Trump 'will not even consider' renaming Army bases named for Confederate leaders

Tony Stark said:
Trump and conservatives,always on the wrong side of history


https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/09/politics/us-navy-ban-confederate-flag/index.html

View attachment 230359




View attachment 230360

(CNN)The Navy's top admiral has directed the drafting of an order that would prohibit displays of the Confederate battle flag, a move that takes place several months after the Marine Corps ordered a similar policy and comes as the Army has said it's open to renaming bases currently named after Confederate officers.

"The Chief of Naval Operations, Adm. Mike Gilday, has directed his staff to begin crafting an order that would prohibit the Confederate battle flag from all public spaces and work areas aboard Navy installations, ships, aircraft and submarines," Gilday's spokesman Cmdr. Nate Christensen said in a statement.

"The order is meant to ensure unit cohesion, preserve good order and discipline, and uphold the Navy's core values of honor, courage and commitment," he added.

The commandant of the Marine Corps, Gen. David Berger, issued a similar policy banning the display of the flag on installations back in April.

View attachment 230361
"I am mindful that many people believe that flag to be a symbol of heritage or regional pride. But I am also mindful of the feelings of pain and rejection of those who inherited the cultural memory and present effects of the scourge of slavery in our country," Berger wrote, adding, "My intent is not to judge the specific meaning anyone ascribes to that symbol or declare someone's personally held view to be incorrect."

"Rather, I am focused solely on building a uniquely capable warfighting team whose members come from all walks of life and must learn to operate side-by-side," he continued.

Two US Defense officials previously told CNN that US Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley are said to be open to holding a "bipartisan conversation" about renaming nearly a dozen major bases and installations that bear the names of Confederate military commanders.

The Army, in a statement Monday, confirmed that McCarthy and Esper are "open to a bipartisan discussion on the topic," but added that "each Army installation is named for a soldier who holds a significant place in our military history."

"Accordingly, the historic names represent individuals, not causes or ideologies," the statement said.

Army installations named after Confederate leaders include Fort Bragg in North Carolina, Fort Hood in Texas and Fort A.P. Hill in Virginia.

The flag of the Confederacy, its symbols and the statues commemorating Confederate leaders have long divided the country. Critics call the flag a symbol that represents the war to uphold slavery, while supporters call it a sign of Southern pride and heritage.

The symbols have increasingly become a rallying call for white supremacists.
More...

Why on earth would a real military, any real military, display the flag or symbols of a treasonous, whooped, enemy?

Oh what times we live in. Can't wait for it all to play out, so I can read about it, then watch the movies. Give it a few years.
 
Bugenhagen said:
View attachment 230363

1932 Antifascist flag. (look carefully)

Modern

View attachment 230364

Maybe what he saw was the combined Allied WWII flag which included the USSR as well as UK, UK, China (old flag), Russia and free France. Remember when the one thing both sides could agree on was that fascism was totally out of order.

Or he is just mistaken. Real history, not made up Southern history is a little complicated for him.

View attachment 230365

Researchers have found the perfectly obvious, there is no organisational link back to the 30s and 40s organisation started in Germany. Its just an echo, same with Italy's anti fascist movement which came earlier and became the Italian Resistance.
More...

Bernd Langer, whose “80 Years of Anti-Fascist Action” was published by Germany’s Association for the Promotion of Anti-Fascist Literature, succinctly defined the rhetorical subterfuge. “Anti-fascism is a strategy rather than an ideology,” wrote Langer, a former Antifa member, for “an anti-capitalist form of struggle.”

Short for the German phrase, “Antifaschistische Aktion,” Antifa served as the paramilitary arm of the German Communist Party (KPD), which the Soviet Union funded. In other words, Antifa became the German Communists’ version of the Nazis’ brown-shirted SA.

The KPD made no secret of Antifa’s affiliation. A 1932 photo of KPD headquarters in Berlin prominently displayed the double-flagged Antifa emblem among other Communist symbols and slogans. In a photo from the 1932 Unity Congress of Antifa in Berlin, the double-flagged banner shared space with the hammer and sickle and with two large cartoons. One supported the KPD, the other mocked the SPD, Germany’s Social Democratic Party.

Today’s Antifa embrace those roots. During February’s protest in Berkeley, masked Antifa agitators caused nearly $100,000 in damage by starting fires, breaking windows, assaulting bystanders with pepper spray and flagpoles, painting graffiti on nearby businesses, and destroying automatic teller machines. “Refuse Fascism,” the group organizing Saturday’s protests, is controlled by the Revolutionary Communist Party USA, which seeks to create a Marxist United States through violent revolution.

Antifa’s goal to suppress “fascism” reflects the views of neo-Marxist philosopher Herbert Marcuse. “A policy of unequal treatment would protect radicalism on the Left against that on the Right,” Marcuse wrote in “Repressive Tolerance,” his 1965 essay. “Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left” extending “to the stage of action as well as of discussion and propaganda, of deed as well as of word.”

Marcuse dismissed the idea of individual liberty protected by law in favor of a Marxist society favoring ostensibly oppressed groups at the expense of everybody else. Such a society, Marcuse wrote, would demand “the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements” that not only “promote aggressive policies, armament, chauvinism, discrimination on the grounds of race and religion” but also “oppose the extension of public services, social security, medical care, etc.” and “may necessitate new and rigid restrictions on teachings and practices in the educational institutions.”

Marcuse even justified violence: “there is a ‘natural right’ of resistance for oppressed and overpowered minorities to use extralegal means if the legal ones have proved to be inadequate,” Marcuse wrote. “Law and order are always and everywhere the law and order which protect the established hierarchy; it is nonsensical to invoke the absolute authority of this law and this order against those who suffer from it and struggle against it … for their share of humanity. If they use violence, they do not start a new chain of violence but try to break an established one.”

In expressing his contempt for “the sacred liberalistic principle of equality for ‘the other side,’” Marcuse maintained in 1968 ”that there are issues where either there is no ‘other side’ in any more than a formalistic sense, or where ‘the other side’ is demonstrably ‘regressive’ and impedes possible improvement of the human condition.”


https://thefederalist.com/2017/11/01/antifa-not-fighting-freedom-communist-revolution/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top