BLM, if you want any sympathy don't do this crap.

[Perknose]

I've already acknowledged as much and its why I used them as an example in the first place. How you think I don't get it is beyond me.

Gee, I dunno. Maybe it's because you responded by leading off with this reprehensibly bullshit "question:"
"So to be clear, you thought in living color was simply a platform for the wayan brothers to spew gay hate?"

However you ignored the reason for me bringing them up in the first place. Will you address that point?

Ok, as concisely as possible:

I support the taking down of prominent, public, civic monuments to those who took up arms against the United States of America in support of the institution of slavery, particularly in towns and cities where a significant percentage of the inhabitants, many (but not all) descendants of those enslaved who were bought and sold at will, wish them to be. Conversely, I do not support the continued clvic deification of these violently secessionist and traitorous generals and politicians, no matter whatever other fine qualities they may have possessed.

I do not support taking down the statues of our founding fathers simply because they owned slaves. Here, the context of their times does not trump the vision of the Republic they bequeathed to us. They gave us the United States of America. They were never traitors to her.

As for Columbus, well, I can't really support the idea that we should honor him because he "discovered" our continent.. He didn't "discover' shite. It was already here, and so were the tribes that populated it. Listen and then sing it with me, "God Bless Vespucci Land."

In sum, two of the above three instances are bad history, and don't deserve our present day official veneration.

Nor do I look back fondly and simply chuckle benignly at the ignorantly destructive caricatures of gays, because IT HELPED TO HURT THESE PEOPLE and to delay their acceptance by the rest of us as, you know, full fledged human beings who didn't deserve to lose employment or be beaten up on the street simply because of who they loved. Sorry. I probably ignorantly laughed at some of those sketches, too. Still and all, I don't hold anything against the Wayans in the present, so long as they have learned and progressed beyond that ignorance, just as I, hopefully, have.

 

[MajinCry]

We don't need to replace one set of divisive symbols with another. White America needs to acknowledge that White Supremacists raised those symbols, to denounce their ideology & its symbols. It's the way we can show Black Americans that we accept full equality.

Unless that's not what we want...

If your country finds someone who was fundamental in the fall of slavery, as a divisive figure, all the more reason they should be commemorated over sex slavers and imperialists.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Gee, I dunno. Maybe it's because you responded by leading off with this reprehensibly bullshit "question:"
"So to be clear, you thought in living color was simply a platform for the wayan brothers to spew gay hate?"


Ok, as concisely as possible:

I support the taking down of prominent, public, civic monuments to those who took up arms against the United States of America in support of the institution of slavery, particularly in towns and cities where a significant percentage of the inhabitants, many (but not all) descendants of those enslaved who were bought and sold at will, wish them to be. Conversely, I do not support the continued clvic deification of these violently secessionist and traitorous generals and politicians, no matter whatever other fine qualities they may have possessed.

I do not support taking down the statues of our founding fathers simply because they owned slaves. Here, the context of their times does not trump the vision of the Republic they bequeathed to us. They gave us the United States of America. They were never traitors to her.

As for Columbus, well, I can't really support the idea that we should honor him because he "discovered" our continent.. He didn't "discover' shite. It was already here, and so were the tribes that populated it. Listen and then sing it with me, "God Bless Vespucci Land."

In sum, two of the above three instances are bad history, and don't deserve our present day official veneration.

Nor do I look back fondly and simply chuckle benignly at the ignorantly destructive caricatures of gays, because IT HELPED TO HURT THESE PEOPLE and to delay their acceptance by the rest of us as, you know, full fledged human beings who didn't deserve to lose employment or be beaten up on the street simply because of who they loved. Sorry. I probably ignorantly laughed at some of those sketches, too. Still and all, I don't hold anything against the Wayans in the present, so long as they have learned and progressed beyond that ignorance, just as I, hopefully, have.

seems appropriate

 

[ivwshane]

Gee, I dunno. Maybe it's because you responded by leading off with this reprehensibly bullshit "question:"
"So to be clear, you thought in living color was simply a platform for the wayan brothers to spew gay hate?"


Ok, as concisely as possible:

I support the taking down of prominent, public, civic monuments to those who took up arms against the United States of America in support of the institution of slavery, particularly in towns and cities where a significant percentage of the inhabitants, many (but not all) descendants of those enslaved who were bought and sold at will, wish them to be. Conversely, I do not support the continued clvic deification of these violently secessionist and traitorous generals and politicians, no matter whatever other fine qualities they may have possessed.

I do not support taking down the statues of our founding fathers simply because they owned slaves. Here, the context of their times does not trump the vision of the Republic they bequeathed to us. They gave us the United States of America. They were never traitors to her.

As for Columbus, well, I can't really support the idea that we should honor him because he "discovered" our continent.. He didn't "discover' shite. It was already here, and so were the tribes that populated it. Listen and then sing it with me, "God Bless Vespucci Land."

In sum, two of the above three instances are bad history, and don't deserve our present day official veneration.

Nor do I look back fondly and simply chuckle benignly at the ignorantly destructive caricatures of gays, because IT HELPED TO HURT THESE PEOPLE and to delay their acceptance by the rest of us as, you know, full fledged human beings who didn't deserve to lose employment or be beaten up on the street simply because of who they loved. Sorry. I probably ignorantly laughed at some of those sketches, too. Still and all, I don't hold anything against the Wayans in the present, so long as they have learned and progressed beyond that ignorance, just as I, hopefully, have.

Great! Then we are in 100% agreement!

Second, it was a question because I asked it as a question and I wanted clarification. I took your response to its conclusion to simply your position to make sure I was understanding you correctly.

I thought this thread was about Columbus and other founding fathers and it seemed like your position was to have those statutes removed. So clearly there was a misunderstanding there but now I know exactly where you stand and I've stated its the exact same position I have so maybe we can both cut out the perceived duouchiness of each others posts

 

[Thebobo]

Everytime I see BLM I think Bureau of Land Management. They should change it to AALM.

 

[Snarf Snarf]

So you are of the opinion that statutes of most of the founding fathers should be taken down?

Do you yourself wish to be judged by future societal norms? Are you absolutely sure your moral compass will pass the morality tests of the future? If you do great things in this life do you want others to hold you in contempt in the future for your moral failings according to their standards long after you've passed?

Taken down, no. I'm okay with caveats and notations in history books or monuments, acknowledgement and condemnation is what we're looking for. For confederate statues, hell yes, rip them all down. Conservatives love to talk about the snowflake generation that gets trophies for losing, aren't those confederate generals getting trophies for losing a civil war? The founding fathers, regardless of intentions, at least established a land where we can have this type of discourse. We have evolved beyond their views, and as such, when reviewing history we should also acknowledge that it is no longer acceptable to think as they do.

For myself, yes I do hope my children and grand children judge me based on future evolved societal norms. That is what I'm going to tech them growing up, no one gets a pass because "that's the way things used to be." Atrocious beliefs should always get acknowledgment and condemnation, it's part of the evolution of society, I am no exception.

There's lots of double standards when it comes to how we remember historical figures. The founding father's get a lot of free passes for their racist beliefs if we're being completely fair. Historians have dragged a lot of famous POC through the mud and some even used their personal failings as a means to discredit their movements (MLK, Malcolm X, Black Panthers etc). If they mention founding father's short comings the exact same way, as well as the confederates I would take that.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Refresh my memory as to all the African-Americans who had starring roles, or roles of any kind, on network TV in that time frame. How many black newscasters were there?

You know when I was growing up I never even gave it a thought and personally BFOQ comes into play with many rolls so you will have an obvious bias slanted towards fulfilling the demands of a given script. When I watched the news I gravitated to those channels with the best anchors period without any regard for any other qualities. Honestly I never think about race until people start their racist bs up.

Everytime I see BLM I think Bureau of Land Management. They should change it to AALM.

More like ARM (another racist movement).

 

[ivwshane]

Taken down, no. I'm okay with caveats and notations in history books or monuments, acknowledgement and condemnation is what we're looking for. For confederate statues, hell yes, rip them all down. Conservatives love to talk about the snowflake generation that gets trophies for losing, aren't those confederate generals getting trophies for losing a civil war? The founding fathers, regardless of intentions, at least established a land where we can have this type of discourse. We have evolved beyond their views, and as such, when reviewing history we should also acknowledge that it is no longer acceptable to think as they do.

For myself, yes I do hope my children and grand children judge me based on future evolved societal norms. That is what I'm going to tech them growing up, no one gets a pass because "that's the way things used to be." Atrocious beliefs should always get acknowledgment and condemnation, it's part of the evolution of society, I am no exception.

There's lots of double standards when it comes to how we remember historical figures. The founding father's get a lot of free passes for their racist beliefs if we're being completely fair. Historians have dragged a lot of famous POC through the mud and some even used their personal failings as a means to discredit their movements (MLK, Malcolm X, Black Panthers etc). If they mention founding father's short comings the exact same way, as well as the confederates I would take that.

I can't say I agree with that at all. By that standard pretty much everyone in history would have an asterisk by their name stating "he treated women unfairly and not as equals" or others (including your parents probably) would have an asterisk that read "he didn't care for his children the way their mother did and they frequently engaged in child abuse" or maybe something like, "his good deeds are overlooked by his use of fossil fuels and he contributed to the cancer epidemic by smoking and causing others to inhale second hand smoke".

 

[Jaskalas]

As a POC I can tell you with 100% certainty that civil rights are not enshrined into our culture.

Thank you for the honest and heart felt reply. It provides a clear picture of the... situation. If you look back 10, 20 years... have you always felt as you do now? I wonder if organized agitation through social media is adding fuel to a fire that I never felt burn so bright before. That in a nation decent enough to honor MLK, you feel it is necessary to sort of... disown American history with animosity and disdain for both past figures and anyone who could identify with them.

You seem to discredit the progress made, driven by personal injury of other people's hate. If that's really the purpose of this new generation's "voice"... to share the pain that they have felt... I'm afraid I don't see how the subjects of this campaign are going to be in a position to back down. I'm not seeing how a message of unity rises from this agitation.

And to what end? One does not find peace after spreading pain unto others. Just as you feel motivation to retaliate, the same will be done in kind. The pain you have felt becomes pain you inflict. Then vice versa, a cycle of violence is unending. Do you think you are on a path to ease us out of it? To break the cycle? How does eliminating Southern heritage promote coexistence? I am blind to the positive outcome from all this.

There must be another way, one that does not inflict new pain onto others. One that rises above and treats us all as one people.

 

[HomerJS]

Thank you for the honest and heart felt reply. It provides a clear picture of the... situation. If you look back 10, 20 years... have you always felt as you do now? I wonder if organized agitation through social media is adding fuel to a fire that I never felt burn so bright before. That in a nation decent enough to honor MLK, you feel it is necessary to sort of... disown American history with animosity and disdain for both past figures and anyone who could identify with them.

You seem to discredit the progress made, driven by personal injury of other people's hate. If that's really the purpose of this new generation's "voice"... to share the pain that they have felt... I'm afraid I don't see how the subjects of this campaign are going to be in a position to back down. I'm not seeing how a message of unity rises from this agitation.

And to what end? One does not find peace after spreading pain unto others. Just as you feel motivation to retaliate, the same will be done in kind. The pain you have felt becomes pain you inflict. Then vice versa, a cycle of violence is unending. Do you think you are on a path to ease us out of it? To break the cycle? How does eliminating Southern heritage promote coexistence? I am blind to the positive outcome from all this.

There must be another way, one that does not inflict new pain onto others. One that rises above and treats us all as one people.

I told someone else, go and read the Cornerstone Speech and tell me why blacks of which I am one, in this country should be fine with Confederate statues in the public square?

 

[ivwshane]

I told someone else, go and read the Cornerstone Speech and tell me why blacks of which I am one, in this country should be fine with Confederate statues in the public square?

Are you for getting rid of confederate monuments? Are you for getting rid of monuments that if the person being honored was held up to today's moral standards they would fail?

 

[HomerJS]

Are you for getting rid of confederate monuments? Are you for getting rid of monuments that if the person being honored was held up to today's moral standards they would fail?

Did you read the speech? My cutoff comes from people who advocated that form of government.

 

[mizzou]

As a symbolic gesture, I'm OK with tearing down a few confederate statutes. Like exploding Confederate Rock in one great spectacle. It should go no further though, because the idea of removing all of them is lunacy.

For example, Mein Kampf is still for sale or checkout at public libraries. Why, if you allow the destruction of civil war statues, would you not also use that logic to start burning books like, "8 Great ways to Justify Yourself as a Nazi! - By Adolf"

Millenials are struggling hard for a cause to fight for and this is not one of them. I do not want this generation to be remembered as the one that burned books and smashed genitalia off statues because they were "offended." This is like a new age Reformation. From Wiki, this is what happened during the last Reformation:

-Negative outcomes

• Witch trials became more common in areas where Protestants and Catholics contested the religious market.[76]
• Protestants were far more likely to vote for Nazis than their Catholic German counterparts.[77] Christopher J. Probst, in his book Demonizing the Jews: Luther and the Protestant Church in Nazi Germany (2012), shows that a large number of German Lutheran clergy and theologians during the Nazi Third Reich used Luther's hostile publications towards the Jews and Judaism to justify at least in part the anti-Semitic policies of the National Socialists.[78]
• Higher suicide rate and greater suicide acceptability.[79][80]

 

[Jhhnn]

As a symbolic gesture, I'm OK with tearing down a few confederate statutes. Like exploding Confederate Rock in one great spectacle. It should go no further though, because the idea of removing all of them is lunacy.

For example, Mein Kampf is still for sale or checkout at public libraries. Why, if you allow the destruction of civil war statues, would you not also use that logic to start burning books like, "8 Great ways to Justify Yourself as a Nazi! - By Adolf"

Millenials are struggling hard for a cause to fight for and this is not one of them. I do not want this generation to be remembered as the one that burned books and smashed genitalia off statues because they were "offended." This is like a new age Reformation. From Wiki, this is what happened during the last Reformation:

-Negative outcomes

• Witch trials became more common in areas where Protestants and Catholics contested the religious market.[76]
• Protestants were far more likely to vote for Nazis than their Catholic German counterparts.[77] Christopher J. Probst, in his book Demonizing the Jews: Luther and the Protestant Church in Nazi Germany (2012), shows that a large number of German Lutheran clergy and theologians during the Nazi Third Reich used Luther's hostile publications towards the Jews and Judaism to justify at least in part the anti-Semitic policies of the National Socialists.[78]
• Higher suicide rate and greater suicide acceptability.[79][80]

Needs more false equivalency.

 

[1prophet]

To what end? America fought a war and freed slaves. We contested in politics and enshrined civil rights. What did we miss, what comes next that necessitates such action? Or, does this "voice" of vengeance and hatred serve no greater purpose?

And if I'm not missing some greater good at play, then why sow discord and division? Why drive people apart instead of bringing them together to heal as one nation, as one people? Lashing out is not a healthy activity... it does not provide for positive outcomes. It breeds force and violence. I hear a call to arms, and for what?

It keeps the little people busy at each others throats, too busy for most to notice the behind the scenes lobbying, legislating, and all sorts of other "boring" activities the haves are using to widen the gap between them and the have nots.

 

[Jhhnn]

To what end? America fought a war and freed slaves. We contested in politics and enshrined civil rights. What did we miss, what comes next that necessitates such action? Or, does this "voice" of vengeance and hatred serve no greater purpose?

And if I'm not missing some greater good at play, then why sow discord and division? Why drive people apart instead of bringing them together to heal as one nation, as one people? Lashing out is not a healthy activity... it does not provide for positive outcomes. It breeds force and violence. I hear a call to arms, and for what?

Whose monuments are they, anyway? Who raised them?

White Supremacists. The continued existence of such monuments merely glorifies their legacy & promotes the revisionist history of the noble lost cause of the Confederacy which wasn't noble in the slightest.

White Americans need to take a hard look at this & understand what such monuments mean to Black Americans.

 

[MajinCry]

I wonder what Native Americans would have to say, about their land having statues to these slaver figures.

 

[Pulsar]

As a symbolic gesture, I'm OK with tearing down a few confederate statutes. Like exploding Confederate Rock in one great spectacle. It should go no further though, because the idea of removing all of them is lunacy.

For example, Mein Kampf is still for sale or checkout at public libraries. Why, if you allow the destruction of civil war statues, would you not also use that logic to start burning books like, "8 Great ways to Justify Yourself as a Nazi! - By Adolf"

Millenials are struggling hard for a cause to fight for and this is not one of them. I do not want this generation to be remembered as the one that burned books and smashed genitalia off statues because they were "offended." This is like a new age Reformation. From Wiki, this is what happened during the last Reformation:

-Negative outcomes

• Witch trials became more common in areas where Protestants and Catholics contested the religious market.[76]
• Protestants were far more likely to vote for Nazis than their Catholic German counterparts.[77] Christopher J. Probst, in his book Demonizing the Jews: Luther and the Protestant Church in Nazi Germany (2012), shows that a large number of German Lutheran clergy and theologians during the Nazi Third Reich used Luther's hostile publications towards the Jews and Judaism to justify at least in part the anti-Semitic policies of the National Socialists.[78]
• Higher suicide rate and greater suicide acceptability.[79][80]

Ahhh - but it's illegal to buy Mein Kampf in Germany. You see... if we ignore our history and bury it, it never happened.

And that in a nutshell is why tearing down these monuments is stupid. Relabel them. Re-plaque them as a memorial to good men who fought for bad ideals. But don't act like it does exist.

 

[Snarf Snarf]

And to what end? One does not find peace after spreading pain unto others. Just as you feel motivation to retaliate, the same will be done in kind. The pain you have felt becomes pain you inflict. Then vice versa, a cycle of violence is unending. Do you think you are on a path to ease us out of it? To break the cycle? How does eliminating Southern heritage promote coexistence? I am blind to the positive outcome from all this.

There must be another way, one that does not inflict new pain onto others. One that rises above and treats us all as one people.

Did you read the speech? My cutoff comes from people who advocated that form of government.

Here's the thing that Homer and myself are pointing out that no one seems to really grasp. If you wish to be a part of a more socially advanced and post racist society, there should literally be only one response to his question about the speech. The answer that is your first response should be "Gee that's a really f*cked up way of thinking."

The fact that people are here spouting off 1984 alternate futures with Orwellian clandestine outcomes all from the basis of wanting to acknowledge that you can look back at the past and say "GEE THAT WAS REALLY F*CKED UP" not "Times were different back then, that was a societal norm."

It's absurd to think that people would reach as far as they are when we're talking about one of the most hateful and fundamentally evil ways of viewing others AND YOU WON'T JUST CONDEMN IT AND MOVE ON. This is literally what gets us fired up about this, stop justifying or rationalizing hateful beliefs and rhetoric because it was the societal norm back then, it's still atrocious.

It's so very simple, acknowledge the bad, accurately discuss it when teaching history of that era, and then condemn it while teaching it so we do not repeat or allow this kind of hateful thinking to permeate in our society again.

For the last time, we're talking about confederate generals who fought for their perceived god given right to subjugate the negro male, because he was inferior and needed the white man to guide him. Jefferson believed the same thing, it's published, go read it it really is eye opening. I can't understand why it's so god damned hard for some of you guys to just say "That's an awful line of thinking, we should never allow that again" and stop the discussion there. Not a single POC in this country wants us to forget history so put that tired ass argument away, we want the 200+ years of oppression this nation was built on to be accurately taught and acknowledged, so we can actually start healing the wounds caused by that period in history without caveats and rationalization.

 

[ivwshane]

Ahhh - but it's illegal to buy Mein Kampf in Germany. You see... if we ignore our history and bury it, it never happened.

And that in a nutshell is why tearing down these monuments is stupid. Relabel them. Re-plaque them as a memorial to good men who fought for bad ideals. But don't act like it does exist.

Lol so you think Germans are ignorant of nazi-sm? Your argument is destroyed by reality.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Lol so you think Germans are ignorant of nazi-sm? Your argument is destroyed by reality.

It's also no longer illegal to sell in Germany as the copyright that it's sale was prevented by has expired.

 

[Jhhnn]

Ahhh - but it's illegal to buy Mein Kampf in Germany. You see... if we ignore our history and bury it, it never happened.

And that in a nutshell is why tearing down these monuments is stupid. Relabel them. Re-plaque them as a memorial to good men who fought for bad ideals. But don't act like it does exist.

Do you think that German schools ignore WW2? That's what they'd need to do to bury their history.

The Bavarian govt held the copyright on mein kampf until last year, when it expired. They held it off the market so that it wouldn't inspire younger generations of Nazis. It's not like anybody denied its existence.

Southern Whites, otoh, raised monuments to the confederacy precisely so that they would inspire younger generations of white supremacists. That's what they do today.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Ahhh - but it's illegal to buy Mein Kampf in Germany. You see... if we ignore our history and bury it, it never happened.

And that in a nutshell is why tearing down these monuments is stupid. Relabel them. Re-plaque them as a memorial to good men who fought for bad ideals. But don't act like it does exist.

Not anymore it isn't. The copyright that it's sale was prevented by has expired.