• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Split Thread Tearing Down Statues Associated With Racial Injustice

Mumbles said:
France was famously far more welcoming than the US as well - most notably James Baldwin, but including many musicians and WW1 soldiers. As I recall, since Nina Simone eventually retired there as well.
Click to expand...
Josephine Baker...
 
Meadmaker said:
Yes. Your indifference to statue destruction is responsible for the downfall of American civilization.
Click to expand...

You seem unable or unwilling to articulate why statue vandalism should be a concern in a manner that isn’t either a glib one-liner or a 19th century Russian novel.

That does not bode well for the legitimacy of your position.
 
johnny karate said:
You seem unable or unwilling to articulate why statue vandalism should be a concern in a manner that isn’t either a glib one-liner or a 19th century Russian novel.

That does not bode well for the legitimacy of your position.
Click to expand...

Interestingly, your response actually illustrates the legitimacy of my position. The core of my response was that your indifference is a symptom of a selfish civilization where the people are only concerned about their special interests instead of the good of the community.

Now you say that either my statements are too short, or too long. I know from experience that the next attempt will meet with similar dismissal.

So, I surrender, at least for the moment. You have bested me, in a battle played by your rules. I have not provided any answer in the form you think I ought to have provided.

I leave you with a suggestion, though. Contemplate what was happening when a mob tore down a statue, any statue, and instead of seeing it through your eyes, try to imagine seeing the event through someone else's eyes. Repeat for multiple statues, and multiple observers.
 
Meadmaker said:
Interestingly, your response actually illustrates the legitimacy of my position. The core of my response was that your indifference is a symptom of a selfish civilization where the people are only concerned about their special interests instead of the good of the community.
Click to expand...

Again, you fail to define your concerns without going into a sophistic diatribe about some non-specific descent into the breakdown of civilization.

Which of course hilariously over-emphasizes the importance of statues without offering a coherent explanation as to why statues are so important.

Now you say that either my statements are too short, or too long. I know from experience that the next attempt will meet with similar dismissal.

So, I surrender, at least for the moment. You have bested me, in a battle played by your rules. I have not provided any answer in the form you think I ought to have provided.

I leave you with a suggestion, though. Contemplate what was happening when a mob tore down a statue, any statue, and instead of seeing it through your eyes, try to imagine seeing the event through someone else's eyes. Repeat for multiple statues, and multiple observers.
Click to expand...

I am trying to see them through someone else’s eyes.

But I can’t do that unless those people explain exactly why statue vandalism is such a significant problem.

General hand-wringing over some vague concerns about societal breakdown doesn’t give me much to hang my hat on.
 
Meadmaker said:
Interestingly, your response actually illustrates the legitimacy of my position. The core of my response was that your indifference is a symptom of a selfish civilization where the people are only concerned about their special interests instead of the good of the community.

Now you say that either my statements are too short, or too long. I know from experience that the next attempt will meet with similar dismissal.

So, I surrender, at least for the moment. You have bested me, in a battle played by your rules. I have not provided any answer in the form you think I ought to have provided.

I leave you with a suggestion, though. Contemplate what was happening when a mob tore down a statue, any statue, and instead of seeing it through your eyes, try to imagine seeing the event through someone else's eyes. Repeat for multiple statues, and multiple observers.
Click to expand...

That seems fine in the abstract, but one of the salient points in the current situation is that "the community" is terribly divided, such that what to some is a special interest is to others the good of the community. If you're a bigot, racial justice is a special interest. If you're on the other side, the existence of racist statues is, and has always been, a special interest, and was never truly for the good of the community.

There has long been an appeal by some to consider the good of the community in various matters, and a large part of the current unrest reflects the fact that the leaders of the community, representing class and racial interests more than those of the community as a whole, have refused to address these issues honestly.

Of course not all statues represent bias and special interest, but if you apply your rule to any statue, you risk saying that all statues are equal, their motives irrelevant, and any statue to anything has as much right to exist as any other as long as the powers that be hold on to it. I think it's reasonable to say that when we tear down the racist traitors we should leave the founding fathers and the Little Mermaid and Alice in Wonderland, but if you argue that all statues are equal you end up with either all or nothing.
 
johnny karate said:
You seem unable or unwilling to articulate why statue vandalism should be a concern in a manner that isn’t either a glib one-liner or a 19th century Russian novel.
Click to expand...

Monuments are important because symbols are important. They're abstractions of what societies wish to be represented as. Removing them is also an important statement as to what a society wishes not to be represented as. Both the construction and destruction of monuments are legitimate concerns, because they involve important symbolic statements.
 
johnny karate said:
Again, you fail to define your concerns without going into a sophistic diatribe about some non-specific descent into the breakdown of civilization.

Which of course hilariously over-emphasizes the importance of statues without offering a coherent explanation as to why statues are so important.



I am trying to see them through someone else’s eyes.

But I can’t do that unless those people explain exactly why statue vandalism is such a significant problem.

General hand-wringing over some vague concerns about societal breakdown doesn’t give me much to hang my hat on.
Click to expand...
The " hand waving" about societal breakdown, as you put it, is hand waving of its own.
Societal breakdown is by far a greater concern than any physical object, perhaps especially because those who are partaking in the vandalism have the most to lose from societal breakdown.
Societal breakdown is what gave us the Tulsa massacre. Societal breakdown is what gave us lynchings. Societal breakdown is what gives us cops acting like the lives of black people do not matter.
You are willing to hand wave away societal breakdown, when society is crucial to the existence of a minority. It is puzzling how someone could not see that.
 
johnny karate said:
Again, you fail to define your concerns without going into a sophistic diatribe about some non-specific descent into the breakdown of civilization.

Which of course hilariously over-emphasizes the importance of statues without offering a coherent explanation as to why statues are so important.
Click to expand...

As I said in the "Russian novel" post, they're more a symptom than a cause, and they are a terrible symptom, but not, by themselves an immense problem. A problem, for sure, but not an immense one.



I am trying to see them through someone else’s eyes.

But I can’t do that unless those people explain exactly why statue vandalism is such a significant problem.
Click to expand...

We are dealing with people who are destroying property that belongs to someone else, specifically something that is collectively owned by a community. If you need an explanation to see the problem when looking through someone else's eyes, I would suggest your inability to see is due to a lack of empathy, rather than a lack of explanation.

Look at the bright side, though. Keep that up and you could be President of the United States some day.
 
bruto said:
That seems fine in the abstract, but one of the salient points in the current situation is that "the community" is terribly divided,
Click to expand...

About elk? Or even about Washington, or Columbus?

I don't think there's much division on any of those. There are lots and lots of pro-Washington people, and a handful of anti-Washington people, and quite a few who really are too bothered about day to day cares to worry about someone who has been dead for 200 years.

I know people want to make this about Confederate statues, where your words could make sense, but more than half of the statues torn down by mobs have been non-Confederates.


(A separate issue is whether the ones who don't care about those dead guys perhaps ought to care a little bit more, but that's a more complicated, and abstract, question.)

ETA: Regarding the "all statues are equal" issue, I would say sort of. I will say I have a lot more sympathy for people tearing down Robert E. Lee than I do for Ulysses S. Grant, but I would still say the best thing would be to go through proper channels.
 
Last edited:
The people, the mayor, and the governor are all behind taking down the confederate statues. It wasn't happening! They were not put up by "the community, " but by the Daughters of the Confederacy with some help from the KKK.
We're finally seeing some action because of people knocking some down. It became too dangerous to leave them, so they are being removed properly.
 
Carlotta said:
The people, the mayor, and the governor are all behind taking down the confederate statues. It wasn't happening! They were not put up by "the community, " but by the Daughters of the Confederacy with some help from the KKK.
We're finally seeing some action because of people knocking some down. It became too dangerous to leave them, so they are being removed properly.
Click to expand...

At the time, the DC and the KKK were the community, or at least the white, i.e. dominant, portion of the community.

And we are certainly seeing some action now. That accursed elk won't be putting his paws in where they don't belong anymore, and Washington and Jefferson (i.e. Thomas, not Davis) are on notice. There's still some of those guys around the country, but not as many as there were. And that bastard Cervantes? He looks good in red, doesn't he?

I got what I want, so screw you.

You're talking about Confederate statues as if those are the statues coming down. Less than half of the statues pulled down by mobs have been of Confederates.

Donald Trump didn't propose putting General Longstreet into the Garden of American Heroes. He's trying to use it as a wedge issue, and to some extent, it will work for him. I don't know how many actual votes he is going to get out of the issue, and it will be impossible to measure accurately. I think people will see through what he's doing, but when it comes down to it, more people agree with Trump than agree with you on this issue. If Joe Biden expresses sympathy to statue pullers, such as the way you just did, he's going to lose actual votes. He can express an opinion that the Confederate statues be removed, but if he dares to actually say that the mob was right to do it, he will lose votes. This is where he may even need his Sister Souldja (sp?) moment.
 
Last edited:
Interesting story here:

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-...rs-to-take-unwanted-statues-from-other-cities

The city of Newton Falls, Ohio, has declared itself a "statuary sanctuary city", offering to take unwanted statues from other cities into their town. The mayor did not include any Confederate monuments among those he offered to take.

ETA: The takeaway from this ought to be how this whole statue toppling craze is playing among swing voters.
 
Meadmaker said:
Interesting story here:

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-...rs-to-take-unwanted-statues-from-other-cities

The city of Newton Falls, Ohio, has declared itself a "statuary sanctuary city", offering to take unwanted statues from other cities into their town. The mayor did not include any Confederate monuments among those he offered to take.

ETA: The takeaway from this ought to be how this whole statue toppling craze is playing among swing voters.
Click to expand...

I wonder if this thought will come up again when Trump is reelected?
 
Meadmaker said:
At the time, the DC and the KKK were the community, or at least the white, i.e. dominant, portion of the community.

And we are certainly seeing some action now. That accursed elk won't be putting his paws in where they don't belong anymore, and Washington and Jefferson (i.e. Thomas, not Davis) are on notice. There's still some of those guys around the country, but not as many as there were. And that bastard Cervantes? He looks good in red, doesn't he?

I got what I want, so screw you.

You're talking about Confederate statues as if those are the statues coming down. Less than half of the statues pulled down by mobs have been of Confederates.

Donald Trump didn't propose putting General Longstreet into the Garden of American Heroes. He's trying to use it as a wedge issue, and to some extent, it will work for him. I don't know how many actual votes he is going to get out of the issue, and it will be impossible to measure accurately. I think people will see through what he's doing, but when it comes down to it, more people agree with Trump than agree with you on this issue. If Joe Biden expresses sympathy to statue pullers, such as the way you just did, he's going to lose actual votes. He can express an opinion that the Confederate statues be removed, but if he dares to actually say that the mob was right to do it, he will lose votes. This is where he may even need his Sister Souldja (sp?) moment.
Click to expand...

No, just no. But it's good to know how you view people who live in the southern part of the country.
It is too bad about the elk! :(
 
Carlotta said:
No, just no. But it's good to know how you view people who live in the southern part of the country.
It is too bad about the elk! :(
Click to expand...

Wait. What? Are you objecting to me saying that the DC and KKK were the (white) community?

Well, obviously, if you just took the membership of those two organizations they wouldn't make up a majority, but surely you realize that segregationists were indeed the majority in most southern states, and those statues went up with the broad support of the white community. It has been said over and over that they went up to intimidate black people. Do you suppose that most whites were opposed to that idea, but an evil cabal of elected officials (key word, elected) were opposing the will of the majority?

The statues stayed up for so long because they were popular. It is only in recent years that that support has eroded. Certainly the willingness of mobs to take action themselves has accelerated that trend, shaking people out of complacency on the subject.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom