Self-righteous vandals

[Starlight]

Obviously you wasted 23 years of your life, then, since you've emerged as a narrow-minded 'specialist'

Really? News to me. My education was unusually broad. What am I a narrow-minded specialist in? Aside from being a specialist at mocking trolls like you?

Statues are insignificant, boring and uninteresting.

The usual in-person response I've been getting recently when I point out to people I've never in my life seen someone engage meaningfully with a statue is "hmm, good point". Nobody I've talked to on this subject (both on this forum and in person) has cited any anecdotes from their lives of people engaging meaningfully with statutes. I note you don't.

Actually, your reaction says more about your profound lack of intellectual curiousity and shallowness. It's just embarrassing.

I think you overloaded the projector.

What a loon you are. As usual you I resort to the lowest of character attacks and attempts at smears. You're a disgrace to your profession and your country.

Fixed that for you.

[MaxVel]

They can also teach history in a museum dedicated to the Jim Crow era, or to the Civil war, or to the history of a particular city. They don't have to be given a place of honor in order to teach history. That smacks me of a conservative attitude of "I know this is a mistake, but we shouldn't fix it. Things should remain as they are."

But that's kind of my point. They aren't being moved to a more appropriate venue, they are being torn down and defaced by angry mobs. That's vandalism.

And there's nothing wrong per se with not changing things - but you'll note that I did say that it would be useful to add more information about the statues so that people can properly contextualize them.

They aren't already if people think they're really old statues, or dedicated by the town, or anything other than a small group of people with money putting them up when segregation was introduced. I thought people were exagerating that for a while, until I read some of the commencement speeches for them.

I think anyone who wants to defend these statues would do well to memorize certain portions of the commencement speech of Julian Carr, who the Daughters of the Confederacy had invited to speak on the dedication of Silent Sam. The decades after the war he talked about, and what was done to "save" the South involved a lot of killing of black people.

Source: Carr's Speech

The present generation, I am persuaded, scarcely takes note of what the Confederate soldier meant to the welfare of the Anglo Saxon race during the four years immediately succeeding the war, when the facts are, that their courage and steadfastness saved the very life of the Anglo Saxon race in the South – When “the bottom rail was on top” all over the Southern states, and to-day, as a consequence the purest strain of the Anglo Saxon is to be found in the 13 Southern States – Praise God.
I trust I may be pardoned for one allusion, howbeit it is rather personal. One hundred yards from where we stand, less than ninety days perhaps after my return from Appomattox, I horse-whipped a negro wench until her skirts hung in shreds, because upon the streets of this quiet village she had publicly insulted and maligned a Southern lady, and then rushed for protection to these University buildings where was stationed a garrison of 100 Federal soldiers. I performed the pleasing duty in the immediate presence of the entire garrison, and for thirty nights afterwards slept with a double-barrel shot gun under my head.

© Copyright Original Source

So put that speech up in permanent form, right there with the statue, so everyone can see what went on. I agree it's awful. But leaving that statue there, with that speech right there with it, shows exactly how bad things used to be.

[MaxVel]

Really? News to me. My education was unusually broad. What am I a narrow-minded specialist in? Aside from being a specialist at mocking trolls like you?

You're not really very good at anything, are you? Except being a narrow-minded bigot. A self-declared well-educated and unusually broadly educated mug who can't cope with any questioning of his pet notions and so resorts to smears and insults. You're a champ.

The usual in-person response I've been getting recently when I point out to people I've never in my life seen someone engage meaningfully with a statue is "hmm, good point". Nobody I've talked to on this subject (both on this forum and in person) has cited any anecdotes from their lives of people engaging meaningfully with statutes. I note you don't.

Gee, maybe because that was never my argument.

I think you overloaded the projector.

Fixed that for you.

Yeah, I insulted you first.

Since you don't seem to have any plausible arguments, it tends to come across as if the underlying cause of the outrage is a love of what these statues stand for (slavery, white supremacy, KKK, confederacy etc), and what you're actually opposed to is the idea of not celebrating those concepts.

It's OK, I expect this response from you, when you haven't grasped or can't deal with actual arguments being made. All you've brought so far is appeals to how great you are, and sleazy insults. That's real convincing.

[JonathanL]

All you've brought so far is appeals to how great you are . . .

Starlight is quite like Trump in that regard.

[Zara]

But that's kind of my point. They aren't being moved to a more appropriate venue, they are being torn down and defaced by angry mobs. That's vandalism.

And there's nothing wrong per se with not changing things - but you'll note that I did say that it would be useful to add more information about the statues so that people can properly contextualize them.

To be clear, I agree, they shouldn't be destroyed. However, many things (pretty much all things of not outstanding value) end up in vaults never to see the light of day again, why not include these?

Instead, give prominence to some more contemporary art depicting emancipation from religious bigotry - a nice big statue of gay men kissing. I mean, who cares if it offends your ilk, right?

[Starlight]

But leaving that statue there, with that speech right there with it, shows exactly how bad things used to be.

If how bad things used to be is being demonstrated by the fact that it was a time period during which such bad men were celebrated with statues... doesn't that make it all the more important to not have those statues in our time period? Else our time period would be as bad as theirs.

[Starlight]

Starlight is quite like Trump in that regard.

A rather important difference is that almost everything Trump ever says about himself is a lie.

[Starlight]

To be clear, I agree, they shouldn't be destroyed. However, many things (pretty much all things of not outstanding value) end up in vaults never to see the light of day again, why not include these?

Unless a specific statue has particular historical value (i.e. the statue itself is important, not just the thing it commemorates)... and such statues would be pretty few and far between (e.g. Statue of Liberty, Lincoln Memorial's main statue), then I don't have a problem with the statues being destroyed. If there are 1000 statues of some confederate general sprinkled across the country, they don't all need to be preserved in museums.

Instead, give prominence to some more contemporary art depicting emancipation from religious bigotry - a nice big statue of gay men kissing.

I could support that. It, at least, speaks to something relevant that has happened recently and had a positive effect on the lives of many people. Statues about concepts are vastly more interesting than statues to historical individuals, because concepts remain relevant.

I saw a picture recently of a set of statues in my country featuring a set of animals from a popular series of childrens books. I thought they were quite cute.

[Leonhard]

But that's kind of my point. They aren't being moved to a more appropriate venue, they are being torn down and defaced by angry mobs. That's vandalism.

And there's nothing wrong per se with not changing things - but you'll note that I did say that it would be useful to add more information about the statues so that people can properly contextualize them.

I am in general against vandalism. I am it first and foremost that it legitimizes vandalism. It's not a healthy cycle that it inspires. Secondly the statues represent craftmanship, and like you say there is a history to them, even if some of the statues might have been propaganda pieces at a time. And the loss of craftmanship, loss of opportunity of teaching is something I think we both agree on. But worst of all because it doesn't become a community decision it doesn't really deal with the fundamental issues at hand, it risk inspiring reactions.

So put that speech up in permanent form, right there with the statue, so everyone can see what went on. I agree it's awful. But leaving that statue there, with that speech right there with it, shows exactly how bad things used to be.

I am reminded of a particular statue in a market square in Rome, where traditionally minded Catholics (such as I have a tendency to be) will spit at. It is the Giordano Bruno statue.

[Starlight]

the statues represent craftmanship, and like you say there is a history to them, even if some of the statues might have been propaganda pieces at a time. And the loss of craftmanship, loss of opportunity of teaching is something I think we both agree on.

Surely you could say that about all artworks ever created. If we are under an obligation to preserve all artworks forever, the world is gradually going to fill up and we're going to be 100 feet deep in preserved artworks.

[Ronson]

I suspect a great deal of complexity lies in the "get the job done" part of that in terms of different people having different ideas as to what "the job" of government is...

Sure. I suspect that exists in all political parties.

[MaxVel]

If how bad things used to be is being demonstrated by the fact that it was a time period during which such bad men were celebrated with statues... doesn't that make it all the more important to not have those statues in our time period? Else our time period would be as bad as theirs.

Maybe - but we're not putting up statues like that now, are we?

I just wonder if it's the wisest choice to allow a small group of emotional and angry people to 'delete' parts of history that are unpleasant, or even bad. Many of the worst people are only remembered by their presence in the form of statues. I wonder if we demolish those whether we will remember what some of the earliest founders of our countries were like, warts and all. With our hindsight we can see clearly that some things that were normal in their day were really social evils. But that doesn't necessarily make them completely evil people who did nothing good, any more than our acceptance of some social evils now makes us completely evil. People are complicated, and perhaps keeping some statues of morally ambiguous figures is a good reminder to us all of that - even people on the opposite side of politics to us aren't pure evil, often they are doing what they think is good.

[Cow Poke]

Wow, the MO of your president. A disgrace to the office and your country - from a global perspective, mind - rather than your narrow minded bubble of closet retards.

"closet retards". Now THERE's a new one!

[MaxVel]

"closet retards". Now THERE's a new one!

It seems that Zara is admirably open about his own mental capacities.

[JimL]

Maybe - but we're not putting up statues like that now, are we?

I just wonder if it's the wisest choice to allow a small group of emotional and angry people to 'delete' parts of history that are unpleasant, or even bad. Many of the worst people are only remembered by their presence in the form of statues. I wonder if we demolish those whether we will remember what some of the earliest founders of our countries were like, warts and all. With our hindsight we can see clearly that some things that were normal in their day were really social evils. But that doesn't necessarily make them completely evil people who did nothing good, any more than our acceptance of some social evils now makes us completely evil. People are complicated, and perhaps keeping some statues of morally ambiguous figures is a good reminder to us all of that - even people on the opposite side of politics to us aren't pure evil, often they are doing what they think is good.

Would you also advocate for statues in reverence to Hitler being displayed in Germany? There used to be, but they've all been taken down, but the history remains intact.