Tearing down statues

Schlong&Stable said:
They were literally erected to celebrate Confederate soldiers who fought and died in a civil war. I very much doubt any were erected to celebrate racism and hatred.
Click to expand...
Abraham Lincoln was also a filthy stinking racist. He didn't free the slaves out of the goodness of his own heart. He did it so that he could trash the economies of southern states. There were states within the Union that were permitted to continue holding slaves.

The Confederate states were just more dependent on slavery than the Unionist states.

If the Unionists were capable of winning the war without freeing any slaves then they would not have freed them.

America was built on the back of slavery. It was not exclusive to the Confederates. They were two sides of the same coin.

If they're going to remove Confederate statues because of racism then I suggest they blow up Mount Rushmore whilst they are at it.
 
"I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.”

Abraham Lincoln 1858
 
TallPaul1878 said:
"I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.”

Abraham Lincoln 1858
Click to expand...

You need to judge Lincoln within the context of the time in which he lived. Back then he was considered very liberal, almost a radical. It's easy to look at him in today's context and call him a racist but by the zeitgeist of his time he was a bit of a trail blazer.
 
LOAM said:
With Britain's checkered history we would have to tear down 90% of anything over 100 years old. I can't see it gaining any support other than the occasional hipster who wants to get on TV. I wouldn't lose any sleep worrying about it.
Click to expand...

Our nation isn't filled with a majority of idiots though. So I'm sure we will be OK. Just a select few making things worse for the rest of us over here.
 
Sliver said:
You need to judge Lincoln within the context of the time in which he lived. Back then he was considered very liberal, almost a radical. It's easy to look at him in today's context and call him a racist but by the zeitgeist of his time he was a bit of a trail blazer.
Click to expand...
http://atlantablackstar.com/2015/05...sts-quotes-abraham-lincoln-said-black-people/

Plenty more of his quotes here. Hardly a radical liberal. He was fine with upholding the status quo. Emancipation was simply a weapon to be wielded against Confederates.
 
I think that there's a difference between pulling down mass-produced Jim Crow-era statues to Confederate heroes and pulling down something like Nelson's Column. Britain has tried to erase the atrocities of its colonial past. However, I don't believe that removing historical statues of prominent colonial figures will change the way most Britons perceive our the British Empire.

The Warner Bros. approach to Tom & Jerry is the correct approach IMO:

4M3maX1l.jpg.png


If Nelson isn't a figure that we should hold in high regard, let's add information rather than remove it.
 
Sliver said:
Yeah but those have nothing to do with the Nazis. They were used at least 5,000 years before Adolf Hitler designed the Nazi flag. The word swastika comes from the Sanskrit svastika, which means “good fortune” or “well-being.
Click to expand...
That won't stop some people from demanding their removal.

It's got nothing to do with what the symbols represent but of a political group exploiting their power and forcing their ideology upon everyone else.
 
TallPaul1878 said:
If they're going to remove Confederate statues because of racism then I suggest they blow up Mount Rushmore whilst they are at it.
Click to expand...

The Confederate statues being removed were built in the 20th century and in two main blocks: the period that saw the introduction of Jim Crow laws and the post-WWII period when there was pressure to repeal the Jim Crow laws. They were built to remind local black people of their place in society. The statues were never about the American Civil War.
 
TallPaul1878 said:
Plenty more of his quotes here. Hardly a radical liberal. He was fine with upholding the status quo. Emancipation was simply a weapon to be wielded against Confederates.
Click to expand...


Fact is, he is a symbol of freedom and liberty regardless of how incorrect it may be and the confederates have become a symbol for racism among some communities. This is why it is happening, a difference in opinion on what symbols represent. Saying 'Lincoln was bad too, why dont you destroy his symbols' is hardly going to convince them that their cause is wrong.
 
Tunney said:
I think that there's a difference between pulling down mass-produced Jim Crow-era statues to Confederate heroes and pulling down something like Nelson's Column.
Click to expand...

Yup that is quite a key distinction, lots of these statues in the US aren't just historical monuments but were deliberately mass produced well after the civil war to help subjugate black people.

While some actual historic statues perhaps ought to remain in place (depending on location), others which occupy a far too dubious location (such as say a confederate statue overlooking a main town square where slaves were sold in a town that now has a very large black population) probably ought to be moved to say confederate war graves or museums. The mass produced ones on the other hand can probably be taken down and just auctioned off.
 
TallPaul1878 said:
But the statues HAVE been erected. They exist. If right wing groups were campaigning to have new statues erected then it would most likely and quite rightly be declined.

It's absolutely not the same thing.
Click to expand...
If they wouldn't be allowed to be added now, on a moral basis presumably, why is it morally ok to allow them to remain standing in front of civic institutions?

I'm not particularly in favour of removing statues in the UK - though I think there is a good argument to do so in USA due to the nature of their particular issues and the origins of the statues themselves. But I think many defending them are not being very logical.
 
Granted I admit that I don't know all of the ins and outs of each particular statue.

If a statue has been erected to antagonise the local black population then I fully support it's removal.

If it's a genuine historic statue then I think that's completely different.

But it is not the responsibility of a baying mob to pull statues.
 
They should simply change the plaque wording to accurately record the history of the person depicted, warts an all. If said person had beliefs and standards that are objectionable to modern society then say so within the record written and use them as a reminder to us to not let those beliefs gain an audience and support.

I am against destroying statues or indeed any historical record of any kind no matter how objectionable it is to modern society. Its ok to be ashamed and sorry for things your country has done in the past so long as you use it as reminder to not go down those paths again. Removing them or trying to wash over them as if they never happened will eventually result in generation not being educated in them and its a known fact that you learn most from your mistakes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom