Confederate Statues

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Confederate Statues

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 7 of 49 < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >

Ray in Houston Houston 16 Aug 17 8.08pm
Originally posted by elgrande Not sure it does to be honest. If say you put a statue of Obama next to or near Lee,would that not send the right message out. I don't think so, it would put them as historical equals which is problematic as one was President and one lead an army in rebellion against the elected government. Now, Obama's going to get his statues elsewhere, so I'm not saying that such things need to be reshuffled every time a prominent figure emerges. But putting a statue to, say, Frederick Douglas, next to Lee is going to increase the insult to those who already find Lee's statue insulting - that being the residents of Charlottesville. They wanted Lee moved. Other towns will choose differently. This is why democracy is messy. We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.
Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston

Houston 16 Aug 17 8.08pm

Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston

Originally posted by elgrande

Not sure it does to be honest.
If say you put a statue of Obama next to or near Lee,would that not send the right message out.

I don't think so, it would put them as historical equals which is problematic as one was President and one lead an army in rebellion against the elected government.

Now, Obama's going to get his statues elsewhere, so I'm not saying that such things need to be reshuffled every time a prominent figure emerges. But putting a statue to, say, Frederick Douglas, next to Lee is going to increase the insult to those who already find Lee's statue insulting - that being the residents of Charlottesville.

They wanted Lee moved. Other towns will choose differently. This is why democracy is messy.

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert a moderator to this post

coulsdoneagle London 16 Aug 17 8.16pm
Say there were statues of Hitler still standing in Germany, should they be left standing or perhaps should they be torn down and in some cases moved to museums where they can be studied in context. I say this because there are literally still statues of Hefferson Davis still standing all over the states despite what he and the confederacy represents. Like I said, the problem is what these statues represent. It's all very well saying that pulling them down is airbrushing history, but there have been more going up in the early part of last century and a changing narrative is the south to the idea of "the lost cause". That's some serious revisionism by the right in America and people like Lee are being used as figures in this completely bullsh*t revisionist viewing of the civil war, hence the outrage from those from that part of the political spectrum at the statues coming down. Call me simplistic, but if Neo nazis and the KKK are against you taking down a statue, that to me suggests it's a pretty good idea to take it down. Edited by coulsdoneagle (16 Aug 2017 8.17pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

coulsdoneagle

London 16 Aug 17 8.16pm

Say there were statues of Hitler still standing in Germany, should they be left standing or perhaps should they be torn down and in some cases moved to museums where they can be studied in context. I say this because there are literally still statues of Hefferson Davis still standing all over the states despite what he and the confederacy represents.

Like I said, the problem is what these statues represent. It's all very well saying that pulling them down is airbrushing history, but there have been more going up in the early part of last century and a changing narrative is the south to the idea of "the lost cause". That's some serious revisionism by the right in America and people like Lee are being used as figures in this completely bullsh*t revisionist viewing of the civil war, hence the outrage from those from that part of the political spectrum at the statues coming down.

Call me simplistic, but if Neo nazis and the KKK are against you taking down a statue, that to me suggests it's a pretty good idea to take it down.

Edited by coulsdoneagle (16 Aug 2017 8.17pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston Houston 16 Aug 17 8.19pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays You are so full of nonsense. Jefferson Davis was the leader of the confederacy. Hitler led the Nazi party and Germany. I'd have no problem with a statue of Rommel. There are statues of him in Germany. Like Lee he was a general under whom many died. The statue of Lee was in the south. Having a statue of Rommel in the UK would be like having a statue of Lee in the north. I'm getting fed up with your nonsense now. Lee's statue was erected in the south 50 years after the end of the civil war. I equated that to a statue of Hitler being erected in Berlin 50 years after the end of WW2. You are making s* up, attributing it to me and then accusing me of "nonsense". We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just waing with a football.
Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston

Houston 16 Aug 17 8.19pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

You are so full of nonsense. Jefferson Davis was the leader of the confederacy. Hitler led the Nazi party and Germany.

I'd have no problem with a statue of Rommel. There are statues of him in Germany. Like Lee he was a general under whom many died.

The statue of Lee was in the south. Having a statue of Rommel in the UK would be like having a statue of Lee in the north.

I'm getting fed up with your nonsense now.

Lee's statue was erected in the south 50 years after the end of the civil war. I equated that to a statue of Hitler being erected in Berlin 50 years after the end of WW2. You are making s*** up, attributing it to me and then accusing me of "nonsense".

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert a moderator to this post

hedgehog50 Croydon 16 Aug 17 8.21pm
Presumably many on here think that all copies of the Band's "The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down" should be destroyed and the song banned from the airways and Robbie Robertson should be tried for confederate sympathies - and that Joan Baez as she covered it too. We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]
Alert a moderator to this post

hedgehog50

Croydon 16 Aug 17 8.21pm

Presumably many on here think that all copies of the Band's "The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down" should be destroyed and the song banned from the airways and Robbie Robertson should be tried for confederate sympathies - and that Joan Baez as she covered it too.

We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]

Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston Houston 16 Aug 17 8.31pm
Originally posted by johnno42000 But not those traitors so any monuments to them should be ripped down. Are you certain none of their descendants let out a good old rebel yell? Also Washington must appear nowhere, vile traitor and slave owner. What's Yannick got to do with it? My idea would sort out everyones problems, a confederate soldier alongside perhaps a black soldier who fought on the Union or Confederate side (not many I grant you but there were some). As I said, Washington et al were slave owners and there is no excusing that. Washington, while the leader of a revolution, is not a traitor to the crown as that was settled by the Treaty of Paris that ended the war and under which England recognised the independence of the United States. Lee was pardoned by President Jackson at the end of the civil war, so he's not a traitor either. But Lee's statue isn't being taken down (solely) because he was a slave owner; it's being taken down because the people of Charlottesville want it so. And it's not to destroy the statue; they are moving it to a site of less prominence befitting their opinion of legacy of the man. We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.
Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston

Houston 16 Aug 17 8.31pm

Originally posted by johnno42000

But not those traitors so any monuments to them should be ripped down. Are you certain none of their descendants let out a good old rebel yell? Also Washington must appear nowhere, vile traitor and slave owner.

What's Yannick got to do with it? My idea would sort out everyones problems, a confederate soldier alongside perhaps a black soldier who fought on the Union or Confederate side (not many I grant you but there were some).

As I said, Washington et al were slave owners and there is no excusing that. Washington, while the leader of a revolution, is not a traitor to the crown as that was settled by the Treaty of Paris that ended the war and under which England recognised the independence of the United States.

Lee was pardoned by President Jackson at the end of the civil war, so he's not a traitor either. But Lee's statue isn't being taken down (solely) because he was a slave owner; it's being taken down because the people of Charlottesville want it so. And it's not to destroy the statue; they are moving it to a site of less prominence befitting their opinion of legacy of the man.

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 16 Aug 17 8.32pm
Originally posted by hedgehog50 Presumably many on here think that all copies of the Band's "The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down" should be destroyed and the song banned from the airways and Robbie Robertson should be tried for confederate sympathies - and that Joan Baez as she covered it too. I think you will find that Joan just liked the tune after her record company suggested she might record it. She was as liberal as they get. I'm sure you knew that.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

16 Aug 17 8.32pm

Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger

Originally posted by hedgehog50

I think you will find that Joan just liked the tune after her record company suggested she might record it.
She was as liberal as they get.

I'm sure you knew that.

Alert a moderator to this post

johnno42000 16 Aug 17 8.39pm
Originally posted by Ray in Houston As I said, Washington et al were slave owners and there is no excusing that. Washington, while the leader of a revolution, is not a traitor to the crown as that was settled by the Treaty of Paris that ended the war and under which England recognised the independence of the United States. Lee was pardoned by President Jackson at the end of the civil war, so he's not a traitor either. But Lee's statue isn't being taken down (solely) because he was a slave owner; it's being taken down because the people of Charlottesville want it so. And it's not to destroy the statue; they are moving it to a site of less prominence befitting their opinion of legacy of the man. Of course they were traitors, they rebelled against the King who ruled the colony. That makes them treacherous scoundrels who, if we had won, would rightly have been executed as traitors. 'Lies to the masses as are like fly's to mollasses...they want more and more and more'
Alert a moderator to this post

johnno42000

16 Aug 17 8.39pm

Originally posted by Ray in Houston

Of course they were traitors, they rebelled against the King who ruled the colony. That makes them treacherous scoundrels who, if we had won, would rightly have been executed as traitors.

'Lies to the masses as are like fly's to mollasses...they want more and more and more'

Alert a moderator to this post

wordup 16 Aug 17 8.40pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger That is a fair point. I'd need to be convinced that they were erected purely to celebrate 'racism' and slavery before I took a sledgehammer to them. That would be unprovable I'd say though it is interesting to see when most of these monuments popped up. Even if or when a monument was removed should a local community decide so do so, I wouldn't ever be in favour of it being destroyed. It's still a part of history and something we can learn from. Attachment: mon.JPG (36.45Kb)
Alert a moderator to this post

wordup

16 Aug 17 8.40pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

That is a fair point.

I'd need to be convinced that they were erected purely to celebrate 'racism' and slavery before I took a sledgehammer to them.

That would be unprovable I'd say though it is interesting to see when most of these monuments popped up.

Even if or when a monument was removed should a local community decide so do so, I wouldn't ever be in favour of it being destroyed. It's still a part of history and something we can learn from.

Attachment: mon.JPG (36.45Kb)

Alert a moderator to this post

.TUX. 16 Aug 17 8.48pm
I've not read the whole of this thread so i'm sorry if this has already been mentioned....... The schools, part of the Centennial School District, were named for the Lynch family, which donated land over a century ago to build the first of the schools. But Centennial Superintendent Paul Coakley says many newer families coming into the district associate the name with America's violent racial history. [Link] Continual crap such as this does the Left no favours whatsoever. Buy Litecoin.
Alert a moderator to this post

.TUX.

16 Aug 17 8.48pm

I've not read the whole of this thread so i'm sorry if this has already been mentioned.......

The schools, part of the Centennial School District, were named for the Lynch family, which donated land over a century ago to build the first of the schools. But Centennial Superintendent Paul Coakley says many newer families coming into the district associate the name with America's violent racial history.

[Link]

Continual crap such as this does the Left no favours whatsoever.

Buy Litecoin.

Alert a moderator to this post

hedgehog50 Croydon 16 Aug 17 8.48pm
Surely the people of Charlotteville should be trying to get the name of the place changed as it was named after the wife of George III, who did not support anti-slavery MPs during his reign. We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]
Alert a moderator to this post

hedgehog50

Croydon 16 Aug 17 8.48pm

Surely the people of Charlotteville should be trying to get the name of the place changed as it was named after the wife of George III, who did not support anti-slavery MPs during his reign.

We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 16 Aug 17 8.53pm
Originally posted by Ray in Houston Lee's statue was erected in the south 50 years after the end of the civil war. I equated that to a statue of Hitler being erected in Berlin 50 years after the end of WW2. You are making s*** up, attributing it to me and then accusing me of "nonsense". Lee was not Hitler and he wasn't the leader of the confederacy. You talk a lot of emotive nonsense. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

16 Aug 17 8.53pm

Originally posted by Ray in Houston

Lee was not Hitler and he wasn't the leader of the confederacy.

You talk a lot of emotive nonsense.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston Houston 16 Aug 17 9.07pm
Originally posted by johnno42000 Of course they were traitors, they rebelled against the King who ruled the colony. That makes them treacherous scoundrels who, if we had won, would rightly have been executed as traitors. I do understand what you mean, but the Treaty of Paris absolved them of the original act of treachery. A technicality for sure, but a fact nonetheless. We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.
Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston

Houston 16 Aug 17 9.07pm

Originally posted by johnno42000

Of course they were traitors, they rebelled against the King who ruled the colony. That makes them treacherous scoundrels who, if we had won, would rightly have been executed as traitors.

I do understand what you mean, but the Treaty of Paris absolved them of the original act of treachery. A technicality for sure, but a fact nonetheless.

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 7 of 49 < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Confederate Statues

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors