Strom Thurmond - DEAD

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Ah, of course. Just like we can recall the names of all the millions of men who risked their lives in WW2.

The names are recorded, and for the most part, remembered by families here and there, distant traces--"my grand-uncle served" and so on. All of them should be honoured as they are recalled by those people who hear about them.

Don't be silly. The only reason you know Strom Thurmond's name is his political career. The fact that he served in the military is merely being used as a rather obvious shield to deflect criticism from some of his contemptible political stances.

And does that change, at all, the fact that he served? I'm not arguing against personal attacks upon veterans, even--just deceased ones, who can no longer respond. And that is what Strom Thurmond is. His political career may deserve censure, and his life may give him a checkered history at best, but this particular action, and willingness of self-sacrifice?

This asks that, as with any other veteran--regardless of publicity--we at least show them the courtesy of not defaming them in death. They were willing to receive that death early for their country, and when they finally got it in the peace of age, the least we can do for them is offer their personal reputations some reprieve from the crass intensity of their affairs in life.

[kojikun]

Service != Instant Respect.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Service != Instant Respect.

When you're dead.

[Darth Wong]

Ah, of course. Just like we can recall the names of all the millions of men who risked their lives in WW2.

The names are recorded, and for the most part, remembered by families here and there, distant traces--"my grand-uncle served" and so on. All of them should be honoured as they are recalled by those people who hear about them.

Yes, they should be honoured. However, this does not mean the rest of their lives become exempt from criticism.

Don't be silly. The only reason you know Strom Thurmond's name is his political career. The fact that he served in the military is merely being used as a rather obvious shield to deflect criticism from some of his contemptible political stances.

And does that change, at all, the fact that he served? I'm not arguing against personal attacks upon veterans, even--just deceased ones, who can no longer respond.

Precisely how and why does someone's deceased status make him exempt from criticism? Are any of his offensive attitudes less offensive? Are his attempts to stand in the way of reform somehow removed from public record after his death? Do any of the objectionable things he stood for in politics suddenly become less objectionable?

And that is what Strom Thurmond is. His political career may deserve censure, and his life may give him a checkered history at best, but this particular action, and willingness of self-sacrifice?

Strom Thurmond the soldier deserved respect. Strom Thurmond the politician was a prick. I don't see why the former statement must erase the latter one or make it any less true.

This asks that, as with any other veteran--regardless of publicity--we at least show them the courtesy of not defaming them in death.

A request which I find wholly objectionable, utterly without merit, completely unjustified by anything but crass appeals to militarist sentiment, and which I refuse to honour. If a veteran is a pedophile but dies, am I not allowed to criticize his disgusting behaviour now?

They were willing to receive that death early for their country, and when they finally got it in the peace of age, the least we can do for them is offer their personal reputations some reprieve from the crass intensity of their affairs in life.

In other words, sacrifice truth and accuracy for some misguided notion of gratitude: "Thanks for fighting in the war; you can now be a huge asshole for the rest of your life and none of us can say anything".

[kojikun]

When you're dead.

INVALID.

[Gil Hamilton]

And he served in the military for thirty-six years; why are we concerned with time, though? It's the impact of events that is important, not their duration.

And you wouldn't have known anything about him if he hadn't been a Senator, now would you off? It seems to me that his political career is the only reason you know he even existed, not his military career, yet you say his politics counted for nothing in terms of impact?

He was a political figure, but his actions outside of the political realm raise him above it. You understand this? No, of course you don't. You don't have any sort of respect for the military like their used to be. Sadly, that sort of respect has begun to fade. That's why ideas like reinstating the draft sometimes seem like good ones to a few people--they want people to learn respect for the sacrifice involved, which leads them to ignore the problems with such proposals.

Oh yes Marina, I know don't have any respect for military... that's why I sent the last five months trying to enlist, listened raptly to any veteren who was willing to tell a story when I worked at the GMC (practically everyone there was a vet and some were quite vocal about it), and am in charge of keeping perserved the letters and charcoal drawings that my grandfather made while fighting in the Pacific and Korea. Oh, I just hate them.

Thurmond was a flawed man, but ultimately deserves to be remembered for his willingness to risk his life for his country. I would not, of course, propose to limit discourse on his political actions: But one should at least respect what he did in his life as a military man, and avoid slandering the person who committed those actions. And Kojikun did precisely that, a personal attack.

Of course he should be remembered as a veteran, but his 48 years of politics also is every bit as important to who he was, and it's the only way we'd know anything about him at all. But he was a politician, and like you said, that greatly charges peoples perceptions of them. Manji made a huge personal attack against another politician, but it's OK for you then. Yet you are shitting lead bricks now? Whether you like it or not, that is hypocrisy.

[Iceberg]

Thurmond was a conservative politician who fought in a just war.
Wellstone was a liberal politician who protested against an unjust war.

[Steve]

I think the point is: Insult them all you want when they're breathing, but show respect to the dead. Whatever Thurmond's misdeeds and mistakes may have been, the character he showed during the Second World War was of a good nature and he should be remembered, in death, for that.

Essentially, say what you want about the living, but let the dead rest.

Naturally, there will be exceptions, but mostly extreme ones. Thurmond may have been a racist and may have fought, in politics, for segregation, but he didn't have millions of people massacred. It's all a matter of degree.

I personally didn't think much of Thurmond as a man or a politician, but that's behind us now. All that remains is to bury the dead and let History judge him.

[Pablo Sanchez]

And does that change, at all, the fact that he served? I'm not arguing against personal attacks upon veterans, even--just deceased ones, who can no longer respond. And that is what Strom Thurmond is. His political career may deserve censure, and his life may give him a checkered history at best, but this particular action, and willingness of self-sacrifice?

He believed that the races should be segregated, and most likely was of the opinion that blacks were inferior. And more than that, he took his thoughts into the political realm and actively tried to make these repugnant things the law of the land. If he had had his way, Marina, there would still be segregation! That may not mean much to you, but it does mean at something to me.

[Gil Hamilton]

What bothers me, Steve, is her willingness to defend the disrespect of other dead politicians, who were no better or worse than Thurmond, but is spazzing the hell out now.

[Steve]

What bothers me, Steve, is her willingness to defend the disrespect of other dead politicians, who were no better or worse than Thurmond, but is spazzing the hell out now.

It's because of the way Marina thinks. As far as she knows, Wellstone never served in the military. Thurmond did. Thus, there is a quantifiable difference. It's not necessarily one another person would recognize or agree with, but it's there.

As for why it's there, Marina places a high value on military service. It's, I think, the Classicist in her; the Greeks and Romans (At least Republic Romans) did the same.

[Iceberg]

I personally didn't think much of Thurmond as a man or a politician, but that's behind us now. All that remains is to bury the dead and let History judge him.

And what we're doing now is part of history's judgment. Suppressing part of the truth will make the judgment of history far harsher in the long run.

[Gil Hamilton]

Not serving in the military doesn't make a man any better or worse than anyone else. Strom Thurmond was no greater a man that Paul Wellstone, yet she only freaked out over massive disrespect over one of them.

[Howedar]

I rejoiced when he retired from the Senate. I don't give a flying fuck that he's dead, to be honest. I'm not going to pretend that his death means something to me, because it doesn't.

[Dark Hellion]

The dead are just as applicable for our criticism as the living. The fact that they cannot defend against it must be considered but the choices they made in life can earn them our contempt or our praise. As for military service making one a saint, it doesn't. Millions have served in the military including murderers, rapists and theives. There willingness to die for their country cannot absolve them of there crimes. To think so is foolish.
My grandfather served in WWII on a destroyer escort that was hit by a betty, a freaking light bomber kamakaized into his tiny escort. He survived but many crewmen lost there lives. If strom deserves praise for being a paratrooper in the war and then serving on segregationist tickets and for not supporting equal rights, then you should be fucking bowing you head and bawling your eyes out for my grandfathers shipmates who actually gave there lifes protecting you freedoms from fascistic regimes.
Don't be so into hero worship that you forget he made many contemptable desisions that will be remembered for far longer than his veteran status. Heros aren't free of there sins and must pay with scorn for the rest of there remembrance.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

If he had had his way, Marina, there would still be segregation! That may not mean much to you, but it does mean at something to me.

Hell, that means a lot to me, too--I hardly approve of the concept, and us Irish weren't exactly popular in the North for a long time, you know, even if it wasn't enshrined in law. But, jeez, Pablo. The man's dead. Doesn't the fact that he can't fight back anymore count for anything when it comes to slandering him? Particularly since he had at least someredeeming qualities, and so personal slander like what Kojikun engaged in is of a, to say the least, highly questionable nature?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Heros aren't free of there sins and must pay with scorn for the rest of there remembrance.

"scorn"? I think it might be better to say that they are, like everyone else, fallible--and death does not, indeed, absolve them of this. What it does do, however, is at least demand that one consider they are now gone, their actions ossified in the context of history, both the glory and the sludge, and it seems contemptible for us to disrespect the person of an individual who sacrificed for the country when they are beyond response. Their actions? Drudge them up, study them, critique them all you wish, that is the way of democracy. But the person!? Please.

I'm not demanding that "Strom Thurmond consistantly supported segregation throughout his early political career and likely never abandoned a private support of it," not be said--that would ludicrous. I'm asking that people not go around saying things like "Excellent! Strom Thurmond is dead! Burn, racist!" Or the like. You have the right to do either, but one, rather obviously, seems a decent way to approach the topic of a dead man who's history is far from black and white, and the other is simply the slander of someone who cannot fight back.

[Gil Hamilton]

Hell, that means a lot to me, too--I hardly approve of the concept, and us Irish weren't exactly popular in the North for a long time, you know, even if it wasn't enshrined in law. But, jeez, Pablo. The man's dead. Doesn't the fact that he can't fight back anymore count for anything when it comes to slandering him? Particularly since he had at least someredeeming qualities, and so personal slander like what Kojikun engaged in is of a, to say the least, highly questionable nature?

Like I've been saying, Paul Wellstone died, a man with every bit as many redeeming qualities as anyone including Thurmond. He couldn't defend himself against any slander either. But you defended Manji spouting disrespect toward the dead then. Why not now?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Not serving in the military doesn't make a man any better or worse than anyone else. Strom Thurmond was no greater a man that Paul Wellstone, yet she only freaked out over massive disrespect over one of them.

Paul Welllstone never risked his life in support of his nation, and was in fact engaged in opposition to our country's policies during a critical era, opposition which, in the long-term, has resulted in some of the most severe political divisiveness in our history. The protestors of the Vietnam Era crossed the line into sedition.

Thurmond? His politics were contemptible, but he could, at least, fight for his nation, and that is a far more admirable stand than any political stand--it shows you value something higher than mere political differences. Thurmond's record as a soldier is certainly more important than the record of any politician. The record of any soldier, even the lowliest private soldier, is more important than the record of any politician.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Like I've been saying, Paul Wellstone died, a man with every bit as many redeeming qualities as anyone including Thurmond. He couldn't defend himself against any slander either. But you defended Manji spouting disrespect toward the dead then. Why not now?

Paul Wellstone had no redeeming qualities. He was a politician; I would say the same thing about any other politician. Thurmond, on the other hand, gains his redeeming qualities from being a soldier--just as would any other soldier who has seen action, regardless of rank or position.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I'm just saying that we honour our soldiers in death--and that respect should be shown to General Thurmond as it would be to any other soldier who has slept his final sleep.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Thurmond was a conservative politician who fought in a just war.
Wellstone was a liberal politician who protested against an unjust war.

Thank you for that Clintonesque soundbyte which contributed nothing to the debate.

[Dark Hellion]

Unfortunately a persons choices reflect that person, you cannot simply seperate them into the politician and the soldier, one is clearly too overpowering. 40+ years of being a politician outshines his military service simply by the longevity of it. You must look at his life hollistically and come to the conclusion that he was, for most of his life, and most of his decisions, truly a contemptable man. He however did serve quite valiently for his country and as such deserves a respect as well. Respect and contempt are not mutually exclusive and sen/major general thurmond is a good example of why.

[AdmiralKanos]

I'm just saying that we honour our soldiers in death--and that respect should be shown to General Thurmond as it would be to any other soldier who has slept his final sleep.

And again, I must ask: WHY?

Why the fuck does a dead soldier become exempt from criticism for anything he might do in the rest of his life? Adolf Hitler served in his fucking military, and he's dead now. Does that mean we're supposed to respect him?

[Coyote]

And the world rejoiced.

After reading this thread, and going back to your original post, you were practically dancing in the streets about the death of someone.

His political views sucked but that is not exactly the most mature way to respond.

I can see rejoicing at the deaths of Hitler and Stalin, who actually carried out actions of fascism, but Thurmond believed in a system of segregation that, while destructive, was not the 'round them up and burn them' type. It was actually once a widely accepted pov at one time and he happened to be one of its last adherents.

I'm glad the system he wanted is gone, and I think he was mistaken in fighting for that system, but I wouldn't answer his death as a cause celebre.