So when is enough? When will we be satisfied?

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
15,175
Reaction score
1,284
Points
113
ESPN reports that some black Texas players want The Eyes of Texas replaced as the school song b/c it was initially played at a minstrel show in 1903. I don’t think that will go over well with the Texas faithful.

Taking statues down, removing names from buildings, military bases, parks, whatever, including the names of presidents and governmental leaders or anyone associated with slavery, segregation, racism, etc. That would certainly include known racists Woodrow Wilson, FDR, and LBJ (who was president at the time the civil rights bill was passed). And what about slave owners George Washington and Thomas Jefferson?

Judging historical figures by modern standards of morality is ridiculous. Judge people and things (like books and movies) by the standards of their era with the knowledge and maturity to understand that those standards have and do change, and stop trying to erase history b/c it ”offends” the emotionally challenged.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
16,786
Reaction score
390
Points
83
ESPN reports that some black Texas players want The Eyes of Texas replaced as the school song b/c it was initially played at a minstrel show in 1903. I don’t think that will go over well with the Texas faithful.

Taking statues down, removing names from buildings, military bases, parks, whatever, including the names of presidents and governmental leaders or anyone associated with slavery, segregation, racism, etc. That would certainly include known racists Woodrow Wilson, FDR, and LBJ (who was president at the time the civil rights bill was passed). And what about slave owners George Washington and Thomas Jefferson?

Judging historical figures by modern standards of morality is ridiculous. Judge people and things (like books and movies) by the standards of their era with the knowledge and maturity to understand that those standards have and do change, and stop trying to erase history b/c it ”offends” the emotionally challenged.
Now this is a thoughtful post. More of this, please, and less shill-speak. I agree totally with this:

“Judging historical figures by modern standards of morality is ridiculous.”
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
13,641
Reaction score
1,820
Points
113
Now this is a thoughtful post. More of this, please, and less shill-speak. I agree totally with this:

“Judging historical figures by modern standards of morality is ridiculous.”
Once a glorification has been bestowed, it shall never be allowed to be unbestowed, because that would be an unjust application of retroactive judgement?? Silly nonsense

I'll leave it to you to argue if slave advocates in civil war times, can still be considered "good people" within their historical contexts, or not. But that has absolutely nothing to do with whether a glorification that persists to modern day can be reassessed.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
9,202
Reaction score
902
Points
113
Here's what I would say.

Instead of tearing down statues, like the Christopher Columbus statue in St. Paul, leave them up and use them as a teaching opportunity.

Teach HS students the whole story. On Columbus - here is what he did. here is why some people think he is a bad guy, and here is the other side of the story. then.......(huge gasp)......let the kids make up their own minds how they feel about it.

History happened. You can't erase it. lay out both sides of the story and let people decide for themselves.

same thing with entertainment. If there is an old movie that depicts blacks, or native americans in a stereotypical way, I say show that movie and put it into context. explain the historical background for that type of depiction, and present the movie in the correct context to understand it. don't just pretend it never happened.

FWIW, "Winchester 73" is one of my favorite Westerns. It features that noted Native American actor Rock Hudson playing an Indian chief.
 

scools12

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
4,597
Reaction score
551
Points
113
It will never be enough. As others have pointed out there is no end.
 

Gopherlife

Active member
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
942
Reaction score
78
Points
28
Here's what I would say.

Instead of tearing down statues, like the Christopher Columbus statue in St. Paul, leave them up and use them as a teaching opportunity.

Teach HS students the whole story. On Columbus - here is what he did. here is why some people think he is a bad guy, and here is the other side of the story. then.......(huge gasp)......let the kids make up their own minds how they feel about it.

History happened. You can't erase it. lay out both sides of the story and let people decide for themselves.

same thing with entertainment. If there is an old movie that depicts blacks, or native americans in a stereotypical way, I say show that movie and put it into context. explain the historical background for that type of depiction, and present the movie in the correct context to understand it. don't just pretend it never happened.

FWIW, "Winchester 73" is one of my favorite Westerns. It features that noted Native American actor Rock Hudson playing an Indian chief.
Yes. Censorship and erasure of history takes us down a very dark path.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
5,273
Reaction score
699
Points
113
I reserve the right to say Eenie meanie minie mo the way our grandparents said it. Heritage, not hate.
 

Herd

Active member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
571
Reaction score
53
Points
28
Glad people are challenging the choice to glorify and celebrate racist, bigoted history.

Hatred must never be glorified and celebrated.
Unless you are the authors of slavery in the United States, the Democrat Party. Right? Then it’s OK to keep your name? How about killing babies, millions of black babies Through legislation? Another Pass? Is that how you want to go after history and bigotry? Selectively, if it fits your narrative? You going to go after blacks killing blacks and protest that, or is that another pass due to narrative.
 
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
113
Reaction score
24
Points
18
"Judging historical figures by modern standards of morality is ridiculous."
>>>>>>>>>
If we are talking about Civil War generals or politicians like Alexander Stephens, the "standards of the day" argument is a thing that is ridiculous. Anti-slavery advocacy and anti-slavery teaching stretches back nearly 200 years before the Civil War. Stephens wasn't ignorant the moral arguments when he said of the Confederacy,

"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition."

Stephens took an immoral stand by today's standards and by the standards of his time. As to his statue in the United State's Capitol, your "by the standards of the day" criteria is a bit shaky when you know that Georgia made a gift of that statue in 1927. Georgia knew exactly what they were doing and the message they were sending and it was an immoral gesture by the standards of today and by the standards of 1927.

I'd share more about the military base names but David Petreaus gives you a good run through those problems in The Atlantic: Take the Confederate Names Off.

Taking names of failures and traitors off of a military base, doesn't erase history. There are no Hitler statues, well public statues, in Germany but you can't say he's been erased from history.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
15,175
Reaction score
1,284
Points
113
Unless you are the authors of slavery in the United States, the Democrat Party. Right? Then it’s OK to keep your name? How about killing babies, millions of black babies Through legislation? Another Pass? Is that how you want to go after history and bigotry? Selectively, if it fits your narrative? You going to go after blacks killing blacks and protest that, or is that another pass due to narrative.
Here’s a good example. Democrat Senator Robert Byrd, who at one time was the Exalted Cyclops in the KKK and recruited over 150 of members just several years before entering Congress.

Later in life, he apologized for his beliefs and association with KKK. But this is a guy that served in Congress and Senate for most of his life. Are we to believe or accept his apology, or was it a matter of expediency? Then why not forgive others for their indiscretions?

None of his many memorials have drawn attention.


Why should he get a pass when some of these people had far less egregious beliefs or relationships to modern racism? Answer: b/c he was a Democrat and truly exalted member of the DP. Same for Wilson, FDR, and LBJ. And exposing the Democrat Party and its relationship to real systemic racism is problematic for the left.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
15,175
Reaction score
1,284
Points
113
"Judging historical figures by modern standards of morality is ridiculous."
>>>>>>>>>
If we are talking about Civil War generals or politicians like Alexander Stephens, the "standards of the day" argument is a thing that is ridiculous. Anti-slavery advocacy and anti-slavery teaching stretches back nearly 200 years before the Civil War. Stephens wasn't ignorant the moral arguments when he said of the Confederacy,

"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition."

Stephens took an immoral stand by today's standards and by the standards of his time. As to his statue in the United State's Capitol, your "by the standards of the day" criteria is a bit shaky when you know that Georgia made a gift of that statue in 1927. Georgia knew exactly what they were doing and the message they were sending and it was an immoral gesture by the standards of today and by the standards of 1927.

I'd share more about the military base names but David Petreaus gives you a good run through those problems in The Atlantic: Take the Confederate Names Off.

Taking names of failures and traitors off of a military base, doesn't erase history. There are no Hitler statues, well public statues, in Germany but you can't say he's been erased from history.
And if you were born in “the South“ in the mid 1800s, you’d be a son of the Confederacy too and supported slavery.

However, I don’t really care if the military bases change their names. But it’s likely whatever new names that the bases adopt, will be of flawed people too.
 

TruthSeeker

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
3,880
Reaction score
445
Points
83
Here’s a good example. Democrat Senator Robert Byrd, who at one time was the Exalted Cyclops in the KKK and recruited over 150 of members just several years before entering Congress.

Later in life, he apologized for his beliefs and association with KKK. But this is a guy that served in Congress and Senate for most of his life. Are we to believe or accept his apology, or was it a matter of expediency? Then why not forgive others for their indiscretions?

None of his many memorials have drawn attention.


Why should he get a pass when some of these people had far less egregious beliefs or relationships to modern racism? Answer: b/c he was a Democrat and truly exalted member of the DP. Same for Wilson, FDR, and LBJ. And exposing the Democrat Party and its relationship to real systemic racism is problematic for the left.
The Dixiecrats embedded within the GOP. The Southern Strategy worked, but it's finally fading. The GOP has no leg to stand upon.
 
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
113
Reaction score
24
Points
18
And if you were born in “the South“ in the mid 1800s, you’d be a son of the Confederacy too and supported slavery.
Wait, what if I'm born in the South at that time and I'm black?

So if I was born in Massachusetts in the 2000s, would my pro-abortion morality be justified? I don't hear pro-life advocates saying that its totally cool to be pro-choice, if you are born in Cambridge or Somerville.
 
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
113
Reaction score
24
Points
18
Answer: b/c he was a Democrat and truly exalted member of the DP. Same for Wilson, FDR, and LBJ. And exposing the Democrat Party and its relationship to real systemic racism is problematic for the left.
Seems that a lot of our partisan arguments are flawed because our sense of the motivations of our political rivals comes from a conversation solely within our circle of political friends.

Alexander Stephens was in the Democratic Party. No Democrat will shed a tear if his statue went back to a closet in Georgia. Plenty of Democrats, I'd think a strong majority, would support removing racist Wilson's name at Princeton.

LBJ and FDR are more complicated, of course, but a look at the African American vote for FDR in 1936 and for Johnson in 1964. Your argument sounds a bit like Rand Paul's visit to Howard and asking the students if knew which party the founders of the NAACP belonged to. That got a laugh and some groans. I think you'll get the same from most Democrats if you threaten to take down a statue of Wilson. Most would say have at it.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
15,175
Reaction score
1,284
Points
113
Seems that a lot of our partisan arguments are flawed because our sense of the motivations of our political rivals comes from a conversation solely within our circle of political friends.

Alexander Stephens was in the Democratic Party. No Democrat will shed a tear if his statue went back to a closet in Georgia. Plenty of Democrats, I'd think a strong majority, would support removing racist Wilson's name at Princeton.

LBJ and FDR are more complicated, of course, but a look at the African American vote for FDR in 1936 and for Johnson in 1964. Your argument sounds a bit like Rand Paul's visit to Howard and asking the students if knew which party the founders of the NAACP belonged to. That got a laugh and some groans. I think you'll get the same from most Democrats if you threaten to take down a statue of Wilson. Most would say have at it.
Yeah, more complicated b/c they happened in the last century and not two centuries ago. The Democrats went from the party of slavery for blacks to the party of dependence for blacks. Both were racist. The latter makes Democrats feel better about themselves and satisfy their white guilt to absolve them of their guilt and assure them votes, even though it undermined the black community by making them dependent on the welfare, public housing, food stamps, child welfare, affirmative action, etc. as if they couldn’t do it for themselves. We dug much of the black community a hole that some will have a much harder time getting out of, except those that maintain their strong parenting, work ethic, value of education, and that haven’t succumbed to the notion that they are victims, but actually see their potential.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
15,175
Reaction score
1,284
Points
113
Wait, what if I'm born in the South at that time and I'm black?

So if I was born in Massachusetts in the 2000s, would my pro-abortion morality be justified? I don't hear pro-life advocates saying that its totally cool to be pro-choice, if you are born in Cambridge or Somerville.
We’re all somewhat a product of the circumstances that were born into. As for your 2nd comment, I don’t even know what that means.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
15,175
Reaction score
1,284
Points
113
The Dixiecrats embedded within the GOP. The Southern Strategy worked, but it's finally fading. The GOP has no leg to stand upon.
The Democrat and Republican Parties have changed significantly in the last decade. I don’t think the “southern strategy” is as relevant as it once was. It‘s more about metropolitan versus non-metro, with the suburban moderates making the difference.
 

USAF

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
825
Reaction score
627
Points
93
Can we get something straight?

It's the Democratic Party.

Not the Democrat Party.

Those of you who insist on using this as an insult make yourselves look stupid, and your arguments automatically are discounted by everyone of importance.

You're welcome.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
13,641
Reaction score
1,820
Points
113
Unless you are the authors of slavery in the United States, the Democrat Party. Right? Then it’s OK to keep your name? How about killing babies, millions of black babies Through legislation? Another Pass? Is that how you want to go after history and bigotry? Selectively, if it fits your narrative? You going to go after blacks killing blacks and protest that, or is that another pass due to narrative.
Which building names, road name, lake names, monuments do you propose changing???

That's the context of the discussion. Not sure if that will go over your head still.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
13,641
Reaction score
1,820
Points
113
Can we get something straight?

It's the Democratic Party.

Not the Democrat Party.

Those of you who insist on using this as an insult make yourselves look stupid, and your arguments automatically are discounted by everyone of importance.

You're welcome.
This will just guarantee that they continue to use the wrong name. The only pleasure they get out of posting here is to frustrate people with bad faith arguments or troll posts. They know they get their asses kicked every time, on good faith debate. That's no fun.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
44,411
Reaction score
1,545
Points
113
Can we get something straight?

It's the Democratic Party.

Not the Democrat Party.

Those of you who insist on using this as an insult make yourselves look stupid, and your arguments automatically are discounted by everyone of importance.

You're welcome.
Who’s using it as an insult?
 

golfing18now

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
1,844
Reaction score
331
Points
83
Washington Monument, Lincoln Memorial, Mount Rushmore, change all of our currency?

I'd have more respect for all these people that can't stomach the sight of a Christopher Columbus statue if they hopped on boats and went back to whatever location their ancestors arrived from in an effort to re-write our history against the Native Americans. I'm willing to collect the tickets.
 

Herd

Active member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
571
Reaction score
53
Points
28
Which building names, road name, lake names, monuments do you propose changing???

That's the context of the discussion. Not sure if that will go over your head still.
I’d start start with “Democrat Party”, all of them, change the name. They are true authors of racism in American history. If you arrogant and stupid enough (and I know you are) to think you need to erase history, then start with the party that authored it all in.
 
Last edited:

John Galt

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
9,230
Reaction score
581
Points
113
50 years from now, they will remove all evidence that our generation existed because we killed animals and ate meat. We will be viewed as barbaric killers.

Wait for it.
 
Top Bottom