• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

The removal of statues

To justify the sense of being singled out for the destruction of statues, we would need fairly analogous statues of non whites would did similar things (cross racial/ethnic conquest or subjugation) under demand to be removed from public quasi governmental space.

Perhaps statues of Emperor Meiji in Hokkaido or Okinawa (if they even exist) would be analogous. But an Ainu or native Okinawan group asking to remove an Emperor Meiji statue in Tokyo instead would be crazy.

Europeans had the jump on expansion so they are the lion's share of these statues.


Belgium has still lots of statues of King Leopold II. He was personally, as private person, responsible for a genocide of a few million people. Estimates vary widely upto 10 million. His family fortune, based on ruthless exploitation in Congo, is still enjoyed by the Belgian Kings.
His grandson even had the chutzpah to praise king leopolds genocide during the Independence opening ceremony of the congolese parliament. (Where Lumamba answered him with the truth and was murdered for it)

I like the statues and monuments of Leo II and would be sad to see them go. I believe a clear memo should be added to the monuments, explaining exactly who the person is and what he did. I like the action of a group of anarchists who cut of Leopolds statues hand to remind people about the less glorious past of this person.

Goes for statues of Lenin and Saddam but also of Stalin (if they exist) I believe there are statues of Genghis Khan, Godefroid of Bouillon. Destroying them all is an attempt to erase a page of our history. Not to explain it.
 
A price should have to be paid for any monuments or displays in public places, if they are to remain in place, or for new ones to be put in any public space. The price should be paid to the local jurisdiction, into its general revenue.

Any exhibitions or displays of any kind in public should have to be paid for by private organizations which want them there. All should be permitted, no matter how offensive, if they are sponsored by private organizations which pay the price for them.

Perhaps a "commercial" display would have to pay a higher price than something non-commercial, assuming these can be distinguished.

Anything not paid for privately should be removed.

This should extend to the removal of pictures of Presidents on the currency bills, unless someone pays a price for them. These should probably be replaced by corporate logos or other commercial symbols which private companies would pay a price for, probably bidding for the space.

Public space should not be used for promoting anyone's personal beliefs or their admiration for certain idolized heroes or symbols of any kind, except in cases where the promoter pays the appropriate price.

Perhaps display of the national flag, or state flags, would be an exception to this.

What a boring world that would be. We'd only keep statues of the new and trendy. It'd also be a "might makes right" world. I thought you were Christian? It's also hard to combine with any democratic ethos.

I think we need to be exposed to plenty of public non-commercial art. Preferably pushing various, and contradicting values and ideals. We don't get pluralism of ideas by being exposed to nothing. We get it by being exposed to lots different ones.

The problem with commercial advertising is that they all have variants of this one message, "you aren't good enough", "you need something to be complete/fixed", "if you only have this you'll finally be happy". Do we really want to be bombarded with this 24/7?

Ideas can have value even if not attached to a marketable product to be sold. Statues in public places can be used for this.

In Europe we're constantly, and everywhere, surrounded by statues. It's important to us. It reminds us of our history and heritage. It reminds us of the bad old days. It reminds us of ages when people had other, and often twisted and corrupt moral values. But mostly they just inject some, much needed, beauty into our daily commute. Just to brighten up our day.
 
[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CHH2FGUBjQ[/YOUTUBE]

Ravin Gandhi is the founder and CEO of GMM Nonstick Coatings, a global supplier of coatings for cookware and bakeware. He was born and raised in Waukegan, Illinois, and currently lives in Chicago. His horrible crime that prompted the above voice mail rant and hundreds of equally vile emails & tweets?

Writing on an op-ed on why he no longer supports Trump after Charlottesville.

But no... it's all about history... not racism. :rolleyes:

You quoted a loony tune who sounds pretty unstable and claim this is somehow representative of all those who support Trump, while you can get loony tunes on the left whom the Democrats want off their side too. The fringes gravitate towards the Centre right or left. Antifa and the CPUSA would traditionally advocate the Democrats but that does not make the Democrats communist.

More violence in the USA

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-n...f/2017/08/anarchists_assault_5_at_san_fr.html

I know it's not politically correct to say this but ANTIFA and other groups turn up expecting trouble and cause it so there is clearly no false equivalence to suggest one extreme is as bad as each other.

In one oaf the photos there is a communist banner. That doesn't mean everyone against Trump is a communist such events are home for such groups.

Once democracy is respected in the US things will calm down.

Even though there's idiots on both sides, I think the Trump side has more idiots. I base this on the fact that they are followers of Trump, an idiot.
 
You quoted a loony tune who sounds pretty unstable and claim this is somehow representative of all those who support Trump, while you can get loony tunes on the left whom the Democrats want off their side too. The fringes gravitate towards the Centre right or left. Antifa and the CPUSA would traditionally advocate the Democrats but that does not make the Democrats communist.

More violence in the USA

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-n...f/2017/08/anarchists_assault_5_at_san_fr.html

I know it's not politically correct to say this but ANTIFA and other groups turn up expecting trouble and cause it so there is clearly no false equivalence to suggest one extreme is as bad as each other.

In one oaf the photos there is a communist banner. That doesn't mean everyone against Trump is a communist such events are home for such groups.

Once democracy is respected in the US things will calm down.

Even though there's idiots on both sides, I think the Trump side has more idiots. I base this on the fact that they are followers of Trump, an idiot.

The US has gone politically insane. Hence if you get a democracy in a lunatic asylum you get an insane democracy. Hence it may then be a matter of determining those who are even more insane or perhaps less insane than a perceived norm :)
 
FFS this tearing down of statues is spreading throughout the political correct West!
Here in Australia some idiots have destroyed statues of Captain Cook overnight.
Greens and one or two Green pc influenced councils are demanding the wording on plaques be re-worded because of claims some indigenous people may be offended!

Well, in Bmore, As I said, the government was told to get rid of the statues one way, or folk'll get rid of it the other.

Whether or not people can actually do that cannot be substantiated. But they did move, didn't they?
 
You are proud of stealing the country and treating its owners as you have?
Well, not 'proud,' but just look at what's happening! If we're going to let second class citizens decide who we honor and how we honor them, then what's the point of being a member of the first class of citizenry?
Then the natives will start to think THEY'RE full citizens, with a say in how the country's run! PC RUN AMOK!

Leave having second-class citizens to the Nazis, and honour those who rightly own the country. Being descended even from worthy convicts is no great recommendation for a master race!
 
That's the bad. What about the good?
Good question. What about the good? Who determines which part was good or ungood? Or good but not worth the bad?
Do we just ignore what European discoveries have contributed to the world because of some bad practices?
The key would be figuring a way to honor the good without honoring, or appearing to honor, the bad. The Benedict Arnold statue may be a way to do that.
Which civilisation can claim to be innocent of some bad practices?
Tearing down -A- statue of -A- person is not quite the same as condemning an entire civilization and all its works. Your hyperbole is noted, though.
 
FFS this tearing down of statues is spreading throughout the political correct West!
Here in Australia some idiots have destroyed statues of Captain Cook overnight.
Greens and one or two Green pc influenced councils are demanding the wording on plaques be re-worded because of claims some indigenous people may be offended!

Well, in Bmore, As I said, the government was told to get rid of the statues one way, or folk'll get rid of it the other.

Whether or not people can actually do that cannot be substantiated. But they did move, didn't they?

The Democrats was once a party which supported slavery so why not knock anything down that is to do with that party. Southern White Democrats joined the KKK and fought against major civil rights acts and supported the Confederate cause. So we can tear down anything to do with the Democrats?!
 
Well, in Bmore, As I said, the government was told to get rid of the statues one way, or folk'll get rid of it the other.

Whether or not people can actually do that cannot be substantiated. But they did move, didn't they?

The Democrats was once a party which supported slavery so why not knock anything down that is to do with that party. Southern White Democrats joined the KKK and fought against major civil rights acts and supported the Confederate cause. So we can tear down anything to do with the Democrats?!

Those Democrats became Republicans after the The Civil Rights Act.

Nixon wins North and South Carolina, Virginia, Kentucky, Florida and Tennessee.

Wallace the favorite of racists everywhere wins Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Arkansas.

Democrats are shut out of the entire South.
 
Referring to post 261. I looked up Belgian demographics on wikipedia and I didn't even mention Congolese. I think that if there were a significant percentage of Congolese in Belgium then demand for the removal of King Leopold Statues would happen. Huh, maybe Belgium was more racist than the UK, not even giving a chance to live in Belgium to the people it conquered like the Brits did.
 
A price should have to be paid for any monuments or displays in public places, if they are to remain in place, or for new ones to be put in any public space. The price should be paid to the local jurisdiction, into its general revenue.

Any exhibitions or displays of any kind in public should have to be paid for by private organizations which want them there. All should be permitted, no matter how offensive, if they are sponsored by private organizations which pay the price for them.

Perhaps a "commercial" display would have to pay a higher price than something non-commercial, assuming these can be distinguished.

Anything not paid for privately should be removed.

This should extend to the removal of pictures of Presidents on the currency bills, unless someone pays a price for them. These should probably be replaced by corporate logos or other commercial symbols which private companies would pay a price for, probably bidding for the space.

Public space should not be used for promoting anyone's personal beliefs or their admiration for certain idolized heroes or symbols of any kind, except in cases where the promoter pays the appropriate price.

Perhaps display of the national flag, or state flags, would be an exception to this.

What a boring world that would be. We'd only keep statues of the new and trendy. It'd also be a "might makes right" world. I thought you were Christian? It's also hard to combine with any democratic ethos.

I think we need to be exposed to plenty of public non-commercial art. Preferably pushing various, and contradicting values and ideals. We don't get pluralism of ideas by being exposed to nothing. We get it by being exposed to lots different ones.

The problem with commercial advertising is that they all have variants of this one message, "you aren't good enough", "you need something to be complete/fixed", "if you only have this you'll finally be happy". Do we really want to be bombarded with this 24/7?

Ideas can have value even if not attached to a marketable product to be sold. Statues in public places can be used for this.

In Europe we're constantly, and everywhere, surrounded by statues. It's important to us. It reminds us of our history and heritage. It reminds us of the bad old days. It reminds us of ages when people had other, and often twisted and corrupt moral values. But mostly they just inject some, much needed, beauty into our daily commute. Just to brighten up our day.

The boring world is the one that never changes and preserves everything in the name of posterity. Its a world where houses are never torn down and rebuilt to be better than the ones they replaced because even a log shack in the woods has a history.
 
One aspect to these old statues is that it seems like the old ones (regardless of whether made by racists or not) seem to be much larger and more detailed than anything made now.

Does this subliminally add a sense of gravitas to the subject of the statue? If a statue was made now of a better (not being sarcastic) person, it would likely not be as grand unless a great deal of money was spent compared to current going rates. Then people would complain about the price.

However, that is not to say that smaller statues are not great as well. I really like small, life size statues. It can personalize the subject more. But the Civil War junkies want statues to idolize, not feel a peer to.
 
The Democrats was once a party which supported slavery so why not knock anything down that is to do with that party. Southern White Democrats joined the KKK and fought against major civil rights acts and supported the Confederate cause. So we can tear down anything to do with the Democrats?!

Those Democrats became Republicans after the The Civil Rights Act.

Nixon wins North and South Carolina, Virginia, Kentucky, Florida and Tennessee.

Wallace the favorite of racists everywhere wins Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Arkansas.

Democrats are shut out of the entire South.

That at the time meant Republicans were just as bad.
 
Well, in Bmore, As I said, the government was told to get rid of the statues one way, or folk'll get rid of it the other.

Whether or not people can actually do that cannot be substantiated. But they did move, didn't they?

The Democrats was once a party which supported slavery so why not knock anything down that is to do with that party. Southern White Democrats joined the KKK and fought against major civil rights acts and supported the Confederate cause. So we can tear down anything to do with the Democrats?!

That is *precisely what the removal of statues of Confederates entails*, the majority of which were Democrats, Like Jefferson Davis.

Why do you feel the need to defend statues to Confederates?
 
The Democrats was once a party which supported slavery so why not knock anything down that is to do with that party. Southern White Democrats joined the KKK and fought against major civil rights acts and supported the Confederate cause. So we can tear down anything to do with the Democrats?!

That is *precisely what the removal of statues of Confederates entails*, the majority of which were Democrats, Like Jefferson Davis.

Why do you feel the need to defend statues to Confederates?

Anything on this thread suggest I support the confederates? The US has to decide sensibly what to do regarding these artifacts.
 
That is *precisely what the removal of statues of Confederates entails*, the majority of which were Democrats, Like Jefferson Davis.

Why do you feel the need to defend statues to Confederates?

Anything on this thread suggest I support the confederates? The US has to decide sensibly what to do regarding these artifacts.

What do you mean by "decide sensibly"?

New York Times said:
The statue — begun by Henry Merwin Shrady, a New York sculptor, and finished after his death by an Italian, Leo Lentelli — had stood in the city since 1924. But over the past couple of years some residents and city officials, along with organizations like the N.A.A.C.P., had called for it to come down.

One local official made a similar suggestion as early as 2012 and quickly discovered that emotions surrounding the issue run deep.It was during the Virginia Festival of the Book, a series of readings and events held every year in Albemarle County, which includes Charlottesville.

At a talk given by the author and historian Edward Ayers, a Charlottesville city councilor, Kristin Szakos, asked about the city’s Confederate monuments. She wondered whether the city should discuss removing them.

People around her gasped. “You would have thought I had asked if it was O.K. to torture puppies,” she recalled during a 2013 conversation on BackStory, a podcast supported by the Virginia Foundation for the Humanities....

... By 2015, debates about Confederate flags and monuments were heating up in Southern states including South Carolina, Texas and Louisiana. Those who favored removal saw the symbols as monuments to white supremacy, but their opponents accused them of trying to erase history.
In Charlottesville that year, someone spray-painted “Black Lives Matter” on the foundation of the Lee statue. City workers cleaned it quickly, leaving only a faint outline.

By 2016, Wes Bellamy, another Charlottesville city councilor and the city’s vice mayor, had become a champion of efforts to remove Confederate monuments. At a news conference in front of the Lee statue in March of that year, he said the City Council would appoint a commission to discuss the issue...

...That same month, Zyahna Bryant, a high school student, petitioned the City Council asking for the Lee statue to be removed. “My peers and I feel strongly about the removal of the statue because it makes us feel uncomfortable and it is very offensive,” she wrote in the petition, which collected hundreds of signatures.
The City Council established its special commission in May 2016. Later that year, it issued a report suggesting that the city could either relocate the Lee statue or transform it with the “inclusion of new accurate historical information.

The addition of historical context might have been welcomed by some defenders of the statues. One group, Friends of C’Ville Monuments, said on its website that statues could be improved “by adding more informative, better detailed explanations of the history of the statues and what they can teach us.”
But in February, the City Council voted to remove the statue from the park. Opponents of the move sued in March, arguing that the city did not have the authority to do so under state law.

That court case is continuing, and the statue has remained in place.”
<link>

The suggestion to remove the Lee statue in Charlottesville had been made several times over the years, was made again in a 2012 city council session, the idea gained wide support over the past 5 years, the City Council agreed to the plan, and their decision is currently under review by the courts.

Aside from Nazis and white supremacists losing their shit, what part of the decision making process wasn't sensible?
 
Last edited:
[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CHH2FGUBjQ[/YOUTUBE]

Ravin Gandhi is the founder and CEO of GMM Nonstick Coatings, a global supplier of coatings for cookware and bakeware. He was born and raised in Waukegan, Illinois, and currently lives in Chicago. His horrible crime that prompted the above voice mail rant and hundreds of equally vile emails & tweets?

Writing on an op-ed on why he no longer supports Trump after Charlottesville.

But no... it's all about history... not racism. :rolleyes:
...claim this is somehow representative of all those who support Trump...

I did? Where? Quote the specific words I said in that post claiming "this is somehow representative of all those who support Trump."

What I DID say is that this is about racism. The "looney tune" (and the hundreds of other equally crazy racists) attacked Mr. Gandhi from a purely racist perspective in purely racist terms, which just goes to show that the argument over the statues is not about art or history - it is about racism.

Are you going to get into trouble with your handlers for creating a link between Trump and racism when I didn't?
 
Are you going to get into trouble with your handlers for creating a link between Trump and racism when I didn't?
Well, YOU don't have to. Others will do the work for you. Happens all the time.
SOmeone at work sees a CNN article on Charlottesville, mutters 'God, damn, i hate racists,' and someone else shouts, 'Hey, asshole! In THIS company, we support our president!'

You really want to sit them down, maybe with some butcher paper and crayons and examine what they just said...
 
That is *precisely what the removal of statues of Confederates entails*, the majority of which were Democrats, Like Jefferson Davis.

Why do you feel the need to defend statues to Confederates?

Anything on this thread suggest I support the confederates? The US has to decide sensibly what to do regarding these artifacts.

It is implied by the post I quoted - don't play dumb.
 
Back
Top Bottom