There is no such memorial. There’s a sculpture – a sculpture in a museum is not a “memorial”.
When racists renounce their racism, that should be celebrated. That’s a great and positive thing.
Feel free to make arguments that these should be taken down – we’ll happily listen.
Could we have your whole list, please? I’d rather not spend the next few pages on a “Well, what about this, and what about this, and what about this?” diversion every third or fourth post instead of an actual discussion.
That’s not a memorial, it’s a statue in a museum. No one has been trying to remove museum pieces from museums. Also even if it was a memorial to her, it would need to be a memorial specifically celebrating her racist work put in place by people who wanted to continue her racist work to be remotely similar to memorials of Confederates put in place by Jim Crow supporters and Civil Rights opponents.
That’s a privately owned statue on private property, not a public memorial paid for and maintained with state money and placed onto property that handles government functions. So not remotely similar. Also the irony of defending a statue of Lenin because it’s privately owned and on private property and doesn’t involve state money is incredibly wonderful.
I skipped the other examples because I didn’t recognize what you were talking about at a glance and I’m not interested in the game of ‘research it, then have the poster either ignore the response or claim he was talking about something else’.
Those people were not losers. Granted, Ernesto had an early, violent end, but he was on the side that won in Cuba.
So here’s my question then:
How do you remove “white privilege” without lowering a white person beneath a non-white person? How do you equalize the scale without making one person be ahead of the other?
Like in all honesty, how do you want to solve these problems?
Because I am guilty of original sin…If I apply for a job, should a non-white person who is less qualified (in terms of experience) get it instead of me to pay for my white privilege?
Should I pay more in taxes simply because I’m white?
These are serious questions, because:
What I see from every person who pushes white privilege are criticisms of institutional racism, criticisms of Capitalist society, telling people that white privilege should be “acknowledged” by whites.
Okay, fine, but acknowledgment alone wouldn’t solve these problems (you can say they help, but is me acknowledging white privilege going to stop a cop in the South from shooting a black person? No). So what would?
What are the goals and the endgame?
It’s hard to hand wave away this:
“I shall never fight in the armed forces with a negro by my side … Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.”
My question is why they are there in the first place. Because some “artist” decided to make some sort of bizarre statement? Not a good reason.
You don’t know who Che Guevera or Robert Byrd were?
You don’t believe a person can change with time and grow to overcome who they were in the past?
Look at Lyndon Johnson. Lyndon Johnson was, in his own words, insensitive as a young man to racism, because growing up in the South, he perceived it as simply the natural order of things. And then when he became President he became the most aggressive proponent of Civil Rights to ever occupy the Oval Office.
Or look at even a figure like Nathaniel Bedford Forest. Founded the original Klan, became disgusted with their violence, publicly disavowed them, abolished it, and:
In July 1875, Forrest demonstrated that his personal sentiments on the issue of race now differed from those of the Klan, when he was invited to give a speech before an organization of black Southerners advocating racial reconciliation, called the Independent Order of Pole-Bearers Association. At this, his last public appearance, he made what the New York Times described as a “friendly speech” during which, when offered a bouquet of flowers by a black woman, he accepted them as a token of reconciliation between the races and espoused a radical agenda (for the time) of equality and harmony between black and white Americans His speech was as follows:
**Ladies and Gentlemen I accept the flowers as a memento of reconciliation between the white and colored races of the southern states. I accept it more particularly as it comes from a colored lady, for if there is any one on God’s earth who loves the ladies I believe it is myself. (Immense applause and laughter.) This day is a day that is proud to me, having occupied the position that I did for the past twelve years, and been misunderstood by your race. This is the first opportunity I have had during that time to say that I am your friend. I am here a representative of the southern people, one more slandered and maligned than any man in the nation.
I will say to you and to the colored race that men who bore arms and followed the flag of the Confederacy are, with very few exceptions, your friends. I have an opportunity of saying what I have always felt – that I am your friend, for my interests are your interests, and your interests are my interests. We were born on the same soil, breathe the same air, and live in the same land. Why, then, can we not live as brothers? I will say that when the war broke out I felt it my duty to stand by my people. When the time came I did the best I could, and I don’t believe I flickered. I came here with the jeers of some white people, who think that I am doing wrong. I believe that I can exert some influence, and do much to assist the people in strengthening fraternal relations, and shall do all in my power to bring about peace. It has always been my motto to elevate every man- to depress none. (Applause.) I want to elevate you to take positions in law offices, in stores, on farms, and wherever you are capable of going.
I have not said anything about politics today. I don’t propose to say anything about politics. You have a right to elect whom you please; vote for the man you think best, and I think, when that is done, that you and I are freemen. Do as you consider right and honest in electing men for office. I did not come here to make you a long speech, although invited to do so by you. I am not much of a speaker, and my business prevented me from preparing myself. I came to meet you as friends, and welcome you to the white people. I want you to come nearer to us. When I can serve you I will do so. We have but one flag, one country; let us stand together. We may differ in color, but not in sentiment. Use your best judgment in selecting men for office and vote as you think right.
Many things have been said about me which are wrong, and which white and black persons here, who stood by me through the war, can contradict. I have been in the heat of battle when colored men, asked me to protect them. I have placed myself between them and the bullets of my men, and told them they should be kept unharmed. Go to work, be industrious, live honestly and act truly, and when you are oppressed I’ll come to your relief. I thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for this opportunity you have afforded me to be with you, and to assure you that I am with you in heart and in hand" (Prolonged applause.)
**
He also publicly volunteered "to exterminate the white marauders who disgrace their race by this cowardly murder of Negroes".**
I don’t know what the specific things you’re calling monuments to them are or the history of those particular things and their installation. The fact that you decided not to provide any substantive discussion on the ones I did address specifically and instead decided to pretend that my refusal to play a guessing game means I’m ignorant of prominent historical figures shows that I made the right decision.
What does any of this have to do with taking down racist monuments? Start a new thread on the topic if you want to discuss that, but since no one talked about removing “white privilege” in this thread but you it doesn’t make any sense to ask the question here.
Do you? Byrd renounced his racist past and where is the Guevara statue? If it’s on punlic land, I’m fine with having a discussion of taking it down. I can only assume the American landscape is dotted with thousands upon thousands of Guevara statues for you to equate it with all of the Confederate statues on public land in the US. I can’t believe that I’ve missed them.
Did you read the Byrd quote? Why does it need any “discussion”? He was vile.
It’s in Central Park.
Wait, there’s just one? From the way you went on, I assumed there were thousands and that entire highways were named after him. But what is your point in bringing up one statue in a thread about a network of thousands of statues put up as a conscious effort to rewrite history?
One statue? Ok, so start a thread about taking it down.
“Che” Guevara’s Statue in Central Park
So it’s not actually a statue honoring Che and erected by the city.
The author takes a different view but if it is artwork, then it seems that free speech applies.
As for Byrd, he joined the Klan in his early 20s, dropped out a few years later and thoroughly renounced his time as a member and the Klan as a group.
Key word being “was”. He got better.
Shall we hold you accountable the rest of your life for every single dumb thing you said when you were young, even if it no longer reflects who you are at all?
I actually think that Reddy Mercury has been much more honest about his opposition to the statues coming down than a lot of other dopers. He’s essentially saying that these statues are part of a system of institutionalized racism that keeps whites on top and that he benefits from it and that he worries about how ending that system will negatively impact him. He doesn’t pretend that his opposition is not based on being opposed to leveling the playing field.
Well, we could start, for example, by taking down statues that were erected specifically to honor leaders who committed treason against their government in defense of the practice of white people literally enslaving non-white people.
Statues that were advocated and chosen by white people, frequently in jurisdictions where non-white people were illegally prevented from voting, specifically to send the message that white people are determined to keep non-white people beneath them indefinitely.
I mean, those Confederacy-glorifying Jim-Crow-era statues are in a very literal sense monuments to white privilege. How does their removal in any way “lower a white person beneath a non-white person”?
[QUOTE=Reddy Mercury]
Okay, fine, but acknowledgment alone wouldn’t solve these problems (you can say they help, but is me acknowledging white privilege going to stop a cop in the South from shooting a black person? No).
[/QUOTE]
Not immediately, no. But you acknowledging white privilege, and declaring that white privilege is contributing to the problem of racism in policing, and going to Black Lives Matter protests to stand up against racism in policing, and persuading your white friends and family to do the same, who then persuade their white friends and family to do the same, until a large swathe of white America is mobilized against racism in policing and police departments across the country start having to pay some real attention to police/community relations and counteracting racial bias in police training, probably ultimately would stop a cop in the South from shooting a black person.
No, of course you can’t solve systemic societal racial problems all by yourself or all at once. But you sure as hell can do something about them that’s a bit more constructive than just sitting on your ass whining about how unfair it is that you personally occasionally catch some of the flak directed at white people as a group for the existence and persistence of systemic social racial problems.
Actually I have stated numerous times I am opposed to Confederate statues being in place; and I feel they should never have been put up. We do not have statues to Benedict Arnold, and the Confederates are in the same category. As far as I know, we also do not have statues of King George III.
Whites in general as a broad group benefit from it. I do not feel I personally in my life have. What I am opposed to is paying for the sins of others. I have absolutely no objection to statues of Confederates coming down. My worry is simply that it will be a slippery slope from there.
I have no problem with leveling the playing field. What I am opposed to is leveling the playing field by moving one race down so that another may come up. Why not lift the race below to me to the same level as me? That would be leveling the playing field in a fair and just fashion. Is that so hard?
And it’s not even there anymore. (2009)
So it might not have been a statue of Che anyways.