Split Thread Tearing Down Statues Associated With Racial Injustice

[Meadmaker]

However:

"I have always thought `Dixie’ one of the best tunes I have ever heard. Our adversaries over the way attempted to appropriate it, but I insisted yesterday that we fairly captured it. [Applause.] I presented the question to the Attorney General, and he gave it as his legal opinion that it is our lawful prize. [Laughter and applause.] I now request the band to favor me with its performance.”

--Abraham Lincoln


My preferred lyrics:

Away down South in the land of traitors,
Rattlesnakes and alligators,
Right away, come away, right away, come away.
Where cotton's king and men are chattels,
Union boys will win the battles,
Right away, come away, right away, come away.

Then we'll all go down to Dixie,
Away, away,
Each Dixie boy must understand,
That he must mind his Uncle Sam,
Away, away,
And we'll all go down to Dixie.
Away, away,
And we'll all go down to Dixie.

That one came up in a youtube mix once. (Yeah, my musical tastes aren't exactly modern.)

 

[Minoosh]

Could any of the more nonsensical statue toppings have been perpetrated by right-wing groups in order to advance the narrative that BLM types etc. are ignorant and out of control?

Off-topic, in the documentary "The Control Room," an Al-Jazeera producer makes a strong case that the toppling of a Saddam statue in Baghdad was absolutely a PR stunt orchestrated by the U.S. Nothing spontaneous about it, just a piece of propaganda. The "protesters" had the wrong accents, erected an outdated flag, were (IIRC) using outdated currency and were filmed in a way meant to overstate the size of the crowd, its motives and the spontaneous nature of the act.

Really excellent flick IMO.

 

[Meadmaker]

Could any of the more nonsensical statue toppings have been perpetrated by right-wing groups in order to advance the narrative that BLM types etc. are ignorant and out of control?

None of the statues were toppled clandestinely, that I am aware of. All the ones I know of, including the recent Wisconsin ones, were done by angry mobs.

I saw a quote in one article saying that they pulled down "Forward" because the state wasn't really going forward, so the statue had to come down because...............I don't temember the exact words. It was kind of incoherent.

Off-topic, in the documentary "The Control Room," an Al-Jazeera producer makes a strong case that the toppling of a Saddam statue in Baghdad was absolutely a PR stunt orchestrated by the U.S. Nothing spontaneous about it, just a piece of propaganda. The "protesters" had the wrong accents, erected an outdated flag, were (IIRC) using outdated currency and were filmed in a way meant to overstate the size of the crowd, its motives and the spontaneous nature of the act.

Really excellent flick IMO.

That's kind of interesting, but there's really no doubt that the US was involved. If I recall right, they hooked the chains to a Humvee to bring it down. I'm sure there were plenty of Iraqi people willing to assist and cheer, though.

As for "wrong accents", I wonder what accents there were. I know Iraq has a lot of ethnic groups. Do they have different accents? I know that Saddam's popularity varied widely among ethnic groups. One thing I'm absolutely certain of is that the Us did not load up a bunch of Bradleys with Arabic actors waving old Iraqi money in order to stage the stunt.

I'm equally certain that the right wing didn't infiltrate BLM demonstrations and topple statues for propaganda purposes.

 

[Minoosh]

As for "wrong accents", I wonder what accents there were. I know Iraq has a lot of ethnic groups. Do they have different accents? I know that Saddam's popularity varied widely among ethnic groups. One thing I'm absolutely certain of is that the Us did not load up a bunch of Bradleys with Arabic actors waving old Iraqi money in order to stage the stunt.

IIRC correctly, yes, there are different Iraqi accents, and the producer criticizing the event said they were not from the city. And as to your certainty, what makes you so certain? There were actually very few people in the frame; just a few guys, which makes it more feasible that the scene was staged indicating that the scene was staged. IIRC the statue-puller-downers inserted a U.S. flag, but that was taken down and an Iraqi flag put up. But it was an odd choice of flag according to the Al-Jazeera producer, some rare out-of-date item and not one that really fit into the "spontaneous" narrative. Yes, the producer seemed somewhat conspiracy-minded, cynical, but not conspicuously kookie. The only reason I bring it up, since it's off-topic, is that staging a snippet of video that will be played over and over again without much context is not all that difficult.

I'll look for a clip.

I'm equally certain that the right wing didn't infiltrate BLM demonstrations and topple statues for propaganda purposes.

Again ... you're certain? Why? I'm not arguing that my speculation is correct, but I don't see why something like that couldn't happen. False flags are a thing, aren't they? Stunts are meant to be manipulative ... that's what makes them stunts.

 

[Meadmaker]

And as to your certainty, what makes you so certain? There were actually very few people in the frame

I just watchied it on youtube. There were at least 150. And why am I so certain? The same reason every other conspiracy theory falls apart. It would be too complex to manage.

I think it's entirely possible that the US soldiers taking down the statue spread the word. It was very definitely a US operation. It wasn't even a Humvee. It was some sort of small armored vehicle that pulled it down, with US soldiers attaching the chains.

Again ... you're certain? Why? I'm not arguing that my speculation is correct, but I don't see why something like that couldn't happen. False flags are a thing, aren't they? Stunts are meant to be manipulative ... that's what makes them stunts.

False flags are a very rare thing. Not completely unknown, but extremely rare. Look right here on this thread for a moment. You will see lots of people cheering on that destruction. I'm pretty sure that the people in the angry mobs were perfectly capable of thinking it was a good idea, although I would like to talk to the people who pulled down Colonel Heg. I saw the explanation about "Forward", but I haven't see anyone defend pulling down Heg.

I think the answer is "old white guy must be bad" mixed with "pulling down statues is fun."

 

[Minoosh]

Of course I'm misremembering a few things. These are YouTube videos with slightly different emphases. One obvious problem is how media packs are super-interested in footage that can be played over and over again with commentators offering spirited narration on what it all means. It really doesn't have much to do with the topic of Confederate monuments, but it does speak to the ease of manipulating media events. To re-iterate, I don't know what's to stop fake "BLM" or "antifa" groups from attacking some popular monument and disseminating it on social media as an example of protests getting out of hand. IMO it's not only quite possible but also potentially inevitable.

Saddam Statue Media Hoax

The Toppling: How the Media Created the Iconic Fall of Saddam's Statue

ETA: Just saw your reply; thanks for looking it up. I don't know how rare false flags are. I'm just urging people to be skeptical of video from events that may be more staged than spontaneous. We know the pitfalls, but what we "see with our own eyes" does still reinforce confirmation bias IMO.

ETA2: And it's not like this concept is so farfetched at the moment. Right-wing groups have been been provoking violence in order to blame left-wing groups.

 

[William Parcher]

False flags are a very rare thing. Not completely unknown, but extremely rare.

I'm not talking about statues, but we can't really know how rare or common false flag things are. This is because we can't know how many are not reported (for any possible reason) and we can't know how many false flags were so successful that they remain being regarded widely, or universally, as authentic.

 

[bruto]

The guy who wrote the song "Dixie" wrote it before Abe Lincoln was elected and....here's the thing.....he didn't make up the name for the territory. That was already in use. He called the song "Dixie" (Or was the actual title "I wish I was in Dixie"?) because the place that it referred to was already called "Dixie". Mason and Dixon drew their line even before there was a USA, much less a CSA.

Oh, but........I don't know exactly what the response will be, but there will be some reason that just because ......IT"S RACIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


But if we're banning racist names, can we ban anything with "Alabama" in the name? Including Alabama. Just erase the whole damned state. Who would miss it?

Yes, but we know that the Mason Dixon line, though it long predated the Civil War, became the dividing line between free and slave states, and most who aren't into parsing things down the last atom would likely acknowledge that Dixie became synonymous with slave territory, and later with segregation. A "Dixiecrat" for example, was more than just a former Southern Democrat. Now granted, it's come also at times, just to mean the South and as such it refers to southern things which may or may not relate directly to slavery and race, such as "Dixieland Jazz" or the Dixie Chicks, or Winn-Dixie supermarkets, but if some people find their names carry uncomfortable connotations, who are we to say they shouldn't?

Citing the song "Dixie" might not be the wisest choice here, with its equivocal history as a blackface minstrel song that became a virtual anthem of the Confederacy.

The fact that certain things predate the Civil War is undoubtedly true, but one of the things that predates it is slavery and racial bigotry. The Confederacy may be the most visible sore on the body politic, but it is certainly not the only one.

 

[Emily's Cat]

but if some people find their names carry uncomfortable connotations, who are we to say they shouldn't?

Yeah, all those people named Karen shoulda known better, amirite?

 

[Meadmaker]

Yes, but we know that the Mason Dixon line, though it long predated the Civil War, became the dividing line between free and slave states, and most who aren't into parsing things down the last atom would likely acknowledge that Dixie became synonymous with slave territory, and later with segregation. A "Dixiecrat" for example, was more than just a former Southern Democrat. Now granted, it's come also at times, just to mean the South and as such it refers to southern things which may or may not relate directly to slavery and race, such as "Dixieland Jazz" or the Dixie Chicks, or Winn-Dixie supermarkets, but if some people find their names carry uncomfortable connotations, who are we to say they shouldn't?

Citing the song "Dixie" might not be the wisest choice here, with its equivocal history as a blackface minstrel song that became a virtual anthem of the Confederacy.

The fact that certain things predate the Civil War is undoubtedly true, but one of the things that predates it is slavery and racial bigotry. The Confederacy may be the most visible sore on the body politic, but it is certainly not the only one.

So did Alabama. Get rid of it.

ETA: In all seriousness, what are we to call that portion of the country where "grits" are a food, not a joke?

As for the commercial usages, they should do whatever they think is best for their brand, but it's unfortunate that people go to such lengths to find something wrong with some people.

 

[Elagabalus]

...Now granted, it's come also at times, just to mean the South and as such it refers to southern things which may or may not relate directly to slavery and race, such as "Dixieland Jazz" or the Dixie Chicks, or Winn-Dixie supermarkets, but if some people find their names carry uncomfortable connotations, who are we to say they shouldn't?

Perhaps they could change their name to Winn-Winn or Winn-Ning.

 

[William Parcher]

ETA: In all seriousness, what are we to call that portion of the country where "grits" are a food, not a joke?

Grits are not a joke in any place where they are served. If you find yourself in a place where grits are a joke then you won't see them on the menu.

Grits are a food of the South, but not at all exclusively. This food is most common in the south and becomes less common as you go northwards. There the availability becomes more patchy, and the change gradient from south to north may not be even and smooth. Going straight north you could move from grits everywhere, to uncommon, and then right back to grits everywhere. But if you go north you will eventually find it very challenging to find grits on a menu.

The portion of the country where grits are a common staple food on menus is the South. But grits are on menus all over the place.

And you will indeed find them on some menus of very expensive gourmet restaurants in the Deep North. Best grits you ever ate - at the bargain price of $36 a plate. My deepest apologies sir, we ran out of our grits as they are very popular and we do use one exclusive artisanal heritage corn grower. Our supply is steady and we manage it for continual availability but it is not without occasional and brief shortages.

 

[SpitfireIX]

I mean, he did some good things. But he also wavered on Reconstruction, and I have difficulty believing that the corruption, incompetence and scandal that plagued his presidency had nothing to do with Grant, the man. There was also a nearly Trumpian sense of self-pity apparent in his second inaugural address:

"Notwithstanding this, throughout the war, and from my candidacy for my present office in 1868 to the close of the last Presidential campaign,I have been the subject of abuse and slander scarcely ever equaled in political history, which to-day I feel that I can afford to disregard in view of your verdict, which I gratefully accept as my vindication."

He says this eight years after Booth painted the walls with Lincoln's brains. But I guess he did say scarcely.

You definitely need to read a biography of Grant, especially if you think he was anything like Trump.

 

[mumblethrax]

You definitely need to read a biography of Grant, especially if you think he was anything like Trump.

I only said he had demonstrated a nearly Trumpian level of self-pity, and gave a specific example where he did so. The point was not that he's like Trump, and no hagiography is going to convince me that he didn't say it.

His policies towards Native Americans were better than his predecessors, but still amounted to cultural genocide, and his commitment to racial equality was limited, and largely driven by popular opinion. I'm not going to heap praise on anyone for that.

 

[bruto]

Yeah, all those people named Karen shoulda known better, amirite?

I think you misread my post, probably my fault. I did not mean why shouldn't the connotations be uncomfortable, but why shouldn't the bearers of the names be free to change them.

People named Karen have plenty of reason for annoyance at the new connotation of that name. If they decide to change it, though, we can lament that they have to, but it's none of our business if they do.

 

[metacristi]

I'd like to know what metacristi thinks "progressivism" means. 'Cause it sure doesn't seem to be what I think it means.

The comments here show rather that people don't even have a clue what they defend. Definitely not the freedom of expression. Yes today's progressivism has little in common with the Enlightenment type, being the result of the convergence of cultural relativist, postcolonial-Third-Wordlist, postmodernist (Foucault- inspired and others), cultural Marxist, cultural materialist (from anthropology) etc intellectual currents which morphed together strongly in the 1990s to yield what we see today, an ideology without commitment to truth, free speech, Reason ultimately. One which borrowed also quite many from the Bolshevik idea that violence is justified until the perceived enemy is completely destroyed (while not rejecting peaceful means when possible, Lenin definitely thought so).

If history teaches us anything this is that what allowed the society in America to recover from the excesses of McHartyism (extreme conservatism more widely) was exactly the commitment to freedom, deeply ingrained at the level of society at that time, even if dominated by conservative ideas (without this the 1968 protests for example or the gradual conquest of Academia by leftist ideas would not have been possible). Today this ability is no more there I'm afraid to temper the excesses of the progressivism of today (a mirror of McHartyism, if not a sort of inverse colonialism),. Collective aberrations of the past were reversible, this one (strong reasons to think so) can continue basically unabated.

 

[William Parcher]

I happen to know for a matter of fact that Robert Johnson is wrong here; for instance in my city the current city council, which is majority African-American, is moving to remove a Confederate statue in front of the city's courthouse, with all of the relevant dialogue at the most recent council meeting being made by the black city councilmen and black citizens giving talks in support. And the individuals on the city council are not young anarchist activists, they are older gentlemen.

Ok, we know that you were wrong about this thing where you said that Robert Johnson is wrong. Johnson was correct by your own definition of what it would mean to be correct.

This actually leaves you with no criticisms of anything that Johnson said. Is that true?

You can lodge your criticisms now, or agree that you have none.

 

[William Parcher]

Robert Johnson's always been like that - BET vastly improved in the years since he sold it to Viacom, although I do mean "years".

Ok, we know that Checkmite was wrong when he said that Johnson was wrong. And so by logical extension, you are wrong about that too. This leaves you with no criticisms of what Robert Johnson said.

Do you have any criticisms at all about what Johnson said?

 

[William Parcher]

She is White, no matter what color they make her. This is Disney and don't let them fool you. There is no limit to their cash and talent for the creation of illusion.

I just watched the trailer for Princess and the Frog (never saw the movie), and I can tell you that this isn't going to stand because it's racist. And it is not subtle at all. This highly entertaining children's movie will have to be deleted or blacklisted.

Right away Black Princess is in a castle where no black person ever lived unless they were a slave. Disney understands that if you put the Black Princess in a castle then the question of racism is off the table right at the start. Racists don't put Black Princesses in (white people) castles let alone acknowledge that a black girl could be some kind of Princess. That is unless she is living in a mud hut in Africa. They have Black Princesses and they are in the biggest mud huts which are castles. So, it's absolutely not racist and nobody is going to think that it would become racist either. Disney got this right.

The trailer then shows us that we will be seeing at least one "black mammy", and apparently some jokes about big black butts throughout. The black people are exactly like what white people imagine black people to be like. It doesn't matter if there is some accuracy because white people don't always get black people "wrong" when they create them in cartoons.

And it starts to make sense because the movie is coming from White Empire. The movie was made by Disney White Empire Corporation. They were always to be entertainment for white people and they still are. Princess and the Frog is entertainment for white people and it shows them good black people and the topic of racism isn't even on the table. Black people would also fill the theaters for this. They are the stars of the movie and Disney is so awesome. It's just so good and really funny. The audience can't get enough of it, and all the little girls demand to be Princesses no matter what race they are. Anyway, Disney is a redneck asshat wearing a Hugo Boss suit and they know people who are great at animation. Money is no object blocking any of their paths.

But people like myself and Robert Johnson don't drink this Kool-Aid. We see the castle right at start and we know that Disney White Empire is pouring the Kool-Aid. Then we see that white guys are currently pulling down statues, and it's almost like everything is Disney now. Who the hell put the white guys in the role of the rope pullers? They were paid to do that by Disney White Empire Corporation. Or maybe they want to be in an anti-racism Disney movie where in the end the white people are salvaged and rehabilitated so that they end up being good folks like the black people. It's an infinite stack of Disneys all the way down. Each one on the back of another. If the sight of it makes you dizzy - I've heard that a sip of Kool-Aid helps.

Check this out...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V27cj6fe19o

 

[Andy_Ross]

Trump Tweeted

Since imposing a very powerful 10 year prison sentence on those that Vandalize Monuments, Statues etc., with many people being arrested all over our Country, the Vandalism has completely stopped. Thank you!