Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Glowcat]

Here's some cops forgetting which twitter account they were on and supporting Spencer's Nazis.
https://twitter.com/davidcolburn/status/897335706938363905

[RedKing]

Exactly. Thanks to our oh-so-enlightened legislature -- who lived in mortal terror of the sort of attack of conscience seen in places like SOUTH Carolina, of all fucking places, that led to the Governor there ordering flags and memorials taken down by the score.

Can't have that here, no sirree! That danged liberal Governor, why he might get rid of the Stars and Bars from a-flyin' in North Carolina 152 years after the entity which that flag represented ceased to exist!

Durham city and county government would LOVE to have gotten rid of these, which is probably why police didn't intercede. It's not like they rigged this up in a matter of seconds, before anybody could stop them. But, thanks to the legislature, the county will probably now be legally required to restore the statue if possible.

[Frumple]

Heh.  No, the local cops were literally there and watching it happen. Reason they gave was that it was county property, and there were county folks on the premises, so their hands were inconveniently tied.

[Loud Whispers]

It's because it inherently implies God's blessing of your war. Even if you can interpret it otherwise, that interpretation exists.

Why does it imply God's blessing, and not judgement? Difference between a monument of glorious victory and a monument in tribute of sombre death

http://theconversation.com/erasing-history-why-islamic-state-is-blowing-up-ancient-artefacts-78667
Incase your wondering why I have an issue with a rampant unruly mob of moralistic ideological rioters tearing down historical artifacts and memorials.

It's an interesting read, but is it really ameripol thread stuff?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

It's because it inherently implies God's blessing of your war. Even if you can interpret it otherwise, that interpretation exists.

Why does it imply God's blessing, and not judgement? Difference between a monument of glorious victory and a monument in tribute of sombre death

Let's be real here, belief in God is not going to be used for contrition over this sort of thing. It is only a motivator. "God blessed our fight but it wasn't enough" doesn't really make sense, but it is how people think about these things.

Contrition is not a functional political emotion in most instances. You've got situations like post-Nazi Germany, that's about it.

[RedKing]

It's because it inherently implies God's blessing of your war. Even if you can interpret it otherwise, that interpretation exists.

Why does it imply God's blessing, and not judgement? Difference between a monument of glorious victory and a monument in tribute of sombre death

Even if you can interpret it otherwise, that interpretation exists.

Besides, Murricans don't do "monument in tribute of sombre death".
We do monuments of "kicking ass and taking names".
And monuments of "we woulda won if the politicians hadn't tied our hands behind our backs".

EDIT: Which takes us back to the Confederate memorials. There are far too many people for whom these aren't commemorations of a tragic loss of life, they're commemorations of "We shoulda won".
Of "Our cause was just".
Of "The South Shall Rise Again".

[Loud Whispers]

Let's be real here, belief in God is not going to be used for contrition over this sort of thing.

I am being real, the European nations did not emerge from the Great War as optimistic as the US - and I don't believe the US even lacks in this same sentiment or monuments

It is only a motivator. "God blessed our fight but it wasn't enough" doesn't really make sense, but it is how people think about these things.

A proverb that pops up from the Parliamentarians in the English Civil war was that God grants death and misfortune strikes your friends as readily as it does your foes. While still learning that Americans are real, it's surely not the case that all Americans think this one way? I have certainly seen Americans in the UK who did not think America fuck yeah 24/7

Contrition is not a functional political emotion in most instances. You've got situations like post-Nazi Germany, that's about it.

Have you ever been to the UK during remembrance day
Used to be that praying for the dead was a thing that didn't happen, a practice that died alongside the decline of English Catholicism. The logic was that a dead soul's already seen last judgement, so they're either in heaven or hell and there's not much else you can do about that. Then comes along the Great War, the war to end all wars, and the scale of death is such that the whole nation builds their own shrines, memorials and national observances, people saying goodbye where they couldn't in life. That the war to end all wars ended up just being part I... I just can't imagine someone using Remembrance Sunday in any other way than respecting the fallen

Even if you can interpret it otherwise, that interpretation exists.

If we destroy our own memorials because someone had a subjective interpretation nothing we have will survive post-modernism

Besides, Murricans don't do "monument in tribute of sombre death".
We do monuments of "kicking ass and taking names".
And monuments of "we woulda won if the politicians hadn't tied our hands behind our backs".

Jokes aside, the USA has its triumph monuments but it also has its sombre ones, like your tomb of the unknowns

EDIT: Which takes us back to the Confederate memorials. There are far too many people for whom these aren't commemorations of a tragic loss of life, they're commemorations of "We shoulda won".
Of "Our cause was just".
Of "The South Shall Rise Again".

So this is an attempt to defeat confederate nostalgia by destroying their memorials? Surely it would simply be preferable to build them schools instead?
This is the logic that would destroy mosques and tombs to defeat Caliphate nostalgia. I am certain it is not an effective strategy, liable to make generations of salty well-armed zealots at great cost to human history

[Greiger]

As much as I despise everything the confederacy is known for these days, I don't see how destroying old statues is going to help matters.  We should not be glorifying it I agree, and I don't doubt for a second that the original purpose of many of these statues down south, were indeed to glorify them.  But perhaps some additional information should be placed near (don't modify the work itself of course) putting them into context, maybe even the most blatant of them relocated to museums.

We shouldn't destroy them outright.  Those who forget their past are doomed to repeat it or somesuch.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

A proverb that pops up from the Parliamentarians in the English Civil war was that God grants death and misfortune strikes your friends as readily as it does your foes. While still learning that Americans are real, it's surely not the case that all Americans think this one way? I have certainly seen Americans in the UK who did not think America fuck yeah 24/7

One does not have to be America Fuck Yeah 24/7. It is merely the dominant trend. The religious left in America are a minor faction, while the religious right are a major one. The right generally prefers militarism, and so God loves war and blesses our struggle both foreign and domestic. The major left trend is secular, and thus there is potential monument salt for the same reason as every other religious v. secular confrontation.

Have you ever been to the UK during remembrance day
Used to be that praying for the dead was a thing that didn't happen, a practice that died alongside the decline of English Catholicism. The logic was that a dead soul's already seen last judgement, so they're either in heaven or hell and there's not much else you can do about that. Then comes along the Great War, the war to end all wars, and the scale of death is such that the whole nation builds their own shrines, memorials and national observances, people saying goodbye where they couldn't in life. That the war to end all wars ended up just being part I... I just can't imagine someone using Remembrance Sunday in any other way than respecting the fallen

All you need to ask yourself is one question: How does this help me get elected? Expressing contrition is expressing weakness, and is generally to be avoided. Politics, religion, ideology...it's all entangled. It's literally science that anger is the strongest emotion and sadness is the weakest. If you take advantage of those trends, you get to win the election.

Now, if something convinces everybody to express contrition at once, like Rememberance Day or "don't forget we used to be the Nazis", then there's metastability to the low efficiency of sadness - everybody is doing it and there is a risk of backlash if you're the first to break away. Still, that break away is likely to eventually happen, when someone decides to take the plunge and the rest follow.

Just wait, one day young Uklanders will chant and complain about how their dumb parents gave up the Empire because they were too weak to prosper.

So this is an attempt to defeat confederate nostalgia by destroying their memorials? Surely it would simply be preferable to build them schools instead?
This is the logic that would destroy mosques and tombs to defeat Caliphate nostalgia. I am certain it is not an effective strategy, liable to make generations of salty well-armed zealots at great cost to human history

All evidence suggests that destroying mosques would result in a reduction in the number of Muslims and thus a reduction in Caliphate nostalgia. There have been plenty of large-scale long-term religious conversions created by destruction of all physical reference points for the religion. It's just wrong to do that sort of thing, not the least of which is the associated genocides.

[Starver]

Just remember that every all-encompassing generalisation is guaranteed to be wrong...

[Loud Whispers]

One does not have to be America Fuck Yeah 24/7. It is merely the dominant trend. The religious left in America are a minor faction, while the religious right are a major one. The right generally prefers militarism, and so God loves war and blesses our struggle both foreign and domestic. The major left trend is secular, and thus there is potential monument salt for the same reason as every other religious v. secular confrontation.

Shit. Well, good luck with monument salt and militiarism

All you need to ask yourself is one question: How does this help me get elected? Expressing contrition is expressing weakness, and is generally to be avoided. Politics, religion, ideology...it's all entangled. It's literally science that anger is the strongest emotion and sadness is the weakest. If you take advantage of those trends, you get to win the election.

Just put a veteran on your platform, a bloo bloo about the tragedy of wasteful, pointless and overstretched US military commitments, that would be popular with the lolbertarian right and progressive left. 9/11 anger must eventually subside some day

Just wait, one day young Uklanders will chant and complain about how their dumb parents gave up the Empire because they were too weak to prosper.

The stereotype for our religious right analogues are little Englanders who actually wanted the UK to abandon the Empire, it would take quite the change in British left-wing academia for such a chant to arise. Plus I think it's self-evident irregardless of your beliefs that the UK would've been hard pressed to defend a literal quarter of the world bukaked all over the globe without being absorbing or being absorbed by a power like the USA

All evidence suggests that destroying mosques would result in a reduction in the number of Muslims and thus a reduction in Caliphate nostalgia. There have been plenty of large-scale long-term religious conversions created by destruction of all physical reference points for the religion. It's just wrong to do that sort of thing, not the least of which is the associated genocides.

Destruction of religious buildings without suppression of the actual religion does not work, it worked for the Mongols because they killed everyone, it worked for the Caliphate vs Zoroastrians because they converted the Zoroastrians in addition to temple destruction. Also it's wrong, but people don't really seem to mind

[Dorsidwarf]

I believe that the destruction of memorials to dead soldiers is always wrong. If you don't like he context get the memorial taken down and put in storage, or the plaques replaced or whatever but it's not okay to smash them.

[wierd]

Seemingly out of place but really not:

I believe that acting and thinking as though one were the modern chosen (of whatever order or faith you adhere to, or lack thereof if the case may be), and thus are the embodiment of righteousness, is the single cardinal sin of every corrupt government in the history of mankind. (And every government older still.)

Saying "I am RIGHT, and they are WRONG, and that is why I do these things, and what makes it OK!!" is exactly what every tyrant has said, ever.

Keep that in mind, when you think about destroying monuments, or trying to convert ideologies by force.

That is all.

[sluissa]

In other news, Elizabeth Warren alienates moderate supporters.

You really think it'd be a good idea to alienate your centrist supporters after your party just got stomped in an election? I guess this is where their conclusion led them though. "Hillary lost because she was too moderate." Not because of any other reason, but simply because she was too close to the middle.

There's room for far left views, there's room for moderate views, and there's room for conservative views. What there isn't room for is this pattern of "If you're not with us, you're against us and we don't need you." Even the two opposing parties in congress are starting to show the tinglings of realization that you can't simply ignore the other side. And yet here is Warren saying that she wants to ignore part of her own party... Not to mention if she IS going to run in 2020, she's insulting a large chunk of independent moderates that she'd need to sway too.

I used to like her a few years ago, but I guess it's true that if you give most people a microphone they'll give you a reason to take it away.

[smjjames]

In other news, Elizabeth Warren alienates moderate supporters.

You really think it'd be a good idea to alienate your centrist supporters after your party just got stomped in an election? I guess this is where their conclusion led them though. "Hillary lost because she was too moderate." Not because of any other reason, but simply because she was too close to the middle.

There's room for far left views, there's room for moderate views, and there's room for conservative views. What there isn't room for is this pattern of "If you're not with us, you're against us and we don't need you." Even the two opposing parties in congress are starting to show the tinglings of realization that you can't simply ignore the other side. And yet here is Warren saying that she wants to ignore part of her own party... Not to mention if she IS going to run in 2020, she's insulting a large chunk of independent moderates that she'd need to sway too.

I used to like her a few years ago, but I guess it's true that if you give most people a microphone they'll give you a reason to take it away.

Such is the fight in the Democratic party for the future of it. Half wants to go in one direction and half wants to go another.