https://dnyuz.com/2020/01/20/weve-got-to-change-this-has-dixie-highway-reached-the-end-of-the-road/?fbclid=IwAR1y4VuXkOx-lBLUwpGH3UmpgTIn0rmyXrP7mpHg-z6CjP5VRyywYfmmsy0
I've never considered the term "Dixie" to be racist nor ever made any connotations to slavery from it. To me, it's a term of unknown origin (see the story for reference) to an area of the country, the same as "Snow Belt," "Sun Belt," "Ohio Valley," "Appalachia," "Great Plains," "Eastern Seaboard," or even "Rust Belt." I understand (but do not agree with) the sentiment behind renaming roads named after Lee, Davis, etc., but not this.
"You people" pushing to get these street names changed are getting out of hand. Of course that phrase has racial undertones and you would be labeled a racist for saying it. Never mind an Atlantic article was arguing how the phrase "you people" was more gender inclusive than "you guys" . In this super sensitive world, or at the very least in a world full of feigned outrage, you can't say or do anything without being labeled racist, sexist, homophobic, etc.
The Problem With "˜Hey Guys'
https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2018/08/guys-gender-neutral/568231/
I've never really associated the Dixie Highway was more than anything than an Auto Trail. Given that I'm most familiar with it from growing up in Michigan I don't even really consider it exclusively "Southern." I was always under the impression that the term "Dixie" just was a term to denote Southern States as a geographic area...am I missing something? Either way there are so many signed segments of the Dixie Highway in Florida I can't imagine that it would be possible to legislate them all to different names. More so the Dixie Highway has a pretty strong following among Auto Trail buffs (myself included regarding Florida) that tend to keep the memory of alignments going.
The Dixie Highway is even noted as being interchangeable with the Lincoln Highway, as per the LHA's map on their official website.
What about Winn-Dixie stores?
(https://vpc-prod-thumbor-public-gcp.boxed.com/unsafe/1024x800/filters:quality(100):max_bytes(200000):fill(white)/https://dcmzfk78s4reh.cloudfront.net/1539544981113.jpg)
Similarly there has been some recent backlash against El Camino Real being signed in California by way of the Mission Bells. The contention stems from how the Spanish conquered native lands and attempted to convert them. Interestingly the Mission Bells were largely an invention of the American El Camino Real promoters who used it to sign the highway (I'd argue an early Auto Trail) in 1906. The sentiments used by descending groups about "outdated history" is very similar to what is seen in the article with the Dixie Highway.
Quote from: GaryV on January 21, 2020, 02:40:04 PM
What about Winn-Dixie stores?
Yep, Winn-Dixie's headquarters is in Jacksonville, Florida and there are 5 Winn-Dixies within a 3 mile radius of Hallandale Beach, Florida. Winn-Dixie co-founder James Davis and his wife Florence were long time supporters of historically black colleges and have a residence hall named after them at Bethune-Cookman University.
Quote from: 1
( Image snippage )
Or Dixie Cups.
:rolleyes:
Mike
I've never associated the word Dixie with slavery or racism or whatever - the first place I think of when I hear Dixie is Washington County, Utah (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixie_(Utah)).
Or is he just whistling Dixie?
In Riveria Beach, FL the Dixie Highway was renamed after President Barack Obama ironically.
However northwest of Ocala there is a county named Dixie in the Sunshine State. It has Cross City as its seat and another city called Old Town as the county is as rural as it can get. Are the few people that live there going to have to settle on a new name for their county as well?
I think this is getting out of hand!
The most straightforward explanation for the South-Dixie connection concerns the Mason and Dixon Line, a boundary between Pennsylvania and Maryland that was drawn in 1767 by English surveyors Charles Mason and Jeremiah Dixon. The line was originally crafted to settle a border dispute between the two colonies, but it later became an informal demarcation point between the southern slave states and the free states to the north. With this in mind, it's likely that "Dixie" and "Dixieland" first emerged as slang terms to refer to the territory south of Jeremiah Dixon's boundary line.
The other derivation I've heard is that it was taken from $10 notes in New Orleans. They had the French word "Dix" on them, and the notes became known as Dixies, which then spread to encompass the South.
Either explanation (Dix or Mason-Dixon) involves something relatively local spreading to a whole region.
I thought Dixie was a woman's name.
All billboards for Branson's Dixie Stampede have been changed to say Dolly Parton's Stampede, and I imagine the same applies to Pigeon Forge as well.
It was hard for the gigantic cross near Branson (JCT US 65 & 160) to be constructed for similar reasons.
oMg tHiS wOrD cOuLd pOsSiBlY bE iNtErPeReTeD aS rAcIsT bAn iT fRoM tHe eNgLiSh lAnGuaGe!
Quote from: ozarkman417 on January 22, 2020, 05:34:12 PM
All billboards for Branson's Dixie Stampede have been changed to say Dolly Parton's Stampede, and I imagine the same applies to Pigeon Forge as well.
It was hard for the gigantic cross near Branson (JCT US 65 & 160) to be constructed for similar reasons.
In Florida they had one that closed completely. One rich developer bought the land it was on, and then the recession came and it never got used for a while. There was signs promoting a pizza parlor (the World's largest) but that never materialized. I think it opened for one day and the owner called it quits and now the outlet mall across the street bought the land and expanded the shopping center instead.
Though I do not think it had to do with the name, I do find it interesting that it never got tested on this.
So by the logic of removing all references to "Dixie" wouldn't that mean that Dixie Chicks would have to be rebranded also? I had to look it up, but surprisingly the Dixie Chicks are still around.
Or is the famous song I Wish I Were in Dixie (part of the Elvis trilogy the King did when alive in concert) going to have to be changed? Also what about Suwanee River by Stephen Foster? Does it not use the line "Blacky" in it?
Quote from: ozarkman417 on January 22, 2020, 05:34:12 PM
All billboards for Branson's Dixie Stampede have been changed to say Dolly Parton's Stampede, and I imagine the same applies to Pigeon Forge as well.
It was hard for the gigantic cross near Branson (JCT US 65 & 160) to be constructed for similar reasons.
Or that could be marketing for Dolly's branding, since I don't think it was widely known that she owned that venue. Didn't she just recently buy it (as in the past few years)?
How is the Dixie Overland Highway getting a pass in all this? The Dixie Overland Highway didn't even leave the sunbelt region, so therefore it is more Dixie than the Dixie Highway.
I agree, Dixie is a reference of all the land south of the Mason-Dixon Line. My guess is that Mason lived on the north side of the border, and Dixon on the south side of it, and therefore, it's how Dixie got its name.
This isn't the first time this sort of issue has come up. Back in 1999, some people were upset with Chief Justice Rehnquist for leading a sing-along at a judicial conference in which one of the selected songs was "Dixie." Some prominent black leaders complained that the song is offensive because the lyrics allegedly seem nostalgic for the days of slavery (note: I don't know the words). The Chief Justice never commented publicly about it, per his standard practice, but some of his papers made available after his death addressed the controversy. A friend wrote to him saying, "Hurray for you! All of our history is important, whether it fits in with the current political correctness or not. You above all people ought to take cognizance of the varied strains of our history which merge in the mosaic that is America today." Rehnquist's reply expressed thanks for the "encouraging letter" and said, "I really feel that it does not bode well for race relations in this country if people constantly strain to find some basis for taking offense."
This was almost 21 years ago. Certainly it seems the habit of straining to find some basis for taking offense has just become all the more prevalent in the interim.
Mason and Dixon were both English, brought in for the survey and both returned to England after finishing.
The "Land of Dixes" , as coming from the French word for 10, DIX, on Louisiana state money, is the more likely origin of the word.
In any event, "Dixie" simply is a word for "the South" and has no racist connotation.
Now here's a fun question: if "Dixie" is racist, then how would one classify "Dixieland Jazz"?
I also think the name
Black & Decker is racist. That should be changed.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 22, 2020, 09:31:24 PM
I had to look it up, but surprisingly the Dixie Chicks are still around.
All bands are kept around until such time as they can open a theater in Branson.
I guess I'm on the "I thought 'Dixie' was just another word for the Deep South and had no idea it was racist" bandwagon.
Quote from: webny99 on January 23, 2020, 10:33:00 AM
I guess I'm on the "I thought 'Dixie' was just another word for the Deep South and had no idea it was racist" bandwagon.
I think people - like those in Miami - are confusing two things.
I agree that Dixie as a name for the South is not in and of itself racist - no more than calling it "The South" would be racist. The fact that racist things happened there (and are still happening there, as well as everywhere else) does not make that term racist. Nor are all the things named for Dixie, like the highway, inherently racist.
The song Dixie, however, does have racist connections. It came out of blackface minstrel shows. It was considered an unofficial anthem for the Confederacy, and was used by Confederate troops when marching.
From the arricle...
Quote
In July, Modesto Abety-Gutierrez was driving on South Dixie Highway in Miami on the way to drop his 16-year-old granddaughter, Isabella Banos, off at a friend's house. When Isabella noticed the sign, she asked her grandfather why a name that symbolized slavery was still being used. ... Mr. Abety-Gutierrez, the founding president of the Children's Trust in Miami, sent an email to the 13 Miami-Dade commissioners. "We've got to change this," he wrote. "I hope you agree."
Maybe the sixteen-year-old was wrong. Geez.
And if we get rid of anything with the word "Dixie", why don't we tell fans of a certain dead mall near Chicago they have to refer to it as "Harvey Square Mall"? (the Mall best known for the car chase in the 1980 movie "The Blues Brothers" was filmed.)
Quote from: ozarkman417 on January 22, 2020, 05:34:12 PM
All billboards for Branson's Dixie Stampede have been changed to say Dolly Parton's Stampede, and I imagine the same applies to Pigeon Forge as well.
It does. I drove through Pigeon Forge last week, and now that you've mentioned it I do remember seeing that new name.
The Dixie Way name survives at least one place in the North, in Roseland, IN, the small town just northwest of the Notre Dame campus:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49432396663_ff4aaae5b4_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ijaXk6)Dixie-Way (https://flic.kr/p/2ijaXk6) by Tom Heline (https://www.flickr.com/photos/185842086@N05/), on Flickr
Dixie Highway exists as a road name in at least 3 Michigan counties: Monroe, Oakland and Saginaw.
Quote from: GaryV on January 24, 2020, 08:05:24 AM
Dixie Highway exists as a road name in at least 3 Michigan counties: Monroe, Oakland and Saginaw.
It does in Illinois too. Most states the Dixie Highway was aligned through have segments that are signed on street blades.
Quote from: theline on January 24, 2020, 12:46:12 AM
The Dixie Way name survives at least one place in the North, in Roseland, IN, the small town just northwest of the Notre Dame campus:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49432396663_ff4aaae5b4_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ijaXk6)Dixie-Way (https://flic.kr/p/2ijaXk6) by Tom Heline (https://www.flickr.com/photos/185842086@N05/), on Flickr
There are a couple different routes running from as far north as Michigan all the way down to Florida known as Dixie Hwy. The one that runs through Indiana enters from the north and goes to Rochester along the original routing of US 31, then IN 25 to Logansport, IN 29/US 421 to Indianapolis, IN 37 to Paoli, and then US 150 to Kentucky.
The segment in Roseland is the only one in Indiana I'm aware of that is still referred to as Dixie Hwy.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2020, 08:49:19 AM
Quote from: GaryV on January 24, 2020, 08:05:24 AM
Dixie Highway exists as a road name in at least 3 Michigan counties: Monroe, Oakland and Saginaw.
It does in Illinois too. Most states the Dixie Highway was aligned through have segments that are signed on street blades.
There's even a "Dixie Highway Beer Trail" in the south suburbs of Chicago.
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2020, 09:04:57 AM
There are a couple different routes running from as far north as Michigan all the way down to Florida known as Dixie Hwy. The one that runs through Indiana enters from the north and goes to Rochester along the original routing of US 31, then IN 25 to Logansport, IN 29/US 421 to Indianapolis, IN 37 to Paoli, and then US 150 to Kentucky.
The segment in Roseland is the only one in Indiana I'm aware of that is still referred to as Dixie Hwy.
So the portion of US 421 was BOTH the Dixie Highway AND Michigan Road?
Quote from: SSR_317 on January 24, 2020, 12:44:44 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2020, 09:04:57 AM
There are a couple different routes running from as far north as Michigan all the way down to Florida known as Dixie Hwy. The one that runs through Indiana enters from the north and goes to Rochester along the original routing of US 31, then IN 25 to Logansport, IN 29/US 421 to Indianapolis, IN 37 to Paoli, and then US 150 to Kentucky.
The segment in Roseland is the only one in Indiana I'm aware of that is still referred to as Dixie Hwy.
So the portion of US 421 was BOTH the Dixie Highway AND Michigan Road?
Yes, from LaSalle/Michigan in South Bend to Washington/West in Indianapolis, Dixie Hwy was concurrent with the Michigan Road.
Quote from: Konza on January 24, 2020, 10:45:39 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2020, 08:49:19 AM
Quote from: GaryV on January 24, 2020, 08:05:24 AM
Dixie Highway exists as a road name in at least 3 Michigan counties: Monroe, Oakland and Saginaw.
It does in Illinois too. Most states the Dixie Highway was aligned through have segments that are signed on street blades.
There's even a "Dixie Highway Beer Trail" in the south suburbs of Chicago.
I've actually been on it, one of the few times I didn't mind a old highway trip where I wasn't the driver:
http://dixiehighwaybrewerytrail.com/
If I recall correctly, the western leg of the Dixie Highway was concurrent with the West Michigan Pike, at least in portions.
There were a number of these concurrencies between various auto trails. This was part of the reason leading to the numbering systems we have.
Stan Freberg anticipated political correctness decades before the term was coined, with his 1957 _Elderly Man River_: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLlTlYfqQV4
There's a Dixie Drive in Dayton; it intersects the famous (on this forum) Needmore Road. The cemetery in which my wife's parents are buried is on Dixie Drive.
Would it make everything better if we erased history and removed every name, statue, flag, grave marker, etc. that there ever was a South or a Civil War or Slavery??
NO
People would just move on to the next thing to bitch about. Understand history, respect history, learn from history. Don't forget history and don't erase it.
Back when it was still standing I had to venture out to find the old Dixie Square Mall in Harvey, IL. Not too pleasant of an area.
Dixie Hwy in Saginaw and Oakland Counties is part of the Saginaw Trail. It starts as Genesee Avenue in Saginaw, eventually ending up leading into Woodward Avenue in Detroit. In Genesee County it's known as Saginaw Road. It was also part of US-10 but now part of M-1, US-24 and M-54.
Quote from: silveradoman298 on February 13, 2020, 06:42:11 PM
Understand history, respect history, learn from history. Don't forget history and don't erase it.
This.
Labeling any person or idea as
only bad is a fundamentally flawed way of looking at the world, too. Our nation's history and culture is made up of more than just racism and slavery. The prevalent knee-jerk reaction to anything related to southern history is to make it all about one certain thing. Doing that removes the opportunity to learn about and discuss any other aspect of the culture. I fear we're now living in a society that is not just unwilling but also incapable of understanding or evaluating the world through any lens of worldview other than their own. CS Lewis, I think, would have a lot to say about how we tend to view our current modern society as the pinnacle of enlightenment and tend deride those of the past as inferior and worthy of contempt.
So, if we erase the history that caused institutionalized problems for certain members of society, then will those problems be erased as well? :rolleyes:
Quote from: MikieTimT on February 14, 2020, 04:35:17 PM
So, if we erase the history that caused institutionalized problems for certain members of society, then will those problems be erased as well? :rolleyes:
You didn't go quite far enough.
If you don't erase that history, then
you are participating in the problem.
If the term "Dixie" indeed stems from the Mason-Dixon Line, shouldn't the area to the north be termed "Macy?" :sombrero:
The belief that the highway's name has an unsavory meaning has worked in the other direction as well. In 1927, the United Daughters of the Confederacy, a group closely linked to the KKK, thought the name justified the placement of a monument to Robert E. Lee alongside the highway in Warren County, Ohio, a location not known for its association with the general. When it was removed in 2017, the "history" crowd protested (what history they believed was being erased, I could not discern) and it was given to a local fraternal group to display on their property.
Quote from: ibagli on February 18, 2020, 03:46:14 AM
The belief that the highway's name has an unsavory meaning has worked in the other direction as well. In 1927, the United Daughters of the Confederacy, a group closely linked to the KKK, thought the name justified the placement of a monument to Robert E. Lee alongside the highway in Warren County, Ohio, a location not known for its association with the general. When it was removed in 2017, the "history" crowd protested (what history they believed was being erased, I could not discern) and it was given to a local fraternal group to display on their property.
I acknowledge your argument, however the monument was rather a rock with a plaque dedicated to both Robert E Lee and the Route of the Dixie Highway. Robert E Lee memorials can be interpreted as people wish, however most are not aware at the lengths Robert E Lee went to to help heal the wounds of the Civil War. The fact that the United Daughters of the Confederacy placed this marker in 1927 is history itself, as is the fact the United Daughters of the Confederacy has strived to implement changes to its creed and belief system to distance itself from pro-slavery and Jim Crow views. As recently as 2019 it has removed the words slave and slavery from its website. How can next generations learn of the push and pull of historical views, even those on slavery, and see how views evolved over time, if historical monuments are removed. My argument is this: At what point to we draw the line on what to keep and what to remove, and who to denounce and not? Those that suppressed women's suffrage, FDR not eliminated Jim Crow laws, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson being slave owners, the later having fathered children with Sally Hemmings. Ben Franklin even owned slaves before evolving into an abolitionist. Yet both Washington and Franklin are on our money and Jefferson lauded as one of the great founding fathers. It's my belief that even the existence of monuments is historical in nature because views have evolved and the fact that views have evolved is historical in itself. We can't rid our selves of these truths. With any fact, there are extreme views on both sides, but as time marches on, views evolve, can't we have physical objects that remind us of our history? Such as a plaque on a rock that was sponsored by the UDC in Ohio of all places.
If the location is actually relevant, such as the site of a battle or a place where an important figure lived, it can stay. Most of the Confederate statues are not in such locations, and they need to go.
Quote from: 1 on February 18, 2020, 11:25:39 AM
If the location is actually relevant, such as the site of a battle or a place where an important figure lived, it can stay. Most of the Confederate statues are not in such locations, and they need to go.
Then the same should be true of all other such statues as well.
The Washington Post (might be paywalled) has a reminder that online mapping services are, uh, uneven in catching up to street and highway name changes (https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/when-a-county-changed-a-confederate-highway-name-some-navigation-apps-were-slow-to-change-it/2020/02/13/101df74a-42cb-11ea-b503-2b077c436617_story.html?carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F1e4b922%2F5e4c5070fe1ff658cab8529c%2Fb3NjYXIudm9zc0Bjb21jYXN0Lm5ldA%253D%253D%2F32%2F57%2F7ed82e7399491a34f796a54da21e0178&utm_campaign=wp_afternoon_buzz&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_buzz), including for some streets in south Florida once named for Confederate generals.
The Gettysburg, PA battlefield has hundreds of monuments and memorials, about half of which are Confederate.
I find the comparison of Robert E. Lee to the Founding Fathers to be inappropriate. Although the Founding Fathers owned slaves, none of them fought against the United States. Robert E. Lee was a general for a wannabe country that fought against the U.S.A.
Race relations are problematic to this day, but thank goodness slavery was finally abolished when Robert E. Lee and the other Confederates were defeated and the U.S.A. united again.
It is therefore hard to see how the statues differ from monuments to traitors. It is also hard to see how keeping statues erected mostly as symbols of white supremacy (literally to remind all who see them that the values defended by the Confederates were not dead) is defensible given their intention.
There's a better idea (from that "Southin' Off" guy) where more statues should have been erected to Southern abolitionists and supporters of the U.S.A. (as opposed to the C.S.A).
All that said, I don't know if Dixie Highway should be renamed, but the reverence displayed towards Confederates that fought against the U.S.A. is misplaced.
But the Lee Highway is relevant to the conversation with getting rid of the Dixie Highway due to concerns over racism. There are lots of Lee Highway segments that still floating around and signed on street blades. I would tend to associate a Confederate General with racism over the Dixie Highway.
Quote from: Rothman on February 18, 2020, 11:43:24 PM
I find the comparison of Robert E. Lee to the Founding Fathers to be inappropriate. Although the Founding Fathers owned slaves, none of them fought against the United States. Robert E. Lee was a general for a wannabe country that fought against the U.S.A.
The North invaded the South. If that hadn't happened then there wouldn't be these monuments and people that you don't like.
The industrial revolution was already making slavery uneconomical and as industrialism advanced, within 20 years or so slavery would have ceased, and the two countries could have worked out their differences and reunited peacefully, and almost certainly would have. Lincoln's tyranny and blunders shortcircuited that process.
Quote from: Beltway on February 19, 2020, 10:08:36 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 18, 2020, 11:43:24 PM
I find the comparison of Robert E. Lee to the Founding Fathers to be inappropriate. Although the Founding Fathers owned slaves, none of them fought against the United States. Robert E. Lee was a general for a wannabe country that fought against the U.S.A.
The North invaded the South. If that hadn't happened then there wouldn't be these monuments and people that you don't like.
The industrial revolution was already making slavery uneconomical and as industrialism advanced, within 20 years or so slavery would have ceased, and the two countries could have worked out their differences and reunited peacefully, and almost certainly would have. Lincoln's tyranny and blunders shortcircuited that process.
So, you're a secessionist holding the torch to the much discredited Lost Cause view of history. Got it.
Erecting those statues wasn't about just honoring the noble defenders of the CSA (how can one claim to be a patriot of the USA while being nostalgic for the CSA?), but also honoring the immoral and racist values of the CSA.
Quote from: Rothman on February 19, 2020, 10:15:02 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 19, 2020, 10:08:36 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 18, 2020, 11:43:24 PM
I find the comparison of Robert E. Lee to the Founding Fathers to be inappropriate. Although the Founding Fathers owned slaves, none of them fought against the United States. Robert E. Lee was a general for a wannabe country that fought against the U.S.A.
The North invaded the South. If that hadn't happened then there wouldn't be these monuments and people that you don't like.
The industrial revolution was already making slavery uneconomical and as industrialism advanced, within 20 years or so slavery would have ceased, and the two countries could have worked out their differences and reunited peacefully, and almost certainly would have. Lincoln's tyranny and blunders shortcircuited that process.
So, you're a secessionist holding the torch to the much discredited Lost Cause view of history. Got it.
Erecting those statues wasn't about just honoring the noble defenders of the CSA (how can one claim to be a patriot of the USA while being nostalgic for the CSA?), but also honoring the immoral and racist values of the CSA.
No, it was about how to resolve things peacefully and not killing over 700,000 people out of a population of 35 million.
It would have been resolved (back to one country) even before my grandparents immigrated to this country, like resolved back in the 1800s.
Quote from: Beltway on February 19, 2020, 10:32:23 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 19, 2020, 10:15:02 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 19, 2020, 10:08:36 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 18, 2020, 11:43:24 PM
I find the comparison of Robert E. Lee to the Founding Fathers to be inappropriate. Although the Founding Fathers owned slaves, none of them fought against the United States. Robert E. Lee was a general for a wannabe country that fought against the U.S.A.
The North invaded the South. If that hadn't happened then there wouldn't be these monuments and people that you don't like.
The industrial revolution was already making slavery uneconomical and as industrialism advanced, within 20 years or so slavery would have ceased, and the two countries could have worked out their differences and reunited peacefully, and almost certainly would have. Lincoln's tyranny and blunders shortcircuited that process.
So, you're a secessionist holding the torch to the much discredited Lost Cause view of history. Got it.
Erecting those statues wasn't about just honoring the noble defenders of the CSA (how can one claim to be a patriot of the USA while being nostalgic for the CSA?), but also honoring the immoral and racist values of the CSA.
No, it was about how to resolve things peacefully and not killing over 700,000 people out of a population of 35 million.
It would have been resolved (back to one country) even before my grandparents immigrated to this country, like resolved back in the 1800s.
Your speculation is based upon a flawed view of history.
If slavery was on its way out economically and the South was willing to let it die that slow death, then the South would not have been willing to fight a war over it. I also think there were non-economic reasons to keep slavery -- to keep black people "in their place." Too many variables for you to conclude how things would have turned out in your alternative universe.
It's also morally repugnant to justify slavery on the basis of economics, anyway.
Quote from: Rothman on February 19, 2020, 10:38:57 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 19, 2020, 10:32:23 AM
No, it was about how to resolve things peacefully and not killing over 700,000 people out of a population of 35 million.
It would have been resolved (back to one country) even before my grandparents immigrated to this country, like resolved back in the 1800s.
Your speculation is based upon a flawed view of history.
If slavery was on its way out economically and the South was willing to let it die that slow death, then the South would not have been willing to fight a war over it.
The South fought a war because they were being invaded by tens of thousands of troops bent on killing and destruction and overthrow of government.
Quote from: Rothman on February 19, 2020, 10:38:57 AM
I also think there were non-economic reasons to keep slavery -- to keep black people "in their place." Too many variables for you to conclude how things would have turned out in your alternative universe. It's also morally repugnant to justify slavery on the basis of economics, anyway.
The North was full and active participants in that economy even in 1860, they helped set it up and helped it to run for almost 200 years. It was 1825 before they stopped importing slaves thru their harbors. They really didn't care about slavery existing as it was boosting their economy, or so they thought.
Look at a map of the size of the 11 states that the North was losing. That is why they invaded the South, they didn't want to lose the territory and its resources.
Quote from: Beltway on February 19, 2020, 10:53:06 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 19, 2020, 10:38:57 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 19, 2020, 10:32:23 AM
No, it was about how to resolve things peacefully and not killing over 700,000 people out of a population of 35 million.
It would have been resolved (back to one country) even before my grandparents immigrated to this country, like resolved back in the 1800s.
Your speculation is based upon a flawed view of history.
If slavery was on its way out economically and the South was willing to let it die that slow death, then the South would not have been willing to fight a war over it.
The South fought a war because they were being invaded by tens of thousands of troops bent on killing and destruction and overthrow of government.
They were "invaded" for seceding from the Union so they could keep their slaves. The Union was rescuing enslaved African-Americans who did not choose to secede. Lincoln's party was committed to freeing all slaves when slavery was the only reason the South's economy functioned. If you think it could eventually have been solved peacefully, you're incredibly naive. Not to mention the estimated four million slaves would still be suffering every day during that time; resolving it by the 1880s (your claim) would still leave actual human beings enslaved for a minimum of 20 more years. Feel free to be a slave for 20 years to see if only twenty more years would be tolerable.
Your claim that the North participated is also incorrect. The North was overwhelmingly opposed to slavery by the time of the Missouri Compromise of 1820. They would happily have closed all ports to the slave trade with the exception of a few powerful (well-financed by slavery dollars) business interests well before 1825. Several of the North's founding fathers wanted to ban all slavery at Independence, but needed the armies of Virginia and the Carolinas to win the war.
Confederate monuments are akin to Nazi monuments, memorials to a morally corrupt system. They all need to go. I don't want an Erwin Rommel Highway from Berlin to Hamburg either.
To Beltway:
No, the invasion was made only after the South seceded due to their desire to keep slavery legal.
I am sure the Union wanted to keep the country as one for economic reasons as well, but the fact is that the war would have been unnecessary had the South not been so adamant about its racist position to defend slavery -- so adamant to risk a war they were sure to lose and cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans in the upmost contempt for the Constitution.
1. Belway is wrong.
2. The reality is it was far more complicated than just slavery/states' rights. Lincoln was no saint, and Northerners were and continue to be racists.
3. In before lock/mass delete.
Quote from: skluth on February 19, 2020, 11:39:38 AM
Confederate monuments are akin to Nazi monuments, memorials to a morally corrupt system. They all need to go. I don't want an Erwin Rommel Highway from Berlin to Hamburg either.
This is dumb. The Confederacy didn't murder millions of its own citizens. And if Germany wants an Erwin Rommel highway from Berlin to Hamburg, that's their right and we don't and shouldn't have a say in it.
Quote from: Rothman on February 19, 2020, 11:41:33 AM
To Beltway:
No, the invasion was made only after the South seceded due to their desire to keep slavery legal.
False premise, false logic. The North didn't make a demand before secession occurred that slavery be made illegal.
Not a casus belli for the Northern war any way you want to look at it.
I look at this as mainly from a matter of alternative history theorizing, which is an interest of mine.
I already posted an alternate history. The historical track and outcome is about the worst alternative imaginable.
Think about in 2021, for example, Donald Trump is reelected. California, Oregon and Washington decide to secede if he doesn't resign in Jan. 2021. Using the same population weighting, 6.7 million people on both sides will die when the rest of the country tries (not knowing whether they will even be successful) to use military force to bring those states back.
Knowing what we know now, there would be little if any support for such a war.
The rest of the country should instead say, "Blessings upon you! Enjoy your new country!"
Quote from: Finrod on February 19, 2020, 02:36:06 PM
Quote from: skluth on February 19, 2020, 11:39:38 AM
Confederate monuments are akin to Nazi monuments, memorials to a morally corrupt system. They all need to go. I don't want an Erwin Rommel Highway from Berlin to Hamburg either.
This is dumb. The Confederacy didn't murder millions of its own citizens.
They did kill plenty of slaves.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49558063313_6bffdb7b39_o.jpg)
So is there some sort of consensus on whether or not the Dixie Highway or the word "Dixie" is somehow synonymous with the Confederacy? Seems like the last dozen or so posts have been more about the American Civil War and it's causes.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 19, 2020, 05:19:07 PM
So is there some sort of consensus on whether or not the Dixie Highway or the word "Dixie" is somehow synonymous with the Confederacy? Seems like the last dozen or so posts have been more about the American Civil War and it's causes.
I already posted my analysis --
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26300.msg2472683#msg2472683
Quote from: silveradoman298 on February 18, 2020, 11:17:42 AM
How can next generations learn of the push and pull of historical views, even those on slavery, and see how views evolved over time, if historical monuments are removed.
By reading a fucking book? Do you think history teachers load their students onto a bus, drive to a statue, read the plaque out loud, and then get everyone back on the bus and drive to the next one?
The first shots that were fired in anger were from the South at Fort Sumpter, SC. IIRC, there were no injuries.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on February 20, 2020, 03:29:42 AM
The first shots that were fired in anger were from the South at Fort Sumter, SC. IIRC, there were no injuries.
Because the garrison there refused to leave after they were asked to several times. They were occupying a harbor fort that had strategic importance to protecting the city from foreign invaders, which also could be used as a base for someone planning an invasion.
Well, in actual news Miami-Dade County has eliminated their county-maintained portions of the name in favor of Harriet Tubman.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/483836-florida-county-officials-unanimously-vote-to-rename-dixie-highways-after?fbclid=IwAR13byMPLp-hciUuHV0mlU8NTkXg8zZSSVYL20DWh7OjIwYFGrLSFttyZ4s
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 20, 2020, 03:08:40 AM
Quote from: silveradoman298 on February 18, 2020, 11:17:42 AM
How can next generations learn of the push and pull of historical views, even those on slavery, and see how views evolved over time, if historical monuments are removed.
By reading a fucking book? Do you think history teachers load their students onto a bus, drive to a statue, read the plaque out loud, and then get everyone back on the bus and drive to the next one?
Exactly. Outside from actual historic sites like Gettysburg, statues aren't to teach history, but to glorify it.
Quote from: vdeane on February 20, 2020, 12:39:02 PM
Outside from actual historic sites like Gettysburg, statues aren't to teach history, but to glorify it.
Gettysburg has over 1,300 monuments from both sides. How does that not glorify war in general and the ACW in particular?
As of 2008, the National Park Service unit managed 1,320 monuments and markers, 410 cannons, 148 historic buildings, and 41 miles of roads (8 miles of them, unpaved). The largest concentration of monuments is at the Gettysburg National Cemetery.
[Wikipedia: List of monuments of the Gettysburg Battlefield]
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 20, 2020, 12:22:01 PM
Well, in actual news Miami-Dade County has eliminated their county-maintained portions of the name in favor of Harriet Tubman.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/483836-florida-county-officials-unanimously-vote-to-rename-dixie-highways-after?fbclid=IwAR13byMPLp-hciUuHV0mlU8NTkXg8zZSSVYL20DWh7OjIwYFGrLSFttyZ4s
I'm curious, how many former segments of the Dixie Highway are still signed as such in Florida? I know that part of US 1 south of Jacksonville is still signed as Dixie Highway approaching St. Augustine. Some maps show the Old Brick Highway north of Espanola as Old Dixie Highway. Amusingly Old Dixie Highway is signed south of Aripeka despite it never being officially designated as an official spur of the Auto Trail.
This thread is turning political. Mods, please lock.
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on February 22, 2020, 03:07:50 PM
This thread is turning political. Mods, please lock.
Looks to me like the discussion that was turning political burned itself out and the most recent post (from two days ago) is about roads.
Quote from: vdeane on February 22, 2020, 09:22:10 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on February 22, 2020, 03:07:50 PM
This thread is turning political. Mods, please lock.
Looks to me like the discussion that was turning political burned itself out and the most recent post (from two days ago) is about roads.
^This.
You guys remember when I mentioned this on another thread, right?
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11045.msg2428088#msg2428088
To be as blunt but non political as possible: If New York can rename a bridge that sees more traffic in a single day than the entire state of Montana does in a week, whats really going to stop any county or state road from being renamed? And New York has done it many of times. Changing names could confuse people, but if the big ones can get it, smaller roads and highways will not be immune.
Quote from: Perfxion on February 24, 2020, 10:26:46 AM
To be as blunt but non political as possible: If New York can rename a bridge that sees more traffic in a single day than the entire state of Montana does in a week, whats really going to stop any county or state road from being renamed? And New York has done it many of times. Changing names could confuse people, but if the big ones can get it, smaller roads and highways will not be immune.
Which bridge is that?
Quote from: Beltway on February 24, 2020, 10:29:00 AM
Quote from: Perfxion on February 24, 2020, 10:26:46 AM
To be as blunt but non political as possible: If New York can rename a bridge that sees more traffic in a single day than the entire state of Montana does in a week, whats really going to stop any county or state road from being renamed? And New York has done it many of times. Changing names could confuse people, but if the big ones can get it, smaller roads and highways will not be immune.
Which bridge is that?
I'm assuming that's the new Tappan Zee Bridge which pretty everyone refused to call the Mario Cuomo Bridge.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 24, 2020, 10:35:22 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 24, 2020, 10:29:00 AM
Quote from: Perfxion on February 24, 2020, 10:26:46 AM
To be as blunt but non political as possible: If New York can rename a bridge that sees more traffic in a single day than the entire state of Montana does in a week, whats really going to stop any county or state road from being renamed? And New York has done it many of times. Changing names could confuse people, but if the big ones can get it, smaller roads and highways will not be immune.
Which bridge is that?
I'm assuming that's the new Tappan Zee Bridge which pretty everyone refused to call the Mario Cuomo Bridge.
Oh ok... I was thinking of the adding of another "Z" to the Verrazano!
Montana roads carried 12.7 billion Annual Vehicle Miles of Travel in 2018. That would be an average of over 244 million per week.
https://mdt.mt.gov/other/webdata/external/Planning/traffic_reports/historical-avmt.pdf
Quote from: Beltway on February 24, 2020, 10:49:39 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 24, 2020, 10:35:22 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 24, 2020, 10:29:00 AM
Quote from: Perfxion on February 24, 2020, 10:26:46 AM
To be as blunt but non political as possible: If New York can rename a bridge that sees more traffic in a single day than the entire state of Montana does in a week, whats really going to stop any county or state road from being renamed? And New York has done it many of times. Changing names could confuse people, but if the big ones can get it, smaller roads and highways will not be immune.
Which bridge is that?
I'm assuming that's the new Tappan Zee Bridge which pretty everyone refused to call the Mario Cuomo Bridge.
Oh ok... I was thinking of the adding of another "Z" to the Verrazano!
Montana roads carried 12.7 billion Annual Vehicle Miles of Travel in 2018. That would be an average of over 244 million per week.
https://mdt.mt.gov/other/webdata/external/Planning/traffic_reports/historical-avmt.pdf
Also the Triboro Bridge and Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel. Couple of parkways too (Richmond and Interboro). Lots of renamed infrastructure downstate.
Quote from: vdeane on February 20, 2020, 12:39:02 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 20, 2020, 03:08:40 AM
Quote from: silveradoman298 on February 18, 2020, 11:17:42 AM
How can next generations learn of the push and pull of historical views, even those on slavery, and see how views evolved over time, if historical monuments are removed.
By reading a fucking book? Do you think history teachers load their students onto a bus, drive to a statue, read the plaque out loud, and then get everyone back on the bus and drive to the next one?
Exactly. Outside from actual historic sites like Gettysburg, statues aren't to teach history, but to glorify it.
I believe my point was misinterpreted. The evolution of views is historical in itself. I don't believe history texts are going to show photos of monuments that no longer exist while explaining that views have evolved which warranted their removal. I respect your views without responding with hostility or sarcasm.
Quote from: Rothman on February 19, 2020, 10:15:02 AM
Quote from: Beltway on February 19, 2020, 10:08:36 AM
Quote from: Rothman on February 18, 2020, 11:43:24 PM
I find the comparison of Robert E. Lee to the Founding Fathers to be inappropriate. Although the Founding Fathers owned slaves, none of them fought against the United States. Robert E. Lee was a general for a wannabe country that fought against the U.S.A.
The North invaded the South. If that hadn't happened then there wouldn't be these monuments and people that you don't like.
The industrial revolution was already making slavery uneconomical and as industrialism advanced, within 20 years or so slavery would have ceased, and the two countries could have worked out their differences and reunited peacefully, and almost certainly would have. Lincoln's tyranny and blunders shortcircuited that process.
So, you're a secessionist holding the torch to the much discredited Lost Cause view of history. Got it.
Erecting those statues wasn't about just honoring the noble defenders of the CSA (how can one claim to be a patriot of the USA while being nostalgic for the CSA?), but also honoring the immoral and racist values of the CSA.
With respect to this point of view, I believe it's inappropriate to question one's patriotism based on their views or interpretation of history. My point was where do we draw the line. Were slave owners such as the founding fathers or plantation owners in the South any better than secessionists? One might argue that if even though the Norfolk, VA court charged Lee with treason, the country hungered for reconciliation and even Grant would oppose charging Lee with treason. Even Andrew Johnson who was adamant on charging secessionists eventually evolved to drop the charges. We can't selectively choose which events in history are valid and which events we discount. It has nothing to do with being "nostalgic for the CSA".
Nah. Erecting statues to Confederate soldiers and officials is being nostalgic for the CSA.
Quote from: Rothman on February 28, 2020, 11:32:47 PM
Nah. Erecting statues to Confederate soldiers and officials is being nostalgic for the CSA.
CSA specifically, or does it also apply to other NRTLs like UL and Intertek?
Quote from: hbelkins on January 22, 2020, 09:49:09 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on January 22, 2020, 05:34:12 PM
All billboards for Branson's Dixie Stampede have been changed to say Dolly Parton's Stampede, and I imagine the same applies to Pigeon Forge as well.
It was hard for the gigantic cross near Branson (JCT US 65 & 160) to be constructed for similar reasons.
Or that could be marketing for Dolly's branding, since I don't think it was widely known that she owned that venue. Didn't she just recently buy it (as in the past few years)?
Nah. Dixie Stampede was always Dolly