University of North Carolina Students Topple Confederate Monument

a reply to: neo96

Neo. Why does every topic have to be about showing that your side is always historically on the right side? Every time a point is brought up that reflects badly on your chosen side, you deflect to talk about something you view as embarrassing about the side you are against. In this case, we've been talking about the South's support of slavery. So now you have to bring up Native American genocide and pretend like I don't care about it just because I wasn't discussing it earlier. Talking to you is like you are keeping score of the number of times your side looks bad versus the number of times you can make the other side look bad.

Sorry. It doesn't work that way. For one, I care DEEPLY about Native American genocide, but for two that isn't the topic of this thread.

a reply to: CriticalStinker


Speaking of milk, do you think ole Sammy will end up on the back of a carton now?

If a person is OK with this action then hopefully the person is also OK with their house being broken into, car stolen, mugged and so on.

Otherwise the person would seem to be OK with law breaking if it doesn't touch them or their beliefs.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Why does every topic have to be about showing that your side is always historically on the right side?

Because it is.

Next.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Krazysh0t

In the end, things were complicated. Villains and heroes are never cut and dry and history is always a series of fights, compromises and concessions.

tearing down statues is not?

I didn't say it wasn't. The statue controversy is a complicated mess. I don't fully support the students taking matters into their own hands, but I also don't care about what that statue stands for either. It would serve a better purpose in a museum where it can be studied as an artifact of history properly and not used as an idol to a losing political ideology.

originally posted by: roadgravel
If a person is OK with this action then hopefully the person is also OK with their house being broken into, car stolen, mugged and so on.

Otherwise the person would seem to be OK with law breaking if it doesn't touch them or their beliefs.

I don't think anyone in the thread agrees with vandalism.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: CriticalStinker


Speaking of milk, do you think ole Sammy will end up on the back of a carton now?

As long as it's not chocolate milk, that would surely send a thread over reply capacity.

originally posted by: roadgravel
If a person is OK with this action then hopefully the person is also OK with their house being broken into, car stolen, mugged and so on.

Otherwise the person would seem to be OK with law breaking if it doesn't touch them or their beliefs.

I'd say it's a BIT more complicated than that. I have a hypothetical for you since this thread is related to the Civil War and slavery. If you lived in the 1850's and in a state that was smack dab in the middle of the underground railroad, would you support railroad operators who hid escaped slaves or would you turn them in or disagree with them because they were breaking the laws of states (and federally) that required them to return escaped slaves?

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Why does every topic have to be about showing that your side is always historically on the right side?

Because it is.

Next.

History isn't a contest to be the most right. It is a teaching tool to give us a window into the past and how previous generations thought and behaved. This tool is used to teach us how to study and apply the mistakes and successes of the past to our own lives and improve on the progress that was made by our ancestors.

If your goal is to approach it as a contest where your side is more right than the other, then you lose all the power of this teaching tool. It just merely becomes an extension of your ego which in turn can and does make people dishonest when looking at the past critically.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

History isn't a contest to be the most right. It is a teaching tool to give us a window into the past and how previous generations thought and behaved.

So are statues.

That is until jacksnips tear them down.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
As long as it's not chocolate milk, that would surely send a thread over reply capacity.

Maybe we can have Samuel L. Stonewall Jackson do a 'have you seen me?' PSA.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The statue controversy is a complicated mess.

agreed

I don't fully support the students taking matters into their own hands, but I also don't care about what that statue stands for either.

Breaking the law is not justified because one does not agree with it. Perhaps actually going through the process to change the law to change what one does not agree with is a more productive use of time and effort?

It would serve a better purpose in a museum where it can be studied as an artifact of history properly and not used as an idol to a losing political ideology.

I agree except I have yet to see anyone worship or celebrate these types of statues. I do not consider leaving flowers on memorial day to be worship or celebrations. IMO most of these monuments were forgotten to most of the public until the movement to remove them began.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t

History isn't a contest to be the most right. It is a teaching tool to give us a window into the past and how previous generations thought and behaved.

So are statues.

That is until jacksnips tear them down.

Well we keep our precious historical artifacts we wish to use for teaching purposes in places called museums.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
As long as it's not chocolate milk, that would surely send a thread over reply capacity.

Maybe we can have Samuel L. Stonewall Jackson do a 'have you seen me?' PSA.

PSA's are so 90's. We'll do a Samuel L Stonewall Jackson IPA, beer truly mends bridges.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t

History isn't a contest to be the most right. It is a teaching tool to give us a window into the past and how previous generations thought and behaved.

So are statues.

That is until jacksnips tear them down.

Well we keep our precious historical artifacts we wish to use for teaching purposes in places called museums.

We can have welding masks up front for the people who don't like the images.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

This entire country is one of those, and it's FREE.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Breaking the law is not justified because one does not agree with it. Perhaps actually going through the process to change the law to change what one does not agree with is a more productive use of time and effort?

I wasn't one of the kids who tore down the statue. Tell that to them.

I agree except I have yet to see anyone worship or celebrate these types of statues. I do not consider leaving flowers on memorial day to be worship or celebrations. IMO most of these monuments were forgotten to most of the public until the movement to remove them began.

Then it should be no issue to take them down. The fact that people are bitter about their removal shows that people venerate them.

a reply to: neo96

If that were true than we wouldn't be allowing corporations to destroy the environment through neglect and for profits. Don't stretch the definition of museum neo. We don't take care of our country nearly as properly as we should be to call it one.

Also, this country is certainly NOT free. We pay taxes to maintain the government and the military sacrifices lives to make sure that our country's ideals and existence is maintained.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

If that were true than we wouldn't be allowing corporations to destroy the environment through neglect and for profits.

Nice deflection!

Bwhahaaaaaaa

a reply to: Asktheanimals

that same constitution also outlines how democracy works, doesn't it. if the entire country agreed that a certain statue or monument should no longer sit somewhere, would it be cultural marxism to take the monument down or would it be the will of the people? if the majority of the people in a city decided that one of their parks should have a water park where a statue or monument sat, would it be cultural marxism or democracy to remove the thing to make room for what the people wanted?
becoming a mob and tearing down a statue because you don't like it isn't the proper democratic process to accomplish it but neither is having a bigger mob merge into the area to raise hell in support of it. if a statue is in danger of being removed in a city or state that you don't even live in, then you only democratic option to preserve it is to petition the Federal Gov't to protect it, which they may or may not have the constitutional authority to do. call the country a republic, call it a democracy, it really does not matter! unless it's a matter where you own personal constitutional rights are being violated, the further you live away from the matter, the less chance you are gonna have any legal right to interfere in what is decided on it!
one of the justifications that is often given about the civil war was that the south was fighting for their state rights! well, ya, communities have rights along with states, they have the right to govern in some areas without the interference of those outside of their boundaries!