More Traitor Monuments .....Gone

^ the argument is some were put up with pure racist intent. I wish I could find the pair i was alluding to -
but there was no historical reason for them to be there. They were simply intended to offend.

On the other hand many are specific to time and place,or generalized memorials by favorite sons -
that sort of thing and should stay.
 
Well Done Memphis!:good4u:

img_1022.jpg
 
sear said:
I have some sympathy with those that object to these monuments.

But it's an immediate introduction to Sorites Paradox. Where do we draw the line? You want Robert E. Lee out? Fine. How about Thomas Jefferson?

In retrospect I'd have vastly preferred tasteful historic explanations in the motif of the statue they address, explaining our history. Hoisting the statue away with a crane doesn't undo the history. It merely burns the history book; an EXCEEDINGLY bad idea.

The cautionary tale such statues recount is far more valuable than any pain they can impart. Anyone old enough to have suffered Robert E. Lee's world-view is too badly decomposed today to fret about a statue. To the contrary, protestors can loiter at these monuments, and pray that massive flocks of diuretic birds will swarm them, and deposit rich, fast-growing layers of guano for future generations to enjoy.
Click to expand...


when you say "Hoisting the statue away with a crane doesn't undo the history. It merely burns the history book" your comment is unbelievably stupid racist. When you get that people of color shouldnt have to go out of there way to spit on a monument things might start to change in this country.
 
I feel sorry for people triggered so badly by Trump winning that they resorted to lashing out at historical statues.

I thank my God every day that my self respect for myself, for others, and for the serenity to be enough in my own skin that I can separate anger from stupidity.
 
"when you say "Hoisting the statue away with a crane doesn't undo the history. It merely burns the history book" your comment is unbelievably stupid racist." k #63
Click to expand...
Yes!
Of course you are completely right, and I'm completely wrong.
Thank god we have such insuperable champions of wisdom and rectitude that simple feeble name-calling can soothe the ills of centuries! You'll probably get lots of Nobel prizes now, because you're so superior to everyone.
"When you get that people of color shouldnt have to go out of there way to spit on a monument things might start to change in this country." k #63
Click to expand...
Did you know there are monuments to MLK too? Should we hoist them away with cranes as well?
Or do you prefer to portray such champions of humanity as irritable troublemakers by making public their actions, but keeping secret the context within which they battled?
 
evince said:
seems having these statues didnt make you idiots remember the history that created them


so who needs them
Click to expand...
Hello evince,

I fully know the history behind them, and whether you agree with all of the reasons behind the south, and the civil war or not, those people had those statues erected. Now, if you say that a referendum was taken, and the citizens of these places voted to remove them, then fine. But, don't give me the tyranny of the minority crap, and how we must tear out monuments based on feelings please.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
 
j-mac said:
Hello evince,

I fully know the history behind them, and whether you agree with all of the reasons behind the south, and the civil war or not, those people had those statues erected. Now, if you say that a referendum was taken, and the citizens of these places voted to remove them, then fine. But, don't give me the tyranny of the minority crap, and how we must tear out monuments based on feelings please.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Oh brother not another right wing neoconfederate.
 
sear said:
I have some sympathy with those that object to these monuments.

But it's an immediate introduction to Sorites Paradox. Where do we draw the line? You want Robert E. Lee out? Fine. How about Thomas Jefferson?

In retrospect I'd have vastly preferred tasteful historic explanations in the motif of the statue they address, explaining our history. Hoisting the statue away with a crane doesn't undo the history. It merely burns the history book; an EXCEEDINGLY bad idea.

The cautionary tale such statues recount is far more valuable than any pain they can impart. Anyone old enough to have suffered Robert E. Lee's world-view is too badly decomposed today to fret about a statue. To the contrary, protestors can loiter at these monuments, and pray that massive flocks of diuretic birds will swarm them, and deposit rich, fast-growing layers of guano for future generations to enjoy.
Click to expand...

I disagree that it's a slippery slope issue. It's fairly cut and dried. Take a statue that reveres someone, and if it is of a guy who is a traitor to the USA it goes, if not, it stays. If it is a statue of a traitor and it shows the person looking ignoble and cowardly and has
verbiage stating, that "this scoundrels shallbe eternally pilloried in effigy, confederate scum" then it can stay.

Not hard to apply at all.

So Lee goes and Jefferson stays. Simple. Lincoln stays and Davis goes, simple. MLK stays and David Duke goes. simple.
 
sear said:
Yes!
Of course you are completely right, and I'm completely wrong.
Thank god we have such insuperable champions of wisdom and rectitude that simple feeble name-calling can soothe the ills of centuries! You'll probably get lots of Nobel prizes now, because you're so superior to everyone.

Did you know there are monuments to MLK too? Should we hoist them away with cranes as well?
Or do you prefer to portray such champions of humanity as irritable troublemakers by making public their actions, but keeping secret the context within which they battled?
Click to expand...


I quote Micawber..."I disagree that it's a slippery slope issue. It's fairly cut and dried. Take a statue that reveres someone, and if it is of a guy who is a traitor to the USA it goes, if not, it stays. If it is a statue of a traitor and it shows the person looking ignoble and cowardly and has
verbiage stating, that "this scoundrels shallbe eternally pilloried in effigy, confederate scum" then it can stay.

Not hard to apply at all.

So Lee goes and Jefferson stays. Simple. Lincoln stays and Davis goes, simple. MLK stays and David Duke goes. simple."
 
katzgar said:
I quote Micawber..."I disagree that it's a slippery slope issue. It's fairly cut and dried. Take a statue that reveres someone, and if it is of a guy who is a traitor to the USA it goes, if not, it stays. If it is a statue of a traitor and it shows the person looking ignoble and cowardly and has
verbiage stating, that "this scoundrels shallbe eternally pilloried in effigy, confederate scum" then it can stay.

Not hard to apply at all.

So Lee goes and Jefferson stays. Simple. Lincoln stays and Davis goes, simple. MLK stays and David Duke goes. simple."
Click to expand...

It's funny, these people are technically traitors to the US even though its just beliefs and they are too cowardly to given action to the beliefs. They see the US Federal Government as "the other"
and therefore bristle at any action taking by it. That is why their party of choice is not really a representative to government, it is a representative with an agenda to dismantle government. So they want to starve it
for revenue, cut all its programs, limit its authority in the demarcation between state and federal, etc.

Even to the point that they support statues of people who once raised arms against this government. How can they argue they are not traitors. Reminds me of the old joke about the wealthy man who
offers the gentlewomen a million to sleep with him, she says yes, then he offers $100 and she says "what kind of woman do you take me for" He responds "we've already established that now we are
just negotiating price. Amazing these Republican scoundrels will admit to treason on the cheap.
 
Micawber said:
It's funny, these people are technically traitors to the US even though its just beliefs and they are too cowardly to given action to the beliefs. They see the US Federal Government as "the other"
and therefore bristle at any action taking by it. That is why their party of choice is not really a representative to government, it is a representative with an agenda to dismantle government. So they want to starve it
for revenue, cut all its programs, limit its authority in the demarcation between state and federal, etc.

Even to the point that they support statues of people who once raised arms against this government. How can they argue they are not traitors. Reminds me of the old joke about the wealthy man who
offers the gentlewomen a million to sleep with him, she says yes, then he offers $100 and she says "what kind of woman do you take me for" He responds "we've already established that now we are
just negotiating price. Amazing these Republican scoundrels will admit to treason on the cheap.
Click to expand...

Old white men matter less everyday there is something like 2 million Boomers in the ground now
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top