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.
They are so misguided, ridiculous and pessimistic. Do they even know what they want? The statue depicts hope and all they see is oppression.
And they are spitting in the face of those who actually DID face oppression. There has never been such a pampered generation as that of the morons who are tearing down the statues. Historically speaking, it hasn't been all that long ago that folks their age would typically be dead. They've never once faced hunger, never once faced REAL disease, never once faced a significant challenge to their lives, never once faced a time where they couldn't afford to dye their hair blue and get a blm tattoo. We're living in a violent version of Idiocracy (the movie).
I don't like the take down of statues.. if anything I hope they are protected in a museum to preserve historical context. Even if the statue is perceived as racial or offensive, its still good to preserve history. Whether or not statues are destroyed or just removed from public viewing are two different things.
But I also don't see how removal of statues equates to Marxism... that's just drama.
I don't like the take down of statues.. if anything I hope they are protected in a museum to preserve historical context. Even if the statue is perceived as racial or offensive, its still good to preserve history. Whether or not statues are destroyed or just removed from public viewing are two different things.
But I also don't see how removal of statues equates to Marxism... that's just drama.
Then you should study Marxism a bit. It's one of their fundamental tenets: erase society's history.
Then you should study Marxism a bit. It's one of their fundamental tenets: erase society's history.
No one is erasing history here.... no more than the removal of Camp Nordland, NJ was removal of history from that time period. Its fake outrage.
Keep in mind, I'm against the removal of these statues... but the public if so wish should have a choice of whether or not it is displayed in public (celebrated) or preserved in museum (historical).
Seems to me, most people, regardless of their politics, don’t care about statues.
This particular statue shows Lincoln with the Emancipation proclamation in hand while a black slave grovels at his feet.
It’s weird.
#1 It was paid for and designed by freed slaves - literally former slaves paid for it. Why are Democrats trying to silence the voices of freed slaves?
#2 It represents in part Lincoln's trip to Richmond Virginia on April 4, 1865. Upon entering the captured confederate capital, slaves mobbed Lincoln, bowed to him, and tried to kiss his feet. At that point Lincoln said and I am paraphrasing - 'don't kneel before me, kneel only before God for he is the one who has freed you, I am but merely his humble instrument, but so long as I live no one will again put shackles on your limbs.'
On April 11 Lincoln then became the first sitting president to propose some black voting rights and John Wilkes Booth in the audience said that is the last speech he will ever make, that means N-word citizenship. On April 14 Booth shot Lincoln who died the next morning.
Seems to me, most people, regardless of their politics, don’t care about statues.
This particular statue shows Lincoln with the Emancipation proclamation in hand while a black slave grovels at his feet.
It’s weird.
This is a very poor interpretation and honestly you're reaching for something that just isn't there.
Lacking the ability to animate the stature, I suppose it's impossible to make it 100% clear on the message they're trying to convey: The black slaves were on their knees. Abraham Lincoln and the abolitionists rescued them from it. If you could add animation to the statue, you would no doubt see Abe Lincoln helping the man rise to his feet -- which is what the black Americans who designed the statue intended.
Jumping to conclusions and inserting the least charitable interpretation is most certainly unhelpful. Only a completed idiot is unaware that Lincoln is the single most important man to made Emancipation happen, so the interpretation that he is the man who has them on their hands and knees makes no historical sense whatsoever. If the black Americans who designed and created the statue left a message that is confusing, I think the most charitable interpretation is in order.
At the end of the day, if the statue is on public property and the people of Boston voted to remove it, then remove it. But I do find the lies about the intended meaning of the statue pretty ridiculous. The original that is displayed in DC was a monument that black Americans designed and demanded, so removing it does seem like a slap in the face to all their efforts.
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.
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.
