Never Hilary, Never Trump... who would you chose?

You seem to be arguing about a few things that have not previously been in the conversation.

The Lenin Statue is privately owned, located on private property, and was placed to draw traffic to the neighborhood businesses (which, according to all reports, is working). Interesting result - Soviet junk art serving a capitalist repurpose. It is also for sale, so an enterprising young capitalist like yourself could buy it, melt it down, and cast it into desktop paperweight busts of Robert E Lee or Donald the t. Maybe you could get a loan from the Koch Bros.

Abolish the 2nd? Please continue.
Nice evasion tactic. You want to explain how the Confederate Statues bother you so much yet you're ok with the Russian Lenin Statue. I guess if they displayed the Confederate Statues at the corner to draw more customers into the local stores you would be ok with it...

You are one sick old man...
 
I bet I could spot you in a crowd of people. The kook in the corner who no one talks to or likes, but once someone gives you a minute of their time, which happens rarely, or probably never, because you're so small, and just weird, not normal type person, like an actual troll, you talk them into a corner, and after they leave, they say, who was that dork? What the hell was he talking about? And why did he look like a troll?

I had no idea that you knew Espola so personally...
 
Nice evasion tactic. You want to explain how the Confederate Statues bother you so much yet you're ok with the Russian Lenin Statue. I guess if they displayed the Confederate Statues at the corner to draw more customers into the local stores you would be ok with it...

You are one sick old man...

The statues in question are owned by the public, and were displayed on public property. They were erected at a time when the local governments were controlled by white supremacists and Civil War sore losers. Times have changed, and the new guys in charge don't support those sentiments any more.

If you want to put up a statue of R E Lee on the corner of your property to draw attention to your store selling MAGA hats, be my guest.
 
The statues in question are owned by the public, and were displayed on public property. They were erected at a time when the local governments were controlled by white supremacists and Civil War sore losers. Times have changed, and the new guys in charge don't support those sentiments any more.

If you want to put up a statue of R E Lee on the corner of your property to draw attention to your store selling MAGA hats, be my guest.
So since the statue is on private property but in plain public view, like the Lenin Statue is, you are ok with it. Had no idea you were that pink..
 
Shifting around I see, how dizzy of you . . . yet your support for the Confederacy stays intact.
I'm using your fucked up logic to support removing memorials of people who embraced slavery and enabled the normalcy & practice of slave labor.
Try being consistent you ignorant whore...
 
I don't think you will get very far with that suggestion.

But I find your attempts at political logic to be amusing, so please continue.
So you think it's fine that we build memorials to those that enslaved fellow Americans...very priggish of you Magoo.
 
The statues in question are owned by the public, and were displayed on public property. They were erected at a time when the local governments were controlled by white supremacists and Civil War sore losers. Times have changed, and the new guys in charge don't support those sentiments any more.

If you want to put up a statue of R E Lee on the corner of your property to draw attention to your store selling MAGA hats, be my guest.
When folks from Ohio or Illinois go to places like Chancellorsville or Charleston and demand that the memorials be removed, they are not the new guys in charge, they are carpetbagging pc intruders...
But if we are being PC & consistent, we should remove all memorials of those who owned and embraced slavery of our fellow Americans.
 
When folks from Ohio or Illinois go to places like Chancellorsville or Charleston and demand that the memorials be removed, they are not the new guys in charge, they are carpetbagging pc intruders...
But if we are being PC & consistent, we should remove all memorials of those who owned and embraced slavery of our fellow Americans.
What about the nazis that come from out of town to march in places like Charlottesville chanting racist slogans carrying torches, some dressed for the fight they know they surely will invoke and then one kills a woman with a car? You really think in that instance there were more people from outside the community protesting the nazis or the nazis themselves? Was it PC for the statues of Saddam Hussein to be torn down or the actions of the victors? As it seems some from the South (and some in here) want to continue to fight the Civil War, then yes it is appropriate for those from the winning side to come down and set things straight. Those statues honor people who fought against the USA, they lost. Future generations erected those statutes in a show of defiance of civil rights movements.

In the early 1900s, states were enacting Jim Crow laws to disenfranchise black Americans. In the middle part of the century, the civil rights movement pushed back against that segregation.

James Grossman, the executive director of the American Historical Association, says that the increase in statues and monuments was clearly meant to send a message.

"These statues were meant to create legitimate garb for white supremacy," Grossman said. "Why would you put a statue of Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson in 1948 in Baltimore?"

https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/5442...e-built-to-further-a-white-supremacist-future
 
What about the nazis that come from out of town to march in places like Charlottesville chanting racist slogans carrying torches, some dressed for the fight they know they surely will invoke and then one kills a woman with a car? You really think in that instance there were more people from outside the community protesting the nazis or the nazis themselves? Was it PC for the statues of Saddam Hussein to be torn down or the actions of the victors? As it seems some from the South (and some in here) want to continue to fight the Civil War, then yes it is appropriate for those from the winning side to come down and set things straight. Those statues honor people who fought against the USA, they lost. Future generations erected those statutes in a show of defiance of civil rights movements.

In the early 1900s, states were enacting Jim Crow laws to disenfranchise black Americans. In the middle part of the century, the civil rights movement pushed back against that segregation.

James Grossman, the executive director of the American Historical Association, says that the increase in statues and monuments was clearly meant to send a message.

"These statues were meant to create legitimate garb for white supremacy," Grossman said. "Why would you put a statue of Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson in 1948 in Baltimore?"

https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/5442...e-built-to-further-a-white-supremacist-future
NPR, HUH?
 
What about the nazis that come from out of town to march in places like Charlottesville chanting racist slogans carrying torches, some dressed for the fight they know they surely will invoke and then one kills a woman with a car? You really think in that instance there were more people from outside the community protesting the nazis or the nazis themselves? Was it PC for the statues of Saddam Hussein to be torn down or the actions of the victors? As it seems some from the South (and some in here) want to continue to fight the Civil War, then yes it is appropriate for those from the winning side to come down and set things straight. Those statues honor people who fought against the USA, they lost. Future generations erected those statutes in a show of defiance of civil rights movements.

In the early 1900s, states were enacting Jim Crow laws to disenfranchise black Americans. In the middle part of the century, the civil rights movement pushed back against that segregation.

James Grossman, the executive director of the American Historical Association, says that the increase in statues and monuments was clearly meant to send a message.

"These statues were meant to create legitimate garb for white supremacy," Grossman said. "Why would you put a statue of Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson in 1948 in Baltimore?"

https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/5442...e-built-to-further-a-white-supremacist-future
Try to focus duck.....
What about the memorials of those who embraced slavery that allowed those men to become wealthy and powerful?
What message does that send?
 
Here's a bit softer view for those of you that cower from the unvarnished truth . . .

While every statue in every town has a different origin, taken together, the roughly 700 Confederate monuments in the United States tell a national story. Many of these commemorations of those on the losing side of the Civil War are a lot newer than one might think.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which compiled a list of these monuments last year, these monuments are spread over 31 states plus the District of Columbia—far exceeding the 11 Confederate states that seceded at the outset of the Civil War.

Most of these monuments did not go up immediately after the war’s end in 1865. During that time, commemorative markers of the Civil War tended to be memorials that mourned soldiers who had died, says Mark Elliott, a history professor at University of North Carolina, Greensboro.

“Eventually they started to build [Confederate] monuments,” he says. “The vast majority of them were built between the 1890s and 1950s, which matches up exactly with the era of Jim Crow segregation.” According to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s research, the biggest spike was between 1900 and the 1920s.

In contrast to the earlier memorials that mourned dead soldiers, these monuments tended to glorify leaders of the Confederacy like General Robert E. Lee, former President of the Confederacy Jefferson Davis and General “Thomas Stonewall” Jackson.

“All of those monuments were there to teach values to people,” Elliott says. “That’s why they put them in the city squares. That’s why they put them in front of state buildings.” Many earlier memories had instead been placed in cemeteries.

The values these monuments stood for, he says, included a “glorification of the cause of the Civil War.”

White women were instrumental in raising funds to build these Confederate monuments. The United Daughters of the Confederacy, founded in the 1890s, was probably the most important and influential group, Elliott says.

In fact, the group was responsible for creating what is basically the Mount Rushmore of the Confederacy: a gigantic stone carving of Davis, Lee and Jackson in Stone Mountain, Georgia. Its production began in the 1910s, and it was completed in the 1960s.

By then, the construction of new Confederate monuments had begun to taper off, but the backlash to the Civil Rights Movement was spreading Confederate symbols in other ways: In 1956, Georgia redesigned its state flag to include the Confederate battle flag; and in 1962, South Carolina placed the flag atop its capitol building. In its report last year, the Southern Poverty Law Center said that the country’s more than 700 monuments are part of roughly 1,500 symbols of the Confederacy in public spaces.

Protesters and city officials have taken down statues in Baltimore and Durham, North Carolina. And many cities—including Washington, D.C.—are calling on their elected officials to do the same. Two of Stonewall Jackson’s great-great-grandsons have written an open letter to the mayor of Richmond, the former capital of the Confederacy as well as the grandsons’ hometown, regarding Jackson’s statue there.

“[W]e are writing today to ask for the removal of his statue, as well as the removal of all Confederate statues from Monument Avenue,” they wrote in their letterpublished on Slate. “They are overt symbols of racism and white supremacy, and the time is long overdue for them to depart from public display.”

Even Robert E. Lee V, whose understanding of his great-great-grandfather’s legacy is steeped in Lost Cause-ism, made a similar recommendation about statues of him. Speaking to The Washington Post, he said: “if it can avoid any days like this past Saturday in Charlottesville, then take them down today.”

https://www.history.com/news/how-the-u-s-got-so-many-confederate-monuments
 
So you think it's fine that we build memorials to those that enslaved fellow Americans...very priggish of you Magoo.
E is caught in a vicious circle. He is trying to ignore the fact that a you agree that the statues should be removed but in using his logic asking why all memorials of people who endorsed slavery be removed? He doesn't know, and neither do any of his liberal buddies, know how to react to that.

The Drunk Rat boy quotes NPR while E scours the internet to try to figure out what his proper response should be. All I know is E is cool with the Lenin Statue and is showing his true colors.
 
Try to focus duck.....
What about the memorials of those who embraced slavery that allowed those men to become wealthy and powerful?
What message does that send?
You keep twisting to avoid what you no doubt already have come to know. You are looking for any out to protect viewpoint concerning the plight of the South. Sorry, they (you) lost, to the victors go the spoils. If you wish to continue supporting the ideals of division and hate that is your prerogative, but don't think I will accept your twisted (cross) view as supporting . . . wait what is it you are supporting?
 
Back
Top