Author The Statues  (Read 1138 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

The Statues
« on: August 31, 2017, 02:52:30 AM »
In a more rational, more libertarian society, before most of the statues were destroyed, they would've each been auctioned off to the highest bidders (collectors, folks who wanted to destroy them, folks who wanted to enshrine them for posterity in high security, and so on). The proceeds would've gone to erect a giant monument to commemorate all the tax-payers who were forced to pay for the commissioning of the statues.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #1 on: August 31, 2017, 02:54:41 AM »
In a more rational, more libertarian society, before most of the statues were destroyed, they would've each been auctioned off to the highest bidders (collectors, folks who wanted to destroy them, folks who wanted to enshrine them for posterity in high security, and so on). The proceeds would've gone to erect a giant monument to commemorate all the taxpayers who were forced to pay for the commissioning of the statues.
Excellent point. ;)

Re: The Statues
« Reply #2 on: August 31, 2017, 05:56:19 AM »
The Confederate statues I'm familiar with - those dedicated to the generic foot soldiers who were generally not slave owners - were built with private funds and erected on private property. Both were then dedicated to the city/county. Some were erected on public property that was cleaned up and improved by the dedicating organization.
The Talbanization of American history by hate groups such as the SPLC is evil.


Re: The Statues
« Reply #3 on: August 31, 2017, 06:34:23 AM »
The Confederate statues I'm familiar with - those dedicated to the generic foot soldiers who were generally not slave owners - were built with private funds and erected on private property. Both were then dedicated to the city/county. Some were erected on public property that was cleaned up and improved by the dedicating organization.
The Talbanization of American history by hate groups such as the SPLC is evil.

Agreed.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #4 on: August 31, 2017, 07:36:17 AM »
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/things-to-think-about-when-taking-down-statues?google_editors_picks=true

Quote
A democratic country’s arguments about public space, history, and art are necessarily continuous. One difference between democracies and dictatorships is that the constructing and revising of public spaces is not a propaganda opportunity for the ruler but a realm of democratic discourse, influenced by popular opinion and competitive electoral politics.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #5 on: August 31, 2017, 07:55:18 AM »
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/things-to-think-about-when-taking-down-statues?google_editors_picks=true

So, George Soros' paid thugs represent popular opinion now?  ???

I'd be OK with an actual vote on it but this astroturf stuff is bullshit.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #6 on: August 31, 2017, 09:31:05 AM »
So, George Soros' paid thugs represent popular opinion now?  ???

I'd be OK with an actual vote on it but this astroturf stuff is bullshit.

Soros and the Demokkkrats are the new "Girls Gone Wild". Back in the day a video production company used to hire a bunch of whores to show up to parties and clubs and they'd take their clothes off in hopes of getting the more submissive insecure women of the crowd to go along and take their clothes off too. Flash their rack etc...It reach its peak under The Clinton admininistration.

Now we have Soros & the Demokkkrat Party hiring a bunch of submissive insecure whores to show up to peaceful public speaking engagements, commiting acts violence against innocent people practicing their 1st amendment rights, to try injure and kill innocent people, and incite to more violence. All while the DemokkkratMedia and their lemmings defend and encourage it.

Conclusion, they're all a bunch of whores.

As for the statues, no one has a right to destroy public property. If the locality decides to remove or change statues they can legally and respectfully. Like Zenman said, Even auctioning off the statue to help those in need. But let's face it, the left is never really concerned with those in need.




Re: The Statues
« Reply #7 on: August 31, 2017, 03:30:44 PM »
The Confederate statues I'm familiar with - those dedicated to the generic foot soldiers who were generally not slave owners - were built with private funds and erected on private property. Both were then dedicated to the city/county. Some were erected on public property that was cleaned up and improved by the dedicating organization.
The Talbanization of American history by hate groups such as the SPLC is evil.

I'm not sure about what would be good to do with the complicated chain of possession statues. The private ones are easy of course. Their fate should be entirely controlled by the owners, as should be their safely from theft and vandalism and such.

The statues that were originally private and then dedicated to a public entity and so on, well, I don't know what to tell ya right off on those. I'm thinking mostly tho that the dedicating entity pretty much has to acknowledge the risks involved with voluntarily handing property over to a public entity.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #8 on: August 31, 2017, 06:37:57 PM »
In a more rational, more libertarian society, before most of the statues were destroyed, they would've each been auctioned off to the highest bidders (collectors, folks who wanted to destroy them, folks who wanted to enshrine them for posterity in high security, and so on). The proceeds would've gone to erect a giant monument to commemorate all the tax-payers who were forced to pay for the commissioning of the statues.

But then that subtracts from the whole Revolutionary meaning of trying to destroy this country's history. You trying to profit off of slavery, bruh?

Re: The Statues
« Reply #9 on: August 31, 2017, 06:40:12 PM »
For the record, I am outraged about all the heat Robert E. Lee is getting. He's not celebrated for his confederacy Generalship, he's celebrated because he stopped the war and the violence at the end of it.

I could understand arguments about statues not being on Federal Land but even then you're going to have to make a strong case and not just throw a temper tantrum as a spoiled child. Where were people when Obama was President with this horse shit?

These fucking idiots on the left don't read history and it makes them sounds like angry three-year olds.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #10 on: August 31, 2017, 07:11:35 PM »
For the record, I am outraged about all the heat Robert E. Lee is getting. He's not celebrated for his confederacy Generalship, he's celebrated because he stopped the war and the violence at the end of it.

I could understand arguments about statues not being on Federal Land but even then you're going to have to make a strong case and not just throw a temper tantrum as a spoiled child. Where were people when Obama was President with this horse shit?

These fucking idiots on the left don't read history and it makes them sounds like angry three-year olds.
Those idiots you refer to are professors at the biggest sham most respected institutions of higher learning in the country.

Formal education is the new stupid

Re: The Statues
« Reply #11 on: September 01, 2017, 10:41:21 AM »
For the record, I am outraged about all the heat Robert E. Lee is getting. He's not celebrated for his confederacy Generalship, he's celebrated because he stopped the war and the violence at the end of it.

Lol, yeah right. Violence continued for a long while after the war well into the Reconstruction era. He stopped the war because the confederacy was soundly defeated, not out of the goodness of his traitor heart.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #12 on: September 01, 2017, 12:01:07 PM »
Lol, yeah right. Violence continued for a long while after the war well into the Reconstruction era. He stopped the war because the confederacy was soundly defeated, not out of the goodness of his traitor heart.

Lee did much to help reunification.  He set the example for others to follow.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #13 on: September 01, 2017, 12:15:25 PM »
In a more rational, more libertarian society, before most of the statues were destroyed, they would've each been auctioned off to the highest bidders (collectors, folks who wanted to destroy them, folks who wanted to enshrine them for posterity in high security, and so on). The proceeds would've gone to erect a giant monument to commemorate all the tax-payers who were forced to pay for the commissioning of the statues.
I can't comment on all statues but many of them were paid for by individuals (UT ones for example were paid by Littlefield- there is a lawsuit going on because his estate says the original grant and agreement for the millions he donated for buildings and statues said that the university would have them for perpetuity,) or groups (from unsavory, like the WCC in New Orleans for one of the big monuments, or innocuous like the Sons or Daughters of the Confederacy, veteran groups, foundations, or by group funding.) Even some of the statues on DC mall etc were a result of fundraising efforts by groups not direct tax-payer funds (though obviously maintenance etc are.) The money-making racket SPLC* has now said even Army bases need to be renamed. Where does it stop? I assume that the Washington Memorial and Jefferson Memorial will be torn down soon and cities and states renamed, like streets are?

* http://freebeacon.com/issues/southern-poverty-law-center-transfers-millions-in-cash-to-offshore-entities/

Re: The Statues
« Reply #14 on: September 01, 2017, 12:30:57 PM »
Lee did much to help reunification.  He set the example for others to follow.

Like the example he set when he said “I think it wiser not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered.” ?

Re: The Statues
« Reply #15 on: September 01, 2017, 12:41:58 PM »
Like the example he set when he said “I think it wiser not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered.” ?

You said it.  I didn't.  You have to realize that he was against secession and only took the side of the South because of his loyalty to Virginia.  I've said many times that back then loyalty to a state such as Virginia was far more important to citizens than loyalty to the US as a whole. 

Also, he was President of Washington College after the war setting a good example for the college's students to follow.  You need to read up more on the man.  Here is a book.  Buy it and read it.


Re: The Statues
« Reply #16 on: September 01, 2017, 01:32:31 PM »
We're dancing around the issue here. The statues were put up at the turn of the last century by southern democrats so that 'darkie' knew their place.

There was a former confederate general who actually worked to include freed slaves in government. But interestingly there are few if any statues for that guy? Why is that?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-confederate-general-who-was-erased-from-history_us_599b3747e4b06a788a2af43e (It's huff-po, I know, but it's actually worth a read)

Quote
So did those “traditionalists” who built monuments to Confederate generals (but not Mahone), and bent history to their purpose. Interracial political cooperation had to be forgotten if southern conservatives were going to sell white supremacy and solidarity as timeless and natural, and not as the result of a 30-year campaign to render black southerners political and economic dependents and social unequals. How we remember our past directly influences the possibilities for our future. This is why white Democrats erased as much as they could of the history of interracial democracy in the South, after they destroyed it

Re: The Statues
« Reply #17 on: September 01, 2017, 02:19:37 PM »
The most obvious place that needs a thorough "cleansing" is Rome. Can you believe they STILL have statues and columns praising leaders who often took slaves in battle and invaded other countries? Trajan's Column, I would think, would be easy to topple and should be done forthwith. As I suggested we could outsource the work to the IRA or ISIS as they are expert in destroying monuments and, with the Celtic Tiger not growling as much and ISIS getting beat back in areas, there is likely some unemployment there. Or, at least, give every "refugee" a sledge hammer and tell them to start swinging for the rent at the humanitarian camps.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #18 on: September 01, 2017, 03:01:34 PM »
Lol, yeah right. Violence continued for a long while after the war well into the Reconstruction era. He stopped the war because the confederacy was soundly defeated, not out of the goodness of his traitor heart.

Maybe you should read more than Facebook memes for your grasp on history and the world you live in?

Quote
Lee resisted calls by some officers to reject surrender and allow small units to melt away into the mountains, setting up a lengthy guerrilla war. He insisted the war was over and energetically campaigned for inter-sectional reconciliation. "So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South."[106]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E._Lee#General-in-chief

Here's an easy to digest video for slow people.



Like the example he set when he said “I think it wiser not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered.” ?

These liberals are so funny, a disingenuous meme is presented to them and then all of a sudden they're experts in history. I love that you cite that quote as your argument when that was a meme that went around in the liberal press a week ago. Your first premise was that Lee was a bad man who didn't really want to stop the war. Now your second premise is Lee is criticized saying the war was stupid three years later at a reunion in Gettysburg. You understand these are conflicts in thought.

We're dancing around the issue here. The statues were put up at the turn of the last century by southern democrats so that 'darkie' knew their place.

There was a former confederate general who actually worked to include freed slaves in government. But interestingly there are few if any statues for that guy? Why is that?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-confederate-general-who-was-erased-from-history_us_599b3747e4b06a788a2af43e (It's huff-po, I know, but it's actually worth a read)
 

Gee why would the Democrats want to get rid of those so badly? Maybe you should leave them up as a reminder of what the Democrats were and what they are as well their historical significance. Huffinton Post?  ;D

It's just boring arguing with people who are only clickbait headlines deep.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #19 on: September 01, 2017, 04:01:18 PM »
It's just boring arguing with people who are only clickbait headlines deep.

Says the guy who resorts to personal insults.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #20 on: September 01, 2017, 04:15:24 PM »
I can't comment on all statues but many of them were paid for by individuals (UT ones for example were paid by Littlefield- there is a lawsuit going on because his estate says the original grant and agreement for the millions he donated for buildings and statues said that the university would have them for perpetuity,) or groups (from unsavory, like the WCC in New Orleans for one of the big monuments, or innocuous like the Sons or Daughters of the Confederacy, veteran groups, foundations, or by group funding.) Even some of the statues on DC mall etc were a result of fundraising efforts by groups not direct tax-payer funds (though obviously maintenance etc are.) The money-making racket SPLC* has now said even Army bases need to be renamed. Where does it stop? I assume that the Washington Memorial and Jefferson Memorial will be torn down soon and cities and states renamed, like streets are?

* http://freebeacon.com/issues/southern-poverty-law-center-transfers-millions-in-cash-to-offshore-entities/

Yes, good point. It definitely gets complicated where private entities have made arrangements with public ones to be caretakers of donated property. As I mentioned earlier, I kinda feel that when a private party donates property to a public entity, they really should acknowledge that they're doing so at their own risk. It's not like making an agreement/contract with another private party. You're basically trusting the care of your property to bureaucracy. I think what I'm essentially saying is that I wish them luck.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #21 on: September 01, 2017, 04:46:43 PM »
The most obvious place that needs a thorough "cleansing" is Rome. Can you believe they STILL have statues and columns praising leaders who often took slaves in battle and invaded other countries? Trajan's Column, I would think, would be easy to topple and should be done forthwith. As I suggested we could outsource the work to the IRA or ISIS as they are expert in destroying monuments and, with the Celtic Tiger not growling as much and ISIS getting beat back in areas, there is likely some unemployment there. Or, at least, give every "refugee" a sledge hammer and tell them to start swinging for the rent at the humanitarian camps.

Not to mention the evil Roman Coliseum where thousands were probably slaughtered.  Tear it all down!!  Oh wait, most of those slaughtered were Christians.  Who cares?    :P

Re: The Statues
« Reply #22 on: September 01, 2017, 05:17:34 PM »
Not to mention the evil Roman Coliseum where thousands were probably slaughtered.  Tear it all down!!  Oh wait, most of those slaughtered were Christians.  Who cares?    :P

They would close it down due to mistreatment of animals.  Nothing to do with Christians.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #23 on: September 01, 2017, 05:39:26 PM »
They would close it down due to mistreatment of animals.  Nothing to do with Christians.

Shhhhhhhhhh, delete that message right now before PITA heads over there.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #24 on: September 01, 2017, 05:47:11 PM »
They would close it down due to mistreatment of animals.  Nothing to do with Christians.

LOL.  Good point.  Plus I think some black minorities were probably killed there too.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #25 on: September 01, 2017, 06:12:07 PM »
Yes, good point. It definitely gets complicated where private entities have made arrangements with public ones to be caretakers of donated property. As I mentioned earlier, I kinda feel that when a private party donates property to a public entity, they really should acknowledge that they're doing so at their own risk. It's not like making an agreement/contract with another private party. You're basically trusting the care of your property to bureaucracy. I think what I'm essentially saying is that I wish them luck.
Yeah and I understand the argument that you can stop development or modernity and that public policy or attitudes will change (or just cities will grow big and say "do we really that park?" "couldn't that statue be some extra parking spaces" "do we really have room for that graveyard" etc.) That is the way of the world since forever but I would like more sober assessment and thought before willy-nilly pulling down art, renaming streets (and, who knows, maybe schools, cities, and states, etc.) Or just by vandalism and crime.
I would think in some cases someone could get some legal protection but when you are fighting city-hall and entities so large, good luck is right!

It brings to mind some interesting "land deals" which one gets to thinking conspiratorially, certain "not for profits" buy up land, or given to them for tax-breaks in wills, to "set aside" for the environment. Don't have to pay taxes on it. Then, a few years later, an odd thing happens. They lobby the city to allow development, say some apartments or condos maybe small new neighborhood, but in exchange they will set aside more property that they have acquired for "green" or to protect some bird or salamander. Meanwhile this "not for profit" got a tax-break on prime real estate, but not developed due to "green,"  that increased in value over the years as the city grew. Then the "rules" change and "limited building can be done at site" "a new study says" or "the City and environment will benefit from having this other land instead' and hey they just made a lot of money and can do new deals and/or buy up more land further out for "green" reasons. Just some examples:
https://tncscandals.blogspot.com/

Re: The Statues
« Reply #26 on: September 01, 2017, 06:18:48 PM »
Not to mention the evil Roman Coliseum where thousands were probably slaughtered.  Tear it all down!!  Oh wait, most of those slaughtered were Christians.  Who cares?    :P

Quick, there's still time to auction it off and use the proceeds to build a massive monument to the slaves who built it!

Re: The Statues
« Reply #27 on: September 01, 2017, 06:37:06 PM »

Re: The Statues
« Reply #28 on: September 01, 2017, 06:53:14 PM »
Says the guy who resorts to personal insults.

Well since your argument was blown out, I guess you have to resort to this. But you're the one who displayed a lack of knowledge and gets your information from clickbait bullshit. I'm just acknowledging that reality. Quite frankly, you should read more.

Re: The Statues
« Reply #29 on: September 01, 2017, 07:08:12 PM »
Mazel tov!
L'chaim! (I think that is how one spells it- I think there is a conspiracy that one cannot know even how to spell their names, unless a member. Hanukkah, Chanuka, Channuka, (?.) I major holiday whose English spelling cannot be agreed upon? I swear, like Kaddafi(sic) the spelling has changed over the years or depending where you see it.)