Certainly there are enough prominent evangelicals who say that because a baker might have to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, next thing will be the outlawing of Christianity.
Now them’s fightin’ words, bucko! 
If we leave both of the rider’s legs in place, then we’ll be giving them twice as much honor as we give to Benedict Arnold.
Montreal does have a history of strong Confederate support, and there’s a good argument for keeping the people there today aware of it.
I thought that was pretty clear. Collectively would be the government elected by the people. So, I’m not sure why you thought I’d have a problem with cities, counties or state or even federal government removing statues. That’s exactly what I’m advocating for.
As I pointed out to monstro, I don’t really care how they were put up…I care how we handle removing them at this stage. I think they should be removed by and at the will of the people using the democratic process to determine that this is what the majority want (I think it is, as can be seen by the number of state and local governments doing it), not at the whim of some angry people deciding to take it on themselves. I’m unsure why my position on this is that controversial or being argued against so forcefully. This is pretty much my default stance on everything…we have a government and a democracy for just this sort of thing. If the democratic process is broken as one poster asserted up thread, then THAT is a more serious issue that should be addressed first. Those statues have been there for a while now…they will keep until we get our collective shit together to decide what we, as a society, want to do about them. They don’t have to come down today…tomorrow would be good too. Or next week, or even next year.
Through the democratic process, that’s how. By changing the attitudes and view point of the majority and showing how morally bankrupt those earlier stances really were. By guys like me seeing on TV black students being attacked by dogs and water jets while trying to go to school and saying, that ain’t right. Again, I’m not saying do nothing. I’m saying work within the system. Going out with a mob to topple some statues by fiat isn’t going to change anything…it’s just going to make people mad and more entrenched and ramp up the violence on both sides. Electing officials who will simply send some government workers out to take them down still get them taken down without all of the potentials for conflict and confrontation.
And in less than 100 years of 1895, all those laws had been overturned. Didn’t do much for those black people living in 1860 or even 1920, but their descendants have it better than they did. While this is still a huge issue that needs to be addressed, it is better. In my lifetime it’s changed a lot, and I expect those changes to continue.
I never said progress happened on its own. I have no problem with people protesting or advocating for change. I have a problem when people take it upon themselves by fiat to do something that should be done collectively, through our system, as I think that their actions are counterproductive in the long term. What gets stuff done is changing attitudes of people, getting them to see the issues, and getting them to vote in people who will actually try to change. I see that as happening in this case…cities, counties, state governments and the like are taking steps to bring those monuments down in a lot of cases. That is progress. What I think is that those racist groups see the handwriting on the wall and are in their last gasp of trying to change the tide of history. But, like a certain king, you can’t just walk out into the surf and change the tide…it’s going to roll right over you. Just like it rolled right over all those folks who tried to stand in the way of the civil rights movement, and those who have tried to stand in the way to block gay marriage. Oh, they have some victories, but the wars have been or will be lost by those racist types, in the end.
I hate to be so blunt but losers don’t get to have that sort of pride. They’re supposed to learn that they were on the wrong side of an issue and move on. They’re not supposed to keep passing on their poisonous beliefs to subsequent generations. It’s been 150+ fucking years already. They lost; their cause was unjust; they don’t get to rub it in the faces of those they would have kept as slaves by keeping monuments to men who defended the unjustifiable.
The NY Review of Books has ungated this great McPherson essay:Southern Comfort.
I think all statues should be replaced with the Greendale Human Being. No race, no sex, no agenda. Just a human being.
As repugnant as these statues are, what is the argument for tearing them down while also being upset over ISIS tearing down ancient Mesopotamian statues? As monotheists, they find Pagan statues just as repugnant as we find Confederate monuments. How does one justify outrage over both situations?
Not defending either one, but I want my moral indignation to be consistent.
We’ll, let’s see, they are not being blown up to smithereens, they are being removed, possibly relocated onto private land. The people of the nation want them gone, not some imposed junta, and they are mostly from the 20th century, not several hundred years old.
So, there’s that.
I’m not upset over ISIS tearing down statues. I save my outrage for the violence they inflict on people.
A large number of confederate statues were mass-produced and mail-ordered from the North during the Jim Crow era. Shoddily mass-produced, I should add, which is why they topple over so easily. I don’t know if you can compare a bunch of catalog statues to ancient Mesopotamia.
Even better, he wants to have Jackson Park repurposed to honor, wait for it, Michael Jackson. There are not enough roll eyes for that one.
Use the horses to made a merry go round .
I’m more than a bit distressed when they destroy cultural heritage sites. Bad enough when they loot them, but the wanton destruction definitely tweaks my outrage meter. Not that I’m downplaying their violence either…it’s kind of a package deal.
I’m not that sentimental, I guess.
I also think there is a big difference between ioutsiders destroying ancient artifacts and communities destroying something in their own public square that was installed not that long ago, possibly even within living memory. There’s also a difference between destroying something out of religious chauvinism and destroying something that glorifies oppression and treason.
I don’t understand why these nuances are so crystal clear to me, but caligulathegod doesn’t seem to see them.
At any rate, I haven’t see a whole lot of people seriously talking about destroying anything.
I don’t think the situations are really analogous…was just commenting that I think the cultural destruction by ISIS definitely warrants some outrage. They have destroyed ancient sites that were there for thousands of years and removed that from our collective common human history forever.
I think wrt the OP, the difference between me and most arguing in this thread is simply that I’m not good with a mob doing the destruction by fiat…I think that should be up to the people to decide collectively, not up to some folks taking it on themselves to do it. I think that such a stance by seeming the majority in this thread is short sighted, as I can see where, if another group wanted to take it on themselves to destroy stuff that many wouldn’t be nearly so keen to handwave it down. But at the core, I am probably in agreement with most that many of those monuments and statues should come down. It’s the details where we seem to differ, not the root.
Some are being pulled down by mobs, but that’s a distinction that does not really matter. The statues are being removed in both cases is the point. We can’t assume there aren’t locals that want the Mesopotamian statues gone. They *are * Muslim and opposed to idolatry and paganism on general principle. ISIS just has the power and motivation to actually do it. Is the time factor enough?
Me too, but I was saddened by the loss of ancient culture.
Perhaps, but the idea is still the same. The respective statues represent what is ultimately History but for the ones that live there they represent a questionable past.
One argument I came up with was dependent on projection. Was the purpose of the Confederate statuary to honor a past glory or was it to intimidate certain citizens? I’m sure some might, but that’s a hard one to prove. Yes, they lost and it seems to odd to honor that past, but some Middle-Eastern cultures are based upon the same veneration of loss. They honor having stood up to their enemies.
And people who feel this way are free to erect their own monuments on their own property. No one is saying that people can’t have controversial monuments.
But if I’m paying money to support my government like a good citizen, I’d like to be able to walk past city hall without seeing artistic expressions that strike me as politically and culturally offensive. If the government wants to sponsor an exhibit showcasing provocative art, I’m fine with that. But in such a case, it should open the doors to all expressions, not just the ones that speak from a certain political view. And none of those expressions should be made into permanent fixtures.
Religious chauvinism? Maybe you don’t realize how seriously Islam take the concept of monotheism vs polytheism. This isn’t a Sprinkle vs Dunk argument. To them, the pagan statues represent something just as repugnant as the Confederates are to us.
Are the ones tearing down the statues in the South locals? Some are, but some aren’t. ISIS has locals in its membership.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m for taking down the monuments, but I’m not sure if my personal feelings are justification, and I see the parallel with the ISIS situation. It all depends on context. If the statues are genuinely historical, then they might have a right to stay. If they are put up to intimidate or specifically to represent the worst aspects of the Southern cause (Like flying Confederate Flags have become, culturally), that’s something else. For instance, the 10 Commandments monuments. Those are never there to honor the concept of Law. They are put up to stake claim as religious monuments. They should not be on public property. On the Supreme Court building, I think there’s a Moses tableau. That makes sense in the context.