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.
