Statues, Monuments, and When to Take Down or Leave Up Ones Dedicated To Flawed Historical Figures

[DMC]

With the rise of nerd culture, I'm just imagining...in 100 years there could be a statue of Tony Stark somewhere, and people will be like, "but, he created Ultron.  And neglected Pepper."  When it comes to historical figures that have been dead for centuries, I can't help but be reminded of this classic from Tony Soprano:

 

[DanteGabriel]

I was today years old when I learned that the first European American woman to get a statue in the US was a colonist who was captured in an Abenaki raid, had her newborn killed, and escaped her captors by murdering and scalping them in their sleep (including six children, referred to in contemporary accounts as "others"). Several monuments all in my neck of the woods. One of the monuments depicts her holding ten scalps.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Duston

[Fury Resurrected]

4 hours ago, DMC said:

Almost literally every edifice in the United States of America is an offense to the indigenous of this country.

Gee thanks for speaking for us.

[DMC]

6 minutes ago, Fury Resurrected said:

Gee thanks for speaking for us.

Welcome!

[Fury Resurrected]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Welcome!

Seriously dude, your comment sucks. It’s flippant and dismissive of the concerns of indigenous people and of course, does not allow indigenous voices to speak to their own concerns. There’s plenty enough of that, don’t you think?

[DMC]

15 minutes ago, Fury Resurrected said:

Seriously dude, your comment sucks. It’s flippant and dismissive of the concerns of indigenous people and of course, does not allow indigenous voices to speak to their own concerns. There’s plenty enough of that, don’t you think?

Do you disagree with the comment on its face, not just because you don't like me?  I wasn't trying to be flippant or dismissive, I was trying to point out that this whole discussion - and effort - is distractive from both substantive and realistic change.  Which is why I linked the Sopranos clip. 

[Relic]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Do you disagree with the comment on its face, not just because you don't like me?  I wasn't trying to be flippant or dismissive, I was trying to point out that this whole discussion - and effort - is distractive from both substantive and realistic change.  Which is why I linked the Sopranos clip. 

yeah, keep taking your life lessons from Tony fucking Soprano.  You ARE being dismissive. And you should stop. 

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Relic said:

yeah, keep taking your life lessons from Tony fucking Soprano.  You ARE being dismissive. And you should stop. 

I'm being dismissive?  The guy who just makes one line posts then peace's out is telling me this?  Rich.

[Fragile Bird]

1 hour ago, DanteGabriel said:

I was today years old when I learned that the first European American woman to get a statue in the US was a colonist who was captured in an Abenaki raid, had her newborn killed, and escaped her captors by murdering and scalping them in their sleep (including six children, referred to in contemporary accounts as "others"). Several monuments all in my neck of the woods. One of the monuments depicts her holding ten scalps.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Duston

That was some family, one sister killing her baby and two others prosecuted as witches at Salem.

The early 1900s really saw a huge number of monuments being raised.

 

[Rippounet]

1 hour ago, DanteGabriel said:

I was today years old when I learned that the first European American woman to get a statue in the US was a colonist who was captured in an Abenaki raid, had her newborn killed, and escaped her captors by murdering and scalping them in their sleep (including six children, referred to in contemporary accounts as "others"). Several monuments all in my neck of the woods. One of the monuments depicts her holding ten scalps.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Duston

It's actually a great example of one of the aspects of the problem.

"Traditionally" humans favor their own, their family, their kingdom, their religion, their ethnicity, their country, their nation...
In the past it was normal to "hero-worhsip" whoever advanced the interests of their family, their kingdom, their religion, their ethnicity, their country, their nation...

But because of the rise of universalism and enlightenment values, we now have notions of humanity as a single species with common interests on a global scale... People who, in the past, advanced the interests of their own at the detriment of others can no longer be praised that easily.

The question is about how you deal with this exactly. And there is no easy answer. You can't reject nationalism altogether, it is not necessarily an evil in itself ; otoh we have not yet reached the point where we can just embrace universalism and see humanity as a single big family.

So we're left in this weird kinda limbo where we're not entirely sure where to draw the line.

[TrueMetis]

9 hours ago, DMC said:

Almost literally every edifice in the United States of America is an offense to the indigenous of this country.

Yeah, so maybe it's time something was done about that (In Canada to) instead of making excuse's to continue injustice against indigenous people. Because there's always an excuse, and it's always bullshit that can be summed up as "no fuck you we benefit from fucking you over so we will continue to do so."

Like what you're saying here is basically that the US is fundamentally unjust, and you're just shrugging it off. Because it would be too inconvenient for you to address what happened in the past.

[Fury Resurrected]

5 hours ago, DMC said:

Do you disagree with the comment on its face, not just because you don't like me?  I wasn't trying to be flippant or dismissive, I was trying to point out that this whole discussion - and effort - is distractive from both substantive and realistic change.  Which is why I linked the Sopranos clip. 

I don’t dislike you or even have an opinion on you as a person. This is the second time I’ve had to call you out on here for acting like a jerk, but who people are on the internet isn’t usually who they are all the time and most of the time even on here you’re not being that way. You made glib and shitty insinuations about my race, that’s what I don’t like. If that’s a personal attack against you in your world, poor you.

 

As to your post- perhaps it reads a way you didn’t intend. That’s not on me. If you don’t see what is wrong with you making a statement about/on behalf of an entire race to which you don’t belong, you gotta do your own work on that. As one of few BIPOC on this board, I don’t have the time to be doing all the labor of educating you on why your statement is fucked up because it’s obvious. 
 

I hope for the people in this thread who are not BIPOC, that you would acknowledge that this is an issue that doesn’t impact you in the way it impacts others. Maybe the best answer you can give to the question this thread poses is that we should be asking BIPOC what to do and listening. Claiming we can’t change anything because of history is saying that we must continue our past mistakes for the sake of educating people by way of having an unexplained statue of a racist they probably can’t even identify in the public square. Doesn’t sound very educational to me.

[Zorral]

24 minutes ago, TrueMetis said:

Because it would be too inconvenient for you to address what happened in the past.

That's exactly what Patrick Henry said, excusing slavery's continuing existence -- slavery could not be abolished, right or wrong, because "of the general inconvenience" of losing our slaves.

https://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/patrick-henry-to-robert-pleasants/

Quote

"Would any one believe that I am master of slaves by my own purchase? I am drawn along by the general inconvenience of living without them."

 

[Kalbear]

How many statues of Hitler are there in existence now?

Under what conditions should someone like Jefferson Davis be commemoralized? What should he be given tribute for? What is the value of giving him momentous status?

This statue can stay

 

 

[DMC]

1 hour ago, TrueMetis said:

Yeah, so maybe it's time something was done about that (In Canada to) instead of making excuse's to continue injustice against indigenous people. Because there's always an excuse, and it's always bullshit that can be summed up as "no fuck you we benefit from fucking you over so we will continue to do so."

Like what you're saying here is basically that the US is fundamentally unjust, and you're just shrugging it off. Because it would be too inconvenient for you to address what happened in the past.

I'm saying fight the actual injustices.  A statue is a symbol.  It is, most of the time, a symbol of systemic racism, but taking all of them down is not going to fix systemic racism.  And in some cases - which is btw what I was mentioning in the damn first place - you'd have to take out most of DC logistically.  Like, all of Metro Center to Chinatown on the Red Line.  I was trying to point out the realistic limits to this qualm, that's all.  I wasn't questioning its legitimacy.  In fact, my point - and I guess you can interpret that Sopranos clip different than I intended - was totally based on saying you had a point.  You have TOO MUCH of a point for the political atmosphere to address your grievances.  It's like reparations.

1 hour ago, Fury Resurrected said:

This is the second time I’ve had to call you out on here for acting like a jerk

  Yeah, alright, sorry internet police chief I didn't clear my statements with you.

[Fury Resurrected]

13 minutes ago, DMC said:

I'm saying fight the actual injustices.  A statue is a symbol.  It is, most of the time, a symbol of systemic racism, but taking all of them down is not going to fix systemic racism.  And in some cases - which is btw what I was mentioning in the damn first place - you'd have to take out most of DC logistically.  Like, all of Metro Center to Chinatown on the Red Line.  I was trying to point out the realistic limits to this qualm, that's all.  I wasn't questioning its legitimacy.  In fact, my point - and I guess you can interpret that Sopranos clip different than I intended - was totally based on saying you had a point.  You have TOO MUCH of a point for the political atmosphere to address your grievances.  It's like reparations.

  Yeah, alright, sorry internet police chief I didn't clear my statements with you.

BIPOC don’t want or need you to dictate to us what to care about or advocate for. We can decide what our points and goals are without you, we can express them without you. Your whole point is just an example of white dominating culture telling people who are not you what to do and care about and how. If the past few months have taught you anything, it should be that minorities are tired of being told the exact things you are saying.

[DMC]

Just now, Fury Resurrected said:

Your whole point is just an example of white dominating culture telling people who are not you what to do and care about and how. If the past few months have taught you anything, it should be that minorities are tired of being told the exact things you are saying.

It's a fucking discussion board.  I'm expressing my opinion on a discussion topic in a discussion board.  You are not the sole spokesperson for all minorities.

[Fury Resurrected]

33 minutes ago, DMC said:

It's a fucking discussion board.  I'm expressing my opinion on a discussion topic in a discussion board.  You are not the sole spokesperson for all minorities.

No, but when you express an at best racially insensitive and at worst racist opinion, expect people to try and teach you better. Which is the more pleasant alternative to telling you to get bent. If you don’t like blowback for saying unacceptable shit, you always have the option of not being dismissive and shitty about the ethnicities of others. It is a kindness to show you a better way instead of assuming you have racist intentions. If you don’t like that kindness being extended upon you, you should try not needing it.

[DMC]

Just now, Fury Resurrected said:

No, but when you express an at best racially insensitive and at worst racist opinion, expect people to try and teach you better.

What opinion have I expressed that was in any way racist?  Honestly, tell me where I said anything even remotely racism.  That didn't seem to be your objection - definitely wasn't about content - it was about me being flippant or dismissive.  Which is why this smacks of being personal.  My opinion is not any more "dismissive" than plenty of people that expressed their opinions on the first couple pages of this thread.  In fact, I'm more in favor than many of such opinions expressed in terms of abolishing statues. 

My question was simply where does it end because almost all monuments - and even most buildings - are fundamentally racist to begin with.  If you want to argue that point, great!  But you don't seem to want to do that.

[Fury Resurrected]

39 minutes ago, DMC said:

It's a fucking discussion board.  I'm expressing my opinion on a discussion topic in a discussion board.  You are not the sole spokesperson for all minorities.

Also, I’m not. But I am a minority. You aren’t. What I am trying to show you is you said something horrible. If that was unintentional, apologize, learn better, move on. I understand much more of what is horrible to say to and about native people because I am a native person. I don’t need to be the spokesperson for all of us to tell you that *you* don’t get to speak for us. 
 

So DMC, just be reasonable. You fucked up, it happens. Apologize (and not secretly in my PMs blaming it on your substance use again) and just be better in the future. This is the work of antiracism and it’s uncomfortable.