Charles,
You hit the nail on the head.

Anita


>From: "Charles L. Dibble MSNx31" <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history         
>      <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Perspectives . . .
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 01:44:47 -0400
>
>Nat Turner.  John Brown.  Denmark Vesey.  Menachem Began.  Yasser Arafat.
>We see time and again where "freedom fighter" and "terrorist" are
>interchangeable, if not synonymous:  these politically charged labels
>generally reflect the views of the speaker/writer.  And donning the formal
>uniform of an organized army doesn't end the debate (Banastre Tarleton, Wm
>T. Sherman).  Likewise, we see time and again where "act of war" and "act 
>of
>terror" are interchangeable, if not synonymous:  these politically charged
>words generally reflect the views of the speaker/writer (Twin Towers, King
>David Hotel, Dresden, Hiroshima).
>
>Over the last two or three months, I have been almost overwhelmed by the
>activity on this List.  And I have been delighted at how very divergent and
>strongly felt opinions been expressed in a temperate manner.
>
>As a non-historian, I bring no special expertise to the discussion.  What I
>have concluded, however, is that history - factual history - is fixed.
>There may be additional facts uncovered.  Additional sources may be
>discovered.  But they merely illuminate what has occurred:  they do not
>change anything.  All the discussion, all the passion, all the debate is
>merely the editorial comment of each succeeding generation that brings its
>own set of "unbiased" opinions and "impartial" values to the continuing
>discussions.  Illumination?  Enlightenment?  Revisionism?  Again, the label
>attached to the exercise will generally reflect the views of the
>speaker/writer.
>
>I haven't read a single post on this list that has advocated re-institution
>of racial segregation, much less slavery.  Yet I wonder what the views of
>this list would have been 50 years ago on the subject of racial 
>segregation.
>And what would the views of this list have been 150 years ago on slavery
>(Paul Finkelman compiled a list of all the "justifications" in a great post
>on 6/11).  It is easy to condemn the actions of those who went before;  it
>is much more difficult - and far more worthwhile - to learn from the past
>and apply that knowledge to the real problems of today.
>
>=============================
>Charles L. Dibble
>Columbia, South Carolina 29202-1240
>=============================
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anne Pemberton
>Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 22:34 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [VA-HIST] VA homeschooling & SOL
>
>Lyle,
>
>In retrospect, I was probably thinking of John Brown as the uprising slave
>who was supported by a number of northerners, Quakers, and abolitionists. 
>It
>
>was a point made in a book about Robert Gould Shaw entitle "Blue Eyed Child
>of Fortune The Civil War Letters of Robert Gould Shaw" edited by Russell
>Duncan with a forward by William S. McFeeley.
>
>But, the point I was making could be applied to either Nat Turner or John
>Brown. They both took the same risks as the leaders of the American
>Rebellion against Britain. The charge of Mass Murder could be laid equally
>against Nat Turner or against the presidents who ordered the bombs dropped
>on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Viet Nam, or Baghdad, just to name those in my
>lifetime. It is all "mass murder", and the numbers are not so severe in the
>case of either Nat Turner or John Brown, as in the ones listed above. Nat
>Turner led an army of insurrection. How many armies of insurrection have we
>supported over the decades just in the 20th century? How is Nat Turner's
>"crime" so different?
>
>Anne
>
>Anne Pemberton
>[log in to unmask]
>http://www.erols.com/apembert
>http://www.educationalsynthesis.org

_________________________________________________________________
http://liveearth.msn.com