Confederate Statues

Yes. But me knowing that the South lost the war isn't influenced one iota by those. The question is; why is your knowledge limited to just statues and monuments? Do you not know what a book is? You do all your learning by looking at bronze sculptures?

Try me.
the point is the monuments and the geography/battlefield tell much more then just by a book.
You walk the battefield, you follow the events and you see the honorable soldiers on both sides.

For non-battlefield monuments it's a good idea to look at the history behind each. when was the dedication?
by whom? for what reasons? It's simply another tool to make history come alive - not supplanting a book
 
a historical commission is not a "biased individual" . these are folks who look at the pedigree of the monument -when it was built and placed , by whom, and dedication, and any other history they can find on it.

IOWs it is a thorough examination of the history of the statue.
That way a recommendation can be made based on the facts of each monument.
Some get torn down, some moved, some stay in place - but that is done on the merits of each situation -
not mob rule, and political motivations

Notice that I said "individuals," not "individual."

Doesn't matter; possibly offensive historical monuments/statues of this sort belong in museums or other venues where those who might take offense can avoid them. Black college students attending a university don't have a lot of choice in the matter if the monument is right there in a public area on campus -- unless there is a special park or exhibit area set aside for such things, that can easily be avoided. Let those who want to view or study them go there to do it.

I can just imagine the joy if my campus (NMU) put up a monument to Andrew Jackson or George Custer in a public area.
 
Notice that I said "individuals," not "individual."

Doesn't matter; possibly offensive historical monuments/statues of this sort belong in museums or other venues where those who might take offense can avoid them. Black college students attending a university don't have a lot of choice in the matter if the monument is right there in a public area on campus -- unless there is a special park or exhibit area set aside for such things, that can easily be avoided. Let those who want to view or study them go there to do it.

I can just imagine the joy if my campus (NMU) put up a monument to Andrew Jackson or George Custer in a public area.
individuals..sorry i missed that. Putting a statue on a college campus is a dubious move.
Putting a statue up of Robert e Lee in Richmond commemorating his prowness is another matter.

There are historical commissions that already do this when called up. The problem is the mob woun't wait for a true evaluation -and the politicians are craven cowards that disown their own commissions.
There needs to be some sense that this is the sane way to go - of course Congress won't pass a resolution' and local politicians cave to mobs -so here we are
 
individuals..sorry i missed that. Putting a statue on a college campus is a dubious move.
Putting a statue up of Robert e Lee in Richmond commemorating his prowness is another matter.

There are historical commissions that already do this when called up. The problem is the mob woun't wait for a true evaluation -and the politicians are craven cowards that disown their own commissions.
There needs to be some sense that this is the sane way to go - of course Congress won't pass a resolution' and local politicians cave to mobs -so here we are

Mobs are what you get when government is non-responsive to the people.
 
And when the mob decides the Jefferson monument needs to go?

I didn't say that I approve of mobs; I'm merely pointing out what happens when the government is not responsive to the citizens. Mobs and violence and vandalism are antithetical to a civilized society.
 
ridiculous/ some statutes have already been removed by government.
mobs are what you get when politicians are too gutless to check them

I think we're saying the same thing but in different ways. Or are you proposing that govt. use its heavy hand to stomp on protesters?

Yes, some govts. have removed the statues. Others have not.
 
I think we're saying the same thing but in different ways. Or are you proposing that govt. use its heavy hand to stomp on protesters?

Yes, some govts. have removed the statues. Others have not.
heavy hand? Like the cops enforcing the laws on vandalism? didn't we see enough of that with Occupy?
(If the cops would not let things get out of hand o begin with) - but they do it at politician insistence they not do their job
 
It's tempting to immediately condemn those who illegally pull down confederate statues, but it's important to remember the context of that vandalism. At least in North Carolina, a law at the state level has made it effectively impossible for communities to remove such statues by lawful means. Even if a university is uncomfortable with subjecting its students to a monument to white supremacy, they cannot take it down or even move it to a less prominent place without a change of the law at the state level. Similarly, if a community of color doesn't like having to see a defender of slavery honored in their midst, they cannot protect themselves from that eyesore through legal action at the community or even city level. By denying people in those locales usable legal tools for addressing offensive statues, the state has effectively invited extra-legal action by those communities.

Here's an idea for an alternative. As I understand it, the law was worded such that it only made it illegal to take the statue down or to move it to a less prominent place. If that's right, you could simply cover it up. The left has a lot of really talented artists. So, just have some design structures that can be built around the offensive ones, hiding them completely. That could include practical things like little clock towers or obelisks for posting placards. Or it could be other monuments, designed to fit snugly (and maybe irreversibly) over the offensive ones and to send a very different message.

For example, put up a big pedestal, covering the offensive statue, and on top of that put a statue to John Adams Hyman, the first African American Congress member in North Carolina. Or have it feature statues of several black students, representing the first black students at UNC, following court-ordered desegregation. Then the statue hasn't been brought down or moved, so nothing illegal has happened, but it's been transformed from a celebration of white supremacist treason to a celebration of something positive.

Can’t we just let the pigeons shit on them?
 
Well, it was on STATE LAND. UNC's campus is a public campus.

You are talking out of your ass here.

Irrelevant. It still didn't belong to the people that destroyed it.

There are MLK statues on public land all over the country. Do you support people that don't like him destroying them? Remember, your argument centers around something being on public land as justification for those that oppose it destroying it.
 
Can you not read? I literally said that it wasn't, nor was that the intention.

History is already written: The South fought for slavery and lost. These monuments don't enhance that history at all. All they do is make you feel better about yourself. And I'm not interested in that. I don't want you to feel better about yourself. I want you to kill yourself.




Yes! They wrote their own Constitution, picked their own capital, and elected their own President. They even called themselves a different name.

They're traitors.

And they lost.

So the heritage you are celebrating is one of losing and treason.

That sounds about right.

If you want that result, step up, be a man, and try to do it yourself. Until you do, you're nothing more than the typical whining pussy on the same level of Nomad, domer, Bourbon, Leon, and any of the other cowards that talk a big game yet do absolutely nothing.

What you describe sounds exactly like the actions of Jefferson, Washington, Adam, Hamilton, etc.
 
Robert Byrd renounced his racist past and supported Barack Obama.

So when are you going to renounce your racist past?

Did Byrd doing that change what those he recruited into the Klan did. He can renounce it but it doesn't change history. Byrd, in case you didn't know, filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

I don't have one or a present one either.
 
Back
Top