T Rump and history

[John S]

It's not often I agree with The Donald (I still think he's a self-centred streak of sh!te), but I have to agree with him on this....

 

Should America destroy statues of past heroes just because they kept slaves? Robert E Lee was one of the main generals during the American Civil War, commanding the Virginia army as well as distinguished himself during the Mexican–American War.

 

(from Wiki).... "After the war, Lee supported President Andrew Johnson's program of Reconstruction and intersectional friendship, while opposing the Radical Republican proposals to give freed slaves the vote and take the vote away from ex-Confederates. He urged them to rethink their position between the North and the South, and the reintegration of former Confederates into the nation's political life. Lee became the great Confederate hero of the War, a postwar icon of the "Lost Cause of the Confederacy" to some. But his popularity grew even in the North, especially after his death in 1870. Barracks at West Point built in 1962 are named after him.

 

Now, because he kept slaves and tried to stop freed slaves from voting, he is vilified by a minority to the extent that his statues are now being pulled down and destroyed. When I say by a minority, I don't mean all black people and their white supporters, but a small number who seemingly can't let go of the past.

 

Is it right that a national hero should be wiped out of the history books (as they would like to do) just because he kept slaves? Okay, no right-minded westerners keep slaves nowadays, and we fully believe that everyone is equal (but try telling that to Muslims when it comes to women), but isn't it time that the coloured section in America started to say "Okay, what happened wasn't good, but we have all progressed and we can look back at those times and hope we never see the same again. Except in the Muslim world when it comes to women"?

 

And as for Black Lives Matter! I say NO!! ALL Lives Matter!

 

Black guy killed by white cop = riots. White girl killed by black cop = all peaceful on the streets. Go Figure.

[Phone]

John,

 

The issue is truly complex. Let me see if I can help out.

 

The Confederate monuments in New Orleans; Charlottesville, Virginia; Durham, North Carolina, and elsewhere around the colonies did not organically pop up like mushrooms. The installation of the 1,000-plus "memorials" across the US was the result of the orchestrated efforts of white Southerners and a few Northerners with clear political objectives: They tended to be erected at times when the South was fighting to resist political rights for black citizens. The preservation of these monuments has likewise reflected a clear political agenda by those in the US who still resist political rights for minorities (ie. toss in the likes of Mexicans and Middle Easterners.)

 

Mr Trump clearly placed himself on the side of the "alt-right" and white nationalists. The jury is out whether it is/was an intentional act on his part. He is back-peddling as fast as possible.

 

Phone

 

Edit: BTW - as to the question of the statues themselves. I'm somewhat torn. On one hand they are sort of like England building a statue of Hitler as a remembrance of WWII. OTOH our situation was a "civil war". Perhaps it isn't over. Perhaps there was merely a pause in the action.

Edited August 19, 2017 by Phone

[chesters1]

Cannot understand why the south is told what to do by the north ,time for another war methinks.

To upset the north i would ask mexico to join the southern states in the struggle against northern oppression and build a wall just a little further north

 

We could send a big new boat over ,not sure what use it is but it can (according to the media) make 500 litres of fresh water a day ,not a lot of good when fully staffed it needs many more times that ,typical modern british thinking

Perhaps you could sink it across the mississippi to stop them darn yankies coming up it like last time

Edited August 19, 2017 by chesters1

[Huge_Vitae]

And where do you draw a line and stop, John S is right because he says it is to a man who was a well liked and respected leader of men, it is, in my view, the people who say the statue represents something else that have the problem, you cannot change people's views by pulling down a statue!

 

Was the same with the statue of Bomber Harris, what was the statue commemorating or even celebrating? That he was the same as Lee or perhaps we are grateful to him for burning women and children as some would believe.

 

Then we have a statue of Cecil Rhodes, "pull it down as it is offensive," says a group of people led by a young man identified as having the potential in his native S. Africa to benefit from education here, paid for by the Cecil Rhodes Foundation, strange that the second chap didn't change his name, oh wait a minute.....

 

As for my opinion on that part of history we have our very own statue of Karl Marx, the man who gave suffering, cruelty and hardship to millions to spare them cruelty, suffering and hardship.

 

Where's me axe?

 

EDIT: Forgot the best bit, George Washington 'owned' several slaves, reportedly setting them free on his deathbed or in his will, therefore 'owning' them for most of his life, better get busy you demolition guys, now that is a lot of work to do.

Edited August 19, 2017 by Huge_Vitae

[gozzer]

I was discussing this with my daughter only yesterday, and I said pretty much the same as John and HV. Although she didn't agree with the way some are just dragged down by a mob, she could understand anger at the statues erected during the 60s when the civil rights movement was in full swing. They were obviously put up, not to celebrate the person, but as a 'slap in the face' meant to anger those who fought for equal rights.

I had to agree with her that some of the statues were erected to celebrate slavery, and apartheid, much more than they did the subject of the sculpture.

 

John.

[chesters1]

Book burning next

[barry luxton]

Huge_Vitae, on 19 Aug 2017 - 13:03, said:

 

Where's me axe?

 

EDIT: Forgot the best bit, George Washington 'owned' several slaves, reportedly setting them free on his deathbed or in his will, therefore 'owning' them for most of his life, better get busy you demolition guys, now that is a lot of work to do.

 

 

Need a bit more than an axe to get rid of mount Rushmore.

[Ken L]

The parallels with he destruction of the Bamiyan Buddha's is striking.

[Martin56]

I think the Statues should stay, if only as a reminder for some or all of us of what took place in our past.

 

History - Bad things happened!!!

 

Live with it - Move On.

[Phone]

All,

 

Again, this is a difficult topic. Hugh, for example bases his comment partly on "it is to a man who was a well liked and respected leader of men". That's only true in the South Hugh. In the North he is remembered as a brilliant and ruthless traitor; who treated his slaves horribly and lots of other horsechit. Fact is, the statues were not placed to either praise or vilify Lee (or any of a thousand other statues of Civil War "heroes". The were, as I said earlier, erected to intimidate minorities by White Southerners who refused and still refuse slaves are not property.

 

May I add, for Chesters1, the winners get to write the history. The Colonies won!! (now if I could only figure out what it is we "won")

 

Phone