Octopus Overlords

El Guapo wrote:Or maybe they're super into that architecture style. That's probably it.

Was curious.

Wiki says you are right. *shrug*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Antebellum

On the BBC Radio 2 Drivetime Show August 9, 2010, the band explained to the host, Liza Tarbuck, that the name Antebellum comes from when the group were photographing "antebellum" homes. The antebellum architectural style describes the large plantation homes in the American South. The Latin word bellum means "war"; "antebellum" therefore means "before the war". In America specifically, the Antebellum era commonly refers to the period before the Civil War. While photographing the houses one of the group said that there's a great band name in there, and they adopted the Lady Antebellum name shortly after. The trio then began performing at local venues in Nashville before being signed in July 2007 to a recording contract with Capitol Records Nashville. In an interview with Sirius Satellite Radio, Scott said she was rejected from auditions for American Idol twice, not even making it past the first round.[5]

tgb wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:
I don't want to read into this, but are you implying anyone interested in the 1700's south shouldn't do so because there was slavery and people take it wrong?

No, he's saying that naming your band in way that honors 17th century South is probably a dumb idea. Which I guess it turns out they didn't do anyway, although they probably should have thought it through.

Just following that logic through, they shouldn't name themselves after something that might be perceived by people (incorrectly) to be associated with honoring the 17th century south.

tgb wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:
I don't want to read into this, but are you implying anyone interested in the 1700's south shouldn't do so because there was slavery and people take it wrong?

No, he's saying that naming your band in way that honors 17th century South is probably a dumb idea. Which I guess it turns out they didn't do anyway, although they probably should have thought it through.

Yeah, pretty much. Basically insofar as slavery was the cornerstone of the antebellum south's way of life and political governance (as Confederate leaders often noted), it's not really possible to honor the antebellum south or the Confederacy without also honoring its system of mass slavery.

That said, as posted above it does actually appear that the band was just referring to the architectural style and that the word sounded cool, though they should be aware that most people (I think) would not see the name as referring to architecture. Though of course that architecture is kind of a plantation house style as well, so there's that.

noxiousdog wrote:

tgb wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:
I don't want to read into this, but are you implying anyone interested in the 1700's south shouldn't do so because there was slavery and people take it wrong?

No, he's saying that naming your band in way that honors 17th century South is probably a dumb idea. Which I guess it turns out they didn't do anyway, although they probably should have thought it through.

Just following that logic through, they shouldn't name themselves after something that might be perceived by people (incorrectly) to be associated with honoring the 17th century south.

Honestly I couldn't care less what the band does. I'm just saying that honoring the antebellum south is to some degree honoring the system of slavery that it rested on - if they want to do that, I don't feel strongly about it.

Also to be clear we're mainly talking about the 19th century south, not the 17th century south. Or at least the 17th - 19th century south.

El Guapo wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:

tgb wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:
I don't want to read into this, but are you implying anyone interested in the 1700's south shouldn't do so because there was slavery and people take it wrong?

No, he's saying that naming your band in way that honors 17th century South is probably a dumb idea. Which I guess it turns out they didn't do anyway, although they probably should have thought it through.

Just following that logic through, they shouldn't name themselves after something that might be perceived by people (incorrectly) to be associated with honoring the 17th century south.

Honestly I couldn't care less what the band does. I'm just saying that honoring the antebellum south is to some degree honoring the system of slavery that it rested on - if they want to do that, I don't feel strongly about it.

Also to be clear we're mainly talking about the 19th century south, not the 17th century south. Or at least the 17th - 19th century south.

Right. Centuries go the other way. Sorry about that.

Actually I think most people have no idea what antebellum means.

Out of curiousity, how do you feel about some of our national buildings, such as the White House, Washington Monument, and Capitol building being built by slaves?

Slave labor is a historical fact, but I don't think continuing to use those buildings necessarily honors it.

noxiousdog wrote:

El Guapo wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:

tgb wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:
I don't want to read into this, but are you implying anyone interested in the 1700's south shouldn't do so because there was slavery and people take it wrong?

No, he's saying that naming your band in way that honors 17th century South is probably a dumb idea. Which I guess it turns out they didn't do anyway, although they probably should have thought it through.

Just following that logic through, they shouldn't name themselves after something that might be perceived by people (incorrectly) to be associated with honoring the 17th century south.

Honestly I couldn't care less what the band does. I'm just saying that honoring the antebellum south is to some degree honoring the system of slavery that it rested on - if they want to do that, I don't feel strongly about it.

Also to be clear we're mainly talking about the 19th century south, not the 17th century south. Or at least the 17th - 19th century south.

Right. Centuries go the other way. Sorry about that.

Actually I think most people have no idea what antebellum means.

Out of curiousity, how do you feel about some of our national buildings, such as the White House, Washington Monument, and Capitol building being built by slaves?

Those are different. Of course slavery is an integral part of United States history generally, not just that of the south or the Confederacy. But slavery was more integrally intertwined with political and civil life, and with cultural and (attempted) national identity with the south and with the Confederacy than with federal institutions generally. Like, the White House is certainly associated with slavery. But it's also associated with the federal war effort to destroy the Confederacy and ultimately to end slavery.

Slavery remains a perpetual stain on the United States's honor, and we certainly should not forget that many national buildings (and our nation generally) was to a large degree built by slaves and on the institution of slavery. The closer one gets to those institutions that fought the hardest to retain slavery, the more problematic that association becomes.

El Guapo wrote: Those are different. Of course slavery is an integral part of United States history generally, not just that of the south or the Confederacy. But slavery was more integrally intertwined with political and civil life, and with cultural and (attempted) national identity with the south and with the Confederacy than with federal institutions generally. Like, the White House is certainly associated with slavery. But it's also associated with the federal war effort to destroy the Confederacy and ultimately to end slavery.

Slavery remains a perpetual stain on the United States's honor, and we certainly should not forget that many national buildings (and our nation generally) was to a large degree built by slaves and on the institution of slavery. The closer one gets to those institutions that fought the hardest to retain slavery, the more problematic that association becomes.

I think the only difference is that "we" are not racists but "they" are. Our motives and symbols are therefore pure and their motives are racist so they are not.

I'm with you on direct symbols like the Confederate Flag, but it's super stretching it to say that "antebellum" is likely contextually racist but monuments known to be built by slavery are not.

YMMV.

noxiousdog wrote:

El Guapo wrote: Those are different. Of course slavery is an integral part of United States history generally, not just that of the south or the Confederacy. But slavery was more integrally intertwined with political and civil life, and with cultural and (attempted) national identity with the south and with the Confederacy than with federal institutions generally. Like, the White House is certainly associated with slavery. But it's also associated with the federal war effort to destroy the Confederacy and ultimately to end slavery.

Slavery remains a perpetual stain on the United States's honor, and we certainly should not forget that many national buildings (and our nation generally) was to a large degree built by slaves and on the institution of slavery. The closer one gets to those institutions that fought the hardest to retain slavery, the more problematic that association becomes.

I think the only difference is that "we" are not racists but "they" are. Our motives and symbols are therefore pure and their motives are racist so they are not.

I'm with you on direct symbols like the Confederate Flag, but it's super stretching it to say that "antebellum" is likely contextually racist but monuments known to be built by slavery are not.

YMMV.

eh, I don't think that's it. We (that is, the United States) are absolutely racist too - it's not like the non-southern antebellum United States, or the postbellum United States was a bastion of racial equality. It's mainly that buildings like the White House and Capitol building have many, many broader connotations that significantly counterbalance / outweigh their immediate mental associations with slavery. Virginia certainly had a huge role in the institution of slavery (and fighting for it), but it similarly has many associations broader than just slavery.

Also I wouldn't say that 'antebellum' as a word is likely contextually racist either. It's just that antebellum is contextually linked (in the United States) with slavery because it's referring to the pre-Civil War period, and the main thing that separates that pre-civil war period from the post-civil war period is that slavery was illegal afterwards but legal beforehand. It's less of a "probably racist" thing and more of a "tread carefully" thing.

El Guapo wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:

El Guapo wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:

tgb wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:
I don't want to read into this, but are you implying anyone interested in the 1700's south shouldn't do so because there was slavery and people take it wrong?

No, he's saying that naming your band in way that honors 17th century South is probably a dumb idea. Which I guess it turns out they didn't do anyway, although they probably should have thought it through.

Just following that logic through, they shouldn't name themselves after something that might be perceived by people (incorrectly) to be associated with honoring the 17th century south.

Honestly I couldn't care less what the band does. I'm just saying that honoring the antebellum south is to some degree honoring the system of slavery that it rested on - if they want to do that, I don't feel strongly about it.

Also to be clear we're mainly talking about the 19th century south, not the 17th century south. Or at least the 17th - 19th century south.

Right. Centuries go the other way. Sorry about that.

Actually I think most people have no idea what antebellum means.

Out of curiousity, how do you feel about some of our national buildings, such as the White House, Washington Monument, and Capitol building being built by slaves?

Those are different. Of course slavery is an integral part of United States history generally, not just that of the south or the Confederacy. But slavery was more integrally intertwined with political and civil life, and with cultural and (attempted) national identity with the south and with the Confederacy than with federal institutions generally. Like, the White House is certainly associated with slavery. But it's also associated with the federal war effort to destroy the Confederacy and ultimately to end slavery.

Slavery remains a perpetual stain on the United States's honor, and we certainly should not forget that many national buildings (and our nation generally) was to a large degree built by slaves and on the institution of slavery. The closer one gets to those institutions that fought the hardest to retain slavery, the more problematic that association becomes.

Is slavery a perpetual stain on the other nations of the world as well?

Is there a point to the stain if all nations share it?

Should Egypt tear down the pyramids?

I blame Massachusetts, they were the first colony to legalize slavery.

Rip wrote: Is slavery a perpetual stain on the other nations of the world as well?

Is there a point to the stain if all nations share it?

Should Egypt tear down the pyramids?

I used to think this way as well, but African slavery is significantly different in the history of the world and not all that surprisingly, you can blame corporations. Shipping companies wanted to protect their shipments, but due to the fact these were people and not cargo, the insurance companies were reluctant. Therefore, they were reclassified as property. This had far reaching cultural ramifications that we still have not recovered from. You can see it in the laws during the 1600s. They slowly changed from more of an indentured servitude to what we think of today as slavery.

Note: this is hard to verify, and I am sure there is disagreement, but for whatever reason, the laws changed significantly during that time period.

I blame Massachusetts, they were the first colony to legalize slavery.

The northern participation in the slave trade is often brushed aside even after their colonies outlawed it. It is a sore spot for me as well. But other than the Boston Celtics, most cities don't try to celebrate their heritage.

Rip wrote: Is slavery a perpetual stain on the other nations of the world as well?

Is there a point to the stain if all nations share it?

Should Egypt tear down the pyramids?

I blame Massachusetts, they were the first colony to legalize slavery.

Slavery is a historical stain that should be acknowledged. All nations should do so. Massachusetts is aware of the slavery in its history. No, they shouldn't tear down the pyramids.

Were those real questions?

America's relationship to slavery is different because the Confederacy was an attempt to found a nation on and for the perpetuation of the institution when the modern world had come to see its evil. Other nations have histories of slavery that they have tried to overcome; the CSA took an ideology of slavery as its defining principle and fought to perpetuate it.

White supremacists have descended on Charlottesville, VA for what's being billed as "Unite the Right" but is basically a declaration of the open racism at the core of the alt-right movement. The big event (centered around a statue of RE Lee the city has planned to remove) is apparently today.

Last night marchers went through the UVA campus carrying torches, giving Nazi salutes, and chanting racist slogans.

Look at these douchebags:
link

Holman wrote:White supremacists have descended on Charlottesville, VA for what's being billed as "Unite the Right" but is basically a declaration of the open racism at the core of the alt-right movement. The big event (centered around a statue of RE Lee the city has planned to remove) is apparently today.

Last night marchers went through the UVA campus carrying torches, giving Nazi salutes, and chanting racist slogans.

Look at these douchebags:

link

The sight of these manly specimens of white nationalism carrying tiki torches is pretty hilarious. I wonder if they're citronella torches?

There was a counter protest at the same time. The neo nazis carrying tiki torches at one point surrounded the counter protestors while chanting.

There was a counter protest at the same time. The neo nazis carrying tiki torches at one point surrounded the counter protestors while chanting.
https://twitter.com/TomasTaylor4/status ... 1091757058

Cornered by a literal torch-wielding mob and nervous, violence broke out. The neo nazis beat the counter protestors with their torches, with several of them getting doused with what was likely flammable liquid.
https://twitter.com/jnsanchez/status/896351164756840448

Eventually the neo nazis cleared out. Police in riot gear then showed up and arrested the counter protestors. I haven't seen any reports that any of the neo nazis were arrested.

This happened in the US in 2017.

It's happening right now. Today's rally isn't huge, but there are several hundred white supremacists. The counter-protest is larger than the rally. There has been some fighting.

The racists are giving Hitler salutes, carrying Confederate and Nazi flags, and shouting racist slogans.

This is the movement that gave us Timothy McVeigh and Dylann Roof and thousands upon thousands of deplorable assholes deserving of nothing but contempt. Trump and his people have emboldened them and called it MAGA.

Remember, their real problem is economic angst. They just want a good job.

Chaz wrote:Remember, their real problem is economic angst. They just want a good job.

Good AMERICAN jobs! (backed by Jewish bankers or Chinese investors... )

Armed right-wing militias are standing around waving guns at people.

Just read that a racist group roughed up a line of clergy.

Police now using tear gas.

Charlottesville just now declared the rally an unlawful assembly and everyone is being told to disperse.

Great pictures from last night via USA Today, including Nazi salutes from a tiki torch wielding attendees. This is normal.

Exactly the sort of strong condemnation of white supremacy the country expects from the Commander in Chief.

We ALL must be united & condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America. Lets come together as one!

There are white supremacists who are marching in your goddamn name, asshat. As in, they're literally chanting "Heil Trump".

Would it kill you to say something a little stronger than "hey guys, both sides are bad, please stop?"

And now a car ploughed into a crowd of counter protesters on the sidewalk, with multiple injuries.

It's a good thing the neo Nazis with guns are so peaceful, or this could get violent.

An Associated Press reporter saw at least one person on the ground receiving medical treatment immediately after the incident. Video on social media showed more than one vehicle involved in the incident.

More than one car, apparently.

Gov has declared a state of emergency.

I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and not read this as a vague dogwhistle.

Trump condemns hatred "on many sides" amid Charlottesville violence -- live updates

The hatred "on many sides"? Fuck you Trump.

Also, apparently one person hit by that car has died.

How does he do it? How does he make every press conference more surreal than the last one? Blaming both sides for violence at a protest filled with people carrying Nazi gear, reminding everyone what our unemployment rates currently are, and then throwing in a few "You're Fired" references for old times sake. So Presidential.

So the far-right white supremacists are making their point by imitating Muslim terrorists.

Fuck Trump. What a complete piece of shit.

This is a shameful day in America. Nazis and the KKK are marching in our streets and the president can't bring himself to condemn them.

Fuck Trump. I hope Mueller has the stuff to send him and his whole gang to prison for the rest of their miserable lives.

Total fucking sack of fucking shit he is. Please get out of my state you steaming pile of shit.

The driver has been located and detained by police.

It's clear that he approached the crowd, then sped up and rammed into it. Then he backed up to do the same thing a second time before fleeing the scene.

There are reports a VA state police copter crashed in vicinity of Charlottesville about 45 minutes ago. No strong reports other than a crash occurred so far.

Edit: Update - confirmed. No report yet about occupants or cause.

just yesterday i saw fliers posted in downtown Seattle for "AMERICA FIRST! Stand up to Google rally" us poor white nationalists are being repressed blah blah blah etc. two women were going around tearing them down.

Defiant wrote:Trump condemns hatred "on many sides" amid Charlottesville violence -- live updates

The hatred "on many sides"? Fuck you Trump.

Also, apparently one person hit by that car has died.

Wouldn't want to jump to conclusions...who says Nazis and Klansmen are violent? Some of them, I assume, are good people.

I hope those who voted for Trump in spite of his open racism can see their complicity. At the same time, I know that they can't.

Also in his statement, Trump said we should "cherish our history." I assume that's a dog whistle to those against removing the statue of a confederate general.

link

We should call evil by its name. My brother didn't give his life fighting Hitler for Nazi ideas to go unchallenged here at home. -OGH

— Senator Hatch Office (@senorrinhatch) August 12, 2017

Elections have consequences.

Holman wrote:Elections have consequences.

I think I need to step away from the intertubes for the night.

Condolences to the family of the young woman killed today, and best regards to all of those injured, in Charlottesville, Virginia. So sad!

"Best regards"? "So sad"?? What in the everloving fuck sort of message is that?!? Especially compared to his reaction to other terrorist attacks around the world.

I'm beginning to think I severely underestimated how much I could actually despise another human being.