So where are the artists to defend the sculpture?
The hacks with spray paint are not artists.
3 Likes
Most if not all of the statues being targeted went up long before the civil rights era. Most went up between 1900-1940. From your own link.
Thank you for clearing up a misconception that I didn’t have, because I didn’t claim most of them went up in the Civil Rights era.
All things considered, it’s a pretty minor part of my post, since my point doesn’t rest on when the majority of them were erected, but when they were. Also, it misses what I think is another key difference between a random book and a traitor statue is that they serve quite different functions - the book is to entertain or inform. The statue is was either raised to intimidate others or because the United Daughters of the Confederacy were trying to rewrite history.
1 Like
It is as though the effort is to disrupt rather than discuss an issue with a public statue…erected by politicians.
I didn’t respond earlier, because I wasn’t notified your comment was a response to me. So please ignore WildRose’s wild and unsubstantiated claim about my argument.
Anyway, I don’t know how to answer your question because I’m not sure on what term’s you’re approaching it. For my part, I’ll say that I don’t think the statues should be destroyed, they should be removed by authorized public officials. The issue, of course, is convincing public officials that the statues do more harm and good and glorify people who fought to maintain slavery.
I read you correctly and responded appropriately.
… .and taking down statutes that suspiciously went up because of the Lost Cause myth and during the Civil Rights era.
All things considered, it’s a pretty minor part of my post, since my point doesn’t rest on when the majority of them were erected, but when they were.
This is of course nonsensical drivel and self contradictory.
We all understand what The Confederacy was and that slavery was a major reason for it’s creation.
It’s part of our history, trying to purge it from the public consciousness will never be productive.
Whether you can accept it or not people served not to protect the institution of slavery but to defend their states.
Prior to the end of the War, “The United States” as we know it today did not exist. People’s first loyalties politically were to their states, not to the US and their states were under attack so millions on both sides enlisted because they saw that as their patriotic duty.
The war ended a hundred years before the civil rights era really started to get up a head of steam, we know that and we all know the south lost.
Many families like my own had members fighting on both sides of the war and they fought for the same reasons and those who served honorably still deserve recognition.
I know something of the Sons and Daughters of The Confederacy, no they aren’t trying to rewrite history they are simply attempting to preserve it and to honor those who “Fought for the cause” and did so honorably.
We live in a completely different world today and a totally different country. Today most of us at least are Americans First and state loyalties are mostly a thing of the past.
Today we understand through the advancement of science that much of the beliefs of people of that era were simply wrong, particularly the superiority of one race vs others.
Somehow we’ve managed right up until very recently to accept all of that and remain united as a nation.
What changed?
Democrats saw these statues as yet another wedge issue to drive Americans apart and they are doing all they can to accelerate it because it’s an election year in which the sitting Republican President is going to be very difficult to beat.
It’s also being exploited as a wedge issue specifically to enrage blacks because of all the great gains made by Black Americans during this presidency and the fact that he could manage between 12-15% of the black vote in our major metro areas it will be all but impossible for him to be defeated.
2 Likes
It is a third world frenzy… Unworthy of consideration.
When we can talk like adults…I can agree to change some things.
1 Like
It’s part of our history, trying to purge it from the public consciousness will never be productive.
Removing statues =/= “purging” history. Germany has outlawed Nazi iconography, yet they are very well aware of their history.
I’ve cut out the large part of your discussion on the soldier’s motivation to fight for the Confederacy or the Union, because that’s not at all relevant to the discussion. The statutes were erected after the War, by groups that were promoting Lost Cause mythology and intimidating black Americans. Their reasons for erecting these statutes is important, not whether or not John C. Smith from Mississippi personally owned slaves or had some national loyalty.
I know something of the Sons and Daughters of The Confederacy, no they aren’t trying to rewrite history they are simply attempting to preserve it and to honor those who “Fought for the cause” and did so honorably.
United Daughters of the Confederacy - Lost Cause and Neo-Confederate views
What changed?
The Charleston church shooting, the Unite the Right rally,, and the recent killing of George Floyd highlighted racial tensions.
I reject the rest of your comment, because it seems founded on the assumption that these statutes were not issues at any prior moment in history, and only recently became issues because Democrats saw them as political tools.
2 Likes
Well stated!!
Please point out to me where in my response to you I did not act like an adult.
Thanks to the frentic action.
The timing is curious. The case needs to be made for each monument.
Please point out where I stated you didn’t.
I was referring to the mobs attacking defenseless statues…like children playing with toys.
There are memorials to the German Soldiers lost during both WWI and WWII all over Germany.
You can honor the fallen, even the great generals without honoring the cause of Nazism.
You can try and reject it all you want but the facts are plain.
We went more than a hundred years without these statues being even a blip on the political radar in this country.
The NAACP started trying to make an issue of them starting in the 90’s, it never gained any traction.
Even during two terms of Obama’s presidency they remained not in the top hundred things anyone cares about in this country.
Shortly after Trump was elected they suddenly became an issue for democrats to seize upon which still gained little or not traction until suddenly in the last month it has become front and center as a major issue dividing the country.
2 Likes
The timing is curious.
The timing on what? The statutes being raised? The news story I posted shows that most were erected around 35 years after the war by people pushing the Lost Cause myth. Others were raised in the Civil Rights era. In those cases, I’d say that the timing is “curious” in the sense that claims that the statues weren’t about black American intimidation don’t seem credible.
If you’re talking about the timing of the renewed interest in taking them down, I disagree. I don’t think it’s curious to want to remove statues glorifying white supremacy after several high profile moments of racial tension.
The case needs to be made for each monument.
Sure. i can agree to that. There are probably some Confederate generals or soldiers or statement who were, all things considered, far more moderate in their views and complex. An issue, however, is that this greatly leaves open the possibility that other statues depict men (or women? I dunno if there are any Confederate women statutes) of abhorrent views.
Please point out where I stated you didn’t.
My mistake. Since you’re directly responding to me and not making reference to other people, I assumed you were talking about me.
I was referring to the mobs attacking defenseless statues…like children playing with toys.
I disagree with vandalism. It only serves to make these statutes and the men they represent more of martyrs than they deserve to be. I’d prefer they were all taken down with full public and official support.
Emphasis mine. We’ve already established this is false, you then went to great pains to claim you hadn’t said this yet you are repeating it again.
Talk about trying to rewrite history.
There are memorials to the German Soldiers lost during both WWI and WWII all over Germany.
Removing statues =/= “purging” history. Germany has outlawed Nazi iconography, yet they are very well aware of their history.
I will also note that your search query is clearly visible at the top. You used Yahoo Image Search, and typed in “Memorial to lost German soldiers” or “Memorial to lost German soldiers WWII”. I know, because I used the exact same search engine and search keywords. and here.
Also, because I can see your image search, I can tell you that those are memorials to lost soldiers, which don’t contain Nazi iconography. The first one in the middle row isn’t depicting Nazis, but Soviet soldiers.
You can honor the fallen, even the great generals without honoring the cause of Nazism.
As I said before, Germany has no Nazi iconography.
Why There Are No Nazi Statues in Germany
Does Germany Have Statues Of Hitler? Nazis Are Not Remembered Like Confederate Generals
There Are No Nostalgic Nazi Memorials
We went more than a hundred years without these statues being even a blip on the political radar in this country.
Except over the objections of some of the very people depicted in them, and letters to newspapers from the Grand Army of the Republic.
The rest of your argument is based on an unfounded premise - that these statues were harmless until turned into divisive tools by Democrats.
And you remain wrong. I entered the search terms for the web then went to the images so I could show them to you.
The insignia of the units including SS Units is on the uniforms featured in the statues and on the memorials.
That is by definition iconography.
This was the first official flag of The Confederate States of Amercia.
Your "leaders’ fueling the outrage machine need to learn some history but they are too busy rewriting and attempting to eliminate the actual history.
You folks have decided to make the Battle Flag , one of many actually, the official flag of The Confederacy which it never was and and thus the symbol of slavery to support the misrepresentation that it was all about slavery.
The statues and monuments honor the men who served honorably, not the cause of slavery or the confederacy as a whole.
If you come across any specifically honoring Slavery by all means post them here so we can discuss them.
1 Like
Emphasis mine. We’ve already established this is false, you then went to great pains to claim you hadn’t said this yet you are repeating it again.
Ok, so I’ll have to quote this for you.
There are some pretty major differences between burning Harry Potter because someone thinks it promotes witchcraft or Satanism and taking down statutes that suspiciously went up because of the Lost Cause myth and during the Civil Rights era.
Note how nowhere in there do I make any claim about when most of the statues went up, simply that they did during two moments in U.S. history. During the Daughter’s push for the Lost Cause 35 after the Civil War and then during the Civil Rights.
Here is my second comment on this.
The timing on what? The statutes being raised? The news story I posted shows that most were erected around 35 years after the war by people pushing the Lost Cause myth. Others were raised in the Civil Rights era. In those cases, I’d say that the timing is “curious” in the sense that claims that the statues weren’t about black American intimidation don’t seem credible.
Here, on the other hand, I do point out that, according to the news story, most of the statutes came up 35 years after the Civil War. By people promoting the Lost Cause myth…
…which I said in my first comment.
Also, you accidentally quoted your entire comment under that.
Learn some history already.
There is no accident I included the entire context intentionally.
The fact is this isn’t about targeting statues that went up during the civil rights era as you have now repeated several times which we know to be false.
Here, on the other hand, I do point out that, according to the news story, most of the statutes came up 35 years after the Civil War. By people promoting the Lost Cause myth…
The graphic from one of your own links shows this to be utterly false.
Less than 10% of them went up after 1945.
Why do you keep repeating something you obviously now know to be false.
1 Like
If only we had the we had access to infinite knowledge with a device we keep in our pocket.
2 Likes
And you remain wrong. I entered the search terms for the web then went to the images so I could show them to you.
… that’s what I said. Your search uses Yahoo Images. We can tell this because your tab has the Y! right next to it and says “Memories to lost German soldiers”. The screencap of your screen also shows the Yahoo Image search URL and search query.
The insignia of the units including SS Units is on the uniforms featured in the statues and on the memorials.
Which statues? Please, point them out. Your image search includes photographs, a sculpture of Soviet soldiers, the War Memorial at Stafford (which doesn’t include Nazi symbolim).according to Strafgesetzbuch section 86a.
