Originally Posted by Banshee
I have always judged men on who they are and how they act not what they look like.

I don't know what any of you look like. I am just pointing out that the appeal to history aligns itself with Nazi ideology.

I appreciate your perspective Banshee. I think you need to realize that despite the hardships you face, if you were African American you would have statistically been starting at a disadvantage. Part of that comes from the persistence of racist attitudes stemming from the civil war and specifically the presence of symbols and acts of racism in our government. This is part of the struggle that African Americans face, and they say that removing these statues is an important step for them to help even the field for their persuit of the American dream. For them, this is not pointless whining, but rather a clear physical manifestation of their disadvantage, one that can be easily addressed immediately, unlike the systemic prejudice it helps perpetuate.

Originally Posted by Derid

My entire broadside against your faction and thinking targeted the means, not the ends.

The "how" is important, and that is where you are failing.

Purported ends do not justify the means. If your approach to dealing with racism actually ends up creating more division, and providing safe haven for the racists, then shouldn't you rethink the tactics? This is a widespread problem with the larger left, where addressing real instances of racial injustice in a thoughtful manner have taken a back seat to finding ways to self-flagellate over white guilt and touting one's own supposed moral enlightenment.

Rhetorical questions like "what if everyone simply agreed to X" are reminiscent of hippy magical thinking "what if everyone just decided to make love not war, wouldn't the world suddenly be great". Sure, it would be, now lets deal with a reality that is drastically more complex.

I am arguing about the "why," not the "how." I appreciate that there is a debate about the "how," but it is separate from the "why." However, I will say that I support Goriom's analysis of Trump's speech immediately following Charlottesville, and again I believe that inaction and dismissal of the issue is itself indicative of the problem.

This is not a hypothetical argument. That we have statues romanticizing traitors and slavers in government property is one of the most literal, and tangible, instances of racial injustice I can think of. Many people in this thread, including yourself, and in America generally have literally stated that they don't actually care about the statues. Fine, but then please get out of the way instead of aligning yourself with Nazis.

Originally Posted by Sini
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.

Originally Posted by Sini
Originally Posted by rhaikh
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. I grant that some people dismiss any debate about race as an unncessary distraction, although they are wrong, and I'll accept that you grant that they were contemporaneously racist.

Originally Posted by Sini
Originally Posted by rhaikh
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.

Originally Posted by Sini
Originally Posted by rhaikh
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. But for the rest of them, since these people can be most generously described as traitors, and this obvious description is not provided in a contexualized way, then it's clear that the historical value does not outweigh the recurring cost to society. I don't even really need to invoke issues of race to prove this point.

Originally Posted by Sini
Originally Posted by rhaikh
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.

I honestly don't understand your argument. 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.

Originally Posted by Sini
Originally Posted by rhaikh
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. I'm not going to check under people's shirts for swastika tattoos before I challenge white supremacist ideology and call it out for what it is. I don't care what their motivation is.

Originally Posted by Sini
Originally Posted by rhaikh
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 because the statues are not solemn symbols of regret, they are presented as heroic romanticizations.

People aren't born racist. If your father is a Nazi and you walk around town and there are grandiose symbols aligned with his world view in the public square, you are more likely to end up just like him, and the inverse is also true.

[Linked Image]