Edited

Recent events in the UK had Black Lives Matter protesters (who were mostly white, from news footage, oddly enough) pulling down the statue of a slave trader and tossing it in the ocean. It was an interesting event for lots of reasons, because of the lockdown, because of the failure of the city officials to respond to previous complaints that the statue be removed, because of the people taking it into their own hands outside of the rule of law, because of the context of George Floyd's death and mistrust of authority, and because of the old white Etonians ruling the country doing their best to be posh and reasonable, but clearly floundering way out of their depth.

However watching the news my first thought was "hey, look, Monumental Melodrama!"

In a way, it's a shame that issue exists, as the question of whether people should be punished for actively destroying an offending statue is much more emotive and interesting than protestors demanding its removal, but it'd be way too much issue overlap to make a new issue about justified vandalism.

Interesting stats for that issue:

Dismissal 9% (that's about average)
#1: 38%
#2: 24%
#3: 16%
#4: 12%*

That's 12% of nations roleplaying out-and-out racial oppression. Or we hope that's they're roleplaying, anyway.

(*rounding is why this doesn't add up to 100%, obviously)

Mount Seymour, Atsvea, Ruinenlust, Lord Dominator, and 9 othersUan aa Boa, Turbeaux, Outer Bele Levy Epies, Kinectia, McClandia Doge 2, Eco-empire, I like fire, Middle Barael, and The young ur

Chan island

3 years 337 days ago

Middle Barael wrote:

While I usually agree that it is a bad decision to take down historic monuments, even if they are bad, ultimately if these bad people are being praised rather than hated, they should be torn down. I feel that if people were to learn from the statues of Robert E. Lee or the like, they could be kept up, but since nobody really learns from it and some even celebrate them, they must be torn down and moved to museums. You are not erasing history if people are not actually learning from the statue, nor if people are celebrating a terrible historic person like white supremacists do.

Some will make the argument that this is like tearing down a concentration camp, which some Germans and Poles support, but here’s the reason why you can tear down a Robert E. Lee statue but not a concentration camp: The victims of the holocaust, mainly the Jews, have the mindset of “never forget” and they want to leave it up, while the People of Color who were hurt most by the slave owners do not want the Robert E. Lee statues to stay up. It’s about what the victims want: if they want to “never forget”, then they must be kept up so that the horrors are not forgotten, while if they simply want to destroy a symbol of hatred and racism, then they can.

That's not even to mention that the former concentration camp is a museum, with guides and plaques explaining in great detail all of the horror that happened at the site. I sometimes dare people to go and visit- the place is extremely educational and nowadays is about as close as it gets to a vaccine against fascism.

Statues on plinths in city centres; not quite the same message now is it?

Not even sure about the argument about moving them to museums either. Perhaps some of them will be of value there for educational purposes, but many aren't even all that remarkable in terms of ... well, anything. A cheaply made statue of Robert E Lee from 1920 put up just to intimidate black people during a time when many cities were doing could well be of more value melted down and recycled.

Verdant Haven wrote:

A person I read who was responding to those same bad arguments had a couple of solid ways of phrasing it. Specifically, that he actions of the protestors are just as much a part of that statue's history as its construction, and that nobody simply learns from statues - they are put in place to celebrate people.

Regarding the first point, I largely agree. While that statue was of a person from the 17th century, it itself was only put up in 1895. It was erected in the same time period as many of the Confederate monuments in the United States, which were put up specifically as racist symbols to emphasize the white hegemony at a time when the efforts of Reconstruction had faded, and the South was looking to re-establish its identity. The people who had been young men during the US Civil War were the politicians and statesmen at the end of the century, and what they grew up with, fought for, and believed in was built in monumental form. These statues aren't some irreplaceable part of a lost civilization, an example of an ancient technique, a monument of some enduring aspect of the human experience, or a superlative construction of forgotten mystery. They were mounted within the lifetime of our grandparents, some of them within living memory, to send specific political and social messages. Their removal, either to a museum (if of particular historical note) or just in general does not cause us loss. I saw somebody trying to say "Oh, if you want to tear down the Colston statue, you may as well tear down the Pyramids, since those were built by slaves." Quite beside the fact that they were almost certainly not built by slaves, the attempt to compare a 5000 year old globally-unmatched monument of a lost civilization's to a 125 year old run-of-the-mill bronze of some dude nobody erecting it had ever met was sick and disingenuous.

The second point was a bit more trite, but also valid. Statues are erected to celebrate people. They are erected to memorialize and tell people "this is an example of our civic values." To the extent that they educate, they do so by showing an example to replicate. No school child has been taken to see a bronze monument in the city center and come away thinking "what a great example of a terrible person I should have nothing to do with." We don't forget bad people, but we sure as hell don't put them on a plinth and give them pride of place in our cities. In Germany, you don't see a bunch of statues of Hitler around, but people darn sure know who he is. You don't see Goebbels and Goering in marble, gazing down upon Berlin. If we did, what would we expect children to think of them? Why should we assume differently for others? The people being celebrated in the controversial monuments aren't from a long-lost time to which these statues grant us insight. The times the represent are painfully recent, and the negative shockwaves of their activities continue to ripple to this day.

Nothing to say but that I completely agree. Was that person you read me in the British politics thread by any chance XD

Mount Seymour, Atsvea, Ruinenlust, Lord Dominator, and 6 othersDarths and Droids, Uan aa Boa, Turbeaux, Outer Bele Levy Epies, McClandia Doge 2, and Middle Barael

Cameroi

3 years 337 days ago

Edited

ah the real lungs of a world are every green thing that photosynthisizes, wither it be on land or at sea.
i do wish people who hate natural environments would try living without one.

there will be an atmosphere with or without anything our own species can breathe, and thus exist in its environment.
almost everything we get from burning anything we have other means, and the potential to develop their sufficiency.

even dead trees have uses. lumber if they haven't rotted yet, and incubators for new life if they have.
even charcoal is useful.

one thing i'm not convinced can exist, is sanity without the convolutedness of natural diversity.

rather instead the dependence of sanity on strangeness, oddness, imperfection, even of beauty itself upon these things,
that are grossly under rated in a culture who's penultimate common denominator is pursuit of symbolic value.

as for statues, i'd rather see odd three dimensional shapes, then anything that looks like anything human.
as for learning from history, we repeat its mistakes deliberately when we do,
and until time machines become as common as cars, most of what is taught as history will remain distorted for purposes of deception.

Atsvea, Ruinenlust, Lord Dominator, Uan aa Boa, and 6 othersTurbeaux, Outer Bele Levy Epies, McClandia Doge 2, Eco-empire, I like fire, and Middle Barael

I like fire

3 years 337 days ago

Cameroi wrote:

ah the real lungs of a world are every green thing that photosynthisizes, wither it be on land or at sea.
i do wish people who hate natural environments would try living without one.

even dead trees have uses. lumber if they haven't rotted yet, and incubators for new life if they have.
even charcoal is useful.

one thing i'm not convinced can exist, is sanity without the convolutedness of natural diversity.

That is very beautifully said.

Getting outdoors is a wonderful, therapeutic experience that nowhere near enough people seem to appreciate. I've never understood the people that adamantly refuse to go outside and experience nature. The human mind wants to see patterns in everything, most people seem to want to live in their organized, simple world, when the true wonder is in the seemingly-random placement of trees, the vastly complex movement of life, the overwhelming yet relaxing parade on the senses.

I've been cooped up for too long, I need to get myself outside, even if it's just sitting outside a bit.

Mount Seymour, Atsvea, Ruinenlust, Lord Dominator, and 7 othersUan aa Boa, Turbeaux, Outer Bele Levy Epies, Kinectia, McClandia Doge 2, Middle Barael, and The young ur

The Valiant Vessal of McClandia Doge 2

3 years 337 days ago

I tried to get a star wars background with like a forest do you think my new flag fits with a starwars/forest theme?

Chan island, Atsvea, Ruinenlust, Turbeaux, and 4 othersCanaltia, Outer Bele Levy Epies, I like fire, and The young ur

The Green Federation of Forrester

3 years 337 days ago

Edited

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:

However watching the news my first thought was "hey, look, Monumental Melodrama!"

Interesting stats for that issue:

Dismissal 9% (that's about average)
#1: 38%
#2: 24%
#3: 16%
#4: 12%*

That's 12% of nations roleplaying out-and-out racial oppression. Or we hope that's they're roleplaying, anyway.

(*rounding is why this doesn't add up to 100%, obviously)

I wonder if this and indeed other issue stats have been affected by the card game where players are answering randomly for quickness or just choosing the first or last answer to every issue?

I know I have a nation that has answered #4 just because it's the last option on the list

Mount Seymour, Atsvea, Ruinenlust, Lord Dominator, and 5 othersTurbeaux, Outer Bele Levy Epies, Kinectia, McClandia Doge 2, and Middle Barael

Herotria

3 years 337 days ago

Hey, I'm existing again.

Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Turbeaux, Outer Bele Levy Epies, and 3 othersKinectia, McClandia Doge 2, and Middle Barael

The Valiant Vessal of McClandia Doge 2

3 years 337 days ago

I just went on an endorsing spree. So if you want to be endorsed by me I will eventually get to you maybe or just telegram me or quote this and I will endorse you if I havent endorsed you already.

Atsvea, Turbeaux, and Outer Bele Levy Epies

Shalotte

3 years 337 days ago

McClandia Doge 2 wrote:

I just went on an endorsing spree. So if you want to be endorsed by me I will eventually get to you maybe or just telegram me or quote this and I will endorse you if I havent endorsed you already.

Do me! Do me!

Mount Seymour, Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Turbeaux, and 2 othersOuter Bele Levy Epies, and McClandia Doge 2

The Valiant Vessal of McClandia Doge 2

3 years 337 days ago

Shalotte wrote:

Do me! Do me!

I cant do you. Your not in the World Assembly. :P

Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Turbeaux, and Outer Bele Levy Epies

Shalotte

3 years 337 days ago

McClandia Doge 2 wrote:

I cant do you. Your not in the World Assembly. :P