Too many statutes of losers

[Lemons]

There are not many humans that have ever lived that have not done great things and horrific things.


There isn’t anyone you can make a statue of if you are requiring that person to be unquestioned.


Germans not having statues of Hitler does not mean we don’t have statues dedicated to war. We do. It also doesn’t mean we don’t have statues of people that did horrible things, we do.

Most countries do end up deciding to destroy these statutes eventually. Lenin, for example, had thousands of statutes erected. It took a few decades but they are being removed from Russia and have been removed from Ukraine. Iranians cheered when the Hussein statue was torn down.

Which statutes are in Germany of people that did horrific things?

Still flapping those gums showing your ignorance. Saddam Hussein's statue that was toppled by US forces was in Iraq, not Iran. Considering the horrors Hussein put his own people through, of course they would cheer to see it torn down.

Mistake over saying Iranians. Did I say that someone else tore down the statue? I don’t see that anywhere.

[Lemons]

The difference is who tells the story.


There simply isn’t a nation today that was not built off of the murder of someone else.

None of these leaders were building nations. None will dispute the evils of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot among others and why there shouldn’t be statues of them. I hope none would dispute the evils of slavery either, so we shouldn’t want statues of Jefferson Davis either. Other leaders won’t be so clear cut. .

I don’t just mean the ones who are thought of as most evil, I mean every single one. Without exception.

That’s when it gets tough and people will disagree. It’s sad to see so many people wanting statues of the losing side of history to remain. I don’t get why anyone would want to be reminded that half the country fought to keep people as slaves. And in historical terms it wasn’t all that long ago.

[Mommamia]

Most countries do end up deciding to destroy these statutes eventually. Lenin, for example, had thousands of statutes erected. It took a few decades but they are being removed from Russia and have been removed from Ukraine. Iranians cheered when the Hussein statue was torn down.

Which statutes are in Germany of people that did horrific things?

Still flapping those gums showing your ignorance. Saddam Hussein's statue that was toppled by US forces was in Iraq, not Iran. Considering the horrors Hussein put his own people through, of course they would cheer to see it torn down.

Mistake over saying Iranians. Did I say that someone else tore down the statue? I don’t see that anywhere.

I was just clarifying your mistake for you.

[Lemons]

Still flapping those gums showing your ignorance. Saddam Hussein's statue that was toppled by US forces was in Iraq, not Iran. Considering the horrors Hussein put his own people through, of course they would cheer to see it torn down.

Mistake over saying Iranians. Did I say that someone else tore down the statue? I don’t see that anywhere.

I was just clarifying your mistake for you.

You said something about ignorance not a mistake so I thought you were talking about the statue. And I always mix those two countries up, very similar to me.

[SouthernIslander]

There are plenty of statues here that are dedicated to wars- even memorials. Removing confederate statues is not removing ALL statues of war in America. This is not a denial of war.

The Union won the war. The war was about slavery. The South wanted to keep AA as chattel. The North wanted slavery abolished. It was and is about morality and human rights ( and money, and the list can go on ...). Ironically, the same population in the South who don't want these statues removed are the same people who accuse the North and Democrats of being godless as they proudly refer to themselves as the bible belt. And not just any bible belt- but new testament bible belt; as in Jesus loving, turn the other cheek, we're all god's children, etc ...

The statues also represent men who fought to break off from the Union. So what is the point of keeping them around? What was the point of erecting the in the first place? America as it is today, with AA free ( to vote, get an education, eat at the same restaurants and whites, ride at the front of the bus, buy and live in homes next to whites, etc) is not the country they wanted to be a part of. So, I say, "Bye, Felicia!"

We do not live in the Confederacy.

As many MAGA supporters likes to remind anyone who'll listen, " This is America."

This is the United States of America..

There are not many humans that have ever lived that have not done great things and horrific things.


There isn’t anyone you can make a statue of if you are requiring that person to be unquestioned.


Germans not having statues of Hitler does not mean we don’t have statues dedicated to war. We do. It also doesn’t mean we don’t have statues of people that did horrible things, we do.

From an outsiders perspective, it seems like the “South” as a general term still wants their statues and flags because they still yearn for a separate country.

But I don’t think it’s just because of race, it seems like the white people of the North and the white people of the South generally don’t like each other in stereotype.

I agree with the last part. A lot of this isn’t about race, than it is a pissing match between the two regions, civil war included.

The north didn’t consider Black people equal either. I think it was more to break the economy of the south and a lot of people up north tend to leave that out topics like this.

[SouthernIslander]

History should never be destroyed, period. Things such as statues that are seen as offensive to a large segment of society could be put into a museum type building where those who want to see them can. Also how do you teach children the history of our country if you destroy that which is a part of our history.

Most of these monuments are moved with the intention of relocating them to a museum or some facility they can be displayed in a historical/educational context.

I’ve never seen one destroyed, so IDK why people keep saying that.

[SouthernIslander]

It's interesting how Trump always claims he hates losers but has a problem with removing statues of all the losers. The southern states were on the wrong side of the civil war and rightly they lost. We need to stop celebrating losers.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way ... e-examples

NPR had an article a few years back about protests over these monuments and how other countries dealt with these type of statutes.

In 2015 Ukraine removed 1,320 statues of Lenin along with other Soviet area symbols. Why should they be reminded every day of living under communist rule and the Iron Curtain.

Germany chose to build monuments to their victims, not their army leaders after WW2. There are monuments to the deserters of the army, to the Jewish and non-Jewish victims.

Americans should be happy to see these statutes go. We can keep the statutes of the winners.

The whole “nana nana boo boo you lost the war” crap is stupid and divisive too IMO. This is not about bragging rights and we’ve been dealing with the confederate debate long before Trump got in office.

These are normally the same people who shame us for the challenges that affect Black people the most (education, poverty, on welfare etc.) like that isn’t generational fall out for being “freed” with no basic rights because the north did not consider us equal either and still don’t.

It does not matter who won or lost the war or bragging rights. Each confederate monument is managed by the local city or state and its between them and their community to decide what they want to do with it.

I think all these outside agitators getting involved for the wrong reasons has made a difficult situation worse.

[MonarchMom]

History should never be destroyed, period. Things such as statues that are seen as offensive to a large segment of society could be put into a museum type building where those who want to see them can. Also how do you teach children the history of our country if you destroy that which is a part of our history.

Most of these monuments are moved with the intention of relocating them to a museum or some facility they can be displayed in a historical/educational context.

I’ve never seen one destroyed, so IDK why people keep saying that.
[/quote]

History is field of study - not a statue. Iraq did not keep the statue of Saddam Hussein in Bagdad to preserve "history." Germany does not keep statues of Hitler so they can "learn" from them. Statues are monuments to the ideas and actions of those persons. To teach the history we preserve the actual artifacts like the death camps, battle sites, diaries and documents.

Many of the Confederate statues were erected during the Jim Crow era, and many in the 1950's in a reaction to expanded Civil Rights for Blacks. There are Confederate statues in 31 states - though most were never a part of the Confederacy. Most are not at the site of battles, but in public squares and courthouses to glorify the leaders who fought for the right to own people in slavery.

[SouthernIslander]

History should never be destroyed, period. Things such as statues that are seen as offensive to a large segment of society could be put into a museum type building where those who want to see them can. Also how do you teach children the history of our country if you destroy that which is a part of our history.

Most of these monuments are moved with the intention of relocating them to a museum or some facility they can be displayed in a historical/educational context.

I’ve never seen one destroyed, so IDK why people keep saying that.

History is field of study - not a statue. Iraq did not keep the statue of Saddam Hussein in Bagdad to preserve "history." Germany does not keep statues of Hitler so they can "learn" from them. Statues are monuments to the ideas and actions of those persons. To teach the history we preserve the actual artifacts like the death camps, battle sites, diaries and documents.

Many of the Confederate statues were erected during the Jim Crow era, and many in the 1950's in a reaction to expanded Civil Rights for Blacks. There are Confederate statues in 31 states - though most were never a part of the Confederacy. Most are not at the site of battles, but in public squares and courthouses to glorify the leaders who fought for the right to own people in slavery.
[/quote]

I’m sorry I’m confused. Are you quoting me or Momma? I got a notification so I wasn’t sure. Didn’t want to overlook your comment if you were.

[MonarchMom]

History should never be destroyed, period. Things such as statues that are seen as offensive to a large segment of society could be put into a museum type building where those who want to see them can. Also how do you teach children the history of our country if you destroy that which is a part of our history.

Most of these monuments are moved with the intention of relocating them to a museum or some facility they can be displayed in a historical/educational context.

I’ve never seen one destroyed, so IDK why people keep saying that.

History is field of study - not a statue. Iraq did not keep the statue of Saddam Hussein in Bagdad to preserve "history." Germany does not keep statues of Hitler so they can "learn" from them. Statues are monuments to the ideas and actions of those persons. To teach the history we preserve the actual artifacts like the death camps, battle sites, diaries and documents.

Many of the Confederate statues were erected during the Jim Crow era, and many in the 1950's in a reaction to expanded Civil Rights for Blacks. There are Confederate statues in 31 states - though most were never a part of the Confederacy. Most are not at the site of battles, but in public squares and courthouses to glorify the leaders who fought for the right to own people in slavery.

I’m sorry I’m confused. Are you quoting me or Momma? I got a notification so I wasn’t sure. Didn’t want to overlook your comment if you were.
[/quote]

Yes, I replied to wrong post, so I deleted and moved it. Thanks for asking.