Erasing history...
- Thread starter Gilligan
- Start date
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
they aren't all of a sudden a problem. They were a problem when they were erected, and the one in question has been moved (because it was a problem) more than once. The difference is that the popular opinion is strong enough to have them completely removed now.
it happens all the time, and sometimes there isn't even a vote on it.......
https://www.propublica.org/images/ngen/gypsy_big_image/gt_saddam_statue_toppling_630x420_101228.jpg
PsyOps
Pixelated
Hmmm... I'm 55 years old and I don't recall any of these monuments being removed until recent couple of years.
But I still want to know what people like you expect out of this? Do you think racism will suddenly come to an end? Or are we just aimed at answering to those who get offended with these thing? Because, if that's the case, we better be ready to remove the all-offensive-and-racist American flag.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
You think those monuments are being removed against the popular will of the locals?
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
This was a monument to white supremacy. no one said removing it will end racism. It will just remove a monument to an ideal that does not represent the people of NO any longer. it is their right to do so.
read the history of the liberty place monument. it has been at issue since it was erected. If a majority in our country want to change the flag, that's what we should do. But that's not the case
Of course not. I'm always stupid that way.
http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/04/confederate_monuments.html
Restitution
New Member
How in the hell is history in a state of change? Have you, or someone you know, perfected time travel?
History, by it's very definition, already happened bozo! There is no "change" that can occur.
Well it was a post by Tommy, so.... :shakesheadsadly:
Larry Gude
Strung Out
I think there are a few actual bigots on here. Gill, in my view, is not one of them. I think bigot also has nothing to do with skin color. In this case, reaction to the monuments is, I think, a normal reaction to a sense of loss of something that has nothing to do with skin color. The South, the war, was primarily about slavery but it was not ALL about slavery. Is Chicago all about murder? Is DC solely about gummint? Further, some of the most bigoted places on the planet were and still are NYC and Boston in a lot of respects. So, this can not, should not be reduced down to simple bigotry. McClellan was a white supremacist. So was Sherman and Grant. Most abolitionists were, in fact, white supremacists. They just happened to oppose slavery. Do we toss all of that out or look at the larger picture?
Should Malcolm X be sum total a racist? Or Davis? Or Lee? Or Robert Byrd?
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Larry Gude
Strung Out
History is written by the victors. By that measure, history is constantly in a state of change as time marches on, passions cool, objectivity does it's slow, inexorable job of leveling propaganda. There is no better example of this than our Civil war as this threat illustrates.
An interesting question. Given those opposition numbers, you would certainly think so. But people have such short political memories...
History is written by the victors. By that measure, history is constantly in a state of change as time marches on, passions cool, objectivity does it's slow, inexorable job of leveling propaganda. There is no better example of this than our Civil war as this threat illustrates.
History does not change. What always changes is how much we know about it and how we view it or interpret it. That is the underlying fundamental reason why I keep purchasing and reading new books written about subjects I've already read a dozen past books on.
But I remain steadfastly opposed to the PC police, or anyone else, erasing history.
Last edited:
Larry Gude
Strung Out
As a philosophical question, doesn't the liberty monument serve the purpose as a reminder of what people, most people, used to believe? I'm sensitive to the piling on happening to white southern heritage because of how similar most of white northern heritage was. And still is.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
a monument to white supremacy placed by racists as an FU to blacks and the federal govenremnt. thats what this is about. This monument in particular is all about racism and defending keeping this monumnet says a lot about the person fighting for it. Gill has shown time and again that he is a bigot. They do come in all colors, and we shouldn't have monuments to any of them.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
History changes all the time. We think of an debate and understand history in human context therefore, like us, it evolves.
Fro example; what was the first major battle in the North: First Manassas or Bull Run? Why? What happened? Who 'won'?
History does not change. What always changes is how much we know about it and how we view it.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
do you need a monument to it to know that?
Larry Gude
Strung Out
What about Malcolm X? Should he be washed away? Robert Byrd? LBJ was a notorious bigot. Some credit him with helping blacks finally attain full civil rights. Don't we WANT history as a teacher, warts and all?
Jefferson Davis, in many respects, was one of the most pure public servants one could ever wish for. Hos vote was not for sale and he would not make back scratching deals. He wanted any proposal to rise or fall on it's own merits. He was a man of enormous integrity and dignity and respect for others. Yet he was a white supremacist who believed, firmly, blacks were genetically inferior.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
I don't. My kids kids might. I oppose ALL censorship. This doesn't mean the klan deserves their own monument on the mall in DC but they ought to be part of any decent curriculum, including it's founder, Nathan Bedford Forrest, and the man who disbanded it as an evil.
Nathan Bedford Forrest.