Given the timeline, imagine Germans erecting Nazi/Hitler statues in the 2040s and 2050s to celebrate their culture and history. Who would put up with that?
Rewiring history..
- Thread starter magicjuan
- Start date
- Status
Given the timeline, imagine Germans erecting Nazi/Hitler statues in the 2040s and 2050s to celebrate their culture and history. Who would put up with that?
Bright spark, keep it current.
SpeedEFC
Player Valuation: £8m
To be honest I don't mind people renaming places and moving monuments and statues as long as they are preserved for future generations to study as we can today. People shouldn't have to live in the shadows of the past if it doesn't benefit their present and future and so should be able to remove or rename things if that's what they prefer given that they adequately preserve it for future generations. After all, if you insist on your environment not changing because it's always been like that then you are flying in the face of human nature and its need for improvement. Using "It's always been there!" as an excuse to keep things as they are would set a precedent that could hinder progress since you would be forced to stick with something even if something better could be put in its place.
Regarding the confederate statue debacles you've got to ask yourself why people are so concerned with having statues to people who were traitors to the USA all because they liked having slaves. There's plenty of American heroes you can make a statue of that upheld the ideals of the US that are much more deserving than Confederate generals and politicians who caused the bloodiest war in US history by a good margin. I don't blame people (especially black people) wanting them to be taken down since having such an overt display of anti-American ideals wouldn't sit right, this doesn't begin to take into account the power play these statues can be against black people since the statues are of people who would rather have them picking cotton as slaves than actual people that are equal to everyone else. You've got to wonder if the people that are so concerned with keeping these statues would be so vocal about keeping a statue of Malcolm X, Nat Turner or John Brown if they had been up for the same amount of time. However, I don't agree with their destruction since they should be put in museums so we can learn from their mistakes just like we do with Nazi paraphernalia or the slave trade.
Regarding the confederate statue debacles you've got to ask yourself why people are so concerned with having statues to people who were traitors to the USA all because they liked having slaves. There's plenty of American heroes you can make a statue of that upheld the ideals of the US that are much more deserving than Confederate generals and politicians who caused the bloodiest war in US history by a good margin. I don't blame people (especially black people) wanting them to be taken down since having such an overt display of anti-American ideals wouldn't sit right, this doesn't begin to take into account the power play these statues can be against black people since the statues are of people who would rather have them picking cotton as slaves than actual people that are equal to everyone else. You've got to wonder if the people that are so concerned with keeping these statues would be so vocal about keeping a statue of Malcolm X, Nat Turner or John Brown if they had been up for the same amount of time. However, I don't agree with their destruction since they should be put in museums so we can learn from their mistakes just like we do with Nazi paraphernalia or the slave trade.
johnnydawg68
Chairperson, People's Front of Saint Domingo
I'll only speak for the Confederate monuments since that's my backyard, but celebrating traitors whose cause was to uphold slavery and destroy our country by splitting it in half is not a worthy goal. Those statues were put up well after the Civil War and they had nothing to do with history and everything to do with white, aristocratic hegemony in the South.
Also:
Currently I'm reading a very interesting book called Magicians of the Gods
It highlights how the history we are/were taught at school is not correct but because it has been taught to so many, it is harder to change. One of the reasons that the history is wrong is due to methods used during the dating of objects was either not as accurate as readings today or because environmental conditions were not taken into account.
Religion takes a good hammering as you'd expect.
It highlights how the history we are/were taught at school is not correct but because it has been taught to so many, it is harder to change. One of the reasons that the history is wrong is due to methods used during the dating of objects was either not as accurate as readings today or because environmental conditions were not taken into account.
Religion takes a good hammering as you'd expect.
tommye
Player Valuation: £120m
Nothing to do with me mate. Don't do gas or leccy.
gonetomorrow
Player Valuation: £80m
"Burying Pharoes - Creating Jobs"
D
Deleted member 28206
Guest
lol
magicjuan
Player Valuation: £60m
I'll only speak for the Confederate monuments since that's my backyard, but celebrating traitors whose cause was to uphold slavery and destroy our country by splitting it in half is not a worthy goal. Those statues were put up well after the Civil War and they had nothing to do with history and everything to do with white, aristocratic hegemony in the South.
Also:
I have read about the hanging gardens of Babylon, I'd like to see them, up close or in books, but there is no choice.
Do we pull down Auschwitz in the same thinking?
I am happy to see examples moved to a confederate theme park that all the bigots can visit but I think destroying historical artefacts is wrong, been too much and it's unintelligent
magicjuan
Player Valuation: £60m
Hancock as well as others have been pushing this for years. I've followed this thinking for a long, long time and find it difficult to argue against but the peer establishment resist new ideas because it makes them look stupid and therefore redundant.
Its amazing to think these scholars can be 'clever' enough to know their chosen subject to the nth degree and yet are too obtuse to explore flaws or updates to their subject. Certainly reading Hancock has proved very thought provoking.
You've answered your own question. We shape our own morality now by learning lessons from the past; and learning those lessons does not necessarily mean continuing to revere them.
You discard the tasteless and irrelevant to advance as a society. There's a reason we don't have statues of Hitler to commemorate World War 2. Because it'd be stupid.
You discard the tasteless and irrelevant to advance as a society. There's a reason we don't have statues of Hitler to commemorate World War 2. Because it'd be stupid.
johnnydawg68
Chairperson, People's Front of Saint Domingo
Well there's a difference. Auschwitz is a living reminder. A statue is a considered decision and act of creation and placement, and is by and large celebratory.
johnnydawg68
Chairperson, People's Front of Saint Domingo
Again, they are not artifacts. Battlefields are artifacts. Things that existed in the period are artifacts. A statue created after the fact is not an artifact.
There's a difference between the haunting relevance of Auschwitz in teaching and reminding us of the horrors of fascism and ethnic cleansing, and having actual statues in pride of place in towns which act as a rallying point for those who stile revere the concept of white supremacy and being traitors to their country of origin.
The historical artifacts only have value if they are significant in the lessons they teach, either positive or negative. A statue of Robert E. Lee does not teach us anything about what happened - it simply glorifies a white surpremacist traitor. Because that's what a statue does - glorifies.
- Status