Anonymous #2 1d

Jayhawkers murdered any Missourians, both slavers and abolitionists, and also tortured women and children for sport. This is well documented from the first governor of Kansas, who was an abolitionist that was on Quantrills hitlist during his raid of Lawrence.

1

Anonymous OP 1d

You cannot argue that the actions of the Bushwhackers are morally equivalent to that of the Jayhawkers, that is just plainly wrong

2

Anonymous #2 1d

I am not, the first governor of Kansas did. And actually he didn’t say they were equivalent, he explicitly said the way Missourians were treated was worse.

7

Anonymous OP 1d

No one really cares about one guy’s opinion. If in a vacuum the Jayhawkers & Bushwhackers actions were the exact same, the bushwhackers are worse because of the motive and intent

-1

Anonymous #2 1d

1. Their actions weren’t the same, bushwackers killed for political points, Jayhawkers tortured for sport. 2. Even if their actions were the same, the bushwackers are universally condemned for what they did and the Jayhawkers are celebrated for it, which is kinda the original problem I was trying to point out.

5

Anonymous OP 1d

That’s why I led with the hypothetical, of course the actions weren’t the same. Bushwhackers did the exact same, so trying to equate them is kind of a fool’s errand. It’s pretty obvious why the Jayhawkers are celebrated. That’s what makes this rivalry so unique, because you cannot divorce the role slavery played into how this rivalry is perceived. It’s the same reason it died for a bit

-1

Anonymous #2 1d

Bad people who are not worth being celebrated can be on the “right side of history.” We don’t wave Soviet flags up and down the street and cheer their name every weekend just because they fought against the Nazis. The Soviets were still seen as enemies to progress because they were, just like the Jayhawkers.

5

Anonymous OP 1d

That logic makes sense, what you can’t say is Jayhawkers being “enemies of progress” because well, the same reason this rivalry exists

0