reducing a person down to their worst qualities, and judging them on that forever.

I can get the argument about civil war statues being offensive to a degree. I'm not sure what harm a statue can do, but if enough people want it removed, so be it. I am old fashioned in that I think we should go about things like that following the protocol we as a nation enacted, but laws don't seem to really matter these days.

But when the argument is made, there ins't any discussion about the good things these men may have done. No discussion about why they were memorialized. George Washington? What did that sorry ass do for us lately? Oh well, he may have had something to do with history, but he had slaves, so he has to go. What kind of idiocy is that? If we do that same theory with others, we can quickly see that Martin Luther King Jr. needs not be memorialized in any way. He was a womanizer, and may have allowed a rape to occur. Sure he may have said some things, but we are now judging on the worst qualities, not the best.

I have yet to hear anyone step into that argument, but it's a valid one at least in my mind. I in no way wish to remove MLK from historical reference, But then, I really don't want to see all the other art work removed by a mob in the dark of night.

I am close to Fayetteville, NC. In the center of town there is a landmark. It's called the market house. It's the center of a roundabout. When I arrived here for my first duty station in the USAF, I noticed it and asked about it. It's where slaves were sold, as well as other things, it what I was told. And from that point forward, every time I see it, I think about that. Maybe not ever to the degree of others, but I see it and it's on my mind. If it's removed, I won't ever see it again, and likely will forget about it quickly.

This is one monument I won't argue with about it's removal. I think it's important to remind us, but I also understand the alternative point. I just wish there could be some dialog about all this before some angry mob lawlessly acts on their emotions.

If you have any constructive thoughts on this, I'd love to hear it. if you just want to rail on about participation trophies, please save that drama for your mama.

a reply to: network dude

It's because in today's society feelings are the most important thing to worry about.
We can't judge people of the past with modern sensibilities and expect them to measure up.

I don't think statues should just be torn down by a mob. How do you know it's the majority that wants them gone? If the majority does, I am sure there is a more civilised way of doing it, with a discussion for the pro and cons of doing so.

Statues are just really poncy images, you can see and touch. Statues are supposed to be noticed and make you ask why these people have been memorialised. Maybe they could just add a bit of detail about each person on the plinth. All the good and and maybe even what we nowadays consider bad included.

The German word for these statues is: Denkmal [literally: ThinkStructure!].

I do not expect non thinking people to appreciate these things, but tearing them down without asking first is a criminal offence in my opinion and should be punished. Sorry, I have not one iota of sympathy for any destruction without due discussions or votes. None.


ETA: To destroy everything you don't like or you find offensive is a child's way of dealing with things. Adults always ask 'why' and try to learn form it.

a reply to: Bluntone22

We can't judge people of the past with modern sensibilities and expect them to measure up

exactly. Nobody would make the cut. So we have to either accept that we all have flaws, or we judge everyone equally. That means everyone EQUALLY, not some more EQUALLY than others. (animal farm)

I think letting the mob get away with lawless behavior and in most cases, even cheering it on, will bite us really hard in the ass really soon. And while the MSM is to blame, who holds them accountable? nobody.

Jason Whitlock is someone I seldom agree with, but he does occasionally get it strongly right.

He made a point about all this:

It's easy to destroy, but it's much, much harder to create.

To the citizens cheering the dismantling of American culture — the toppling of statues, the renaming of buildings, the discarding of fight songs, symbols and mascots, the remaking of customs associated with singing our national anthem and flying the flag — let me warn you:

Destruction requires little skill or wisdom. Construction requires an abundance of both.

Destruction vs. Construction. One demands no thought. The other necessitates a plan. One relies on emotion. The other depends on logic.

The passionate supporters and silent sympathizers of the Black Lives Matter Movement mistakenly believe we’re living in an era of historic change similar to the Abolitionist Movement, the Women’s Suffrage Movement and the Civil Rights Movement.

Freeing slaves, granting women the right to vote and ensuring black people full citizenship increased American freedom. Supporters of those movements sought to strengthen our country by being additive rather than punitive and restrictive.

This current wave of social justice reformers seeks to punish and restrict and, perhaps most devastatingly, demolish every tradition that preceded their feeling of superior enlightenment.

-- Jason Whitlock

There are too many people in prominent positions today in academia and elsewhere who do this. They make their name and mark by destroying, by tearing others down. They make no creative or positive contributions themselves. Instead, they highlight the flaws they see in others and demean them, and they get put on a pedestal for it and lauded, but in the end, it's all destructive with nothing to come after. There are no real suggestions for any positive replacement. There is no real outcome. Then they all cry for change without having anything to put in its place.

Change for the sake of change is seldom good or wise.

Look at Minneapolis. They voted already to abolish their police force. They have their change coming, but they had no plan ready for what they were going to do without it. They had to start a commission to try to create a workable plan for what they will do without police, and it had about a month to piece something together so they can put a proposal on the ballot for voters in November.

Change for the sake of change. All destructive with no creative impulse. We'll see how that works out for them.

We see the French Revolution -- change for the sake of change.

We see Germany. Change for the sake of change.

We see CHAZ. Change for the sake of change. How does their garden grow?

What happened in the US was the exception, not the rule.

originally posted by: Hecate666
I don't think statues should just be torn down by a mob. How do you know it's the majority that wants them gone? If the majority does, I am sure there is a more civilised way of doing it, with a discussion for the pro and cons of doing so.

Statues are just really poncy images, you can see and touch. Statues are supposed to be noticed and make you ask why these people have been memorialised. Maybe they could just add a bit of detail about each person on the plinth. All the good and and maybe even what we nowadays consider bad included.

The German word for these statues is: Denkmal [literally: ThinkStructure!].

I do not expect non thinking people to appreciate these things, but tearing them down without asking first is a criminal offence in my opinion and should be punished. Sorry, I have not one iota of sympathy for any destruction without due discussions or votes. None.

very good post. All I can say is AMEN.

Julius Caesar had some slaves too, and that A hole has a casino in Las Vegas!

Nobody’s brought him up yet!

This reminds me of a Hunter S Thompson quote,

“And that, I think, was the handle — that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn't need that. Our energy would simply PREVAIL. There was no point in fighting — on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave...

So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high water mark — that place where the wave finally broke, and rolled back.“

Let’s hope these new hippies crash and burn like the old hippies.

a reply to: network dude

That is one of the best headlines I have read here in a long long time Dude. What a good topic of discussion. I agree. No one is all one way or the other.

I wonder how much we either demonize a person or idolize a person stems from this paradigm of total good and total evil in the persona of God and the Devil that permeates our culture .

a reply to: network dude

I mentioned it in a previous post.

Someone said maybe the bible said to not have idols because they knew they caused conflict.
I have to agree.

What are statues? The ego of men immortalized. You are right, MLK was a womanizer.

Should the question be..........Do we really need statues of specific people? I'm talking in public places. In private places, go nuts.

a reply to: TexasTruth

Yale. Berkeley. Clemson.

All major universities named for slave owners. The first two have quite a bit of cultural and academic cache and bona fides. When will they be shamed into renaming themselves?

I have yet to hear the mob come howling after them, and I'll bet it never does.

a reply to: JAGStorm

Statues are art.

Art is meant to evoke a response in its viewer. If the response is one that is violently negative in you, then perhaps you ought to examine yourself to find out why that is.

An idol is a different thing. We have lots of idols. An idol is merely something that comes between God and you. In that sense, a sports team or a rockstar can be an idol. A drug can be an idol. Most people think of statues and the like as idols because pagan cultures often used them to represent their deities and people would bow to the statues in worship. In that sense, a person could confuse the statue representation with the deity, but that comes back to the idea that Catholics might worship the crucifix in like manner making it an idol.

I guess I'm saying that an idol is more complicated concept than simply any old statue you see.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: network dude

I mentioned it in a previous post.

Someone said maybe the bible said to not have idols because they knew they caused conflict.
I have to agree.

What are statues? The ego of men immortalized. You are right, MLK was a womanizer.

Should the question be..........Do we really need statues of specific people? I'm talking in public places. In private places, go nuts.

Perhaps you have looked around the world, but there are memorials all over the world, and some are very old. We call these "works of art" now. Between the statues and the architecture, there is a lot to see. It sure would be a shame if the world was reduced to grass, blacktop, and skyscrapers. But you see the world as you want to.

a reply to: network dude

I say with archaeolgy we learn of societies by the statues we find....

What will they be able to disern about us? With nothing left?

Upon reflection? Have we done that as well in interpreting ancient cultures ourselves? Maybe some did destroy all traces...

I hope we don't.

a reply to: network dude

I am not buying that a one percent of the country's citizenry is powerful enough to take down statues, and restructure the moral norms of a society.

This is all part of a much bigger plan. When the majority feels it is being forced to accept what they are led to believe are the demands of the few, they either give in or they don't.

Many say we have to fight back, and I agree. The problem is that the majority has been brainwashed to focus and attack the wrong enemy. The minority is brainwashed to believe they are doing something great and historical. They are gullible, and often ignorant of what is supposed to be their cause, or ignorant of the fact they are being used.

The majority is aware that what the system is constructing is not in anyone's favor, but the majority have been too conditioned to fight back in a meaningful way; that would call for losing more than the majority wants to give up. So they fight a little fight against the minority offenders, exactly as was always the plan. The majority can then tell themselves that they didn't just take it, and feel good about themselves when they brag to their friends and the strangers online, that they stood up. Yet still find themselves standing neck deep in the swamp.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

I think the majority instinctively sense that any fight will mean the kind of fight that is extremely nasty and very high stakes. I don't think anyone wants that fight. No one in their right mind wants that fight.

You should turn all events into something useful and positive. As soon as "they" deleted that part of history there is no reason to ask "what history?"

a reply to: network dude

Thought I need to share this, Since you mentioned mobs tearing down art.


The beauty has been removed from our art, architecture and music. We have generations that have no concept of what beauty is. Something must be useful to them for it to be essential, to be admired. Like a song they can tap a beat too. All other songs are useless and can be torn down.

The same is being done to our history, only keep the useful bits. Many have lost the ability to contemplate beauty.

"We can forgive a man for making a useful thing as long as he does not admire it. The only excuse for making a useless thing is that one admires it intensely. All art is quite useless." ― Oscar Wilde,

a reply to: network dude This the beginning of a cultural revolution, if you look at these types of revolutions in Mao's great leap forward, Stalin's revolution of the Bolsheviks, they tore down the old to build the new. In doing so millions died even those who thought they were part of the revolution. No one was safe from the public shaming to the public executions. Once they get a taste for blood like in the French revolution it will all go to hell real quick. Seen the videos of children calling their parents Nazis, think your safe?

a reply to: network dude

Remember how a couple of decades ago, the Talaban destroyed huge statues of Buddha that had stood for 1700 years? One was 174 feet tall.

And leave us not forget the Library of Alexandria.

a reply to: ketsuko

Yes, it will be nasty, and the stakes will be high, but the fight should not be against the people. It should be against the system.

We have to break the mind meld. Our countrymen are not our enemy. They are just pawns, just like us.