Persistence of Confederacy Imagery and Glorification

[Albion]

I just wish those so desperate to cast down symbols or statues of Confederate heroes would apply the same rules to all symbols of Karl Marx, one of the main causes of slavery and death in the modern world.

But as usual, Marx gets a free pass cos he's a leftie.

Very true.

 

[Strathos]

I haven't seen any statues of Marx anywhere near where I live.

 

[muichimotsu]

Very true.

Pretty sure you're still under a burden of proof to support this claim, you don't get a free pass because someone agrees with you. Where's the evidence of this?

 

[muichimotsu]

I haven't seen any statues of Marx anywhere near where I live.

I'd bet money you can find most of them in, you know, Europe and probably not in huge numbers anyway

 

[Albion]

I haven't seen any statues of Marx anywhere near where I live.

I'll bet there aren't any of Mother Teresa or Gandhi, either. So what?

 

[dzheremi]

I'd bet money you can find most of them in, you know, Europe and probably not in huge numbers anyway

And in China, India, and Turkey, but yeah, there don't appear to be many.

Statues of communist (and other) dictators have been torn down routinely throughout history, too.

I wonder what the "tearing down statues is erasing history" crowd has to say about the American revolutionaries tearing down the statue of King George in Manhattan in 1776, mentioned in the article at the last link. Is King George's time as ruler of the colonies not also history? If it is, should they not have done that? Should we put up a new one in Manhattan today to replace it, in order to show that we are not in favor of censuring or erasing history?

 

[Strathos]

I'll bet there aren't any of Mother Teresa or Gandhi, either. So what?

So it seems to be a complete red herring argument.

 

[muichimotsu]

I'll bet there aren't any of Mother Teresa or Gandhi, either. So what?

Mother Teresa and Gandhi have flaws, but those are in spite of, at least on the surface, good things they've done, Gandhi in particular, while Mother Teresa was more extreme in the idea of suffering as a virtue to get closer to Christ. And Gandhi supposedly was somewhat racist and had some creepy predilections, though I don't recall specifics on that.

 

[muichimotsu]

And in China, India, and Turkey, but yeah, there don't appear to be many.

Statues of communist (and other) dictators have been torn down routinely throughout history, too.

I wonder what the "tearing down statues is erasing history" crowd has to say about the American revolutionaries tearing down the statue of King George in Manhattan in 1776, mentioned in the article at the last link. Is King George's time as ruler of the colonies not also history? If it is, should they not have done that? Should we put up a new one in Manhattan today to replace it, in order to show that we are not in favor of censuring or erasing history?

It's seemingly a historical revisionism masquerading as historical purism or such, which is...contradictory and dissonant, to say the least.

When someone is so attached to their identity in regards to a historical group they want to whitewash, it's not unreasonable to conclude they'd compartmentalize or such

 

[muichimotsu]

I'll bet there aren't any of Mother Teresa or Gandhi, either. So what?

Not sure what the comparison is meant to be, because Mother Teresa and Gandhi weren't making that kind of influence where you hear about Gandhism or Mother Teresaism. The problem here is the comparison, a red herring as pointed out already, since I don't think anyone is utilizing Marx in the same way as such people that are considered saintly and are rooted in a spiritual/religious worldview

 

[Francis Drake]

I haven't seen any statues of Marx anywhere near where I live.

The comment was about removing all symbols of Marx!
The Hammer and Sickle, a symbol of cruelty, torture, pillage, and mass slaughter, can be found all over the USA, particularly on campus and in the current street protests.

 

[ViaCrucis]

And in China, India, and Turkey, but yeah, there don't appear to be many.

Statues of communist (and other) dictators have been torn down routinely throughout history, too.

I wonder what the "tearing down statues is erasing history" crowd has to say about the American revolutionaries tearing down the statue of King George in Manhattan in 1776, mentioned in the article at the last link. Is King George's time as ruler of the colonies not also history? If it is, should they not have done that? Should we put up a new one in Manhattan today to replace it, in order to show that we are not in favor of censuring or erasing history?

Who is King George? I can't know who that is if there's no statue of him. And if there's no statue, then obviously the history about the independence of the American colonies--whatever that is--was erased.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Strathos]

The comment was about removing all symbols of Marx!
The Hammer and Sickle, a symbol of cruelty, torture, pillage, and mass slaughter, can be found all over the USA, particularly on campus and in the current street protests.

That symbol was actually created under Lenin. And I don't think I've ever seen it IRL outside of a historical context.

 

[DaveHTexas]

I haven't seen any statues of Marx anywhere near where I live.

I have not seen them personally, but there reportedly are installations of Karl Marx statues in Seattle, Portland, San Francisco and Chicago. Again I have not seen them personally, just seen news articles on the installations and I could be badly misinformed on them. HOWEVER, it is true that a good majority of American Universities DO glorify Karl Marx and his ideaology that has lead to so much suffering and death. Marx himself kew his ideas would have to be implemented by violence, and his adherents were more than happy to oblige... The violence and death of Socialism / Communism has vastly outpaced that of the Nazis.

 

[Francis Drake]

That symbol was actually created under Lenin.

So does being created by Lenin, somehow negate the fact the Hammer and Sickle emblem represents Karl Marx?

And I don't think I've ever seen it IRL outside of a historical context.

Watch the BLM and Antifa protests and you will see the hammer and sickle.

 

[Strathos]

So does being created by Lenin, somehow negate the fact the Hammer and Sickle emblem represents Karl Marx?

I thought it represented the Soviet Union.

Watch the BLM and Antifa protests and you will see the hammer and sickle.

I wouldn't know how common that is, as I never watch those.

 

[muichimotsu]

I wouldn't know how common that is, as I never watch those.

The problem with symbols is the changing of them over time, especially when the usage for certain things becomes outdated and merely historical (Superman Red Son has the hammer and sickle on his outfit, iirc, though I haven't read the comics, only the animated adaptation, which was really thought provoking with Superman as the lead, esp. in his relationship to Stalin), not common, similar to Neo Nazis using the 3rd Reich Swastika

And BLM doesn't, to my knowledge, use the hammer and sickle, though Antifa's use may be more an overlap, similar to BLM's fist imagery that may have historical links back to communism in some form, though that's not my area of expertise at all.

 

[Strathos]

The problem with symbols is the changing of them over time, especially when the usage for certain things becomes outdated and merely historical (Superman Red Son has the hammer and sickle on his outfit, iirc, though I haven't read the comics, only the animated adaptation, which was really thought provoking with Superman as the lead, esp. in his relationship to Stalin), not common, similar to Neo Nazis using the 3rd Reich Swastika

And BLM doesn't, to my knowledge, use the hammer and sickle, though Antifa's use may be more an overlap, similar to BLM's fist imagery that may have historical links back to communism in some form, though that's not my area of expertise at all.

In a public protest can't anyone bring any sign or symbol they want?

 

[muichimotsu]

In a public protest can't anyone bring any sign or symbol they want?

It's the same line of thought that I have no issue with in private citizens using any offensive symbols they want as long as it isn't causing a negative climate for the community at large. Someone wants to hang a Nazi flag on their porch, I could care less until it becomes them harassing anyone who doesn't agree with them in the neighborhood and then I will likely intervene

The mascot example is little different than some Southern states that hung the Confederate flag in their capitol buildings. People can do it as individuals, the state is not under the same protections