I personally can't stand knee-jerk shaming. He could be advocating for a feasible solution for a world peace, and the moment he attempted shaming I'd be against it.
Yes, we've already established that you care more about the attendance of debate club than the agenda.
You at least have to pause to consider that there might be others that would feel that way. Wait, what if there was a better way to convince others... No, that is crazy talk. More shaming got to do the tick.
in whole or in part to signal that the communities they reside in stand for the ideology of white supremacy and white nationalism.
This is unsubstantiated assertion. There are other possibilities that you have to consider - that this was at one point true, but with time no longer the case; that it might intend to signal such, but is ineffective at doing so; that for many different people it stands for different things, while you might be correct in case of supremacists, there are many non-supremacists that take different meaning from these.
If you want me to prove that people agree with me that the statues are racist in the present, then just turn on the news.
So we now settle debate by media frenzy? Need I remind you that this approach brought us Trump? He would still be peddling stakes if less people "just turn on the news".
Nazis today wish to maintain the status quo, to further their own cause of white nationalism.
Status quo is irrelevance and powerlessness of Nazis.
As I said earlier, I am referring to the status quo of having racist monuments in prominent public places.
You repeatedly failed to establish that they are racists. Simply stating it again won't do it. I hope you eventually catch on and stop doing the same thing over and over again hoping for a different outcome.
spurious dog-whistle arguments about the historical value of these statues
You might not like it, but these statues do have historical value. You can't argue it away, the best you can do is present arguments why we should disregard this value.
Since many of these monuments were mass produced, they have as much historical value as an old fashioned sardine can.
This is actually a good argument, I am glad you are trying. Less shaming, and couple more arguments and you might start convincing people.
since these people can be most generously described as traitors
This is not a good argument. Many people from south see them as patriots and this has nothing to do with slavery. Southern Identity is a real thing and your attempts to deny it exists would be seen as an attack. Since it isn't core of your argument, you are better off not mentioning it to not unnecessary alienate people.
Aside from being disingenuous, these arguments are demonstrably false because history books and museums will continue to exist
It is very easy to demonstrate that a great deal of historical artifacts, places, monuments and so on exist outside of museums. To use your flawed logic - lets tear down White House and replace it with a soulless modern office building, after all it will still exist in museums and history books.
If a certain local government decided to remove their symbols of slavery, and gave the United Daughters of the Confederacy or the KKK or whomever desired to foot the bill the authority to move them into a museum, I am not opposed.
I am not opposed to that either, but this is not what we were talking about up to this point. It was lawless and often violent demonstrators that were not local that pulled down these statues in front of cameras while yelling various endearing phrases like "down with white privilege!"
By supporting these arguments and rejecting their clear purpose, you are therefore de facto, in action if not in spirit, supporting the cause of white nationalism.
This is fallacy.
What you say can by transcribed as follows:
Nazi argue monuments are historical
You argue monuments are historical
Therefore you are a Nazi
Nazi like cheese
You like cheese
Therefore you are a Nazi
I hope even you can see how ridiculous and broken such arguments are.
One problem I keep bringing up, and you keep ignoring, that reaction to tearing down statues would actually push some, people that see these statues as part of Southern Identity, to sympathize/side with supremacists?
Opinions on cheese are ideologically orthogonal to the ideology of white supremacy. Arguments about historical value of symbols of slavery are parallel.
You can't fix your broken argument without adding another premise. I won't fix it for you, as it is sufficient to point out that:
1. Nazi argue monuments are historical
2. You argue monuments are historical
Therefore you are a Nazi
Is fallacious. That is, you can't conclude I am a nazi based on 1. and 2. alone. Even if you have pictures of me in a white robe in a front of a burning cross doing nazi salute while holding a copy of mein kampf the argument is wrong.
Additionally they serve as false signals to white people that racism is normal, which when combined with all other sources of normalization, contributes to the perpetuation of racism and systemic oppression.
How do you see this actually working? That is, you keep asserting that these statues lead to increased racism. However, you fail to outline any mechanism for this.
Two can play this game: These statues serve as a reminders of regretful past and the necessity to not repeat it to everyone involved. This contributes to reduction of racism and deeper understanding between different racial groups.
Both of these arguments are pure BS. These statues do not change how people treat each other.
Yeah, your argument is BS
My argument is BS because it is unsubstantiated. So is yours.