Protestors Try to Topple Andrew Jackson Statue

98cwitr said:

What we are watching right now is the unfolding and execution of a marxist revolution. It happened in Vietnam, in China, in Venezuela, and it's happening here...right now.

Click to expand...

Removing the statue of an evil man isn't Marxist revolution. It's simply the right thing to do.

Honoring evil men isn't the work of a Godly nation but a nation who worships the devil.

timewerx said:

Whites stole North American lands.... They came to claim a land that doesn't have their names on it....

Click to expand...

...and so they put their names on it just as the tribes that lived there before them did. Land to live on is gained by conquest. If there’s any constant of five thousand years of recorded history it’s that. Whites merely did it more efficiently than others.

timewerx said:

So whatever the Native Americans did to them is justified. The Native Americans are simply getting rid of thieves and robbers who are trying to steal their lands.

Click to expand...

What about whatever they did to other tribes that lived on their lands before they did?

In any case, I think we've established that this isn't just about the Confederacy or slavery.

SoldierOfTheKing said:

...and so they put their names on it just as the tribes that lived there before them did. Land to live on is gained by conquest. If there’s any constant of five thousand years of recorded history it’s that. Whites merely did it more efficiently than others.

Click to expand...

Native Americans are Nomads and kept relocating. That's why they lived in highly portable tents.

They don't have a claim on lands as Europeans does.

The early Israelites in the Old Testament are also nomads UNTIL they became envious and covetous of their pagan neighbors who settled in one place and had kings. Settling down and building cities is the way of the pagans....But God allowed it eventually to satisfy the curiousity (and perhaps the greedy hearts) of the covetous and envious Israelites.

Things went downhill from there for the Israelites so by the time Jesus have come, the Israelites were already completely corrupted by their Godless neighbors.

timewerx said:

Removing the statue of an evil man isn't Marxist revolution. It's simply the right thing to do.

Honoring evil men isn't the work of a Godly nation but a nation who worships the devil.

Click to expand...

We've all been evil. No one is perfect. Making excuses for lawless behavior is simply the wrong thing to do. It's like saying "they were wrong then, so let's be wrong now." That's not right, or good, and only proliferates societal harm. Why is it appropriate to judge the past through the present's lenses? Should we not place ourselves into the frame of the time?

2 Thessalonians 2:7
For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.

timewerx said:

Whites stole North American lands.... They came to claim a land that doesn't have their names on it....

So whatever the Native Americans did to them is justified. The Native Americans are simply getting rid of thieves and robbers who are trying to steal their lands.

Click to expand...

Native Americans did not have the concept of private property. How was that stealing when you attempt to enter into treaty with a tribe, they sign, and then renege on said treaty because they did not grasp the concept? This is not to say there weren't exceptions. There were many tribes with different views and believes, and many did honor the agreements made with European settlers.

It's rather a conundrum to say "they lost their land" when they never conceded that it was their land in the first place.

Sparagmos said:

What do you mean exactly?

Click to expand...

Instead of hearing and understanding what you labeled as conspiracy theory...you can roll over and allow CNN to scratch your belly.

Silmarien said:

I think you may have a point. It actually reminded me a little bit of the Islamic hostility towards graven images, though I suppose the theory behind that is a bit different.

I saw something a little bit similar earlier, though from a secular perspective... the idea that because all historical figures have their problematic side, we should reconsider honoring heroes altogether. The idea of the article was ultimately that we should honor groups like BLM instead, which as far as I'm concerned just leads to the same problem, since groups are made up of people and also have a problematic side, but I think you might be right. You could argue that we're just turning history into a new religion with the focus on heroes.

On the other hand, there are some historical figures who have a quasi-mythical status--I'm thinking of Joan of Arc or Vercingetorix in France. Granted, France has got its problems and I'm not sure that holding people like this up as national heroes does them justice, given that one is medieval and the other classical and neither has anything to do with modern France.

Click to expand...

I thought the instance of Joan of Arc was interesting to think on. I tend to want to see each and every person depicted (helpfully!) as human in the full sense of having a mix of strengths and weaknesses, good and less good qualities. I don't want some actual real individual to be made in a sense non human, to become an archetype or mythic figure, and if they are shorn of human qualities. We are all so used to statues that these reactions took work to remember. The person wasn't bronze or stone, but a human struggling in ignorance, right enough.

It's quite easy to reach a different conclusion, such as for instance one seeing all humans as flawed (we all do already practically) and then merely the figure is being elevated for some heroic act, so that the statue is in effect about someone that did an act of courage or self-sacrifice, and who could be against that, etc. So, it would be easy for anyone to cavalierly (if they wanted ) argue that it's much ado about little. But, here we are -- we have all of these statues that elevate these individuals who were often supporting treating groups of people as if less than other people, and who could sincerely endorse that if they were able to see others as equal? But, there's a better reason, to me, to bring them all down to human scale. We've had enough of worshiping humans.

Forrest owned slaves, led soldiers who murdered black Union troops and founded the KKK. Jefferson owned slaves and didn’t free them. Penn owned slaves but freed his slaves when he died. Franklin owned a few slaves but later freed them, became anti slavery and headed an organization dedicated to ending slavery. Wilson owned one slave who he freed; he later worked to make slavery illegal. Buchanan purchased two slaves but brought them to a free state and freed them. Whose statue should be removed, whose should stay up?