Pepe_Silvia
#mikehawk
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2006
- Messages
- 22,478
- Likes
- 44,015
I see this as a total non-issue and a pointless distraction from important subjects. However, I will be interested in seeing the reaction when people take aim at monuments to yankee heroes with troublesome records on race.
I see this as a total non-issue and a pointless distraction from important subjects. However, I will be interested in seeing the reaction when people take aim at monuments to yankee heroes with troublesome records on race.
We already saw this at Yale - it's named after some wealthy benefactor who IIRC participated in slave trade. "well that's different".
We've seen calls to disassociate with Thomas Jefferson - some dinner (again IIRC).
Endless
True in some cases but I think we'll see some people go after monuments to Lincoln, Sherman, Grant, et al, after they've had all the Confederate monuments removed.
No survivors made the statues.The Civil War was the bloodiest in our entire history, a severely life altering event for those who endured it. It was natural for survivors to remember the sacrifices with monuments, but I also think it is natural now for us to also remember the system of slavery at the center of the conflict. People are right to question such monuments lording over us in public spaces. Exaggerated disrespect and hatred for soldiers of that war seem wrong, to me, and unnecessary. I can be okay with removal of the monuments without hating on Confederate soldiers or the people who want to remember them respectfully.
Even if the monuments are historically inaccurate, or are viewed as celebrating the wrong side of history, they are in and of themselves history.
If the goal is to have people learn whatever point you want them to learn from monuments I think the better solution is to build a monument next to the existing ones. Maybe a monument next to Lee showing human suffering of an enslaved person.
You can still argue states rights. You can still point to the evils of slavery. You can still argue the price to be paid for both. You can still argue how America has evolved since.
I don’t disagree but let’s not pretend every tribe was the same and just peaceful people hanging out either. Several were bloodthirsty savages and killed Americans from the beginningThe U.S. broke far more treaties with the Native Americans than vice versa. Our treatment of them was absolutely inhumane.
For all intents and purposes, colonists were an invading force. I can see history from both sides. We were conquerors. They were here first.I don’t disagree but let’s not pretend every tribe was the same and just peaceful people hanging out either. Several were bloodthirsty savages and killed Americans from the beginning
Maybe, but you cannot argue Native Americans were here first. You also cannot argue we treated them inhumanely. You act as if you cannot own our ugly past. It is what it is. We cannot change the past, just recognize it for what it was. Don't let reverence blind you to truth.They had conquered other tribes and peoples to settle the same land as well