Tearing down statues

dowie said:
I don't care about the statue in your wedding photo and likely neither do any of the people who may have some influence on whether it stays or goes, it is a non-issue and has practically no relevance to whether the local authority may or may not decide to take down the statue. No I don't know how much that specific statue cost(only you know which specific statue it even is as you've not given the name of the county), I do know that large number of these statues were produced cheaply in order to help subjugate black Americans during the Jim Crow era.

Do you know that the particular statue was one of the minority constructed as a monument in the immediate aftermath of the civil war or one of the many constructed decades later with some political motivation?

For example does the statue have any writing on the bottom attributed to the "United Daughters of the Confederacy"?



I don't think it is particularly rude, it is a straightforward point - who cares if the statue is in the background of his wedding photo - that is of pretty much no significance as far as the argument of whether or not to take down such a statue is concerned. What blanket assumption? Note the word 'if' in my post - I'm not making an assumption regarding this specific statue.
Click to expand...

Yes it does, Erected by The United Daughters of The Confederacy 1916
Sure, that was during the Jim Crow laws period, which I think was
late 1870s to 1950s, but to me, it was just a memorial.
 
Jean-F said:
Yes it does, Erected by The United Daughters of The Confederacy 1916
Sure, that was during the Jim Crow laws period, which I think was
late 1870s to 1950s, but to me, it was just a memorial.
Click to expand...

Well to others it is a bit more of a political statement paid for by an organisation now tainted as white supremacists, bit different to say a memorial put up in the aftermath of the war with say the names of local men who died etc.. it was instead one of a large number of statues put up in a later period for politically motivated rather than just commemorative reasons. I can totally understand the locals, especially if they contain a lot of African Americans among them, not wanting it there any more.
 
dowie said:
Well to others it is a bit more of a political statement paid for by an organisation now tainted as white supremacists, bit different to say a memorial put up in the aftermath of the war with say the names of local men who died etc.. it was instead one of a large number of statues put up in a later period for politically motivated rather than just commemorative reasons. I can totally understand the locals, especially if they contain a lot of African Americans among them, not wanting it there any more.
Click to expand...

I am nothing if not scrupulously fair, and always ready to hold my hands up if I am proved wrong, and this may be one of those times.
After a whole slew of emails back and forth across the pond, with a host of friends, in the main college educated, and from both sides of the Mason-Dixon Line, I am assured by them that you are on the right track.
Quite a few of the memorials that went up between 1912 and 1924 coincided with the resurgence of the KKK, and it became like a chicken and egg thing.
KKK activity was inevitably followed a short while later by a memorial being raised, or if a memorial was erected somewhere, it was followed before long by the raising of a new Klavern.
So I apologise dowie, not profusely, as no one likes to admit that they got it wrong, but I apologise anyway.
 
Jean-F said:
I am nothing if not scrupulously fair, and always ready to hold my hands up if I am proved wrong, and this may be one of those times.
After a whole slew of emails back and forth across the pond, with a host of friends, in the main college educated, and from both sides of the Mason-Dixon Line, I am assured by them that you are on the right track.
Quite a few of the memorials that went up between 1912 and 1924 coincided with the resurgence of the KKK, and it became like a chicken and egg thing.
KKK activity was inevitably followed a short while later by a memorial being raised, or if a memorial was erected somewhere, it was followed before long by the raising of a new Klavern.
So I apologise dowie, not profusely, as no one likes to admit that they got it wrong, but I apologise anyway.
Click to expand...

no need to apologise, I'm not sure you've necessarily been 'wrong' here, I mean your main point previously was that it has some significance to you personally due to a wedding picture which I don't doubt it does :)
 
dowie said:
Abraham Lincon statue has been vandalised/burned in Chicago's south side... the mind boggles...

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2017/08/17/lincoln-bust-vandalized/

8UYaeQ0.jpg


oh and a statue of a soldier from the American war of independence/revolutionary war NOT the civil war! has been decapitated... Doh!

http://www.news5cleveland.com/news/...ecapitated-outside-crawford-county-courthouse

k8hu3N5.jpg


Yay, good job SJWs, keep fighting the 'Nazis' and the patriarchy!

HN7Osfv.jpg
Click to expand...

Yeah, these rabid AntiFa types just ain't that bright!

MK6gpkx.png


http://www.dailywire.com/news/19861/oops-antifa-protesters-vandalized-peace-monument-emily-zanotti#
 
Freakbro said:
About as bright as the rabid right wingers they are fighting ;)
Click to expand...
Tbf just put the lot of them in a pit and let them fight it out to the death.

Meh Nazi's and the anti fascists are bad as each other. Seems we cannot protest in peace these days without some moron wanting to have a fight.
 
Has this mockery of 'justice' set a precedent? Does this mean somebody can tear down the Mandela statue and dump it in the Thames without fear of recourse?
 
Laws shouldn't just be there to be laws, they should exist to make society better.

Toppling a public statue of a slave trader is unambiguously a good thing. The only bad to come from the act would be if those who provided the service were to be punished.

Ergo, the law applied to punish them would make society worse, and that's not what laws are supposed to do.
 
Tenuous at best. So we just trash what we don't like, where do we draw the line? Can't imagine the pyramids at Giza built themselves for example...
 
SpeedFreak said:
Tenuous at best. So we just trash what we don't like, where do we draw the line? Can't imagine the pyramids at Giza built themselves for example...
Click to expand...
We must now pull down the Egyptian pyramids and all other monuments built using slavery. Pull it all down. Pull down the schools this guy built as well. Any project he contributed money towards, it's tainted now; pull it all down.

All the railways, built using navvies, bulldoze them all.

All the old Roman towns, bulldoze them. It's all got to go!
 
SpeedFreak said:
Tenuous at best. So we just trash what we don't like, where do we draw the line? Can't imagine the pyramids at Giza built themselves for example...
Click to expand...
I don't see how you're equating something incredible that slaves may have built (were they slaves?) with a statue celebrating a man who made his fortune by enslaving people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom