4 ms·

It's almost like two sides can play that game. Who started the game anyway? I remember some statues being toppled last year by very progressive minded people.

It's almost like two sides can play that game. Who started the game anyway? I remember some statues being toppled last year by very progressive minded people. Maybe you know destroying art wasn't the progressive thing to do after all.

JaimeThompson 5y ago
Conservative religious groups have been doing this for decades so implying it started last year isn't really supported by evidence.
- dukeofdoom 5y ago
  I know both sides engage in this. And I'm not in support.
chowchowchow 5y ago
Good grief. We got a real relativist over here. Maybe the “art” you keep and what you remove from public display reflects your values. At least to me, the values of those in favor of keeping southern memorials and banning Maus seem pretty odious.
- dukeofdoom 5y ago
  These weren't removed by elected officials. But by an angry mob from one side. You're overlooking that little important bit. "Relative" is trying to apply modern values to historical figures. A standard most of your previous presidents would fail. Might as well remove their statues too.
  - chowchowchow 5y ago
    What? You sound aggrieved & not entirely logical. It is relativism to equate taking down the statues and banning this book, unfortunately.
nickpeterson 5y ago
Would those statues happen to be of traitors who sided against the United States and supported human slavery based on race?
- dukeofdoom 5y ago
  If someone went around smashing depictions of the devil to rid the world of evil, you would think they're kind of nuts. Are we going to tear out pages in books these same people were mentioned in, to erase any positive memory of them. I don't see how that would be different.
  - chowchowchow 5y ago
    …how many honorary depictions of satan do you think there are on public display in America?
    - dukeofdoom 5y ago
      There's at least one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/08/17/a-satanic-idols-3-year-journey-to-the-arkansas-capitol-building/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/08...
      - chowchowchow 5y ago
        You didn’t read the article. The statue was on wheels and only there for a few hours.
  - nickpeterson 5y ago
    The devil doesn’t exist unless you’re a rube. These men did and shouldn’t be honored or celebrated.
muricula 5y ago
I feel like publicly owned statues serve a very different purpose than school library books. The former are usually forms of veneration, the others are for education.
ggm 5y ago
> It's almost like two sides can play that game. Who started the game anyway? The book banners started centuries ago. the origins of the word "Bowdlerized" are about cutting unsuitable language from Gibbon's 'decline and fall of the roman empire' [0] Thats 1820s. "Lambs Tales from Shakespeare" was an earlier instance. They cut all the good bits, to make it suitable for kids. [1] > I remember some statues being toppled last year by very progressive minded people. Maybe you know destroying art wasn't the progressive thing to do after all. There really isn't linkage. One is about teaching materials and how to expose young minds to written ideas and expression. The other is about memorialising the past and how its treated. Personally?? I think context panels on the statues to explain why we no longer think they deserve memorialising is better, but thats just my take. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Bowdler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Bowdler [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tales_from_Shakespeare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tales_from_Shakespeare
ceejayoz 5y ago
> Who started the game anyway? It certainly didn't start last year. I remember conservatives being grumpy about Dogma and The Simpsons decades ago, and that's hardly the start either. Hell, Socrates got "canceled".

JaimeThompson 5y ago

Conservative religious groups have been doing this for decades so implying it started last year isn't really supported by evidence.

dukeofdoom 5y ago
I know both sides engage in this. And I'm not in support.

chowchowchow 5y ago

Good grief. We got a real relativist over here. Maybe the “art” you keep and what you remove from public display reflects your values. At least to me, the values of those in favor of keeping southern memorials and banning Maus seem pretty odious.

dukeofdoom 5y ago
These weren't removed by elected officials. But by an angry mob from one side. You're overlooking that little important bit. "Relative" is trying to apply modern values to historical figures. A standard most of your previous presidents would fail. Might as well remove their statues too.
- chowchowchow 5y ago
  What? You sound aggrieved & not entirely logical. It is relativism to equate taking down the statues and banning this book, unfortunately.

nickpeterson 5y ago

Would those statues happen to be of traitors who sided against the United States and supported human slavery based on race?

dukeofdoom 5y ago
If someone went around smashing depictions of the devil to rid the world of evil, you would think they're kind of nuts. Are we going to tear out pages in books these same people were mentioned in, to erase any positive memory of them. I don't see how that would be different.
- chowchowchow 5y ago
  …how many honorary depictions of satan do you think there are on public display in America?
  - dukeofdoom 5y ago
    There's at least one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/08/17/a-satanic-idols-3-year-journey-to-the-arkansas-capitol-building/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/08...
    - chowchowchow 5y ago
      You didn’t read the article. The statue was on wheels and only there for a few hours.
- nickpeterson 5y ago
  The devil doesn’t exist unless you’re a rube. These men did and shouldn’t be honored or celebrated.

muricula 5y ago

I feel like publicly owned statues serve a very different purpose than school library books. The former are usually forms of veneration, the others are for education.

ggm 5y ago

> It's almost like two sides can play that game. Who started the game anyway? The book banners started centuries ago. the origins of the word "Bowdlerized" are about cutting unsuitable language from Gibbon's 'decline and fall of the roman empire' [0] Thats 1820s. "Lambs Tales from Shakespeare" was an earlier instance. They cut all the good bits, to make it suitable for kids. [1] > I remember some statues being toppled last year by very progressive minded people. Maybe you know destroying art wasn't the progressive thing to do after all. There really isn't linkage. One is about teaching materials and how to expose young minds to written ideas and expression. The other is about memorialising the past and how its treated. Personally?? I think context panels on the statues to explain why we no longer think they deserve memorialising is better, but thats just my take. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Bowdler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Bowdler [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tales_from_Shakespeare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tales_from_Shakespeare

ceejayoz 5y ago

> Who started the game anyway? It certainly didn't start last year. I remember conservatives being grumpy about Dogma and The Simpsons decades ago, and that's hardly the start either. Hell, Socrates got "canceled".