White supremacists and counter protesters clash in Charlottesville

[chimp3]

[Jackie]

I graduated from a High School named after Lee. I was too young and stupid to understand it at the time, and nothing about the reality of that history back then. The only reason I changed schools was chasing after a cheer leader who had no interest in me. Sad part is that in pluralistic Northern Va such names still exist and it still holds that name today.

Having said that, the statues should not be destroyed, but put into a Holocaust type museum as part of a history of what not to do to our fellow humans. The sickos insisting they remain argue it is part of our history. Yes, but nothing to be glorified or celebrated.

[Mr.wizard]

I think that it should be left up to a town vote, the residents who make up the town should get to decide how they are represented.

[Jackie]

I think that it should be left up to a town vote, the residents who make up the town should get to decide how they are represented.

Everyone here knows I am hardly PC, but no, sorry, this isn't about free speech, this is about clinging to institutionalized racism. Leaving those statues up in the context that they were put up, to glorify what they defended to keep, is not what our nation should seek to keep.

I can see them as part of a museum of what not to do, but to leave them up knowing why they were put up in the first place to paint them as heros is vile. Leaving them up in that context is no different to me than glorifying Andrew Jackson and what he did to Native Americans. 

Slavery was a horrible part of our history. Lynchings were a horrible part of our history. Segregation was a horrible part of our history. Nobody back then who supported that should be represented in such a way as those who made the statues back then supported or the actual men who supported it.

Nobody should erase that past nor pretend it never happened. But I am not talking about erasing history but putting those figures in the context of what humans should not do to other humans.

[Mermaid]

I feel like with the douchebaggery of the Republicans, and the growing white movement in the south, that the civil war hasn't ended after all-- it was just under an extended cease-fire.

Oh, please. Let's not be too overly dramatic.
It was a national organization that couldn't muster more than a few hundred ass hats to protest for the weekend. That hardly points to a mass issue.

It absolutely does. Have you read comments on news stories? They have a lot of support, and it's not just trolls. This is the America that POC have been telling us about all along, but we just didn't believe them. They are in the white house, FFS. 

This is not a splinter.

[Pat Mustard]

. 

Back to you saying the southern citizens armed themselves and went to war... the Confederacy didn't want a war.

Well then why did they fire the first shot? The Confederate militia tried to force the US Army out of Fort Sumter as manoeuvring towards securing their sea flanks during what they saw as an inevitable war. They fired at the garrison in a deliberate act of war.

Even their conventions demanding to be alliwed secede were taken in the full knowledge those actions would provoke wae. Guess what? The Confederate leaders didn't care. They wanted war ever since they realised they could no longer control the federal government.

[Jackie]

Oh, please. Let's not be too overly dramatic.
It was a national organization that couldn't muster more than a few hundred ass hats to protest for the weekend. That hardly points to a mass issue.

It absolutely does. Have you read comments on news stories? They have a lot of support, and it's not just trolls. This is the America that POC have been telling us about all along, but we just didn't believe them. They are in the white house, FFS. 

This is not a splinter.

I 100% agree. I think there is still far too much old money and Nixon bitterness still infecting modern politics. We saw the same far right support when the right wing terrorists took over the nature reserve. 

The amount of right wing religious hate groups shot through the roof when Obama got elected the first time. Since then the GOP and 45 have dog whistled to that far right base. No, of course not all GOP are bigots, but just like the middle east and Islam, it has just enough support to cause problems. 

I would love nothing more that for poor urban blacks and poor rural whites to understand nationwide that economics should be what we all have in common. But only 1 party for decades has been using race to distract the middle class and working poor of all races from the fact they use that to protect corporate welfare.

But no, those statues should not stand in their current context. Those statues of the military of the south can only be appropriate in the context of a museum of what not to do to our fellow humans.

[Mr.wizard]

I think that it should be left up to a town vote, the residents who make up the town should get to decide how they are represented.

Everyone here knows I am hardly PC, but no, sorry, this isn't about free speech, this is about clinging to institutionalized racism. Leaving those statues up in the context that they were put up, to glorify what they defended to keep, is not what our nation should seek to keep.

I can see them as part of a museum of what not to do, but to leave them up knowing why they were put up in the first place to paint them as heros is vile. Leaving them up in that context is no different to me than glorifying Andrew Jackson and what he did to Native Americans. 

Slavery was a horrible part of our history. Lynchings were a horrible part of our history. Segregation was a horrible part of our history. Nobody back then who supported that should be represented in such a way as those who made the statues back then supported or the actual men who supported it.

Nobody should erase that past nor pretend it never happened. But I am not talking about erasing history but putting those figures in the context of what humans should not do to other humans.

Why shouldn't the town have a say, it doesn't violate any constitutional rights and if the people there want the statue then they should be able to keep it, as well as if they don't want it then they they should be able to remove it. Slavery is bad no doubt about it, but that's not the issue here, the issue is should towns not be able to display statues of people who fought for the confederacy.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Now we are having to defend Black Lives Matter instead of condemning actual hate groups,  this is just the kind of deflection that Trump was going for.

[Jackie]

Everyone here knows I am hardly PC, but no, sorry, this isn't about free speech, this is about clinging to institutionalized racism. Leaving those statues up in the context that they were put up, to glorify what they defended to keep, is not what our nation should seek to keep.

I can see them as part of a museum of what not to do, but to leave them up knowing why they were put up in the first place to paint them as heros is vile. Leaving them up in that context is no different to me than glorifying Andrew Jackson and what he did to Native Americans. 

Slavery was a horrible part of our history. Lynchings were a horrible part of our history. Segregation was a horrible part of our history. Nobody back then who supported that should be represented in such a way as those who made the statues back then supported or the actual men who supported it.

Nobody should erase that past nor pretend it never happened. But I am not talking about erasing history but putting those figures in the context of what humans should not do to other humans.

Why shouldn't the town have a say, it doesn't violate any constitutional rights and if the people there want the statue then they should be able to keep it, as well as if they don't want it then they they should be able to remove it. Slavery is bad no doubt about it, but that's not the issue here, the issue is should towns not be able to display statues of people who fought for the confederacy.

^^^^^ Is like saying, "Why cant Islamic countries throw gays off rooftops and deny women equal rights?"

This is about the pure fact that government property is the property of everyone, not one group, not one political party and should not be used to promote or glorify cruelty to other humans. Those who conducted the war in the south were not heros, they were the enemy.

You would not say that say, if Iran had a civil war, and out of the ashes a western democracy rose but some still kept the statues of those who clung to the past. 

If you defend the town/city in that fashion then you have no value for the bloodshed and struggle of those who supported the likes of MLK and what he did and died for to end segregation. To leave up statues of those who apposed the progress he died for is vile. 

The only context those statues should be kept around like I said, is in a museum of what not to do to your fellow human being.

You are not defending free speech by arguing like this. You are defending a vile history that nobody should want to glorify.