Daigle wrote. “The loss of Nottoway is not just a loss for Iberville Parish, but for the entire state of Louisiana. It was a cornerstone of our tourism economy and a site of national significance.”
It was at one point. It stopped being a museum because of income issues because people in this country aren’t the “learn your horrible history” type, they’re more the bulldoze and forgot type.
Ahhh that’s why the US is such a shit country. I get it! It’s because of the genocide of the indigenous people. So the entire US is kinda like Auschwitz. It’s just not a place you want to live.
Contrasting the Plantation vs Auschwitz is about a living celebration of evil vs. a living reminder of evil. Which, I mean, I totally get it if you want to paint the whole nation with a brush like that, but I hope you at least apply that logic to all destruction of indigenous peoples and cultures, not just in the US.
The more accessible point to be made in this context is that Mt. Rushmore should be like Auschwitz. Given the nature of the Six Grandfathers and the Black Hills - yeah, absolutely.
And this here is why capitalism is good, it prevents the masses from forcing the horrors of history to be dull and gloomy just because the vast majority of people want it to be.
I am specifically advocating for this to be burnt down. These monsters gleefully ignore the torture and murder that went on here when the building was made. Imagine modern Germans throwing parties and getting married at Buchenwald. Imagine if Dachau’s website made no mention of the 40,000+ people murdered there.
Historical sites shouldn’t be preserved just because they’re old. They should be preserved with context, and when the context is taken away, the reason to preserve them is as well.
You can not advocate for something to happen but be glad it did.
Agreed. I never advocated for violence against CEOs, but Luigi has already saved hundreds of lives (United healthcare started approving more claims immediately after BT died) and he revitalized the debate for socialized medicine so I am very glad he did was he did.
And the quoted person wasn’t for advocating or glorifying the history of the house or property and yet somehow you’re ok with insulting them personally.
It should have been bought by the fed and turned into a museum of shit Sherman didn’t burn.
Louisiana’s usage of the term “parish” for a geographic region or local government dates back to the French colonial and Spanish colonial periods and is connected to ecclesiastical parishes.
I’m aware but if we’re talking about buildings built in the backs of inhumane acts then religion tops all but race and I’m pretty sure there would be a different reaction if it were a church burning down.
I personally feel that the historical significance of a thing outweighing its own bloody history, and believe that keeping the thing around helps us to remember its evil history, which may help us prevent it from happening, again.
Like the Confederate statues? Nah. Tear it down. It doesn’t serve as a reminder to prevent. It serves as a monolithic idol for shitty people to rally around and mythologize.
I don’t advocate burning history altogether, but keeping shitty places and statues around for shitty people to glorify serves the exact opposite of preserving the history. It just gives them hope and ideas that the “old days” will come back around. Take a picture or something and put it in a museum, at most. And make the museum about the horrific acts and atrocities, not about preserving the history of the vile.
There’s a reason the Vietnam memorial is so iconic. It lists the soldier’s names, and it preserves their legacy as a reminder of pointless war. But it doesn’t glorify the war. Same for the ground zero memorial in NYC. It does not glorify the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, nor the atrocities that occured over there despite the reminder from the Vietnam war. It serves to remind of the lives of many that were taken.
The only reason I’m okay with the preservation of the Holocaust memorial locations is that the history of the people murdered there is on display. The scratches in the walls. Their glasses and belongings. The current political situation aside, people can go there and see the evil that occured as a somber reminder. Whether they are one of the peoples that those atrocities happened to or not.
Yet still, shitty people pose on the tracks for instagram, or go there for the evil itself, rather than that somber reminder.
A slave house, plantation, or Confederate statue isn’t a somber reminder. It’s simply there because they want glorify the shitty acts and want them to come back around. They want to remind people what they think the worth of their existence is. They want to deify their generals and create some type of mythology to their history. There’s nothing there for the people who were abused or murdered in those times. It only stands currently so people now can say they want to preserve “the history,” which is the history of the abusers and the murderers.
Regarding confederate statues, I believe the only place they should be… is in their cemeteries. They should remove them from public lands and place them in the cemeteries.
This plantation house was used as a resort, so that’s a little off putting, and glorifying the history instead of being a sobering reminder of atrocity. I would have rather it be given over to the local government and turned into a museum against slavery. But, even then with how much the south glorifies the confederacy, the state wouldn’t have done a good job showing the evils of plantations like this.
Agreed on the second part. I don’t understand why anyone would want to sleep in a place like that.
But I disagree on the first part. Should all be rubble, imo. Glorifying the traitors just set us up for the current situation since the plants that have grown are just as rotten as the root imo. The only reason the man got office is because he co-opted the movement that’s been in play for at least 60 years by the likes of turtle-lookin fuckbag McConnell. Remember the Tea Party a few years ago? All of this is a culmination of years of effort by the right wings to push out progressive ideals. Trump just took advantage of the hysteria and pushed the GOP old guard out and set him up as narcissist supreme.
Remove the reminders of the old days as physical locations, imo.
No the statues are almost exclusively post civil war by like 50+ years. This house is an actual contemporary and iirc still has some of the slave quarters on property from when it was still a museum.
Ehh we gotta keep a few remnants around. Think, if none of these places existed, you’d get neo-nazis claiming shit like “slavery never existed, there is no evidence of such a thing, where are the buildings? Where are these so called “plantations”. Exactly, it never existed”.
Where did I draw a line, I just don’t see it as something to cheer.
The state should have taken it as a landmark and kept it as a museum. The absence of visible history is the easiest way to try to forget history, people already argue that the antebellum South wasn’t as horrific as it actually was and you’re cheering on the absence evidence that exists without it. Ie. You’re cheering on slavery denialism via spoliation.
Exactly, erasing these things threatens to erase history. Granted, this is a bad case to defend as a historical landmark of slavery, since it was being used as a venue and resort, and therefore glorifying a southern culture largelywholly made from the enslavement of Africans.
So are generalized platitudes. On the flip side somebody might feel “different” about WWII if their sweet, beloved great grandpa was a gestapo officer, but that wouldn’t be a valid reason for anyone to change their opinion.
Fuck that guy
I mean I like old houses and would have gone specifically to dunk on some asshole not owning their slave built home.
I don’t like religion but I don’t advocate burning them down either for the same reason.
Were it an actual museum of sorts, I’d agree. This wasn’t a place people went to learn about the horrors of slavery, it was a fucking resort
Yeah, visiting that should have been like visiting fucking Auschwitz, not a vacation.
It was at one point. It stopped being a museum because of income issues because people in this country aren’t the “learn your horrible history” type, they’re more the bulldoze and forgot type.
Ahhh that’s why the US is such a shit country. I get it! It’s because of the genocide of the indigenous people. So the entire US is kinda like Auschwitz. It’s just not a place you want to live.
Contrasting the Plantation vs Auschwitz is about a living celebration of evil vs. a living reminder of evil. Which, I mean, I totally get it if you want to paint the whole nation with a brush like that, but I hope you at least apply that logic to all destruction of indigenous peoples and cultures, not just in the US.
The more accessible point to be made in this context is that Mt. Rushmore should be like Auschwitz. Given the nature of the Six Grandfathers and the Black Hills - yeah, absolutely.
And this here is why capitalism is good, it prevents the masses from forcing the horrors of history to be dull and gloomy just because the vast majority of people want it to be.
Oh thank God for the people working to make the horrors of history less horrible
Edit: oh shit, did I eat the onion? Imma feel bad about that downvote if I missed the implied /s
I almost missed it myself, but I’m quite confident it’s peeking out from behind “the vast majority of people want it”
Oh yeah that’s exactly what was happening there.
🤡
Wow, this was the strongest case of Poe’s law I’ve seen in awhile. Well done.
It literally was a museum it wasn’t profitable so it was sold and made a resort.
Well, people aren’t specifically advocating for this to be burnt down, they’re just happy to see a remnant of slavery gone away.
You can not advocate for something to happen but be glad it did.
I am specifically advocating for this to be burnt down. These monsters gleefully ignore the torture and murder that went on here when the building was made. Imagine modern Germans throwing parties and getting married at Buchenwald. Imagine if Dachau’s website made no mention of the 40,000+ people murdered there.
Historical sites shouldn’t be preserved just because they’re old. They should be preserved with context, and when the context is taken away, the reason to preserve them is as well.
Agreed. I never advocated for violence against CEOs, but Luigi has already saved hundreds of lives (United healthcare started approving more claims immediately after BT died) and he revitalized the debate for socialized medicine so I am very glad he did was he did.
And the quoted person wasn’t for advocating or glorifying the history of the house or property and yet somehow you’re ok with insulting them personally.
It should have been bought by the fed and turned into a museum of shit Sherman didn’t burn.
Shame they didn’t do that beforehand, then someone could’ve finished what Sherman started.
In Louisiana, they call their counties “parishes.” It has nothing to do with religion lol
lol
Yes, it means “geographical region” in this context because we are not in French and Spanish colonial times… It is not religious any more.
The origin of the word ‘county’ is:
It no longer has anything to do with feudalism, just like parish has nothing to do with religion anymore.
I’m aware but if we’re talking about buildings built in the backs of inhumane acts then religion tops all but race and I’m pretty sure there would be a different reaction if it were a church burning down.
Oh I thought you were saying previously that it was burned due to a religious affiliation with the parish, I misunderstood your last sentence
If it ruined your families lives you might think differently.
I personally feel that the historical significance of a thing outweighing its own bloody history, and believe that keeping the thing around helps us to remember its evil history, which may help us prevent it from happening, again.
But, I also appreciate your POV. 🤷♂️
If white rich people are using it as a place to vacation and get married, it’s not a lesson and should burn.
People used that house for celebrations and weddings, not to remember its history
The slave quarters and other structures remain unburned, actually, so in fact the historical landmark/lesson is still there. :)
Like the Confederate statues? Nah. Tear it down. It doesn’t serve as a reminder to prevent. It serves as a monolithic idol for shitty people to rally around and mythologize.
I don’t advocate burning history altogether, but keeping shitty places and statues around for shitty people to glorify serves the exact opposite of preserving the history. It just gives them hope and ideas that the “old days” will come back around. Take a picture or something and put it in a museum, at most. And make the museum about the horrific acts and atrocities, not about preserving the history of the vile.
There’s a reason the Vietnam memorial is so iconic. It lists the soldier’s names, and it preserves their legacy as a reminder of pointless war. But it doesn’t glorify the war. Same for the ground zero memorial in NYC. It does not glorify the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, nor the atrocities that occured over there despite the reminder from the Vietnam war. It serves to remind of the lives of many that were taken.
The only reason I’m okay with the preservation of the Holocaust memorial locations is that the history of the people murdered there is on display. The scratches in the walls. Their glasses and belongings. The current political situation aside, people can go there and see the evil that occured as a somber reminder. Whether they are one of the peoples that those atrocities happened to or not.
Yet still, shitty people pose on the tracks for instagram, or go there for the evil itself, rather than that somber reminder.
A slave house, plantation, or Confederate statue isn’t a somber reminder. It’s simply there because they want glorify the shitty acts and want them to come back around. They want to remind people what they think the worth of their existence is. They want to deify their generals and create some type of mythology to their history. There’s nothing there for the people who were abused or murdered in those times. It only stands currently so people now can say they want to preserve “the history,” which is the history of the abusers and the murderers.
Regarding confederate statues, I believe the only place they should be… is in their cemeteries. They should remove them from public lands and place them in the cemeteries.
This plantation house was used as a resort, so that’s a little off putting, and glorifying the history instead of being a sobering reminder of atrocity. I would have rather it be given over to the local government and turned into a museum against slavery. But, even then with how much the south glorifies the confederacy, the state wouldn’t have done a good job showing the evils of plantations like this.
Agreed on the second part. I don’t understand why anyone would want to sleep in a place like that.
But I disagree on the first part. Should all be rubble, imo. Glorifying the traitors just set us up for the current situation since the plants that have grown are just as rotten as the root imo. The only reason the man got office is because he co-opted the movement that’s been in play for at least 60 years by the likes of turtle-lookin fuckbag McConnell. Remember the Tea Party a few years ago? All of this is a culmination of years of effort by the right wings to push out progressive ideals. Trump just took advantage of the hysteria and pushed the GOP old guard out and set him up as narcissist supreme.
Remove the reminders of the old days as physical locations, imo.
No the statues are almost exclusively post civil war by like 50+ years. This house is an actual contemporary and iirc still has some of the slave quarters on property from when it was still a museum.
Ehh we gotta keep a few remnants around. Think, if none of these places existed, you’d get neo-nazis claiming shit like “slavery never existed, there is no evidence of such a thing, where are the buildings? Where are these so called “plantations”. Exactly, it never existed”.
The slave quarters and other structures remain unburned, actually, so in fact the historical landmark/lesson is still there. :)
You’re drawing really strange moral lines here.
As if you aren’t.
Where did I draw a line, I just don’t see it as something to cheer.
The state should have taken it as a landmark and kept it as a museum. The absence of visible history is the easiest way to try to forget history, people already argue that the antebellum South wasn’t as horrific as it actually was and you’re cheering on the absence evidence that exists without it. Ie. You’re cheering on slavery denialism via spoliation.
How so?
If the quarters are important the house is as well.
Exactly, erasing these things threatens to erase history. Granted, this is a bad case to defend as a historical landmark of slavery, since it was being used as a venue and resort, and therefore glorifying a southern culture
largelywholly made from the enslavement of Africans.What the fuck? It was being used as a resort? Jesus fucking Christ.
Amazing show of empathy
Big jump to assume it hasn’t bud.
Doubt
Bigot.
Having empathy is being a bigot now?
Fuck off
No doubting my race is bigoted so let’s reverse that and you fuck off ya fuckin bigot.
Oh suddenly you care, huh?
Doubting you does not make sometime a bigot. It just means they don’t believe you. Especially with your comment history.
And burning it down means that you’re erasing your history and have zero respect for your family.
Yes, having an emotional stake in an issue can make people think differently, but it doesn’t make any POV objectively right.
Ignoring the context of a situation is completely useless.
So are generalized platitudes. On the flip side somebody might feel “different” about WWII if their sweet, beloved great grandpa was a gestapo officer, but that wouldn’t be a valid reason for anyone to change their opinion.