25
   

The Statue Wars Begin

 
 
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 07:31 am
http://abc13.com/2320244/

This is a link to a story about a Christopher Columbus statue getting defaced. I have noticed a spate of news articles about non Civil War statues attacked, since the protesters started in on confederate statues. Even the Lincoln Memorial is not immune.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 25 • Views: 8,108 • Replies: 362

 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 08:06 am
@edgarblythe,
Nobody's immune, even those figures who have supposedly risen above party politics.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/740000/images/_740524_statue300.jpg

Even now it's debatable as to whether those who punked Churchill were attacking an imperialist or claiming a prominent anti fascist as one of their own.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 08:07 am

I would oppose anyone who wished to take down a statue of Washington. As for Lee, Jackson, Beauregard and the rest of those traitors, I'd help to haul them down. They were forsworn of their oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution (much like President Plump, who is forsworn, however, just because he's so stupid). They made war on their own nation to preserve the institution of slavery. They're scum.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 08:27 am
@edgarblythe,
I think its gonna be interesting on Monument Ave in Richmond. Theres such a mix of all kinds of stoshuary an taking out a CSA in between the Washingtons and CHies Tecumseh. Its gonna be noticed. I can see a lot of bromze becoming available for statues ofTrumptydumpty
0 Replies
 
seac
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 12:52 pm
@edgarblythe,
Maybe removing statues have become the new trend for expressing discontent. Who knows what will be next. People are becoming their worst enemies for free speech. Having memorial symbols in public is a form of free speech in my opinion.
centrox
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 01:09 pm
@seac,
seac wrote:

Maybe removing statues have become the new trend for expressing discontent. Who knows what will be next. People are becoming their worst enemies for free speech. Having memorial symbols in public is a form of free speech in my opinion.

There are limits to so-called "free speech" in any societies, even those where it is fetishised. In Austria, Germany, Spain, etc, they have been removing memorials to Hitler and Franco (both dictators). Many people see Confederate monuments, the flag, etc, in a similar light (slavery, ever heard of that?) - not just historically but as a rallying point for murderous domestic terrorism. The "free speech" rights (if there are any) of the pro-statue or monument people have to be balanced against those of the victims, and the benefits to society. This is the type of decision that is frequently made in democratic societies.

maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 01:30 pm
Remember the Alamo? (and should we tear that down?).
centrox
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 01:36 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

Remember the Alamo? (and should we tear that down?).

Yup. Turn it into a mall.
0 Replies
 
seac
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 01:50 pm
@centrox,
Oh boy, remember the Vietnam War? Did we really have to fight in that one? So many memorials on it and what if some group decides it is a disgrace to our country.
Sturgis
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 01:54 pm
...and there goes former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Roger Taney's statue. It has been removed from The Maryland State House.

www.delmarvanow.com/story/news/local/maryland/2017/08/18/roger-b-taney-statue-removed-md-state-house/579188001/


Roger Taney authored the final decision on the Deed Scott v John Sandford.

This was the 1857 ruling that said negroes were not citizens and therefore had no rights to bring a case before the Supreme Court. It should also be noted that the final vote by the Justices was 7-2, so, there should be four more statues that must be removed nationwide.

Also to be noted, by so ruling, The Missouri Compromise was negated.
cameronleon
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 01:55 pm
Removing statues is a way to brainwash people.

In Washington DC we have a Metro Station in the North East side of the city which is called Brookland.

It happens that the whole area is called Brookland, and this is so because the former owner of those lands was Colonel Brooks, who was a slave trader.

Well, remove the name of that zone and call it Boo Coo (tok -the sound) Toomahta, in honor of the slaves brought from Africa.

Lets change names of lands, remove the Colonel Brooks cantina in front of the Brooks mansion which still is in existence... or better, turn down that building as well.

Also, remember that Jews were the greatest slave traders in the US in colonial times, even in the republican era, then, remove their names from historical records as well.

Yes, be part of the idiotic movement which believes that turning down statues will change the ideals of people.

No doubt that liberals are nothing but a herd of stupid people, because they want to destroy the "diversity" of our society.

These liberals want everybody to be gay, to be lunatics and reject their nature of being born males by the feeling that they are women, and other goals that make our society to fall into chaos.

I'm not pro Nazi because such is not a recognized political movement in the US, I'm not pro gay because such is a sexual perversion, I'm not pro hatred because such is what feeds criminal actions in liberals and conservatives.

The best is to base the laws in reasoning with ordered thoughts and with solid facts. If removing statues eliminates the tendency of following a white supremacist sentiment, then such is illegal because people has right to follow their believes as long as their believes are not imposed over others.

When those statues were posted in parks and government sites, I don't think that the intention was to honor slave traders or white supremacists.

Then, these liberals are committing crimes when without the proper permit they are taking the law in their own hands.

The best is to arrest and put in prison to all those people who brake the law with the intention to do harm of private and public property..

The removal of statues by mandate of the government is allowed unless the people opposes to such an action.











0 Replies
 
centrox
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 01:56 pm
@seac,
seac wrote:

Oh boy, remember the Vietnam War? Did we really have to fight in that one? So many memorials on it and what if some group decides it is a disgrace to our country.

You are being deliberately obtuse. Most if not all Confederate memorials were put up decades after the Civil War during the Jim Crow era, and were (and are) prized symbols of white ('cracker') domination. Slavery is too big to brush over. or to be dismissed as a concern of "some group". Nor is far-right domestic terrorism. Anyhow the Confederates who were memorialized were fighting, as rebels and, arguably, traitors, for a racist wannabe state, against the lawful government.
0 Replies
 
centrox
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 01:57 pm
@Sturgis,
Sturgis wrote:
...and there goes former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Roger Taney's statue. It has been removed from The Maryland State House.

Good.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  3  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 02:07 pm
Taney also struck down Lincoln's first emancipation order--talk about fighting in the last ditch.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  4  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 02:13 pm
About a decade ago, City Hall here approved the erection of a series of statues commemorating historical figures of the Southwest. One is an enormous statue of Juan de OƱate, purported to be the largest bronze equestrian statue in the world. People protested the statue seeing as how OƱate was not a progressive kind of conquistador and brutally oppressed the indigenous peoples he conquered, but only managed to get the statue's official unveiling at El Paso International Airport cancelled and name changed from Juan de OƱate to the generic The Equestrian.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSWqGgerdBJO_MbxgA8PLevKjUe5emMSQvLUyX1filp3vBDK2uS
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 02:19 pm
@InfraBlue,
Does that imply that some other conquistador was a progressive kind of conquistador? (You learn something new every day.)
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 02:29 pm
@maxdancona,
not very "conquistadorial" is he?
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 02:57 pm
@maxdancona,
Sure, I don't know of any, however.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 03:01 pm
Should the Vatican change the name Roman Catholicism to Latin Catholicism, since Romans made slaves of all who they conquered? From my background I'm not enamored with anything with the word Roman in it. And that collar that priests wear can become Latin collars. And, since we are erasing "history," we can change history to herstory.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Aug, 2017 03:48 pm
Statues of hate. Let's get those out first. The rest should come on a case by case basis.
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Statue Wars Begin
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/22/2018 at 01:06:34