Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

FrostyJack

Kimsang wrote: »

The argument was being made that whoever was there had questionable morales, because nazis were there. This is guilt by association.

I believe there was a very real reason to protest that day and many good fine people were there.

No, whoever marched with Nazi's supporting them were the ones who's morals were questioned. Police, journalists, UCLA etc were not marching with them, some of the counter protesters were not good people either but were on the right side of the debate. Richard Spencer was on the other side, enough said. There was no good reason to protest the statue wasn't build by General Lee, it was made it the 1920's, 50 years after his death, it was put in at time to keep black people down and celebrate traitors and slavers.

Outlaw Pete

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Any chance you could reply to the question in this post?

Billy Mays wrote: »

Now that you're here Pete could you answer the questions you previously ignored about Trump's 10,000+ lies

I'm too busy dealing with the 10,000 lies about Trump.

FrostyJack

BloodBath wrote: »

But it's all Trump right? Not an endemic part of their crappy culture which continues to this day.

He didn't start it, but he supports it, like his 20 dollar note controversy this week, he doesn't even hide his racism anymore.

Kimsang

pixelburp wrote: »

Correct: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/white-nationalist-leads-torch-bearing-protesters-against-removal-confederate-statue-n759266



Sure, and if the subject came up I'd be all for the removal of Washington from public display as well; the question didn't come up so why throw it out as some argument against action? The first step in coming to terms with its past, the least that can be done is remove statues that openly commemorate or celebrate those who were brazen in the attitude of wanting to maintain the slave trade.

As we've seen in the news though, Republicans are stoutly against any kind of reparations in the first place, so the country is a long way from a South Africa or Spanish form of healing.

I want to get a point across to you, but its difficult. Did you watch game of thrones? There is a scene with Misande in the final series, where the only object she kept was her slave collar. Even though the collar was a symbol of her lack of freedom, and everything bad in her life, she chose to keep it after she was freed. Do you understand this sentiment?

pixelburp

Kimsang wrote: »

I want to get a point across to you, but its difficult. Did you watch game of thrones? There is a scene with Misande in the final series, where the only object she kept was her slave collar. Even though the collar was a symbol of her lack of freedom, and everything bad in her life, she chose to keep it after she was freed. Do you understand this sentiment?

No I don't watch Game of Thrones, and TBH I'm only dealing with the ideas you're proposing: you conflated the Charlottesville protests with ISIS' dynamiting of antiquities, then talked about about famine statues in Limerick. You are trying to suggest some hidden meaning or complexity in a pretty boilerplate example of a military statue celebrating a figure who is divisive, to put it mildly.

This isn't a TV show, this is a country with a very deep scar in its history, and continues to equivocate over the simplest measures to move on from that sordid past. The inability to remove statues that celebrate people who fought to preserve the enslavement of Americans is not a 'complex' issue, or a rebuke against Southern history. It's the least the country can do for itself, yet the Richard Spencers would say otherwise.

If you want comparisons in real life they're easily apparent: no Irish town would erect a statue dedicated to Cromwell, no South African township would erect one for an Apartheid figure. Cautionary Tales, as you put it, do not apply when the intent is to celebrate the figure, not act as a stern reminder of past costs.

FrostyJack

Kimsang wrote: »

I want to get a point across to you, but its difficult. Did you watch game of thrones? There is a scene with Misande in the final series, where the only object she kept was her slave collar. Even though the collar was a symbol of her lack of freedom, and everything bad in her life, she chose to keep it after she was freed. Do you understand this sentiment?

She chose to keep it, it was her choice not someone elses, she didn't keep a statue of the rich slavers. Only the slavers and their supporters wanted to keep the statue, how can you not understand it. None or very few black people walked by the statue and said, this makes me feel good, reminds me of my roots. Rednecks with truck nuts on the car painted like the Dukes of Hazzard would go by and think it is great and maybe the South will rise again.

rossie1977

What always amazes me is that those on the right and especially Trump supporters are quick to identify themselves as the 'party of Lincoln' yet march behind confederate flags and gather around monuments erected to guys like Lee who fought against Lincoln.

weisses

Kimsang wrote: »

I want to get a point across to you, but its difficult. Did you watch game of thrones? There is a scene with Misande in the final series, where the only object she kept was her slave collar. Even though the collar was a symbol of her lack of freedom, and everything bad in her life, she chose to keep it after she was freed. Do you understand this sentiment?

Everyone joining a protest organized by neo-Nazi and white supremacists are fair game.
One of the organizers was sworn in to The Proud Boys which is a far-right neo-fascist men's organization that promotes political violence.

If you are out protesting with that scum you shouldn't get your knickers in a twist if someone calls you a Nazi

Gbear

Brian? wrote: »

You realise some culture isn't worth protecting? A culture of owning other people and being willing to fight a war to maintain that right isn't worth saving.

It's with arguments like this that you see the core difference in how people see the world.

One wishes to promote a hierarchy and an identity and anything goes in service to that, facts be damned. The other attempts to describe the way things are and derive a world view from those facts.

It doesn't matter that large chunks of American conservatism and Christianity is fundamentally the same kind of barbarian nonsense as Sharia law. It's not about the details, it's about "us" being "us" and "them" being "them", and as such they must be attacked. There doesn't need to be a rationale or consistency to the attack. It just needs to be aggressive and persuasive.

You constantly hear alt-lite talking points attacking Muslim countries as having inferior cultures for their treatment of women, gays and so on, but it's quite clear they don't really give a **** about those things and are just using them as a stick to beat the brown people with.

You can't attempt to make an argument from principle when your own side has no principles and is populated with racists, homophobes, holocaust deniers, history revisionists and misogynists. By definition, I no longer believe it is possible to support Trump and not be one of the above, because he either is one of the above, or adjacent to supporters of it, and support for him requires tacit acceptance of those points. Either that, or you erroneously believe he is helping the economy, and such considerations are more important than having a shred of morality.

Ignorance is no longer an excuse for this administration. We've eaten the pudding and have seen the proof of it. There was no tacking back towards normalcy.

Professor Moriarty

Racial discrimination and slavery in the US can be explained by a character in Game Of Thrones? Ah no, Jaysus, no. No.

Kimsang

pixelburp wrote: »

No I don't watch Game of Thrones, and TBH I'm only dealing with the ideas you're proposing: you conflated the Charlottesville protests with ISIS' dynamiting of antiquities, then talked about about famine statues in Limerick. You are trying to suggest some hidden meaning or complexity in a pretty boilerplate example of a military statue celebrating a figure who is divisive, to put it mildly.

This isn't a TV show, this is a country with a very deep scar in its history, and continues to equivocate over the simplest measures to move on from that sordid past. The inability to remove statues that celebrate people who fought to preserve the enslavement of Americans is not a 'complex' issue, or a rebuke against Southern history. It's the least the country can do for itself, yet the Richard Spencers would say otherwise.

If you want comparisons in real life they're easily apparent: no Irish town would erect a statue dedicated to Cromwell, no South African township would erect one for an Apartheid figure. Cautionary Tales, as you put it, do not apply when the intent is to celebrate the figure, not act as a stern reminder of past costs.

The comparison to Cromwell is ludicrous. Cromwell wasn't born here, didn't live here, didn't fight for 'here'.


Not all statues that are erected, or left standing,are done to commemorate that person, or to idoloize them. Where is the choice for the people that want a reminder of their dark history for fear that it repeats?

If you don't see why I made a point about the Limerick statues, and again in the game of thrones example, then I'm done trying.

pixelburp

Kimsang wrote: »

The comparison to Cromwell is ludicrous. Cromwell wasn't born here, didn't live here, didn't fight for 'here'.


Not all statues that are erected, or left standing, or done to commemorate that person, or to idoloize them. Where is the choice for the people that want a reminder of their dark history for fear that it repeats?

If you don't see why I made a point about the Limerick statues, and again in the game of thrones example, then I'm done trying.

You're point isn't hard to grasp, you're implying the Charlottesville statue is a Cautionary Tale, your words. It isn't. It's a celebratory, commemorative statue erected that you'd see in a thousand other cities across the world, built 50 years after Lee's death. That some might prefer to celebrate Lee's positive elements (the underdog spirit is often a part of Southern celebrations over the Confederacy) doesn't negate the larger, broader aspects that is hugely problematic in a country incapable of dealing with its racial past.

Show me examples that says this statue acts as a beacon of caution towards the ills of American's past and I'll take your point - otherwise you're just conjecturing out of pure contrarianism. Who are these people? Literally no narrative I've read in favour of these statues has made this point.

Pull down the Lee statue, and replace it with a true "reminder of their dark history" as you put it, ala the Famine statues on the quays in Dublin. There's the obvious, sensible and compassionate solution, but this isn't what we - or the Proud Boys or their ilk - are talking about.

No "general on horseback" statue ever becomes anything except that which it celebrates - unless you count the infamous 'traffic cone' statue in Glasgow

Outlaw Pete

Brian? wrote: »

The truth matters alright. The truth is that people who marched with Neo Nazis and White Supremacists have to be judged by the company they keep.

Well by that logic then we should judge all the counter protesters by the actions of Antifa who taunted those protesting and instigated the violence (in this clip at least) by smashing those they disagreed with in the face with baseball bats:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PD9Bxbsf1A

So, you okay with all those on the left who were there being judged by the scumbag company that they keep?

AbusesToilets

Part of the issue for certain sections of Southerners, is that their legitimate culture has been hijacked by those who were keen to maintain the wealth and benefits of slavery. Descendants of the leaders and slaveowners who led the Confederacy into a war with the Union. For those people, they see an attack on the symbols of the Confederacy as an attack on them.

To be frank, those against bigotry do a poor job of their messaging when it comes to the issue, little effort to win over Southerners, rather going the brow beating route.

Professor Moriarty

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Well by that logic then we should judge all the counter protesters by the actions of Antifa who taunted those protesting and instigated the violence (in this clip at least) by smashing those they disagreed with in the face with baseball bats:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PD9Bxbsf1A

So, you okay with all those on the left who were there being judged by the scumbag company that they keep?

That's rubbish. I've never seen a more doctored or deliberately misinterpreted video.

AbusesToilets

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That's rubbish. I've never seen a more doctored or deliberately misinterpreted video.

Anitfa is a pretty scummy group themselves. Shows how far the situation has sunk that they look reasonable by comparison.

Igotadose

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

So, you okay with all those on the left who were there being judged by the scumbag company that they keep?

Why do you think all those protesting Nazis are on the left?
Nazis are on the right, sure, but plenty of Americans despise Nazis, alt-right, Proud Boys, etc. and aren't particularly on the left or right, though I imagine a fair number of folks otherwise on the right condemn Nazis and Nazism (e.g., POTUS45)

Water John

The 'cautionary tale' was to the coloured people under Jim Crowe Laws. Remember these statues erected in the 1920/30s facing the coloured part of town. Lest they forget their place.
The Proud Boys were giving a shout out for Tommy Robinson. Sort of tells you where their beliefs lie.

Billy Mays

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Well by that logic then we should judge all the counter protesters by the actions of Antifa who taunted those protesting and instigated the violence (in this clip at least) by smashing those they disagreed with in the face with baseball bats:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PD9Bxbsf1A

So, you okay with all those on the left who were there being judged by the scumbag company that they keep?

But Antifa

Gbear

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Part of the issue for certain sections of Southerners, is that their legitimate culture has been hijacked by those who were keen to maintain the wealth and benefits of slavery. Descendants of the leaders and slaveowners who led the Confederacy into a war with the Union. For those people, they see an attack on the symbols of the Confederacy as an attack on them.

To be frank, those against bigotry do a poor job of their messaging when it comes to the issue, little effort to win over Southerners, rather going the brow beating route.

I think it behooves those with beliefs entangled with a racist past to be the ones to disentangle them.

To an extent you can make the argument you'll catch more flies with honey, but people can only be expected to make accomodations up to a point.
When one side only consumes media that willfully misrepresents the purpose of liberal intitiatives, whether it's about pro-slavery statues or kneeling for the national anthem, it's always going to be difficult to reach them, but progress shouldn't stop just because some people are digging in their heels.

StringerBell

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I'm too busy dealing with the 10,000 lies about Trump.

I assume that sounded clever in your head?

Look, you are not the first and certainly won't be the last to dodge questions you simply cannot reasonably answer while on the whole pro-Trump, anti-whatever Trump is against today jaunt.

Just as long as you understand you are not having any success making your case, and if you are busy as alluded to in the quoted post then perhaps your time would be better spent in fruitful labour rather than such a pointless exercise?

everlast75

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The truth matters.

Super! Delighted to hear it. Welcome aboard.

Now, can you answer this please, given your newfound relationship with it...

everlast75 wrote: »

Can some Trump defender please tell me he didn't actually say what we see him say?

https://twitter.com/renato_mariotti/status/1137002774300889088?s=19

MrFresh

Kimsang wrote: »

The comparison to Cromwell is ludicrous. Cromwell wasn't born here, didn't live here, didn't fight for 'here'.


Not all statues that are erected, or left standing,are done to commemorate that person, or to idoloize them. Where is the choice for the people that want a reminder of their dark history for fear that it repeats?

If you don't see why I made a point about the Limerick statues, and again in the game of thrones example, then I'm done trying.

If they were cautionary would they not have some indication of that in the statue? If you wanted a cautionary one would you not have him on his knees waving a white flag instead of rearing triumphantly on a horse? And why were so many of these "cautionary" statues built in the south during the Jim Crow era? Not really consistent with a negative view of what the men in the statues did.

26000 Elephants

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That's rubbish. I've never seen a more doctored or deliberately misinterpreted video.

In fairness, when the title contains the word TRUTH in all caps, you have to lower your expectations of anything approaching 'truth'.

AbusesToilets

Gbear wrote: »

I think it behooves those with beliefs entangled with a racist past to be the ones to disentangle them.

To an extent you can make the argument you'll catch more flies with honey, but people can only be expected to make accomodations up to a point.
When one side only consumes media that willfully misrepresents the purpose of liberal intitiatives, whether it's about pro-slavery statues or kneeling for the national anthem, it's always going to be difficult to reach them, but progress shouldn't stop just because some people are digging in their heels.

I'd agree, but there are a lot of issues relationg to education in this instance. It suits those in power to rile up the poor, white Southerners with messaging about an attack on them and their culture. You leave them to fight with the poor black people. Rich stay rich. It also doesn't help that the most visible elements on the other side are pretty much black supremacist groups themselves, with their own extreme and bigoted views.

The education system has also been worked on to obfuscate the history surrounding the Civil war and post Reconstruction period.

Brian?

Kimsang wrote: »

In Limerick there are statues of people suffering during the famine. This isn't glorying the suffering of those people. I guess it comes down to interpretation.

It doesn’t come down to interpretation. Stick up a statue of a confederate general on a horse pointing a sabre as if about to charge. Is that a solemn memorial to those who lost their lived in the civil war? No.

To clarify my position, vs many points made here, I would be happy if the statues were removed in an orderly civil way, but they were removed at the behest of an emotional mob. Those are two entirely different things, hence my comparison to isis.

They weren’t removed at the behest of an emotional mob. It was a democratic decision by the city council afaik.

Timberrrrrrrr

Trumps awake and has heard the news about his drone, his latest tweet.

Iran has made a huge mistake!

MrFresh

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Trumps awake and has heard the news about his drone, his latest tweet.

Iran has made a huge mistake!

The problem for Trump and his administration is that they have so little credibility in the international community. I'd be surprised if they get any support on Iran outside of the likes of SA and Israel.

everlast75

If the concern is that history will be destroyed by tearing down the statutes, then that can be avoided by sticking them in a museum.

What you'll find when that is proposed is that *isn't* the real reason folk want them to remain where they are.

Kimsang

Brian? wrote: »

It doesn’t come down to interpretation. Stick up a statue of a confederate general on a horse pointing a sabre as if about to charge. Is that a solemn memorial to those who lost their lived in the civil war? No.



They weren’t removed at the behest of an emotional mob. It was a democratic decision by the city council afaik.

I believe it is subjective. My argument which spawned this tangent; was that there were indeed good people on both sides of what happened in Charlottesville. Having a symbol of previous oppression around isn't always condoning its actions and idoloizing the statue. I don't feel like I have to defend why the statue isn't a symbol of oppression, but just that it is a point of conjecture for many people, and good reasonable people can be seen to be opposing the removal of this statue. As a previous poster alluded to, white southerners could see it as an attack on their culture.

I think we agree the statue was erected to idoloize the man. But since, it becomes a lot more than that. Generations of people have left that statue standing, and for good reason. A statue needs only ever be taken down once, and it will be forgotten about forever.