UN Virginia Democrats remove Jefferson and Jackson from dinner - cause they owned slaves

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...bf9d112159c_story.html?utm_term=.505569d21659

RICHMOND — Guess who’s not coming to dinner?

Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson, two Democratic icons who’ve lost some luster in some modern eyes because they owned slaves, are no longer welcome at the party’s annual gala in Virginia.

The annual Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, the party’s biggest fundraiser, has been renamed the Blue Commonwealth Gala.

“The future of our Commonwealth will be painted in broad blue strokes,” Susan Swecker, chairwoman of the Democratic Party of Virginia, said as she announced the change over the weekend. “The Blue Commonwealth Gala will be a celebration of our party’s dedication to expanding opportunity for all Virginians.”

Virginia Democrats are following the lead of party chapters in several other states, who started abandoning the name in recent years amid a new reckoning over Confederate symbols. What remained of Jackson’s reputation probably went down the tubes with Democratic activists when President Trump declared himself an admirer by hanging his portrait in the Oval Office.

But throwing shade on Jefferson is not without peril in Virginia, where the native son and University of Virginia founder remains widely admired. A statue of him went up just a few years ago in the state Capitol, which he designed and where people refer to him reverentially as “Mr. Jefferson.”

“Good thing Jefferson doesn’t have anything to do with higher education in Virginia,” said Garren Shipley, the Republican National Committee’s Virginia spokesman. “Can you imagine if there was actually a statue of this guy in the Capitol? Unreal. Let alone some quotes literally carved in stone? Oh, wait.”

The renaming comes as Virginia and other Southern states have wrestled with whether to remove Confederate monuments from prominent public spaces. Plans to pull a statute of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee from a downtown Charlottesville park were the focus of a white supremacist rally last summer that led to a counterprotester’s death.

Swecker described the renaming as a way to build on victories in November, when an anti-Trump wave helped Democrats sweep statewide offices for governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general, and pick up 15 seats in the House of Delegates.

“We are excited to rename our signature event as we work to make Virginia a stronger, fairer, and more prosperous Commonwealth,” she said in a written statement.

 

[Dirt McGirt]

It's not like they were two of our most important Presidents... oh wait

 

[Bassomatic]

And in other news that holds no real bearing but makes you look like a scum bag.

FUCK GHANDI he didn't like the beatles.

This stuff is so absurd and Teej' is a personal hero of mine, so any slight towards him really extra irks me.

 

[Canned Bread]

Out of the 16 Presidents there were while Slavery was legal, and arguably even acceptable in the eyes of society before the Civil War, 10 of them owned slaves (Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Jackson, Van Buren, Harrison, Tyler, Polk, and Taylor) and the 17th and 18th Presidents also owned slaves while it was still legal (Andrew Johnson and Ulysseus S. Grant). That is 12/44, or 27.2% of our total Presidents (Cleveland was both our 22nd and 24th President, that's why I said 44 not 45) that these SJWs basically want removed from American History.

Why don't we just make criteria up to remove every single President that isn't Obama or Clinton from our history while were at it?

 

[Munchingonfish]

Why don't we just make criteria up to remove every single President that isn't Obama or Clinton from our history while were at it?

Obama was the first president of the AW era. After wokeness.

 

[Draza]

How orwellian of them.

 

[millais]

They are afraid of Jacksonian Democracy because there are too many parallels and similarities between it and Trump populism.
And they don't like Jeffersonian philandering because there are too many parallels and similarities between it and Clinton intern-banging.

 

[Coconut Gun]

Weren't politicians supposed to be good at doing things that were meaningless, but got the public on their side?

 

[Slap47]

So the only pre-civil war presidents we can honor are John Adams and his son Quincy? Against slavery and not owning slaves ever.

Even the republicans were pretty viciously racist in regards to immigrants, kinda why you see New York being a Democratic stronghold even during the civil war. Guess we can't honor any 19th century accomplishments eh?

 

[Tranhuviya]

Washington, the father of our country, owned slaves. I suppose we should rename our capital city and the state now. Can't make blacks uncomfortable by honoring slaveowners, can we now? That's all they accomplished, after all: owning slaves and killing Indians. Nothing else.

 

[REGENDarySumanai]

How stupid. You can't rewrite history to suit your narrative. History is filled with disturbing shit, but it shouldn't be buried.

 

[Autopsy]

Washington, the father of our country, owned slaves. I suppose we should rename our capital city and the state now. Can't make blacks uncomfortable by honoring slaveowners, can we now? That's all they accomplished, after all: owning slaves and killing Indians. Nothing else.

Washington still runs one hell of a plantation.

Andrew Jackson was a total badass and his administrative record is almost pristine, without him and Polk we would have taken centuries to finish sweeping North America, fought the Civil War decades earlier while the nation was especially malleable, and spent a shitload of time and money sidling up to foreign powers. There's a reason even the "muh Indian" sorts rank him up near the top.

 

[Ruin]

I'm getting real fucking sick of nogs demanding we tear down our history and culture because it hurts their feelz. They get affirmative action in education and hiring, grants and loans specifically for black people and are they grateful? No, fuck them.

The people complaining about this were born over 150 years after slavery ended, they're owed precisely jackshit,

 

[soy_king]

These people are either absolute morons or actual Fifth columnists by choosing to actively disown great men who helped develop the American system under the guise of "muh feels".

 

[Kled]

How stupid. You can't rewrite history to suit your narrative. History is filled with disturbing shit, but it shouldn't be buried.

The entire purpose of the concept of any history is to learn from it and take lessons or deeds done to either grow or hell, shrink. Human history is filled with flawed ideas, concepts, kingdoms, all of it because we're very flawed creatures. If you delete all of the things you hate, it's the same idea as putting a picture over a big gaping hole in your wall. You can cover it up as much as you want but the fuckin' hole is still there. When you learn from history, it shows that you're clearly intelligent enough to problem solve and you have a learning mind. In my opinion, the people who sleep through History or Social Studies or use them as filler classes to shit up and fuck around in are the ones 5-10 years from now will be conflating minor challenges to major events--OH WAIT..!

What's that saying? Those who don't learn from history--?

 

[REGENDarySumanai]

The entire purpose of the concept of any history is to learn from it and take lessons or deeds done to either grow or hell, shrink. Human history is filled with flawed ideas, concepts, kingdoms, all of it because we're very flawed creatures. If you delete all of the things you hate, it's the same idea as putting a picture over a big gaping hole in your wall. You can cover it up as much as you want but the fuckin' hole is still there. When you learn from history, it shows that you're clearly intelligent enough to problem solve and you have a learning mind. In my opinion, the people who sleep through History or Social Studies or use them as filler classes to shit up and fuck around in are the ones 5-10 years from now will be conflating minor challenges to major events--OH WAIT..!

What's that saying? Those who don't learn from history--?

Those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it.

 

[Magic Sun Daddy]

Shit like this is genuinely worrisome. You can work all your life to accomplish great things only to have it undermined decades later by hypersensative pricks who can't comprehend the idea of people from another time having an entirely different moral framework than them.

 

[Duncan Hills Coffee]

This is really disturbing trend I've been noticing; people nowadays are so quick to denounce a person's accomplishments because they did something we now consider immoral or committed some moral failing despite the fact that, you know, they're only human.

There are people out there who disregard Martin Luther King's achievements and beliefs because he cheated on his wife and was homophobic. Nuance is fucking dead now. MLK did some questionable things but we shouldn't just disregard all the good he's done in the world because of them. Same thing with Gandhi. Same thing with Jefferson.

Furthermore, saying we shouldn't trust the Founding Fathers because they owned slaves is stupid and somewhat dangerous. They were extremely intelligent men. In fact, most of them wanted to get rid of slavery, but then they realized that the South relied heavily on slavery and would have collapsed. Does that excuse them from hypocritically owning slaves? Personally, I don't think so. But I'm not going to say we should just denounce everything they say and do just because I don't 100% agree with their beliefs.

 

[Magic Sun Daddy]

This is really disturbing trend I've been noticing; people nowadays are so quick to denounce a person's accomplishments because they did something we now consider immoral or committed some moral failing despite the fact that, you know, they're only human.

There are people out there who disregard Martin Luther King's achievements and beliefs because he cheated on his wife and was homophobic. Nuance is fucking dead now. MLK did some questionable things but we shouldn't just disregard all the good he's done in the world because of them. Same thing with Gandhi. Same thing with Jefferson.

Furthermore, saying we shouldn't trust the Founding Fathers because they owned slaves is stupid and somewhat dangerous. They were extremely intelligent men. In fact, most of them wanted to get rid of slavery, but then they realized that the South relied heavily on slavery and would have collapsed. Does that excuse them from hypocritically owning slaves? Personally, I don't think so. But I'm not going to say we should just denounce everything they say and do just because I don't 100% agree with their beliefs.

People seem to want to downplay MLK's accomplishments on the basis of them being done through non-violence.

 

[Bassomatic]

People seem to want to downplay MLK's accomplishments on the basis of them being done through non-violence.

Well his last two years he was a commie faggot, and honestly if wasn't shot by racists he woulda eaten it via some WOPs.

Also he kinda liked to fuck kids.

I'm getting real fucking sick of nogs demanding we tear down our history and culture because it hurts their feelz. They get affirmative action in education and hiring, grants and loans specifically for black people and are they grateful? No, fuck them.

The people complaining about this were born over 150 years after slavery ended, they're owed precisely jackshit,

Slavery has been illegal longer than it was legal. Really makes you think....