Cancel Culture?

[JosephM]

On 7/26/2020 at 8:01 PM, PaulS said:

The average representation of blacks in the US community is 13.4%.  Hard to imagine them winning any majority vote alone.

Yes but many of other ethic backgrounds may also agree with them. All US citizens are  Americans first. Democracy is not the cry of a single ethnic background nor the loudest though it may sometimes seem so. 

 

On 7/26/2020 at 8:01 PM, PaulS said:

These statues and memorials were never placed just as historical markers, they were only ever placed to honor those they represent and what they stood for.

The community at the time were racist, so who cares that they thought white supremacy was appropriate.  It's not.  

I don't agree that all statues were place only to honor the man and "never just as historical markers"Most states are like Florida and I quote from their site...

"The Florida Historical Marker Program is one of the Division of Historical Resources' most popular and visible public history programs. It is designed to raise public awareness of Florida’s rich cultural history and to enhance the enjoyment of our historic sites by citizens and tourists. These markers allow us to tell the stories of the places and people who created the Florida that we all enjoy today, by identifying the churches, schools, archaeological sites, battlefields and homes that represent our past."

Many cancel culture oriented people may want to change history but it cannot be done especially by removing the past. Change can happen by understanding it in the context of the time period. Sure some are offended by these historical markers. Let each community vote on it and let society speak for itself.

If the community at the time was racist let it show in the context of the time. There is no need to remove historical content to change that context.

[thormas]

1 hour ago, JosephM said:

Change can happen by understanding it in the context of the time period. Sure some are offended by these historical markers. Let each community vote on it and let society speak for itself.

Many do understand the historical context of both the actual civil war and also the context of Jim Crow, the KKK, Wallace, segregation, profiling, etc. Many/most/all of these statues were erected after the war and influenced by these other periods - which were not worthy of America and its ideal of equality.

Let America vote as what they are supposed to be, one nation (and without voter suppression or scare tactics) and let us see how the American society speaks :+}

 

[PaulS]

6 hours ago, JosephM said:

Yes but many of other ethic backgrounds may also agree with them. All US citizens are  Americans first. Democracy is not the cry of a single ethnic background nor the loudest though it may sometimes seem so. 

So you think blacks have had no issues being represented in your democracy where they are a minority group?  It's all been hunky dory and equally fair for all?  You don't think the odds are ever against them in any way?  I think it's a little naive to think that black people have complete and utter equal opportunity in democracy when they are only 14% of the electorate.

Quote

 

I don't agree that all statues were place only to honor the man and "never just as historical markers"Most states are like Florida and I quote from their site...

"The Florida Historical Marker Program is one of the Division of Historical Resources' most popular and visible public history programs. It is designed to raise public awareness of Florida’s rich cultural history and to enhance the enjoyment of our historic sites by citizens and tourists. These markers allow us to tell the stories of the places and people who created the Florida that we all enjoy today, by identifying the churches, schools, archaeological sites, battlefields and homes that represent our past."

Many may want to change history but it cannot be done especially by removing the past. Change can happen by understanding it in the context of the time period. Sure some are offended by these historical markers. Let each community vote on it and let society speak for itself.

If the community at the time was racist let it show in the context of the time. There is no need to remove historical content to change that context.

How many statues have the Florida Marker Program erected?  Statues have ever only been put in place to honor the individual or honor their ideals and what they stood for.  They were never installed as balanced, historical markers telling all sides of a story.  The Florida Historical Marker Program is a much, much better approach where marker's are used to tell a story, and not just one side of the story.  Efforts from the likes of the Florida Program are used to balance the story.  

I don't see any cancel culture oriented people wanting to change history or change the past, they just want it acknowledged that hero worship of racist figures should not continue unchallenged.  Such statues should be removed and replaced with a marker that accurately tells the story.  That would actually provide better context of the time period without it appearing as a form of status.  Proper historical markers properly explain history and don't just display a statue honoring one side of the story.

Here's a 'historical marker' of Robert Lee in Virginia.  Can you seriously say this is just a simple historical marker that explains history and not an idol of hero worship to somebody who the majority of whites in that area praised for his anti-black ideals?

 

 

[thormas]

12 hours ago, PaulS said:

I don't see any cancel culture oriented people wanting to change history or change the past, they just want it acknowledged that hero worship of racist figures should not continue unchallenged. 

That is exactly it. No one is ignoring the history or wants it cancelled or changed. They know the history (all too well), they want, as you have clearly stated, an acknowledgement that the statues of racist figures should not go unchallenged, (and) that they be removed (placed in a museum) ..........and perhaps we begin a new time when we live up to the constitution: that all men are created equal.

 

I live in NC and the University of NC at Chapel Hill just decided to change the name of 3 buildings named after people who do not deserve to be so honored. One of those buildings was my daughter's last dorm and for that reason I had some very sentimental feelings toward it (and I admit I never stopped to think or consider its namesake, it was just the name of the dorm). However, I saw a black female student saying how the names made her feel and I thought "change them." Simply change them and make it a bit better for her, for other black students: make it a new day, make them 'feel' welcome...............and the university will be better for it, we will all be better. 

Why would any 'caring' human being not be willing to support the removal of such impediments to our brothers and sisters, to all of us feeling and being equal?

[JosephM]

14 hours ago, PaulS said:

So you think blacks have had no issues being represented in your democracy where they are a minority group?  It's all been hunky dory and equally fair for all?  You don't think the odds are ever against them in any way?  I think it's a little naive to think that black people have complete and utter equal opportunity in democracy when they are only 14% of the electorate.

You put those words in my mouth not me. Certainly the odds are against a minority group but society as a whole reaches an agreement in time as a majority of society or the elected representatives of society agrees with the issue at hand affecting the minority. Patience grasshopper. 😃

[PaulS]

1 hour ago, JosephM said:

You put those words in my mouth not me. Certainly the odds are against a minority group but society as a whole reaches an agreement in time as a majority of society or the elected representatives of society agrees with the issue at hand affecting the minority. Patience grasshopper. 😃

I didn't put any words in your mouth - I was asking you questions.  That's what the question marks mean.

Society may reach a whole eventually, but I can't help but wonder if "patience grasshopper" wasn't a phrase that black slaves used when they were enslaved by the majority rule that existed at the time.  I would encourage you to remember that society as a whole at one point thought that slavery of blacks was okay.  At a later point society felt that such opinions needed changing. I think you would agree that as history demonstrates, just because a majority believe something to be right, doesn't make it right! 

Do you think the image I shared was simply a historical marker, or do you think it was a statue in honor of the person?

[thormas]

Perhaps rather than suggesting 'patience grasshopper' we should suggest 'wisdom and compassion grasshopper.'

[JosephM]

5 hours ago, PaulS said:

I didn't put any words in your mouth - I was asking you questions.  That's what the question marks mean.

Nah ! It's what we here in the US call a declarative question.

 

6 hours ago, PaulS said:

Society may reach a whole eventually, but I can't help but wonder if "patience grasshopper" wasn't a phrase that black slaves used when they were enslaved by the majority rule that existed at the time.  I would encourage you to remember that society as a whole at one point thought that slavery of blacks was okay.  At a later point society felt that such opinions needed changing. I think you would agree that as history demonstrates, just because a majority believe something to be right, doesn't make it right! 

I don't know the history on the phrase but i know an Aussie that has used it more than once.😃 Yes, society as a whole thought slavery was okay at one point and that is the way society works and it usually and hopefully evolves beyond such beliefs as time passes.  As far as making something right or not right goes, that to me is irrelevant. I simply do not view it that way  since reality and the evolution of collective consciousness dictate societal norms that will ultimately change with time. Do you suppose that reality can  be not right..   hmm ... do i question mark that or not?🙂

 

[thormas]

 

36 minutes ago, JosephM said:

As far as making something right or not right goes, that to me is irrelevant. I simply do not view it that way  since reality and the evolution of collective consciousness dictate societal norms that will ultimately change with time.

Needs a clarification.

There have been others throughout history and in different lands and cultures who have (attempted to) 'make things right:' they have gone against societal norms and have changed the world (or the world they touched). Thus the expression 'before their time.' Is this not relevant? 

[JosephM]

22 hours ago, PaulS said:

How many statues have the Florida Marker Program erected? 

Never bothered to count them. Key Largo fl has "Christ of the deep statue " I guess that could offend a non-believer or different religion.

Islamorada fl  has a hurricane monument. I wonder if it is to honor the hurricane. BTW, the monument is also a mass grave.

Miami fl has a holocaust memorial. Who might it honor? It's history, not to be forgotten. 

22 hours ago, PaulS said:

I don't see any cancel culture oriented people wanting to change history or change the past, they just want it acknowledged that hero worship of racist figures should not continue unchallenged. 

Then let them say so without malice. There would be no disagreement here. We can't stop people from hero worship and we certainly can voice our dislike of it. Still, some will  worship statues as heroes but there is a history and story to most all monuments which includes statues. There is usually literature nearby or attached to tell the story.  

A historical monument is a rich source of History. It gives us a sense of wonder and makes us curious to know more about the past connected with it. We might not like what it represents whether it be slavery or anything else but it still remains a rich source of history for which it was designed. 

[JosephM]

7 minutes ago, thormas said:

 

Needs a clarification.

There have been others throughout history and in different lands and cultures who have (attempted to) 'make things right:' they have gone against societal norms and have changed the world (or the world they touched). Thus the expression 'before their time.' Is this not relevant? 

Carification, okay ...

'right' used as  - morally good, justified, or acceptable.        Society or the rulers at the time dictate and establish what is right , morally good, justified, or acceptable at any current point in time. It may or may not be agreeable to an individual and he/she may be ahead of their time but the consequences remain  until the change occurs.     "right" in the sense of true or correct as a fact is not applicable in my statement.

[thormas]

1 hour ago, JosephM said:

Carification, okay ...

'right' used as  - morally good, justified, or acceptable.        Society or the rulers at the time dictate and establish what is right , morally good, justified, or acceptable at any current point in time. It may or may not be agreeable to an individual and he/she may be ahead of their time but the consequences remain  until the change occurs.     "right" in the sense of true or correct as a fact is not applicable in my statement.

It is that (unique?) individual or small group of individuals who are 'ahead of their time' and disagree with the 'status quo' who are (or make) the change.

Thus we have relevant.

thought I'd help you out :+}

[thormas]

1 hour ago, JosephM said:

Then let them say so without malice. There would be no disagreement here. 

Yet many, for years upon years, decade upon decade (and longer) have said it without malice and yet there remains disagreement and much of it is malicious and hate filled. 

History and story along with the monuments can find a home in a history museum. If it is important, "they will come" (and if not it will fade with the years). 

 

[PaulS]

3 hours ago, JosephM said:

I don't know the history on the phrase but i know an Aussie that has used it more than once.😃 Yes, society as a whole thought slavery was okay at one point and that is the way society works and it usually and hopefully evolves beyond such beliefs as time passes.  As far as making something right or not right goes, that to me is irrelevant. I simply do not view it that way  since reality and the evolution of collective consciousness dictate societal norms that will ultimately change with time. Do you suppose that reality can  be not right..   hmm ... do i question mark that or not?🙂

 

'Patience Grasshopper' means (to me) - 'wait'.  I think many people are tired of waiting as Thormas points out - for years upon years, decade upon decade (and longer).  The point I was making about a black minority is that they can wait until the cows come home  - they simply don't necessarily have a strong enough voice in a democracy dominated by whites who don't accept their side of the argument.  

2 hours ago, JosephM said:

Never bothered to count them. Key Largo fl has "Christ of the deep statue " I guess that could offend a non-believer or different religion.

It's not about 'offence', it's about what the statues stand for.  The ones I am talking about, like the one in the photo above, are shrines to an out-of-date ideology.  Time for them to go to a museum and not be given a position of prominence in the community. 

Quote

Islamorada fl  has a hurricane monument. I wonder if it is to honor the hurricane. BTW, the monument is also a mass grave.

I would suggest the monument is to honour those innocents who died.  No issue.

Quote

Miami fl has a holocaust memorial. Who might it honor? It's history, not to be forgotten. 

Again, it honors those who died by terrible deeds and reminds the community how such trauma is not a good thing. 

What does the above statue of Genera Lee express to you?  Just a little bit of history or do you think the noble steed and proud pose suggests a little more?  Do you know what historical information is shared alongside this monument to Lee?  

Quote

Then let them say so without malice. There would be no disagreement here. We can't stop people from hero worship and we certainly can voice our dislike of it. Still, some will  worship statues as heroes but there is a history and story to most all monuments which includes statues. There is usually literature nearby or attached to tell the story.  

What 'them' are you referring to?  The ones who have been writing articles, posting on blogs, doing you-tube videos, talking on chat shows for years and years?  I would suggest (as I have quite a few times now) you stop focusing on the ones who have vandalized and illegally removed statues and try to listen to the ones who are promoting their peaceful message and have been crying for change for years and years.  New Orleans is not in isolation with removing these statues.  Nor are Army Generals who peacefully want to change names of army bases.  What about all the sports players taking a peaceful knee during the national anthem to demonstrate they think there is an issue. On and on and on it goes.

Quote

A historical monument is a rich source of History. It gives us a sense of wonder and makes us curious to know more about the past connected with it. We might not like what it represents whether it be slavery or anything else but it still remains a rich source of history for which it was designed. 

I don't believe a majority of the confederate monuments were genuinely designed to only display history.  Knowing the time most were constructed, the states in which they were constructed, and how black people have been treated in those parts makes it pretty clear to anybody open-minded that there were other intentions behind creating these grandiose statues other then explaining history.  There are much better ways to share history and that is what many people are asking for.  I hope others can listen to them and take affect and help your country heal.

[PaulS]

1 hour ago, thormas said:

It is that (unique?) individual or small group of individuals who are 'ahead of their time' and disagree with the 'status quo' who are (or make) the change.

Many, many people have broken the law and caused disruption to the majority, only to be viewed looking back as exceptional agents for change that we now look favourably on.

Imagine if Rosa Parks had never defied the order to be a good nigger and sit at the back of the bus.

What if nelson Mandela never fought against the majority rule of white apartheid.

Martin Luther King was arrested for 5 times in his fight for civil rights of black people.

The list goes on.  Myself, I think the minority that are pushing for change regarding these confederate statues will be shown to be on the right side of history when generations look back on now.

[PaulS]

15 hours ago, thormas said:

Why would any 'caring' human being not be willing to support the removal of such impediments to our brothers and sisters, to all of us feeling and being equal?

That's the bit I just don't really get.  White people, confederate supporters, other blacks, or whoever it is that want to retain these statues and monuments, do so deliberately knowing that a significant portion of their community is asking them to please understand their hurt and harm and do away with the icons in places of prominence in the community.  Why is it so hard to say "fair enough, if it helps you and us as a community, let's do it, let's put them in a museum, then we can all move on.  We hear you that to you they are symbols of oppression and racial hatred, and we don't want you to feel that way."  I just don't see the downside other than maybe one side feels it has to give something up, even though it doesn't.  The upside, even from a cynical point of view, is simply that there is no argument anymore.  One less hurdle in helping the US heal and in Australia's case (not so much statues, more about names) one more step toward racial reconciliation. 

[thormas]

9 hours ago, PaulS said:

Many, many people have broken the law and caused disruption to the majority, only to be viewed looking back as exceptional agents for change that we now look favourably on.

Imagine if Rosa Parks had never defied the order to be a good ###### and sit at the back of the bus.

What if nelson Mandela never fought against the majority rule of white apartheid.

Martin Luther King was arrested for 5 times in his fight for civil rights of black people.

The list goes on.  Myself, I think the minority that are pushing for change regarding these confederate statues will be shown to be on the right side of history when generations look back on now.

You are exactly right. And we can also include the late John Lewis and many religious leaders across time.

We can even include unsung 'ordinary' people: ex. VP Pence was at a local school last week in the next town and some of the protestors were two rising freshman a local public school. Both  ahead of their time, both against the social norm on display that day and both involved in change.

[thormas]

11 hours ago, PaulS said:

I think the minority that are pushing for change regarding these confederate statues will be shown to be on the right side of history when generations look back on now.

The funny thing is that it is inevitable with the 'browning of America.'

[JosephM]

12 hours ago, PaulS said:

Time for them to go to a museum and not be given a position of prominence in the community. 

No problem. That is your opinion.  Let the community decide.

 

12 hours ago, PaulS said:

What does the above statue of Genera Lee express to you?  Just a little bit of history or do you think the noble steed and proud pose suggests a little more?  Do you know what historical information is shared alongside this monument to Lee?  

It expresses history. Brave and noble people on both sides who fought for what they believed in. What one believes in doesn't always win out. War is a terrible thing where there are no real winners. Do you suppose the Civil War was all about slavery? Read this historical take on it by author and historian Reed Lannom.

"Putting aside the political and economic causes of the Civil War, when assessing the men themselves, the personal motivations of most who did the fighting on either side, had nothing to do with slavery. The truth is most Southern soldiers (80% owned no slaves) would have considered themselves to be fighting to defend their homes; just as most Union soldiers were motivated to defend the Union. It seems preposterous that very many of them were thinking “We must keep the slaves!” or “We must free the slaves! As they charged into a hail of cannon and musket fire.

and on pbs.org 

 

What led to the outbreak of the bloodiest conflict in the history of North America? A common explanation is that the Civil War was fought over the moral issue of slavery.

In fact, it was the economics of slavery and political control of that system that was central to the conflict.

A key issue was states' rights. The Southern states wanted to assert their authority over the federal government so they could abolish federal laws they didn't support, especially laws interfering with the South's right to keep slaves and take them wherever they wished.

Another factor was territorial expansion.The South wished to take slavery into the western territories, while the North was committed to keeping them open to white labor alone.

Meanwhile, the newly formed Republican party, whose members were strongly opposed to the westward expansion of slavery into new states, was gaining prominence. The election of a Republican, Abraham Lincoln, as President in 1860 sealed the deal. His victory, without a single Southern electoral vote, was a clear signal to the Southern states that they had lost all influence. Feeling excluded from the political system, they turned to the only alternative they believed was left to them: secession, a political decision that led directly to war.

12 hours ago, PaulS said:

I don't believe a majority of the confederate monuments were genuinely designed to only display history.  Knowing the time most were constructed, the states in which they were constructed, and how black people have been treated in those parts makes it pretty clear to anybody open-minded that there were other intentions behind creating these grandiose statues other then explaining history.  There are much better ways to share history and that is what many people are asking for.  I hope others can listen to them and take affect and help your country heal.

You as others are welcome to express your opinion. Perhaps things are not changing fast enough for you and others. I know you don't agree with the violence but again change has been happening and will happen.... patience grasshopper...... things are not that bad here in the US when you remove the protester violence from the peaceful protesters and the relatively minority of bad eggs in the both the police force and government. Immigrants still flock here in droves because it  provides great opportunities, safety and freedoms not seen in their own country.

[thormas]

13 hours ago, PaulS said:

.............whoever it is that want to retain these statues and monuments, do so deliberately knowing that a significant portion of their community is asking them to please understand their hurt and harm and do away with the icons in places of prominence in the community

That is spot on and it is simply baffling why they dig their heels in especially knowing that eventually these statues will be removed since they do and will forever 'cause harm' to a significant (and growing with ever expanding influence) percentage of Americans.  This is not a question of assimilation, it is a matter of consideration, respect, justice...........and equality.

[JosephM]

2 hours ago, thormas said:

That is spot on and it is simply baffling why they dig their heels in especially knowing that eventually these statues will be removed since they do and will forever 'cause harm' to a significant (and growing with ever expanding influence) percentage of Americans.  This is not a question of assimilation, it is a matter of consideration, respect, justice...........and equality.

Perhaps when you get over your so called  harm and hurt, then they can be removed grasshopper. 🙂 

 

16 hours ago, PaulS said:

That's the bit I just don't really get.  White people, confederate supporters, other blacks, or whoever it is that want to retain these statues and monuments, do so deliberately knowing that a significant portion of their community is asking them to please understand their hurt and harm and do away with the icons in places of prominence in the community.  Why is it so hard to say "fair enough, if it helps you and us as a community, let's do it, let's put them in a museum, then we can all move on.  We hear you that to you they are symbols of oppression and racial hatred, and we don't want you to feel that way."

We Americans and a majority i might add want to retain these things. I hear your claim of harm and hurt and perhaps you may or may not understand what is going on behind the scenes but this isn't all about statues and monuments. We could cave in to it but that is not the real issue nor will it bring healing. Hurt and the harm spoken of is internal. The statues only have the power you give to them and it will not end there, in my view.

[thormas]

14 minutes ago, JosephM said:

Perhaps when you get over your so called  harm and hurt, then they can be removed grasshopper. 🙂 

Doesn't even make sense..........................but neither does the choice of statues over people.

Thus, we can say "wisdom grasshopper., wisdom.............and perhaps a little compassion." :+}

[thormas]

20 minutes ago, JosephM said:

We Americans and a majority i might add want to retain these things

Actually this is not the case given a poll last month (June):

"Fifty-two percent of voters said they support removing such statutes, while just 44 percent oppose removing them, according to a Quinnipiac University Poll survey..............."

😀

[thormas]

45 minutes ago, JosephM said:

I hear your claim of harm and hurt and perhaps you may or may not understand what is going on behind the scenes but this isn't all about statues and monuments. We could cave in to it but that is not the real issue nor will it bring healing. Hurt and the harm spoken of is internal. The statues only have the power you give to them and it will not end there, in my view.

Please!

What behind the scenes, is there a conspiracy going on, for example with the black female student at UNC who expressed her 'hurt' and her efforts (along with many others) to have the names of certain buildings on campus changed?  What is 'going on behind the scenes' that Paul or supposedly many USA citizens are missing?

 If you want to talk about 'behind the scenes' focus on the trumpeter's ploy to play this card in his bid to be re-elected.  One doesn't really have to wonder about his motivation.

This is amazing: in a few short sentences you describe the idea of seeing things from the side of those who clearly state they are 'hurt' as caving in and in the next breath you declare that the removal of the statues will not result in healing - when it already has in numerous cases - from the removal of the flag in SC, to the same decision at Nascar, to the students at UNC with the renaming of buildings and the removal of the 'Silent Sam' confederate monument and on and on.

For people, institutions, state governments, etc. to not only LISTEN to black men and women but to RESPOND.................has already brought moments of real healing.

 

p.s. it's actually surprising that the trumpster supports the statues of confederates (until one thinks about it for a silly millisecond) because they lost and he hates, he really hates, losers 😟

Edited August 1, 2020 by thormas

[JosephM]

49 minutes ago, thormas said:

Actually this is not the case given a poll last month (June):

"Fifty-two percent of voters said they support removing such statutes, while just 44 percent oppose removing them, according to a Quinnipiac University Poll survey..............."

😀

Depends on who you are polling. If what you say is the case then take it up with the community for a vote. I will abide with my community wishes here.