3 ms·
This is basically the same argument that southern right-wingers use to defend keeping their confederate statues, but oddly enough many internet commenters seem
by throw20102010 7y ago
This is basically the same argument that southern right-wingers use to defend keeping their confederate statues, but oddly enough many internet commenters seem to have no problems with ripping down those pieces of art since they represented something they didn't like.
I'm not accusing you (mc32) of being hypocritical since I haven't seen you make any comments saying that we should rip out old confederate statues because they represent slavery.
However, (let me reiterate that this isn't an attack on you, mc32), I think we as a collective internet need to rethink how we feel about removing artwork if it represents something bad. It is not okay for us to be okay with ripping out some untasteful art but not others, simply because some bad art is "left" and other bad art is "right."
Before you go jumping on me about how slavery is different than communism, remember that communism is responsible for nearly a hundred million deaths, which puts it near the level of slavery in terms of harm it has done to humanity (even if they aren't directly comparable).
- BeeOnRope 7y agoI mean there is the slight difference that the statues intend to glorify the figures they represent, while this mural does the opposite - it's a pointed commentary on slavery and colonialism.
- rjf72 7y agoStatues are inanimate. What glorification happens is by people. When you see a statue of something or someone you find distasteful, do you find yourself glorifying whatever it represents or does the statue instead simply serve as a reminder to you of the past for which you make your own judgements? Do statues impose meaning, or do people find their own meaning in them? Of course the answer is self evident. One reason that purging of the past is so intrinsically tied to authoritarian regimes is because authoritarian regimes do not want people to think for themselves. They want to enforce their views and only their views with no possible ambiguity or counterpoint. This is the danger of flirting with authoritarianism, as I feel we have been doing in trying to purge the past. Once the momentum for 'cultural purification' grows, you may find that where you draw your personal line in the sand is not where the rest of those pursuing such ends choose to.
- magpi3 7y agoHowever poor its implementation has been, the ideology behind communism is based is the idea that people should not be stratified by class. The ideology behind slavery is that some people are subhuman and can be treated like animals. The broad brush you are using to equate the two is inappropriate. The U.S. freedom loving founding fathers participated in not only the legalization of slavery but also the genocide of native americans. Should we lay those sins at the feet of democracy and capitalism as a whole?
- mantas 7y agoInterwebs is not a "collective mind". A lot of individuals participate. Each with his own ideas. Why would it be hypocritical to go be against another user of the tool? Are politicians hypocritical to have opposing ideas?