Public land Confederate statues: No compromise?

Post Reply New Topic

All tbe people here who are dead set against the Confederate statues being removed from public land and releases to private hands: Would your opinion be best desvribed.as: " EVERY SINGLE ONE of the statues must be kept on public land, with public monies being spent on their maitenence and NO additional other memorials or plaques near them - FOREVER !"?

...It seems that the public land Confederate statues supporters here find it very imporyant that the statues remaon on public land. I have essentially ruled out calling for their destruction - Why can't the statue-lovers accept them moved to privaye land - whete a truly appreciative audience can gaze upon them?

It's more the reason for their removal than anything, and that reason is they (those who are the driving force) are pissed off at Trump and his voters. It's no use trying to get me to believe that after all these years these these statues are suddenly an urgent issue. I smell sour loser all over it.
People need to face up to the fact their girl Hilary lost to Donald J.

I think it is reasonable that state facilities display the badge/crest/flag of the state plus badge/crest/flag of the United States of America and no other allegiance. It is not really a complicated concept really.

It has nothing to do with freedom expression. Rights are protection against the state. This is the state. It is supposed to represent the state only and have allegiance to the US exclusively.

Just think if a French town hall started flying a German flag, or some separatist group. It is absurd.

Anyone should be able to fly any flag they like, that is a different question.

To be clear, I'm talking about state facilities not public spaces.

People can fly any flag in public spaces, so long the doesn't damage those public spaces or prevent others from using the. Just the state in any official capacity show allegiance to another flag / state / nation.

Not my girl.
Bernie

Public advertising is an interesting conundrum too.

See if someone has private land it is their expression to allow or not allow adverting on it. No problem.

When the state has advertising spaces in public spaces, which it hand picks advertisers (agencies, etc) or there is a bidding process with a small pool of advertisers, then the state and those advertisers expression is given more weight than ordinary folk.

You would say at a minimum the state should not be interfering the choice of advertising. Better still that anyone could purchase the advertising without restriction (unless it breaks existing laws).

In that case it would be fine to purchase advertising with the Confederate Battle Flag on it.

Last edited by 0_equals_true on 10 Sep 2017, 12:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I should have added Bernie. That old fart might be dead or at least senile in the next 10 years so I wouldn't waste much hope.

But the Confederacy has been dead for over 150 years so whatever actual allegiance is only out of nostalgia.

Doesn't matter the principle is the same. There shouldn't be insignia unrelated to their role as US state facility.

Whatever little actual allegiance there is left will die out of natural causes (i.e. time).

...First, you seem to be displaying that tendency of Trump voters to " complain about winning ".
Feel insecure about D.T. having actually reveived over 2,750 000 LRSs votes than Hilary ?
Second, whatyou're complaing about comes pretty close, I belive, at least to " It wa hose outside agitators who stirred everything up ! !!".
You know - like the people who say " Martin Luther C**n ". (Many) Supporters of public land for the statues.
If the statue- worshippers don't accept the offer of taking the statues, they may get 10-15 more years of segregagion/Jim row statues on public land, jus' like the good ol' days of local soverignity and states' rights - But then, future leaders may just bluntly DESTROY the styues - and perhaps (though I would be against tbis myself) outlae or at least make difficult the display of Confederate imagery! Like that?





ptor"]It's more the reason for their removal than anything, and that reason is they (those who are the driving force) are pissed off at Trump and his voters. It's no use trying to get me to believe that after all these years these these statues are suddenly an urgent issue. I smell sour loser all over it.
People need to face up to the fact their girl Hilary lost to Donald J.[/quote]

The far-right keeps coming back to this, it seems as though they might be the ones obsessed with $hillary. You don't hear too many folks on the left who are enthusiastic for her, just a few centrists and media hacks.

Most of the Trump voters weren't and still arent too enthusiastic about him either but by listening to the cawing of the left you'd think anyone that voted for him is a dyed in the wool jackbooted Nazi or KKK grand dragon (or whatever)
Of course, I've become fond of being the left's villain so I actually enjoy all the labels.

That's actually quite fair and more than a little frustrating. Not every Trump voter is/was a Trump supporter (and not all Trump supporters fall into the nationalist camp, let alone the white nationalist/white supremacist camp), many of them just voted for the least horrible looking s**t sandwich, just like many $hillary voters.

It also leads to another frustrating aspect with politics these days, it seems as though many people can't conceive that their opponents sincerely believe in the positions they espouse so they insist they're either trolling or paid and use that to excuse their own tendencies to troll their opponents. Back-and-forth it goes leaving more and more of us convinced the opposition just believes what they believe in order to antagonize us. It's also possible that establishment politicians and some in the media (both mainstream and beyond) like to take advantage of this by keeping the attention on relatively trivial issues that have a strong partisan split to keep partisans who might agree on some issues distracted from where they agree and focused on less important issues (meanwhile the establishment politicians advance their shared agenda).

I'm both cynical and pragmatic.
Politicians are dirtbags and the ones that arent will be, given enough time in office. Power corrupts.
I don't listen to campaign speeches or debates and think that anyone that takes to heart any election campaign promise also believes in Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny.

My biggest concern over Trump was actually that he wasn't a politician. I know that sounds contradictory to what I said, but with a candidate that's held office you can at least look at thier record to see how they've voted on the issues and which bills they've introduced. Their past record in office is as close to the proverbial acid test as we can get.

With Trump we were getting a pig in a poke, but with Hillary we were getting someone who should be in a federal pen and is generally a b***h. The b***h thing goes back to her sh***y treatment of secret service agents as first lady. So much for championing the working class, eh...