Pittsburgh’s Christopher Columbus statue covered after Mayor Peduto recommends its removal (Washington: home, landscaping)

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by Higherho

Statues are not history nor do they teach you it. They are meant for idolization and yes Christopher was indeed a racist, rapist, and committed genocide. Individuals like this don’t deserve a national holiday (for a country they did not find) or praise in the sense of a statue. I think it is very easy for people to be dismissive of this because they don’t understand their history.

What good does removing statues and/or history do?

They certainly are history and they bring awareness of history. Folks learn from the past, whether it hurts their feelings or not.

Do your feelings go for all statues of people who have been found to have a checkered past, or are you being dismissive of certain ones?

[Higherho]

No they are not history, please study up on the subject. Also, who is saving anything about removing History? Stop putting words in peoples mouth. Statues play a role in history for illustrations in museums. Clearly these cases (especially the one in this thread) they are used for idolization / romanticizing the past. You do not learn from statues, you learn from books.

I read through this thread and clearly people are being very ignorant on what he actually did. People standing up to keep these statues up, in this context, are are promoting idolization for such a human and that behavior is ok. Again, individuals need to understand their history better.

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by Higherho

No they are not history, please study up on the subject. Also, who is saving anything about removing History? Stop putting words in peoples mouth. Statues play a role in history for illustrations in museums. Clearly these cases (especially the one in this thread) they are used for idolization. You do not learn from statues, you learn from books.

I read through this thread and clearly people are being very ignorant on what he actually did. People standing up to keep these statues up in this context, are are promoting idolizing such a human and that behavior is ok. Again, individuals need to understand their history better.

Most statues represent people in history. That’s why they’re erected.

And statues bring attention to history, where people read the books about the people.

So in other words, you want certain statues removed and other statues are okay, even though many of these people have checkered pasts?

[svband76]

How many statues memorializing people of today's younger politically correct generation will be erected in the future?

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by zalewskimm

How many statues memorializing people of today's younger politically correct generation will be erected in the future?

With the way feelings are going, very few. Those that hand out the most free stuff and coddle the most will get the nod.

[Charley Barker]

This is one place where I have changed my mind after talking to people. I had felt that any statue is simply a reverential statement specific to some time or place. If the understanding of that time has changed, which is inevitable, then it is a learning opportunity for current and future people to present that opposing view in a way that places the figure in historical context. However, the post-civil war era statues are an exception. Almost all were erected after reconstruction as a statement of support for the prevailing (white) power structures. Why should any taxpaying African American citizen of Alabama (or Mississippi, or South Carolina . . .) have to put up with a blatant public expression of institutional racism in the year 2021?

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by Charley Barker

This is one place where I have changed my mind after talking to people. I had felt that any statue is simply a reverential statement specific to some time or place. If the understanding of that time has changed, which is inevitable, then it is a learning opportunity for current and future people to present that opposing view in a way that places the figure in historical context. However, the post-civil war era statues are an exception. Almost all were erected after reconstruction as a statement of support for the prevailing (white) power structures. Why should any taxpaying African American citizen of Alabama (or Mississippi, or South Carolina . . .) have to put up with a blatant public expression of institutional racism in the year 2021?

So those that don’t pay taxes have no say?

Because statues don’t hurt everyone’s feelings and history can be learned from what the people did in the past.

What many don’t understand is that picking and choosing what happens/happened, doesn’t represent everyone, and picking and choosing which should stay and go is often a matter of hypocrisy, especially since we now know the past of so many of these folks.

[Charley Barker]

Originally Posted by erieguy

So those that don’t pay taxes have no say?

Strike that. It is irrelevant. However, I would argue if you are paying to maintain the park where the statue sits, and to have the statue cleaned or lighted or landscaped, etc., it might add a little more insult to injury.

My point is that the civil war Confederate "hero" statues are a singular case. The only ones I am in favor of removing rather than explaining with context. I know, I know, whose context? Well, that's culture and it will be different today than it will be 50 years from now. Compare the interpretation of any museum collection to what was provided 50 years ago and it will be very different.

[USC1986]

Originally Posted by Higherho

Statues are not history nor do they teach you it. They are meant for idolization and yes Christopher was indeed a racist, rapist, and committed murder. Individuals like this don’t deserve a national holiday (for a country they did not find) or praise in the sense of a statue. I think it is very easy for people to be dismissive of this because they don’t understand their history. Taking this down is correcting a mistake of the past. People who are against this, I truly question.

Oh boy, a voice from the woke brigade speaks.
Who are you or those of your clueless ilk to determine what is "idolization" or merely commemoration, which is what most statutes were erected for? Do you even know the difference?
I would argue that statutes of Lenin & Stalin, during the days of the USSR, or currently in Cuba with the odious Che, or the Kim family of despots in North Korea are idols, as were those of Hitler in Germany.
What about the various regimental memorials at Gettysburg, or those for the USAAF in England, where my father served ? You better not go to Trafalgar Square in London; there's old Lord Nelson 169 feet up in the air.
If anyone doesn't understand history, it's you. You don't view 1492, or 1863, or 1944, or 44 B.C. through the lens of 2021.

[USC1986]

Originally Posted by zalewskimm

How many statues memorializing people of today's younger politically correct generation will be erected in the future?

They could erect one statue symbolizing the entire generation of nitwits; a "human", preferably a transgender who is pansexual, with cranium firmly inserted into it's fundament.