TDS 2/24/14 - Denunciation Proclamation has been added as a related post - related requested by Trancecoach on that post.

Let's see, Judge Andrew Napolitano is a Judge who went to law school. He doesn't have a degree in history, he hasn't presented a book with citations or even notes. Nothing tangible about this, it's not supported by any facts whatsoever, I suggest he write an essay at least that can be backed up.

This is the problem with a lot of academia, anyone can claim anything for history because it's a soft science. You should be forced to demonstrate your findings with evidence, none of which is presented here. So it's just hard to take seriously.

I'd love to see an essay written on this subject, and references to the evidence on which this idea comes from. So far though I've only seen stuff that's ethereal.

Also maybe it's just me but why is this being brought up again? If you want to take down Lincoln whatever you can do this to every president, they're world leaders who make hundreds of decisions. To me though this is most likely about racists trying to show that the country isn't that racist and the real baddies are those who stopped the racists.

Specifically this new challenge to the Civil War reminds me of a book that came out awhile ago arguing that the Palestinians aren't actually from Palestine, so they don't belong there. There's no issue, they don't belong so the Jews are doing nothing wrong occupying their land and keeping them in a giant open air prison. This book was praised in the media for obvious reasons that Israel is one of our close allies. It didn't take long though before it was destroyed academically by some intelligent people. It has largely been forgotten because it's a waste of fucking paper.

This in my opinion is a waste of breath and time, please prove me wrong.

I'm surprised that Jon, being as liberal as he is, cannot see through the myth of Lincoln. I guess it's indoctrinated thoroughly into most Americans that Lincoln free the slaves. Sure he counters Napolitano's arguments, but he doesn't touch the sacred myth of Lincoln.

When it's a point we don't agree with it's 'harping' or something equally dismissive.

But oh yeah... comparing the Civil War carte blanche to EVERY other war is a solid argument... about as solid as arguing in favor of assassinations.

He "tricked" Carolina, has to be the most moronic argument I've ever heard. Talk about twisting history to fit your beliefs. I'm honestly hoping that was a joke.

I find it hilarious that you post a video that so utterly refutes your point, but there's really not much point in rehashing the slavery thing as we both find the others position abhorrent.

What I'd like to know now is, given that assassinations are less "morally dubious" than war, I'm guessing you're in favour of the current administrations drone strike program?

I'm not used to my posts being ignored, but since you did I'll reiterate. Nobody has busted the "Myth of Lincoln" in this video. I don't know what you think happens when people say something, but words said by just some person don't trump historical evidence.

If you would like to present an argument or point me towards a well researched book that presents the argument that's different. But just being surprised that someone doesn't accept something they've just heard and hasn't been substantiated is stupid.

What's ultimately going to come from this is maybe a few people will realize that these situations involving an entire country and large swaths of people and interests aren't easily buttoned up with a few statements. These situations aren't simple they're complex and it takes a bit more background and understanding to get to a point where we think we have a handle on things.

You find this out for example when you try to understand how Germany allowed the Nazi's to take over and do the evil things they did. Some will just say ridiculous things trying to brush it off or close the book on it. The reality is there's a ton of different factors that have a great effect on historical events.

Would you argue that whatever academics say about major world conflicts if they aren't parroting other agreed-upon-by-experts musings could be part of the overall codification of these events in world subconscious and conscious with a view to shaping minds for the next conflict to be orchestrated and implemented? The simple or complex aspects of any sacrificial lump of money and people can always be rendered into the essence of the insanity of the same with a simple and universally-agreed-upon homo-sapient common-sense.
Eveyone thinks 'ol Tom Edison was a goddamn genius and that Chris Columbus wasn't a complete cockbag posing as some ground-breaking explorer as well. What does the tinkerer and and a boat captain have in common? A lot of assholes have written tomes about both of them to deify them. One was an egotistical half-ass and the other a dirty fucking example of a Spaniard working for a cunt whore empire-builder.

ChaosEngine, your lack of any point reads COMPLETELY retarded and it's a not-so-cloaked personal attack at someone much more intellectually honest than yourself.

If you provide evidence that's compelling and can be verified there is no reason why a serious academic shouldn't take it seriously. There are a lot of echochamber and lazy academic bullshit that bounces around. I'm not going to deny that I hate it and see it constantly.

But I cite again when Noam Chomsky makes an argument against something like that, he provides a mountain of fucking evidence. This video doesn't do that sir, it's a debate that should've been had after the material say a book or study or essay had been presented and a challenge had been thrown down. We've skipped a bunch of fucking steps here, we're basically sitting in a garage with some beers arguing whether or not Beiber should be legally sent back to Canada.

So far no one has been able to point me towards someone who's done serious academic work on this subject. Heck no one is even claiming like Donald Trump that they've already done the work on it.

To your point about Christopher Columbus, when I was in High School I found this out when I was given "A People's History of the United States." The reason why it was compelling to me was the shear volume of material on the subject as well as it's references. In contrast my history book had one paragraph on Christopher Columbus's finding of the nation, it was preposterous.

As usually, Swirley, your diatribe reads true...for and about yourself.

Oh, and ole Chris...not Spanish.

Moving this video to Trancecoach's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.