Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Jim Crow Confederate Monuments Go Down in America


Recommended Posts

fine. take 'em down. take them all down....

 

but their removal affects the daily unrelenting homicide rate in chicago not one iota..

 

and that is what some are asking...

 

which is the greater social ill?...

 

confederate monuments or an out of control murder rate in a major metropolitan city???

 

and yet it makes more sense to liberals to obsess over these old statues than to address immediate out of control murderous mayhem which calls into question liberalism's priorities.

 

so the slaughter continues with no sign of abatement and no sign of the urgency of the matter from Rahm Emanuel and his liberal chicago police force yes men.

 

silence from the NAACP and the congressional black caucus. not a peep from them on Rahm Emanuel's tragic failure of leadership and to protect the innocent. just nonsense about confederate monuments

 

like Rush Limbaugh has said for years, symbolism over substance. the final pathetic gasp of 20th century american liberalism, it's inevitable end result. an almost complete impotency in the face of murderous violence and chaos.

 

Unlike Conservatives,  Liberals can do more than one thing at a time.     In fact Conservatives can't even do one thing;   E.g. where is that Healthcare reform legislation?     :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would they take him down?

 

This guy discovered the lands we now call America,  and by bringing back his discovery to Europe lead to the invasion of the land by white people,  which lead to the killing of the native people,  taking of their land,   and destruction of their culture.

 

NYC is reviewing all monuments and statues with the mayor saying 'anything that could be viewed as 'hateful' will be reviewed" and that includes Christopher Columbus.   Columbus Day has ended in many areas (like L.A.),  replaced by Indigenous People Day. 

 

It is very possible the same would happen related to Lief Erickson.     (but I'm not saying the statue in the photo since I don't know were that one is located,  I'm just using NYC as an example of what is going on)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy discovered the lands we now call America,  and by bringing back his discovery to Europe lead to the invasion of the land by white people,  which lead to the killing of the native people,  taking of their land,   and destruction of their culture.

 

NYC is reviewing all monuments and statues with the mayor saying 'anything that could be viewed as 'hateful' will be reviewed" and that includes Christopher Columbus.   Columbus Day has ended in many areas (like L.A.),  replaced by Indigenous People Day. 

 

It is very possible the same would happen related to Lief Erickson.     (but I'm not saying the statue in the photo since I don't know were that one is located,  I'm just using NYC as an example of what is going on)

 

I don't agree. We have no record of Leif Erikson committing any kind of crime or atrocities against the natives. Columbus isn't disliked because he brought Europeans here, it's because he practiced and advocated genocide against the natives, and he spearheaded the transatlantic slave trade. The other contested statues are Confederates whom people, rightly or wrongly, view as US traitors, and/or were slave owners and/or traders.

 

Erikson doesn't fit any of those definitions. Is it possible some extremist will call for it to come down? Yes. But do we now look at issues from the viewpoints of the fringe extremists on each side? That seems absurd, and counter-productive. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy discovered the lands we now call America,  and by bringing back his discovery to Europe lead to the invasion of the land by white people,  which lead to the killing of the native people,  taking of their land,   and destruction of their culture.

 

NYC is reviewing all monuments and statues with the mayor saying 'anything that could be viewed as 'hateful' will be reviewed" and that includes Christopher Columbus.   Columbus Day has ended in many areas (like L.A.),  replaced by Indigenous People Day. 

 

It is very possible the same would happen related to Lief Erickson.     (but I'm not saying the statue in the photo since I don't know were that one is located,  I'm just using NYC as an example of what is going on)

 

Statue is at the state capital in St Paul, Minnesota.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree. We have no record of Leif Erikson committing any kind of crime or atrocities against the natives. Columbus isn't disliked because he brought Europeans here, it's because he practiced and advocated genocide against the natives, and he spearheaded the transatlantic slave trade. The other contested statues are Confederates whom people, rightly or wrongly, view as US traitors, and/or were slave owners and/or traders.

 

Erikson doesn't fit any of those definitions. Is it possible some extremist will call for it to come down? Yes. But do we now look at issues from the viewpoints of the fringe extremists on each side? That seems absurd, and counter-productive. 

 

I assume you understood I was cracking wise in that put down of Leif.    Anyhow,  sorry if that wasn't clear but I agree with what you say here.    

 

It does appear you believe removal of Columbus is warranted (or at least that calling for the removal has logical reasons like the Confederate monuments and isn't extreme on its face). 

 

But those of Italian heritage in NYC are very upset that the Columbus statue there is even being considered for removal.   So the question remains;  How do local authorities determine which set of FEELINGS prevail?    

Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume you understood I was cracking wise in that put down of Leif.    Anyhow,  sorry if that wasn't clear but I agree with what you say here.    

 

It does appear you believe removal of Columbus is warranted (or at least that calling for the removal has logical reasons like the Confederate monuments and isn't extreme on its face). 

 

But those of Italian heritage in NYC are very upset that the Columbus statue there is even being considered for removal.   So the question remains;  How do local authorities determine which set of FEELINGS prevail?    

 

I personally have no love for Columbus, or the Confederate "heroes" memorialized in statuary. However, personally, I don't care about the statues. Leave them where they are or move them to private land or museums, either is fine by me. Statues are symbolic gestures and I never put much stock in those. I also don't wish to see them destroyed or defaced. Move them if you must, but don't destroy them. That's where I actually agree with Nipkow...destroying or damaging the statues makes the activists no better than ISIS or the Taliban when they destroy ancient works of art because they find them offensive. 

 

I've always agreed with you that the issue of these statues should be left up to the local populace and/or local governments. But I personally don't care if they stay or leave, just stay in one piece. But I'm an atheist who says "Merry Christmas", too. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume you understood I was cracking wise in that put down of Leif. Anyhow, sorry if that wasn't clear but I agree with what you say here.

 

It does appear you believe removal of Columbus is warranted (or at least that calling for the removal has logical reasons like the Confederate monuments and isn't extreme on its face).

 

But those of Italian heritage in NYC are very upset that the Columbus statue there is even being considered for removal. So the question remains; How do local authorities determine which set of FEELINGS prevail?

I've got friends in the Knights of Columbus and we have a lot of membership around here in my neck of the woods.

 

Since I've often enjoyed their Hospitality, I never had the gall to tell them that the whole Columbus thing was sponsored by the Spanish government. Even though Columbus was an Italian man.

 

But I suppose he must have been one heck of a guy to get the Queen of Spain to pawn her jewels, just so he could go on a long boat trip.

 

Columbus is much revered in European history because he stuck

his neck out on a limb and was courageous to do so. The products that he brought back from the New World were instrumental in the course of European history. He even brought back some American Native people to be introduced at the Spanish Court.

 

Columbus's trip to the New World was courageous and brilliant, but his behavior toward the natives was not something to be proud of. Yet, it goes without saying that His viewpoints and behavior toward the natives were very much part of the typical attitude in Europe at the time.

 

Columbus could well be a good example of the binary of factor of this issue, which I'm sure there are other viewpoints on it besides those two.

 

The Native American population has a right to discuss and air any grievances they may have about the whole issue in public.

 

As far as the Italian-Americans are concerned, while I certainly can empathize with their Viewpoint personally--

 

However, I think they're going to have to learn to appreciate the feelings and the history of the natives of this continent.

 

It's complex, but at the same time you've got to say that the natives were here first-- and it's time that their ancestors had their own say and a lot of recognition for their accomplishments too.

 

 

When we're discussing this whole issue-- talking about Columbus and the Confederacy in the same sentence may be a little misleading.

 

Christopher Columbus came from the western civilization of the 15th century.

 

By the mid- 19th century, Western Civilization had progressed to the point of actually outlawing slavery , except for the practice of that peculiar institution in the south of the United States.

 

So I would be careful about equating Behavior, activities from the 15th century with behavior, activities in the 19th century.

 

If we have made some progress to the 21st century, then I would hope we don't have to see the worst behavior and activities of the 20th century--

 

the Third Reich Holocaust or

the American Jim Crow Ku Klux Klan Jim Crow lynchings and terrorist cross burnings --

 

Repeated today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Columbus could well be a good example of the binary of factor of this issue, which I'm sure there are other viewpoints on it besides those two.

 

As far as the Italian-Americans are concerned, while I certainly can empathize with their Viewpoint personally--

 

However, I think they're going to have to learn to appreciate the feelings and the history of the natives of this continent.

 

It's complex, but at the same time you've got to say that the natives were here first-- and it's time that their ancestors had their own say and a lot of recognition for their accomplishments too.

 

With regards to statues of Columbus,  like the one NYC is reviewing,  the question is a very simple one: Will it remain or will it be removed.     (but yea deciding which side to take is a complex task).

 

Based on the comments made by Italian-American leaders in NYC they "appreciate the feeling and history of the natives",  but not to the extent they want that statue of Columbus taken down.  

 

The only win-win type solution I can think of is for the Columbus statue to remain but NYC builds another statue that honors native people.     But something tells me the native people activist wouldn't call that a 'win';  I.e.  anything less than the removal of the status is a lost.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to statues of Columbus, like the one NYC is reviewing, the question is a very simple one: Will it remain or will it be removed. (but yea deciding which side to take is a complex task).

 

Based on the comments made by Italian-American leaders in NYC they "appreciate the feeling and history of the natives", but not to the extent they want that statue of Columbus taken down.

 

The only win-win type solution I can think of is for the Columbus statue to remain but NYC builds another statue that honors native people. But something tells me the native people activist wouldn't call that a 'win'; I.e. anything less than the removal of the status is a lost.

 

Well, while I think I understand your viewpoint, I also know that Columbus has been revered and treated as a hero in this country for more than a century.

 

From the native person's Viewpoint, they may be looking, not just to have equal or dual recognition, but they may feel some sort of redress is required in this situation.

 

But I'm not a citizen of New York City, so it would be interesting to see what our resident New Yorker, Mr. Swithin has to say about all this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, while I think I understand your viewpoint, I also know that Columbus has been revered and treated as a hero in this country for more than a century.

 

From the native person's Viewpoint, they may be looking, not just to have equal or dual recognition, but they may feel some sort of redress is required in this situation.

 

But I'm not a citizen of New York City, so it would be interesting to see what our resident New Yorker, Mr. Swithin has to say about all this.

 

What point of view?    I don't have a POV as it relates to if Columbus statues should remain or come down.    Like I said deciding what 'side' to take in this one is complex, so I have no POV as it relates to what should happen with Columbus statues.

 

NYC has formed a commission that is reviewing  all monuments and statues that could be viewed as 'hateful' (which to me could be almost anything and everything).     They have to decide and I'm glad I'm not on that commission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump is still trolling Democrats on monuments; they’re still falling for it  

 

Trump's defense of Confederate memorials may be incoherent — but it's not nearly as dumb as it seems

 

 

"

“The Democrats, the longer they talk about identity politics, I got ’em,” Bannon told American Prospect co-editor Robert Kuttner. “I want them to talk about racism every day. If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats.”

 

A look at recent polling about Confederate memorials, the source of much recent agitation on both left and right, seems to suggest that Bannon has more of a point than many of his critics may want to admit.....

 

Trolling liberals is a technique specifically encouraged by far-right libertarian economist Hans-Hermann Hoppe, as in this 2013 discussion about returning to the gold standard.

“Don’t get involved in technical details, but ask them questions almost like a child,”...

 

Bannon and Trump’s strategy of using Confederate monuments as a means of deflecting attention from the GOP’s unpopular views on taxes, health care and domestic spending is nothing new. It is, in fact, another application of the “cultural populism” that Republicans have utilized to win elections for decades..........

 

In the short run, however, seeking to “trigger” liberals over and over again continues to pay political dividends."

 

http://www.salon.com/2017/09/05/trump-is-still-trolling-democrats-on-monuments-theyre-still-falling-for-it/

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump is still trolling Democrats on monuments; they’re still falling for it

 

Trump's defense of Confederate memorials may be incoherent — but it's not nearly as dumb as it seems

 

 

"

“The Democrats, the longer they talk about identity politics, I got ’em,” Bannon told American Prospect co-editor Robert Kuttner. “I want them to talk about racism every day. If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats.”

 

A look at recent polling about Confederate memorials, the source of much recent agitation on both left and right, seems to suggest that Bannon has more of a point than many of his critics may want to admit.....

 

Trolling liberals is a technique specifically encouraged by far-right libertarian economist Hans-Hermann Hoppe, as in this 2013 discussion about returning to the gold standard.

“Don’t get involved in technical details, but ask them questions almost like a child,”...

 

Bannon and Trump’s strategy of using Confederate monuments as a means of deflecting attention from the GOP’s unpopular views on taxes, health care and domestic spending is nothing new. It is, in fact, another application of the “cultural populism” that Republicans have utilized to win elections for decades..........

 

In the short run, however, seeking to “trigger” liberals over and over again continues to pay political dividends."

 

http://www.salon.com/2017/09/05/trump-is-still-trolling-democrats-on-monuments-theyre-still-falling-for-it/

Sleight of hand has long been "stoke in trade" for republicans.  It's been said our involvement in KUWAIT and the eventual DESERT STORM began as a subterfuge by then president H.W. Bush to draw attention away from son NEIL's involvement in the savings and loan scandal.

 

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

How dare they touch Saint Lee and Saint Jackson. ;):blink:  

 

 

How long before this is targeted?

 

But of course the thought of his elevation.....GIVE ME A BREAK!

 

 

To me you're being silly and "crying wolf" for no reason;   The Washington National Cathedral is a privately owned building managed by The Protestant Episcopal Cathedral Foundation.     They made a decision.  

 

Shouldn't private entities be able to 'target' anything they want?     My view is that they should have the legal right to have whatever they want and of course that means removing whatever they want.

 

PS:  The United States Congress has designated the "Washington National Cathedral" as the "National House of Prayer."     Members of Congress can remove this designation and should attempt to do so if the actions of the Foundation upset them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How dare they touch Saint Lee and Saint Jackson. ;):blink:

 

 

How long before this is targeted?

 

But of course the thought of his elevation.....GIVE ME A BREAK!

Apotheosis_of_George_Washington_2.jpg

 

It's not really the Sistine Chapel is it?

 

I've seen the Sistine Chapel and

I think I'm sticking with the First Commandment.

 

And Render unto Caesar-- you know the rest on that one too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me you're being silly and "crying wolf" for no reason;   The Washington National Cathedral is a privately owned building managed by The Protestant Episcopal Cathedral Foundation.     They made a decision.  

 

Shouldn't private entities be able to 'target' anything they want?     My view is that they should have the legal right to have whatever they want and of course that means removing whatever they want.

 

PS:  The United States Congress has designated the "Washington National Cathedral" as the "National House of Prayer."     Members of Congress can remove this designation and should attempt to do so if the actions of the Foundation upset them.

 

 I just thought angels, saints were in stain glass.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...