Silent Sam Toppled by Protestors

[BillyL]

Not sure about the blue, purple or red state justice . . All I know is that I'm not going to jail for any length of time. For the racist fvcking bastards that are, i say this, enjoy your new accommodations . .



Tomorrow morning, Ima gonna be liking my donuts & coffee . .

. . and of course

 

[TarHeelMark]

 

[tarheel0910]

 

[cletusnow]

Good news here we can all be proud of . .

View embedded media

Neo-Nazis are not right, but left. National Socialist Germán Workers party.

 

[strummingram]

Neo-Nazis are not right, but left. National Socialist Germán Workers party.

Yeah, the Nazis called themselves the 'National Socialists', and they even nicked some (incredibly benign) socialist policies. It is, however, a total misnomer, it's like the World Series, or Democratic People's Republic of Korea, or 'ethics in gaming journalism'. The Nazis were fascists. Indisputably. They drew their ideology from Italy's fascists, who arose in reaction to the Left.

 

[SorryNotSorry]

"...white supremacist industrialist Julian Carr speaking at the 1913 unveiling of the Silent Sam statue on the UNC campus, an alumni, was also a veteran of the Civil War. He spoke about how, just a hundred yards from the statue, he had, in the weeks immediately after the end of the Civil War, personally horse-whipped a black woman, quote, 'until her skirts hung in shreds, because upon the streets of this quiet village she had publicly insulted and maligned a Southern lady, and then rushed for protection to these University buildings where was stationed a garrison of 100 Federal soldiers. … I performed the pleasing duty in the immediate presence of the entire garrison....'"

Let's stop whitewashing the nature of this statue and the intent of those who put it up.

www.democracynow.org

BOOM

 

[ticket2ride04]

Neo-Nazis are not right, but left. National Socialist Germán Workers party.

You seem like a bright fella

 

[Raising Heel]

I'm amazed that 6 and 10 year sentences were handed out in this case, while the bike lock guy (Eric Clanton) got 3 years probation.

Just more evidence of what is obvious, both sides are not treated equally, not by the Judiciary, not by the Press.

Hadn't heard about the bike lock guy before. Wow.

The disparities between the sentences are definitely odd. However, I fail to see how that is "evidence" of anything. Are you intimately familiar with the details of each case? Have you followed the proceedings thoroughly? Are you knowledgeable about the respective state-specific sentencing guidelines where the cases were tried? It's entirely possible there are reasonable explanations for the differences.

Suggesting it's proof of something "obvious" makes you sound paranoid. It's also a good example of the kind of knee-jerk reaction that is killing civil discourse in this country.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Hadn't heard about the bike lock guy before. Wow.

Neither had I. I wonder why....

That was a pretty messed up story. Wow.

 

[cletusnow]

You seem like a bright fella

And you seem like a douche.

 

[cletusnow]

Yeah, the Nazis called themselves the 'National Socialists', and they even nicked some (incredibly benign) socialist policies. It is, however, a total misnomer, it's like the World Series, or Democratic People's Republic of Korea, or 'ethics in gaming journalism'. The Nazis were fascists. Indisputably. They drew their ideology from Italy's fascists, who arose in reaction to the Left.

Most left leaning ideologies can also be classified as fascist as well.
“Fascism emphasizes direct action, including supporting the legitimacy of political violence, as a core part of its politics.”
Sounds a lot like Antifa, Soviet and Chinese communism.
Fascism has nothing to do with classical liberalism, conservatism, and free market economics.
The whole left/right argument is a ruse to hide the fact that it is a left/left argument. Socialism or Socialism with a racial aspect? Both are total and complete failures of human endeavor.

 

[mikeirbyusa]

Ok, will agree that statue was in the wrong place. But are we going to promote vandalism and say it's ok? Make sure you understand the can of worms this can open. Those folks are criminals and should pay for their crimes. What say you?

 

[tarheel0910]

Ok, will agree that statue was in the wrong place. But are we going to promote vandalism and say it's ok? Make sure you understand the can of worms this can open. Those folks are criminals and should pay for their crimes. What say you?

I think the majority of posters in this thread agree with you. The statue probably should have been moved already, but done so in a legal way. It shouldn't have been torn down and those who did so should be prosecuted.

 

[cletusnow]

Ok, will agree that statue was in the wrong place. But are we going to promote vandalism and say it's ok? Make sure you understand the can of worms this can open. Those folks are criminals and should pay for their crimes. What say you?

yes, if there are no consequences, they will become emboldened to escalate in the future. Next time it may be private property that destroyed.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

It's not over, though.

As I stated earlier in the thread; This will help the conservative legislature in the state. If you're trying to shift the majority to a Democratic/Liberal side, then this was a bad idea. The GOP will use this to get more votes. People who disrespect the rule of law, take into their own hands, mobs destroying monuments and property... that won't appeal to constituents, I don't think. In Chapel Hill, it will be fine.

We often agree on issues, but less so on tactics.

It always puzzles me that (to me) you seem to be saying not to challenge evil because if you challenge evil, there could be a backlash that would strengthen evil or weaken good. You may be right about the backlash. But if you don't challenge evil then, um, evil goes unchallenged. How do things get better?

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I think the majority of posters in this thread agree with you. The statue probably should have been moved already, but done so in a legal way. It shouldn't have been torn down and those who did so should be prosecuted.

When the authority of the state opposes positive change - as in this case - what sometimes happens is civil disobedience.

When you have civil disobedience, there's always a chance that some will not behave civilly.

That's the risk society takes when it cuts off the normal, peaceful avenues for change.

So now we are at the point where you have to choose to be on the side of the state law that prevents the peaceful removal of a symbol of a reprehensible era and philosophy, or whether you want to tolerate some vandalism, as you call it.

I side with the vandals. Vandalism should not have been necessary, but NC legislators pushed the debate in that direction.

In a reasonable, civil society, any NC legislator who voted for that should be booted out of office. But we're talking about NC, so that's unlikely.

As for UNC's role, did the university speak out forcefully against the legislation? Or did it hide behind it? Seem to me, some heads should roll there, too, but I won't hold my breath.

 

[dadika13]

I think the majority of posters in this thread agree with you. The statue probably should have been moved already, but done so in a legal way. It shouldn't have been torn down and those who did so should be prosecuted.

Yep, won't argue with that.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Yeah... I'd have to agree. Owning other humans doesn't appeal to me at all. I'm glad the South lost the war. I wish the country could have ended chattel slavery without a war. But, wishing isn't getting.

SS had been in place for 105 years.

Longer than the US existed before the war to defend slavery broke out.

You say it would have been great if the US could have ended slavery without going to war. I agree.

It also would have been great to remove all symbols of institutionalized racism from public spaces without "vandalism."

In each case, the authorities failed.

The war was a tragedy. The "vandalism" was trivial. But we still have people defending institutionalized racism - even from trivial and long-overdue redress.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

When you have civil disobedience, there's always a chance that some will not behave civilly.

If people aren't behaving civilly, then by definition it's not civil disobedience.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

The statue probably should have been moved already, but done so in a legal way.

I actually don't agree with this. If the statue is benign, and it was made to honor students that enlisted and possibly died to defend their home/state, then it should be displayed on the campus of the University that those students were enrolled at.

If the statue represents racism, then it shouldn't be moved - it should be destroyed. If it's racist, moving it somewhere else and displaying it there is stupid - there should be no place for racism. The problem is that a certain group operated under the assumption that it did represent that. Maybe there should have been a vote as to whether people thought it represented racism or not, and majority rule would have determined if it stayed or was destroyed.

I'm sure there are statues, plaques, memorials, etc. of things that I would prefer not be there. But if I'm in the minority opinion, then I don't reserve the right to destroy it just because I don't like it.

 

[tarheel0910]

I actually don't agree with this. If the statue is benign, and it was made to honor students that enlisted and possibly died to defend their home/state, then it should be displayed on the campus of the University that those students were enrolled at.

If the statue represents racism, then it shouldn't be moved - it should be destroyed. If it's racist, moving it somewhere else and displaying it there is stupid - there should be no place for racism. The problem is that a certain group operated under the assumption that it did represent that. Maybe there should have been a vote as to whether people thought it represented racism or not, and majority rule would have determined if it stayed or was destroyed.

I'm sure there are statues, plaques, memorials, etc. of things that I would prefer not be there. But if I'm in the minority opinion, then I don't reserve the right to destroy it just because I don't like it.

In a perfect world everyone would have been able to understand the backstory of the statue and separate what some idiot said from the intended purpose. That would have allowed the statue to stay up. We don't live in a perfect world and the statue wasn't going to be able to stay there. Either it was going to be moved legally and placed somewhere else or people were going to tear it down. It would have made more sense to just go ahead and move it somewhere else so it wouldn't have come to this.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

If people aren't behaving civilly, then by definition it's not civil disobedience.

LOL. But this is not a word game. Racism is a serious evil that has been enormously destructive to this nation for as long as it has existed. "Civil disobedience" has a well-understood definition, and has been practiced by many American heroes to combat evils as widely-varied as racism, war, environmental depredation, oppression of women, and more. It's always a shame when things go too far. But how far is "too far" in the face of evil?

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

In a perfect world everyone would have been able to understand the backstory of the statue and separate what some idiot said from the intended purpose.

Here we go with the whitewash again.

 

[tarheel0910]

The war was a tragedy. The "vandalism" was trivial. But we still have people defending institutionalized racism - even from trivial and long-overdue redress.

Two questions for you:

1. Who gets to decide that vandalism is trivial and do they also get to decide if other laws are trivial?
2. Who was defending institutionalized racism by saying the statue shouldn't have been taken down?

 

[tarheel0910]

Here we go with the whitewash again.

How am I whitewashing it?

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

In a perfect world everyone would have been able to understand the backstory of the statue and separate what some idiot said from the intended purpose. That would have allowed the statue to stay up. We don't live in a perfect world and the statue wasn't going to be able to stay there. Either it was going to be moved legally and placed somewhere else or people were going to tear it down. It would have made more sense to just go ahead and move it somewhere else so it wouldn't have come to this.

I see what you're saying. But I feel that by moving it, you're acknowledging that it's a racist statue. And once you do that, there should be no place for it anywhere. If it's not racist, then there's no need to move it even if there are some people who don't like it. If we get into the business of moving stuff whenever someone says they think it has a different meaning and will destroy it, we'll end up moving things all over the place.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

But this is not a word game.

It's not. But when you botch a definition that is integral to your point, it needs to be pointed out. That sentence just sounded as dumb as if I said "When you're standing up, there's always a chance that you won't be standing up"

Racism is a serious evil

I completely agree with this

But how far is "too far" in the face of evil?

What is evil about the statue?

 

[tarheel0910]

I wish we would just get rid of this statue culture altogether. There are far too many statues going up lately, especially in college sports. It's inevitable that someone at some point is going to have a problem with the statue and in today's world we don't really need to see someone physically to learn about them. Just google them.

 

[Raising Heel]

I wish we would just get rid of this statue culture altogether. There are far too many statues going up lately, especially in college sports. It's inevitable that someone at some point is going to have a problem with the statue and in today's world we don't really need to see someone physically to learn about them. Just google them.

So I'm not getting a statue?

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

I wish we would just get rid of this statue culture altogether. There are far too many statues going up lately, especially in college sports. It's inevitable that someone at some point is going to have a problem with the statue and in today's world we don't really need to see someone physically to learn about them. Just google them.

Completely agree. I could see UNC putting up a statue of Ty Lawson near the Dean Dome, and then in 15-20 years drunk driving is seen on the same level as racism is today, and we'd have a mob decide to tear that one down too. Better to just avoid recognizing people altogether, lest something about them become the in vogue subject of rage in the future.

 

[Terror Beard]

Institutionalized racism is overstated.

I don’t believe the statue needed to come down.

People who believe the same things I do are not evil.

This ongoing discussion about race in this country is so f*cking tiresome at this point.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

This ongoing discussion about race in this country is so f*cking tiresome at this point.

The ironic thing is that the same people who claim to want to make race issues disappear, and make people "color-blind", are the same ones that perpetually bring racial differences to the forefront of discussions and debates.

 

[heelmanwilm]

Okay i’m gonna try and be as logical and objective as i can.

The statue honors students who died in service to the csa

The csa seceded from the union, according to several of their letters of secession, in their own words, In response to slavery being outlawed. (Convince me they would have seceded otherwise.)

So it seems to me if you’re honoring those who died for a certain cause then you’re defending that cause. Thats just the way i see it.

So imho, as someone born and raised in the south, as a grad of unc myself, with ancestors who fought on both sides, there is no reason to honor what the south did or the people who served. To me its an embarrassment. You can talk about the culture of the time and state’s rights, and how blacks fought for the south, and “northerly aggression” yadda yadda yadda. I’ve heard it all. but to me it was just wrong. If not evil. Sorry i know a lot of u disagree. Not saying those who fought were evil, their cause was though and that cause does not deserve honoring. Teach about it, put up museums to it, but dont honor it.

 

[tarheel0910]

So I'm not getting a statue?

Nope, but if you play your cards right I might be willing to name a toilet after you.

I could see UNC putting up a statue of Ty Lawson near the Dean Dome, and then in 15-20 years drunk driving is seen on the same level as racism is today

Well, there are some people on radar that are already saying we should put up a statue of Dean where Sam was.

Better to just avoid recognizing people altogether

I'm ok with doing things like recognizing people in museums and maybe by naming something after them (street, building, etc.).

lest something about them become the in vogue subject of rage in the future.

Going back to the statue of Dean (which he would hate), I could easily see that turning into a race issue. There are already some people in academic circles that don't like the reverence that Dean gets and some are trying to say that the whole afam thing was racist because it somehow denied black students an education. It wouldn't take much for people to start saying Dean was a racist and so is the statue.

 

[dadika13]

This ongoing discussion about race in this country is so f*cking tiresome at this point.

That's a very white person thought. The majority of black people would very much disagree with you, they don't think it's talked about enough.

 

[tarheel0910]

This ongoing discussion about race in this country is so f*cking tiresome at this point.

That's a very white person thought. The majority of black people would very much disagree with you, they don't think it's talked about enough.

So, I would say that there really isn't a discussion going on because the discussion gets stopped as soon as someone tries to be honest about it. If you don't like what someone is saying, just call them a racist. That will cause people to just stop discussing it and keep people from even bothering discussing it to begin with. It's also hard for people to realize/understand/care about the difference between a socioeconomic discussion and a discussion about race. Those two things do have some overlap, but might not have the same solutions based on the specific causes/problems.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

It wouldn't take much for people to start saying Dean was a racist and so is the statue.

Agreed. I could see people saying "WTF, you had a racist statue that got torn down, and you replace it with another white dude, and this one orchestrated the AFAM thing that prevented a proper education to Blacks?" And if we're allowing people to just tear down whatever they want, that Dean statue could easily get torn down in the future - which would be a terrible look for the University.

 

[strummingram]

I guess the pedestal stays... which is commemorating the dead... like a collective headstone.

The soldier and even CSA on the canteen must have been the problem.

 

[strummingram]

That's a very white person thought. The majority of black people would very much disagree with you, they don't think it's talked about enough.

So, I would say that there really isn't a discussion going on because the discussion gets stopped as soon as someone tries to be honest about it. If you don't like what someone is saying, just call them a racist. That will cause people to just stop discussing it and keep people from even bothering discussing it to begin with. It's also hard for people to realize/understand/care about the difference between a socioeconomic discussion and a discussion about race. Those two things do have some overlap, but might not have the same solutions based on the specific causes/problems.

Yep... to both.


I've heard it said by historians and academics of the Civil War that every generation has to fight it in some way. That's what is necessary because of the impact of the institution of slavery and the war. Its impact is that deep.

 

[strummingram]

Most left leaning ideologies can also be classified as fascist as well.
“Fascism emphasizes direct action, including supporting the legitimacy of political violence, as a core part of its politics.”
Sounds a lot like Antifa, Soviet and Chinese communism.
Fascism has nothing to do with classical liberalism, conservatism, and free market economics.
The whole left/right argument is a ruse to hide the fact that it is a left/left argument. Socialism or Socialism with a racial aspect? Both are total and complete failures of human endeavor.

My point is; Tyranny isn't left or right. It's just tyranny.