Can you explain how removing a statue that honors a traitor rewrites history?
That’s kind of a loaded question, isn’t it?
I didn’t refer to any category of persons in my statement, which was not about any particular thing. I’m really not a big fan of any public statues, in any case, which are generally a dated gesture and less interesting than other public art. I don’t think there should be statues of pretty good people, much less “traitors”. The problem is there is not always broad agreements on labels. I can come up with a list of people I don’t think deserve honours. So can you or anyone. There should be some minimum level of dissatisfaction required before making changes.
I’d say that there has been a substantial amount of dissatisfaction shown regarding the statues honoring the racism and traitorousness of racist traitors.
That’s fair. Ok, how does removing any statue anywhere rewrite history? And if you didn’t mean statues, how does removing any public display of anything rewrite history?
History is always told with a certain bias. And people tend to judge history based on contemporary values.
In Canada, the first Prime Minister skillfully united various disparate groups (with different cultures and languages) without a Civil War. He was a successful Attorney General for decades and helped build an important railway from coast to coast. He was grouchy, drank too much and had a condescending opinion of Aboriginals which had real, regrettable and far-reaching consequences. Yet he played a large role in forging a nation. There has been some call to change the names of buildings and remove statues and other public things. Doing so would not really right any wrongs (nor “rewrite history”, which I agree is a poor term). Better (in my opinion) to show a more realistic determination of the person including the accomplishments and the flaws and take more meaningful actions to reflect needed changes. I have no experience with many of the recent American examples. Obviously, if the flaws outweigh the accomplishments many people would support changes.
I do support war memorials that honour a group of individuals and prefer this approach to a statue honouring one person.
How about this idea!
Save all the statues instead of pulling them down. Place them instead in a lovely, gated garden. The arch over the gate could be labeled with somerhing poetic, something heartfelt, like “History’s Assholes.”
~VOW
You mean like this:
I know you’re joking here, but I keep hearing people float the idea that all these statutes should be moved to one place. The idea being that they’re out of sight and out of mind, but still available for those that want to see them.
Personally, I’m not a fan of that idea. Right now you have a random statue in this town, a random statue in that town, the locals see them and don’t think much of them after a while.
If all those statues are in one place, I feel like it would be come a mecca. I can’t put my finger on it, but it seems like people planning their vacations around going to see all these statues wouldn’t be a good thing.
Group A vandalizes statues because they are symbols of racism and white supremacy.
Group B vandalizes statues because they are racists all in favor of white supremacy.
I can think of why I might oppose one or the other…
I don’t pretend to have the answers.
Many statues were put up with public money and considerable support. I think to be taken down, a certain number of people should agree. A process whereby a very small group of people decide to take down a statue for their own vanity/ social recognition/ selfies/ publicity/etc. is not an ideal process. There is a case to be made for removing sufficiently controversial statues. Updating the plaque might be a better starting point.
I don’t think Dr_Paprika answered this question.
In Germany there are zero statues of Hitler or any other leaders of the third reich.
I still seem to recall the events that transpired.
I acknowledged “rewriting history” was a bad choice of words. Without making the usual comments on Internet analogies to despots, when I went to Berlin there were plenty of other regrettable monuments to that particular person.
Plenty of art honours (for example) notable Ancient Greeks and Romans who had questionable mores but arouse less passion.
This is not, personally, a topic of great importance to me. Forgive me if I decline further comment.
A Black Lives Matter mural was defaced in Martinez, California, just after it was painted.
Folks applied for a permit and were approved by the city. They painted a BLM slogan in the street. Less than an hour after they finished, some white Trump supporters were out there painting over it with black paint. That’s right, the Trump supporters were vandalizing the city approved art.
So, will Trump be pushing for them to go to prison for 10 years?
Will octopus come here and lament the lawlessness of the Trumpers?
No you can’t. That’s why explicitly condoning mob violence for personal or political gain is so problematic.
They were swiftly caught and charged with three crimes including a ridiculous charge. When Antifa, blm, and other lawless groups get arrested, charged and go to trial than I’ll worry about one couple painting over two letters.
Cite?
As far as I know, the police are still looking for the suspects, 2 days later. . .
Group A is opposed to honoring slavery.
Group B is in favor of honoring slavery.
I don’t see any reason to pretend these two positions are equal.
Group A is right and Group B is wrong.
Sure.
Now if only municipalities cared that much for 8 year old children, businesses and retired police.
That’s not an accurate description of group a or b.
Put them all in one place, then publicize the names and hometowns of every single mother-fucker that goes to see them. That would take care of the worshippers real damn quick.