• Confederate Memorial Vandalized in Charleston
    507 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Michael haxz;48047674]That's because most of us didn't, our ancestors did. That and a good majority of people from the 10s/20s/30s+ that were part of it are regretful of their actions.[/QUOTE] +40s/50s/60s/70s/80s/90s/00s The end of slavery did not mark the end of racism, nor of the oppression of minorities. [editline]25th June 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=EdvardSchnitz;48044815]The gays being persecuted in modern society don't mater because only black lives matter. Or hispanics Or any other group persecuted Nope Only black lives[/QUOTE] How dense can you possibly be? How can [I]anybody[/I] fail to see what "black lives matter" means? It is not, "black lives matter more than other lives!" It never has been, and that is some truly disingenuous shit to imply. How terrified must somebody be of the status quo balancing out that you would try to pretend that this is an issue with black people demanding [I]less rights[/I] for all other demographics instead of simply demanding that America start looking at their mistreatment in the modern age as an acceptable thing. It is "black lives matter [I]too,[/I]" not "black lives matter [I]more.[/I]"
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48047784]+40s/50s/60s/70s/80s/90s/00s The end of slavery did not mark the end of racism, nor of the oppression of minorities.[/QUOTE] The guy said that Americans aren't ashamed of how they treatED (past tense) black people: [QUOTE=Soret;48047645]It's really surprising that how many americans aren't ashamed about how they treated black people.[/QUOTE] Implying that Americans aren't ashamed about things that happened in the past in regards to how blacks were treated. It's a pretty safe bet that other than the small minority of racist assholes, the vast majority of Americans realize that the way America treated Blacks in the past was horrible. However, the real atrocities are done and in the past (not to say that everything is perfect today by any means). There is nothing we can do to change the past. We don't feel an always present guilt over it, but we don't deny it either. We've accepted that those atrocities happened, and that they were horrible, but we don't dwell on it. What happened in the past is important to remember, because it helps to prevent us from making the same mistakes, but delwelling on it and living in the past only serves to hinder progress and moving on. You can't progress into the future if you're stuck living in the past.
We should always remember and preserve the past, however it is a little disconcerting how people are using the past to push a lot of self loathing, negative ideas. We, as a society, have moved forward SO much and sometimes it may feel like we'll never "get there", you have to remain positive and fight the good fight. Doing things like this does not help anyone, and just defaces pieces of our past, whether it be good or bad.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48047784]+40s/50s/60s/70s/80s/90s/00s The end of slavery did not mark the end of racism, nor of the oppression of minorities. [editline]25th June 2015[/editline] How dense can you possibly be? How can [I]anybody[/I] fail to see what "black lives matter" means? It is not, "black lives matter more than other lives!" It never has been, and that is some truly disingenuous shit to imply. How terrified must somebody be of the status quo balancing out that you would try to pretend that this is an issue with black people demanding [I]less rights[/I] for all other demographics instead of simply demanding that America start looking at their mistreatment in the modern age as an acceptable thing. It is "black lives matter [I]too,[/I]" not "black lives matter [I]more.[/I]"[/QUOTE] Which is great -- until you tag it over a memorial to dead people, and then the message becomes "black lives matter [B]more[/B] [I]than these people who are being memorialized[/I]."
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48047784]+40s/50s/60s/70s/80s/90s/00s The end of slavery did not mark the end of racism, nor of the oppression of minorities. [editline]25th June 2015[/editline] How dense can you possibly be? How can [I]anybody[/I] fail to see what "black lives matter" means? It is not, "black lives matter more than other lives!" It never has been, and that is some truly disingenuous shit to imply. How terrified must somebody be of the status quo balancing out that you would try to pretend that this is an issue with black people demanding [I]less rights[/I] for all other demographics instead of simply demanding that America start looking at their mistreatment in the modern age as an acceptable thing. It is "black lives matter [I]too,[/I]" not "black lives matter [I]more.[/I]"[/QUOTE] If you paint your own message over a memorial then you're no longer trying to bring awareness to the importance of someone else's life and are instead promoting it as a more important life than whoever was memorialized. A memorial can only represent one thing at a time, although that thing can be as large as humanity if you want it to - what's important is what's written on it. If you replace that label with something else, then you're not adding to it, you're replacing it.
[QUOTE=Sir Colton;48044525]"Black lives mater"[/QUOTE] pretty sure there's 2 Ts, it's just that one of them is kind of merged into the E.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48048101]Which is great -- until you tag it over a memorial to dead people, and then the message becomes "black lives matter [B]more[/B] [I]than these people who are being memorialized[/I]."[/QUOTE] really don't see how the context of 'black lives matter' changes just because of this sole incident
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48048101]Which is great -- until you tag it over a memorial to dead people, and then the message becomes "black lives matter [B]more[/B] [I]than these people who are being memorialized[/I]."[/QUOTE] Surely you don't expect people to ignore the intentional symbolism of putting that on a [I]confederate[/I] monument? The message is clear, "the ideals of racial superiority that the Confederacy has come to symbolize are still alive today, still being celebrated even, and black Americans are still suffering because of it." Yes, it is defacing a monument and that is disrespectful, but what do you expect? Paint washes off, and the message was publicized, so whoever did this accomplished their goal in an ultimately nondestructive way. Otherwise, if you or anyone else want to interperet this entire trend as black people trying to argue that they are actually [I]superior[/I] in some sense, then that's your prerogative. Its deeply misinformed, and even outright delusional, but that rarely matters to anybody that likes loudly declaring hatred and ignorance. [editline]25th June 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;48047864]The guy said that Americans aren't ashamed of how they treatED (past tense) black people:[/QUOTE] The point is that mistreatment of minorities based on race and ethnicity, especially [I]black[/I] minorities, [I]isn't[/I] in the past. Yes, slavery is over and so is overt, government-sanctioned racism. Things have improved in a lot of very notable ways, but we are still far from the way that things should be. Being born black should not condemn you to poverty, prejudice, violence, ridicule, and jail, and the fact that it does today, at a hugely disproportionate rate, should not be viewed as acceptable or normal.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48048438]Surely you don't expect people to ignore the intentional symbolism of putting that on a [I]confederate[/I] monument? The message is clear, "the ideals of racial superiority that the Confederacy has come to symbolize are still alive today, still being celebrated even, and black Americans are still suffering because of it." Yes, it is defacing a monument and that is disrespectful, but what do you expect? Paint washes off, and the message was publicized, so whoever did this accomplished their goal in an ultimately nondestructive way. Otherwise, if you or anyone else want to interperet this entire trend as black people trying to argue that they are actually [I]superior[/I] in some sense, then that's your prerogative. Its deeply misinformed, and even outright delusional, but that rarely matters to anybody that likes loudly declaring hatred and ignorance.[/QUOTE] That's not what I'm saying, or even trying to suggest. I'm saying that tagging a memorial with that message is ignorant and conveys a different message than intended. Black lives matter is a fine slogan, it's an important message that needs to be heard. Tagging war memorials, even Confederate memorials, with it isn't the right way to get it out.
then what's the point of this comment if you think it's a relevant slogan: [QUOTE=Grenadiac;48044602]How about this: Every life matters[/QUOTE] are you trying to move goal posts around?
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48048520]That's not what I'm saying, or even trying to suggest. I'm saying that tagging a memorial with that message is ignorant and conveys a different message than intended. Black lives matter is a fine slogan, it's an important message that needs to be heard. Tagging war memorials, even Confederate memorials, with it isn't the right way to get it out.[/QUOTE] Well then, we'll simply have to disagree. The Confederacy is seen as a symbol of oppression, slavery, white supremacy, and exploitation. While historically, both sides of the Civil War might have been deeply ugly in their own ways, that does not change the public perception of what the Confederacy represents, or how minorities typically view it. Confederate flags flying over state buildings, memorials in parks, roads named for Confederate figures and icons-- these evoke the same concepts to minorities: [I]know your place.[/I] Defacing or destroying those symbols makes perfect sense to me, from a symbolic perspective at least. It is defying the ideals that those symbols represent to that population.
[QUOTE=Ownederd;48048553]then what's the point of this comment if you think it's a relevant slogan: are you trying to move goal posts around?[/QUOTE] In the context of tagging a war memorial? You're removing the context from the comment. [QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48048566]Well then, we'll simply have to disagree. The Confederacy as a whole is a symbolism of oppression, slavery, white supremacy, and exploitation. While historically, both sides of the Civil War might have been deeply ugly in their own ways, that does not change the public perception of what the Confederacy represents, or how minorities typically view it. Confederate flags flying over state buildings, memorials in parks, roads named for Confederate figures and icons-- these evoke the same concepts to minorities: [I]know your place.[/I] Defacing or destroying those symbols makes perfect sense to me, from a symbolic perspective at least. It is defying the ideals that those symbols represent to that population.[/QUOTE] It's not saying the right thing to people who are invested in that monument. To the tagger, defacing the monument makes sense. To descendants of the people that monument represents - in many cases, the people who need that message the most? It's disrespectful and saps the meaning from the message.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48048566]Well then, we'll simply have to disagree. The Confederacy as a whole is a symbolism of oppression, slavery, white supremacy, and exploitation. While historically, both sides of the Civil War might have been deeply ugly in their own ways, that does not change the public perception of what the Confederacy represents, or how minorities typically view it. Confederate flags flying over state buildings, memorials in parks, roads named for Confederate figures and icons-- these evoke the same concepts to minorities: [I]know your place.[/I] Defacing or destroying those symbols makes perfect sense to me, from a symbolic perspective at least. It is defying the ideals that those symbols represent to that population.[/QUOTE] General Ambrose Burnsides razed my city to the ground in the Siege of Knoxville, slaughtered half the population. The Union wasn't necessarily perfect either. It was a dirty, disgusting war on both sides.
[QUOTE=woolio1;48048579]General Ambrose Burnsides razed my city to the ground in the Siege of Knoxville, slaughtered half the population. The Union wasn't necessarily perfect either. It was a dirty, disgusting war on both sides.[/QUOTE] He acknowledged that
Dear Grenadiac [img]http://i.imgur.com/XqQjAcq.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=woolio1;48048579]General Ambrose Burnsides razed my city to the ground in the Siege of Knoxville, slaughtered half the population. The Union wasn't necessarily perfect either. It was a dirty, disgusting war on both sides.[/QUOTE] bda never said that the union wasn't perfect?
[QUOTE=woolio1;48048579]General Ambrose Burnsides razed my city to the ground in the Siege of Knoxville, slaughtered half the population. The Union wasn't necessarily perfect either. It was a dirty, disgusting war on both sides.[/QUOTE] That's exactly what I said. I don't disagree. It doesn't change the social perspective of the Confederacy, however. History is written by the victors, as they say, and the narrative passed down of the Confederacy is one of slavery and oppression. That is what it represents to most of America, and especially to American minorities.
[QUOTE=LordCrypto;48048595]bda never said that the union wasn't perfect?[/QUOTE] Oh. Well then.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;48048593]Dear Grenadiac [img]http://i.imgur.com/XqQjAcq.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] If someone tagged my uncle Joel's headstone with "RIP MY BUDDY TOM" it'd be just as pointless and disrespectful as tagging a war memorial with "BLACK LIVES MATTER". They're irrelevant to each other. The memorial isn't memorializing slavery or racism. It's memorializing men who defended the city. Their beliefs varied wildly and don't come into the memorial.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48048609]If someone tagged my uncle Joel's headstone with "RIP MY BUDDY TOM" it'd be just as pointless and disrespectful as tagging a war memorial with "BLACK LIVES MATTER".[/QUOTE] except that's not even comparable everyone dies not everyone is culturally oppressed, and then a memorial that whether or not it's celebrating the people or the institution behind said people (yes i get it the memorial is for the soldiers, not the CSA), kinda says "guess what minority, you're still fucked over by society"
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48048609]If someone tagged my uncle Joel's headstone with "RIP MY BUDDY TOM" it'd be just as pointless and disrespectful as tagging a war memorial with "BLACK LIVES MATTER".[/QUOTE] Your buddy tom doesn't get killed by cops for no reason on a constant basis
[QUOTE=Lambeth;48048621]Your buddy tom doesn't get killed by cops for no reason on a constant basis[/QUOTE] That doesn't make the message any more relevant to the thing it's being tagged on. The soldiers being memorialized weren't cops who killed black people for being black.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48048629]That doesn't make the message any more relevant to the thing it's being tagged on. The soldiers being memorialized weren't cops who killed black people for being black.[/QUOTE] the cops killing black people because they're black is because of the institutionalized racism in the south that has existed since the era of slavery???
And that doesn't matter regarding the current case. People are vandalizing monuments honoring dead soldiers. Nothing more, nothing less.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48048629]That doesn't make the message any more relevant to the thing it's being tagged on. The soldiers being memorialized weren't cops who killed black people for being black.[/QUOTE] Yet the memorial itself is a Confederate icon, the soldiers being memorialized having fought for the benefit of system of oppression in the perception of these folk. Yes, it is disrespectful, but what else can you expect? How can they simultaneously respect the values of white supremacy and demand an end to minority oppression and exploitation? They're conflicting ideologies. The monument was targeted for a reason. It IS relevant.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;48048655]And that doesn't matter regarding the current case. People are vandalizing monuments honoring dead soldiers. Nothing more, nothing less.[/QUOTE] you want your precious monument to not get vandalized? solve the situation that is causing them to get vandalized jesus christ, half of sensationalist headlines is staring institutionalized racism right in the face and going "but they vandalized my memorial with paint their reason is literally irrelevant now"
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48048667]Yet the memorial itself is a Confederate icon, the soldiers being memorialized having fought for the benefit of system of oppression in the perception of these folk. Yes, it is disrespectful, but what else can you expect? How can they simultaneously respect the values of white supremacy and demand an end to minority oppression and exploitation? They're conflicting ideologies. The monument was targeted for a reason. It IS relevant.[/QUOTE] The issue here is that you're hung up on an erroneous belief that every or even most Confederate soldier was a slave owning racist (more racist than what was normal for that time period). I would feel comfortable in saying that there was not a measurable population of slave owners among the Confederate fighting force, and that most of them could really have not cared less about slavery when the Union was bearing down on their cities and torching them one by one while the Confederate government was offering them a rifle to stop it with. [QUOTE=LordCrypto;48048668]you want your precious monument to not get vandalized? solve the situation that is causing them to get vandalized jesus christ, half of sensationalist headlines is staring institutionalized racism right in the face and going "but they vandalized my memorial with paint their reason is literally irrelevant now"[/QUOTE] Putting words anyone's mouth isn't a way to make an argument. Vandalizing a memorial with this message is not the way to make people take the tagger seriously, full stop. I think it's entirely ridiculous to tag a war memorial with [I]anything[/I]. I don't care if it's BLACK LIVES MATTER or SAVE THE TREES or MUSCLE CARS ARE ALRIGHT I GUESS.
[QUOTE=The Calzone;48044664]All lives do matter, but right now it's black lives that are in danger. You don't hear about cops killing white twelve year olds or cops crashing white pool parties and beating the shit out of unarmed 14 year old girls. That stuff is happening to black people. All lives matter, but racism isn't putting all lives in danger. I know that Facepunch is full of racists that like to dance around the fact that they're racists so I'm essentially wasting my time here trying to explain it, but I feel the need to at least attempt to do it. The bad parts of America's history are to be recognized and remembered, but they aren't to be celebrated. Memorials like this are celebrating the memory of the things the confederacy fought for. That's not the way to go about it.[/QUOTE] How the fuck can you even say that it's only black people who are in danger. You americans will always live in constant danger of yourselves as long as you don't do something to improve psychiatry and wrangle your public schools into not being a bunch of bible thumpers.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48048682]The issue here is that you're hung up on an erroneous belief that every or even most Confederate soldier was a slave owning racist (more than what was normal for that time period). I would feel comfortable in saying that there was not a measurable population of slave owners among the Confederate fighting force, and that most of them could really have not cared less about slavery when the Union was bearing down on their cities and torching them one by one while the Confederate government was offering them a rifle to stop it with.[/QUOTE] if it had been a monument to the CSA would that make you happy?? the point isn't that "omg not all soldiers were slave owners and their homes were being destroyed" but that the reason their homes were being destroyed is because they seceded from the union, a move which was because depending on which letter of secession you read, was either due to the north not enforcing the fugitive slave acts, or the western territories not being allowed to have slaves
[QUOTE=LordCrypto;48048694]if it had been a monument to the CSA would that make you happy?? the point isn't that "omg not all soldiers were slave owners and their homes were being destroyed" but that the reason their homes were being destroyed is because they seceded from the union, a move which was because depending on which letter of secession you read, was either due to the north not enforcing the fugitive slave acts, or the western territories not being allowed to have slaves[/QUOTE] OK, I guess they deserved to have their cities burned and their families massacred because a country formed around them and aggro'd another country. I'm sorry. Fuck those people for taking up arms against an invasion they didn't incite.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.