All things Charlottesville (merged)

[The Bread Guy]

Ah yes, Seth Rogen, the Aristotle of our time....

:rofl:

 

[angus555]

Nope, I meant decadence, but not in the way you think.  Decadence as in "decline" whether perceived or real.  When enough Muslims get pissed off at the Religious zealots running their societies, there will be a war/conflict and a cultural shift.  Likewise, when enough Westerners get pissed at perceived social excesses in our society, there will also be a war/conflict. 

Yes I knew you meant "decline".

It's easier to call it decadence in hindsight, after the decline. And whether a society or culture is in decline depends entirely on who you ask and their own perceptions.

Since my perceptions are not influenced by any edition of the Goat Herder's Guide to the Galaxy, you could probably guess why I think only one of your images is a decent sign of decline.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

.......So we are a little late.

I dont see why Southerners care so much that General Lee statue's are taken down.... he basically lost the South the war through his poor strategic vision and insistence on invading the north in the hopes that he would get his "Austerlitz" and the war would magically end (like he had been taught through his Clausewitz lessons at West Point). His lack of grip on the reality of the time and insistence in living in the past cost the south. If nothing, the south should be happy to not have to see this poor strategic thinkers face and not think about the strategic defence anymore!

 

[The Bread Guy]

I dont see why Southerners care so much that General Lee statue's are taken down.... he basically lost the South the war through his poor strategic vision and insistence on invading the north in the hopes that he would get his "Austerlitz" and the war would magically end (like he had been taught through his Clausewitz lessons at West Point). His lack of grip on the reality of the time and insistence in living in the past cost the south. If nothing, the south should be happy to not have to see this poor strategic thinkers face and not think about the strategic defence anymore!

At one level, you're right.  However, with most statues, there's one "history" for those backing the side/ideas of the person being honoured, and another "history" for those feeling screwed over by said people.  All is cool if you like the idea of honouring someone with a statue because you're gung ho behind them, but ask some Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians or Ukrainians how much they like all those statues of Lenin & Stalin honouring these guys.  And when people say, "well, it IS part of the history, like it or not", how many Confederate statues have plaques highlighting their traitorous support for a slave-driven economy, or how many statues of Lenin/Stalin/Pol Pot mention all the "re-educated" for their own good?  #MoreThanOneHistory

 

[Kat Stevens]

Thin edge of the wedge, though. First you take down the statues.  Then you destroy all references to that history. Then you rewrite that history to suit your needs/mood at the time. I get it, it was an awful time and awful things happened, and they can't be undone. Let's tear down Hadrians Wall, it's a reminder of forced segregation. Let's tear down all the Viking standing stones, they committed terrible atrocities across Europe. We're letting a single segment of society dictate what is acceptable to display in public, while at the same time accepting that simulated oral and genital copulation on a parade float is just dandy.

 

[jmt18325]

Thin edge of the wedge, though. First you take down the statues.  Then you destroy all references to that history.

Why would you do that?  History is there to be remembered, not forgotten.  We can tear down statues and still have books.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Why would you do that?  History is there to be remembered, not forgotten.  We can tear down statues and still have books.

Until they offend someone, then they get burned.

 

[mariomike]

We can tear down statues and still have books.

Until they offend someone, then they get burned.

MAY 10, 1933
JOSEPH GOEBBELS SPEAKS AT BOOK BURNING IN BERLIN
Forty thousand people gather to hear German propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels speak in Berlin's Opera Square. Goebbels condemns works written by Jews, liberals, leftists, pacifists, foreigners, and others as "un-German." Nazi students begin burning books. Libraries across Germany are purged of "censored" books. Goebbels proclaims the "cleansing of the German spirit."

"They marched by torchlight in nighttime parades, sang chants, and threw books into huge bonfires. On that night more than 25,000 books were burned."
https://www.ushmm.org/outreach/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007677

 

[Good2Golf]

Until they offend someone, then they get burned.

:nod:

 

[EpicBeardedMan]

I dont think it is accurate to keep comparing the stuff going on today to Hitler and Nazi Germany.  I do not like how loosely the term Nazi is being thrown around in the past couple years, most recently to describe anyone on the right who voices an opinion..

Even the actual Nazis of today being compared to the Nazis who actually committed genocide, manned concentration camps, fought for Hitler is kind of a joke.

The idea that some 18 year old kid who just shaved his head and wears a symbol on his shirt because his older brother does it is compareable to an SS member in 1940 is sad. People arent born with hate in their hearts, they are taught it.

The idea that Nazis would ever come back in any sort of power (Real power, not marching on the street with tiki torches from home depot shouting hateful and moronic slogans) without a global intervention is laughable to be honest, so can we stop comparing people in 2017 who are just ignorant to people in 1940 who actually killed people by the hundreds of thousands?

 

[mariomike]

I dont think it is accurate to keep comparing the stuff going on today to Hitler and Nazi Germany.

Then you won't like today's Economist or Time magazine covers. 

A Nazi salute, a KKK hood and Trump: Magazine covers after Charlottesville are jarring
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/08/17/a-nazi-salute-a-kkk-hood-and-trump-magazine-covers-after-charlottesville-are-jarring/?utm_term=.4468d95d0e88
The latest from the Economist depicts the president bellowing into a white, conical megaphone — with eye holes that lend the appearance of a Ku Klux Klan hood. The clear implication is that Trump has amplified the message of white supremacists by failing to treat them as any more blameworthy than the counterprotesters with whom they clashed in Charlottesville last weekend.

Time magazine's new cover image features a boot-clad white man behind an American flag, held aloft at a 45-degree angle by a pole whose ornament is an outstretched hand, creating the effect of a Nazi salute.

 

[EpicBeardedMan]

Then you won't like today's Economist or Time magazine covers. 

A Nazi salute, a KKK hood and Trump: Magazine covers after Charlottesville are jarring
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/08/17/a-nazi-salute-a-kkk-hood-and-trump-magazine-covers-after-charlottesville-are-jarring/?utm_term=.4468d95d0e88
The latest from the Economist depicts the president bellowing into a white, conical megaphone — with eye holes that lend the appearance of a Ku Klux Klan hood. The clear implication is that Trump has amplified the message of white supremacists by failing to treat them as any more blameworthy than the counterprotesters with whom they clashed in Charlottesville last weekend.

Time magazine's new cover image features a boot-clad white man behind an American flag, held aloft at a 45-degree angle by a pole whose ornament is an outstretched hand, creating the effect of a Nazi salute.

It's the media so I guess to be expected. They need to make money somehow, even if it means calling everyone and their grandmother a Nazi or KKK member.

Not missing the irony that Trump was on the cover of Time magazine not too long ago, haha. I guess that makes Time magazine a Nazi propaganda piece.

 

[FJAG]

I dont think it is accurate to keep comparing the stuff going on today to Hitler and Nazi Germany.  I do not like how loosely the term Nazi is being thrown around in the past couple years, most recently to describe anyone on the right who voices an opinion..

Even the actual Nazis of today being compared to the Nazis who actually committed genocide, manned concentration camps, fought for Hitler is kind of a joke.

The idea that some 18 year old kid who just shaved his head and wears a symbol on his shirt because his older brother does it is compareable to an SS member in 1940 is sad. People arent born with hate in their hearts, they are taught it.

The idea that Nazis would ever come back in any sort of power (Real power, not marching on the street with tiki torches from home depot shouting hateful and moronic slogans) without a global intervention is laughable to be honest, so can we stop comparing people in 2017 who are just ignorant to people in 1940 who actually killed people by the hundreds of thousands?

So at what point do they qualify for full status: when they commit their first lynching or gas their first Jew?

These people self identify with the ideas and the actions of those predecessors. Wearing a swastika isn't a simple fashion statement. It's done by them with the full knowledge of what the symbols and rhetoric represents and believe me when they march down a main street wearing those symbols, shouting those slogans and giving the Nazi salute, they have every intention of being associated with them.

To dismiss their present status as a mere phase or a playful activity which will never take root is naive in the extreme. By the way, the Nazi's killed people in the millions not hundreds of thousands.

[cheers]

 

[jollyjacktar]

I like a lot of George's stuff too but I've been speaking out quite a bit against folks who are passively failing to condemn the Alt R while (like Trump) suggesting there is equal fault on both sides. I think that's bullsh*t.

If I, as the child of people who fought for the Nazis, can see this then it should be blindingly obvious to everyone whose forefathers landed in Italy and Normandy.

While the message of hate and intolerance being displayed by the white supremacy groups in NC is wrong and distasteful, what happened cannot be totally laid at their feet.  As the saying goes, "it takes two to Tango", there were those there on the opposite side of the coin who assisted in accelerating shit going south swiftly.  If the protestors had of had their say and day to weep, wail and stamp their feet without being goaded further, maybe we wouldn't have this thread going on.  There might not be equality in blame between the two, but one of those sides shouldn't get a complete pass in complicity. That isn't right or proper either.

Lastly, as a child of a man who went through Italy, France and Holland against "real" Nazi and Fascists I'm pretty sure the skinhead dickbags and sheet wearing fucks of the KKK don't rate that status  or that I'd fail to recognize that.  The Reich is the major leagues these amateurs will never pay in. If it comes to pass, I expect it will look and be much different.

 

[EpicBeardedMan]

To dismiss their present status as a mere phase or a playful activity which will never take root is naive in the extreme.

[cheers]

The idea that you think a tiny fraction of the world's population could rise up and erect another Nazi Party (Again) is shocking. When do you think white supremacists will come into power and can you source what politicians you feel would turn Canada or America in general into another Nazi Party?

Also, I never said playful activity - you said that - but since you brought it up can you source anything in the past couple years that involves mass genocide, global war, lynchings, bombings, etc that makes these people a threat other than having to listen to their moronic chants while carrying tiki torches from your local hardware store? It seems to me that these people are a nuisance who comprise a tiny percentage of the population that talk the talk but don't do anything, much like the Westboro Baptist Church. They survive and thrive off the attention that people give them, and the funny thing is that the left doesnt even realize they're helping their cause by calling everyone you disagree with on the right a Nazi.

Lastly, as a child of a man who went through Italy, France and Holland against "real" Nazi and Fascists I'm pretty sure the skinhead dickbags and sheet wearing ****s of the KKK don't rate that status  or that I'd fail to recognize that

My grandfather was a conscripted European and my other grandfather fought for Canada, I have heard stories from both and the wieners of 2017 who call themselves Nazis or "Anti-fascists" are a joke. The real anti-fascists stormed the beaches on D-Day, they didn't pepper spray elderly people, beat people with poles, damage personal property, and ironically, stop free speech (Berkeley was an eye-opener for most).

I also have no problem condemning the alt-right, but people on the left haven't condemned BLM or "Antifa" so, you get what you give in my opinion...

 

[George Wallace]

FJAG

Let's not focus too narrowly on this meme(s).  The fact is that the Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists are already being blamed for what happened, and many other Southerners with NO affiliation to them or the KKK, but protesting the dismantling of Confederate memorials, are being LUMPED right in there with them.  That is fact.  What is offensive in my mind is that there is a total ignoring of the other side having Alt-Left and likely Black Blok instigators who may have initiated the violence.  I have seen video of them throwing rocks and when they ran out of rocks, they knocked over a dumpster full of bagels and comically started throwing the bagels....Also in that video they were seen throwing explosive devices.  I am in no way siding or ignoring the Nazis/KKK/White Supremacists; but giving equal exposure to the violent Alt-Left who were there counter protesting.

Infanteer

I have no problem with municipalities removing the statues and memorials to place in museums and such, but there have already been filmed instances of the Alt-Left toppling them a la Sadam Husan Statues.

And Trump was right:  Chicago pastor urges mayor to remove George Washington statue, rename park over slavery

 

[Infanteer]

What is offensive in my mind is that there is a total ignoring of the other side having Alt-Left and likely Black Blok instigators who may have initiated the violence.

That's how you're choosing to see it.  The problem with commentators who are going on about the "alt-left" is that they are missing the point.  Nobody is giving "alt-left" organizations a pass, but the problem last weekend was that ethnonationalist groups organized with the goal of violent confrontation and did so with a message of racial hate.  That the other side (although I'd argue it was a minority of them) got baited in and also used violence is an issue, but not the primary one, and trying to do so confuses the issue.

When ISIS attacks, nobody wants to hear about how bad Earth First is.

I have no problem with municipalities removing the statues and memorials to place in museums and such, but there have already been filmed instances of the Alt-Left toppling them a la Sadam Husan Statues.

One incident, and the offender was arrested for breaking the law.  Don't conflate that event with what is generally occurring:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/30/us/what-to-do-with-confederate-monuments/index.html

 

[EpicBeardedMan]

That the other side (although I'd argue it was a minority of them) got baited in and also used violence is an issue

You think Antifa needs to get baited to be violent? Why not look upon every protest event since Trump was inaugurated? Are you really implying that Antifa/BLM are peaceful by default? Interesting.

 

[Eaglelord17]

The argument my grandparents (or great-grandparents) fought against something therefore I am against it, is a pretty poor argument. In fact many of those right wing protesters who showed up did so because of there ancestors fighting for the Confederacy. If you feel the argument is valid, then you have given legitimacy to their beliefs.

There is wrong on both sides, between the loose collation of right wing groups (neo-nazis, white sepremicists, alt-right, etc. who all don't share the same beliefs), and the loose collation of left wing groups (antifa (I particularly enjoy the irony of antifa as they happen to use fascist tactics almost exclusively), BLM, communists, anarchists etc.). Both showed up wanting to fight. I will say one of the interesting points is that despite the heavily armed presence, there was very little violence overall (in terms of property damage, looting, etc. excluding that sad incident with the nutjob driving into the counter-protesters).

Personally I think it is wrong for any member of government to be calling anyone out for there beliefs. The role of government in a Liberal Democracy is not to tell people how or what to think, only to ensure people do it peacefully. If those beliefs can't survive in the marketplace of ideas, they will die out or be stuck to the minority. When you actively censor people and their ideas you are arguing you cannot defeat them on the marketplace of ideas, and as such they have some legitimacy.

If you want to take down monuments to slavery, when do we want to start on the Pyramids?

 

[jollyjacktar]

If you want to take down monuments to slavery, when do we want to start on the Pyramids?

Actually, the Pyramids weren't built by slaves but a (for the day) well paid, we'll treated work force.  They even had medical benefits.