Confederate Statue Advice

Confederates fought to preserve slavery. White America was built by the hands of African descendants stolen from their home land to do dirty work. There is no such thing as "American culture" that you're trying to defend because America is made of up thousands of different kinds of cultures and languages and origins and was never intended to be ruled by one. Whites are not an "elite race" and those statues deserve to be removed as Robert E. Lee even wanted the Confederate flags and symbols taken down in the end. It's a symbol of idiocy and disunity, not something a country should be defined by. You're a fucktard of the highest degree if you think there are any well-founded facts to offer for the Confederate side (which was defeated for a reason over 60 years ago). It's not spite to smack someone when they refuse to see you as an equal just because your skin color or religion or country of origin is different. That's what America is made of.

I never understood why Americans want statues honouring losers. I thought you guys were about winning?

>>18669687

The majority of us don't. It's just taking this long to finally eradicate the idiots that bred on the losing side.

>>18669644
When the nazis were overthrown in germany the german government took down every nazi statue and monument in the country, the only thing they left was the concentration camps so that they could remind everyone of the atrocities commited

Now lets not kid ourselves, the civil war was never about self governance, it was about owning slaves

Lets also not kid ourselves by saying that the south and the nazis were the same, but if you go at it from the way of life angle your going to get compared to nazi sympathizers, even if it is a slight stretch

So why do you want to keep it anon? Does it have some special meaning to you? If it does you should just voice that in the best way you can

>>18669686
gonna try to go sentence-by-sentence for this.

What confederates fought for is a moot point. I never said I condone their beliefs, but I honor their integrity and loss of life. They were severely misguided, but not evil. It wasn't just about slaves, either. State sovereignty was the other main catalyst for the civil war.
Partially, until 1865. Work was not exclusive to the slaves, and credit to slave labor, civil rights, and apology to those people have already been served, water under the bridge, in a sense.
You could say the same for many other countries, it doesn't invalidate said country's culture.
I never brought up that dumbass narrative written by nurighters, you're inserting context that isn't there. Source required, and he didn't reflect the entirety of confederate sentiment.
The action of taking down a statue because it's superficially labelled as racist 100+ years later is anti-unity in of itself, and will only strengthen the resolve of the nu-right into thinking their way of life is under direct attack by libtards or something.
Not an argument. try again.
In some ways it is, in others it isn't, but the problem is the instigator will often see it as spite no matter what, and they're be further resolved to act out in a shitty manner.

Overall you continue to see this as a symbol of solely oppression when it isn't. I suppose we should tear down the great pyramids of Giza because they were built on slave labor? We would ban Fanta across the globe because of its Antisemitic origins, too.Or how about the WWII memorial because some of the people represented in it committed war crimes? The statue stands as a reminder/reflection of our past tragedy and mistakes, never to repeat them. The confederates weren't bad people simply because of a diff. viewpoint, in context of 150 years ago, that's they key here. It's illogical to demonize the entire confederacy from a generation no one is old enough to remember. confederates nowadays would be a diff. story.

>>18669712
disproportionate comparison.

it was very much about both. You cannot assume context that is too old to remember, based on modern prejudices.

>Lets also not kid ourselves by saying that the south and the nazis were the same
why bring up point 1 then?
>but if you go at it from the way of life angle your going to get compared to nazi sympathizers, even if it is a slight stretch
Ironically, that's a common type of injust judgement, seeing as being apart of a group of awful people for sharing 1 common interest among many disagreements. One that I wish but don't realistically expect to be gone from the world one day.

I have no special personal connection with the statue itself, and even if I did, it's irrelevant. the majority wont pander to the needs of one. Its a matter of principle to contribute towards stopping the ever-growing rift in-between our country. Removing a symbol of permanent historical signficiance over a flavor-of-the-election-term sentiment will be seen in very bad taste by many, especially alt-right esque types that genuinely want to do harm. Removing the statue will not stop racism, it will serve as a martyr for those types and invigorate them.
if removing the statue objectively put a slow on racist sentiment, I would reconsider my stance. But i've multiple times that statue removal and similar gestures do the opposite.

It's pretty simple desu.

Those that want to take down statues want to erase the bad parts of history. However, those who forget bad parts of history are doomed to repeat it.

>>18669687
They weren't to honor losers. They were put up during the civil rights era as a "fuck you" to black people.

>>18669795
Absolutely this. The grand majority of these statues date to exactly the time the civil rights movement was blossoming in America. They were purposely built in opposition to the civil rights movement. For that fact and that fact alone, they are symbols of oppression.

>>18669813
How did the statues oppress people? If you want to add that political context to the statues then fine, but those statues now represent history. The only people who think those statues = oppression are those that want it to be equivalent to that.

>>18669839
He said they're symbols of oppression not that the statues literally oppressed people.

>>18669754
Point 1 was meant to demonstrate how other countries deal with monuments glorifying people responsible for the systematic mistreatment minorities

And to your point about the way of life thing, the nazis were fantastic for germany in terms of infrastructure, economy and science, that still doesn't make killing milions of jews any less horrible, just like wanting self governance doesnt make kidnapping and owning others any less horrible either

Are you going to argue that abolishing slavery wasnt the thing that pushed the south over the edge to finally rebel? Ontop of that, the confederate flag has become a symbol of white supremacy in recent years, and is used by white nationalist groups across the country. And yet you still want monuments that glorify the confedracy on government property?

Do not try to argue that the monument has a different meaning, as of this monment they have become symbols racism and bigotry and that has no place in a government building.

Here is my advice, let them take it down, but ask that they keep it in tact, if people ever want to put it up again then they can.

>>18669845
I understood that when I was making my post and I think I addressed that in my answer.
Those statues are only looked at as racists because people want that to be the entire context of it. It's a very similar case with the confederate flag where they are trying to label an identity or culture as racist and make that the entire context of it. It's not, but you can have that opinion if you want.

>>18669864
If you're arguing there's no racial component to this the one who is confused about context is you. I can't tell if you're trying to play devil's advocate too hard or really don't get it but, don't expect to be taken seriously if this is your line of argument in a town hall or wherever you said you're going.

>>18669874
Our country's history is full of racial and "non progressive" components. Should we rewrite the line in our constitution that all Men AND Women are created equally? Are we going to rewrite that or pretend that the constitution is oppressing women nowadays? Either assumption is appropriating morals to a history where it exists.

The statues are built under a racist context, yes, but is that all to their meaning? The reason you think it embodies itself as a symbol of racism is because you want it to be.

>>18669917
It's not because I want it to be, it's because they were erected in protest to the civil rights movement.

Statues of confederate soldiers are an idolization of the confederacy, it does not serve as a reminder of our past mistakes, it works to glorify them in a way. For that reason they should be taken down and moved to a museum.

The civil war is also required curriculum in American education.
Nobody is going to forget our history because some statues were taken down.

>>18669921
So statues of Confederate historical figures are only depicted to be racist? There are more statues than the one you are referencing and they were all made at the same time to be racist? You can believe that if you want, but now it is a part of our history. They exist as symbols of oppression because that what you want to make them into. I have a feeling neither of us is going to agree on those one so I would propose to agree to disagree. If you want to look at them a evil than do so, but it makes the erasure of our nation's small amount of history no more justified in my mind.

>>18669644

The Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis statues should come down. Both men were cowards who abandoned the righteous cause of Southern Independence against the Yankee heathen devil.

>>18669962

WAR OF NORTHERN AGGRESSION

No such thing as a Civil War. Use proper nomenclature.

>>18669968
>There are more statues than the one you are referencing and they were all made at the same time to be racist?

Yes, that is it. The vast majority of these statues were erected by racists to counter the civil rights movement. Google it. It's a fact. It's not just some made up thing. As long as you ignore that fact, there can be no intelligent discourse between you and the people you're debating.

>>18669979
>All the meaning of every Confederate statue ever made it to glorify racism.

Okay Brainlet, you got me. U R 2 SMURT 4 3 TALK 2.

Most of the Confederate statues you see today were built in the last 100 years, well after the war was done. Those cheapass statues were put up for political reasons, not historical ones. Those are the statues that need to come down, they served their purpose and are now pointless.

>>18669995
So you twist my words until they become a false hyperbole, then fill your diaper with stale memespeak?

Good luck at Town Hall. This statue is really lucky to have you on its side

>>18669995
Nice strawman. Not what he said.

>>18669968
>They exist as symbols of oppression because that what you want to make them into.

They exist as symbols of oppression because that was the literal motive behind putting them up in the first place. You keep alluding to this not being the case or, being irrelevant and strawmanning and projecting about what I "want" when I have no desire to remove the statues or see them come down I'm simply arguing a literal fucking fact.

You fucking suck at arguing dude.

"Your entire point is just in your head and you can think that if you want to but I am going to dismiss it QED" is not a rebuttal.

>>18669995
Jesus, you're a retard. You're gonna get laughed out of your town hall meeting.
This is really simply, dude. Like the other guy said, you're either genuinely dumb or too deep into being the doubles avocado.
They were literally put up as 'we used to own you, you are forever lesser' dickwaving. Please at least read up on the history of these statues before you go. Some were erected immediately following the war, yes, but most were not.

Look I get it, lots of well meaning people died defending the south. The Confederate Army was not made up of slaveowners, let's be real. The slaveowners were the ones in power. Most of the footsoldiers were poor dudes trying to protect their land, families, and way of life.

However, that way of life was built on and sustained by slave labour, this cannot be denied.

People want to honour those fallen people because their descendants still live in the lands they died for. That makes sense.

But these statues, like it or not, are symbolic of too many negative things. They glorify those nasty stains on US history more than anything else.

What you SHOULD be fighting for, is a proper replacement for those statues. Something that really honours and glorifies what it means to be a Southerner, but also an American.

>>18670020
I haven't changed my argument at all or twisted your words.
Here I said
>>18669917
Some of them were depicted for political reasons, some more historical. I admited that there were quite a few made under "racist" pretexts Then you went and said that they were majoritivly.
>>18669921
Made to protest civil rights. Certainly some were, but not all. I pointed that out and then talked about how that wasn't all to their meaning, but all you did was sperg about how they were almost all made to counter the civil rights and refused to talk if I didn't agree with you on there meaning. I then assumed that means you think they are inherently all about racism and to "oppress".

You never were looking for a debate. I'm not going to call you a baby or anything, but you certainly can't have a disscussion if you don't have your way.

>>18670064
>You never were looking for a debate.
This line is gonna go over great at the town hall

rofl

Be honest OP, you dont give a fuck if any statute comes down anywhere in the world--let alone a confederate statue. You've just been brainwashed to aggressively oppose anything you view as "the liberal agenda."

If SJWs were the ones putting up confederate statues, you would be trying to take them down.

I usually go Socratic and just pretend not to understand why anyone cares about a statue. It usually goes like this

>why are they taking down the statues tho
bro they're a symbol of oppression it's good they're taking them down
>but it's just a lump of metal
bro it's about the symbols okay
>I guess man, anyway I have to get to work, have fun at the protest. you on paid time off for the protest?
uhhh well I'm unemployed right now
>ooh, gotcha haha. alright bro heading to my six figure job. seeya

>>18670086
This isn't going to work in OP's case because he's the same kind of retard wasting time going to a town hall to bicker about this, just on the side of "muh heritage" rather than "muh oppression"

>>18670086
I'm gonna commission a statue of your mom getting plowed by a BBC and put it across the street from your home.
Just a lump of metal bruh.

>>18670086

Things that never happened, for 100 Alex

>>18670081
ANTIFA is that you? No seriously though, you can envision the statues as racist icons if you want, but what I was trying to discuss was appropriating morals to historical monuments and making them partisan puppets. It seems no one wanted to have that conversation though.

>>18670097

FA-FA is that you? No seriously though, you're a faggot and your only debate strategy is playing dumb. "I dont get it, would would anyone be offended by a statue of the men who almost broke the country in half to continue on with slavery?"

Also, i would put $100 on you bitching about some hippy putting a Stalin statue somewhere

>>18670097
>ut what I was trying to discuss was appropriating morals to historical monuments and making them partisan puppets. It seems no one wanted to have that conversation though.
Because you're trying to apply that to a context and situation where it doesn't apply, but you just keep dismissing anyone trying to explain that to you.

>>18670097
You're a moron.
Please explain how statues erected IN LARGE MAJORITY as a response to black folks wanting civil rights can somehow be divorced from morality?
Like the other guy said, they are and were dick waving.
It's not that they are icons of racism, unless it's a statue of like Nathaniel Bedford Forrest or something. It's that they were erected in an act of racial provocation.
Stop playing dumb.

>>18670064
>Then you went and said that they were majoritivly Made to protest civil rights. Certainly some were, but not all. I pointed that out and then talked about how that wasn't all to their meaning

What I said was correct. The majority were made to protest civil rights. I never said that pre-civil rights movement statues don't exist.

So, I guess the pertinent thing to do would be to find out when the statue in question dates to, who commissioned it, why they commissioned it, etc.

Either way, the point is that you can't divorce the confederacy from racism. Like >>18670047 said, although not everyone who fought for them were slave owners, the people at the head of the Confederate army were fighting to perpetuate slavery. To say anything otherwise is just revisionist history

File: 2017-08-29-192501_344x104_scrot.png (7KB, 344x104px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 344x104px

>>18670096
no worries bro, you'll make it someday

>>18670097
>appropriating morals to historical monuments

The monuments were created by and for people who were openly racist FOR THE PURPOSES OF RACISM. How is that appropriating morals? You're just doing mental gymnastics to avoid the fact that the monument you want to defend was erected for a sinister and shitty purpose

File: 1378894506621.png (50KB, 344x514px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 344x514px

>>18670097

>you can envision the statues as racist icons if you want

It has nothing to do with vision. Thats what they are. Most of them were erected during the Jim Crow era and in the middle of the civil rights era. It has nothing to do with history and everything to do with erecting boogeymen in the middle of town to give a big middle finger to black people.

>what I was trying to discuss was appropriating morals to historical monuments and making them partisan puppets. It seems no one wanted to have that conversation though.

I think if you demand that people respect your right to separate a historical figure and their accomplishments for their moral failings then you have respect peoples' right to take issue with historical figure that is a literal symbol for pain and oppression in their lives.

I think that if you actually gave a shit about the history then you would have no problem going to see it in a museum. The statues and commemorations that go in public spaces are tax payer funded and maintained projects and if the tax payers want it gone, whether you like it or not, it has to go. We've finally got to a point in history where people aren't cool walking around ignoring the monuments to death and racism in their town and now they want them gone. No one is destroying the statues, just relocating them out of public spaces. I honestly don't see why anyone would have a problem with that other than because they have an unstoppable urge to be contrarians against everything that liberals want on sheer principal even if the things they want make sense.

>>18669686
>There is no such thing as "American culture" that you're trying to defend because America is made of up thousands of different kinds of cultures and languages and origins
There's no such thing as British culture that you're trying to defend, there's no such thing as French, there's no such thing as Greek, there's no such thing as Chinese, etc. etc. etc. etc. You can apply this argument to literally any country. Yet you somehow imply America is "made of" something else, so I guess it does have a culture/identity???

>>18669644
Probably too late, but it's a slippery slope. George Washington was a slaveowner, should his statues be removed? Abraham Lincoln made clear he still thought blacks were inferior, even if he freed them (may have been politically strategic, but we don't know his real views). Should his statue be removed? What's not to say, that 400 years from now, Obama will become an unfortunate part of our history? He deported millions of illegals, after all.

>>18670134
>Look at how much money I have. This redeems the fact that I'm a complete dumbass and have no idea what I'm talking about.

The world needs less people like you

>>18670143
>Conservative bordering on the revelation that America, like many other countries that are now world powers, was built on the backs of the poor and oppressed

You're almost there, man. Keep going.

Unless you already knew that and are fine with the world continuing to operate that way, in which case, you're morally bankrupt.

>>18670160
That's not my issue with what you said. The statement that there is no such thing as American culture is absolutely false.

>>18670134

$3,500 a month? You're kidding me, right? Thats not even really that much money. Its a stable living, but I have apprentices that make more than that. And they arent faggots like you.

>>18670143

If you can't tell the difference between the culture of a country like France that has its own unifying language, cuisine and art and the culture of a country like America that has no national language and is comprised entirely of immigrants then we're incapable of having a productive conversation.

The Chinese have been living in China for thousands of years. A great population of "Americans" are only 3rd, 4th or 5th generation. You seriously can't tell the difference between the two?

If "American" culture is anything its Native American culture. Native Americans are the only people here who are actually from America. Every other aspect of American culture is borrowed and ran through the filter of capitalist convenience. Nearly nothing we enjoy here was invented here in America.

>>18670179
If you go back far enough, every country is composed of immigrants from completely disparate places. Is American magically the only country on Earth without a culture?

>>18670134
Please tell me I'm missing something or that's a brokerage account and you aren't bragging about 42k/year

>>18670179

I agree with you for the most part, but I think there are the early signs of culture. There is definitely an american style of architecture and music.

>>18670126
I am going to address this post and leave this thread because it's not debate anymore. The main response and argument against the statues is
> The majority of the statues were made during the civil rights period in response to Civil Rights.
Yes, a lot of them were, but that is not all there is to there meaning. I have admitted they were "racist" before several times. What no one is trying to talk about is the meaning beyond the "racism" and why I'm using parenthisis.

I'm using parenthesis because there are countless moments in our history that we chose to do something that was non progressive. The reason that the Constitution is still celebrated and looked up to is that there is more to its having some unprogressive qualities and it effects our lives today. I was never trying to say it wasn't racist, but fuck it. Earlier you said I was twisting your words when I assumed you thought every monument only represented racism. I feel like I have said plenty of times that there is more to the monuments than racism and that was my argument, but it seems like that's not the case.

>>18670190
>if you go back far enough

That's the point. Other countries have an ancient culture that is ingrained in them throughout generations and generations. Compared to them, our "culture" is brand new and still developing.. 250 years is nothing.. and so far it has been built on opression. Of Native Americans, Blacks, and the rest of the poor working class

>>18670213

You are going to make an ass of yourself at the debate, and set your side back even further.

Please dont go--for your own sake at least

>>18670213

You're an idiot, dude. You're trying to separate two things that are indelibly connected. They were erected for the sole purpose of terrorizing blacks and honoring racism. You can try to spin it any way you want but its an objective fact. You keep saying there is "more meaning" yet you fail to even begin to illustrate what that meaning is, which says to me you're just pulling unfounded claims out of your ass to avoid admitting that you were wrong.

I'm in Memphis and the same thing might happen to the Nathan Forest statue. I understand both sides. Our history is definitely important and it should be relocated to a museum. At the same time, it's not cool to have a statue that commemorates a man that was in the KKK in a predominantly black city.

>>18670230

He wants you to specifically address the few odd-ball statues that actually werent built as a protest to the civil rights movement.

To which the obvious answer is, any confederate monument is a monument to slavery inherently because of what the confederacy stood for.

If liberals are stupid for associating it with muh slavery, then you, OP, are stupid for associating it with muh culture.

An intelligent conservative would realize that statues are not worth the political capital it takes to defend them. A conservative would focus their energy on battles that meant something

>>18670213
Please record video of you speaking. I need to see this.
You don't even know the difference between quotation marks and parentheses.

>>18670177
>>18670198
>t. hasn't heard of tax brackets
My base pay is 100k. I know its not much but I haven't finished undergrad yet. Give me some time.

>>18670431
The fuck does that have to do with tax brackets?
What exactly was your picture supposed to illustrate?
Are you not actually making 100k and assuming that you will after you finish?

>Live in the north
>See people driving with confederate flags around the time it becomes controversial

I mean really, what are you trying to prove? Is there actually any genuine reason to keep them? I honestly have such a hard time believing that these statues and monuments hold any personal value to people, and that it isn't just a case of "well, why isn't there a WHITE entertainment channel?"

>>18670513
I live in West Michigan and see them constantly.
One guy I've known since we were kids, he has a pickup with one across the rear window. The guy has never been further south than Detroit, and when I asked him about it he went into the 'muh heritage.' His family immigrated here in the 40s from the Netherlands.

Towns should vote for taking them down.

Violent lynch mobs shouldn't take them down.

>>18670657
It seems to be that cities/states decide on removal or not, then a bunch of shitty assholes from one side or the other show up because they don't like the decision.

>>18670513
I was in pennsylvania the other day and I saw this too. I literally don't understand what kinda logic someone would have to get their truck and house draped in confederate flags like it's Christmas, while living in PA of all places.

>>18670524
Not even considering that literally every single person in New Hampshire is Irish, French Canadian, or both.