|
Post by genosguy on Apr 29, 2018 19:13:17 GMT -5
Two historical figures that lived in Connecticut. I will always have a soft part in my head for Connecticut history, especially the not so popular view.
John Brown, a fanatic certainly, rabble rouser for sure, he took his view of religion to the full extent. However, even though only some believe in what he did, my view was he was right for the right reason. He did not believe it right to enslave any group of people--very modern -hey what?
Benedict Arnold did commit treason, as one who views the laws strictly, he was a traitor. But he served more than honorably and was seriously wounded in a battle his actions won, and another got the credit. Washington ignored his pleas. Arnold's spouse pushed a French (lover?) man in his direction toward treason. He was part of a miss adventure into Quebec Prov to ignite the French Canadian against the British in which his troop paid dearly for a bad decisions by another that carried Arnold into Canada.
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on May 9, 2018 16:39:19 GMT -5
John Brown is such an interesting person to contemplate because many of his day believed he was merely a terrorist (even his supporters such as Emerson and Thoreau, who had raised money to fund guns for him in Kansas really wrestled with the morality of it). After all, he did kill innocent women and children in Kansas in pursuit of a greater cause. And at Harpers Ferry, more slaves ended up dead than Virginia troops. A very radical person who helped spark the Civil War. But one person's martyr is another person's terrorist, an extremely uncomfortable observation for me to make in this day and age. I apologize ahead of time for any possible contemporary allusions, which I'm not trying to draw because there is no moral right among these terrorists who call themselves martyrs, but it's a hard thing to think about.
|
|