This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.
Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
swoop42 wrote:From what I've heard in various media reporting and so far something that hasn't been raised in this thread is that many of these statues weren't solely erected with the purpose to commemorate civil war "heroes" they were often built and put in place decades after the fact and during periods of history when the KKK felt embolden by the political climate of the time.
Basically they were erected as a means to remind the black community of there rightful place of servitude and once again instill a sense of fear.
That's something I hadn't considered. In such cases I'd probably err on the side of tearing the statues down.
I find Planet America usually does a pretty good job of looking beyond the hyperbole of American politics, it's pretty even handed and just concentrates on the reality of any one situation and lets the facts win out.
Last weeks episode dealt specially with the issue of your OP starting at the 9:30 minute mark.
David wrote:I don't necessarily disagree. Even on this discussion, I had to pick the "unsure/don't know" option.
On Gandhi: look, I don't want to harp on about one thing he said (and possibly later retracted) in a lifetime of anti-colonial activism, but what he said was pretty clearly racist. Claiming that an equivalence between Indians and Africans is a 'degradation' of the former (not to mention that Africans are primitive and lazy) is ... well, what else can that statement possibly be?
Accurate at the time? Certainly the primitive part compared to the Indians.
What is on Gandhi look he or she don't want to harp on about one thing he said and retracted in a lifetime of anti-colonial activism but what he said was racist like on Gandhi look he or she don't want to harp on about one thing he said and retracted in a lifetime of anti-colonial activism but what he said was racist.
Wokko wrote:Nobody gave a shit about those statues for the 8 years before Trump.
You also didn't have white supremacists marching in the street torches blazing.
Something that seems to be lost in all this is that these people are exactly the type that would have pulled on the robe, placed a burning cross and lynched an African American until dead in times past.
The fact they now feel so embolden to not even hide behind a hood speaks volumes for what Trump symbolizes to them.
^ Exactly. Trump's unashamedly divisive and belligerent campaign and election victory have brought all of these latent conflicts to the boil. Those of you who supported him, Wokko, must have had some inkling that this would happen.
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange
swoop42 wrote:From what I've heard in various media reporting and so far something that hasn't been raised in this thread is that many of these statues weren't solely erected with the purpose to commemorate civil war "heroes" they were often built and put in place decades after the fact and during periods of history when the KKK felt embolden by the political climate of the time.
Basically they were erected as a means to remind the black community of there rightful place of servitude and once again instill a sense of fear.
This is the key point here, which most people seem to be ignorant of.
Wokko wrote:Nobody gave a shit about those statues for the 8 years before Trump.
^ Never let the facts get in the way of a misleading lie. In reality, there has been controversy and acrimony about civil war "hero" statues for many years. But don't let that stop you, just make stuff up. Or, if you are lazy, just repeat the lies that Brietbart made up today. Saves effort that way.
