White Nationalist leads torch-bearing protestors against removal of confederate statue

[bcking 3,157]

22 minutes ago, Mr&Mrs G. said:

Someone should notify UNESCO about the Alamo monument which also has links to slavery. It might be time to remove it's status as a world heritage site. 

 

http://fusion.kinja.com/the-alamo-and-its-overlooked-history-of-slavery-could-1793848838

 

What about General Custer monuments surely they are offensive to native Americans and should be removed also. 

 

There will always be something that someone finds offensive about part of your countries history it doesn't mean it has to be removed or hidden.

 

 

Statues of men in specific towns are different than actual historical sights. You can't just pick up and move the Alamo into a museum. If we want to preserve it (and I believe we do) then we have to preserve it where it stands. However in that situation if there are lessons to be learned regarding negative aspects to the sight and the history (a slavery connection with the Alamo, I'll admit I'm not that familiar with the Alamo and its history so I know nothing about that) it can be featured/mentioned at the sight to educate people.

 

Statues in towns commemorating people who not only lost a war, but generally speaking stood for values and systems that we pretty much all realize now to be wrong (slavery) don't really have a reasonable place. I could see commemorating a loser who fought for an ideal that still resonates today. But someone who lost and was fighting for what was clearly the morally wrong side when it comes to an evil system in place at the time...I agree that should be in a museum. 

 

Also keep in mind putting things in a musem isn't "hiding them", unless I guess you're the kind of person who never visits museums.

[CaliCat 3,957]

2 minutes ago, bcking said:

Statues of men in specific towns are different than actual historical sights. You can't just pick up and move the Alamo into a museum. If we want to preserve it (and I believe we do) then we have to preserve it where it stands. However in that situation if there are lessons to be learned regarding negative aspects to the sight and the history (a slavery connection with the Alamo, I'll admit I'm not that familiar with the Alamo and its history so I know nothing about that) it can be featured/mentioned at the sight to educate people.

 

Statues in towns commemorating people who not only lost a war, but generally speaking stood for values and systems that we pretty much all realize now to be wrong (slavery) don't really have a reasonable place. I could see commemorating a loser who fought for an ideal that still resonates today. But someone who lost and was fighting for what was clearly the morally wrong side when it comes to an evil system in place at the time...I agree that should be in a museum. 

 

Also keep in mind putting things in a musem isn't "hiding them", unless I guess you're the kind of person who never visits museums.

 

I think the Alamo comparison was somewhat off topic, but I also think American history is seen differently in other shores. People have a more romanticized idea of history through movies and books that sometimes leave out the gory details. Unless you study American history you'd never understand the direct link between the end of the Civil War and Jim Crow laws and these statues and the confederate flag.

[Ban Hammer 12,842]

thread closed per op request