First They Came for the Confederate Statues, Then they came for the...

[volinbham]

Your edit is funny, because you're making the biggest strawman argument ever.

"Everyone has flaws." Well hell, let's just throw Saddam up on a pedestal then

You justified the expansion of the confederate statue issue to statues of Columbus because of his bad deeds.

So I'll ask again - what's your standard for who is statue worthy and who is not?

 

[volinbham]

This is for America to decide, and all this "slippery slope" crap is mostly paranoia about America making the "wrong" decision.

There are thousands of black or white abolitionists that we know about, many of whom were killed for their efforts, and yet the people we put on pedestals are the Confederates fighting to preserve slavery. The fact that people know that, and respond with "Yeah, sounds about right," blows my mind.

But America isn't deciding - a small group of people is demanding and some politicians are caving in.

The slippery slope is not crap - we've already seen it. A minute ago you were defending removing the Columbus statues because he did some bad things too.

As I said earlier the larger implications are unknown but this has already gone beyond Confederate statues.

 

[NashVol11]

You justified the expansion of the confederate statue issue to statues of Columbus because of his bad deeds.

So I'll ask again - what's your standard for who is statue worthy and who is not?

Oh, I don't know, maybe enslaving and killing hundreds of thousands (or millions) of people from specific ethnic groups, or fighting to defend that institution, shouldn't earn you a spot on a pedestal. Just a thought.

 

[volinbham]

Oh, I don't know, maybe enslaving and killing hundreds of thousands (or millions) of people from specific ethnic groups, or fighting to defend that institution, shouldn't earn you a spot on a pedestal. Just a thought.

So Confederates and Columbus? Can we keep Jefferson? How about that bastard Francis Scott Key?

 

[NashVol11]

But America isn't deciding - a small group of people is demanding and some politicians are caving in.

That's ridiculous. Politicians don't need to cave to small groups of people; those people can't vote them out of office. Politicians are largely making these decisions because they see the rationale behind it.

The slippery slope is not crap - we've already seen it. A minute ago you were defending removing the Columbus statues because he did some bad things too.

As I said earlier the larger implications are unknown but this has already gone beyond Confederate statues.

The larger implications are very much known, which is that it won't change a damn thing except that people will be more educated on their past. How terrible.

 

[Boston Vol]

This is for America to decide, and all this "slippery slope" crap is mostly paranoia about America making the "wrong" decision.

There are thousands of black or white abolitionists that we know about, many of whom were killed for their efforts, and yet the people we put on pedestals are the Confederates fighting to preserve slavery. The fact that people know that, and respond with "Yeah, sounds about right," blows my mind.

Well a Marist poll taken less than a month ago showed that 62% of respondents thought the statues should stay up. Hell the same poll showed that a plurality of African Americans thought they should stay up. So is that Americans deciding?

 

[volinbham]

That's ridiculous. Politicians don't need to cave to small groups of people; those people can't vote them out of office. Politicians are largely making these decisions because they see the rationale behind it.

The larger implications are very much known, which is that it won't change a damn thing except that people will be more educated on their past. How terrible.

Politicians don't cave to small groups of people? What kind of fantasy land are you living in?

As for American deciding - polling clearly indicates that just over 1/4 of people want the statues to come down (and that's the Confederate statues - I'm sure it's smaller for Columbus, Jefferson, etc.)

Say what it really is - you want them down and don't care how it happens.

 

[LouderVol]

That's ridiculous. Politicians don't need to cave to small groups of people; those people can't vote them out of office. Politicians are largely making these decisions because they see the rationale behind it.



The larger implications are very much known, which is that it won't change a damn thing except that people will be more educated on their past. How terrible.

most naive and funniest thing I had read on this board today.

 

[luthervol]

The whole course of human history is about the continual debate on where to draw the various lines with regards to human co-existence. This is no different.

 

[volinbham]

The whole course of human history is about the continual debate on where to draw the various lines with regards to human co-existence. This is no different.

so we should have the debate

what we are seeing is action both at the hands of the mob and politicians.

Personally, I see both sides on the Confederate statue issue. I object to the methods that are akin to unilateral decision making rather than informed debate.

I also see the natural progression from Confederate statues to all symbols of anything in this country. We didn't have to wait to see if it would happen - it already has.

The debate is the part that is missing.

 

[luthervol]

so we should have the debate

what we are seeing is action both at the hands of the mob and politicians.

Personally, I see both sides on the Confederate statue issue. I object to the methods that are akin to unilateral decision making rather than informed debate.

I also see the natural progression from Confederate statues to all symbols of anything in this country. We didn't have to wait to see if it would happen - it already has.

The debate is the part that is missing.

I agree. But unfortunately sometimes debate is only taken in response to actions such as these. I don't agree with the actions, nor do I agree that the debate should have taken this long to see results.

 

[volinbham]

I agree. But unfortunately sometimes debate is only taken in response to actions such as these. I don't agree with the actions, nor do I agree that the debate should have taken this long to see results.

I'd argue we haven't had the debate. At best we've had some people bring it up but it was a non-issue for the vast majority of the public - and that should tell us something right there.

Nashvol argues the removal of statues will have no impact - kinda makes you wonder why go to the bother and have the fight then...

 

[hndog609]

So Confederates and Columbus? Can we keep Jefferson? How about that bastard Francis Scott Key?

Screw it...git ur done!

http://ijr.com/the-declaration/2017...tatues-locations-three-lenin-statues-america/

http://splinternews.com/while-were-tearing-down-confederate-monuments-lets-dea-1797914525

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...be-triggering-harmful/?utm_term=.fe7d56b8a5f6

The real issue is the promulgation of the idea that being "offended" brings about special rights and justifications. IMHO the slippery slope isn't some squabble about statues but in the ideology of who can be offended about what, justified actions based on this perceived offense and who gets to referee where any lines limiting any of the above are drawn.

 

[volinbham]

Screw it...git ur done!

http://ijr.com/the-declaration/2017...tatues-locations-three-lenin-statues-america/

http://splinternews.com/while-were-tearing-down-confederate-monuments-lets-dea-1797914525

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...be-triggering-harmful/?utm_term=.fe7d56b8a5f6

The real issue is the promulgation of the idea that being "offended" brings about special rights and justifications. IMHO the slippery slope isn't some squabble about statues but in the ideology of who can be offended about what, justified actions based on this perceived offense and who gets to referee where any lines limiting any of the above are drawn.

Agreed

 

[Carl Pickens]

If you think we need giant statues to remember something, it's pretty hard to call yourself "the most reasonable."

If I said we needed a statue of Osama bin Laden in order to remember 9/11, how do you think that would go over?

Yeah.... this argument here^..... it's just not very smart..... or good..... or even applicable..... it's really just kinda dumb

 

[luthervol]

Screw it...git ur done!

http://ijr.com/the-declaration/2017...tatues-locations-three-lenin-statues-america/

http://splinternews.com/while-were-tearing-down-confederate-monuments-lets-dea-1797914525

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...be-triggering-harmful/?utm_term=.fe7d56b8a5f6

The real issue is the promulgation of the idea that being "offended" brings about special rights and justifications. IMHO the slippery slope isn't some squabble about statues but in the ideology of who can be offended about what, justified actions based on this perceived offense and who gets to referee where any lines limiting any of the above are drawn.

Sure, but it's the age old debate. Breastfeeding in public, pornography, what constitutes child abuse, public displays of affection, vulgar speech and actions at a UT football game.

 

[lawgator1]

straw man - show me one place where people made such a claim.

This example along with the Colombus and many others do show it's a slippery slope from Confederate monuments to others that someone finds offensive. That has been established.

The implications for the country are unknown but that doesn't mean those predicting the spread were incorrect in that prediction.

"implications are unknown...."

Ooooooh that sounds ominous. We should all be very concerned!!! Worried!

I'll tell you what the implications are: zero. None. Nada. Zilch.

10 % of the people talking about taking down Jefferson or Washington statues are college kid professional protestors with nothing to do but go to class three times a week and try to change the world. Then get a pizza.

The other 90 % of the people talking about it are Trump, his idiot minions on Fox and Breitbart, and folks like yourself who want to use the 10 % to try to mischaracterize people to fit your narrative.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

Bunch of kids riling up trouble. We've seen this movie a thousand times. Get over yourself. The fake hysteria from the right that this is some real threat to rewrite history is just terri-stupid.

The hippies of the 60s are the leaders of the Democratic party now, just like this "bunch of kids riling up trouble" represents the future of your party.

 

[Carl Pickens]

How long before a historical site such as The Hermitage becomes a target?
What's the over/under on days? +/- 35?

 

[lawgator1]

The hippies of the 60s are the leaders of the Democratic party now, just like this "bunch of kids riling up trouble" represents the future of your party.

Sure, but that's always true. College kids are immature and idealistic. By the time they are running the world, they become much more conservative than they were, even if not as much as you or others.

 

[NashVol11]

"implications are unknown...."

Ooooooh that sounds ominous. We should all be very concerned!!! Worried!

I'll tell you what the implications are: zero. None. Nada. Zilch.

Exactly. The "Oh no!! What will happen next?!?!" reactions are fear-mongering bulls***.

 

[volinbham]

"implications are unknown...."

Ooooooh that sounds ominous. We should all be very concerned!!! Worried!

I'll tell you what the implications are: zero. None. Nada. Zilch.

Exactly. The "Oh no!! What will happen next?!?!" reactions are fear-mongering bulls***.

FYI - what I meant by that was that I simply have no idea if there are any implications and I'm making no claim to any specific implications. If you read the thread that should be clear but instead you try to turn the comment into something it is not.

On to the no implications claim that you've both made - if there are no implications of taking them down and most people don't want them taken down what's the point of taking them down.

Why bother if it will have no implications or consequences?

 

[NashVol11]

Nashvol argues the removal of statues will have no impact - kinda makes you wonder why go to the bother and have the fight then...

It's funny, I have this same question for people angrily defending Confederate statues. These statues were largely put up (quickly, and out of crappy materials) to intimidate black people at the peak of Jim Crow and the KKK, not to "help remember." They're not historic places, and people need zero help "remembering" the Civil War. So what are you defending?

Some say things like "We should keep these statues as examples of what not to do." We do that with museums, not by putting them on a pedestal. For many, the defense ends up being a defense of the Confederates themselves, saying that Robert E. Lee was actually a pretty good guy because he treated his slaves better than others. Or the Bill O'Reilly special: Yes, much of this country was built by slaves, but the slaves were actually treated well.

You want to find someone "sanitizing history," go look at all the people fighting this hard to honor the Confederacy, or the ones saying fighting for slavery isn't that bad. These statues, among other things, have made that attitude socially acceptable in the South for a long time, and we're seeing the results today.

 

[volinbham]

It's funny, I have this same question for people angrily defending Confederate statues. These statues were largely put up (quickly, and out of crappy materials) to intimidate black people at the peak of Jim Crow and the KKK, not to "help remember." They're not historic places, and people need zero help "remembering" the Civil War. So what are you defending?

Some say things like "We should keep these statues as examples of what not to do." We do that with museums, not by putting them on a pedestal. For many, the defense ends up being a defense of the Confederates themselves, saying that Robert E. Lee was actually a pretty good guy because he treated his slaves better than others. Or the Bill O'Reilly special: Yes, much of this country was built by slaves, but the slaves were actually treated well.

You want to find someone "sanitizing history," go look at all the people fighting this hard to honor the Confederacy. These statues, among other things, have made that attitude socially acceptable in the South for a long time, and we're seeing the results today.

I'm not defending these statues.

I'm asking you if there are no larger implications of taking them down why the rush and demands to take them down?

How will America change if we tear them all down?

 

[NashVol11]

I'm not defending these statues.

I'm asking you if there are no larger implications of taking them down why the rush and demands to take them down?

How will America change if we tear them all down?

I answered all of these questions in the post you quoted but apparently didn't read. The statues were built to be a public display of black inferiority, meant to intimidate black people and show former Confederates that their power wasn't threatened. The more the government sends that message, the more you're telling everyone in those areas that you're fine with all this "honor the Confederacy" **** and that you don't really care whether black people feel welcome in that place.