Weird Argument about removing statues

I've never understood the claim that if you remove a statue, it erases history.
I find that funny, even hilarious.

www.forbes.com... 898
These are rough statistics, but probably close enough:

-- Eleven percent of survey respondents have never traveled outside of the state where they were born.
-- Over half of those surveyed (54 percent) say they’ve visited 10 states or fewer.
-- As many as 13 percent say they have never flown in an airplane.
-- Forty percent of those questioned said they’ve never left the country

So you are telling me a statue of Robert E. Lee in Alabama will erase history for someone in Utah, that will likely never travel there, or ever see it?

yes I will keep posting till the lights go out

What relevance did Robert E. Lee have in Utah?

Idk if he had any there, real question.

In Alabama, the city and its people had those statues there for varying valid reasons as it was part of the history that has espoused those figures.

I think you're missing the point in a huge way, this basically comes down to "Community" and associated areas.

Their erecting and symbology is a tangible reminder of what was, what became and what could have been. If course you can read about it in a book, but its synonymous with the area and a constant reminder of that fact.

confederate statues in general in public spaces are dumb.
Might as well put a statue of Tim McVeigh up...enemy of the state.

Rebels rebelled against the US, went to war, and were soundly defeated. These were treasonous bastards (personally might have been nice, honest guys, but what they represent is what I am discussing here) that never deserved a statue except at some museum perhaps at best, and in an area where all pictures and demonstrations of traitors of the US are.

I wonder if in Germany, there are statues of Himmler and the like.

They should be happy that they weren't all summarily executed at the end of the war...a show that the US, even with its enemy, can be merciful and understanding. Footnote in history, sure. statues, no.

a reply to: JAGStorm

Half of the people these statues are of I have never heard of before. Or if I did in history class in school they have been forgotten.

But now that they have been tearing them down I been learning some history of the USA.

a reply to: Arnie123

Their erecting and symbology is a tangible reminder of what was,

Yeah like the symbolism in letting the descendants of Slaves to remind them of their place.. especially since a great amount of those statues and monuments were erected as an opposition of AAs civil , economic and political rights.

a reply to: SaturnFX

Call them rebels if you want. But a lot of them southerners thought of them as heroes. Maybe not all sure but was enough to get some statues put up

originally posted by: JAGStorm
I've never understood the claim that if you remove a statue, it erases history.
I find that funny, even hilarious.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

www.historians.org... the-world

www.rom.on.ca...

www.britishcouncil.org...

PDF link

Archaeologists and historians disagree with you. Countless amounts of history has been lost over the centuries because the leader at the time disagreed with things from the past and had it destroyed.

Furthermore, it seems to matter greatly to people in north America when statues and other relics are destroyed on the other side of the world. I guarantee, if you look for it, a good majority one culture's statues and artifacts were likely offensive to some other culture.

We have no problem glorifying Babylonian slavery, Egyptian slavery, Roman slavery, Ottoman slavery and on and on and people decry the destruction of those artifacts as erasing history. How is this different?

The only reason why monuments are destroyed is to erase history. Why else destroy them if not to remove them from public conciousness along with the history they represent? That's literally why they're being torn down now.

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: Arnie123

Their erecting and symbology is a tangible reminder of what was,

Yeah like the symbolism in letting the descendants of Slaves to remind them of their place.. especially since a great amount of those statues and monuments were erected as an opposition of AAs civil , economic and political rights.

You don't know what people think and how they approach things, they've never had an issue before and carried on with their business every other day.

You're essentially telling us what we will think and acting upon that emotional bias for us.

a reply to: JAGStorm

In order to even be seriously arguing this, you have to accept the underlying premise that a statue of a man sitting on horse perpetrates a great moral harm on some people.

a reply to: JAGStorm

I will never forget that P.G.T Beauregard Barnum was a famous Civil War guy before he ran off and joined the circus.

originally posted by: Plotus
Post removed by staff

Key words here In Muesum.
Not unlike the below

Yes ^^ this is about as subtle a statement for it's existence.

a reply to: Spider879

If the statement is from the obelisk, that's not a statue of one of the generals or the conquistadors, of Washington or Jefferson, or Columbus, or any of the other figures who have been either torn down or vandalized lately.

Did that get torn down? If not why?

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: Arnie123

Their erecting and symbology is a tangible reminder of what was,

Yeah like the symbolism in letting the descendants of Slaves to remind them of their place.. especially since a great amount of those statues and monuments were erected as an opposition of AAs civil , economic and political rights.

You don't know what people think and how they approach things, they've never had an issue before and carried on with their business every other day.

You're essentially telling us what we will think and acting upon that emotional bias for us.

b
Am sure many noticed but were powerless to do a damn thing about it for decades,see reply to Plotus.

a reply to: Spider879

If you remove one historical statue...... you remove them ALL... Slavery and anything associated with it like the museum in Montgomery Alabama...

I actually do believe they belong in a Museum or like space. I don't believe they should be in front of a courthouse, school, public park etc.

a reply to: JAGStorm

So burning books in one state is okay if they have copies in another state?

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: Arnie123

Their erecting and symbology is a tangible reminder of what was,

Yeah like the symbolism in letting the descendants of Slaves to remind them of their place.. especially since a great amount of those statues and monuments were erected as an opposition of AAs civil , economic and political rights.

You don't know what people think and how they approach things, they've never had an issue before and carried on with their business every other day.

You're essentially telling us what we will think and acting upon that emotional bias for us.

b
Am sure many noticed but were powerless to do a damn thing about it for decades,see reply to Plotus.

That doesn't make sense, they didn't do a damn thing because if wasn't relevant, nobody cared, why should they. these people weren't living there for 10 years bitching about some statues. All of a sudden, BLM is raised from the dead and DNC is awashed in cash.

No, there is a systemic effort to topple statues, coupled with absolute ignorance of the subject.

a reply to: JAGStorm

Perish that though that instead of seeing them, our children will actually have to learn about them!

What will you do when your poor, traumatized children do upon coming home from those lessons in school? Will you put them into therapy? Scary stuff, I know. Understand, it's never easy for *any* child to learn about human ugliness, but hiding it doesn't make it go away. It only starts us down the path toward it all over again.

Again, this is all if you accept the premise that a statue of a man sitting on horse is a great moral harm to another person.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: JAGStorm

So burning books in one state is okay if they have copies in another state?

Of course, then everyone can point and laugh or jeer at those backward, racist, ignorant states.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
I've never understood the claim that if you remove a statue, it erases history.
I find that funny, even hilarious.

www.forbes.com... 898
These are rough statistics, but probably close enough:

-- Eleven percent of survey respondents have never traveled outside of the state where they were born.
-- Over half of those surveyed (54 percent) say they’ve visited 10 states or fewer.
-- As many as 13 percent say they have never flown in an airplane.
-- Forty percent of those questioned said they’ve never left the country

So you are telling me a statue of Robert E. Lee in Alabama will erase history for someone in Utah, that will likely never travel there, or ever see it?

yes I will keep posting till the lights go out

Wait for the book burnings, history has been erased before. The schools have been re-programming for many years now and revising history to the children, hence what we see now. Columbus and our founding fathers of this nation are an example. Look at the curriculum they are teaching in History now in schools, you wouldn't recognize it from 30-40 years ago.