Protesters destroy confederate monument in Durham

[Noradin]

Really? I mean really? The concept of skabery is that the slaves are property, and not people.

The statement started with "attempt to own"...
And no the concept of slavery is that "people can be property", not that they are "property, not people".
Slavery isn't about owning dead bodies.

And no, I do not support with slavery.

[Jutath]

Address the point. What would happen if people started tearing down civil rights icons because it offends them?

Backlash from the black community, yeah?

I was just about to say this very thing. I also think you hit it right on the head with a point that could not be more correct.

[Zeth Hawkins]

I am sorry, i got mixed up, it's been kind of a hassle to classify all the alt-right types cropping up the past days. Of course this post didn't link you to the terror-apoligists. I apologize for that and of course, take it back.

You posted the rally was validated, not the terror attack, so i was obviously wrong.

You only posted that the rally was validated - the rally where nazis ran around carrying swastika flags, nazi uniforms and chanting "gas the jews".

Again, I'm sorry, you're not a terror-apologist, you're a nazi-apologist. Thanks for correcting my mistake.

You still seem to be mixed up. Tell me, what was the purpose of the rally?

[Deleted]

Your attempt at justifying a hate rally with an act of vandalism is rather sad, nothing justifies racism.

It's not a symbol of racism. Exploitation, sure, but the slaves weren't targeted specifically because of their ethnic features. "It's black/african therefore X". That's not how it went but rather "it looks weak and exploitable". They capitalised on them in the same way McDonald's tries to fish employees from a specific target group that fits certain criteria, to exploit their dependancies for the best quota.

[Themius]

Address the point. What would happen if people started tearing down civil rights icons because it offends them?

Backlash from the black community, yeah?

So on one side we have people wanting to tear down a statue of a person who fought to own slaves and lost. Statues put up by racist white supremacist groups years after the civil war.

On the other side we have a statue of a civil rights icon say... MLK who peacefully fought to attain equal rights when non-whites were segregated and forced to use subpar things and so forth....

[Noxx79]

Address the point. What would happen if people started tearing down civil rights icons because it offends them?

Backlash from the black community, yeah?

Im comfortable in saying that the black community is much more important than the racist community.

[Machismo]

From what I gathered in the other thread, we are supposed to blame this on the people who didn't do it, so this is the fault of conservatives.

Or...

Maybe the statue shouldn't have been in the way.

Or, you could choose to not be a moron, and say it like this:

The people responsible are assholes, and they deserve to be punished. Period.

[Noxx79]

The statement started with "attempt to own"...
And no the concept of slavery is that "people can be property", not that they are "property, not people".
Slavery isn't about owning dead bodies.

And no, I do not support with slavery.

What do dead bodies have to do with this? And again, slavery is about owning people as property, not people. Your apologism is sad.

[Themius]

It's not a symbol of racism. Exploitation, sure, but the slaves weren't targeted specifically because of their ethnic features. "It's black/african therefore X". That's not how it went but rather "it looks weak and exploitable". They capitalised on them in the same way McDonald's tries to fish employees from a specific target group that fits certain criteria, to exploit their dependancies for the best quota.

I guess we want to ignore what individual states and leaders of the confederacy literally said

[BuckSparkles]

So on one side we have people wanting to tear down a statue of a person who fought to own slaves and lost. Statues put up by racist white supremacist groups years after the civil war.

On the other side we have a statue of a civil rights icon say... MLK who peacefully fought to attain equal rights when non-whites were segregated and forced to use subpar things and so forth....

Irrelevant. The point is monuments have value to a certain portion of the population, so tearing them down and vandalizing them is a great way to piss people off.

[rogueMatthias]

Chanting "No police, No KKK" though

Are people really just equating them together now then?

[Draco-Onis]

It's not a symbol of racism. Exploitation, sure, but the slaves weren't targeted specifically because of their ethnic features. "It's black/african therefore X". That's not how it went but rather "it looks weak and exploitable". They capitalised on them in the same way McDonald's tries to fish employees from a specific target group that fits certain criteria, to exploit their dependancies for the best quota.

Please elaborate on how what happened in the south had nothing to do with racism, perhaps you will say the KKK who killed thousands of blacks / africans were just fans of cosplay

[Deleted]

I guess we want to ignore what individual states and leaders of the confederacy literally said

The leaders of communism said similar things.

[Jeezy911]

I can't wait till the Republican supermajority of 2018. Democrats keep playing these losing hands.

[-aiko-]

It's a little unsettling that people are okay with this. Get it taken down the proper way, don't take matters into your own hands and vandalize property.

[Themius]

Irrelevant. The point is monuments have value to a certain portion of the population, so tearing them down and vandalizing them is a great way to piss people off.

It's not irrelevant.. the reason for wanting to take down the statues is very valid.

Statues of traitors and slavers put up by racist violent groups....

- - - Updated - - -

The leaders of communism said similar things.

whataboutism? Who is talking about communism? We are talking about the civil war.

[Pannonian]

I'm glad that such things isn't a problem in my country. The part where I live, used to belong to another country, and the battles and purgings of the war that lead to it being taken by my current country were outright unspeakable. You know, standard European middle ages, the likes the US has never even seen on their soil (well, maybe the treatment of the natives comes somewhat close). Things that make the american revolution pale to the degree of a battle between gentlemen, at any rate. Yet the fact that plenty of statues of the kings and generals of that time, for both sides (the king of the neighbouring country at the time is a statue in my birth town for instance, as he founded it) still stands here isn't even the smallest of issues. Noone cares, literally. They fought for their countries, wars were bloody at the time, it's all understandable if not any less horrible in retrospect. Reasonable people do not get offended for such things, hundreds of years later. In fact, almost noone apart from extremists want to hide the past in such a manner.

It's sad that the US is so immature a country in that respect. A fantastic one in many other respects, no doubt, but incredibly immature when it comes to it's history and how it deals with it. When it comes to that part, it very much looks like an uncouthed teenage brat, and it is NOT a flattering thing to be sure. Understandable, perhaps, seeing how and when it was founded, but still.

Mhm, yeah but it's hard to compare medieval wars to more recent ones. Back then the idea of a state/nation or a people was way less common than today, so of course it wasn't a big topic ever. Also something you don't have in europe for most countries, is a significant majority with a very special history. Also the Civil War was extremely bloody, one of the bloodiest conflict ever, for several reasons: They horrible medical treatment, US troops used no bajonettes (therefore units never scattered, but stood until they're gunned down), and of course it was the first war fought with modern weapons on both sides. Many european war observers wrote home that the hope they wont have a war soon because the destructive power was so immense.

Also conflicts can scar a whole population. Take the german french feud that lasted from Napoleon until the second world war. That's 150 years where people still get aroused - so i don't think the civil war still gripping peoples mind is so outlandish. And don't forget - every black person in the US is a daily reminder of history - because most of them came to this country in a very special way...

Again, to stress on this, if i'd be a black person with this history (not claiming that i really understand anything) i would at least be angry if i saw a statue of a guy that started a civil war because he denied my forefathers freedom being defended.

[Themius]

I can't wait till the Republican supermajority of 2018. Democrats keep playing these losing hands.

Republicans do not have the support of the people.... they have the support of drawn up maps.

[Paranoid Android]

It's not irrelevant.. the reason for wanting to take down the statues is very valid.

Statues of traitors and slavers put up by racist violent groups....

- - - Updated - - -



whataboutism? Who is talking about communism? We are talking about the civil war.

Keep fighting the good fight but after every post just say this; "Vandalism is bad, mmkay." I'm sure you do not condone vandalism, but what is crazy about his is the Nazi sympathizers in these forums, excuse me "pro Confederate" and people loving history can basically use this as the bad people like to destroy things.

[Deleted]

Chanting "No police, No KKK" though
Are people really just equating them together now then?

I mean, what exactly do you expect from people who think it's okay to go out and just destroy things they don't like?