How Long til Silent Sam is Removed (one way or the other)?

[TarHeelNation11]

A few things I would like to point out with respect to this specific Silent Sam case as well as UNC in general:

• As we have discussed, Silent Sam is a "silent" figure and is directly related to UNC. It's not a willy nilly throw up of Lee in a random town square in Tennessee
• Much has been made about Julian Carr's statements at the dedication of Silent Sam in 1915. While his statement is pretty disgusting, it still highlights how the world was simply different back then, and that historical figures were much more complex than what we try to pigeon-hole from a 2017 view. While yes he did make that awful statement, at the same time, Carr was a huge advocate to the women's suffrage movement, drawing direct praise and commendation from Susan B. Anthony for his encouragement of forming the Equal Suffrage League of North Carolina. You see, it's fairly stupid to assign one specific binary descriptor (he was racist or he wasn't, e.g.) to historical figures.
• In the early 1960s, the N.C. General Assembly passed what became known as "the speaker ban" that banned any Communists (the wording of the act put specific criteria in place to identify someone as a Communist) from speaking on any campus in the UNC-system. In response, current UNC student body president Paul Dickson invited two known Communists to speak "on" campus. They found a loophole and had the speakers stand on Franklin just on the other side of campus. All of the audience stood just on campus in McCorckal Place (sorry, I know I butchered that spelling) right in front of....you guessed it.... Silent Sam.... to listen to the speakers. Funnily enough, Mr. Dickson was no Communist. He was an Air Force veteran and despised Communism. But, he also respected his fellow students' rights to both have and experience free speech. It was his hope that by inviting the speakers to talk, the students would hear their spiel and would, ultimately, decide for themselves that Communism was evil, etc. etc.
• UNC's campus is a treasure chest of 220+ years of history. It's a campus that has been operational through (by my count), 8 U.S. wars, seen tragedies, seen celebrations, hosted presidents, hosted criminals, and lots of things in between.

All of this and we're going to cave to pressure from some outside bullies coming on to campus to cause trouble? I don't like it.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Since Chapel Hill has more police officers than some major cities, maybe they could send a few officers over to campus today to keep the peace? I'm just spit balling here.

Why would they do that? That would potentially prevent the violence - which is the exact opposite of what they want. They want something to happen there, so they have an excuse to take the statue down. Double win for them if the violence is caused by a right wing group so they can grandstand about that as well, but they'll take violence from the left as well, and just bury any finger pointing of who instigated the violence

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Why would they do that? That would potentially prevent the violence - which is the exact opposite of what they want. They want something to happen there, so they have an excuse to take the statue down. Double win for them if the violence is caused by a right wing group so they can grandstand about that as well, but they'll take violence from the left as well, and just bury any finger pointing of who instigated the violence

Sadly, you're exactly correct.

 

[ticket2ride04]

You have to ask, at what point did the topic of abortion being wrong come up. When they were planning to do abortions? Or once the abortions began? Was it legal for a woman to seek means to destroy that child within, before doctors could do it legally? The flaw in your comparison is all the state's had already been guilty of slavery. Abortion popped up once a modern civilization decided it was ok to murder an innocent. And then defend it. It's some of that same group who are denouncing these monuments that are fine with a woman killing that child. As stated above, next week, they will have some other topic to carry this banner for

You think abortions just popped up recently?

 

[Grayhead]

The medical practice in modern times for money, yes

I'm aware that it has taken many forms throughout history

 

[DeanFor President]

And it begins:
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article168968782.html

 

[Raising Heel]

Legislation Calls for Moving Silent Sam Inside

Silent Sam could be moved to an indoor location on campus if there is adequate support for bills introduced Tuesday that is sponsored by four legislators, three of whom represent Orange County.

The bills, which cite recent vandalism that “threaten the preservation and integrity of the monument,” call for Chancellor Carol L. Folt to identify a site by April 2019 and, if approved, for the Confederate monument to be moved by one year later.

https://alumni.unc.edu/news/legislation-calls-for-moving-silent-sam-inside

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Legislation Calls for Moving Silent Sam Inside

Silent Sam could be moved to an indoor location on campus if there is adequate support for bills introduced Tuesday that is sponsored by four legislators, three of whom represent Orange County.

The bills, which cite recent vandalism that “threaten the preservation and integrity of the monument,” call for Chancellor Carol L. Folt to identify a site by April 2019 and, if approved, for the Confederate monument to be moved by one year later.

https://alumni.unc.edu/news/legislation-calls-for-moving-silent-sam-inside

Move it into one of the buildings built by slaves.... oh wait. In general, I hate the influence Orange County and the town of Chapel Hill have over UNC, on lots of things, not just this.

I realize this topic is the flame to my moth.

If I ever personally witnessed someone vandalizing Silent Sam, you'd see my picture in the paper the next day because my ass would be getting arrested for assault and battery.

 

[tarheel0910]

Legislation Calls for Moving Silent Sam Inside

Silent Sam could be moved to an indoor location on campus if there is adequate support for bills introduced Tuesday that is sponsored by four legislators, three of whom represent Orange County.

The bills, which cite recent vandalism that “threaten the preservation and integrity of the monument,” call for Chancellor Carol L. Folt to identify a site by April 2019 and, if approved, for the Confederate monument to be moved by one year later.

https://alumni.unc.edu/news/legislation-calls-for-moving-silent-sam-inside

Two things I'm curious about. Isn't NC legislature still controlled by republicans? Second, why would they think moving it inside would help? People will just break in and vandalize it.

 

[Raising Heel]

Two things I'm curious about. Isn't NC legislature still controlled by republicans?

Yes. The bill was sponsored by four Democrats but it's unlikely it would ever be approved.

 

[tarheel0910]

Yes. The bill was sponsored by four Democrats but it's unlikely it would ever be approved.

So it's one of those I'm going to do something useless, but it will make me look good to my base situations.

 

[Raising Heel]

So it's one of those I'm going to do something useless, but it will make me look good to my base situations.

They have a responsibility to represent their constituents.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

If I ever personally witnessed someone vandalizing Silent Sam, you'd see my picture in the paper the next day because my ass would be getting arrested for assault and battery.

Wow, that's some dedication right there, good for you. I wouldn't care enough about it to do that. I just love that having the statue there chaps asses, and I'm against giving in to people who whine the loudest, which is why I'm against its removal.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Wow, that's some dedication right there, good for you. I wouldn't care enough about it to do that. I just love that having the statue there chaps asses, and I'm against giving in to people who whine the loudest, which is why I'm against its removal.

While that is incredibly petty, I couldn't agree more. I alluded to this sentiment yesterday in a poast.

 

[strummingram]

Wow, that's some dedication right there, good for you. I wouldn't care enough about it to do that. I just love that having the statue there chaps asses, and I'm against giving in to people who whine the loudest, which is why I'm against its removal.

While I don't think it should be removed, I also don't think it's helpful to be an asshole for the sake of being an asshole. You're not actually defending or representing the statue, and what it stands for, or what it is "supposed to" stand for (which is obviously not universal). You're just doing all you can to be more shitty to people that you think are being shitty.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

You're just doing all you can to be more shitty to people that you think are being shitty.

Yes.

 

[Raising Heel]

While I don't think it should be removed, I also don't think it's helpful to be an asshole for the sake of being an asshole. You're not actually defending or representing the statue, and what it stands for, or what it is "supposed to" stand for (which is obviously not universal). You're just doing all you can to be more shitty to people that you think are being shitty.

Not necessarily. There is principle involved. If the majority of people don't want the statue removed, then it shouldn't be removed. Policy shouldn't be based on the whims of small contingents just because they're extremely outspoken and visible. It's the stupid bathroom bill all over again.

 

[Raising Heel]

You're just doing all you can to be more shitty to people that you think are being shitty.

Yes.

I stand corrected.

 

[strummingram]

Not necessarily. There is principle involved. If the majority of people don't want the statue removed, then it shouldn't be removed. Policy shouldn't be based on the whims of small contingents just because they're extremely outspoken and visible. It's the stupid bathroom bill all over again.

People being shitty for the sake of being shitty is exactly why African Americans will not accept any other meaning behind Silent Sam other than "Nigggers, know your place!"

 

[gunslingerdick]

Policy shouldn't be based on the whims of small contingents just because they're extremely outspoken and visible.

That's is so well said and the underlying theme to many of my beliefs.

 

[gunslingerdick]

People being shitty for the sake of being shitty is exactly why African Americans will not accept any other meaning behind Silent Sam other than "Nigggers, know your place!"

Maybe you're right. But I guess what I'm saying and what I'm often saying in these situations is we don't have to get black folks to sign off on it with approval. The powers that be could simply say, "the statue doesn't represent hatred towards blacks. We've now declared it, it should be settled and you can now choose to be offended by it or not but we consider this matter closed."

 

[strummingram]

Maybe you're right. But I guess what I'm saying and what I'm often saying in these situations is we don't have to get black folks to sign off on it with approval. The powers that be could simply say, "the statue doesn't represent hatred towards blacks. We've now declared it, it should be settled and you can now choose to be offended by it or not but we consider this matter closed."

Well, they will probably see that as "white folks declaring it law." And, I really can't blame them for taking that position. They've been on the shit-end of that stick for several centuries now. Don't be surprised when there's push-back in all kinds of unpleasant forms. And, then the statue will finally come down anyway.

I'm not saying that I totally agree with this, personally, but objectively; From what I can tell over the last 20-30 years of my life, the South, the Southern cost, and price paid, and "the Cause" is deserving of no recognition at all in modern-day society in any positive context. It's just not on-the-table anymore. It was given recognition after the war because of the carnage and the decision, I guess, to appease the South by letting them honor their fallen and the price they paid. The wound was fresh and had to heal so all the white people killing each other could end. But, now? It's just not going to be tolerated. And, maybe it shouldn't be.

ETA: Maybe, in another hundred years, it will come back into an awareness or understanding of what the loss of life felt like for Southerners as well. Maybe one day it will be that way for all "losing sides" of wars fought. I can bet that a mother or father burying a son didn't care much about the flag they died under. And, if they did care, then they have to abide by the outcome.

 

[Raising Heel]

People being shitty for the sake of being shitty is exactly why African Americans will not accept any other meaning behind Silent Sam other than "Nigggers, know your place!"

Do you think there's a way to convince them it means something other than this? Because it feels to me like people who want the statue removed are so entrenched that there's no amount of reasoned explanation that will make any difference to them. Treating every issue like a winner-take-all proposition is a horrible mindset that is ruining public discourse in this country IMO.

If citizens and politicians believe that victory is to the loudest, or to the most dramatic, then loud and dramatic they will be. The process of public discourse, by contrast, is often deliberative, difficult, and slow. Its participants must, on occasion, “dare to be boring.” - The Witherspoon Institute

 

[gunslingerdick]

Well, they will probably see that as "white folks declaring it law." And, I really can't blame them for taking that position. They've been on the shit-end of that stick for several centuries now. Don't be surprised when there's push-back in all kinds of unpleasant forms. And, then the statue will finally come down anyway.

I'm not saying that I totally agree with this, personally, but objectively; From what I can tell over the last 20-30 years of my life, the South, the Southern cost, and price paid, and "the Cause" is deserving of no recognition at all in modern-day society in any positive context. It's just not on-the-table anymore. It was given recognition after the war because of the carnage and the decision, I guess, to appease the South by letting them honor their fallen and the price they paid. The wound was fresh and had to heal so all the white people killing each other could end. But, now? It's just not going to be tolerated. And, maybe it shouldn't be.

ETA: Maybe, in another hundred years, it will come back into an awareness or understanding of what the loss of life felt like for Southerners as well. Maybe one day it will be that way for all "losing sides" of wars fought. I can bet that a mother or father burying a son didn't care much about the flag they died under. And, if they did care, then they have to abide by the outcome.

So what you're saying is that people should revolt whenever they don't like a decision that has been made?

 

[gunslingerdick]

Do you think there's a way to convince them it means something other than this? Because it feels to me like people who want the statue removed are so entrenched that there's no amount of reasoned explanation that will make any difference to them. Treating every issue like a winner-take-all proposition is a horrible mindset that is ruining public discourse in this country IMO.

If citizens and politicians believe that victory is to the loudest, or to the most dramatic, then loud and dramatic they will be. The process of public discourse, by contrast, is often deliberative, difficult, and slow. Its participants must, on occasion, “dare to be boring.” - The Witherspoon Institute

OMG, @Raising Heel is making this thread his bitch. That's another solid gold poast.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Because it feels to me like people who want the statue removed are so entrenched that there's no amount of reasoned explanation that will make any difference to them.

It feels like that to me as well.

 

[strummingram]

So what you're saying is that people should revolt whenever they don't like a decision that has been made?

I don't know what people should or shouldn't do. I just know what I expect them to do, or not do. And, I know what they actually DO do.

If all you took from what i wrote is " you're saying that people should revolt whenever they don't like a decision that has been made", I'm sorry I wasn't more eloquent.

 

[gunslingerdick]

I don't know what people should or shouldn't do. I just know what I expect them to do, or not do. And, I know what they actually DO do.

If all you took from what i wrote is " you're saying that people should revolt whenever they don't like a decision that has been made", I'm sorry I wasn't more eloquent.

Ok. So do you expect people to revolt when they don't like a decision that has been made? And secondly, do you revolt when a decision you don't like has been made?

Thanks.

 

[strummingram]

Do you think there's a way to convince them it means something other than this? Because it feels to me like people who want the statue removed are so entrenched that there's no amount of reasoned explanation that will make any difference to them. Treating every issue like a winner-take-all proposition is a horrible mindset that is ruining public discourse in this country IMO.

If citizens and politicians believe that victory is to the loudest, or to the most dramatic, then loud and dramatic they will be. The process of public discourse, by contrast, is often deliberative, difficult, and slow. Its participants must, on occasion, “dare to be boring.” - The Witherspoon Institute

No, I don't think there is a way to convince them... now. At this point, no, it's beyond repair or clarification. There's a possibility... maybe? But, you'd need to get some kind of person, or group, or some kind of interceding body that could be "trusted", and I don't know who it would be, nor would it matter if I did. And, I don't think it would happen soon enough. Time has to pass where there is a general, collective, accepted feeling of equality. I don't know how much time, but i know it hasn't fully started as yet.

I've heard that the loudest and strongest succeed and that is the way it should be. That's how it's playing-out here, I suppose.

 

[strummingram]

Ok. So do you expect people to revolt when they don't like a decision that has been made? And secondly, do you revolt when a decision you don't like has been made?

Thanks.

It depends on the decision and the people.

Do I "revolt?" It depends on the decision. I don't march outside the Chik-Fil-A because I can't get a milkshake on a Sunday. In fact, I've been whipped into a fairly obedient human being, I guess. No disorderly conduct arrests on my record.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Time has to pass where there is a general, collective, accepted feeling of equality.
.

The crux of the discussion right here. I believe we are there. And I also believe that if you do not share that belief, then what you're advocating for is decisions to be made that would not be in the vein of "equality" but in the vein of "favoritism". And those that believe what I believe, will not support that.

 

[tarheel0910]

Maybe you're right. But I guess what I'm saying and what I'm often saying in these situations is we don't have to get black folks to sign off on it with approval. The powers that be could simply say, "the statue doesn't represent hatred towards blacks. We've now declared it, it should be settled and you can now choose to be offended by it or not but we consider this matter closed."

Most of these articles I read about this are written by white people. I think a lot of the outrage is driven by white guilt.

 

[strummingram]

The crux of the discussion right here. I believe we are there. And I also believe that if you do not share that belief, then what you're advocating for is decisions to be made that would not be in the vein of "equality" but in the vein of "favoritism". And those that believe what I believe, will not support that.

I'm basing that on what I have seen. I'm not advocating for any of it. You're adding a wrinkle that's not there. I want the statue to stay up. But, I understand, and accept, why it will either come down, or be moved. The "reason for it" isn't going to be universal anyway. It will always be subjective.

You're going to "believe we are already there" now, just like you believed it in 1986, when you were sure that no one was bothered by Soul Man. It didn't bother you then, and you liked rap music, too, so how could you, or anything you concluded from a racial standpoint, be considered racist? You were never inconvenienced by racial inequality, so the blacks, spurred-on by liberal whites, were then, and are now, just making something out of nothing. I would hope you've come to realize it wasn't okay/equal then and so, maybe, it's not equal now. But, I'm sure you don't and won't. You seem to revel in your own inability to change or see anything any different from how you have always seen it. And, that's... okay.

 

[strummingram]

Most of these articles I read about this are written by white people. I think a lot of the outrage is driven by white guilt.

There ya go. It's not black people who are bothered by this... nooooo. It's only white people who think black people SHOULD be bothered by it. Blacks aren't capable of being outraged by it unless whitey tells them to be. You're still on the plantation with that attitude.

This is why it's taking for-fvcking-ever to correct itself.

 

[tarheel0910]

There ya go. It's not black people who are bothered by this... nooooo. It's only white people who think black people SHOULD be bothered by it. Blacks aren't capable of being outraged by it unless whitey tells them to be. You're still on the plantation with that attitude.

This is why it's taking for-fvcking-ever to correct itself.

Where did I say any of that?

 

[strummingram]

Where did I say any of that?

Most of these articles I read about this are written by white people. I think a lot of the outrage is driven by white guilt.

 

[Raising Heel]

We need more black poasters on this board. I'm serious. A lot of this discussion is white people talking about what they perceive to be blacks' point of view but really there's a lot of guessing and assumptions being thrown around.

Maybe our next board invasion should double as a recruiting trip.

 

[tarheel0910]

@strummingram

Where did I say any of that?

 

[strummingram]

We need more black poasters on this board. I'm serious. A lot of this discussion is white people talking about what they perceive to be blacks' point of view but really there's a lot of guessing and assumptions being thrown around.

Maybe our next board invasion should double as a recruiting trip.

That would help immensely. And, I've often wondered "Why aren't there more black people here?" No women, no black guys. Just white guys of varying ages.

Having black friends IRL helps immensely, too. It's made me change a lot of my views that I had in younger years. It gave me a different insight. And, it wasn't always what I expected.

 

[Raising Heel]

Most of these articles I read about this are written by white people. I think a lot of the outrage is driven by white guilt.

There ya go. It's not black people who are bothered by this... nooooo. It's only white people who think black people SHOULD be bothered by it. Blacks aren't capable of being outraged by it unless whitey tells them to be. You're still on the plantation with that attitude.

Whoa, dude. All he said was that some white people share the sentiment. That's a ridiculous leap to suggest he was saying blacks can't have their own opinions on the subject.