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

[Fury Resurrected]

Just now, DMC said:

 

Figure your argument out.  Now I said something racist, not just made a racist point.  What's next?

Those are the same things stated different ways. And if you disagree that saying that all public buildings and monuments are offensive to indigenous people is racist, you can come out and say that instead of complaining about being called out by someone of the race you made the comment about. If you can’t defend the statement, you shouldn’t defend having said it. So stop making this about your inability to take criticism or whining that you think I don’t like you. You know damn well I wouldn’t let a statement like that slide from anyone.

[Lollygag]

I'm a Midwesterner but I lived in the deep South for some time.

The Confederate statues need to come down as they're being used to rewrite the history of a war over slavery to a war fought over the more palpable state's rights. In this case, their presence doesn't keep history alive, it keeps the lie about the history alive, so they're actually right that removing them is removing history. It's just removing the history that never existed and revealing the one that did.

That said, the left, while correct here, has a tendency to steamroll rather than discuss in a way helpful to the people who need to make the biggest changes. Some folks can't handle change in general and sometimes any hostility toward difference is a symptom rather than the disease itself. It's no coincidence that Donald Trump's a racist but he also can't change his hair and is only able to eat the types of foods that change-adverse toddlers typically eat. Rural cultures are more attached to their history and tradition as things don't change quickly and we don't have the multitude of distractions and constant barrage of newness that city people have. History is huge part of their personal identity and tearing that down recklessly and abruptly without help to adjust won't go well. It will create a backlash, and Trump is definitely a backlash to earlier steamrolled changes. Let's not contribute to the set up Trump part II.

The memorials suggested upthread are a good idea. Southerners need a way to reconcile their history in a way that also doesn't lie about it. Most of the Confederates who died, as said above, didn't have true agency in the course of their lives and got caught up in a wave. They chose the wrong side, but they were still fathers, brothers and sons. I think acknowledging that people are complicated and respecting their humanity is extremely important. We'll pay for it later otherwise. It's a bit hypocritical of an attempt to recognize humanity in some to do so by angrily denying recognizing it in others and it reinforces the us vs them narrative that feeds our worst tendencies.

As to the broader question of statues, it seems relative to me. While keeping the Confederate statues up reinforces the lie of states' rights over the true history of slavery, statues like Jefferson and Washington have become sufficiently complicated in the public consciousness that I don't think they're any longer in the category of blind hero-worship. Monticello, Mt Vernon, Williamsburg, etc openly acknowledge and discuss the role of slavery, the lost opportunities and hypocrisies. They've evolved to become symbols of human aspirations, our very human failures to reach those aspirations, and that we will always have work to do.

 

[OldGimletEye]

47 minutes ago, Fury Resurrected said:

It’s because it is still ALL THE TIME. I still think DMC was probably not trolling, but no amount of me explaining he said something racist is going to convince even a well meaning person who is unwilling to believe the experiences of POC over their own perceptions of self. If you have the attitude of “I am not a racist therefore what I said can not have been racist” or “I have POC friends and therefore I can not have said something racist” nothing is going to convince you otherwise. And there’s a ton of that out in the world.

 

Its a lot of work on this board to remind people in discussions of race that indigenous people exist. During the peak of the primaries I had to have daily discussions on here and in my outside life About why what Elizabeth Warren did is a big deal and bad for native people.

 

At work, when clients bring up my ethnicity- it is almost always to make some comment they do not know is racist. Some examples are asking if I get money from the government, if my “Indian name” is on my birth certificate or Kelli, what my Indian name is, what my spirit animal is, how you determine your spirit animal, do I drink a lot, they tell me that dances with wolves is their favorite movie or comment I must love tattooing dream catchers. It’s constant. I cannot educate each of these people and if I did it would adversely impact my employment. It’s not my job to end racism. It isn’t possible for me to succeed in that and trying every time in these mostly white spaces I am in would make me the target for even more racist issues. So I can’t even mostly tell these people at work they are being incredibly rude to me.  And more recently at work, I have to explain about POC and police use of force because it’s in the news and a lot of my clients are white people who don’t know other POC to ask. I get their intentions are good, but it’s a lot to put on a person to give an entire dissertation on their racial experience all the time and give all these personal stories and details to help others understand. That’s a big part of why I feel so bereft of other indigenous people. I am almost never in a space filled with people who get where I’m coming from where nobody is going to ask about my spirit animal. White people get that most of the time, where they are surrounded by people with similar experiences and customs that don’t need to be explained. 

 

1. The epistemological confusion of the left:  Left wing theorizing often tries to make "lived experience"  the epistemological gold standard. The essential idea is that the oppressed have certain pieces of knowledge that the oppressors don't, an idea that traces back to at least the Hungarian Communist Georg Lukács. If true, then it stands to reason, that there are certain things the oppressor class doesn't know and needs to be "educated" about. So its a bit inconsistent to say "well there are things you don't know because of your positionality, but I'm not going to explain them."

2. Lets just say for the sake of argument @DMC did say something racist. If he did, then his mistake was extremely subtle. In fact, it would seem the person to whom the original comment was directed to did not catch it and agreed with him.

3, If @DMC did in fact make an error, it probably would have been easier to understand where the mistake was made, had a reason been given for why Mount Rushmore is offensive, but not other buildings.

4. Frankly, the whole "Its not my job to educate you" doesn't sound like it is given in good faith. But, just an attempt to avoid explaining one's position.

5. If some random doofus ask you what your "spirit name" is and can't figure out why that is offensive, after being rebuked, then I can understand just cutting off conversation.  

6. I get your point to the extent that somebody ask a question, and the material is readily publicly available and not too hard to understand.

[OldGimletEye]

6 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

I'm a Midwesterner but I lived in the deep South for some time.

I have southern relatives. And I have had explain to them why I think confederate statues should come down. The fact is that they have heard one story (wrong) their whole lives. Trying to lay out the reasons and fixing their understanding, even going so far as suggesting books or things to read, is more helpful than just saying, "Its not my job to educate you!",

[DMC]

20 minutes ago, Fury Resurrected said:

And if you disagree that saying that all public buildings and monuments are offensive to indigenous people is racist, you can come out and say that instead of complaining about being called out by someone of the race you made the comment about.

....I, um, have come out and said it.  That's what this whole stupid discussion has been about.  I do not think it's racist to point out that the entire structure of this country is based on racism.  How is it racist to assert that?  You have yet to explain that to me.  And you never can. 

You just want to continue calling me racist, acting like a badass for somehow "calling me out" and clearly seem weirdly interested in impugning my reputation.

[TrueMetis]

3 hours 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.

Of course it is to you it doesn't impact you. So of course you can happily ignore the very real injustice it perpetuates. And of course you can downplay it by pretending to be "reasonable." "oh can't you just focus on what really matters*" as though that exact same line of reasoning continuously being used isn't responsible for events like what happened to George Floyd. Shut up, don't make waves, and eventually when we feel like it we'll treat you like actual people with feelings that are worth considering. Just ya know, don't get too uppity and act like you're actually equal, then we'll take it all back.

*as defined by the majority of people who don't give two shits about you and in fact will consider every attempt to redress injustice exactly the same.

 

[Fury Resurrected]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

....I, um, have come out and said it.  That's what this whole stupid discussion has been about.  I do not think it's racist to point out that the entire structure of this country is based on racism.  How is it racist to assert that?  You have yet to explain that to me.  And you never can. 

You just want to continue calling me racist, acting like a badass for somehow "calling me out" and clearly seem weirdly interested in impugning my reputation.

Because that was not the content of your words. You said that every public building and monument is offensive to indigenous people. You didn’t say that the entire country was founded on racism. You keep saying you said that, but if that were the case I’d heartily agree with you. Saying that every public building is offensive to indigenous people is a racist statement because it puts incorrect words into the mouths of indigenous people, and makes their demands (which are actually just the ones you’re giving them) look unreasonable and unattainable. Which sounds more like “there’s no pleasing them” than anything else. Attitudes like that are the majority of what you would encounter if you were an indigenous person asking for change, and they are THE biggest barrier to dismantling institutionalized racism against indigenous people.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, TrueMetis said:

Shut up, don't make waves, and eventually when we feel like it we'll treat you like actual people with feelings that are worth considering.

I wasn't trying to tell you to shut up.  All I'm saying is there's diminishing returns on this endeavor.  Polling has shifted, and the best way of taking advantage of that - I think! - is through legislation that seems..well, at least possible in some places.  That should be the focus, not taking down Mount Rushmore.  I know, I'm a horrible racist for suggesting so.

[TrueMetis]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

I wasn't trying to tell you to shut up.  All I'm saying is there's diminishing returns on this endeavor.  Polling has shifted, and the best way of taking advantage of that - I think! - is through legislation that seems..well, at least possible in some places.  That should be the focus, not taking down Mount Rushmore.  I know, I'm a horrible racist for suggesting so.

The focus was on returning it back to those who have a right to the area, including the Lakota to whom the US government promised control over the area "in perpetuity" then immediately reneged on, but this wouldn't be one of these conversations without someone hyper focusing on one part of what was said and ignoring the rest, so this is to be expected.

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, OldGimletEye said:

f something is that goddamned important, then maybe it should be explained.

How frackin often does this have to be explained by the people for whom it is important to people who insist they are the smartest people in the room?  mansplaining, why Jefferson was a terrible POTUS and human being is who is responsible for the racist bullshit that is this nation and all the other shyte for which he is extolled,  etc. -- people get tired of educating people who whine they aren't being educated by the people they dismiss as inferior idiots.

[OldGimletEye]

5 minutes ago, Zorral said:

How frackin often does this have to be explained by the people for whom it is important to people who insist they are the smartest people in the room?  mansplaining, why Jefferson was a terrible POTUS and human being is who is responsible for the racist bullshit that is this nation and all the other shyte for which he is extolled,  etc. -- people get tired of educating people who whine they aren't being educated by the people they dismiss as inferior idiots.

I never said you had to explain your reasons a billion times. I did say, I can understand it if somebody is acting in bad faith or just being troll. Now maybe you feel that your objections to Jefferson did no good, but I suggest there maybe some people, after hearing your argument, might change their minds or reconsider their position.

[Zorral]

7 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

I never said you had to explain your reasons a billion times. I did say, I can understand it if somebody is acting in bad faith or just being troll. Now maybe you feel that your objections to Jefferson did no good, but I suggest there maybe some people, after hearing your argument, might change their minds or reconsider their position.

What does this mean?????

[DMC]

25 minutes ago, TrueMetis said:

The focus was on returning it back to those who have a right to the area, including the Lakota to whom the US government promised control over the area "in perpetuity" then immediately reneged on, but this wouldn't be one of these conversations without someone hyper focusing on one part of what was said and ignoring the rest, so this is to be expected.

Again, my point was just this isn't going to happen.  The US government, and the South Dakotan government, simply make too much off it to ever do such a thing.

[OldGimletEye]

10 minutes ago, Zorral said:

What does this mean?????

It's not my job to educate you! Just kiddin'.

Consider the situation where you have explained your objections to Jefferson. Now suppose further the person keeps asking you to explain the same thing over and over again. Then I get just ending the conversation.

Now consider the situation where you state "I think Jefferson should come down". And another person ask "Why?". And then you say, "It's not my job to educate you!" Now even if that person decided to read up on Jefferson, he may not see things the way you do. And will never understand your point of view if you don't explain them.

It's like me trying to explain some economic issue to somebody that watches Fox News all the time. If I don't explain it, he'll never hear a different point of view. Maybe I don't quite convince him. But, I have at least put the idea in his head and maybe got the wheels turning a little bit.

[DMC]

42 minutes ago, Fury Resurrected said:

Saying that every public building is offensive to indigenous people is a racist statement because it puts incorrect words into the mouths of indigenous people, and makes their demands (which are actually just the ones you’re giving them) look unreasonable and unattainable.

Sorry I can't help myself with this horseshit. How in the hell did I put words in the mouth of anyone but myself?  I said:  

Quote

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

That is MY OPINION.  Not anyone else's.  Just mine.  I wasn't trying to put the words in the mouth of everybody or anybody.  Certainly not the indigenous.  I was trying to point out how much this country fucked over the indigenous people of this country.  And, it seriously does make me sad.  So I made a joke out of it.  That's what I do.  That is not an example of institutionalized racism.  Acting like it is just means you don't understand the term.

[Fury Resurrected]

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

Sorry I can't help myself with this horseshit. How in the hell did I put words in the mouth of anyone but myself?  I said:  

That is MY OPINION.  Not anyone else's.  Just mine.  I wasn't trying to put the words in the mouth of everybody or anybody.  Certainly not the indigenous.  I was trying to point out how much this country fucked over the indigenous people of this country.  And, it seriously does make me sad.  So I made a joke out of it.  That's what I do.  That is not an example of institutionalized racism.  Acting like it is just means you don't understand the term.

You keep arguing the words you said don’t mean what the words you said mean. That’s a very weird defense. You can’t say what offends indigenous people without putting the words in their mouths they are offended. That’s what you said. And that’s the kind of thing that I have heard over and over and over while trying to get my white neighbors to oppose Line 3 going through my reservation. That since everything bothers indigenous people, we might as well do whatever. And I have tried once or twice to say hey, saying that is a really racist and unhelpful generalization of indigenous people that is used all the time to stop our agenda- they say exactly the kind of stuff you’ve said. But if you can’t see that claiming that you know what’s an offense to indigenous people and it is every public building is a very shitty thing to say- even with an indigenous person telling you it is and why- you’re just very committed to being able to say something that is offensive and destructive to indigenous people and causes while claiming to be a sincere ally. 
 

If I said that you are offended by my right to vote, would I not be putting words in your mouth? Would it be okay to do it if it was just my OPINION

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Fury Resurrected said:

But if you can’t see that claiming that you know what’s an offense to indigenous people and it is every public building is a very shitty thing to say

It's..very hard to parse that post.  But if what you're saying is you are very offended by me suggesting simply pointing out that "all of this these buildings are ultimately offensive to indigenous people" offends indigenous people, then sure I honestly did not know that.  It's also a hard one to figure from my limited vantage point.  I didn't mean any ill-will towards anybody, and I certainly wasn't directing it at you personally.  But you've decided to take it that way and make me spend hours explaining myself.  That's on you.  You don't get to be the arbitrator of my posts just because of your ethnicity.  And if you're going to make a mountain out of a molehill because you have some personal gripe with me, I will respond to it.  Not through PMs - I was trying to be nice but then you threw it back in my face.  I will point out your unfounded accusations right in public.  Fury is just a name, I'd suggest you calm the fuck down.

[DMC]

15 minutes ago, Fury Resurrected said:

If I said that you are offended by my right to vote, would I not be putting words in your mouth? Would it be okay to do it if it was just my OPINION

Sorry missed the edit.  I..really don't get this.  You have some sad logical correlations in your head.  I would never deny your right to vote.  I'm an unemployed piece of shit and I still fight for your right to vote.  I was trying to talk political strategy, but your equation with that to "me being a racist" is not only absurd but honestly tiresome.  It's 1.  I'm done.

[Fury Resurrected]

15 minutes ago, DMC said:

It's..very hard to parse that post.  But if what you're saying is you are very offended by me suggesting simply pointing out that "all of this these buildings are ultimately offensive to indigenous people" offends indigenous people, then sure I honestly did not know that.  It's also a hard one to figure from my limited vantage point.  I didn't mean any ill-will towards anybody, and I certainly wasn't directing it at you personally.  But you've decided to take it that way and make me spend hours explaining myself.  That's on you.  You don't get to be the arbitrator of my posts just because of your ethnicity.  And if you're going to make a mountain out of a molehill because you have some personal gripe with me, I will respond to it.  Not through PMs - I was trying to be nice but then you threw it back in my face.  I will point out your unfounded accusations right in public.  Fury is just a name, I'd suggest you calm the fuck down.

You wouldn’t have had to spend all night responding (which I didn’t make you do at all, you can ignore whatever you like) if you had understood that I was all along telling you that it is offensive and racist for you to say what you said. You say you didn’t know, which I believe- that’s why I bothered telling you. But instead of taking in that information, you just argued as though I don’t know what is offensive to me regarding my own ethnicity. Which is again, offensive. Now you do know, and should have for some time now. And yes, I do absolutely get to point out and expect correction of statements that are racist or dismissive or otherwise demeaning of my ethnicity. And I get to do that because I understand it better than you do, having dealt with it my entire life. As far as the calm down- you know that’s rude, you’re deliberately being rude. It makes it hard to believe your gaffes are accidental when you are deliberately and publicly rude when they are pointed out and at various other times.

 

As for the analogy, which you didn’t understand, I don’t think you are offended by my right to vote. My point was that deciding what offends others isn’t an opinion. It’s an assumption you’ve made. And if it’s an assumption you’ve made involving race, I think you know what that is despite you saying all night you don’t.

[Heartofice]

Wow so many pages of argument that might never have happened if someone had simply asked ‘hey, what did you actually mean with this comment?’