Statues celebrating slavers and reparations disconnect

[Tommy Tainant]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

 

[bluzman61]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

How's that snitching on your neighbors going, Tommy?

 

[Marion Morrison]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

These are slaver statues in the UK, right? Where the largest percentage of the slavers came from?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

How's that snitching on your neighbors going, Tommy?

Very well thank you. Why dont you bend your intellect to the subject under discussion ?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Once again, Tainted Tommy starts a threat to pontificate on a subject that he knows nothing about, in a country that he knows nothing about.

And he wonders why nobody on this forum sees him as anything better than an ignorant, arrogant fool.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I agree that any slaves held by Americans prior to 1865 still extant deserve something from the Democrats.

 

[odanny]

A well thought out question, that skewers the hypocrisy of right-wingers, many who still hold the same views today as those that were held in 1865.

 

[Pogo]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

You have it exactly right.
I would make one minor correction, in that the statue-worshipers' position is not that such monuments "celebrate" history but rather, that they "ARE" history. As if history BOOKS don't exist (and for this knuckledragger type, that's a likely possibility).

Many of them seem blissfully unaware that such monuments were feverishly put up by a grand and grotesque history revision propaganda crusade called the Cult of the Lost Cause, and that they celebrated the Klan at the same time in the same cause. The odd thing is that once they're informed of this history ------ they don't adjust, but rather dig in deeper.

"When the known facts change, I change my mind. What do YOU do, sir?"

 

[Pogo]

Once again, Tainted Tommy starts a threat to pontificate on a subject that he knows nothing about, in a country that he knows nothing about.

And he wonders why nobody on this forum sees him as anything better than an ignorant, arrogant fool.

Actually he opened for questions about it. Apparently your answer to that question is "Waaah I'm butthurt".

 

[yidnar]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

well reach into your pocket and start paying reparations asshole ! set an example and dole out some cash hypocrite !

 

[yidnar]

Once again, Tainted Tommy starts a threat to pontificate on a subject that he knows nothing about, in a country that he knows nothing about.

And he wonders why nobody on this forum sees him as anything better than an ignorant, arrogant fool.

Actually he opened for questions about it. Apparently your answer to that question is "Waaah I'm butthurt".

tell us ho much do you owe for reparations commie ?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

Once the statues are removed is that the end of the repression and ask for reparations?

 

[Muhammed]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

The statues were put there by Democrats and now they want to take them down to erase the sordid history of the Democratic party.

 

[Ringel05]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

How's that snitching on your neighbors going, Tommy?

Very well thank you. Why dont you bend your intellect to the subject under discussion ?

What discussion? You present a rhetorical bias steeped in stereotypes and generalities then expect people to argue it on your terms.......
Though that does appear to be the norm on this hackfest board......... Guess that makes you no better than the hard right you rail against........ Oops........

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

How's that snitching on your neighbors going, Tommy?

Very well thank you. Why dont you bend your intellect to the subject under discussion ?

Because nobody likes communicating with someone who is as low as you are.

 

[Correll]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

What is the contradiction?


Celebrating the important figures of the past, is not the same as being hung up on the past, or expecting to hold the people responsible for sins supposedly committed by their ancestors.




I visited the Washington Memorial in the past. I am not angry with you, for your ancestors waging war against him. I am not holding your responsible for any of the sins your ancestors committed against my nation.

Indeed, I have nothing but the best wishes for your nation and it's people.


Your imagined contradiction is caused by YOUR holding on to the past and assuming everyone else does the same.

 

[yidnar]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

The statues were put there by Democrats and now they want to take them down to erase the sordid history of the Democratic party.

yes we need the statues to remind Americans of the history of democrat slave owners.

 

[Pogo]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

The statues were put there by Democrats and now they want to take them down to erase the sordid history of the Democratic party.

The statues were put there primarily by the UDC, and no, D doesn't stand for "Democrats", it stands for "Daughters". And those statues/monuments said nothing about any political party.

More insidious was the UDC's stronger and more comprehensive focus on LITERALLY rewriting history:

​

This, of course, for the same purpose as all the statue propaganda ---- to rewrite a shameful and dishonorable history, that of the Confederacy. Which as you know, HAD NO POLITICAL PARTIES.

 

[Pogo]

I know that the destruction of confederate statues has caused some anguish amongst many people. The argument is that these statues celebrate history and that it is wrong to forget an important part of the past.

And then, on the other hand, there are well constructed arguments setting out a case for reparations to people whose ancestors were victims of the slave states. This is strongly opposed by a section of the community.

And there seems to be a disconnect between these two issues. One that is causing me some confusion.

The issue I have is this.

Those people who are arch defenders of the statues and want to pay tribute to the slavers.......................................are the same people who are telling black folks to "get over it" and "move on" when reparations are mentioned.

If I was into judging I might be tempted to accuse them of hypocrisy.

How do you square this contradiction?

The statues were put there by Democrats and now they want to take them down to erase the sordid history of the Democratic party.

yes we need the statues to remind Americans of the history of democrat [sic] slave owners.

Slavery went on here for three hundred years before "Democrats" even existed, and not one slave owner, literally zero, was ever required to join a political party to do it.

It may interest you to know, if your head is so low-bridge that it can only think in binary, that the last President to have been a slave owner, was a Republican.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I am guessing that there isnt a meme that covers this yet.