Only a small minority of people are advocating for tearing down statues of people that can be considered to say or do anything racist, I really don't know what you are arguing. What point are you trying to make? I am not for tearing down statues because somebody once said or did something that could be considered racist. I am still looking for the racist thing Grant did.
This is a thread concerned with statue removal/toppling/vandalism. I am discussing statue removal/toppling/vandalism. What I am discussing happens to be concerned with non-confederate statues. Those are being removed/toppled and vandalized all over the world. It's a legitimate topic to discuss. If you want to talk about it. I'll talk to you about it. Just because a "small minority" are carrying out that activity doesn't mean its not a worthwhile topic. You can go back to page 7 and begin reading where my participation in the thread began. It's fairly limited. Less then a dozen posts probably. I never advocated for the removal of Grant, Lincoln or Sherman's statues. I'm simply pointing out that if the standard of statue removal/vandalism is simple racism, which we have seen around the globe recently, even the heroes of the American Civil War's statues should be coming down. Grant married into a prominent slaving family and literally owned a slave. Sherman was a terrible racist too.
He looked the part. Wikipedia was down just before the guillotine noose garage puller apparatus was applied.
Heg became a rising young politician who found slavery abhorrent. He naturally became an ardent member of the Free Soil Party. ..wow his bio sounds like if he was alive he would be alongside BLM, and they tear down his statue And decapitate the head? This is insane even in 2020. What sad times we live in ...what statue or monument is safe if Hans Christian heg is not? He was the most left leaning radical of his time and fought for the union...seriously is this a case of ignorance I guess because you would be hard pressed to find a greater ally of civil rights during the civil war.
Grant freed his slave right, here is how he actually interacted with slaves. “The use of slaves on the farm…was a source of irritation and shame to Grant. Jefferson Sapington told me that he and Grant used to work in the fields with the blacks. He said with glee, ‘Grant was helpless when it came to making slaves work,’ and Mrs. Boggs corroborated this. ‘He was no hand to manage negroes,’she said. ‘He couldn’t force them to do anything. He wouldn’t whip them. He was too gentle and good tempered and besides he was not a slavery man.’” Whether or not Grant wasn’t a “slavery man” by inclination, we know he briefly owned William Jones. He does not mention Jones in his memoirs or other writings, so the exact nature of their relationship remains a mystery. We do know that in March 1859 Grant filed the following manumission document. “I Ulysses S Grant of the City and County of St. Louis in the State of Missouri, for diverse good and valuable considerations me hereunto moving, do hereby emancipate and set free from Slavery my negro man William, sometimes called William Jones(Jones)of Mullatto complexion, aged about thirty-five years, and about five feet seven inches in height and being the same slave purchased by me of Frederick Dent-And I do hereby manumit, emancipate & set free said William from slavery forever.” There is no standard for statue removal which is my point, you are basing this discussion on something that is not there,
Grant did free his slave. That does not mean his ownership of him didn't occur. He didn't have to own a slave at all. I'm saying Grant was a racist. I'm saying Lincoln was a racist. I'm saying Sherman was a racist. We are seeing racists have their statues removed all across the world based on their racism. I like how you keep picking on Grant though. Want to address Sherman? Lincoln?
You want to address the fact that there is no set rule on who can have statue or not? You are arguing something that does not exist. Them being racist is not the only criteria for these statues to be removed. Nobody in this thread or anybody important has said if you can be considered a racist you need your statue removed. No I don't want to address Sherman and Lincoln because this entire discussion is pointless.
I don't care if monuments of the Confederacy are torn down..... just be aware it is a slippery slope because damn good arguments can be made to tear down the monuments of Washington, Jefferson, Wilson, Lincoln and anyone that signed the Constitution including Benjamin Franklin.
What are these damn good arguments? It seems you would have to simplify the argument to encompass all of those people with the confederacy.
Damn good arguments? In the case of George Washington he owned over 700 black people. He broke up black families and sold their children. He also had the teeth of black men ripped from their skull while alive so that he could use their teeth for dentures. So if someone came to me, especially someone African American and said they did not like Washington and wanted his statues taken down...... I would certainly understand. As for Jefferson, he owned over 600 black people and raped some of them. He did not free them when he died either. He also was one of the supporters of the Constitution that had the 3/5th's compromise for slaves. Woodrow Wilson was a strong racist that fought hard to keep African Americans out of government and college. Indeed, he resegregated the government in 1913. Wilson was also a vocal supporter of the KKK and a strong supporter of preserving and venerating the Confederacy. U.S.S. Grant owned a black man for an entire year that he either bought or was given as a gift. He lived with and married a woman that owned 4 slaves. Grant also wrote that his concern was saving the union and not the rights of black people. He also financially profited off the slavery accepting money from his inlaws. He made the decision to live with his inlaws and their slaves rather than close to his abolitionist father. Everyone signing the Constitution knew that they were signing a document that pushed slavery with the 3/5th's compromise and continued the ownership of black people. Just to be clear I am not saying any or all statues should come down, only that it is a slippery slope for sure when you apply current standards to people from hundreds of years ago.
Have I made an argument for Heg to be torn down? I think no statues should be torn down, I think some should be removed from public places. People are overreacting and virtue signalling and some statues have suffered the consequences. So stop trying to paint me into a corner and realize what I am saying.
Who is arguing for slave ownership to be a cut off point except for fringe rabble rousers? The largest issue seems to be confederate soldiers from what I can see.
