Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
i have watched many documentaries showing screaming teenagers with one or a few little teenage black girls in a crowd...many of those are still alive today
i have watched many documentaries showing screaming teenagers with one or a few little teenage black girls in a crowd...many of those are still alive today
If we are going to have historical markers for Emmett Till, we should also have monuments to the Confederacy. To advocate for erecting one while tearing down the other is to countenance the whitewashing (no pun intended) of one part of the history of the South while commemorating another.
BTW, I think we should have both. Emmett Till and the Confederacy are all part of the history of the South, and should all be commemorated.
If we are going to have historical markers for Emmett Till, we should also have monuments to the Confederacy. To advocate for erecting one while tearing down the other is to countenance the whitewashing (no pun intended) of one part of the history of the South while commemorating another.
BTW, I think we should have both. Emmett Till and the Confederacy are all part of the history of the South, and should all be commemorated.
Monuments to people are about honoring them. Victims of systemic racial violence merit the honoring of their memory. Perpetrators of enslavement, and those who defended such, do not merit said honor. Declining to honor them is not whitewashing. No one was white-washing Iraqi history when statues of Saddam Hussein were torn down in 2003. No one white-washed history in the Eastern bloc when statues of Lenin, Stalin, and Dzerzhinsky were torn down in 1991. Where are all the statues of Benedict Arnold? There aren't any, because as a traitor he is deemed unworthy of being so honored. Yet the story of Benedict Arnold is widely known, which demonstrates how baseless is the assertion that to not honor people with statues is akin to writing them out of history. And no one is white-washing history when it is decided that those traitors whose treachery was rooted in the pursuit of perpetuating enslavement - and the historical record leaves no doubt that the Confederacy existed solely to do precisely that - should not be honored.
If we are going to have historical markers for Emmett Till, we should also have monuments to the Confederacy. To advocate for erecting one while tearing down the other is to countenance the whitewashing (no pun intended) of one part of the history of the South while commemorating another.
BTW, I think we should have both. Emmett Till and the Confederacy are all part of the history of the South, and should all be commemorated.
Even without monuments, people would know all about the Confederacy's failure.
If we are going to have historical markers for Emmett Till, we should also have monuments to the Confederacy. To advocate for erecting one while tearing down the other is to countenance the whitewashing (no pun intended) of one part of the history of the South while commemorating another.
BTW, I think we should have both. Emmett Till and the Confederacy are all part of the history of the South, and should all be commemorated.
I'm not sure I understand you. Are you saying that we should have equal reverence for the perpetrators of the injustice as for the victims?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.