• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

New Orleans Starts Tearing Down Confederate Monuments, Sparking Protest

Status
Not open for further replies.
People were having virgils over the statues??? wtf

glad the statues are going anyways

VQB5ou9.jpg


oh well. good riddance.
 

Mael

Member
It took us something like 60 years to get rid of our own traitor Pétain's name off French streets.
And that guy was actually one of the biggest war heroes before he was one of the biggest traitor.
No one is going to forget about WWI anytime soon either.
Tear down these statues, melt them and make proper monuments to honor fallen soldiers if you want but by god do not celebrate people who preferred to die before they would recognize that black people were worth more than the shit they take.
If you come to France, you'll notice a distinct lack of monuments dedicated to enemies of the State. Stop honoring traitors with horrible deeds.
 

ZZMitch

Member
Crazy that the workers have to wear masks and bullet proof vest while working on taking down the statue. Hope nothing happens
 

HylianTom

Banned
I'm vacationing in NOLA this week and literally every person I've talked to who is local is pissed.
I wonder where the locals you talk to are from. Most people in the city proper are against the statues; if it were put up to a vote, they'd come down easily.

But the suburbs outside of the city are drastically more conservative/Confederate-friendly (Steve "I'm David Duke without the baggage" Scalise is the congressional rep), and the folks living there - many of whom commute into the city for work - have no problem screaming as loudly as they can about how we should run our city.

It's a theme that we've seen for decades around here: many suburban residents are people who followed white flight out of New Orleans in previous decades, but they still hold strong, loud opinions about the city and its inhabitants. This issue has flared them up like very few I've ever seen.
 

shintoki

sparkle this bitch
Sure, if they want to preserve it.

It can go into a museum next to Nazis memorabilia.

I think it's a fair trade
 

Eidan

Member
I wonder where the locals you talk to are from. Most people in the city proper are against the statues; if it were put up to a vote, they'd come down easily.

But the suburbs outside of the city are drastically more conservative/Confederate-friendly (Steve "I'm David Duke without the baggage" Scalise is the congressional rep), and the folks living there - many of whom commute into the city for work - have no problem screaming as loudly as they can about how we should run our city.

It's a theme that we've seen for decades around here: many suburban residents are people who followed white flight out of New Orleans in previous decades, but they still hold strong, loud opinions about the city and its inhabitants. This issue has flared them up like very few I've ever seen.

This is what I figured. The city proper is pretty goddamn liberal.
 

Z3M0G

Member
I'm shocked by how many people say they should be destroyed instead of put on display in an isolated location, at the very least...

The bad points of history shouldn't be wiped out... they should be studied and learned from, even more so than the good points in history.
 
I'm shocked by how many people say they should be destroyed instead of put on display in an isolated location, at the very least...

The bad points of history shouldn't be wiped out... they should be studied and learned from, even more so than the good points in history.
I mean I'm fine with having them in a museum but I don't understand how you need a giant statue of a confederate leader to learn about the confederacy. I don't see many Hitler and Mussolini statues lying around.
 
I'm shocked by how many people say they should be destroyed instead of put on display in an isolated location, at the very least...

The bad points of history shouldn't be wiped out... they should be studied and learned from, even more so than the good points in history.

You don't need statues that honor traitors do this.
 
I'm shocked by how many people say they should be destroyed instead of put on display in an isolated location, at the very least...

The bad points of history shouldn't be wiped out... they should be studied and learned from, even more so than the good points in history.

I mean I'm fine with having them in a museum but I don't understand how you need a giant statue of a confederate leader to learn about the confederacy. I don't see many Hitler and Mussolini statues lying around.

What Psycho said. You don't need a deified monuments of traitors to learn history. You want monuments? The historical cup runneth over with black heroes pivotal in gaining rights for people rather than fighting to strip people of them.
 

NOLA_Gaffer

Banned
How about who fucking cares if they get scraped? Don't know about these monuments in particular, but a lot of confederate monuments were erected during the civil rights movement long after the civil war. What is it with statues of horrible people and moderates saying "we need to preserve history." Didn't realize a statue was the only way to remember history. A bunch of racists put up statues of Civil War confederates during the civil rights movement to antagonize black people and all the sudden they can't be touched and we need to preserve history. Bullshit

To me it's not that we're preserving the history of the Civil War, but that we're preserving the culture of New Orleans. Which why I'm totes cool with the removal of the monuments but not so cool with their (probable) destruction. Some of these monuments are more representative of the city itself than what they actually depict.

I don't think I'll ever stop calling the roundabout around where the Robert E. Lee monument was "Lee Circle".
 

NOLA_Gaffer

Banned
Sure, if they want to preserve it.

It can go into a museum next to Nazis memorabilia.

I think it's a fair trade

Ideally they would find an area to place them around the Civil War Museum in New Orleans, but there isn't really a whole lot of free space around it.

W1siZiIsInVwbG9hZHMvcGxhY2VfaW1hZ2VzLzE0YTg4MGM5N2ViZjgyZWU0Zl9JTUdfMTQ1MS5KUEciXSxbInAiLCJ0aHVtYiIsIngzOTA-Il0sWyJwIiwiY29udmVydCIsIi1xdWFsaXR5IDkxIC1hdXRvLW9yaWVudCJdXQ
 

JordanN

Banned
I'm shocked by how many people say they should be destroyed instead of put on display in an isolated location, at the very least...

The bad points of history shouldn't be wiped out... they should be studied and learned from, even more so than the good points in history.

When they only attract Nazis and alt-right, I don't see why not.

We're not talking about the Mona Lisa or Dinosaur fossils that actually serve a purpose.

These are statues that represent a slave state that had to be destroyed by force.
 
To me it's not that we're preserving the history of the Civil War, but that we're preserving the history of New Orleans. Which why I'm totes cool with the removal of the monuments but not so cool with their (probable) destruction.

I don't think I'll ever stop calling the roundabout around where the Robert E. Lee monument was "Lee Circle".

Thats cool, but whats even better is that in a generation or two that group of people will NOT remember that roundabout as Lee Circle.
 

Z3M0G

Member
I mean I'm fine with having them in a museum but I don't understand how you need a giant statue of a confederate leader to learn about the confederacy. I don't see many Hitler and Mussolini statues lying around.

What Psycho said. You don't need a deified monuments of traitors to learn history. You want monuments? The historical cup runneth over with black heroes pivotal in gaining rights for people rather than fighting to strip people of them.

Artistic value / merit then? I don't know... of course statues of Hitler would have been destroyed, but at this time it would be interesting to have some around to look at...

You don't need statues that honor traitors do this.

At the time both sides would have considered each other "traitors"... do you get to call them "traitors" today only because they lost? I didn't realize America was still fighting this conflict... I guess the people who care still feel you are.
 
I'm shocked by how many people say they should be destroyed instead of put on display in an isolated location, at the very least...

The bad points of history shouldn't be wiped out... they should be studied and learned from, even more so than the good points in history.

"History" with no context and objective fact isn't history, it's deification. You want to make the history argument then put up statues of slaves who died, of slaves who overthrew their masters, of slaves themselves who fought in the war.

Putting up statues on US territory of people who didn't want to be part of the US and seceded from it makes no sense, the argument about history makes even less sense because by such a remedial argument we should put up statues of Japanese pilots who bombed Pearl Harbor, you know to learn from history and all…
 
i hope they melt all these down and turn them into a giant megastatue of obama that you can see from anywhere in the state, purely out of spite
 
Just imagine how much better this country would be without Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee and Louisiana. Or at least if they weren't full of ignorant, "Christian" fundies.
 

HylianTom

Banned
If you're going to build a megastatue of someone to spite Louisianians, I can think of better candidates than Obama.
I once asked someone from Covington how their residents would feel if people from New Orleans dictated that they must keep a statue of Hillary-&-Barack-hugging in one of their prominent public spaces. 😋
 

Koomaster

Member
Good lord, if you want to study these statues I bet there are tons of pictures of them. Today we have something called the 'internet' - may have heard of it. Lots of information to be gathered there, including studying statues if your heart so desires.

We really really don't need physical representations anymore of these guys holding up literal white supremacy plaques.

Again I say if people really don't want them destroyed, then stick them in the middle of a landfill and let all who admire them reek of filth.
 

Slayven

Member
Artistic value / merit then? I don't know... of course statues of Hitler would have been destroyed, but at this time it would be interesting to have some around to look at...



At the time both sides would have considered each other "traitors"... do you get to call them "traitors" today only because they lost? I didn't realize America was still fighting this conflict... I guess the people who care still feel you are.

You really going to cape for people that were fighting to keep other humans as cattle? To keep the right to murder, rape, mutilate them as they please? We really "both sides" this bullshit.

Must be great to be so above the bullshit like human rights
 

SummitAve

Banned
If using public founds to preserve and keep this monuments is an issue I think they should be scrapped and reused to form a new monument so that history of the statues can be preserved while building a more worthwhile historical foundation to remember. Simply destroying them seems like a waste of potential positive value. People in the future should know that this battle of ideas was fought in 2017.
 
Artistic value / merit then? I don't know... of course statues of Hitler would have been destroyed, but at this time it would be interesting to have some around to look at...



At the time both sides would have considered each other "traitors"... do you get to call them "traitors" today only because they lost? I didn't realize America was still fighting this conflict... I guess the people who care still feel you are.
These traitors seceded from the United States because they wanted to keep their slaves and fired on a federal fort that started a civil war. These people are traitors by its definition.
 

besada

Banned
I find it weird that people conflate erasing history with getting rid of monuments. The history doesn't disappear, and we don't forget it, just because there's not a monument up somewhere. The purpose of a monument isn't as an aide to memory, it's because we are memorializing things that speak to our values and are important to us.

Robert E Lee and his entire history aren't going to be forgotten because a statue gets moved, or even destroyed. The Civil War still happened, he still lost, no one is forgetting any time soon. The argument that the statues themselves are important is much akin to the idea that it's the flag, rather than what it represents, that's important.

Both ideas are wrong-headed. They're just objects that we've imbued with meaning, and the specific meaning those statues were imbued with is a thing no reasonable American believes in anymore.

Stick them in a little room somewhere and call it a Confederate Museum.
 

Cocaloch

Member
I'm shocked by how many people say they should be destroyed instead of put on display in an isolated location, at the very least...

The bad points of history shouldn't be wiped out... they should be studied and learned from, even more so than the good points in history.

History isn't just a bunch of statues.

These traitors seceded from the United States because they wanted to keep their slaves and fired on a federal fort that started a civil war. These people are traitors by its definition.

He's right in suggesting that the CSA didn't see themselves as that. Much like the Colonists didn't see themselves as that in the revolutionary war.

The south being traitors isn't the issue here. The fact that they supported racial slavery is the issue. It's fine to have statues of traitors. It isn't fine to have statues glorifying racial slavery.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
At the time both sides would have considered each other "traitors"... do you get to call them "traitors" today only because they lost? I didn't realize America was still fighting this conflict... I guess the people who care still feel you are.

Uhh yes? They are very much traitors to the United States of America back during the civil war as much as they are today. They are the definition traitors.
 

dark_chris

Member
I mean, just move the statues to a museum. They're works of art and part of history, so just present them somewhere with context.

Fuck that obelisk though, no regrets on tearing that down.

I agree. They should have been moved to a museum and make it a learning experience for people. They didn't have to really tear them down
 
Artistic value / merit then? I don't know... of course statues of Hitler would have been destroyed, but at this time it would be interesting to have some around to look at...



At the time both sides would have considered each other "traitors"... do you get to call them "traitors" today only because they lost? I didn't realize America was still fighting this conflict... I guess the people who care still feel you are.
bruh

the south seceded from the union because they didn't let slavery expand as much as the south wanted to

there was only one side of traitors
 
Colin Moriarty did a really good video on this very topic for Colin's Last Stand.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLrn5eE-wMY

He basically calls the Confederate leaders all traitors and thinks it was BS how they received zero punishment after the war for their traitorous actions. As for the monuments, he completely agrees with them being taken down from public lands and placed in museums.
 
Some of you are trippin. And I'm dying at someone actually invoking "both sides" argument, what shit.

I agree. They should have been moved to a museum and make it a learning experience for people. They didn't have to really tear them down

How do you propose they move them to a museum without taking them down?
 
Colin Moriarty did a really good video on this very topic for Colin's Last Stand.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLrn5eE-wMY

He basically calls the Confederate leaders all traitors and thinks it was BS how they received zero punishment after the war for their traitorous actions. As for the monuments, he completely agrees with them being taken down from public lands and placed in museums.

This is a pretty surprising stance for him to take tbh
 
History isn't just a bunch of statues.



He's right in suggesting that the CSA didn't see themselves as that. Much like the Colonists didn't see themselves as that in the revolutionary war.

The south being traitors isn't the issue here. The fact that they supported racial slavery is the issue. It's fine to have statues of traitors. It isn't fine to have statues glorifying racial slavery.

They might not have seen themselves as traitors, but they were they still traitors.
 

Cocaloch

Member
They might not have seen themselves as traitors, but they were they still traitors.

Sure, but what he's saying is that traitor is one of those notoriously slippy words that lacks much in the way of analytical value in favor or pure rhetoric. Look at the conversation earlier in the thread on Cromwell.

Focusing on them being traitors is pointless anyway.

Focus on the thing they did which was actually bad. Which is supporting racial slavery.
 
At the time both sides would have considered each other "traitors"... do you get to call them "traitors" today only because they lost? I didn't realize America was still fighting this conflict... I guess the people who care still feel you are.

Whether both would have considered each other traitors means little since only one of those sides were factually correct in standing by the union and the imperative to free slaves. They are not traitors because they lost, they are traitors because of their actions and beliefs. Those who still buy into their shit today are traitors to the ideal of the US as a land where all men are free as well as traitors to the human race as a whole for believing their race is inherently superior to another.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Sure, but what he's saying is that traitor is one of those notoriously slippy words that lacks much in the way of analytical value in favor or pure rhetoric. Look at the conversation earlier in the thread on Cromwell.

Focusing on them being traitors is pointless anyway.

Focus on the thing they did which was actually bad. Which is supporting racial slavery.

They became traitors because of their continued and ardent support slavery, oh and states rights... to own people. What is with the semantics games people are playing to not call these people what they were?
 

Cocaloch

Member
They became traitors because of their continued and ardent support slavery, oh and states rights... to own people. What is with the semantics games people are playing to not call these people what they were?

I mean literally in your statement you're turning this into it being about racial slavery. This is the root of the issue. Focusing on anything else gives apologists room in which to maneuver.

I'm not sure what you're getting at with semantic games here. I'm certainly not trying to paint this figures in a positive light.
 
At the time both sides would have considered each other "traitors"... do you get to call them "traitors" today only because they lost? I didn't realize America was still fighting this conflict... I guess the people who care still feel you are.

No, it's definitely the Confederacy that were fucking traitors for the following reasons:

- Hypocritical Confederacy refused to allow East Tennessee to rejoin the union
- No where in the constitution gave confederate states the right to leave the union
- Confederacy only started because confederate states refused to accept that explicit slavery was going to soon go away
- Confederates were ALREADY engaging in war-like behavior with the shit they did in Kansas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacking_of_Lawrence
 

Mael

Member
Once torn down, these statues' only purpose now would be to remind people how the people in the state viewed the traitors long after their rebellion was quashed.
As it is, it's a good piece of history to show how willfully blind people were in trying to glorify actual slavery and white supremacy.
 

Lunar15

Member
The protests only strengthen my resolve that the statues should be removed.

People want to talk about "remembering history", but it's pretty clear what's going on. Especially when the same people like to "forget" certain parts of history.

That said, I think they should be placed somewhere. Knowing that one statue literally had a line about white supremacy carved into it was an eye opener and I'd like people to know that existed.
 
Sure, but what he's saying is that traitor is one of those notoriously slippy words that lacks much in the way of analytical value in favor or pure rhetoric. Look at the conversation earlier in the thread on Cromwell.

Focusing on them being traitors is pointless anyway.


Focus on the thing they did which was actually bad. Which is supporting racial slavery.

Would you rather call them Successionist then? The CSA was formed to protect slavery when the federal government had a party that had anti-slavery as one of the main points and wanted the states to move away from slavery and abolished it. It says in the Constitution that no states can leave the Union and they did it anyway. They open fire against the federal government by attacking Fort Sumter that were the first shots of the civil war.
 

Cocaloch

Member
Would you rather call them Successionist then? The CSA was formed to protect slavery when the federal government had a party that had anti-slavery as one of the main points and wanted the states to move away from slavery and abolished it. It says in the Constitution that no states can leave the Union and they did it anyway.

If we're talking about them in the context of taking down statues I'd prefer to call them Militant White Supremacists.

The reason succession was bad was because it was done to preserve a particularly horrible system of white supremacy. Focus on the actual problem here.

(On a tangent: the GOP also wasn't anti-slavery so much as anti-slave power. The South succeeded because they misunderstood that.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom