Charlottesville to remove statue that sparked deadly white supremacy rally 8-) 8-)

'Statue to be removed'


Our recent and ancient cultural history is to be 'negated',     .....to be ERASED, from our collective social memory.

That is what neo-Marxists do, have always done.

So that no one will retain any ancient 'datum point' [in their memory], against which, to compare THE VALUE of current political realities.

Mind control.

Reinforcing the ['collective'] HIVE MIND.

Remove the option for the individual to make    INFORMED    choices, which will direct his own path, into his own future.

Again.....
Mind control.




War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.
- George Orwell




Proverbs 22:28
Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 10^th, 2021 at 6:30pm:

Charlottesville to remove statue that sparked deadly white supremacy rally 8-) 8-)

Charlottesville to remove statue that sparked deadly Coloured Supremacy Rally that caused death and destruction all around ...

The Good Gineral never owned a slave, and spent his years fighting to defend the rights of his State... dying shortly after the Old Grey Goose Was Killed...

Maybe some of these jerks on that council could consider fighting for the rights of their state as a whole, and not just their chosen groups.

They all need to be thrown on the street with nothing...

How much do they want for that statue?  Would look great in my front yard...

How did this statue become 'a rallying point for White Supremacists' when it was, in reality, the rallying point for Sallow Supremacists and their running dogs?

It was the demand that it be torn down that caused the whole thing...... so guilt lies anywhere else but with those who sought to say NO.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 10^th, 2021 at 6:30pm:

Charlottesville to remove statue that sparked deadly white supremacy rally 8-) 8-)

One day soon, LEFTIST legislators around the world will decide that they need to outlaw the possession of Holy Bible, as 'an evil 'instrument' which excites social division and which promotes social inequality and racism'.

Laugh.

Go on, laugh.

Yadda wrote on Jul 10^th, 2021 at 7:24pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 6:30pm: Charlottesville to remove statue that sparked deadly white supremacy rally 8-) 8-) One day soon, LEFTIST legislators around the world will decide that they need to outlaw the possession of Holy Bible, as 'an evil 'instrument' which excites social division and which promotes social inequality and racism'. Laugh. Go on, laugh.

Yes, that is definitely in their plans. Keep people ignorant, it is easier to convince them with lies that way!

You all seem to be assuming this is some ancient monument.  It isn't.  It is less than 100 years old.  "They were erected in the 1920s when Jim Crow laws were eroding the rights of Black citizens."  They were erected to further oppress black people.  Remember, the Confederacy lost the Civil War.  They lost it fair and square.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS9yLgJ4sqo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju8p1-wAhYQ

Read up on or watch a documentary on the Lee family... They owned slaves alright... But Robert, himself, was an armchair abolitionist... Knew it wasn't right but did not act against it... And he was an owner of a small number of slaves, but considered himself a good and kindly master.

He was the top pick to lead the union army. He was a pro-abolitionist and anti-secessionist but could not bring himself to take up arms against his fellow Virginians.

He would not have approved of a statue erected in his honour and would have been first in line to tear it down.

His whole backstory is easy to find.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 10^th, 2021 at 9:12pm:

Read up on or watch a documentary on the Lee family... They owned slaves alright... But Robert, himself, was an armchair abolitionist... Knew it wasn't right but did not act against it... And he was an owner of a small number of slaves, but considered himself a good and kindly master. He was the top pick to lead the union army but could not bring himself to take up arms against his fellow Virginians. His whole backstory is easy to find.

Does this cancel culture that is infecting the US apply to all slave owners or just the white ones?

Will the idiots from this cancel culture say anything about this slave owner who was white or will they accuse people who point this of islamophobia?  ::) ::) ::)


Quote:

It was narrated from Anas, that the Messenger of Allah had a female slave with whom he had intercourse, but 'Aishah and Hafsah would not leave him alone until he said that she was forbidden for him. Then Allah, the Mighty and Sublime, revealed: "O Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you.' until the end of the Verse. https://sunnah.com/nasai:3959

The Islamic prophet owned and sold slaves he even had sex with his slaves against the wishes of his wives because the sky fairy called Allah said it was halal.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 10^th, 2021 at 9:18pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 9:12pm: Read up on or watch a documentary on the Lee family... They owned slaves alright... But Robert, himself, was an armchair abolitionist... Knew it wasn't right but did not act against it... And he was an owner of a small number of slaves, but considered himself a good and kindly master. He was the top pick to lead the union army but could not bring himself to take up arms against his fellow Virginians. His whole backstory is easy to find. Does this cancel culture that is infecting the US apply to all slave owners or just the white ones?

As I added above, Lee, himself, would not have approved of a statue erected in his honour and would have been first in line to tear it down.

He considered the civil war to be the greatest tragedy in US history and never aggrandised his own role in the war. He dedicated himself to rebuilding the morale of the south but was never in his life regranted US citizenship.

He was lucky not to have been hanged as a traitor after the war. Had it not been for General Grant himself threatening to resign his commission from the US army if Lee was charged with treason, he would have likely been hanged.

These statues will be moved to museums. Sounds like a good idea. Put them where they belong.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 10^th, 2021 at 9:05pm:

You all seem to be assuming this is some ancient monument.  It isn't.  It is less than 100 years old.  "They were erected in the 1920s when Jim Crow laws were eroding the rights of Black citizens."  They were erected to further oppress black people.  Remember, the Confederacy lost the Civil War.  They lost it fair and square.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::)

What has erecting a statue to a Civil War general got to do with 'Jim Crow laws'?

How exactly does a statue go about oppressing people?

https://monumentaustralia.org.au/content/directory/full/Captain_James_Cook_Statue-14074-23207.jpg

All statues are going to be replaced with George Floyd statues complete with black face, that should please everybody, no?

We are gunna go a burnin and a lootin tonight, just ask Bob Marley.

---

What a terrible thing to do to remove the history of a place.

It reminds me of the Taliban and ISIS
destroying Buddhist statues.

Bobby. wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:38am:

What a terrible thing to do to remove the history of a place. It reminds me of the Taliban and ISIS destroying Buddhist statues.

'I think it's wiser not to keep open the sores of war, but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavour to obliterate the marks of civil strife; to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered'.

Removing the statue of Robert E Lee is in no way the same as the destruction of buddhist statues.

This guy (as an American from the south) explains it best:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwNzq6BIng4

Bobby. wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:38am:

What a terrible thing to do to remove the history of a place.

The library is still open, and they still have books.

Remember those - books?

You don't need a statue to teach you history, Booby.

https://hestia.jmrl.org/findit/Record/1065923

https://hestia.jmrl.org/findit/Record/1011141

https://jmrl.org/

The history of the American South is 400+ years. The Confederacy lasted 4 years.

Is 1000+ years of German history represented by the Nazis?

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Jul 10^th, 2021 at 11:23pm:

What has erecting a statue to a Civil War general got to do with 'Jim Crow laws'? How exactly does a statue go about oppressing people?

I can answer that: the history of the Confederacy was re-written by a once powerful lobby called "Daughters of the Confederacy" and they, by and large, erected those statues.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 8:48am:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:38am: What a terrible thing to do to remove the history of a place. It reminds me of the Taliban and ISIS destroying Buddhist statues. 'I think it's wiser not to keep open the sores of war, but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavour to obliterate the marks of civil strife; to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered'. Removing the statue of Robert E Lee is in no way the same as the destruction of buddhist statues. This guy (as an American from the south) explains it best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwNzq6BIng4

That guy can virtue signal as much as he wants to -
it's still destroying the history and soul of a city and a country.

Bobby. wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 11:18am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 8:48am: Bobby. wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:38am: What a terrible thing to do to remove the history of a place. It reminds me of the Taliban and ISIS destroying Buddhist statues. 'I think it's wiser not to keep open the sores of war, but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavour to obliterate the marks of civil strife; to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered'. Removing the statue of Robert E Lee is in no way the same as the destruction of buddhist statues. This guy (as an American from the south) explains it best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwNzq6BIng4 That guy can virtue signal as much as he wants to - it's still destroying the history and soul of a city and a country.

Maybe it's not him virtue-signalling as it is your assuming American culture and sensibilities is world culture and, by that, part of Australian culture.

It's a common problem in the Anglophonic new world - The presumption that all American social issues are ours as well.

Richmond’s Confederate Monuments Were Used to Sell a Segregated Neighborhood
Real-estate developers used the statues on Monument Avenue to draw white buyers to a neighborhood where houses could not be sold “to any person of African descent.”

https://archive.is/NDNl1#selection-697.0-706.0

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 11:28am:

Maybe it's not him virtue-signalling as it is your assuming American culture and sensibilities is world culture and, by that, part of Australian culture. It's a common problem in the Anglophonic new world - The presumption that all American social issues are ours as well.

Next thing those woke poofters will tear down all
our statues including Captain Cook.

AiA wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 11:35am:

Richmond’s Confederate Monuments Were Used to Sell a Segregated Neighborhood Real-estate developers used the statues on Monument Avenue to draw white buyers to a neighborhood where houses could not be sold “to any person of African descent.” https://archive.is/NDNl1#selection-697.0-706.0

A good example of where a use of symbolism is endemic to certain parts of the United States to suit the purposes of their specifically parochial social issues.

It cannot and should not be perceived unfiltered by those of another culture.

AiA wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 11:35am:

Richmond’s Confederate Monuments Were Used to Sell a Segregated Neighborhood Real-estate developers used the statues on Monument Avenue to draw white buyers to a neighborhood where houses could not be sold “to any person of African descent.” https://archive.is/NDNl1#selection-697.0-706.0

Any links to a certain alleged child rapist?

Removal of statues is all part of the greater plan: https://americanmind.org/features/whos-next/minority-report/?fbclid=IwAR0zs8fwiZlnMWg7C_UvDrIjgWZNKeNQTo7LMSsUT9ld9OaRon4aEL2K-T4

Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 2:06pm:

Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::)

In this case it is the story of segregation... Separate but 'equal'.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 2:06pm:

Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::)

There are war memorials in Germany, in Japan, in Russia. Should these be torn down because the cause for which the people fought was wrong?   ::)

The Good Gineral fought to preserve State's Rights - not the institution of slavery or discrimination etc.... that's why he refused the command of the Union armies...

Does that town council accept any responsibility for the violence from left and right it created when it first mooted this stupid idea?

Ultimately it is they who hold responsibility for the injuries, rioting and death. Their answer - let's do it all again.... FFS.... stoopid is as stoopid does, sah...

If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it.

This issue was a 'rallying point' for the leftist history re-workers - the response from those wishing to see it remain does not constitute 'white supremacy', and it is very sad that the media always seek to portray any leftist violence as all good while any response is considered the oppression and vi8olent regardless of its content or reasons.

Oh, well - you cannot educate fools.....

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races —that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."

Should a man who said this have a statue erected to his memory? If there are any such, should they be torn down?

Silence Greggy,
those poofters want to erase our history too -
even our statues of Captain Cook are not safe now.

Bobby. wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 4:06pm:

Silence Greggy, those poofters want to erase our history too - even our statues of Captain Cook are not safe now.

Why do you get so turned on by statues, Bobby?

https://pyxis.nymag.com/v1/imgs/c6c/1a7/350f69ceecb2cb2c4003abe3a3230d441c-18-naked-trump.rsquare.w700.jpg

Belgarion wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 3:22pm:

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races —that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." Should a man who said this have a statue erected to his memory? If there are any such, should they be torn down?

Yes, but even Lincoln, Grant and Sherman agreed with Lee.

They may have agreed that slavery was an evil that must be destroyed, but equality was another matter.

Belgarion wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 2:57pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 2:06pm: Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::) There are war memorials in Germany, in Japan, in Russia. Should these be torn down because the cause for which the people fought was wrong?   ::)

Depends on what the memorials commemorate?  Is it the loss of life or the glorification of the regimes?  What is lost all too often the message the memorials are sending to latter generations.  In the case of Germany and Russia it is the horrific loss of lives that occurred in wartime.  Japan?  I am unsure.  The Yasikuni shrine commemorates the war criminals who created the massacres.  In Australia it is the War Memorials in Canberra, Melbourne and all the other cities and towns across the land.  What message do they send?  Is it the loss of life or the glory of Australia?  Such memorials, whether here or overseas were erected within a few years of the cessation of hostilities.  These statues in Charlotsville were erected in the 1920s, 60 years after the end of the ACW.  They were erected to further oppression of black people.  They send the wrong message IMO. ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 4:47pm:

They were erected to further oppression of black people.

Statues, inanimate objects, further oppression? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 5:01pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 4:47pm: They were erected to further oppression of black people. Statues, inanimate objects, further oppression? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Do you think symbols mean nothing?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 5:20pm:

Do you think symbols mean nothing?

No. But I don't believe they mean anything more. So statues erected to Southern Civil War luminaries are just that. Nothing to do with oppressing American negro descendants. Statues at the Alamo are not oppressing Mexican descendants.

Replaced with

---

lee wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 5:28pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 5:20pm: Do you think symbols mean nothing? No. But I don't believe they mean anything more. So statues erected to Southern Civil War luminaries are just that. Nothing to do with oppressing American negro descendants. Statues at the Alamo are not oppressing Mexican descendants.

What does 'luminaries' mean to you?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 5:52pm:

What does 'luminaries' mean to you?

The ordinary dictionary meaning.

Luminary - "a person who is famous and important in a particular area of activity: "

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/luminary

But perhaps you have a different definition. ;)

lee wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:03pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 5:52pm: What does 'luminaries' mean to you? The ordinary dictionary meaning. Luminary - "a person who is famous and important in a particular area of activity: " https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/luminary But perhaps you have a different definition. ;)

I was asking you what you meant... But OK... Should we have statues of Hitler... Or maybe Jeffrey Epstein?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:05pm:

I was asking you what you meant

To which I responded "the ordinary dictionary meaning". What didn't you understand?


NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:05pm:

But OK... Should we have statues of Hitler... Or maybe Jeffrey Epstein?

You can have any statue YOU want.  Hitler is a luminary but not one widely admired. Jeffrey Epstein? Was he FAMOUS and IMPORTANT? ;)

Dnarever wrote on Jul 10^th, 2021 at 11:10pm:

These statues will be moved to museums. Sounds like a good idea. Put them where they belong.

There are so many things that could be said to belong in museums that are out in the open, Pyramids, Stonehenge. Why does the past need to be locked away and hidden? Leaving the statue in place with plaques explaining why it's there and the history would be far more beneficial and progressive than tearing them down. Leave the tearing down of the past to people like the Taliban, no need to join the ignoble.

lee wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:26pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:05pm: But OK... Should we have statues of Hitler... Or maybe Jeffrey Epstein? You can have any statue YOU want.  Hitler is a luminary but not one widely admired. Jeffrey Epstein? Was he FAMOUS and IMPORTANT? ;)

Ah, see... It's all about who you like, who you'd tolerate and who you'd draw the line at.

Of course, it's a safe to assume the answer to the question: who want's a statue a Jeffry Epstein? Even if he dragged US presidents, UK royalty and tech billionaires under his bus...

So, it begs the question: What is the definition of 'famous and important' such that it wouldn't breach the limits you're prepared to go?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 10^th, 2021 at 9:24pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 9:18pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 9:12pm: Read up on or watch a documentary on the Lee family... They owned slaves alright... But Robert, himself, was an armchair abolitionist... Knew it wasn't right but did not act against it... And he was an owner of a small number of slaves, but considered himself a good and kindly master. He was the top pick to lead the union army but could not bring himself to take up arms against his fellow Virginians. His whole backstory is easy to find. Does this cancel culture that is infecting the US apply to all slave owners or just the white ones? As I added above, Lee, himself, would not have approved of a statue erected in his honour and would have been first in line to tear it down.

Did you ask him or make up that bullshit?

What about Muhammad he was a white man who owned slaves does he get a free pass from the woke leftist idiots?

---

.

---

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 4:22pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 4:06pm: Silence Greggy, those poofters want to erase our history too - even our statues of Captain Cook are not safe now. Why do you get so turned on by statues, Bobby? https://pyxis.nymag.com/v1/imgs/c6c/1a7/350f69ceecb2cb2c4003abe3a3230d441c-18-naked-trump.rsquare.w700.jpg

It's you posting your pinup erotica on here... Why is that?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:36pm:

Ah, see... It's all about who you like, who you'd tolerate and who you'd draw the line at.

I didn't draw any lines. The dictionary meaning is FAMOUS AND IMPORTANT. Hitler maybe. But it is you who wants the statue.

Epstein? As I said is/was he FAMOUS AND IMPORTANT? He seems more famous for the rich and famous he knew. I think any importance he may have had has been incredibly overblown.


NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:36pm:

So, it begs the question: What is the definition of 'famous and important' such that it wouldn't breach the limits you're prepared to go?

Infamous is not the same as famous. ;D ;D ;D

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:40pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 9:24pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 9:18pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 9:12pm: Read up on or watch a documentary on the Lee family... They owned slaves alright... But Robert, himself, was an armchair abolitionist... Knew it wasn't right but did not act against it... And he was an owner of a small number of slaves, but considered himself a good and kindly master. He was the top pick to lead the union army but could not bring himself to take up arms against his fellow Virginians. His whole backstory is easy to find. Does this cancel culture that is infecting the US apply to all slave owners or just the white ones? As I added above, Lee, himself, would not have approved of a statue erected in his honour and would have been first in line to tear it down. Did you ask him or make up that bullshit? What about Muhammad he was a white man who owned slaves does he get a free pass from the woke leftist idiots?

Check out what Lee wrote about, or was quoted as saying about, his role in the war and post-war.

lee wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:44pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:36pm: Ah, see... It's all about who you like, who you'd tolerate and who you'd draw the line at. I didn't draw any lines. The dictionary meaning is FAMOUS AND IMPORTANT. Hitler maybe. But it is you who wants the statue. Epstein? As I said is/was he FAMOUS AND IMPORTANT? He seems more famous for the rich and famous he knew. I think any importance he may have had has been incredibly overblown. NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:36pm: So, it begs the question: What is the definition of 'famous and important' such that it wouldn't breach the limits you're prepared to go? Infamous is not the same as famous. ;D ;D ;D

Now you're going to need to define famous and important.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:36pm:

lee wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:26pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:05pm: But OK... Should we have statues of Hitler... Or maybe Jeffrey Epstein? You can have any statue YOU want.  Hitler is a luminary but not one widely admired. Jeffrey Epstein? Was he FAMOUS and IMPORTANT? ;) Ah, see... It's all about who you like, who you'd tolerate and who you'd draw the line at. Of course, it's a safe to assume the answer to the question: who want's a statue a Jeffry Epstein? Even if he dragged US presidents, UK royalty and tech billionaires under his bus... So, it begs the question: What is the definition of 'famous and important' such that it wouldn't breach the limits you're prepared to go?

Well, if my local council put up a statue of Xi, I would not tear it down, their taste in art sculpture is renowned in it's insanity and none of it has been removed.

Setanta wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:46pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:36pm: lee wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:26pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:05pm: But OK... Should we have statues of Hitler... Or maybe Jeffrey Epstein? You can have any statue YOU want.  Hitler is a luminary but not one widely admired. Jeffrey Epstein? Was he FAMOUS and IMPORTANT? ;) Ah, see... It's all about who you like, who you'd tolerate and who you'd draw the line at. Of course, it's a safe to assume the answer to the question: who want's a statue a Jeffry Epstein? Even if he dragged US presidents, UK royalty and tech billionaires under his bus... So, it begs the question: What is the definition of 'famous and important' such that it wouldn't breach the limits you're prepared to go? Well, if my local council put up a statue of Xi, I would not tear it down, their taste in art sculpture is renowned in it's insanity and none of it has been removed.

None of it has been removed but you'd tear it down? Then get to it!

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:47pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:46pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:36pm: lee wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:26pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:05pm: But OK... Should we have statues of Hitler... Or maybe Jeffrey Epstein? You can have any statue YOU want.  Hitler is a luminary but not one widely admired. Jeffrey Epstein? Was he FAMOUS and IMPORTANT? ;) Ah, see... It's all about who you like, who you'd tolerate and who you'd draw the line at. Of course, it's a safe to assume the answer to the question: who want's a statue a Jeffry Epstein? Even if he dragged US presidents, UK royalty and tech billionaires under his bus... So, it begs the question: What is the definition of 'famous and important' such that it wouldn't breach the limits you're prepared to go? Well, if my local council put up a statue of Xi, I would not tear it down, their taste in art sculpture is renowned in it's insanity and none of it has been removed. None of it has been removed but you'd tear it down? Then get to it!

Umm, did you misread? Benefit of the doubt for now.

Setanta wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:48pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:47pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:46pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:36pm: lee wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:26pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:05pm: But OK... Should we have statues of Hitler... Or maybe Jeffrey Epstein? You can have any statue YOU want.  Hitler is a luminary but not one widely admired. Jeffrey Epstein? Was he FAMOUS and IMPORTANT? ;) Ah, see... It's all about who you like, who you'd tolerate and who you'd draw the line at. Of course, it's a safe to assume the answer to the question: who want's a statue a Jeffry Epstein? Even if he dragged US presidents, UK royalty and tech billionaires under his bus... So, it begs the question: What is the definition of 'famous and important' such that it wouldn't breach the limits you're prepared to go? Well, if my local council put up a statue of Xi, I would not tear it down, their taste in art sculpture is renowned in it's insanity and none of it has been removed. None of it has been removed but you'd tear it down? Then get to it! Umm, did you misread? Benefit of the doubt for now.

Why?

Setanta wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:48pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:47pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:46pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:36pm: lee wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:26pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:05pm: But OK... Should we have statues of Hitler... Or maybe Jeffrey Epstein? You can have any statue YOU want.  Hitler is a luminary but not one widely admired. Jeffrey Epstein? Was he FAMOUS and IMPORTANT? ;) Ah, see... It's all about who you like, who you'd tolerate and who you'd draw the line at. Of course, it's a safe to assume the answer to the question: who want's a statue a Jeffry Epstein? Even if he dragged US presidents, UK royalty and tech billionaires under his bus... So, it begs the question: What is the definition of 'famous and important' such that it wouldn't breach the limits you're prepared to go? Well, if my local council put up a statue of Xi, I would not tear it down, their taste in art sculpture is renowned in it's insanity and none of it has been removed. None of it has been removed but you'd tear it down? Then get to it! Umm, did you misread? Benefit of the doubt for now.

To keep it in context, your internal inclination is to tear it down but you wouldn't in actuality... Why (honestly) ?

Gordon wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 5:48pm:

Replaced with

hahahha

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:50pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:48pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:47pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:46pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:36pm: lee wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:26pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:05pm: But OK... Should we have statues of Hitler... Or maybe Jeffrey Epstein? You can have any statue YOU want.  Hitler is a luminary but not one widely admired. Jeffrey Epstein? Was he FAMOUS and IMPORTANT? ;) Ah, see... It's all about who you like, who you'd tolerate and who you'd draw the line at. Of course, it's a safe to assume the answer to the question: who want's a statue a Jeffry Epstein? Even if he dragged US presidents, UK royalty and tech billionaires under his bus... So, it begs the question: What is the definition of 'famous and important' such that it wouldn't breach the limits you're prepared to go? Well, if my local council put up a statue of Xi, I would not tear it down, their taste in art sculpture is renowned in it's insanity and none of it has been removed. None of it has been removed but you'd tear it down? Then get to it! Umm, did you misread? Benefit of the doubt for now. Why?

Why? Because you misrepresented what I said to the point of being opposite of what I said. Hence I asked if you misread and would give you the benefit of doubt leaning that way.
On the other hand if this "why?" is a persistence in your belief I said that I would tear them down, my post says I would not.

We are at odds in what you think I said and would say that error is on your side.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 4:47pm:

Belgarion wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 2:57pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 2:06pm: Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::) There are war memorials in Germany, in Japan, in Russia. Should these be torn down because the cause for which the people fought was wrong?   ::) Depends on what the memorials commemorate?  Is it the loss of life or the glorification of the regimes?  What is lost all too often the message the memorials are sending to latter generations.  In the case of Germany and Russia it is the horrific loss of lives that occurred in wartime.  Japan?  I am unsure.  The Yasikuni shrine commemorates the war criminals who created the massacres.  In Australia it is the War Memorials in Canberra, Melbourne and all the other cities and towns across the land.  What message do they send?  Is it the loss of life or the glory of Australia?  Such memorials, whether here or overseas were erected within a few years of the cessation of hostilities.  These statues in Charlotsville were erected in the 1920s, 60 years after the end of the ACW.  They were erected to further oppression of black people.  They send the wrong message IMO. ::) ::)

Then you would certainly have a problem with a statue erected to the man I quoted in post 29 ?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 4:24pm:

Belgarion wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 3:22pm: "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races —that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." Should a man who said this have a statue erected to his memory? If there are any such, should they be torn down? Yes, but even Lincoln, Grant and Sherman agreed with Lee. They may have agreed that slavery was an evil that must be destroyed, but equality was another matter.

Then you would wish statues of this man torn down?

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 2:06pm:

Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::)

It should be remembered. Just because history is messy and often barbaric in hindsight does not mean we should retire to our "safe place" and hug unicorns.

Setanta wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:54pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:50pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:48pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:47pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:46pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:36pm: lee wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:26pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:05pm: But OK... Should we have statues of Hitler... Or maybe Jeffrey Epstein? You can have any statue YOU want.  Hitler is a luminary but not one widely admired. Jeffrey Epstein? Was he FAMOUS and IMPORTANT? ;) Ah, see... It's all about who you like, who you'd tolerate and who you'd draw the line at. Of course, it's a safe to assume the answer to the question: who want's a statue a Jeffry Epstein? Even if he dragged US presidents, UK royalty and tech billionaires under his bus... So, it begs the question: What is the definition of 'famous and important' such that it wouldn't breach the limits you're prepared to go? Well, if my local council put up a statue of Xi, I would not tear it down, their taste in art sculpture is renowned in it's insanity and none of it has been removed. None of it has been removed but you'd tear it down? Then get to it! Umm, did you misread? Benefit of the doubt for now. Why? Why? Because you misrepresented what I said to the point of being opposite of what I said. Hence I asked if you misread and would give you the benefit of doubt leaning that way. On the other hand if this "why?" is a persistence in your belief I said that I would tear them down, my post says I would not. We are at odds in what you think I said and would say that error is on your side.

I'm interested in the fact that (while assuming you wouldn't act on your disapproval) why would you not tear down (or have torn down - I'm assuming) a statue of Xi only because you believe that your local council is insane?

Belgarion wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:56pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 4:24pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 3:22pm: "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races —that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." Should a man who said this have a statue erected to his memory? If there are any such, should they be torn down? Yes, but even Lincoln, Grant and Sherman agreed with Lee. They may have agreed that slavery was an evil that must be destroyed, but equality was another matter. Then you would wish statues of this man torn down?

As I am not a southern American, I am not privy to their sensibilities. I can only stand on sidelines and observe, as you too are restricted (unless you're a southern American).

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:58pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:54pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:50pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:48pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:47pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:46pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:36pm: lee wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:26pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:05pm: But OK... Should we have statues of Hitler... Or maybe Jeffrey Epstein? You can have any statue YOU want.  Hitler is a luminary but not one widely admired. Jeffrey Epstein? Was he FAMOUS and IMPORTANT? ;) Ah, see... It's all about who you like, who you'd tolerate and who you'd draw the line at. Of course, it's a safe to assume the answer to the question: who want's a statue a Jeffry Epstein? Even if he dragged US presidents, UK royalty and tech billionaires under his bus... So, it begs the question: What is the definition of 'famous and important' such that it wouldn't breach the limits you're prepared to go? Well, if my local council put up a statue of Xi, I would not tear it down, their taste in art sculpture is renowned in it's insanity and none of it has been removed. None of it has been removed but you'd tear it down? Then get to it! Umm, did you misread? Benefit of the doubt for now. Why? Why? Because you misrepresented what I said to the point of being opposite of what I said. Hence I asked if you misread and would give you the benefit of doubt leaning that way. On the other hand if this "why?" is a persistence in your belief I said that I would tear them down, my post says I would not. We are at odds in what you think I said and would say that error is on your side. I'm interested in the fact that (while assuming you wouldn't act on your disapproval) why would you not tear down (or have torn down - I'm assuming) a statue of Xi only because you believe that your local council is insane?

I could show you some pics of the "sculptures" they have paid big money for. Their sense of artistic sensibility is lacking in me and many other ratepayers who pay for it. We don't tear it down though. It will become part of our history as much as we don't think it reflects the community. If they put up a Xi statue, no-one would tear it down, we'd just wait for Aqua and his ilk to come to pay homage and take their money.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:45pm:

Now you're going to need to define famous and important.

Nope. I don't.

You are the one seems to want to build/remove statues. ;)

Setanta wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:06pm:

I could show you some pics of the "sculptures" they have paid big money for. Their sense of artistic sensibility is lacking in me and many other ratepayers who pay for it. We don't tear it down though. It will become part of our history as much as we don't think it reflects the community. If they put up a Xi statue, no-one would tear it down, we'd just wait for Aqua and his ilk to come to pay homage and take their money.

OK... But what you're saying (and I don't mean this as a personal offense, we're all tested like this) is that you don't have the courage it would take to stand by your convictions.

lee wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:07pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:45pm: Now you're going to need to define famous and important. Nope. I don't. You are the one seems to want to build/remove statues. ;)

No. I'm exceptionally immune to political iconography and political / psychological dogma.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:09pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:06pm: I could show you some pics of the "sculptures" they have paid big money for. Their sense of artistic sensibility is lacking in me and many other ratepayers who pay for it. We don't tear it down though. It will become part of our history as much as we don't think it reflects the community. If they put up a Xi statue, no-one would tear it down, we'd just wait for Aqua and his ilk to come to pay homage and take their money. OK... But what you're saying (and I don't mean this as a personal offense, we're all tested like this) is that you don't have the courage it would take to stand by your convictions.

That's not it at all. Statues or art do not define my convictions. I'm happy for others to have convictions opposed to mine, I live and deal with them every day. What I don't like is the attempt at rewriting history via the deletion of parts of it because they offend someone in the present for what happened in the past.

Setanta wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 6:57pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 2:06pm: Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::) It should be remembered. Just because history is messy and often barbaric in hindsight does not mean we should retire to our "safe place" and hug unicorns.

I look at it both ways, but both are about context. Most of the Confederate monuments were erected by a society that had lost many thousands of family members, and whether we agree or not, the spilling of blood overrides all other sensibilities. However, times have changed, as has the demographic. This means those living with these statues get to decide whether or not they represent their ideals. And I am sorry to have to say that if the descendants of the Confederate soldiers wanted those statues so badly, they should have taken them when they moved to better economic locations.

Robert E. Lee was offer the command of the US forces, and he chose to side with the rebel authorities at Montgomery Alabama, who before war broke out, attempted to coerce Kentucky and Missouri into overthrowing the US government in those states, but what is worse is that they sent commissioners to try to get Maryland to do the same. Had they been succussful Washington and the government would have fallen without a shot. So the worship of Lee's statue is not the way to remember history in the United States. Thankfully, the rebels were defeat after they started the war in April 1861

Setanta wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:14pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:09pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:06pm: I could show you some pics of the "sculptures" they have paid big money for. Their sense of artistic sensibility is lacking in me and many other ratepayers who pay for it. We don't tear it down though. It will become part of our history as much as we don't think it reflects the community. If they put up a Xi statue, no-one would tear it down, we'd just wait for Aqua and his ilk to come to pay homage and take their money. OK... But what you're saying (and I don't mean this as a personal offense, we're all tested like this) is that you don't have the courage it would take to stand by your convictions. That's not it at all. Statues or art do not define my convictions. I'm happy for others to have convictions opposed to mine, I live and deal with them every day. What I don't like is the attempt at rewriting history via the deletion of parts of it because they offend someone in the present for what happened in the past.

Even Lee himself recognised the danger of symbols to a lost and wrong cause and yet his effigy is misappropriated despite the man's wishes.

issuevoter wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:18pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:57pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 2:06pm: Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::) It should be remembered. Just because history is messy and often barbaric in hindsight does not mean we should retire to our "safe place" and hug unicorns. I look at it both ways, but both are about context. Most of the Confederate monuments were erected by a society that had lost many thousands of family members, and whether we agree or not, the spilling of blood overrides all other sensibilities. However, times have changed, as has the demographic. This means those living with these statues get to decide whether or not they represent their ideals. And I am sorry to have to say that if the descendants of the Confederate soldiers wanted those statues so badly, they should have taken them when they moved to better economic locations. Robert E. Lee was offer the command of the US forces, and he chose to side with the rebel authorities at Montgomery Alabama, who before war broke out, attempted to coerce Kentucky and Missouri into overthrowing the US government in those states, but what is worse is that they sent commissioners to try to get Maryland to do the same. Had they been succussful Washington and the government would have fallen without a shot. So the worship of Lee's statue is not the way to remember history in the United States. Thankfully, the rebels were defeat after they started the war in April 1861

I don't know that anyone worships them. That'd be dodgy. The point is that it is a part of their history whether they like it or not. No history should be forgotten.

There are two sides to this and I'm on the Orwell side.
Rewriting the past: Those who control the past, control the future.

Setanta wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:24pm:

I don't know that anyone worships them. That'd be dodgy. The point is that it is a part of their history whether they like it or not. No history should be forgotten. There are two sides to this and I'm on the Orwell side. Rewriting the past: Those who control the past, control the future.

Then be prepared to transfer your land to the original owners.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:37pm:

Then be prepared to transfer your land to the original owners.

based upon?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:37pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:24pm: I don't know that anyone worships them. That'd be dodgy. The point is that it is a part of their history whether they like it or not. No history should be forgotten. There are two sides to this and I'm on the Orwell side. Rewriting the past: Those who control the past, control the future. Then be prepared to transfer your land to the original owners.

I can't see how that follows, sorry. Perhaps if I supported pulling down James Cook's statues you could say that and there are members here that would support it. I would like you to support your contention "Then be prepared to transfer your land to the original owners" from what I have said.

Setanta wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:24pm:

issuevoter wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:18pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:57pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 2:06pm: Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::) It should be remembered. Just because history is messy and often barbaric in hindsight does not mean we should retire to our "safe place" and hug unicorns. I look at it both ways, but both are about context. Most of the Confederate monuments were erected by a society that had lost many thousands of family members, and whether we agree or not, the spilling of blood overrides all other sensibilities. However, times have changed, as has the demographic. This means those living with these statues get to decide whether or not they represent their ideals. And I am sorry to have to say that if the descendants of the Confederate soldiers wanted those statues so badly, they should have taken them when they moved to better economic locations. Robert E. Lee was offer the command of the US forces, and he chose to side with the rebel authorities at Montgomery Alabama, who before war broke out, attempted to coerce Kentucky and Missouri into overthrowing the US government in those states, but what is worse is that they sent commissioners to try to get Maryland to do the same. Had they been succussful Washington and the government would have fallen without a shot. So the worship of Lee's statue is not the way to remember history in the United States. Thankfully, the rebels were defeat after they started the war in April 1861 I don't know that anyone worships them. That'd be dodgy. The point is that it is a part of their history whether they like it or not. No history should be forgotten. There are two sides to this and I'm on the Orwell side. Rewriting the past: Those who control the past, control the future.

They are not going to destroy them - they will be moved to museums where that type of history belongs.

These guys were traitors who fought a war against the United States, these statues are inappropriate insulting to Blacks and encouraging to white nationalists.

These are the people who fought for slavery and that is what these statues represent.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:18pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:14pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:09pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:06pm: I could show you some pics of the "sculptures" they have paid big money for. Their sense of artistic sensibility is lacking in me and many other ratepayers who pay for it. We don't tear it down though. It will become part of our history as much as we don't think it reflects the community. If they put up a Xi statue, no-one would tear it down, we'd just wait for Aqua and his ilk to come to pay homage and take their money. OK... But what you're saying (and I don't mean this as a personal offense, we're all tested like this) is that you don't have the courage it would take to stand by your convictions. That's not it at all. Statues or art do not define my convictions. I'm happy for others to have convictions opposed to mine, I live and deal with them every day. What I don't like is the attempt at rewriting history via the deletion of parts of it because they offend someone in the present for what happened in the past. Even Lee himself recognised the danger of symbols to a lost and wrong cause and yet his effigy is misappropriated despite the man's wishes.

That's history for you. Jesus! <-not an exclamation to a god person. An example.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:48pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:24pm: issuevoter wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:18pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:57pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 2:06pm: Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::) It should be remembered. Just because history is messy and often barbaric in hindsight does not mean we should retire to our "safe place" and hug unicorns. I look at it both ways, but both are about context. Most of the Confederate monuments were erected by a society that had lost many thousands of family members, and whether we agree or not, the spilling of blood overrides all other sensibilities. However, times have changed, as has the demographic. This means those living with these statues get to decide whether or not they represent their ideals. And I am sorry to have to say that if the descendants of the Confederate soldiers wanted those statues so badly, they should have taken them when they moved to better economic locations. Robert E. Lee was offer the command of the US forces, and he chose to side with the rebel authorities at Montgomery Alabama, who before war broke out, attempted to coerce Kentucky and Missouri into overthrowing the US government in those states, but what is worse is that they sent commissioners to try to get Maryland to do the same. Had they been succussful Washington and the government would have fallen without a shot. So the worship of Lee's statue is not the way to remember history in the United States. Thankfully, the rebels were defeat after they started the war in April 1861 I don't know that anyone worships them. That'd be dodgy. The point is that it is a part of their history whether they like it or not. No history should be forgotten. There are two sides to this and I'm on the Orwell side. Rewriting the past: Those who control the past, control the future. They are not going to destroy them - they will be moved to museums where that type of history belongs. These guys were traitors who fought a war against the United States, these statues are inappropriate insulting to Blacks and encouraging to white nationalists. These are the people who fought for slavery and that is what these statues represent.

That one they are, what about all the others? I remember seeing one decapitated and the head thrown in the water in the UK. You are talking about one when there is a litany of this Taliban like destructiveness.

There is a Confederate statue maybe 4-5 blocks from my office. It is one of the many generic statues of a soldier, not of anyone specific, erected in the early 20th century by the powerful lobby "Daughters of the Confederacy." It memorializes no one in particular and was put there as part of that organization's propaganda efforts.

Next to it now stands a memorial to Martin Luther King.

AiA wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 8:04pm:

There is a Confederate statue maybe 4-5 blocks from my office. It is one of the many generic statues of a soldier, not of anyone specific, erected in the early 20th century by the powerful lobby "Daughters of the Confederacy." It memorializes no one in particular and was put there as part of that organization's propaganda efforts. Next to it now stands a memorial to Martin Luther King.

That sounds like a very balanced approach.

White supremacists in America have identified with Confederate statues and used them as a point of protest and white pride....Removing them to a museum is common sense???

:-? :-? :-?

Setanta wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:24pm:

issuevoter wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:18pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:57pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 2:06pm: Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::) It should be remembered. Just because history is messy and often barbaric in hindsight does not mean we should retire to our "safe place" and hug unicorns. I look at it both ways, but both are about context. Most of the Confederate monuments were erected by a society that had lost many thousands of family members, and whether we agree or not, the spilling of blood overrides all other sensibilities. However, times have changed, as has the demographic. This means those living with these statues get to decide whether or not they represent their ideals. And I am sorry to have to say that if the descendants of the Confederate soldiers wanted those statues so badly, they should have taken them when they moved to better economic locations. Robert E. Lee was offer the command of the US forces, and he chose to side with the rebel authorities at Montgomery Alabama, who before war broke out, attempted to coerce Kentucky and Missouri into overthrowing the US government in those states, but what is worse is that they sent commissioners to try to get Maryland to do the same. Had they been succussful Washington and the government would have fallen without a shot. So the worship of Lee's statue is not the way to remember history in the United States. Thankfully, the rebels were defeat after they started the war in April 1861 I don't know that anyone worships them. That'd be dodgy. The point is that it is a part of their history whether they like it or not. No history should be forgotten. There are two sides to this and I'm on the Orwell side. Rewriting the past: Those who control the past, control the future.

I lived in NC for 11 years. I saw Robert E. Lee revered by those who glorify him as if he were a saint. Take a look at the Confederate apologists on Youtube. Also movies like Gods and Generals perpetuate the myth surrounding Lee.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:48pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:24pm: issuevoter wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:18pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:57pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 2:06pm: Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::) It should be remembered. Just because history is messy and often barbaric in hindsight does not mean we should retire to our "safe place" and hug unicorns. I look at it both ways, but both are about context. Most of the Confederate monuments were erected by a society that had lost many thousands of family members, and whether we agree or not, the spilling of blood overrides all other sensibilities. However, times have changed, as has the demographic. This means those living with these statues get to decide whether or not they represent their ideals. And I am sorry to have to say that if the descendants of the Confederate soldiers wanted those statues so badly, they should have taken them when they moved to better economic locations. Robert E. Lee was offer the command of the US forces, and he chose to side with the rebel authorities at Montgomery Alabama, who before war broke out, attempted to coerce Kentucky and Missouri into overthrowing the US government in those states, but what is worse is that they sent commissioners to try to get Maryland to do the same. Had they been succussful Washington and the government would have fallen without a shot. So the worship of Lee's statue is not the way to remember history in the United States. Thankfully, the rebels were defeat after they started the war in April 1861 I don't know that anyone worships them. That'd be dodgy. The point is that it is a part of their history whether they like it or not. No history should be forgotten. There are two sides to this and I'm on the Orwell side. Rewriting the past: Those who control the past, control the future. They are not going to destroy them - they will be moved to museums where that type of history belongs. These guys were traitors who fought a war against the United States, these statues are inappropriate insulting to Blacks and encouraging to white nationalists. These are the people who fought for slavery and that is what these statues represent.

Traitors were they? Then what  do you call the British people in America who rebelled against their lawful government around  80 years earlier?

The Old South was a hyper-slave-holding-oligarchy. It wasn't about freedom in the least, at least not for the 99%.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:48pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:24pm: issuevoter wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:18pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:57pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 2:06pm: Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::) It should be remembered. Just because history is messy and often barbaric in hindsight does not mean we should retire to our "safe place" and hug unicorns. I look at it both ways, but both are about context. Most of the Confederate monuments were erected by a society that had lost many thousands of family members, and whether we agree or not, the spilling of blood overrides all other sensibilities. However, times have changed, as has the demographic. This means those living with these statues get to decide whether or not they represent their ideals. And I am sorry to have to say that if the descendants of the Confederate soldiers wanted those statues so badly, they should have taken them when they moved to better economic locations. Robert E. Lee was offer the command of the US forces, and he chose to side with the rebel authorities at Montgomery Alabama, who before war broke out, attempted to coerce Kentucky and Missouri into overthrowing the US government in those states, but what is worse is that they sent commissioners to try to get Maryland to do the same. Had they been succussful Washington and the government would have fallen without a shot. So the worship of Lee's statue is not the way to remember history in the United States. Thankfully, the rebels were defeat after they started the war in April 1861 I don't know that anyone worships them. That'd be dodgy. The point is that it is a part of their history whether they like it or not. No history should be forgotten. There are two sides to this and I'm on the Orwell side. Rewriting the past: Those who control the past, control the future. They are not going to destroy them - they will be moved to museums where that type of history belongs. These guys were traitors who fought a war against the United States, these statues are inappropriate insulting to Blacks and encouraging to white nationalists. These are the people who fought for slavery and that is what these statues represent.

https://www.amren.com/videos/2021/07/some-crazy-things-we-are-supposed-to-believe-about-blacks/

The winners write the history. The Northern States had the votes to end slavery by outlawing it but instead passed the Morrill Tariff. Ending slavery suddenly would have had a massive economic impact so just taxing Southern States more seemed the better opportunity to raise revenue for larger government. The South fought to end control under the more populated and represented Industrialized North and the North fought to preserve the Union or mare accurately the wealth in the South. Part of destroying the South was destroying their economy. Sherman's march to the sea was glamorized but was a scorched earth invasion. His troops burned, raped, murdered and looted the South. He sent almost 300 wagon loads of spoils North. Until the war between the States the Federal Government was subservient to the States. After the war the Federal Government seized the power to become the supreme law of the land, like it or not! Using this example the EU should invade and conquer the UK to bring them back under their control!

Mortdooley wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 11:19pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:48pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:24pm: issuevoter wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:18pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:57pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 2:06pm: Tell us, what story do the statues in this case tell?  Is it a story of the glorification of slavery and rebellion?   Should that be celebrated or condemned?   ::) ::) It should be remembered. Just because history is messy and often barbaric in hindsight does not mean we should retire to our "safe place" and hug unicorns. I look at it both ways, but both are about context. Most of the Confederate monuments were erected by a society that had lost many thousands of family members, and whether we agree or not, the spilling of blood overrides all other sensibilities. However, times have changed, as has the demographic. This means those living with these statues get to decide whether or not they represent their ideals. And I am sorry to have to say that if the descendants of the Confederate soldiers wanted those statues so badly, they should have taken them when they moved to better economic locations. Robert E. Lee was offer the command of the US forces, and he chose to side with the rebel authorities at Montgomery Alabama, who before war broke out, attempted to coerce Kentucky and Missouri into overthrowing the US government in those states, but what is worse is that they sent commissioners to try to get Maryland to do the same. Had they been succussful Washington and the government would have fallen without a shot. So the worship of Lee's statue is not the way to remember history in the United States. Thankfully, the rebels were defeat after they started the war in April 1861 I don't know that anyone worships them. That'd be dodgy. The point is that it is a part of their history whether they like it or not. No history should be forgotten. There are two sides to this and I'm on the Orwell side. Rewriting the past: Those who control the past, control the future. They are not going to destroy them - they will be moved to museums where that type of history belongs. These guys were traitors who fought a war against the United States, these statues are inappropriate insulting to Blacks and encouraging to white nationalists. These are the people who fought for slavery and that is what these statues represent. https://www.amren.com/videos/2021/07/some-crazy-things-we-are-supposed-to-believe-about-blacks/ The winners write the history. The Northern States had the votes to end slavery by outlawing it but instead passed the Morrill Tariff. Ending slavery suddenly would have had a massive economic impact so just taxing Southern States more seemed the better opportunity to raise revenue for larger government. The South fought to end control under the more populated and represented Industrialized North and the North fought to preserve the Union or mare accurately the wealth in the South. Part of destroying the South was destroying their economy. Sherman's march to the sea was glamorized but was a scorched earth invasion. His troops burned, raped, murdered and looted the South. He sent almost 300 wagon loads of spoils North. Until the war between the States the Federal Government was subservient to the States. After the war the Federal Government seized the power to become the supreme law of the land, like it or not! Using this example the EU should invade and conquer the UK to bring them back under their control!

Yes, winners do write the history and a historian just published a book last year that details how the South did just that:

How the South Won the Civil War


https://www.amazon.com/How-South-Won-Civil-War/dp/0190900903

The South would have won if its goal was control of the entire country. They could have taken DC in the first few months. All they wanted was independence from an overbearing North and didn't have the resources to succeed because the Union blockades were so effective.

I must have forgotten, which side did Lewis and Clarke fight for?

Mortdooley wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 11:49pm:

The South would have won if its goal was control of the entire country. They could have taken DC in the first few months. All they wanted was independence from an overbearing North and didn't have the resources to succeed because the Union blockades were so effective. I must have forgotten, which side did Lewis and Clarke fight for?

Mortie, don't insult my intelligence. Exactly how the Daughters of the Confederacy and their powerful allies re-wrote the narrative of the war has been well documented, as how the oligarchy not only continued in the South but was also transported out West. The book I mentioned is fascinating. Give it a read.

AiA wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 12:00am:

Mortdooley wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 11:49pm: The South would have won if its goal was control of the entire country. They could have taken DC in the first few months. All they wanted was independence from an overbearing North and didn't have the resources to succeed because the Union blockades were so effective. I must have forgotten, which side did Lewis and Clarke fight for? Mortie, don't insult my intelligence. Exactly how the Daughters of the Confederacy and their powerful allies re-wrote the narrative of the war has been well documented, as how the oligarchy not only continued in the South but was also transported out West. The book I mentioned is fascinating. Give it a read.

Then buy it and gift it to me. I read Hillarys book but I checked it out of the Library, I wouldn't put any of my money in the pocket of the clinton crime family. I doubt this book would be purchased by libraries because of low interest.

Quote:

Many economists contend that the United States is now or is becoming an oligarchy. In saying this, they point to the country’s worsening income inequality and social stratification, two of the main characteristics of a wealth-based oligarchy. Between 1979 and 2005, the incomes of the top 1% of U.S. workers rose by 400%. According to a 2104 study by political scientists Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page, the U.S. Congress passes legislation benefiting the wealthiest 10% of Americans more often than measures benefiting the poorest 50%.

The Democrats are the oligarchy, they manage their ignorant voters selling them on the idea of class inequity. Congress passes laws that benefit the top 10%, check it out. You may be in the top 10% yourself, I am and it doesn't take millions to get there. When people piss away the opportunity to get a useful education and spend their income on bobbles and bullshit it is their own failure. Not the system! There is an interesting bunch of YouTube videos about what the poor do that the wealthy don't and what the wealthy do that the poor don't do. Check them out.

Just to remind you all - Thomas Jefferson, President of the Confederate States, was prepared to go the Emancipation route to garner more troops to defend the South, and many Blacks were prepared to do so.

So the statue destruction has nothing to do with 'oppression' or 'discrimination' or 'slavery' at all.

Just saying...

Also saying - there were Irish Brigades on BOTH sides - who suffered terrible losses - in the hope that 'fighting for freedom' would mean the Americans would fight for Irish freedom as well...

It's not a simple matter of Black and White.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu1Jo5C_tdU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtBR0U_M0Fw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVeSKwM--1M

Richard Branson blasts into space while Trump supporters like Mortie are still fighting the Civil War in their heads ...

AiA wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 2:57am:

Richard Branson blasts into space while Trump supporters like Mortie are still fighting the Civil War in their heads ...

Lol    ;D

Well, at least there's plenty of room in there.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:01pm:

Belgarion wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:56pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 4:24pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 3:22pm: "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races —that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." Should a man who said this have a statue erected to his memory? If there are any such, should they be torn down? Yes, but even Lincoln, Grant and Sherman agreed with Lee. They may have agreed that slavery was an evil that must be destroyed, but equality was another matter. Then you would wish statues of this man torn down? As I am not a southern American, I am not privy to their sensibilities. I can only stand on sidelines and observe, as you too are restricted (unless you're a southern American).

Not being a Southern American has not stopped you commenting thus far. Why not answer the question. If there are statues to the man who said these words, should they be torn down?

Setanta wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:48pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:18pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:14pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:09pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:06pm: I could show you some pics of the "sculptures" they have paid big money for. Their sense of artistic sensibility is lacking in me and many other ratepayers who pay for it. We don't tear it down though. It will become part of our history as much as we don't think it reflects the community. If they put up a Xi statue, no-one would tear it down, we'd just wait for Aqua and his ilk to come to pay homage and take their money. OK... But what you're saying (and I don't mean this as a personal offense, we're all tested like this) is that you don't have the courage it would take to stand by your convictions. That's not it at all. Statues or art do not define my convictions. I'm happy for others to have convictions opposed to mine, I live and deal with them every day. What I don't like is the attempt at rewriting history via the deletion of parts of it because they offend someone in the present for what happened in the past. Even Lee himself recognised the danger of symbols to a lost and wrong cause and yet his effigy is misappropriated despite the man's wishes. That's history for you. Jesus! <-not an exclamation to a god person. An example.

Not as good an example as you might think... Jesus instructed his apostles to remember him and (allegedly) created a ritual meal by which he would be intimately remembered.

lee wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:39pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:37pm: Then be prepared to transfer your land to the original owners. based upon?

If you believe no history should be forgotten, then historical theft of land or property should not be forgotten.

And it follows that if you acknowledge an historical crime has been committed, don't you have the responsibility to offer restitution... To right an acknowledged wrong?

If remembering injustices was easy (i.e had no consequences), we'd all be doing it 3 times before lunch.

Belgarion wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 12:12pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:01pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:56pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 4:24pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 3:22pm: "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races —that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." Should a man who said this have a statue erected to his memory? If there are any such, should they be torn down? Yes, but even Lincoln, Grant and Sherman agreed with Lee. They may have agreed that slavery was an evil that must be destroyed, but equality was another matter. Then you would wish statues of this man torn down? As I am not a southern American, I am not privy to their sensibilities. I can only stand on sidelines and observe, as you too are restricted (unless you're a southern American). Not being a Southern American has not stopped you commenting thus far. Why not answer the question. If there are statues to the man who said these words, should they be torn down?

Commenting on what Lee said against his own apotheosis with regard to 'symbols' in his honour, is not me claiming to know what it feels like to be a southern American still processing the ripple effects of the American Civil War.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 12:22pm:

If you believe no history should be forgotten, then historical theft of land or property should not be forgotten.

True


NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 12:22pm:

And it follows that if you acknowledge an historical crime has been committed, don't you have the responsibility to offer restitution... To right an acknowledged wrong?

No. That would mean everything back to at least the Picts would require restitution. ;)

lee wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 1:44pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 12:22pm: And it follows that if you acknowledge an historical crime has been committed, don't you have the responsibility to offer restitution... To right an acknowledged wrong? No. That would mean everything back to at least the Picts would require restitution. ;)

OK...

Then you'd need to define the timeframe by which remembering historical wrongs no longer implies a duty to offer restitution.

Or are you saying there is no responsibility of any kind to right any historical wrongs?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 12:25pm:

Belgarion wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 12:12pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:01pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:56pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 4:24pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 3:22pm: "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races —that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." Should a man who said this have a statue erected to his memory? If there are any such, should they be torn down? Yes, but even Lincoln, Grant and Sherman agreed with Lee. They may have agreed that slavery was an evil that must be destroyed, but equality was another matter. Then you would wish statues of this man torn down? As I am not a southern American, I am not privy to their sensibilities. I can only stand on sidelines and observe, as you too are restricted (unless you're a southern American). Not being a Southern American has not stopped you commenting thus far. Why not answer the question. If there are statues to the man who said these words, should they be torn down? Commenting on what Lee said against his own apotheosis with regard to 'symbols' in his honour, is not me claiming to know what it feels like to be a southern American still processing the ripple effects of the American Civil War.

So you won't answer the question. I accept your surrender. I notice none of the other statue destroyers have chipped in on this question either. Understandable, as it makes them look even more foolish.  ;D

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 1:48pm:

Then you'd need to define the timeframe by which remembering historical wrongs no longer implies a duty to offer restitution.

Nope. it was your proposition; you define the timeline.


NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 12:22pm:

And it follows that if you acknowledge an historical crime has been committed, don't you have the responsibility to offer restitution... To right an acknowledged wrong?

Belgarion wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 4:13pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 12:25pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 12:12pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:01pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 6:56pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 4:24pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 3:22pm: "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races —that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." Should a man who said this have a statue erected to his memory? If there are any such, should they be torn down? Yes, but even Lincoln, Grant and Sherman agreed with Lee. They may have agreed that slavery was an evil that must be destroyed, but equality was another matter. Then you would wish statues of this man torn down? As I am not a southern American, I am not privy to their sensibilities. I can only stand on sidelines and observe, as you too are restricted (unless you're a southern American). Not being a Southern American has not stopped you commenting thus far. Why not answer the question. If there are statues to the man who said these words, should they be torn down? Commenting on what Lee said against his own apotheosis with regard to 'symbols' in his honour, is not me claiming to know what it feels like to be a southern American still processing the ripple effects of the American Civil War. So you won't answer the question. I accept your surrender. I notice none of the other statue destroyers have chipped in on this question either. Understandable, as it makes them look even more foolish.

Another one as stupid as Pastor Ross.

I don't wish for statues to be torn down... But if the culture in which they belong deems that they should be torn down because they, say, represent something more than just a memorial to the past but also cause a significant negative response within their respective communities, I can understand why they'd decide to tear them down.

Whatever Lee represents, in the southern states, it's definitely more than just a memorial to history. It seems it represent a reminder of segregation.

If in Australia statues of, say, Queen Victoria represented more than just a memorial to the past but to a dark history that is persisted into the present specifically by their existence, such that it caused considerable current social grief, then yes, remove them.

lee wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 4:34pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 1:48pm: Then you'd need to define the timeframe by which remembering historical wrongs no longer implies a duty to offer restitution. Nope. it was your proposition; you define the timeline. NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 12:22pm: And it follows that if you acknowledge an historical crime has been committed, don't you have the responsibility to offer restitution... To right an acknowledged wrong?

OK... From 1920.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 4:39pm:

OK... From 1920.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11^th, 2021 at 7:37pm:

Then be prepared to transfer your land to the original owners.

Then that does not apply. ::)

lee wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 6:41pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 4:39pm: OK... From 1920. NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 11th, 2021 at 7:37pm: Then be prepared to transfer your land to the original owners. Then that does not apply. ::)

You can't know that, but make it, say, 1870.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 7:21pm:

You can't know that, but make it, say, 1870.

I can know that. Once land has been sold/rated it becomes freehold to the owner. There is no going back from that.

lee wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 8:20pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 7:21pm: You can't know that, but make it, say, 1870. I can know that. Once land has been sold/rated it becomes freehold to the owner. There is no going back from that.

There is if you choose to return it to its rightful owner.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 4:37pm:

Another one as stupid as Pastor Ross. I don't wish for statues to be torn down... But if the culture in which they belong deems that they should be torn down because they, say, represent something more than just a memorial to the past but also cause a significant negative response within their respective communities, I can understand why they'd decide to tear them down. Whatever Lee represents, in the southern states, it's definitely more than just a memorial to history. It seems it represent a reminder of segregation. If in Australia statues of, say, Queen Victoria represented more than just a memorial to the past but to a dark history that is persisted into the present specifically by their existence, such that it caused considerable current social grief, then yes, remove them.

You don't wish the statues torn down? Good. Why not say that before instead of resorting to all that obfuscation?  However the culture that created them does not wish them torn down either, only a noisy minority who think that the destruction of monuments will make all their problems disappear.  ::)

Still waiting to hear from the statue vandals.....whats your take on this?    ;D

Belgarion wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 11:19am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 4:37pm: Another one as stupid as Pastor Ross. I don't wish for statues to be torn down... But if the culture in which they belong deems that they should be torn down because they, say, represent something more than just a memorial to the past but also cause a significant negative response within their respective communities, I can understand why they'd decide to tear them down. Whatever Lee represents, in the southern states, it's definitely more than just a memorial to history. It seems it represent a reminder of segregation. If in Australia statues of, say, Queen Victoria represented more than just a memorial to the past but to a dark history that is persisted into the present specifically by their existence, such that it caused considerable current social grief, then yes, remove them. You don't wish the statues torn down? Good. Why not say that before instead of resorting to all that obfuscation?  However the culture that created them does not wish them torn down either, only a noisy minority who think that the destruction of monuments will make all their problems disappear.  ::) Still waiting to hear from the statue vandals.....whats your take on this?    ;D

As I said... Stupid...

Do you understand the concept of iconoclasm? It's been with human society since societies were a thing.

What happened to all those statues of Lenin? Defaced statues of the Roman Caesars? Greek gods? The destruction of pagan images during the Christianizing of Europe? How about the tearing down of the statue of King George III in New York in 1776? The destruction of the artwork in the Hagia Sophia?

Do you have any objection to historical iconoclasm? If so, why?

Iconoclasm. It's a thing humans do when the images and art that represent a past society offend its current iteration.

I didn't 'wish' for the statues of Lenin to be torn down in, say, Ukraine (even if I could understand why they were), did you? And what if you did... Do you have any right to impose that on Ukrainians?

I know... I guess you're an old man now and the past is greater than your future, so maybe you're inclined to defend all past things... Even if they're not yours.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 8:42pm:

lee wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 8:20pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 7:21pm: You can't know that, but make it, say, 1870. I can know that. Once land has been sold/rated it becomes freehold to the owner. There is no going back from that. There is if you choose to return it to its rightful owner.

A very lose concept when you apply it to wandering groups crossing vast swathes of land... which parts to you want to give them?  Only the very best?  Why, when there is no documentation and such to support their contentions?

As I said - most of our local groups are mixed now anyway.... very difficult to say who actually wandered which land etc...

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 11:51am:

Belgarion wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 11:19am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 4:37pm: Another one as stupid as Pastor Ross. I don't wish for statues to be torn down... But if the culture in which they belong deems that they should be torn down because they, say, represent something more than just a memorial to the past but also cause a significant negative response within their respective communities, I can understand why they'd decide to tear them down. Whatever Lee represents, in the southern states, it's definitely more than just a memorial to history. It seems it represent a reminder of segregation. If in Australia statues of, say, Queen Victoria represented more than just a memorial to the past but to a dark history that is persisted into the present specifically by their existence, such that it caused considerable current social grief, then yes, remove them. You don't wish the statues torn down? Good. Why not say that before instead of resorting to all that obfuscation?  However the culture that created them does not wish them torn down either, only a noisy minority who think that the destruction of monuments will make all their problems disappear.  ::) Still waiting to hear from the statue vandals.....whats your take on this?    ;D As I said... Stupid... Do you understand the concept of iconoclasm? It's been with human society since societies were a thing. What happened to all those statues of Lenin? Defaced statues of the Roman Caesars? Greek gods? The destruction of pagan images during the Christianizing of Europe? How about the tearing down of the statue of King George III in New York in 1776? The destruction of the artwork in the Hagia Sophia? Do you have any objection to historical iconoclasm? If so, why? Iconoclasm. It's a thing humans do when the images and art that represent a past society offend its current iteration. I didn't 'wish' for the statue of Lenin to be torn down in, say, Ukraine, did you? And what if you did... Do you have any right to impose that on Ukrainians? I know... I guess you're an old manu now and the past is greater than your future, so maybe you're inclined to defend all past things... Even if they're not yours.

You're equating statues of Robert E Lee with Lenin?

How about, in the mad rush to uphold and protect the icons of a certain culture - we give the same privilege to others who happen to live there?

Here in Oz there was a rightful outcry over the destruction of caves containing some paintings going way back - I joined in with that - it was one company, not a general program to destroy a culture... but the crass indifference to many things in the name of profit is breathtaking...

Where was the equal outcry over the vandalism of Captain Cook's statue in Hyde Park?  Where the demonstrations?  Where the mass signings of protest? What would have happened if Australians had linked arms to form a wall around it to protect their heritage and culture or set up a camp there?

Robert E Lee's statue was to commemorate the stand of the State over State's Rights as they saw it then - and to commemorate those who died in that cause...... not one thing to do with oppression of blacks and slavery apart from peripherally ....... VERY peripherally.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 11:51am:

Belgarion wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 11:19am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 4:37pm: Another one as stupid as Pastor Ross. I don't wish for statues to be torn down... But if the culture in which they belong deems that they should be torn down because they, say, represent something more than just a memorial to the past but also cause a significant negative response within their respective communities, I can understand why they'd decide to tear them down. Whatever Lee represents, in the southern states, it's definitely more than just a memorial to history. It seems it represent a reminder of segregation. If in Australia statues of, say, Queen Victoria represented more than just a memorial to the past but to a dark history that is persisted into the present specifically by their existence, such that it caused considerable current social grief, then yes, remove them. You don't wish the statues torn down? Good. Why not say that before instead of resorting to all that obfuscation?  However the culture that created them does not wish them torn down either, only a noisy minority who think that the destruction of monuments will make all their problems disappear.  ::) Still waiting to hear from the statue vandals.....whats your take on this?    ;D As I said... Stupid... Do you understand the concept of iconoclasm? It's been with human society since societies were a thing. What happened to all those statues of Lenin? Defaced statues of the Roman Caesars? Greek gods? The destruction of pagan images during the Christianizing of Europe? How about the tearing down of the statue of King George III in New York in 1776? The destruction of the artwork in the Hagia Sophia? Do you have any objection to historical iconoclasm? If so, why? Iconoclasm. It's a thing humans do when the images and art that represent a past society offend its current iteration. I didn't 'wish' for the statues of Lenin to be torn down in, say, Ukraine (even if I could understand why they were), did you? And what if you did... Do you have any right to impose that on Ukrainians? I know... I guess you're an old manu now and the past is greater than your future, so maybe you're inclined to defend all past things... Even if they're not yours.

Your attempts to dig yourself out of the hole you created by refusing to answer my question in the first place are rather pathetic. I will give you one more chance.

Do you see the removal of the Lee statue as an action approved by the majority of the people, or one supported only by an unrepresentative but noisy minority?  A simple question. Mentions of ancient Rome, the former Soviet Union, and 15th century Byzantium are not required.   

Belgarion wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:04pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 11:51am: Belgarion wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 11:19am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 4:37pm: Another one as stupid as Pastor Ross. I don't wish for statues to be torn down... But if the culture in which they belong deems that they should be torn down because they, say, represent something more than just a memorial to the past but also cause a significant negative response within their respective communities, I can understand why they'd decide to tear them down. Whatever Lee represents, in the southern states, it's definitely more than just a memorial to history. It seems it represent a reminder of segregation. If in Australia statues of, say, Queen Victoria represented more than just a memorial to the past but to a dark history that is persisted into the present specifically by their existence, such that it caused considerable current social grief, then yes, remove them. You don't wish the statues torn down? Good. Why not say that before instead of resorting to all that obfuscation?  However the culture that created them does not wish them torn down either, only a noisy minority who think that the destruction of monuments will make all their problems disappear.  ::) Still waiting to hear from the statue vandals.....whats your take on this?    ;D As I said... Stupid... Do you understand the concept of iconoclasm? It's been with human society since societies were a thing. What happened to all those statues of Lenin? Defaced statues of the Roman Caesars? Greek gods? The destruction of pagan images during the Christianizing of Europe? How about the tearing down of the statue of King George III in New York in 1776? The destruction of the artwork in the Hagia Sophia? Do you have any objection to historical iconoclasm? If so, why? Iconoclasm. It's a thing humans do when the images and art that represent a past society offend its current iteration. I didn't 'wish' for the statues of Lenin to be torn down in, say, Ukraine (even if I could understand why they were), did you? And what if you did... Do you have any right to impose that on Ukrainians? I know... I guess you're an old manu now and the past is greater than your future, so maybe you're inclined to defend all past things... Even if they're not yours. Your attempts to dig yourself out of the hole you created by refusing to answer my question in the first place are rather pathetic. I will give you one more chance. Do you see the removal of the Lee statue as an action approved by the majority of the people, or one supported only by an unrepresentative but noisy minority?  A simple question. Mentions of ancient Rome, the former Soviet Union, and 15th century Byzantium are not required.

How many in Charlottesville voted against the removal of the statue?

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:00pm:

Robert E Lee's statue was to commemorate the stand of the State over State's Rights as they saw it then - and to commemorate those who died in that cause...... not one thing to do with oppression of blacks and slavery apart from peripherally ....... VERY peripherally.

So,  not to sell land to whites only in the 1920s?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12^th, 2021 at 8:42pm:

lee wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 8:20pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 7:21pm: You can't know that, but make it, say, 1870. I can know that. Once land has been sold/rated it becomes freehold to the owner. There is no going back from that. There is if you choose to return it to its rightful owner.

The rightful owner is the one who is making the rates payments. ::)

Why do you want to keep changing the dates? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:18pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 8:42pm: lee wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 8:20pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 12th, 2021 at 7:21pm: You can't know that, but make it, say, 1870. I can know that. Once land has been sold/rated it becomes freehold to the owner. There is no going back from that. There is if you choose to return it to its rightful owner. The rightful owner is the one who is making the rates payments. ::) Why do you want to keep changing the dates? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

You're conflating the imposition of legality with morality.

The original point was that if you acknowledge that past actions were wrong, do you have a responsibility to right the wrong?

Changing the dates? Because they're meaningless in the context of moral actions if you believe that the past should not be forgotten. What is it not to forget an unjust act except to hold for its reckoning?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:09pm:

How many in Charlottesville voted against the removal of the statue?

The City Council voted. All voted for the removal. Of course that doesn't mean a majority of ratepayers in the city agreed. ;)

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:29pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:09pm: How many in Charlottesville voted against the removal of the statue? The City Council voted. All voted for the removal. Of course that doesn't mean a majority of ratepayers in the city agreed. ;)

So you don't know how many would have voted either way.

The statue in question has been removed to a museum so it cannot be vandalised or used by white supremacists as a staging point for anarchy....The statue has not been destroyed and is in a better place to be preserved!!!

::) ::) ::)

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:31pm:

lee wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:29pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:09pm: How many in Charlottesville voted against the removal of the statue? The City Council voted. All voted for the removal. Of course that doesn't mean a majority of ratepayers in the city agreed. ;) So you don't know how many would have voted either way.

No I don't and neither do you. Why did you bring it up in the first place? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:33pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:31pm: lee wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:29pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:09pm: How many in Charlottesville voted against the removal of the statue? The City Council voted. All voted for the removal. Of course that doesn't mean a majority of ratepayers in the city agreed. ;) So you don't know how many would have voted either way. No I don't and neither do you. Why did you bring it up in the first place? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

It was a response to another poster (see thread above for context).

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:32pm:

The statue in question has been removed to a museum so it cannot be vandalised or used by white supremacists as a staging point for anarchy....The statue has not been destroyed and is in a better place to be preserved!!! ::) ::) ::)

Well, yes... Which was more than what was done for the statue of George III in New York.

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:32pm:

The statue in question has been removed to a museum so it cannot be vandalised or used by white supremacists as a staging point for anarchy.

Yes we wouldn't want African American's or those of the left to vandalise them. ;)

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:09pm:

But if the culture in which they belong deems that they should be torn down because they, say, represent something more than just a memorial to the past but also cause a significant negative response within their respective communities, I can understand why they'd decide to tear them down.

You mean this? How did you determine it was a "significant negative response within their respective communities". They were loud, they were heard - It doesn't make it significant.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:36pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:32pm: The statue in question has been removed to a museum so it cannot be vandalised or used by white supremacists as a staging point for anarchy....The statue has not been destroyed and is in a better place to be preserved!!! ::) ::) ::) Well, yes... Which was more than what was done for the statue of George III in New York.

I fail to see what the problem is with putting the statue in a museum....The statue in question is controversial because of what it represents....Racists and rednecks have been triggered???

:-? :-? :-?

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:43pm:

The statue in question is controversial because of what it represents..

What does it represent phil? Other than its original intent of honour?

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:43pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:36pm: philperth2010 wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:32pm: The statue in question has been removed to a museum so it cannot be vandalised or used by white supremacists as a staging point for anarchy....The statue has not been destroyed and is in a better place to be preserved!!! ::) ::) ::) Well, yes... Which was more than what was done for the statue of George III in New York. I fail to see what the problem is with putting the statue in a museum....The statue in question is controversial because of what it represents....Racists and rednecks have been triggered??? :-? :-? :-?

Yes. Iconoclasm is universal in human society... In earlier times they would have been smashed or melted down... Now, at least, they're putting the icons in museums.

And anyone who wants to weep at the feet of Robert E Lee for 'the lost cause' can still do it at his tomb.

https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/0b/1a/e2/e2/robert-e-lee-tomb.jpg

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:42pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:09pm: But if the culture in which they belong deems that they should be torn down because they, say, represent something more than just a memorial to the past but also cause a significant negative response within their respective communities, I can understand why they'd decide to tear them down. You mean this? How did you determine it was a "significant negative response within their respective communities". They were loud, they were heard - It doesn't make it significant.

Well, it was significant enough to cause the removal of a symbol and make world news.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:45pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:43pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:36pm: philperth2010 wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:32pm: The statue in question has been removed to a museum so it cannot be vandalised or used by white supremacists as a staging point for anarchy....The statue has not been destroyed and is in a better place to be preserved!!! ::) ::) ::) Well, yes... Which was more than what was done for the statue of George III in New York. I fail to see what the problem is with putting the statue in a museum....The statue in question is controversial because of what it represents....Racists and rednecks have been triggered??? :-? :-? :-? Yes. Iconoclasm is universal in human society... In earlier times they would have been smashed or melted down... Now, at least, they're putting the icons in museums.

A site has not been named yet but a Museum or Gallery is the likely destination....Either way it is better than destroying history???

:-? :-? :-?

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:45pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:43pm: The statue in question is controversial because of what it represents.. What does it represent phil? Other than its original intent of honour?

" ... the sin of being willing to destroy Black people for economic gain."

As long as the statues "remain standing in our downtown public spaces, they signal that our community tolerated white supremacy and the lost cause these generals fought for."

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 1:10pm:

lee wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:45pm: philperth2010 wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:43pm: The statue in question is controversial because of what it represents.. What does it represent phil? Other than its original intent of honour? " ... the sin of being willing to destroy Black people for economic gain." As long as the statues "remain standing in our downtown public spaces, they signal that our community tolerated white supremacy and the lost cause these generals fought for."

Which some dickheads believe represents honour???

::) ::) ::)

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 12:54pm:

Well, it was significant enough to cause the removal of a symbol and make world news.

Was the fact that it was significant? Or the fact that it made world news made it significant? ;)

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 1:10pm:

" ... the sin of being willing to destroy Black people for economic gain."

Really? Where did they  write that? At the foot of the statue? Or is it just present justification?


greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 1:10pm:

As long as the statues "remain standing in our downtown public spaces, they signal that our community tolerated white supremacy and the lost cause these generals fought for."

But the community never got a vote. So how did they know that? On the voices only?  The "Loud and Proud'? ::)

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 3:12pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 12:54pm: Well, it was significant enough to cause the removal of a symbol and make world news. Was the fact that it was significant? Or the fact that it made world news made it significant? ;)

It would have not worked had it not been significant to us...

Do you think a report on the tearing down of the statue of a rebel monk from Bhutan would have been of any interest to most Australians?

The only question to ask is: why is Robert E Lee's effigy so significant to us?

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 3:15pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 1:10pm: " ... the sin of being willing to destroy Black people for economic gain." Really? ...

Yes.

[quote author=helian link=1625905809/112#112 date=1626142172]
How many in Charlottesville voted against the removal of the statue?
[/quote]

Were the people given a vote?

Belgarion wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 3:53pm:

[quote author=helian link=1625905809/112#112 date=1626142172] How many in Charlottesville voted against the removal of the statue?

Were the people given a vote?
[/quote]
I'm asking you.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 3:47pm:

lee wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 3:15pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 1:10pm: " ... the sin of being willing to destroy Black people for economic gain." Really? ... Yes.

And the rest petal? Don't want to answer?  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 3:55pm:

Belgarion wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 3:53pm: [quote author=helian link=1625905809/112#112 date=1626142172] How many in Charlottesville voted against the removal of the statue? Were the people given a vote?

I'm asking you.
[/quote]

Not how this works. You prove to me that there was a popular vote and that the majority voted to remove this statue. I'm sure you must have sources to back this up?   

Belgarion wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 4:45pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 3:55pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 3:53pm: [quote author=helian link=1625905809/112#112 date=1626142172] How many in Charlottesville voted against the removal of the statue? Were the people given a vote? I'm asking you.

Not how this works. You prove to me that there was a popular vote and that the majority voted to remove this statue. I'm sure you must have sources to back this up?   
[/quote]
Exactly how it works...

You suggested it was an 'unrepresentative but noisy minority' who carried the day.

How do you know that?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 4:51pm:

You suggested it was an 'unrepresentative but noisy minority' who carried the day. How do you know that?

Poor petal. As I wrote earlier it was a City Council decision. The was no public vote.

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 5:00pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 4:51pm: You suggested it was an 'unrepresentative but noisy minority' who carried the day. How do you know that? Poor petal. As I wrote earlier it was a City Council decision. The was no public vote.

Ahh, the homoerotic element. Are you nearing 70?

Yes, a council decision. Is the council a manifestation of democratic process?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 5:02pm:

Is the council a manifestation of democratic process?

Does it have its limits? Or is anything a Council decides sacrosanct?  ::)

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 5:06pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 5:02pm: Is the council a manifestation of democratic process? Does it have its limits? Or is anything a Council decides sacrosanct?  ::)

If the council exceeded its lawful limits, don't you think, over years, the opposition to the proposal could not have raised that?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 5:11pm:

lee wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 5:06pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 5:02pm: Is the council a manifestation of democratic process? Does it have its limits? Or is anything a Council decides sacrosanct?  ::) If the council exceeded its lawful limits, don't you think, over years, the opposition to the proposal could not have raised that?

Edit: "The push to remove the statue of Robert E. Lee has been around for years. The most recent call came in 2016, when high school student Zyahna Bryant started a petition. When Charlottesville city council voted to remove the monument, they were quickly slapped with a lawsuit and forced to put the project on hold."

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/american-civil-war/statue-of-confederate-general-robert-e-lee-removed-from-charlottesville-park.html

You mean like this? ;)
So because there were some noises about removing one they decided on three? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

But as I said not a public vote so no one knows what the general public think.

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 5:18pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 5:11pm: lee wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 5:06pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 5:02pm: Is the council a manifestation of democratic process? Does it have its limits? Or is anything a Council decides sacrosanct?  ::) If the council exceeded its lawful limits, don't you think, over years, the opposition to the proposal could not have raised that? So because there were some noises about removing one they decided on three? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D But as I said not a public vote so no one knows what the general public think.

Then the people of Charlottesville can vote in, at the next council elections, those candidates who pledge to revoke the orders of the former administration.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 5:23pm:

Then the people of Charlottesville can vote in, at the next council elections, those candidates who pledge to revoke the orders of the former administration.

But that is not what you have been arguing. ;)

BTW - The Council has 5 members. So 5 people voted to remove the statues. ;)

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 5:25pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 5:23pm: Then the people of Charlottesville can vote in, at the next council elections, those candidates who pledge to revoke the orders of the former administration. But that is not what you have been arguing. ;)

I said that Lee wouldn't have approved of his effigy honoured.

As I'm not a southern American, not a Virginian, not American, how the people of Charlottesville vote one way or another doesn't affect me any more than if another statue of Lenin was  taken down from a city in the former USSR.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 5:30pm:

As I'm not a southern American, not a Virginian, not American, how the people of Charlottesville vote one way or another doesn't affect me any more than if another statue of Lenin was  taken down from a city in the former USSR.

And yet you argue so passionately.

BTW - 5 members of Council - so 5 people voted. Just to answer your previous question. ;)

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 5:33pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 5:30pm: As I'm not a southern American, not a Virginian, not American, how the people of Charlottesville vote one way or another doesn't affect me any more than if another statue of Lenin was  taken down from a city in the former USSR. And yet you argue so passionately. BTW - 5 members of Council - so 5 people voted. Just to answer your previous question. ;)

Argue passionately? Maybe... I'm practising. Aren't we all?

OK, then maybe the people of Charlottesville can argue the process by which the number of councillors are determined.

But, at least, should we not honour the wishes of the subject of honour?

.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 4:51pm:

Belgarion wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 4:45pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 3:55pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 3:53pm: [quote author=helian link=1625905809/112#112 date=1626142172] How many in Charlottesville voted against the removal of the statue? Were the people given a vote? I'm asking you. Not how this works. You prove to me that there was a popular vote and that the majority voted to remove this statue. I'm sure you must have sources to back this up?

Exactly how it works...

You suggested it was an 'unrepresentative but noisy minority' who carried the day.

How do you know that?
[/quote]


Oh dear...more obfuscation, showed up by the above posts.   You should give up on this, it is embarrassing for you.

Belgarion wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 6:26pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 4:51pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 4:45pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 3:55pm: Belgarion wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 3:53pm: [quote author=helian link=1625905809/112#112 date=1626142172] How many in Charlottesville voted against the removal of the statue? Were the people given a vote? I'm asking you. Not how this works. You prove to me that there was a popular vote and that the majority voted to remove this statue. I'm sure you must have sources to back this up?    Exactly how it works... You suggested it was an 'unrepresentative but noisy minority' who carried the day. How do you know that?

Oh dear...more obfuscation, showed up by the above posts.   You should give up on this, it is embarrassing for you.
[/quote]
Ahh... You're back... I knew you would be.

It's true what 'they' say that teenagers and geriatrics have at least some things in common: they bleat like goats and pout like kids.

Don't worry about the Robert E Lee statue, it won't upgrade status in your future care home.

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 5:33pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 5:30pm: As I'm not a southern American, not a Virginian, not American, how the people of Charlottesville vote one way or another doesn't affect me any more than if another statue of Lenin was  taken down from a city in the former USSR. And yet you argue so passionately. BTW - 5 members of Council - so 5 people voted. Just to answer your previous question. ;)

How many of those five do you expect to survive the Civil War?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 5:37pm:

But, at least, should we not honour the wishes of the subject of honour?

You mean this? -

“As regards the erection of such a monument as is contemplated,” Lee wrote of an 1866 proposal, “my conviction is, that however grateful it would be to the feelings of the South, the attempt in the present condition of the Country, would have the effect of retarding, instead of accelerating its accomplishment; [and] of continuing, if not adding to, the difficulties under which the Southern people labour.”

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/robert-e-lee-opposed-confederate-monuments

The statue, built 50 years after the ACW, is not the  "present" he was talking about. ;)

BTW - did the people who are represented by the other two statues say the same?

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Jul 10^th, 2021 at 11:23pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 9:05pm: You all seem to be assuming this is some ancient monument.  It isn't.  It is less than 100 years old.  "They were erected in the 1920s when Jim Crow laws were eroding the rights of Black citizens."  They were erected to further oppress black people.  Remember, the Confederacy lost the Civil War.  They lost it fair and square.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::) What has erecting a statue to a Civil War general got to do with 'Jim Crow laws'? How exactly does a statue go about oppressing people? https://monumentaustralia.org.au/content/directory/full/Captain_James_Cook_Statue-14074-23207.jpg

So it would be ok to put a statue of Hitler next to it ?

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 5:25pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 5:23pm: Then the people of Charlottesville can vote in, at the next council elections, those candidates who pledge to revoke the orders of the former administration. But that is not what you have been arguing. ;) BTW - The Council has 5 members. So 5 people voted to remove the statues. ;)

Would they be the same representatives of likely the 5 council members that originally commissioned the statue ?

They giveth and they taketh away ? Good decision.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 7:45pm:

Would they be the same representatives of likely the 5 council members that originally commissioned the statue ?

Hardly petal. They were done in 1920. So as voting age was 21 that would make them 122 currently at the least. ;)

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 8:03pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 7:45pm: Would they be the same representatives of likely the 5 council members that originally commissioned the statue ? Hardly petal. They were done in 1920. So as voting age was 21 that would make them 122 currently at the least. ;)

representatives of - meaning the current batch of 5 councillors ? Saying it was likely erected the same way - no community vote ?

Anyway it is going to a museum where it belongs an ugly part of history.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 8:09pm:

Saying it was likely erected the same way - no community vote ?

Ah likely is it. No stump speeches to the masses? back in those days they may have been shot or lynched. ;)

Actually it was a private commission built on then privately owned land. It was later donated to the city.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 7:42pm:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 11:23pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 9:05pm: You all seem to be assuming this is some ancient monument.  It isn't.  It is less than 100 years old.  "They were erected in the 1920s when Jim Crow laws were eroding the rights of Black citizens."  They were erected to further oppress black people.  Remember, the Confederacy lost the Civil War.  They lost it fair and square.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::) What has erecting a statue to a Civil War general got to do with 'Jim Crow laws'? How exactly does a statue go about oppressing people? https://monumentaustralia.org.au/content/directory/full/Captain_James_Cook_Statue-14074-23207.jpg So it would be ok to put a statue of Hitler next to it ?

Absolutely.

The only way to teach history (to Republicans/conservatives) is through statues.

They don't read them socialist books.

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 3:15pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 1:10pm: " ... the sin of being willing to destroy Black people for economic gain." Where did they  write that? At the foot of the statue? Or is it just present justification? greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 1:10pm: As long as the statues "remain standing in our downtown public spaces, they signal that our community tolerated white supremacy and the lost cause these generals fought for." But the community never got a vote. So how did they know that? On the voices only?  The "Loud and Proud'? ::)

So tell us all about the rest greggy. :)

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 8:33pm:

lee wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 3:15pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 1:10pm: " ... the sin of being willing to destroy Black people for economic gain." Where did they  write that? At the foot of the statue? Or is it just present justification? greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 1:10pm: As long as the statues "remain standing in our downtown public spaces, they signal that our community tolerated white supremacy and the lost cause these generals fought for." But the community never got a vote. So how did they know that? On the voices only?  The "Loud and Proud'? ::) So tell us all about the rest greggy. :)

Why would anyone care about the statue of a traitor who fought against the USA to defend slavery ?

Dnarever wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 9:06pm:

Why would anyone care about the statue of a traitor who fought against the USA to defend slavery ?

Poor petal supplying 21st century feelings for 19th century facts. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 8:22pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 8:09pm: Saying it was likely erected the same way - no community vote ? Ah likely is it. No stump speeches to the masses? back in those days they may have been shot or lynched. ;) Actually it was a private commission built on then privately owned land. It was later donated to the city.

OH white supremacists built it, that makes sense.

lee wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 9:39pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 9:06pm: Why would anyone care about the statue of a traitor who fought against the USA to defend slavery ? Poor petal supplying 21st century feelings for 19th century facts. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

21st century facts for 21st century actions. We are not still in the past. It does not matter how popular the KKK were back then

Dnarever wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 7:42pm:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 11:23pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 9:05pm: You all seem to be assuming this is some ancient monument.  It isn't.  It is less than 100 years old.  "They were erected in the 1920s when Jim Crow laws were eroding the rights of Black citizens."  They were erected to further oppress black people.  Remember, the Confederacy lost the Civil War.  They lost it fair and square.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::) What has erecting a statue to a Civil War general got to do with 'Jim Crow laws'? How exactly does a statue go about oppressing people? https://monumentaustralia.org.au/content/directory/full/Captain_James_Cook_Statue-14074-23207.jpg So it would be ok to put a statue of Hitler next to it ?

No comparison - one was a hero of State's Rights in a Great Cause - the other was a self-declared enemy of the United States, which at that time included the Confederate States.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 13^th, 2021 at 10:28pm:

lee wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 9:39pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 9:06pm: Why would anyone care about the statue of a traitor who fought against the USA to defend slavery ? Poor petal supplying 21st century feelings for 19th century facts. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D 21st century facts for 21st century actions. We are not still in the past. It does not matter how popular the KKK were back then

So we run developments over Aboriginal shrines and artefacts without any argument?  All those places like the Taj Mahal and the Pyramids can make way for new tract housing ..... OK......

Boys, send in the gas to clear out The Butterfly Cave.... and strip that paint off them walls NOW before blowing it all up and putting in a shopping mall... pave it for a car park...

Robert E had nothing to do with the KKK ...

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Jul 14^th, 2021 at 7:40am:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 13th, 2021 at 7:42pm: Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 11:23pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 10th, 2021 at 9:05pm: You all seem to be assuming this is some ancient monument.  It isn't.  It is less than 100 years old.  "They were erected in the 1920s when Jim Crow laws were eroding the rights of Black citizens."  They were erected to further oppress black people.  Remember, the Confederacy lost the Civil War.  They lost it fair and square.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::) What has erecting a statue to a Civil War general got to do with 'Jim Crow laws'? How exactly does a statue go about oppressing people? https://monumentaustralia.org.au/content/directory/full/Captain_James_Cook_Statue-14074-23207.jpg So it would be ok to put a statue of Hitler next to it ? No comparison - one was a hero of State's Rights in a Great Cause - the other was a self-declared enemy of the United States, which at that time included the Confederate States.

Great Cause. Heh.

Not so good at reason, eh?

The above intercessionary note inserted in order to promote mothra's retort sufficiently for it to be read today sometime rather than left in OzPol doldrum...

Many confuse the difference between 'fighting to free the slaves' and the Rights of an agreeing State to withdraw that agreement to Federation.... hence Con (against) Federation.

Lincoln made no effort to 'free the slaves' until it was clear the South would lose... and the North fought to preserve the Union - not to free the slaves.

Robert E Lee fought to defend the right of a state to withdraw from a voluntarily entered into Federation... such withdrawal being equally voluntary, capisce? 

So dragging down his statue is emotional nonsense at its worst, and is deliberately inflammatory, and was and will be the cause of any violence and deaths that result from this decision to tear down that statue.

You reap what you sow.

Lets try this again.

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races —that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."

Should a man who said this have a statue erected in his honour? If there is, should it be torn down?

Belgarion wrote on Jul 14^th, 2021 at 11:37am:

Lets try this again. "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races —that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."

Ahh, yes.. Winston Churchill.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 14^th, 2021 at 6:48pm:

Ahh, yes.. Winston Churchill.

That was almost clever. ::)

lee wrote on Jul 14^th, 2021 at 6:58pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jul 14th, 2021 at 6:48pm: Ahh, yes.. Winston Churchill. That was almost clever. ::)

So, the complete opposite of you.

Don't worry the US has gone full retard now & this should also nullify all the leftard Liberal democrats, BLM rioters & their virtue signaling statue pulling down supporters....

They've now erected two statues of a violent drug abusing criminal(George Floyd) - one in Newark New Jersey & one in Brooklyn New York.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/george-floyd-statues-racist-biden-marxist-denigrate-black-men


Quote:

"America's global elites prefer China and the Communist Chinese Party. That's why we're erecting statues honoring George Floyd's last nine minutes of life," he writes. "That's why President Biden suggested Floyd's death was more meaningful than Dr. Martin Luther King's." He further argues that Biden and "the elitist revolutionaries" want people to believe that the American system denies Black people agency and makes them "defenseless punching bags for Trump supporters, Proud Boys, conservative evangelicals, rural militias, Republicans, and every other group that doesn't pledge allegiance to the Democratic Party." "The politicians, activists, celebrity influencers, and media personalities – the exploiters of George Floyd – are determined to transform an amateur porn star, violent criminal, and drug abuser into a national hero," he writes. "They do so because they have no respect for black men or black people."

Quote:

On Friday, a new 700-pound bronze statue of George Floyd commissioned by the city of Newark was unveiled outside City Hall. It happened a day before Saturday’s celebration of Juneteenth, the newly deemed federal holiday honoring the emancipation of slaves in the United States.  "The statue in Newark [highlight]has Floyd seated on a park bench wearing a 'wifebeater' shirt[/highlight]," Whitlock wrote. "I'm shocked the sculptor didn't put a crack pipe in one hand and a 40-ounce of beer in the other."

Quote:

After 6 burglaries, 3 car thefts, committing 2 violent home invasions, 3 armed robberies, beating 4 victims senseless, passing counterfeit money, and being arrested 23 times since 1998. George Floyd hasn't committed a crime in over one year ;D But his family has recieved $27 MILLION from MINNEAPOLIS and $25 MILLION from “GO FUND ME”. Also, President Biden and his VP met with the Floyd family on May 25th, the one year anniversary of his death. Nancy Pelosi in June of 2020, gave the Floyd family a folded American Flag that had flown over the Capitol on the day he died - as a fallen hero > Think about that one.

Insanity... & no matter how much of a chump Trump was/is.....Bumbling Biden & his crew are worse.

---