Split Thread Tearing Down Statues Associated With Racial Injustice

[Mumbles]

To me, it just sounds like more "This is what matters, and I'm only going to talk about this! And anyone who says anything else is......" (fill in the blank with racist, or racist apologetics, or whatever is convenient at the time.)

Washington and Grant are "collateral damage". It's just a way of saying, "If it's not important to me, it doesn't matter."

We can always just...wait a year or three after we get rid of the statues of traitorous slavers that are meant to tell people like me that I'm inferior because of my skin color.

Local governments could even get off their behinds and speed up the process, imagine that.

I still don't love the idea of amateurs yanking down statues, just as I didn't like seeing Bree Newsome climbing that flagpole (that was protected by guards *and* fencing) to take down that damn flag.

Don't like wearing a mask every time I go to a store because of some virus, either.

But none of this garbage should be there now in the first place. Their presence alone is a sign that officials ****** up colossally.

 

[dann]

The outrage culture we see these days is hilariously contradictory, guys like Bill Burr made a good career out of commenting on it in front of an audience.

People being outraged by monuments to slavers is fair play, obviously, but people being outraged on behalf of other people is just funny, it's the ultimate in Chris Crocker behaviour.

Do you mean that since no slave is alive today, and anybody who disapproves of slavery is thus 'outraged on behalf of other people', nobody has a right to be outraged about slavery?
Or do you mean that only descendants of slaves have a right to be outraged about slavery?
That sounds racist to me.

 

[johnny karate]

There's plenty of contradictory behaviour taking place, not just here, but on social media and in society in general, again, I've spoken about it before. The fact that you can't be arsed to look and simply want me to satisfy your laziness by sending you some kind of link in which I literally name a person being contradictory and then elaborate on why they're being contradictory is just a weird kind of reaction to what I'm saying.

I’m not sure why my unwillingness to do the research to substantiate your claim makes me the lazy one.

It seems the only thing here that is lazy are your arguments.

Not many, I get on here for a couple of hours every couple of days, the rest of my time is taken up with work and actually bothering to help my community out in person rather than blathering about it on the internet.

Someone else posting online in a manner with which you disagree is ridiculous and a waste of time.

You posting online to complain about those people is perfectly fine and a good use of time.

Yeah, that tracks.

Who said I was offended? Are you feeling outrage on my behalf?

Well, you seem pretty put out by all of this. You might not actually be offended, but you certainly come across that way.

And no, I’m not outraged on your behalf. I tend to save my outrage for things that matter.

 

[William Parcher]

I dunno, Uncle Ben's is a pretty big brand over here, well, in terms of its place in the rice/sauce market. I'd be surprised if they faded into obscurity. I just think they'll keep going but will find themselves being confused about who they are, brand-wise. Unless they can spin it into being less negative, but still keep the Uncle Ben character.

You should already know that Uncle Ben's Europe is deleting the image of Ben. It was cited numerous times upthread. You guys over there are going to totally stop seeing Ben but it will still be the same rice and sauces.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Do you mean that since no slave is alive today, and anybody who disapproves of slavery is thus 'outraged on behalf of other people', nobody has a right to be outraged about slavery?
Or do you mean that only descendants of slaves have a right to be outraged about slavery?
That sounds racist to me.

I was commenting on "outrage culture" in general, and our ability to spend so much time being outraged because, for the vast majority of outraged people, they have a lot of free time on their hands. As for slavery, there are many slaves around today, they're just not really being noticed.

Of course people have the right to be outraged by slavery, I literally said that in a comment a few posts back.

 

[Meadmaker]

Statues are monuments to a person or event, not historical records of that person or event. We have libraries and museums for that.

I was explicitly talking about "disowning" history, or emulating the people in it. That's what statues are for. It's a way of us telling the next generation, "I want you to know about this." It's more than just a museum piece.

So, we should be careful what we put up, and over time, what we want to tell the next generation might change, so statues can be removed when they no longer fit the desires of our society, if they send the wrong message.

I just don't want to leave that decision to whoever happens to have a rope.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

I’m not sure why my unwillingness to do the research to substantiate your claim makes me the lazy one.

It seems the only thing here that is lazy are your arguments.

Not really, I spoke about outrage culture, I've gone into it before in this thread, you've just decided to swan in and demand that I offer some kind of evidence of a person being contradictory or else my point is somehow invalidated. That's frankly just strange, but you do you, mate.

Someone else posting online in a manner with which you disagree is ridiculous and a waste of time.

I never really said that, did I? I've said that many of these people would be far better off actually instigating the changes they demand to see, as opposed to sitting about on the internet talking about it.

You posting online to complain about those people is perfectly fine and a good use of time.

I'm not really concerned with what people spend their time doing, I just find it funny that so many people often spend their time doing absolutely nothing for charity in their local community.

Well, you seem pretty put out by all of this. You might not actually be offended, but you certainly come across that way.

Of all of the problems in life that could potentially cause me bother, an ISF debate about statues isn't really up there.

And no, I’m not outraged on your behalf. I tend to save my outrage for things that matter.

Good, I hope you actually seek to do something about that outrage besides making social media posts about it like most half-arsed people.

 

[Meadmaker]

We can always just...wait a year or three after we get rid of the statues of traitorous slavers that are meant to tell people like me that I'm inferior because of my skin color.

Local governments could even get off their behinds and speed up the process, imagine that.

I still don't love the idea of amateurs yanking down statues, just as I didn't like seeing Bree Newsome climbing that flagpole (that was protected by guards *and* fencing) to take down that damn flag.

Don't like wearing a mask every time I go to a store because of some virus, either.

But none of this garbage should be there now in the first place. Their presence alone is a sign that officials ****** up colossally.

I agree with this. Sometimes it takes a bit of rule-breaking to break the complacency and get something done. I have some sympathy.

In this case, though, I think we're throwing out the good with the bad, and I think that was predictable as the statue destruction began. The crowds seemed kind of mindless, and I think that has been proven by subsequent events.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

You should already know that Uncle Ben's Europe is deleting the image of Ben. It was cited numerous times upthread. You guys over there are going to totally stop seeing Ben but it will still be the same rice and sauces.

Uncle Ben: the Man Who Wasn't There.

Be interesting to see how the brand markets themselves going forward, as I recall many of their adverts being voiced by a black American fella, presumably supposed to be the Uncle Ben.

 

[Meadmaker]

People don't have to be consistent before they are allowed to do good.

In the context of this conversation, I find this kind of funny.

A lot of people whose statues have come down had done some good in their lifetimes, even if they were not consistently good.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

In the context of this conversation, I find this kind of funny.

A lot of people whose statues have come down had done some good in their lifetimes, even if they were not consistently good.

With regards to my city, this perfectly describes William Gladstone. He's being attacked for his father's links to slavery, as well as his own tentative links to it, yet the man actually fought for welfare rights for all, and the right to vote, among many other things. The case for Gladstone isn't as black and white as people here are making out, it really is a case of people searching through history books looking for witches to burn.

With Colston? Yeah, fair enough, have away with him. A guy like Gladstone isn't as clear cut as Colston.

 

[William Parcher]

Be interesting to see how the brand markets themselves going forward, as I recall many of their adverts being voiced by a black American fella, presumably supposed to be the Uncle Ben.

That is all to suddenly vanish. Everything changes - but it's the same rice and sauces.

But it isn't just Ben. Upthread you saw cites stating that Aunt Jemimah Europe is deleting her picture. Also cited is the fact that Aunt Jemimah Europe is still portrayed as being a "black mammy" in advertising and marketing. That persona of Aunt Jemimah was deleted in North America decades ago. Here, she was stripped of all "mammyness" and turned into "just a regular black woman with some gray hair."

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

That is all to suddenly vanish. Everything changes - but it's the same rice and sauces.

But it isn't just Ben. Upthread you saw cites stating that Aunt Jemimah Europe is deleting her picture. Also cited is the fact that Aunt Jemimah Europe is still portrayed as being a "black mammy" in advertising and marketing. That persona of Aunt Jemimah was deleted in North America decades ago. Here, she was stripped of all "mammyness" and turned into "just a regular black woman with some gray hair."

I can't say I disagree with it, if that's what people want, and apparently they do. Though I am admittedly just perplexed by it all as it feels like we're now just looking for anything that may or may not be offensive to somebody, somewhere.

 

[wareyin]

In the context of this conversation, I find this kind of funny.

A lot of people whose statues have come down had done some good in their lifetimes, even if they were not consistently good.

Jefferson Davis once petted a puppy, so he wasn't all bad?

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

I was commenting on "outrage culture" in general, and our ability to spend so much time being outraged because, for the vast majority of outraged people, they have a lot of free time on their hands. As for slavery, there are many slaves around today, they're just not really being noticed.

Of course people have the right to be outraged by slavery, I literally said that in a comment a few posts back.

I think we should start limiting people to only being outraged about two things. Although it'd really cut down on new threads and Internet usage in general. Just pick your top two and concentrate your outrage there.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Jefferson Davis once petted a puppy, so he wasn't all bad?

Oh, c'mon. That's a ridiculous characterization of what was said.

 

[jimbob]

Then let's follow Lenin who was saying basically the same (well definitely the first part). I'm afraid the situation does not need a violent revolution, the 'institutional racism' is a perception carefully cultivated by the 'progressive activists (finally yes the core of postmodernist 'progressive' ideology is deeply flawed).

That well known left-wing organisation, the Telegraph had a series of tweets on racial inequality in the UK

https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1271116234411708416?s=20

 

[johnny karate]

I was explicitly talking about "disowning" history, or emulating the people in it. That's what statues are for. It's a way of us telling the next generation, "I want you to know about this." It's more than just a museum piece.

So, we should be careful what we put up, and over time, what we want to tell the next generation might change, so statues can be removed when they no longer fit the desires of our society, if they send the wrong message.

I just don't want to leave that decision to whoever happens to have a rope.

Your notion of what statues mean and the function they serve is patently false.

No one forgets about the Civil War because a statue of Robert E. Lee is taken down.

History is recorded in books, not sculptures.

 

[Meadmaker]

Your notion of what statues mean and the function they serve is patently false.

That's hilarious.

 

[johnny karate]

Not really, I spoke about outrage culture, I've gone into it before in this thread, you've just decided to swan in and demand that I offer some kind of evidence of a person being contradictory or else my point is somehow invalidated. That's frankly just strange, but you do you, mate.

Your claim remains unsubstantiated.

I never really said that, did I? I've said that many of these people would be far better off actually instigating the changes they demand to see, as opposed to sitting about on the internet talking about it.

Like you’re doing now, you mean.

I'm not really concerned with what people spend their time doing, I just find it funny that so many people often spend their time doing absolutely nothing for charity in their local community.

Yes, those hypothetical people you’ve imagined really are something.

Of all of the problems in life that could potentially cause me bother, an ISF debate about statues isn't really up there.

And yet here you are, wasting time discussing something you now claim to not really care that much about.

Surely, there is a local charity in need that could make better use of your idle time.

Good, I hope you actually seek to do something about that outrage besides making social media posts about it like most half-arsed people.

Oh sweet irony.