Tiles that resemble the Confederate flag are being removed from a Times Square subway station

[LGA Link N Train]

So should the topic be locked now????

 

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

[Via Garibaldi 8]

So should the topic be locked now????

 

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

Why should it be?  I also don't see what putting a sticker over the signs is going to do.  My understanding was they were putting in new tiling.  That's even more foolish.  Just keep the damn things there and leave them.  What I can't stand is people that yell about racism and then go and try to sweep everything under the rug to erase a part of history.  Yes, there's racism here.  There always will be. All we can do is try to be better human beings as a society, but going beserk over every incident isn't going to change anything.  We should be having discussions about such things, but unfortunately that hasn't been happening.  All I know is I make fun of myself and my background all of the time because I don't give a damn and I don't take things too seriously.  

[LGA Link N Train]

Why should it be? I also don't see what putting a sticker over the signs is going to do. My understanding was they were putting in new tiling. That's even more foolish. Just keep the damn things there and leave them. What I can't stand is people that yell about racism and then go and try to sweep everything under the rug to erase a part of history. Yes, there's racism here. There always will be. All we can do is try to be better human beings as a society, but going beserk over every incident isn't going to change anything. We should be having discussions about such things, but unfortunately that hasn't been happening. All I know is I make fun of myself and my background all of the time because I don't give a damn and I don't take things too seriously.

You have a point, but I asked if the topic should be locked because First- Removing a bunch of tiles is a waist of money Second- "Yes, there's racism here. There always will be" and Third - is what you said "All we can do is try to be better human beings as a society" and Fourth - the event already passed, and this society is filled with a bunch of idiots so it's best to let them mind their own business and let them deal with their problems

 

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

[RR503]

BrooklynBus is a retired employee. We still have employees on here. So you disagree with BrooklynBus. That doesn't make him ignorant about the entire system, but yet again, anyone who disagrees with you is misinformed and racist. Smh

 

Yes, there's someone that died and that's a tragedy. The point was maybe if there weren't instigators on both sides that showed up to the event, perhaps the situation wouldn't have become deadly in the first place, but no no no, we can't possibly think that way because MHV disagrees.

I'm interested by how you suggest that nazis have a legal right to protest (something that sickens me but I don't disagree with) but when the other side shows up to give their opinion, they are instigators.

 

Look, the right has spent the last week trying to convince themselves that 'antifas' and the 'radical left' are just as bad as neonazis. Aside from the fact that one is a modern continuance of a movement that systematically exterminated millions of people, and the other is a movement whos mission is to hinder that (I'm NOT saying I agree with their tactics), the far right is and has been orders of magnitude more deadly than the far left. I'm no fan of those who respond to this sort of hate with violence, but to equate their actions with those of the radical right is frankly ignorant.

 

I'm honestly unsure where I stand on the tiles. I agree that having discussions is good, and not whitewashing things we don't like is smart, but I'm still not convinced it's the best course of action...

 

As for the above, I suggest you read this

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/us/politics/trump-alt-left-fact-check.html

 

And yes, this topic should be closed.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I'm interested by how you suggest that nazis have a legal right to protest (something that sickens me but I don't disagree with) but when the other side shows up to give their opinion, they are instigators.

 

Look, the right has spent the last week trying to convince themselves that 'antifas' and the 'radical left' are just as bad as neonazis. Aside from the fact that one is a modern continuance of a movement that systematically exterminated millions of people, and the other is a movement whos mission is to hinder that (I'm NOT saying I agree with their tactics), the far right is and has been orders of magnitude more deadly than the far left. I'm no fan of those who respond to this sort of hate with violence, but to equate their actions with those of the radical right is frankly ignorant.

 

I suggest you read this

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/us/politics/trump-alt-left-fact-check.html

 

And yes, this topic should be closed.

No, you read what you wanted to. What I said was:

 

 

 

The point was maybe if there weren't instigators on both sides that showed up to the event....

 

Can't make it any clearer than that.  I also didn't equate anyone's violence to anything. You inserted that in there.  I'll say it again... Just because people show up to an event supposedly to support a good cause doesn't mean they have carte blanche to do as they please. That's not equating their actions to Neo-Nazis or any other group. It means just what I said and nothing more.

 

Oh and for the love of God, if I can't quote the Post, you sure as hell shouldn't be quoting the Times. I used to love the reading the Times, but they've really gone off of the deep end with the slanted reporting of late.

[Deucey]

...Yes, there's someone that died and that's a tragedy. The point was maybe if there weren't instigators on both sides that showed up to the event, perhaps the situation wouldn't have become deadly in the first place, but no no no, we can't possibly think that way because MHV disagrees.

So Nazi Confederacy Racists marching is free speech but people using their free speech rights protesting against the Nazi Confederacy Racists are instigators?

 

Good to know.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

So Nazi Confederacy Racists marching is free speech but people using their free speech rights protesting against the Nazi Confederacy Racists are instigators?

 

Good to know.

It is because you quoted my post where I said there were instigators on both sides and I stand by that.  In other words you're telling me everyone that went down there on both sides went down there not wanting to stir the pot? I don't buy it. I'm sure people went there on both sides to stir the pot and if you seriously think that's not the case I think you're very naive.  I'm thinking there were folks on the racist side that wanted to do damage and people that were so outraged by their presence that they didn't care either and wanted to do physical harm.  Violence is violence. I'm not going to sugarcoat anything and excuse the actions on either side.

[Interested Rider]

For the record, the point of removing monuments has not passed as our illustrious mayor has convened a panel to begin the examination of all monuments that are located in this city to determine which ones are to be removed within 90 days. It is still in the news as the Congresswoman continues to complain about the confederate street names in Fort Hamilton and is doing everything in her power to have them changed. There is a problem here with our elected officials and the media who have jumped on a non-issue for purposes of political posturing to the ones that are supporting them. Why at this time? The mayor is running for re-election and this is to mobilize his base and the governor is worried that these same supporters of the mayor will desert him next year when he tries for a third term. 

To me, the monuments represent history that should never be forgotten as do many of the monuments throughout the world represent history, whether they are in Poland, Germany, Russia or anywhere else.. When we see these monuments, it is important that we teach the history that goes along with it so that people will know how easy it is to have the same thing happen again. When one side is presented but hot the other, it presents a false narrative which becomes the mantra of the day. I believe in the right of free speech without any violence and exposing the falsehoods by both sides as neither side loves this country and will do everything in their power to destroy it. When I hear terms that are not appropriate or attack other groups, I challenge them as I have done in my career behind the wall or when I am in public.I made this abundantly clear when I wrote up staff and inmates whenever any form of racism was expressed directly or indirectly where I worked or on the street I do the same thing when it appears in print or appears on the internet. I will not go near the New York Times or for that matter many websites as the views have a hidden agenda when something is written as fact when it is just' that person's interpretation of what they read or see based on their own biases.

There are far more important stories that should be covered and discussed by the media and our elected leaders as our nation is on the edge of a cliff but  until "honesty and truth" come back into their vocabulary, the country will continue to fall deeper into the abyss.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

For the record, the point of removing monuments has not passed as our illustrious mayor has convened a panel to begin the examination of all monuments that are located in this city to determine which ones are to be removed within 90 days. It is still in the news as the Congresswoman continues to complain about the confederate street names in Fort Hamilton and is doing everything in her power to have them changed. There is a problem here with our elected officials and the media who have jumped on a non-issue for purposes of political posturing to the ones that are supporting them. Why at this time? The mayor is running for re-election and this is to mobilize his base and the governor is worried that these same supporters of the mayor will desert him next year when he tries for a third term. 

To me, the monuments represent history that should never be forgotten as do many of the monuments throughout the world represent history, whether they are in Poland, Germany, Russia or anywhere else.. When we see these monuments, it is important that we teach the history that goes along with it so that people will know how easy it is to have the same thing happen again. When one side is presented but hot the other, it presents a false narrative which becomes the mantra of the day. I believe in the right of free speech without any violence and exposing the falsehoods by both sides as neither side loves this country and will do everything in their power to destroy it. When I hear terms that are not appropriate or attack other groups, I challenge them as I have done in my career behind the wall or when I am in public.I made this abundantly clear when I wrote up staff and inmates whenever any form of racism was expressed directly or indirectly where I worked or on the street I do the same thing when it appears in print or appears on the internet. I will not go near the New York Times or for that matter many websites as the views have a hidden agenda when something is written as fact when it is just' that person's interpretation of what they read or see based on their own biases.

There are far more important stories that should be covered and discussed by the media and our elected leaders as our nation is on the edge of a cliff but  until "honesty and truth" come back into their vocabulary, the country will continue to fall deeper into the abyss.

Your post is excellent.  We have people now trying to erase history.  What happened in the past happened, and we can't change it.  Trying to erase history won't change it either.  It just leads to us not discussing parts of history and that too is wrong.  

 

Next thing we'll be doing is not teaching certain topics of history in the classroom because they're too controversial or negative.  

[LGA Link N Train]

Your post is excellent. We have people now trying to erase history. What happened in the past happened, and we can't change it. Trying to erase history won't change it either. It just leads to us not discussing parts of history and that too is wrong.

 

Next thing we'll be doing is not teaching certain topics of history in the classroom because they're too controversial or negative.

It's a waste that people are trying to erase history, and if it's not taught in classrooms imagine the consequences of that factor it will lead to

 

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

[Via Garibaldi 8]

It's a waste that people are trying to erase history, and if it's not taught in classrooms imagine the consequences of that factor it will lead to

 

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

Well we've started with these subway tiles. Now they're reviewing all of the statues around NYC, including Columbus Circle.  I mean that's an iconic square and one that I've loved as a New Yorker and have spent plenty of days in relaxing. I've been to the one in Genoa in Italy and ours in NYC is 10 times better.  It's stunning.  To think that we could lose that to me is mind boggling.  Sure, the guy wasn't a saint, but he was an explorer that had a huge impact on history, be it positive or negative.  That should be acknowledged.  

[GojiMet86]

For the record, the point of removing monuments has not passed as our illustrious mayor has convened a panel to begin the examination of all monuments that are located in this city to determine which ones are to be removed within 90 days. It is still in the news as the Congresswoman continues to complain about the confederate street names in Fort Hamilton and is doing everything in her power to have them changed. There is a problem here with our elected officials and the media who have jumped on a non-issue for purposes of political posturing to the ones that are supporting them. Why at this time? The mayor is running for re-election and this is to mobilize his base and the governor is worried that these same supporters of the mayor will desert him next year when he tries for a third term. 

To me, the monuments represent history that should never be forgotten as do many of the monuments throughout the world represent history, whether they are in Poland, Germany, Russia or anywhere else.. When we see these monuments, it is important that we teach the history that goes along with it so that people will know how easy it is to have the same thing happen again. When one side is presented but hot the other, it presents a false narrative which becomes the mantra of the day. I believe in the right of free speech without any violence and exposing the falsehoods by both sides as neither side loves this country and will do everything in their power to destroy it. When I hear terms that are not appropriate or attack other groups, I challenge them as I have done in my career behind the wall or when I am in public.I made this abundantly clear when I wrote up staff and inmates whenever any form of racism was expressed directly or indirectly where I worked or on the street I do the same thing when it appears in print or appears on the internet. I will not go near the New York Times or for that matter many websites as the views have a hidden agenda when something is written as fact when it is just' that person's interpretation of what they read or see based on their own biases.

There are far more important stories that should be covered and discussed by the media and our elected leaders as our nation is on the edge of a cliff but  until "honesty and truth" come back into their vocabulary, the country will continue to fall deeper into the abyss.

 

 

 

EXCEPT none of that is true.

 

 

The Germans, the Poles, the Italians, and just about any other country invaded by Nazi Germany and Communist Russia have taken down the statues and monuments dedicated to Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, and Mussolini.

 

 

No one has EVER forgotten about these a-holes...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

EXCEPT none of that is true.

 

 

The Germans, the Poles, the Italians, and just about any other country invaded by Nazi Germany and Communist Russia have taken down the statues and monuments dedicated to Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, and Mussolini.

 

 

No one has EVER forgotten about these a-holes...

You can't forget about them because you would have to destroy MORE than just some stupid statue.  Mussolini's footprint is throughout Italy, whether people like it or not. I have many photos while traveling and living in Europe, and one of the photos that sticks out the most is the famous Stazione Centrale in Milan.  It rivals Grand Central and it is a prime symbol of fascism in Italy and the idea of the nation being bigger than the people.  The structure is massive and requires you to stand quite a ways in order to get the entire building into one shot.  If the country were truly trying to eradicate the memory of Mussolini, they were have to destroy that beautiful piece of architecture and many other buildings around the country.  That's why all of this yelling is nothing but BS.  

[GojiMet86]

You can't forget about them because you would have to destroy MORE than just some stupid statue.  Mussolini's footprint is throughout Italy, whether people like it or not. I have many photos while traveling and living in Europe, and one of the photos that sticks out the most is the famous Stazione Centrale in Milan.  It rivals Grand Central and it is a prime symbol of fascism in Italy and the idea of the nation being bigger than the people.  The structure is massive and requires you to stand quite a ways in order to get the entire building into one shot.  If the country were truly trying to eradicate the memory of Mussolini, they were have to destroy that beautiful piece of architecture and many other buildings around the country.  That's why all of this yelling is nothing but BS.  

 

 

Jesus Christ, you sound enamored by Mussolini.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Jesus Christ, you sound enamored by Mussolini.

You brought him up, not me.     Your "logic" is illogical.

[GojiMet86]

You brought him up, not me.     Your "logic" is illogical.

 

I'm not the one who's talking about how beautiful his monuments are.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I'm not the one who's talking about how beautiful his monuments are.

Yes, because I'm not the one who is calling for every statue or monument to be destroyed. 

[P3F]

I believe the reason for the covering the tiles up with stickers is fairly clear. It gets rid of the complaints, but does not damage hundred year old tiles, and also does not require significant monetary input; printing and pasting stickers is much cheaper than tearing down old tiles and having new ones created and installed.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I believe the reason for the covering the tiles up with stickers is fairly clear. It gets rid of the complaints, but does not damage hundred year old tiles, and also does not require significant monetary input; printing and pasting stickers is much cheaper than tearing down old tiles and having new ones created and installed.

We both know how great their previous stickers have been.  I'm just saying covering them with stickers... They can easily be peeled off. That's a beautiful part of history and should be left as is.  

[Interested Rider]

When I read a comment on this thread in response to my statement "To me, monuments represent history that should never have been forgotten as do many of the monuments throughout the world that are in Poland, Germany and Russia,and the response "was none of this is true", it indicated to me that someone either cannot read or is being deliberately intellectually ignorant. For the record, Gojimet86 the latter statement is yours and for your edification, the monuments  are at Dachau, Ravensbruck, Babi Yar Madjanek, Treblinka and Auschwitz, which I was referring to in my statement and it seems that you either did not deliberately understand or comprehend what this reference was referring to in the context of the paragraph. By your statement "that is not true" it  is perpetuating a falsehood that is practiced by many who deny that the existence of these places where millions of people were killed, never existed. When people visit these places they learn about the horrors of the Hitler regime just as those who visit the Katryn Forest in Poland learn about the horrors of Stalin. The problem with Russia was that they waited a long time after his death to finally come to grips with the horrors of his regime and it took a long time for it to be discussed as many people still liked Stalin. So now, we have to stifle free speech and remove monuments as the deniers of history want us to forget it just like the Russians wanted to forget about Stalin after he died even though his atrocities were just as bad as Hitler and which the aforementioned New York Times did not choose to cover as they did not choose to cover the Holocaust.

Gojimet86 You should take into consideration anytime you post anything, here that it is subject to be challenged. Many of us who post are quite well versed in American history and World history and that is why your statements that you wrote in response to my post will not  go unchallenged by me or any of the other posters on this forum. This is not the first time that you have posted similar statements on this forum in response to what I wrote and while I appreciate a well thought rebuttal, i will not tolerate your subtle racism which your response was to my writing on this forum.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

When I read a comment on this thread in response to my statement "To me, monuments represent history that should never have been forgotten as do many of the monuments throughout the world that are in Poland, Germany and Russia,and the response "was none of this is true", it indicated to me that someone either cannot read or is being deliberately intellectually ignorant. For the record, Gojimet86 the latter statement is yours and for your edification, the monuments  are at Dachau, Ravensbruck, Babi Yar Madjanek, Treblinka and Auschwitz, which I was referring to in my statement and it seems that you either did not deliberately understand or comprehend what this reference was referring to in the context of the paragraph. By your statement "that is not true" it  is perpetuating a falsehood that is practiced by many who deny that the existence of these places where millions of people were killed, never existed. When people visit these places they learn about the horrors of the Hitler regime just as those who visit the Katryn Forest in Poland learn about the horrors of Stalin. The problem with Russia was that they waited a long time after his death to finally come to grips with the horrors of his regime and it took a long time for it to be discussed as many people still liked Stalin. So now, we have to stifle free speech and remove monuments as the deniers of history want us to forget it just like the Russians wanted to forget about Stalin after he died even though his atrocities were just as bad as Hitler and which the aforementioned New York Times did not choose to cover as they did not choose to cover the Holocaust.

Gojimet86 You should take into consideration anytime you post anything, here that it is subject to be challenged. Many of us who post are quite well versed in American history and World history and that is why your statements that you wrote in response to my post will not  go unchallenged by me or any of the other posters on this forum. This is not the first time that you have posted similar statements on this forum in response to what I wrote and while I appreciate a well thought rebuttal, i will not tolerate your subtle racism which your response was to my writing on this forum.

He always does that. With him it's his way or the highway, and when he's challenged, he'll just cry racism.   And yes, he deliberately disregarded your comments because he has an agenda.

[MHV9218]

When I read a comment on this thread in response to my statement "To me, monuments represent history that should never have been forgotten as do many of the monuments throughout the world that are in Poland, Germany and Russia,and the response "was none of this is true", it indicated to me that someone either cannot read or is being deliberately intellectually ignorant. For the record, Gojimet86 the latter statement is yours and for your edification, the monuments  are at Dachau, Ravensbruck, Babi Yar Madjanek, Treblinka and Auschwitz, which I was referring to in my statement and it seems that you either did not deliberately understand or comprehend what this reference was referring to in the context of the paragraph. By your statement "that is not true" it  is perpetuating a falsehood that is practiced by many who deny that the existence of these places where millions of people were killed, never existed. When people visit these places they learn about the horrors of the Hitler regime just as those who visit the Katryn Forest in Poland learn about the horrors of Stalin. The problem with Russia was that they waited a long time after his death to finally come to grips with the horrors of his regime and it took a long time for it to be discussed as many people still liked Stalin. So now, we have to stifle free speech and remove monuments as the deniers of history want us to forget it just like the Russians wanted to forget about Stalin after he died even though his atrocities were just as bad as Hitler and which the aforementioned New York Times did not choose to cover as they did not choose to cover the Holocaust.

Gojimet86 You should take into consideration anytime you post anything, here that it is subject to be challenged. Many of us who post are quite well versed in American history and World history and that is why your statements that you wrote in response to my post will not  go unchallenged by me or any of the other posters on this forum. This is not the first time that you have posted similar statements on this forum in response to what I wrote and while I appreciate a well thought rebuttal, i will not tolerate your subtle racism which your response was to my writing on this forum.

 

This is a confused response. His remark that "that is not true" was in regard to your conflation of preserved history (camps and killing fields) with "monuments." He wasn't denying the Holocaust. There are, in fact, few if any standing preserved monuments (regarding what the word actually means) to the men you described. It was your imprecise language that led to GojiMet's response. If you meant to say that history should be kept as a lesson, you should not have referred to monuments. 

 

Furthermore, your post is also rather intellectually imprecise. These "monuments" -- in fact, preserved artifacts of history -- are in no way akin to the true "monuments" around the country that have been erected to Civil War leaders. Statues are, inherently, dedications, in a way that no preserved camp possibly is. At best, one can argue that they represent an era in which thinking was different and pose an intellectual stimulus, but in no way are they equivalent or even worthy of comparison. Furthermore, as I elaborated in an earlier post, most Confederate monuments in northern states are ahistorical additions produced in the twentieth century as a part of the Daughters of the Confederacy's movement to erect monuments to the war. No northern states erected monuments to the losing, racist side, whose generals believed that slavery should be defended to the very end. In this way, the comparison between preserved European history and American post-mortem monuments is even looser and more inaccurate. 

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Just to put my views onto this thread:

 

1) Should we take down statues, symbols, or pieces of architecture because of the past: In some cases, yes.

2) Is this example a good case of aforementioned, no.

3) Should we still teach the about fascist leaders in history classes, yes.

4) Do people have the right to express themselves, despite differing views, yes.

 

To add on to the above, I was in DC, and I was traveling on the bus when a female BO, a lady, and a guy (all black BTW) were discussing the events in Charlottesville. The BO and the lady were more or less on the same terms that despite not agreeing with their views, that said people should be able to protest (albeit non-violently). The guy was not on the same page, and got into an argument with the BO (essentially arguing that they don't have the right to do so). It went off on a tangent, but more or less, but never did that argument get violent.

 

Although my viewpoints differ drastically from the neo-nazis and such, both sides should have the freedom to express their opposition to the removal of the statues or approval to do so. Violence of any kind should not be condoned, I don't care which side you're on. 

 

There's been a lot of coverage of the guy who ran over people, killing one. That is appalling and unacceptable. IDK if there were people who started fights against the neo-Nazi and White Supremacists, I wasn't there. If there was, then that's not making the other side look too good either. If there wasn't, then that's okay.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Just to put my views onto this thread:

 

1) Should we take down statues, symbols, or pieces of architecture because of the past: In some cases, yes.

2) Is this example a good case of aforementioned, no.

3) Should we still teach the about fascist leaders in history classes, yes.

4) Do people have the right to express themselves, despite differing views, yes.

 

To add on to the above, I was in DC, and I was traveling on the bus when a female BO, a lady, and a guy (all black BTW) were discussing the events in Charlottesville. The BO and the lady were more or less on the same terms that despite not agreeing with their views, that said people should be able to protest (albeit non-violently). The guy was not on the same page, and got into an argument with the BO (essentially arguing that they don't have the right to do so). It went off on a tangent, but more or less, but never did that argument get violent.

 

Although my viewpoints differ drastically from the neo-nazis and such, both sides should have the freedom to express their opposition to the removal of the statues or approval to do so. Violence of any kind should not be condoned, I don't care which side you're on. 

 

There's been a lot of coverage of the guy who ran over people, killing one. That is appalling and unacceptable. IDK if there were people who started fights against the neo-Nazi and White Supremacists, I wasn't there. If there was, then that's not making the other side look too good either. If there wasn't, then that's okay.

Well there was definitely instigating going on when people were protesting here when Trump came recently, and one of the people protesting against Trump went and punched someone in the face who was peacefully showing their support for Trump, but MVH and Goji would think that's justified, because the person was against Trump. Smh

[GojiMet86]

This is a confused response. His remark that "that is not true" was in regard to your conflation of preserved history (camps and killing fields) with "monuments." He wasn't denying the Holocaust. There are, in fact, few if any standing preserved monuments (regarding what the word actually means) to the men you described. It was your imprecise language that led to GojiMet's response. If you meant to say that history should be kept as a lesson, you should not have referred to monuments. 

 

Furthermore, your post is also rather intellectually imprecise. These "monuments" -- in fact, preserved artifacts of history -- are in no way akin to the true "monuments" around the country that have been erected to Civil War leaders. Statues are, inherently, dedications, in a way that no preserved camp possibly is. At best, one can argue that they represent an era in which thinking was different and pose an intellectual stimulus, but in no way are they equivalent or even worthy of comparison. Furthermore, as I elaborated in an earlier post, most Confederate monuments in northern states are ahistorical additions produced in the twentieth century as a part of the Daughters of the Confederacy's movement to erect monuments to the war. No northern states erected monuments to the losing, racist side, whose generals believed that slavery should be defended to the very end. In this way, the comparison between preserved European history and American post-mortem monuments is even looser and more inaccurate. 

 

 

Exactly. Those Confederate statues weren't built by former slaves or by Union members. Almost all of them were built after the Civil War. Imagine if a Sons and Daughters of the Third Reich society had been building statues in the name of Hitler and Goebbels 30 years AFTER they lost WWII. Look at Auschwitz, where I visited last year. That isn't being maintained by Nazi descendants or people who respect Nazis. It is preserved by the people who suffered, and their descendants. That is a huge difference. Here, the people who want the statues kept are either Neo-Nazis and Confederate wannabes, or people who despise PC culture so much that they are willing to side with Neo-Nazis, even if the Neo-Nazis would love to kill them.

 

 

Well there was definitely instigating going on when people were protesting here when Trump came recently, and one of the people protesting against Trump went and punched someone in the face who was peacefully showing their support for Trump, but MVH and Goji would think that's justified, because the person was against Trump. Smh

 

There was a lot of instegation and violence committed on by both sides in World War II. Yet, we all know the Allies had the better idealogy.

 

Unless of course, you somehow believe the Neo-Nazis have a better idealogy than liberals, BLM, and PC culture...

Just to put my views onto this thread:

 

1) Should we take down statues, symbols, or pieces of architecture because of the past: In some cases, yes.

2) Is this example a good case of aforementioned, no.

3) Should we still teach the about fascist leaders in history classes, yes.

4) Do people have the right to express themselves, despite differing views, yes.

 

To add on to the above, I was in DC, and I was traveling on the bus when a female BO, a lady, and a guy (all black BTW) were discussing the events in Charlottesville. The BO and the lady were more or less on the same terms that despite not agreeing with their views, that said people should be able to protest (albeit non-violently). The guy was not on the same page, and got into an argument with the BO (essentially arguing that they don't have the right to do so). It went off on a tangent, but more or less, but never did that argument get violent.

 

Although my viewpoints differ drastically from the neo-nazis and such, both sides should have the freedom to express their opposition to the removal of the statues or approval to do so. Violence of any kind should not be condoned, I don't care which side you're on. 

 

There's been a lot of coverage of the guy who ran over people, killing one. That is appalling and unacceptable. IDK if there were people who started fights against the neo-Nazi and White Supremacists, I wasn't there. If there was, then that's not making the other side look too good either. If there wasn't, then that's okay.

 

But the freedom of speech of Neo-Nazis is not the issue. People can say whatever the hell they want, unless it is inflammatory. The issue is whether or not Neo-Nazi arguments and complaints over Confederate statues, expressed through free speech, are valid. And they are not.