First it was Confederate monuments - Now it's former president William McKinley

Status
Not open for further replies.
BodyDouble said:
‘To arrive at a just estimate of a renowned man’s character, one must judge it by the standards of his time, not ours.’ ...M. Twain
Click to expand...

Twain was right of course.

The obsession with some of these statues has more to do with moral preening as much as anything.
 
smb said:
I don't have any complaints about statues of William McKinley but then again there is not a huge bronze statue of him in my community either. My point is which you offered no response to is that why does it matter to you? If you don't live in the community then why do you care? Why do you feel you should tell other people in a different community what statues they should or should not maintain? Who they should or should not honor? Quite fucking arrogant of you.
Click to expand...

We have a big statue that most people have no idea who it is. It is one of the few proper statues in my city (actually it is the only one that I know of here). A former long serving mayor I think but could just as easily be Lenin or Col. Sanders. They all kind of looked the same.
 
Kacper said:
We have a big statue that most people have no idea who it is. It is one of the few proper statues in my city (actually it is the only one that I know of here). A former long serving mayor I think but could just as easily be Lenin or Col. Sanders. They all kind of looked the same.
Click to expand...

That’s just it lol.

Nobody paid any attention to them till they were told to.
 
Kacper said:
We have a big statue that most people have no idea who it is. It is one of the few proper statues in my city (actually it is the only one that I know of here). A former long serving mayor I think but could just as easily be Lenin or Col. Sanders. They all kind of looked the same.
Click to expand...
that's most people reaction,but there are those with historical value, or honorarium that are celebrated.

It's the mindless "historical pain" that is stupidly PC driving this
 
Threedee said:
The Confederacy was a degenerate society by both the standards of 1860 and of 2018.
Click to expand...
The Confederacy was an assembly of several states with a goal to live by the laws of their own state and not under the thumb of a federal government. Back then, you were a citizen of your state first and a citizen of the U.S. second. And that sentiment applied to the citizens of all states, both north and south (and west).
 
BodyDouble said:
The Confederacy was an assembly of several states with a goal to live by the laws of their own state and not under the thumb of a federal government. Back then, you were a citizen of your state first and a citizen of the U.S. second. And that sentiment applied to the citizens of all states, both north and south (and west).
Click to expand...

Cool. Neither citizenship nor federal law/policy were the reasons for secession.
 
noise said:
that's most people reaction,but there are those with historical value, or honorarium that are celebrated.

It's the mindless "historical pain" that is stupidly PC driving this
Click to expand...


It's America coming to grips with racism that's driving this
 
smb said:
So what about people deciding for themselves whom to honor and whom not to honor in their own communities makes you uncomfortable? Should you and you alone decide for them who they should honor in their own communities?

Were patriot groups "snowflakes" for tearing down statues of British monarchs?

The notion that people can decide things for themselves must be highly distressful to you heh?
Click to expand...

you mean like owning AR15s?
 
noise said:
I promote realpolitik and historical perspective.
Click to expand...

You constantly say that your defense of CSA monuments is a defense of history, yet say nothing about how every apology of the CSA is a deliberate attempt to distort history. Everytime someone claims the south seceded over tariffs, federal overreach, etc., they are lying and attempting to mislead people into accepting a false history. But tearing down monuments to our enemies is what you have a problem with.
 
Threedee said:
You constantly say that your defense of CSA monuments is a defense of history, yet say nothing about how every apology of the CSA is a deliberate attempt to distort history. Everytime someone claims the south seceded over tariffs, federal overreach, etc., they are lying and attempting to mislead people into accepting a false history. But tearing down monuments to our enemies is what you have a problem with.
Click to expand...

There are a myriad of reasons for the secession -you know this. The primary mover was slavery but it wasn't the sole factor.
I defend statues of soldiers in battle -and recall Congress allowed the CSA to be considered veterans for purposes of grave tendering.

I do not defend the antebellum south, or the reasons for secession.
My concern is historical rembrance for the brave and honorable on both sides, and battle markers themselves.

which is why I always promote a historical commission to make these decisions, not done in the heat of passion in the middle of the night
 
noise said:
No other city has taken down a monument to a president for his misdeeds. But Arcata is poised to do just that. The target is an 8½-foot bronze likeness of William McKinley, who was president at the turn of the last century and stands accused of directing the slaughter of Native peoples in the U.S. and abroad.

"Put a rope around its neck and pull it down," Chris Peters shouted at a recent rally held at the statue, which has adorned the central square for more than a century.

Peters, who heads the Arcata-based Seventh Generation Fund for Indigenous People, called McKinley a proponent of "settler colonialism" that "savaged, raped and killed."

A presidential statue would be the most significant casualty in an emerging movement to remove monuments honoring people who helped lead what Native groups describe as a centuries-long war against their very existence.



The push follows the rapid fall of Confederate memorials across the South in a victory for activists who view them as celebrating slavery. In the nearly eight months since white supremacists marched in central Virginia to protest the removal of a Robert E. Lee statue, cities across the country have yanked dozens of Confederate monuments. Black politicians and activists have been among the strongest supporters of the removals.

This time, it's tribal activists taking charge, and it's the West and California in particular leading the way. The state is home to the largest Native American population in the country and more than 100 federally recognized tribes.

In February, San Francisco officials said they planned to remove a prominent downtown monument depicting a defeated Native American at the feet of a vaquero and a Spanish missionary. In March, the San Jose City Council booted a statue of Christopher Columbus from the lobby of City Hall.

Other states are joining the movement. The city of Kalamazoo, Mich., said last month it would take down a park monument of a Native American in a headdress kneeling before a westward-facing pioneer. In Alcalde, N.M., and El Paso, statues of the conquistador Juan de Oñate have become subjects of renewed debate.

In Baltimore, a city councilman has vowed to replace a smashed Columbus monument with something that better reflects "current-day values."

In Arcata, a city of about 17,000 about two hours south of the Oregon state line, a long-simmering debate over McKinley caught fire after Charlottesville. Area tribes and activists launched a petition campaign and descended on City Hall. The protesters said they couldn't watch Confederate monuments fall without thinking of their own statue.

By the winter, the plaza played host to regular protests. McKinley became a symbol of Arcata's sins against Natives and, by extension, other races too, forcing the city to confront some of its embarrassing history. In 1886, for example, Arcata passed a law calling for the "total expulsion of the Chinese."

Is there a difference between honoring McKinley and Robert E. Lee?" the mayor, Sofia Pereira, who was part the majority, said in a recent interview. "They both represent historical pain."

The land that is now Arcata was once inhabited by the Wiyot Tribe. Then in the 1850s the logging boom began — and pioneers seeking wealth began rapidly grabbing tribal lands. In 1860, settlers massacred dozens of Wiyots, whom tribe members still mourn today. Wiyot children were commonly abducted and forced into servitude.

McKinley, a Republican who was president from 1897 until his assassination in 1901, never set foot in the region. But after his death dozens of memorials to him popped up across the nation.

In Honolulu, there's McKinley High School. In Philadelphia, a McKinley statue stands in front of City Hall. Chicago has McKinley Park neighborhood, with a statue of the president at the entrance to its main park.

McKinley fought for the Union in the Civil War. LaRue also pointed out that McKinley defied the norms of his time in appointing several African Americans to federal posts.

"Certainly by today's standards, he had different ways of looking at things," he said. "But looking at Abraham Lincoln by today's standards, you could also say he was a horrible racist."

The debate has also divided families.

Former Arcata Mayor Bob Ornelas, who has lived in the city since 1979, said tearing down McKinley would take away from the city's culture. He said he couldn't imagine the square, home to the Saturday farmers market and nearly every major city festival, without the McKinley statue there.



Other monuments protested by Native peoples are also getting private caretakers. The Columbus statue in San Jose was moved to the hall of the Italian American Heritage Foundation, where the group said it will be enclosed as protection from vandalism.

In San Francisco, the city has considered moving the "Early Days" statue to a museum, though a legal challenge has kept it up for the time being.

Another Columbus statue — the most widely seen in the world — appears to be staying put. It stands 76 feet high at the center of Columbus Circle in Manhattan.

After the Charlottesville violence, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio vowed to examine all "symbols of hate." While the city decided Columbus would stay, the mayor promised "new historical markers" near the monument to contextualize it as well as a new monument honoring "indigenous peoples."

Pereira, the Arcata mayor, said simply adding context to the McKinley monument would amount to too little, too late.

"I would not try to guess or tell other cities what to do," she said. "If you think of presidents of our country, I don't think people would even know who McKinley is. But we do. And here, we want to set the right example."
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-native-american-statue-removal-20180401-story.html
Click to expand...

I think all cities starting with "San" should immediately change their names as no city should be named after any religions Saint.

Or if you prefer, it is appropriation of the word for bushmen in southern Africa.

Either way. San Fran and San Jose (plus a few thousand others) have got to be changed!!!
 
noise said:
the statue itself isn't that important except it's not the only one that's targeted.
If you read the article there are others, there is the war on Christopher Columbus,and there is the Jefferson statue at Hofstra. Now are you concerned? It's obvious the PC/far/whack-a-doodle left agenda is to whitewash selected parts of history that cause them "historical pain".

Americans don't do markers or statues anymore because we don't produce notables, but also because we have no sense of the continuum of the county. We live/ponder in the moment of Tweets and iphones.

You Stalinesque memories of statutes should not color your evaluation of the the historical perspective here.
Click to expand...

You need to try tearing down the statue of one of his icons. Perhaps Che Guevara... then he would lose his shit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top