77
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by zyratoxx@lemm.ee to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Depending on how the next four years go I'm on the fence between Bush Jr. and Trump but I'd like to hear from you

Edit:

Top 10 suggestions so far (unordered):

  • Andrew Jackson
  • Andrew Johnson
  • George W. Bush Jr
  • Ronald Reagan
  • Richard Nixon
  • James K. Polk
  • Woodrow Wilson
  • James Buchanan
  • Franklin Pierce
  • Donald J. Trump
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee 19 points 1 day ago

andrew jackson (or johnson can never remember which) for the trail of tears. absolutely awful

Jackson was trail of tears, Johnson was the one who killed reconstruction. Both very bad.

[-] OmnipotentEntity@beehaw.org 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Andrew Jackson was Trail of Tears, but I actually think Andrew Johnson was arguably worse. He was Lincoln's Democrat vice president (he was brought on to help "balance the ticket" instead of sticking with his strongly abolitionist first term VP Hannibal Hamlin), who started dismantling reconstruction and giving the power back to the former slaveowners.

You can pretty much lay Jim Crow at his feet.

[-] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 3 points 21 hours ago

kinda hard to argue apartheid is worse than genocide imo

[-] OmnipotentEntity@beehaw.org 0 points 10 hours ago

I'm not really trying to weigh and decide if 6000+ deaths and forcible removal of 100k+ people from their homes is better or worse than 100 or so years of systemic oppression followed by more, quieter oppression. Instead, I'm looking at this from the perspective of alternatives.

After the Civil War we very nearly had a moment when we could have maybe did something real for racial equality beyond anything we've seen even up to the present day. The Freeman's Bureau was fighting for wages for former slaves, and was generally a force for working class empowerment. Black congressmen were already being voted into office rapidly. If it were left to do its work, it might even have helped to innoculate the Irish- and Italian-Americans against future union busting on Black/White racial lines a few decades down the line.

Instead, after only about a year, Andrew Johnson started fighting and dismantling the Bureau, placing the former slaveowners back into a de facto master/slave relationship with their former slaves, giving the old Southern Democrats back their political power, and generally restoring the status quo as much as possible. The Bureau itself lasted only 5 or 6 years, don't remember. The KKK rose up because reconstruction wasn't there anymore to prevent it, because the Democrats wanted so bad to just put all of the states back in the union and go back to bad old days, and so on.

That was never a realistic moment that I know of in American history where people against war with the native tribes of this land had outsized power and influence. Jackson completely ignoring the Supreme Court's ruling was awful, but while the ruling was grounded in good moral and legal principles, it was, like it or not, extremely unpopular. There wasn't an entire party with a supermajority in Congress that could have kept up the pressure on this issue.

[-] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 hours ago

To only count the direct deaths of the forced march and not the deaths resulting in having your land stolen and along with it your ability to reproduce your society is straight up genocide denial.

After the Civil War we very nearly had a moment when we could have maybe did something real for racial equality beyond anything we’ve seen even up to the present day.

And this is absolving responsibility of all the people who maintained slavery, which one could argue is even worse than jim crow.

this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2024
77 points (89.7% liked)

Asklemmy

43958 readers
1284 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS