this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2025
123 points (96.2% liked)

ShermanPosting

194 readers
306 users here now

Where we meme (joking in tone and detail, serious in sentiment) about General Sherman, the Civil War, and how the secesh traitors had it coming.

RULES

  1. No bigotry. The Union, or at least the part of the Union WE support, fought AGAINST that shite. We are anti-racist, anti-sexist, anti-homophobic, anti-transphobic, and in general anti-bigot here, even if not all the lads in Union blue uniforms were.

  2. No Confederate sympathizing. Anti-democratic racist slaver traitors don't deserve shit.

  3. Follow all Piefed.social rules

founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS
PugJesus@piefed.social
123
Also, maybe white identity is kind of fucked as a concept to begin with? (media.piefed.social)
submitted 6 days ago by PugJesus@piefed.social to c/shermanposting@piefed.social
32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Just because something is unpopular doesn’t mean it isn’t true. Yes, it’s true that the notion of objectivity/neutrality is no longer popular. But it still exists. Some scholars still aspire to it.

The idea of 'apolitical' historical narratives has run into the core problem that constructing narratives is inherently political, from Herodotus on down. That is the purpose of History as a discipline - to construct narratives, not simply to record facts.

The idea that narratives can be apolitical is itself political, as it constructs a bloodless interpretation as 'neutrality' instead of 'a failure to address the implications of the status quo'. What is an 'apolitical' narrative of the US Civil War? A timeline of major events with names and dates? That's not history, that's a chronicle.

The idea that there is no truth entirely serves those who only see history and scientific inquiry as means to an end and having no worth in and of themselves.

"Pilate saith, 'What is truth?'"

The idea that truth is apolitical ignores that subjective values of observers ensure that there is always dispute, even when all the facts are known and agreed upon.

It sounds like you think any neutral history that might not share your liberal political views is ‘conservative’ and ‘bad’. You are basically saying history, for you, only serves it’s purpose if it furthers your own agenda.

Fucking what.

Not everyone has an agenda in tehir interest of history. I do not. I actually quite enjoy history when it is inconvenient to my own political beliefs.

I don't think you understand what's being said.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 0 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I fundamentally disagree with you. The notion that all history is nothing more than a narrative that is inherently political is absurdly reductive and that's one of the tenants of CRT by which I can't take it seriously.

I mean, look you don't believe in Enlighment values, cool. Other people still do. Not everyone thinks the world is purely subjective. Subjectivity is something we can shed through education and practice.

From where you stand what I'm saying seems totally absurd, I have no doubt. Because I am well aware they don't educate with enlightenment values anymore and even when I was doing my undergrad/grad work it was 'old school' to think that way and the 'new school' was the pure subjectivity assumption.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 1 points 6 days ago

I fundamentally disagree with you. The notion that all history is nothing more than a narrative that is inherently political is absurdly reductive

... the idea that you can make a narrative about the past without a political lens is absurdly reductive of our past.

and that’s one of the tenants of CRT.

what

I mean, look you don’t believe in Enlighment values, cool. Other people still do.

... Enlightenment values are, themselves, political, not innate. Or do you think that humanity was born in the 17th century AD? And who the fuck said I didn't believe in Enlightenment values? Have you ever read any of the great authors of the Enlightenment?