Editor in Chief Bill | 23 Jun 2018 10:12 a.m. PST |
Was the abolitionist John Brown insane? |
John Leahy | 23 Jun 2018 10:30 a.m. PST |
At a minimum he was a fanatic. |
Winston Smith | 23 Jun 2018 10:31 a.m. PST |
Of course, but in a good cause. Madman, yes. Not insane. |
Frederick | 23 Jun 2018 10:46 a.m. PST |
Depends on the criteria but for sure a madman |
zoneofcontrol | 23 Jun 2018 10:58 a.m. PST |
Definitely overzealous but a man focused on a mission. Not sure he knew how big a can of worms he was trying to open. |
etotheipi | 23 Jun 2018 11:27 a.m. PST |
|
14Bore | 23 Jun 2018 11:29 a.m. PST |
No, but he did have convictions. |
Wackmole9 | 23 Jun 2018 11:31 a.m. PST |
bat crazy!! |
Memento Mori | 23 Jun 2018 11:38 a.m. PST |
This question is an example of how History is being abused by using current morals and political thoughts to past events. To know your history you must first know the attitudes and circumstances that surround an event so as to place it in context.Peole thought and acted differently in the past and what today we see as mad was acceptable behaviour . Brown was a revolutionary who advocated violence and armed insurrection to free the slaves He had fought in the anti slavery struggles in Kansas and was opposed by individuals who advocated violence to maintain or extend slaery In the 1850s that was the way many peope thought; it was a common opinion not a sympton of madness or insanity Fanatics are not necessarily mad ( ie insane) In 1848 revolutions swept Europe in France, Ireland Germany Russia Poland Austria Hungary etc etc Some were sparked by revolutionaries but a common theme was to achieve independence from an occupying power through violence. In 1861 two years after Harper's Ferry the Southern States seceded from the Union to essentialy maintain slavery and fought a long war to defend that principle Again violence was used to further political goals. Brown was an extreme abolitionis who advocated a war of independence to free the slaves and while many would have hated the violent means, they certainly would have embraced himm as a hero if he had won. in James Loewen's book "Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong, " he cites a survey of American history textbooks going back into the 1800s His conclusion was that until 1890 Brown's actions were generally viewed as natural and even heroic. After 1890 his actions were viewed as insane and that lasted into the 1970s. |
Dn Jackson | 23 Jun 2018 11:54 a.m. PST |
Certainly a fanatic, but not necessarily insane. He would be classified as a terrorist under today's rules. he advocated, an conducted, violence against civilians for political ends. |
Joes Shop | 23 Jun 2018 12:25 p.m. PST |
|
cosmicbank | 23 Jun 2018 12:55 p.m. PST |
|
Bobgnar | 23 Jun 2018 1:25 p.m. PST |
Either way a great game too. Redblack: I thought he did win, that is achieve the goal he had, to publicize the slavery issue. |
Legion 4 | 23 Jun 2018 1:30 p.m. PST |
He meant well … but … his way of doing it was not really the way to go … Regardless a good cause certainly …
|
advocate | 23 Jun 2018 1:59 p.m. PST |
All I know about John Brown I gleaned from Flashman. Clinically insane? Hard to tell at this distance, given I'm neither a psychologist nor a psychiatrist. |
The Beast Rampant | 23 Jun 2018 4:09 p.m. PST |
|
Ceterman | 23 Jun 2018 4:17 p.m. PST |
|
Grelber | 23 Jun 2018 5:31 p.m. PST |
I grew up in the Sunflower State. In our history books, he is a hero. I think the term used to describe Brown at the time of the attack on Harper's Ferry was "monomaniacal," concentrating on just one thing--in Brown's case, abolition. Grelber |
Winston Smith | 23 Jun 2018 8:45 p.m. PST |
It's funny. When we wish to denigrate a person who has a steely eyed devotion to his cause, we call him insane. Was John Brown insane? Do you approve of his mission? I do. So he was not insane. Do you disapprove of Hitler's mission? I do. But that doesn't make him insane. |
JimSelzer | 23 Jun 2018 9:06 p.m. PST |
terrorist for sure fanatical driven probably insane only by todays lefty standards which is weird because he would have been a poster child for based on his goals but anti because he advocated guns |
ZULUPAUL | 24 Jun 2018 2:52 a.m. PST |
No. He was very goal driven & seemed to know that his death was not the end of the struggle to free slaves but the beginning of a bloody struggle to accomplish that goal. |
Ceterman | 24 Jun 2018 4:13 a.m. PST |
"terrorist for sure". REALLY? And how bout "the good people" that used, owned & operated the damn Slave trade? Just wonderful, law abiding, well adjusted Americans, huh? He advocated guns, to kill the people who refused to stop owning, selling & killing PEOPLE. Ya know? Those people DIDN'T need guns to kill their "property". They could just whip them, or starve them or kill them any way they wanted to. |
Gunfreak | 24 Jun 2018 4:17 a.m. PST |
His cause was far more just then the cause that started the revolution some 80+ years earlier |
jdpintex | 24 Jun 2018 7:14 a.m. PST |
|
donlowry | 24 Jun 2018 9:01 a.m. PST |
I have seen no evidence that he was psychotic -- maybe neurotic, but who isn't? |
USAFpilot | 24 Jun 2018 9:28 a.m. PST |
No, he was not insane. He was right, but also wrong. Slavery is evil, but he broke the law and was hanged. |
EJNashIII | 24 Jun 2018 9:33 a.m. PST |
Maybe, he was the only sane one and everybody who supported slavery and bigotry where insane. An alien visitor. "So, I got this correct? You base your social, economic and educational system only on the basis of your skin color at birth? That doesn't sound very intelligent." |
PJ ONeill | 24 Jun 2018 9:35 a.m. PST |
John Brown and his followers would ride into a farmstead and slaughter every man woman and child on it. Weather is was anti-slavery or voices from his dog doesn't matter. He was a psychotic serial killer and the modern attempts to white-wash his actions are disgusting. |
EJNashIII | 24 Jun 2018 9:41 a.m. PST |
Interesting PJ, any proof he did those deads you speak of? I would like to read about it. |
Pan Marek | 24 Jun 2018 1:38 p.m. PST |
|
Katzbalger | 24 Jun 2018 2:53 p.m. PST |
link Something like that, EJ? |
Ceterman | 24 Jun 2018 3:00 p.m. PST |
"but he broke the law and was hanged" The Law was EVIL. The Law was WRONG. We changed the law. After many, many deaths. Now, I can think of a bunch of others, right now who are breaking the GOOD law & deserve the same. |
Legion 4 | 24 Jun 2018 3:44 p.m. PST |
maybe neurotic, but who isn't? Amen ! |
Dn Jackson | 24 Jun 2018 6:02 p.m. PST |
Interesting read katzbalger. I was aware of the Pottwatomie killings, but didn't know about the 'confiscation' of the murdered people's possessions. That, in my mind, downgrades the 'holiness' of his actions. Ceterman, you might consider calming down, considerably. You are using 21st century morals to condem people living in the 19th century. |
Memento Mori | 25 Jun 2018 7:32 a.m. PST |
As a Canadian I am interested to see how the issues of legality vs morality are still divisive over 150 years after the fact. Just because a law is legal does not make it right The Nazi party had the Nurenburg Laws that treated people according to race and eventually led to death camps. The gap beween legality and attrocity can be very fine at times or it can be a gap as wide as the Grand Canyon. As a historian I would be very interested to see how our descendents will treat today's events 100 years from now I am sure that there will still be alot of differing oppinions as there are today America is still a revolutionary society meaning that current sstes and ways of doing things are always under prssure to change and to adapt to current events Today's revolutionary will become tomorrow's reactionaries they try to safeguard what they have won and to see that their views continue . However it is still "bad"history to extend current political thinking backwards so as to judge the motives or minds of our predecessors I see a lot of that in this thread which should be an object lesson on assuming we know why people acted the way they did My motto is to "Assume nothing and prove everything". If you assume you make an "ass" of "u" and "me". |
USAFpilot | 25 Jun 2018 10:33 a.m. PST |
but he broke the law and was hanged" The Law was EVIL. The Law was WRONG. We changed the law. After many, many deaths. Now, I can think of a bunch of others, right now who are breaking the GOOD law & deserve the same. This is the same twisted logic (or maybe no logic at all but just pure emotion) that a very small minority use to justify murdering doctors who perform certain (currently legal) procedures on women. No matter which side of the debate you fall, the vast majority in this country understand you cannot have individuals deciding for themselves which laws they can break and who they can execute at will. John Brown was on the right side, but his methods were wrong. He broke the law and was justly executed. |
Cloudy | 25 Jun 2018 12:59 p.m. PST |
+1 USAFpilot. In 1850's Kansas, abolitionists such as John Brown, the pro-slavery Border Ruffians and all the monstrous crimes that were committed in the names of their respective causes were (IMHO) a major if not THE direct cause of the Civil War. All the bitterness continued to fester and in a few years, finally came to a bitter resolution via might of arms. Any number of causes, both old and new generate like feelings today in "excitable" folks and will continue to do so as long as there are two sides to any issue. That is why I can never rule out "Might-of-Arms" as the final arbiter… |
Davek0scale | 25 Jun 2018 7:34 p.m. PST |
He killed Shepherd Heyward. |
Ceterman | 26 Jun 2018 5:50 a.m. PST |
USAFPilot, "No matter which side of the debate you fall, the vast majority in this country understand you cannot have individuals deciding for themselves which laws they can break and who they can execute at will." EXACTLY what we have going on in the Country TODAY. No law is unbreakable, apparently. No need to consult one single person about it. Much less Congress. Or Judges. Or Morals… "John Brown was on the right side, but his methods were wrong. He broke the law and was justly executed." These people, doing it NOW, "Are on the on Wrong side, And their methods are wrong. They have broken the law and need to be executed." |
etotheipi | 26 Jun 2018 6:53 a.m. PST |
That is why I can never rule out "Might-of-Arms" as the final arbiter… This is the foundation of Star Trek political philosophy. We're benevolent to all the species whose asses we could kick without breaking a sweat. |
USAFpilot | 26 Jun 2018 10:06 a.m. PST |
"Ironically the first man to die in John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry was a free black man from Winchester, Heyward Shepherd. " Maybe ironic for everyone except poor Heyward who certainly didn't deserve to die. |
Ceterman | 26 Jun 2018 11:02 a.m. PST |
"Ironically the first man to die in John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry was a free black man from Winchester, Heyward Shepherd. " Yeah, & how about Crispus Attuck, in Boston? How's that working out for the African Americans now? What's your point? That African Americans are worth putting in the line of fire but not the voting booth or what? To me it seems, awww to hell with it… I think I'll just go outside & talk to the bricks… |
Ceterman | 26 Jun 2018 11:04 a.m. PST |
USAFpilot, Did the approx 620,000, who did in the ACW deserve it? |
USAFpilot | 26 Jun 2018 12:11 p.m. PST |
Ceterman, Do the approx 620,000 unborn who are aborted each year in the US deserve it? By your logic, the fanatic zealots who murder doctors that perform abortions is justified and should go unpunished. The law is the law. If you don't like it, lobby to change it. That is our system of government. Rebels on either side of an issue will be held accountable to the law. |
Old Contemptibles | 26 Jun 2018 3:05 p.m. PST |
Clinically, who knows? If insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results, then perhaps he was insane. |
138SquadronRAF | 27 Jun 2018 7:24 a.m. PST |
Are any members who have commented either psychologist or psychiatrist? In that case, I can dismiss your opinion of those of a layman. If any of you are, perchance a psychologist or psychiatrist, then what are you doing diagnosing a person without an interview and testing? Not very professional. Brown was a fanatic – such persons are dangerous to society. By placing their concept of the law above the established law of society they will justify any action. I am not qualified to comment on his actual mental state. |
donlowry | 27 Jun 2018 6:32 p.m. PST |
Brown was a fanatic – such persons are dangerous to society. Also the ones most likely to bring about change (for good or ill). |