condition. Have an open mind CM.
I'll never watch it again, but worth watching for those who haven't.
4 years of war, the Union was pissed and aimed to make the South bleed to end the rebellion. Sherman sacked and pillaged GA. Sheridan sacked and pillaged VA. The combatants were hardened by several years of fighting. No fucks were given at that point and they wanted a beat-down that would end the war in a few months.
Was it right?..... In the same vein as Bomber Harris destroying Hamburg and Dresden, I guess.
Sherman's army captured the railroad track from Macon, pushing the Confederates to Lovejoy's Station. With his supply lines fully severed, Hood pulled his troops out of Atlanta the next day, September 1, destroying supply depots as he left to prevent them from falling into Union hands. He also set fire to eighty-one loaded ammunition cars, which led to a conflagration watched by hundreds.[15]
There you go, Dartsy. Atlanta was burned by CSA general John Bell Hood. Not Sherman.
Dartsy bullshits once again..... and is caught out once again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Atlanta#Siege_and_closure
You are wrong, again. Real historians credit/blame Sherman for burning Atlanta.
"Sherman burned Atlanta for two reasons, both perfectly sound: Because no sane general, planning to send an army of more than 60,000 men across the enemy's heartland with no supply line or hope of reinforcement, would leave a major rail/supply center like Atlanta intact in his rear. Burning Atlanta was a no-brainer.Nov 20, 2014"
