Removing Civil War Monuments

[Area54]

32 minutes ago, swansont said:

And why would this be necessary, as opposed to some other museums? Where the papers are already kept.

The text and sub-text of your posts create, for me, the clear impression that you wish to put anything associated with Lee out of sight. I don't know how many more ways you want me to phrase that. You say, or at least imply, that this is not what you mean. Fine. We'll subscribe to the hypothesis this is due to poor reading comprehension on my part. If I so stipulate may I get the hell out of here? (Rhetorical question)

[zapatos]

2 hours ago, swansont said:

Yes, it was.

Disappointing. 

[iNow]

2 hours ago, Outrider said:

He was never tried or convicted of anything but you are right he did admit his guilt. But then he came back to this country and worked hard to bring it back together. Wasn't a tratior, was a tratior, wasn't a tratior. Died not a tratior and I don't think he deserves to be remembered as one.

Clarify for us: Do the majority of statues celebrate his time during the war riding a horse and carrying a sword when he WAS a traitor, or do they celebrate his reconciliation efforts after the war when (according to you) he WASN'T a traitor? 

 

2 hours ago, Area54 said:

The text and sub-text of your posts create, for me, the clear impression that (snip) You say, or at least imply, that...

This isn't jazz where you listen for the notes not played. Stop trying to read words swansont is not typing. 

Edited September 2, 2017 by iNow

[Outrider]

Zapatos 

Pretty sure swansont was agreeing with you well on what your discussion was about anyways. 

2 hours ago, iNow said:

Clarify for us: Do the majority of statues celebrate his time during the war riding a horse and carrying a sword when he WAS a traitor, or do they celebrate his reconciliation efforts after the war when (according to you) he WASN'T a traitor? 

According to me and Gerald Ford and the 1975 congress?

Its a fair point. It is just possible that the monument is a tribute to his service in the Mexican War but much more likely that uniform has a CSA somewhere on it.

All I can do is repeat what I already said I think for Lee it was a choice between tratior to his country or tratior to his state. He loved Virginia more. 

Edited September 2, 2017 by Outrider

[zapatos]

11 minutes ago, Outrider said:

Zapatos 

Pretty sure swansont was agreeing with you well on what your discussion was about anyways. 

Thanks Outrider, I may indeed have misunderstood.

[Area54]

7 hours ago, iNow said:

This isn't jazz where you listen for the notes not played. Stop trying to read words swansont is not typing. 

I stopped that some time ago. I have offered an honest statement of my position. If you find that annoying that is your problem not mine.

I've also made a note that you are an individual who denies the existence of sub-text in forum discussions. It will give the grandchildren a good laugh.

Finis.

[Strange]

1 minute ago, iNow said:

I guess when all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail. 

Protests grow MORE violent when the police intervene “armed to the teeth.” It makes things worse. 

People are protesting police violence. More police violence isn’t going to solve it. 

Just saw an interview with the officer in charge of the police in Bristol explaining why they didn't stop a statue of a well-known slave trader being pulled down and thrown in the docks. Basically, they made the tactical decision that attempting to intervene at that stage would have caused more trouble. They are there to stop things getting out of control (*) and that's what they did. It remained an entirely peaceful protest. 

 

(*) And not to stop people doing the job that Bristol council should have done years ago (he didn't quite say that, but very strongly implied it)

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, Strange said:

Just saw an interview with the officer in charge of the police in Bristol explaining why they didn't stop a statue of a well-known slave trader being pulled down and thrown in the docks. Basically, they made the tactical decision that attempting to intervene at that stage would have caused more trouble. They are there to stop things getting out of control (*) and that's what they did. It remained an entirely peaceful protest. 

 

(*) And not to stop people doing the job that Bristol council should have done years ago (he didn't quite say that, but very strongly implied it)

 Removing symbols of injustices is a good thing? "Lest We Forget".   A short-sighted and naive action worthy of an authoritarian government 'cleansing' its past. But that's another discussion...                

[MigL]

Are we discussing police action during a protest, or in general ?

Protests like these are a special case.
People are protesting general police action ( which has led to the incident and resulting protests ).

I am discussing general police action, and the way they are sometimes forced to handle situations, for which social workers, nurses, or educators may not be appropriate or enough.

Edited June 8, 2020 by MigL

[zapatos]

7 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

 Removing symbols of injustices is a good thing? "Lest We Forget".   A short-sighted and naive action worthy of an authoritarian government 'cleansing' its past. But that's another discussion...                

Lest we forget, perhaps we should put up statues of ALL tyrants.

[StringJunky]

12 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Lest we forget, perhaps we should put up statues of ALL tyrants.

No, leave the ones that are there as authentic reminders of history and where not to tread in future. How many times has that statue prompted a child to ask who he was and what he did, thus introducing them to the concept of slavery and discrimination?

Edited June 8, 2020 by StringJunky

[MigL]

40 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

No, leave the ones that are there as authentic reminders of history and where not to tread in future.

I remember having this discussion about 3-4 years ago, Stringy, in regards to Confederate flags, statues and other 'reminders' of the Southern States' unsavoury past.
I'm not sure what the forum consensus was, but I believe most were for removing 'reminders'.
I tried INow's trick of using google with 'science forums' in the search string along with the subject, but got no results.
( maybe INow will oblige )

[geordief]

Why not leave the statues   in place and give them a new or additional  plaque that reflects the present view of the person  being commemorated? (eg "Notorious  and wealthy Slave owner of the 18th century")

I remember as a teenager being accommodated by a French family who took me to see the Arc de Triomphe in Paris where are listed all of Napolean's military victories in battle.

 

Totally naively I looked for Waterloo and it was not there.

I asked my hosts "Where is Waterloo?" with a very frosty response.

I was later informed of my faux pas  in as gentle a way as possible.

Edited June 8, 2020 by geordief

[iNow]

33 minutes ago, MigL said:

I tried INow's trick of using google with 'science forums' in the search string along with the subject, but got no results.

https://www.google.com/search?q=confederate+monuments+site:scienceforums.net

 

33 minutes ago, MigL said:

maybe INow will oblige

 

23 minutes ago, geordief said:

Why not leave the statues   in place and give them a new or additional  plaque that reflects the present view of the person  being commemorated

When these statues honor men who killed your grandfather or raped your grandmother, or who sent soldiers into battle to die so that people who look like you could continue being owned as property and without human rights or dignity... when those statues were put up as a direct response to increasing calls for equal and civil rights... a time when those calls for equality were met with dogs and hoses and state sanctioned viciousness in response... when the statues were used to remind you of your diminished place in society... to remind you that you’re “less than” those in power and lack any power or autonomy of your own... when you must relive that trauma every. single. day walking past those statues on your way to and from work, or to bring your child to school, to the grocery store... then the statues should be removed for the harm they cause.

People can study history in books and these statues can and should be put into a museum. But...

Putting up monuments to these symbols of oppression does little more than reinforce how the state agrees with those values we claim to have discarded... it implicitly sanctions the ideas that some of us are inferior or subhuman or less than due merely to the melanin content in our skin. 

Monuments are physical manifestations of what we value as a society and a culture. That’s why not. ✌️
 

Note: I’ve requested this conversation be split into its own thread. 

Edited June 8, 2020 by iNow

[MigL]

Thanks INow.
You can always be counted on.

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

No, leave the ones that are there as authentic reminders of history and where not to tread in future. How many times has that statue prompted a child to ask who he was and what he did, thus introducing them to the concept of slavery and discrimination?

You seem to have a very specific approach to a very general issue. You want reminders, and it's "short-sighted and naive" to remove the statue of this one particular guy. And you don't want to add other statues. Why? What's so great about this particular statue? Is it more important to be reminded of this scofflaw over all others who do not have a statue? Shouldn't children be prompted to ask about other bad actors? The history we want to remember is the man and his acts, not the manufacture and erection of a statue. 

I understand a general desire to ensure we don't forget, but statues and monuments are usually reserved for those we wish to emulate. Not those we deem unworthy citizens.

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

I remember having this discussion about 3-4 years ago, Stringy, in regards to Confederate flags, statues and other 'reminders' of the Southern States' unsavoury past.
I'm not sure what the forum consensus was, but I believe most were for removing 'reminders'.
I tried INow's trick of using google with 'science forums' in the search string along with the subject, but got no results.
( maybe INow will oblige )

Yes, it is that thread. I had that deja vu feeling but couldn't put my finger on it. I was also the outlier then.

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

You seem to have a very specific approach to a very general issue. You want reminders, and it's "short-sighted and naive" to remove the statue of this one particular guy. And you don't want to add other statues. Why? What's so great about this particular statue? Is it more important to be reminded of this scofflaw over all others who do not have a statue? Shouldn't children be prompted to ask about other bad actors? The history we want to remember is the man and his acts, not the manufacture and erection of a statue. 

I understand a general desire to ensure we don't forget, but statues and monuments are usually reserved for those we wish to emulate. Not those we deem unworthy citizens.

But at one time he was a "worthy" citizen. If there are no visible symbols those acts will disappear from the collective memory. If you want to respond, do so, but I'll leave it here. 

1 hour ago, iNow said:

https://www.google.com/search?q=confederate+monuments+site:scienceforums.net

 

 

When these statues honor men who killed your grandfather or raped your grandmother, or who sent soldiers into battle to die so that people who look like you could continue being owned as property and without human rights or dignity... when those statues were put up as a direct response to increasing calls for equal and civil rights... a time when those calls for equality were met with dogs and hoses and state sanctioned viciousness in response... when the statues were used to remind you of your diminished place in society... to remind you that you’re “less than” those in power and lack any power or autonomy of your own... when you must relive that trauma every. single. day walking past those statues on your way to and from work, or to bring your child to school, to the grocery store... then the statues should be removed for the harm they cause.

People can study history in books and these statues can and should be put into a museum. But...

Putting up monuments to these symbols of oppression does little more than reinforce how the state agrees with those values we claim to have discarded... it implicitly sanctions the ideas that some of us are inferior or subhuman or less than due merely to the melanin content in our skin. 

Monuments are physical manifestations of what we value as a society and a culture. That’s why not. ✌️
 

Note: I’ve requested this conversation be split into its own thread. 

And in hundreds of years it'll all be forgotten and we'll start all over again. I wonder how many times it's happened already? I will not comment anymore here on this.

Edited June 8, 2020 by StringJunky

[CharonY]

2 hours ago, StringJunky said:

No, leave the ones that are there as authentic reminders of history and where not to tread in future. How many times has that statue prompted a child to ask who he was and what he did, thus introducing them to the concept of slavery and discrimination?

I assume that would also mean that Germany should have kept all the monuments and statues of the third reich and just add a plaque everywhere that the symbols were actually bad but are everywhere lest we forget? I kinda feel that survivors would have a word to say about that. There is a reason why those emblems have been delegated to text books and museums. There you can provide proper context. 

[iNow]

12 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

And in hundreds of years it'll all be forgotten and we'll start all over again. I wonder how many times it's happened already? 

Perhaps the kid beaten as a child by his father or molested by her babysitter is better off forgetting and not being forced to relive these traumas through state funded and sanctioned monuments to those events. 

[StringJunky]

8 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I assume that would also mean that Germany should have kept all the monuments and statues of the third reich and just add a plaque everywhere that the symbols were actually bad but are everywhere lest we forget? I kinda feel that survivors would have a word to say about that. There is a reason why those emblems have been delegated to text books and museums. There you can provide proper context. 

But when the living memories are long gone,  there are real artifacts that people can get a sense that these things really happened, and not everybody is as literate as we are and books may be too abstract. I care very much that these things don't happen again.

Edited June 8, 2020 by StringJunky

[iNow]

9 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

I care very much that these things don't happen again.

As do we all, but what evidence is there that the existence of monuments to these oppressors and murderers and dividers do more to prevent than they do to inspire the recurrence of such acts? 

[StringJunky]

3 minutes ago, iNow said:

As do we all, but what evidence is there that the existence of monuments to these oppressors and murderers and dividers do more to prevent than they do to inspire the recurrence of such acts? 

I don't know atm.

 

[CharonY]

20 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

But when the living memories are long gone,  there are real artifacts that people can get a sense that these things really happened, and not everybody is as literate as we are and books may be too abstract. I care very much that these things don't happen again.

I think we had that all covered, but the issue is that  these monuments glorify the events and/or where specifically created to intimidate. Just adding a plaque just to clarify only makes sense if there is proper contextualization. If there are certain areas where they are collected together with additional info material, then it would make sense. I.e. a space to commemorate and remember. However, mixing it with areas that are used for entertainment, relaxation or other business would only dilute the message and/or result in misinterpretation, IMO.

I do not want to see a bust of Hitler or Nazi flags in a town hall or court, even if there was huge plaque stating that those guys were really not good. It just would not be enough and it would be the wrong space.

[StringJunky]

2 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I think we had that all covered, but the issue is that  these monuments glorify the events and/or where specifically created to intimidate. Just adding a plaque just to clarify only makes sense if there is proper contextualization. If there are certain areas where they are collected together with additional info material, then it would make sense. I.e. a space to commemorate and remember. However, mixing it with areas that are used for entertainment, relaxation or other business would only dilute the message and/or result in misinterpretation, IMO.

I do not want to see a bust of Hitler or Nazi flags in a town hall or court, even if there was huge plaque stating that those guys were really not good. It just would not be enough and it would be the wrong space.

 There doesn't need to be every remnant of a bad era around.

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

 There doesn't need to be every remnant of a bad era around.

Then I assume you have nothing against tearing most or at least many down? I will also note that with time monuments lose their power. Kids in Germany now experience a visit to Auschwitz quite a bit different than even my generation did. Especially now with very few survivors still a round's to tell their stories.