Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,115
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 25, 2020 5:30:38 GMT
When government sits on its hands and fails to take needed action, mobs will do it quicker but with far more chaos and wrong steps.
|
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,585
|
Post by bama beau on Jun 25, 2020 5:34:08 GMT
I've always been unimpressed by commemorative statues of any kind.
They rarely if ever have any artistic merit.
They are more an attempt to deify people who generally don't deserve that honor.
Granted, but sculptors gotta eat too. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,115
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 25, 2020 5:40:15 GMT
I've always been unimpressed by commemorative statues of any kind.
They rarely if ever have any artistic merit.
They are more an attempt to deify people who generally don't deserve that honor.
Granted, but sculptors gotta eat too. So pay them to eat, not suck.
|
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,585
|
Post by bama beau on Jun 25, 2020 5:48:20 GMT
Granted, but sculptors gotta eat too. So pay them to eat, not suck.
Sculpturally, many of those monuments are worthy of preservation. One of the great sculptures of the 16th century is Giambologna's The Rape of the Sabine Women. You can't get any more offensive than that, yet that sculpture is considered to be GB's masterpiece. Surely a racist on a horse is less offensive subject matter than the rape of a group of defenseless women. The art itself is not the problem. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,115
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 25, 2020 5:51:46 GMT
So pay them to eat, not suck.
Sculpturally, many of those monuments are worthy of preservation. One of the great sculptures of the 16th century is Giambologna's The Rape of the Sabine Women. You can't get any more offensive than that, yet that sculpture is considered to be GB's masterpiece. Surely a racist on a horse is less offensive subject matter than the rape of a group of defenseless women. The art itself is not the problem.
That's a sculpture depicting mythology, not a statue commemorating an actual person or event.
|
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,585
|
Post by bama beau on Jun 25, 2020 5:52:21 GMT
Sculpturally, many of those monuments are worthy of preservation. One of the great sculptures of the 16th century is Giambologna's The Rape of the Sabine Women. You can't get any more offensive than that, yet that sculpture is considered to be GB's masterpiece. Surely a racist on a horse is less offensive subject matter than the rape of a group of defenseless women. The art itself is not the problem.
That's a sculpture depicting mythology, not a statue commemorating an actual person or event.
Granted. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,207
Member is Online
|
Post by demos on Jun 25, 2020 13:23:53 GMT
He's just gonna make a grand exit. Queshank Fireworks show over N. Korea. I keeeed, I keeeeed. It'll be Iran.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 14:09:45 GMT
Statues are governments virtue signalling. Queshank As time goes by, you won't think that as clever as you think it is now. Doesn't mean you'll be right or wrong. Just sayin'.
I don't think so.
I think stone age photography is kind of stupid. It's even stupider when our governments promote it.
Queshank
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 14:10:05 GMT
He's just gonna make a grand exit. Queshank Fireworks show over N. Korea. I keeeed, I keeeeed. It'll be Iran.  ROFL
Queshank
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 15:28:32 GMT
If only it were that easy. You say the soldiers on both sides started to meet and gather for reunions as the 19th century dawned... well that's actually off by about 35 years. www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/confederate-veterans-associations.htmlIf you look you will see that Union groups were meeting and remembering early after the war ended as well. The KKK formed in 1866 so its rather obvious that some ex-Confederates were regularly meeting. You will also note a rather constant rate of statue building from 1866 through the 1880's, with an uptick right around 1890-4, which puts us right in the middle of a civil rights struggle and a period where white folks were looking to legally limit the civil rights of black people through Jim Crow laws. You act as if that context should simply be ignored. This is all coincidental. Ignore the correlation with the broader cultural context. Those statues had no political message. It was all about honoring grandpa. Uh huh. Couple of corrections: your statement "as the 19th century dawned" is incorrect and not what I said. It's "as the last decade of the 19th century dawned", i.e. 1890. And 35 years prior to 1890 is 1855; that's a little too early for Confederate reunions.
Of course there were certainly gatherings of old friends before 1890, but the regular large meetings tended to ramp up after that. Your "KKK counts as a meeting!" was hilarious, though; there was a hint of desperation (or perspiration) evident in that little bit of hyperbole. But it WAS funny.
Here's the problems with your little faux narrative. Black Codes existed before the war, mainly in the North. Those laws continued in the North for many years after the war in the North, and many say that Southern laws were patterned after the Northern restrictions. Many of the "Jim Crow" laws were created outside of the South and long before the time frame in question.
It's an egregious logical fallacy to list two historical occurrences that happened to occur in the same 25 year period and assume a cause and effect relationship without any evidence to support that theory. I've shown that white supremacy is not a theme in the design of these monuments. Most of these Confederate monuments were funerary, with theme of remembrance and loss, with a few that were erected to leaders and generals. These monuments were local affairs that took years for planning, designing, funding, creation, shipment and erection of each memorial.
Do cemetery headstones have a "political" message? That's why it's stupid to assign such messages to these monuments when there's no evidence to back that up.
The facts that I keep having to repeat still prove that the war was not about slavery, very few Confederate soldiers owned slaves, and the monuments erected after the war were not about white supremacy. The animals tearing down these monuments have no factual basis for their hatred. The protester's own racism is driving this inhuman vandalism and intolerance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 15:51:41 GMT
So, I've proven that the monuments erected in 1890-1920 were not racially motivated, so let's look at the 1950s and 1960s. Now why would there be monuments during that time? Let's do a little ciphering, shall we?....the year 1861 plus 100 years is.....well, how about that!...the second peak of little red and blue dots correspond to the centennial of the War Between the States! That's cute and all but the rate of statue building is flat from the mid 50's through the early 60's. It doesn't pick up until 1963-1965, which encapsulates the period when George Wallace blocked the schoolhouse door, not to mention the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. So much for the centennial. It seemed to pass without notice. You do understand that they didn't just snap their fingers and a memorial appeared in 1963, right? It takes years of planning, which means that the work on these monuments started long before those unrelated Civil Rights events. Once again, these monuments were NOT about white supremacy. Rather than peddling your "there just has to be connection!" logical fallacy, let's see you make the case of a direct cause and effect relationship if you can.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,207
Member is Online
|
Post by demos on Jun 25, 2020 15:57:03 GMT
I can meet you half way and admit that some mistakes are being made which are actually quite embarrassing, and that a better approach would probably be more constructive. But part of me thinks there's only one way this actually happens. As long as we're tearing down statues, I'm perfectly ok with tearing down this one (and other Jackson statues) for a whole host of reasons. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 16:02:17 GMT
When government sits on its hands and fails to take needed action, mobs will do it quicker but with far more chaos and wrong steps.
So, based on this statement, you must actually hate our representative republic, right?
It's designed so that the passions of the mob don't drive our decisions. That kind of direct democratic action is what the Founders knew would destroy this country.
Who the hell are these animals in the streets to determine what actions are needed? Do they represent all of us? There are many of us who think that removing the monuments is wrong. Protecting them even when we might disagree is a sign of true tolerance; vandalizing and unilaterally tearing them down is a sign of racism and hatred, the very things that the protesters claim that they are opposing. Hypocrites all. Perverts ascendant.
That's the danger of mob rule; you wind up with a reign of terror that consumes all of the culture...and perhaps the nation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 16:11:41 GMT
So, I've proven that the monuments erected in 1890-1920 were not racially motivated, so let's look at the 1950s and 1960s. Now why would there be monuments during that time? Let's do a little ciphering, shall we?....the year 1861 plus 100 years is.....well, how about that!...the second peak of little red and blue dots correspond to the centennial of the War Between the States!
No. You didn't. You gave more pieces of evidence for the redoubled anti black prejudice in the South. As people remembered "why" the Southerners fought.
Queshank
Sorry, but, yes I did prove that the reasons for the monuments were not related to white supremacy by proving that the themes and content of those monuments were military and funerary. As I noted before, these were the grave markers...the tombstones....of the Confederacy. TL failed to show any connection and neither are you. A fallacious assumption by you and TL that "white supremacy must have had SOMETHING to do with those monuments!" does not establish the veracity of that alleged cause and effect relationship. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 16:30:26 GMT
If only it were that easy. You say the soldiers on both sides started to meet and gather for reunions as the 19th century dawned... well that's actually off by about 35 years. www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/confederate-veterans-associations.htmlIf you look you will see that Union groups were meeting and remembering early after the war ended as well. The KKK formed in 1866 so its rather obvious that some ex-Confederates were regularly meeting. You will also note a rather constant rate of statue building from 1866 through the 1880's, with an uptick right around 1890-4, which puts us right in the middle of a civil rights struggle and a period where white folks were looking to legally limit the civil rights of black people through Jim Crow laws. You act as if that context should simply be ignored. This is all coincidental. Ignore the correlation with the broader cultural context. Those statues had no political message. It was all about honoring grandpa. Uh huh. Couple of corrections: your statement "as the 19th century dawned" is incorrect and not what I said. It's "as the last decade of the 19th century dawned", i.e. 1890. And 35 years prior to 1890 is 1855; that's a little too early for Confederate reunions.
Of course there were certainly gatherings of old friends before 1890, but the regular large meetings tended to ramp up after that. Your "KKK counts as a meeting!" was hilarious, though; there was a hint of desperation (or perspiration) evident in that little bit of hyperbole. But it WAS funny.
Here's the problems with your little faux narrative. Black Codes existed before the war, mainly in the North. Those laws continued in the North for many years after the war in the North, and many say that Southern laws were patterned after the Northern restrictions. Many of the "Jim Crow" laws were created outside of the South and long before the time frame in question.
It's an egregious logical fallacy to list two historical occurrences that happened to occur in the same 25 year period and assume a cause and effect relationship without any evidence to support that theory. I've shown that white supremacy is not a theme in the design of these monuments. Most of these Confederate monuments were funerary, with theme of remembrance and loss, with a few that were erected to leaders and generals. These monuments were local affairs that took years for planning, designing, funding, creation, shipment and erection of each memorial.
Do cemetery headstones have a "political" message? That's why it's stupid to assign such messages to these monuments when there's no evidence to back that up. Ok so you were off by 25 years, not 35. That doesn't make it much better. The response about black codes being in the north before and after the war is mere whataboutery. And you are also attacking a straw man. When have I ever argued the north was free from racism? Or legal inequality? And I smile as you insist these are funerary monuments without a political message, yet many are on court house grounds, and went up during periods of heightened social/racial tension. No political message. Uh huh. |
|
|
|
Post by crepe05 on Jun 25, 2020 16:31:03 GMT
I've been wondering what will happen in future years when some idiot wants to remove statues of Martin Luther King Jr.? That will be years from now, when the reason for having them has all but disappeared. None of us are going to live forever.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 16:32:04 GMT
Southern Poverty Law Center? Could you find a less reputable source? They are preloaded to call anything white supremacy or racism. Of course they tried to make a case that white supremacy had something to do with the statues. That's all they do is tie everything to white supremacy.
The SPLC is pure shit. They are a horribly biased and unreliable organization.
But you can research the dates these statues were raised independent of the SPLC's analysis. Those are facts. There is no spin. There is no bias. And Occam's Razor serves us well in determining the arguments for putting them in place.
It's done. It's over. You resisted moving these to a place for a reverence for history for too long. You don't get to decide anymore. I'm not saying that to you as if I'm saying it. I'm saying it because it's reality. People who defended these statues defended them long past the point of reasonableness. So an unreasonable response shouldn't be so surprising.
And the longer it takes Trump to admit this and move the fuck on ... the more water his sinking campaign takes on.
Queshank
It isn't the dates that are disputable but the reason. The reason is not only disputable, but laughable. |
|
|
|
Post by Fiddler on Jun 25, 2020 16:57:09 GMT
It isn't the dates that are disputable but the reason. The reason is not only disputable, but laughable. The 'reason' they were installed was to demonstrate to uppity Blacks that no matter how the Civil War turned out white men were still in charge.. . it's obvious. The idea that it has nothing with race is utterly ridiculous.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 17:02:01 GMT
That's cute and all but the rate of statue building is flat from the mid 50's through the early 60's. It doesn't pick up until 1963-1965, which encapsulates the period when George Wallace blocked the schoolhouse door, not to mention the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. So much for the centennial. It seemed to pass without notice. You do understand that they didn't just snap their fingers and a memorial appeared in 1963, right? It takes years of planning, which means that the work on these monuments started long before those unrelated Civil Rights events. Once again, these monuments were NOT about white supremacy. Rather than peddling your "there just has to be connection!" logical fallacy, let's see you make the case of a direct cause and effect relationship if you can.
Okay so they couldn't plan ahead of time to get these up for the 100 year anniversary? I don't think you are understanding the argument. We're not saying that the Civil Rights Act is the reason these monuments cluster in the mid 1960's. The point is the social climate of the times was one characterized by years of racial struggle and tensions and it is in this context that we must situate these monuments. Its not apolitical. As Que pointed to earlier, there is an element of virtue signaling involved with the creation of these statues. To reduce it all to a funerary purpose, while ignoring the fact they were largely created during periods of civil rights crisis, is naivety on stilts. That POV is too cute to be real. |
|
|
|
Post by Fiddler on Jun 25, 2020 17:19:00 GMT
I've been wondering what will happen in future years when some idiot wants to remove statues of Martin Luther King Jr. When King becomes an enemy combatant against the U.S. I'll join the call to remove his statue. |
|
