Our biggest threat to freedom is ignorance.....
- Thread starter Trigeek
- Start date
Who cares who had them erected? It was still a statue of the leader of the country put up in the era he ruled. Tearing down statues is either erasing history or it isnt, you cant have it both ways. I would actually argue Saddam statues have more historical significance since they were relics of their time, where as the confederate statues were years after the fact.
Lol at the OP in this thread. The context is about having historical and current affairs knowledge.
"If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed."
And yet people want history wiped out of the public discourse.
"If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed."
And yet people want history wiped out of the public discourse.
https://www.ajc.com/news/theodore-r...useum-natural-history/dwaNhyJfgfym2GZlDSUsTI/
So is this one not ok because its outside the museum when it should be inside the museum? I dont know how this all works with the leftists.
It'll be ignored, because that's what happens. "I'm OK with these statues being in a museum", but here we are with a statue in a museum of a guy that wasnt a slave owner, brought forth the modern progressive movement, used the power of government to support the plight of workers, broke down the supposed capitalist monopolies on business, and was the originator of environmentalism but his statue also needs to be removed.
Yeah, we are TOTALLY not trying to erase history.
Thomas Jefferson is the US' biggest hypocrite and US Press controller that has only been matched by the Clintons in modern times. And I'm not talking about Slaves. He literally undermined foreign governments, and was anti-British, pro-War to an extreme ... right down to stomping on Civil Rights, much to the cheers of the US Press.
Everything Jefferson complained about Washington and, even more so, Adams doing, he did and then some. The 1807 law that got some US Media play has been a perfect example, let alone the common saying that Madison couldn't have invaded Canada without Jefferson's approval rings absolutely true. It was only the Madison administration that finally ended the reign of the Jefferson cult-of-personality and separated itself after that disasterous [second] invasion of Canada we've re-written in our history books as the War of 1812.
This is why I've always had a problem with the Democratic party which continues thru today. They've always been the Press Popularist party since inception with Jefferson. I have my complaints about the Republican party as well, but they have long had established, line-in-the-sand views on everything from Civil Rights (including the 1964 CRA!) to real 'ballot access' that is both a blessing and a curse. The GOP began with anti-Jefferson solidified with anti-Jackson views.
One of these days, Americans will actually read up on the framers of the US and understand they had long been debating the exact same issues we still have today. It's easy to blame. It's difficult to see the deep realities and their details. Like why the Civil War didn't solve anything just like the 3/5ths Compromise didn't, and how the framers knew the capitalist ogliarchy would eventually led to the US becoming exactly like the UK at some point in the future.
Oh yes, they considered trying to outlaw capitalism. The thing is, small farmers and traders are really what made capitalism the best back then, just like small businesses today. The problem is always government control, manadates, monopolies and growth ... just like back then with the crown, and today with the federal.
The individual right of speech/arms were specifically assembled by Madison -- from over 100 submissions of the people after 9 out of 13 states refused to ratify the US Constitution -- so the government couldn't define them, and the power of the press/militia were the assembly of individuals the government had no right to bar. That's why we started lambasting the Crown in 1770, and then starting shooting their soldiers in 1775 ... the Crown outlawed the Press, then Militias.
The problem with press/militias are when they don't serve the local community, as our media conglomerates have become now with national-international control, as well as far-left and far-right militias that are chaos tourists and not about protecting local communities. That's why the Press and Militias have become dirty words, even though they are now needed more than ever.
It's the local Press and the community Militias that still really matter ... especially now.
Last edited:
What about privately owned statues on privately owned property from private donors and investors that are maintained by private entities?
I am, of course, talking about the Washington statue at the German American Society, donated by a private organization, funded by a private individual, for the US' 150th birthday, and still maintained by funds provided by the private endowment of the Smithsonian.
And that's hardly the only one too.
Everything is 'public' according to News outlets like CNN ... except when 'Protestors Turn Violent' (CNN's words) when they 'attack' things like their sign.
I'm to the point where I think there is no fighting it. Just let it happen because we HAVE to reset. The prevailing sentiment is what you find in this thread, so let them have their way and find out what that means. I'm not sticking around for it. Not my problem.What about privately owned statues on privately owned property from private donors and investors that are maintained by private entities?
I am, of course, talking about the Washington statue at the German American Society, donated by a private organization, funded by a private individual, for the US' 150th birthday, and still maintained by funds provided by the private endowment of the Smithsonian.
And that's hardly the only one too.
Everything is 'public' according to News outlets like CNN ... except when 'Protestors Turn Violent' (CNN's words) when they 'attack' things like their sign.
Which means it's okay to take down private buildings and property. It's not just statues. That's my problem ... where does it end?
I think CNN takes the cake in call private property as public, peaceful destruction, only to scream "Protestors Turn Violent" when it's their sign, and then they put up 'cages' to protect their property.
It ends the same way it always ends. This isn't unique to history, its just unique to us in this moment.
Economically we are past the point of no return. Sociologically we are past the point of no return. Religiously, we are past the point of no return. Just let it burn.
When a society gets to the point where individuals would rather use violence to enforce their beliefs than be receptive to having their minds changed, its done. I feel bad for those that are going to be trapped in it, but I'm not sticking around to get caught in the middle of this.
Similar threads
