Charlottesville VA - WTF???

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

What are you even talking about? Who cares about incoherence on the topic of Louis Riel? That has nothing to do with neo nazis in virginia.

Do you seriously not understand what is going on in this thread? Seriously?

Yeah, someone brought up the question of whether other countries had statues commemorating traitors, someone posted Louis Riel, and we started talking about whether that was a reasonable analogy. With me so far?

Then you made that post, which was both a cheap shot and baffling given that his post was pretty clear.

Now you're raving about how this has nothing to do with the thread topic. Did you really think that the thread would have zero de-rails in it whatsoever? Are you new to CP, or what? This is barely a tangent.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I can't tell what Corsi and Cliff are arguing, but it seems like they're saying "confederates TOO require more nuance! (just like Riel)" which seems about as strong of a condemnation of that ideology as Trump attempted.

Well, I definitely think that the civil war is a more nuanced event than just a struggle of good vs evil, slavers vs emancipators, but that should be obvious to anyone who isn't a complete moron. That's not really my point though; it's more that statues can be put up for other reasons than to honour someone. I don't think whoever put up the statue of Guy Fawkes in Somerset was trying to encourage attempts to blow up government buildings. There's also just a historical commemoration aspect to these things. I appreciate that in the case of statues of confederate generals, that may not have been the intent of the people who put up the statues in the pre-civil rights era, so maybe this is an exceptional case, but even here, those statues can be re-appropriated to something more positive. For me, rather than tearing down statues of controversial figures, the best option is to just replace the plaque, or add a new one, that provides whatever context or additional information is thought to be needed in the particular case. Then the thing at least continues to serve an educational and commemorative purpose.

That said, I'm not really much fussed if you want to tear down a statue of Robert E. Lee because it was put up by racists who wanted to commemorate the confederacy. I'm just mildly concerned about the precedent of destroying historical artifacts and public art because it can be seen as a representation of something we don't like, in general terms.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The guy led a rebellion and was hung for treason.

He was also voted to parliament three times while in exile. The people of his province saw him as a hero, while the establishment saw him as an enemy.

Canadians have pretty incoherent feelings about Riel.

Canadians have pretty incoherent feelings about a lot of their own history, because they don't know a lot of their own history. Canadians would be surprised at some of the dirt that has gone on in the past.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I can't tell what Corsi and Cliff are arguing, but it seems like they're saying "confederates TOO require more nuance! (just like Riel)" which seems about as strong of a condemnation of that ideology as Trump attempted.

I was just commenting on statues to traitors. Riel was certainly regarded as a traitor at the time. Today, he is and he isn't, depending on who you ask. The anecdote about the principal was to illustrate how someone could hold incredibly conflicted ideas about a rebel.

I can see why a lot of people want to take down statues of confederate generals. I can see how some people don't associate those statues with racism (though I think they're deluded). I can also see why some other people feel that taking down statues of people once they become controversial means we'll end up taking them all down.

Originally Posted by New Era

He was also voted to parliament three times while in exile. The people of his province saw him as a hero, while the establishment saw him as an enemy.

So not much different from how different people regarded Lee.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by New Era

He was also voted to parliament three times while in exile. The people of his province saw him as a hero, while the establishment saw him as an enemy.



Canadians have pretty incoherent feelings about a lot of their own history, because they don't know a lot of their own history. Canadians would be surprised at some of the dirt that has gone on in the past.

Including but not limited to...slavery.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Well, I definitely think that the civil war is a more nuanced event than just a struggle of good vs evil, slavers vs emancipators, but that should be obvious to anyone who isn't a complete moron.

Everything in life is a little more nuanced than what it appears.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

Everything in life is a little more nuanced than what it appears.

Absolutely true. Although I definitely take the point that this might just be a special case. If there's one thing this past weekend did, it completely obliterated the "heritage, not hate" argument for things like the confederate flag. There's just no room left to stand there, I think, when the rebuttal is simply to point to this:

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

Everything in life is a little more nuanced than what it appears.

The important part is remembering when that nuance is important, and when it isn't.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The important part is remembering when that nuance is important, and when it isn't.

good point.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by transplant99

That being said, and as I pointed out before, this is a miniscule amount of people in proportion to the population. That is where, I believe, the focus should lie. Though they are clearly very organized and somehow well funded, the fact that they are outnumbered so vastly by those that don't share their beliefs is the starting point to making them completely irrelevant.

I'll agree and disagree.

The publicly VERY vocal asshats are a small proportion of the population.

The less vocal public asshats are greater in number. I go for a daily walk around the neighborhood. A 3 or so mile loop. On nice evenings as everyone sits in their garage turned man cave (seriously, it seems almost no one parks a car in a garage) I get to walk past 6 very proudly displayed giant confederate flags in those man caves. And it's a good neighborhood filled with well educated people. It's worse elsewhere as you drive around town with the number of confederate flags flying from pick up trucks or as bumper stickers or on properties.

And that doesn't even include the private asshats that silently smile and agree with the others.

So yes the guys going to a march yelling hateful slogans are a miniscule minority but the people that believe much of what they say are not that small. It's pretty evident.

And I won't just point to the US here...if you sit down and talk to canadians for any length of time you will find much the same thing though the numbers are less.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I mean, first of all, if you think that sounds like some sort of glorious victory for the counterprotesters - "175 people were injured including police, women and children", for a march that if it had proceeded would probably have resulted in no bodily harm to anyone - I just don't agree with you at all.

The vast majority of people injured were the anti-fascists, followed by the police and the fascists as a really distant third. This makes your argument essentially "they did not win because a lot of them got hurt while fighting the police who were trying to disperse them". What ever, the anti-fascists and history and philosophy in general disagrees with that kind of reductionist utilitarianism.

These were people ready to fight and get hurt. They did it willingly and those of them living are still proud of being there that day.

Also, you're seriously arguing that in Europe in 1936 Nazis marching through Jewish quarters were probably not up to anything? That the local Jews had no need to be scared of a Nazis march? I think you should read up on your history. Antisemitism was becoming an acceptable and commonly discussed stance in UK politics by the mid 1930's. Anti-jewish rhetoric was widespread, as were small scale attacks. Antisemitism is still common in the UK today. It was not and is not in any way a marginal issue of some lunatics.

I mean, it's theoretically quite possible that if the BUF didn't get the wind knocked out of them in 1936, the anti-war and pro-fascist sides in UK politics would have won over the pro-war side in the debate on whether or not to commit to the war against Nazis. Even the way things went, it was an extremely close call that UK didn't make peace with the Axis in May 1940. It took Churchill a lot of maneuvering to get his way against Lord Halifax. After that point he got Mosley and BUF interned, because that's just how dangerous they were thought to be.

No one who goes to a demonstration with the intention of turning it into a war zone is "in the right", no matter how objectionable the content of the march itself.

The counter-protestors did not go out on a march against the Nazis. They gathered to stop Nazis from coming to a certain place at a certain time. Yes they were prepared for a fight, but that was simply practical because they knew a fight was coming if they tried to stop the Nazis. The counter-protestors were protecting an area, not "turning it into a war zone". The police turned those marches into an all out fight when they tried to violently get the anti-fascists to disperse. Instead of backing down against police violence the anti-fascists fought back. Yes, a lot of them got hurt, but to argue that they were in the wrong because the got hurt for fighting for what the believe in is pretty bonkers.

Let's remember the anti-fascists had a right to their protest too. In the face of two opposing groups of protesters, the Metropolitan police unambiguously sided with the Nazi white guys against the local Jews protected by a large gathering of mostly communists and ethnic minorities. It was not a proud day in police history, but it's far from a rare event, and something that keeps happening. Anti-fascist protests are violently dispersed so fascists get to march unopposed.

And some people will inevitably come along and say "hey freedom of speech y'all, they should talk to the Nazis".

Second, though... I mean, yeah, Antifa has had some success in beating the piss out of white supremacists (or in other cases, just random people they happen not to like) using pepper spray, bike locks and metal poles, or just their bare hands... What do you think is going to happen when a real fight breaks out between Antifa and these lunatics?

So, they should not oppose Nazis because Nazis are armed and dangerous and they might get hurt? I take it you still think Lord Halifax war right and Churchill was wrong in May 1940? Just think of all the lives that could have been saved.

This is why we have free speech principles, to stop this from being the sole means of resolving ideological conflict.

Good luck with trying to solve an ideological conflict with Nazis with free speech.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by ernie

And I won't just point to the US here...if you sit down and talk to canadians for any length of time you will find much the same thing though the numbers are less.

Absolutely, and the numbers are likely higher comparing which areas you're comparing in Canada and the US.

Racism, homophobia, sexism, bigotry... these are all alive and well in far greater amounts that most people are willing to admit. The problem is that we allow an "acceptable" amount of it (not just legally, free speech protects it and it ought to) but as a society. It's easier to let problem comments slide, or laugh them off, than it is to confront them. We weigh the intent behind the comment which is good sometimes, but we're not always skilled in measuring that intent, nor should it be our habit to give the benefit of the doubt to everyone.

People who say, think, and do things that stem from a place of hate or ignorance should be called out again and again until they fully understand how stupid they've been. Pretending the problem doesn't exist because you don't know someone who goes to KKK marches or believes homosexuality is a sin doesn't mean you don't someone who believes racism-bred ideas.

It happens on CP still, as far as it's definitely come based on those old threads that get bumped, it probably happens in your friend group, it might even happen at the dinner table. Not every example of this problem in the world is big and violent. It's often small.

[Torrie the Whaler]

I was told that this was a total left wing setup. The protesters had a permit. The day started with the police at the protest separating all groups that were there like they should. But when the Antifa and Blm protestors stated throwing stuff the police stood down. They retreated and would not let the protestors leave unless they turned around and walked passed the antifa and blm protestors. The police said the mayor told them to stand down. It really looks like a setup just to create violence and blame the alt right group.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Flash Walken]

The thing about Nazism is it has a tangible result. It's not an ideology where there is some ambiguity about what it means or its end result.

We know what happens when people don't confront nazism directly and assertively.

It doesn't really require nuance to understand someone's position who is holding a nazi flag or someone who is standing next to someone holding a nazi flag. We know what they are. They are nazis.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Torrie the Whaler

I was told that this was a total left wing setup. The protesters had a permit. The day started with the police at the protest separating all groups that were there like they should. But when the Antifa and Blm protestors stated throwing stuff the police stood down. They retreated and would not let the protestors leave unless they turned around and walked passed the antifa and blm protestors. The police said the mayor told them to stand down. It really looks like a setup just to create violence and blame the alt right group.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

*sigh*

[CaptainCrunch]

I guess in terms of tearing down statues and removing confederate flags, its going to create a rage reaction especially from these groups.

But it we try to bury the past or white wash it we are doomed to repeat it.

Why not leave them, or move them to a museum somewhere and try to use those images and artifacts to educate people so that we can reduce the number of angry and poorly educated people.

But if you just bury and deny the existence of past history you actually make it a even larger and often time exaggerated legend that people will rally around.

[chemgear]

"I'm just here for the fun"

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Torrie the Whaler

I was told that this was a total left wing setup. The protesters had a permit. The day started with the police at the protest separating all groups that were there like they should. But when the Antifa and Blm protestors stated throwing stuff the police stood down. They retreated and would not let the protestors leave unless they turned around and walked passed the antifa and blm protestors. The police said the mayor told them to stand down. It really looks like a setup just to create violence and blame the alt right group.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ahahaahah

"We were setup! Our hateful ideology was never meant to breed hate! Everyone is against us! Bloo bloo bloo bloo!"

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I guess in terms of tearing down statues and removing confederate flags, its going to create a rage reaction especially from these groups.

But it we try to bury the past or white wash it we are doomed to repeat it.

Why not leave them, or move them to a museum somewhere and try to use those images and artifacts to educate people so that we can reduce the number of angry and poorly educated people.

But if you just bury and deny the existence of past history you actually make it a even larger and often time exaggerated legend that people will rally around.

Totally. There's no statues to nazi's in germany and nobody knows what a nazi is anymore.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Torrie the Whaler

I was told that this was a total left wing setup.

Told by who?

[Mass_nerder]

Originally Posted by Torrie the Whaler

I was told that this was a total left wing setup. The protesters had a permit. The day started with the police at the protest separating all groups that were there like they should. But when the Antifa and Blm protestors stated throwing stuff the police stood down. They retreated and would not let the protestors leave unless they turned around and walked passed the antifa and blm protestors. The police said the mayor told them to stand down. It really looks like a setup just to create violence and blame the alt right group.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Even if the violence was orchestrated by the Left, the Nazi paraphernalia and shouted slogans were all brought by the alt right groups in attendance.
I think, in the long run, the shocking display of support for Nazis and white supremacists is more troubling than any violence that took place, no matter who or what sparked it.