|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On October 15 2020 21:00 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2020 20:54 Velr wrote: Wanting to knock every statue down, is an extreme position, no matter how you spin it. It's not like they're bridges, they're statues.
I'm actually with you on this one, I was merely pointing out that Lee and Napoleon statues are not equivalent.
I'm all for making a monument for the good things the statues stand for and tear them all down. At least that way, when you go as a tourist to these cities, you get something artistically interesting rather than a generic white dude on a horse.
|
On October 15 2020 20:58 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2020 20:54 Velr wrote: Wanting to knock every statue down, is an extreme position, no matter how you spin it.
Btw: Napoleon is also seen positive in Switzerland, he basically created modern Switzerland. I would say the concept that we should celebrate ideas, not individuals is fairly nuanced and not extreme at all. I don't think it's extreme, but I do think it's a pointless and condescending limitation. It's not like people aren't offended by ideas. And hypothetically, let's say it were impossible for some reason to make statues of people during Jim Crow, surely it would have been no more difficult to make symbolic statues with the same effect. The problem there being the vile intention rather than the set of objects possible to portray in stone.
On October 15 2020 21:09 EnDeR_ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2020 21:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 15 2020 20:54 Velr wrote: Wanting to knock every statue down, is an extreme position, no matter how you spin it. It's not like they're bridges, they're statues. I'm actually with you on this one, I was merely pointing out that Lee and Napoleon statues are not equivalent. I'm all for making a monument for the good things the statues stand for and tear them all down. At least that way, when you go as a tourist to these cities, you get something artistically interesting rather than a generic white dude on a horse.
While I'm not particularly attached to statues of people, I would like to point out that most 'idea statues' are generic geometric slabs. Mohdoo's mouse knitting DNA example is an outlier, Nettles could post the Vestal Virgin Tuccia to argue the opposite.
|
On October 15 2020 20:58 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2020 20:54 Velr wrote: Wanting to knock every statue down, is an extreme position, no matter how you spin it.
Btw: Napoleon is also seen positive in Switzerland, he basically created modern Switzerland. What is it about statues that allow you to classify any position on their existence 'extreme'? I would say the concept that we should celebrate ideas, not individuals is fairly nuanced and not extreme at all. The only way you can call it 'extreme' is that we've always had statues of individuals, so we should continue to have them, and anyone that says otherwise is an extremist. You could call it a minority point of view which is fair enough, but minority =/= extreme.
And we can do that, with new statues and buildings. I see no point in tearing down hundreds of years old monuments because the person or whatever depicted held views that people held at the time. The confederate statues that were built way later just to "rub it in" are a diffrent matter for obvious reasons.
|
On October 15 2020 20:25 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2020 18:38 Biff The Understudy wrote:On October 15 2020 17:29 EnDeR_ wrote:On October 15 2020 17:07 Dan HH wrote: I'm fine with both building/keeping statues of controversial/deeply flawed people and with protesters tearing them down. I may disagree with either of those actions on a case by case basis, but that's also okay. I don't understand why this position isn't more common. I do think there is a distinction between say Napoleon statues (deeply flawed character but the statue is meant to represent enlightenment in Europe) and Rober E Lee statues (erected as a symbol of oppression during the Jim Crow era). In fairness, I don't think I've ever been curious enough to go check who the random white guy on a horse is when visiting cities; so don't really get the drive to protect statues of horrible people at all costs that seems to be prevalent in some sections of the population. Exactly. The confederate monuments are a very special case and they deserve a very special treatment. Once again the maximalist position ("let's tear down every statue of everyone who did bad things!!") is hugely harmful to the progressive side of the argument. It alienates everyone who is not an extremist and gives plenty of ammo to the white supremacists defending those confederate statues. And they do need to go down. Did you really just put the label 'extremist' on people who disagree with the veneration of individuals? What are you, the Stasi for bland conformism? Nobody asks you to venerate everyone at all that's very much my point. And if you want to tear down every statue in France (there are tens of thousands, lots of them by incredible artists) you are probably an extremist. It was done at the Revolution and France lost forever some if the treasure of its artistic patrimony.
|
On October 15 2020 21:09 EnDeR_ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2020 21:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 15 2020 20:54 Velr wrote: Wanting to knock every statue down, is an extreme position, no matter how you spin it. It's not like they're bridges, they're statues. I'm actually with you on this one, I was merely pointing out that Lee and Napoleon statues are not equivalent. I'm all for making a monument for the good things the statues stand for and tear them all down. At least that way, when you go as a tourist to these cities, you get something artistically interesting rather than a generic white dude on a horse. You do realize that many of the "dudes on a horse" thingies are actually artistic masterworks that have existed for centuries?
|
I don't think the focus is on whether statues offend, rather it's on how Confederate monuments were one among a host of Jim Crow socio-political tools used to solidify the consequences of Reconstruction's defeat (primarily "fuck you North, we'll do what we please" and "you may have been nominally freed, black folk, but you are not free"). Stuff like Brown v. Board of Ed. and the CRA of '64 attempted to stop the use of many of those tools, but the statues remain. It's along those lines that I think removing Lost Cause statues and putting them in a museum makes far more sense than allowing them to remain.
It's not as easy a call on statues of other historical figures like Jefferson, but unless and until US society addresses the heroification of slaveowners and the one dimensional approaches to US history that are hugely popular here, it seems wrong to condemn those pushing for their removal.
It's worth remembering stuff like Ruby Bridges, the first black girl to attend an integrated elementary school in the South, is only 66 years old.
|
Northern Ireland26799 Posts
I may be wrong and going from memory, but aren’t quite a lot of Confederate monuments actually relatively recent? So in comparison to say Biff mentioning statues of Napoleon in France there’s a bit of difference there?
As per my previous ruminations on the subject, I have no particular issue with x statue existing, it’s how it’s placed and how it’s framed in terms of the overall culture.
To paraphrase an Irish person on the subject ‘I have no particular problem with Cromwell standing outside the Houses of Parliament, I have a problem that the average British person doesn’t know why an Irish person would have a problem with this state of affairs.’
|
On October 15 2020 21:48 WombaT wrote: I may be wrong and going from memory, but aren’t quite a lot of Confederate monuments actually relatively recent? So in comparison to say Biff mentioning statues of Napoleon in France there’s a bit of difference there?
As per my previous ruminations on the subject, I have no particular issue with x statue existing, it’s how it’s placed and how it’s framed in terms of the overall culture.
To paraphrase an Irish person on the subject ‘I have no particular problem with Cromwell standing outside the Houses of Parliament, I have a problem that the average British person doesn’t know why an Irish person would have a problem with this state of affairs.’ This gets right to the heart of the problem; there are millions of Americans who either don't understand why a black person wouldn't adulate a man like Thomas Jefferson or do understand and think they should simply get over it. It is not a coincidence that many of those very same people are pro-small government, pro local control, and opposed to the interventions of the feds.
|
On October 15 2020 21:38 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2020 21:09 EnDeR_ wrote:On October 15 2020 21:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 15 2020 20:54 Velr wrote: Wanting to knock every statue down, is an extreme position, no matter how you spin it. It's not like they're bridges, they're statues. I'm actually with you on this one, I was merely pointing out that Lee and Napoleon statues are not equivalent. I'm all for making a monument for the good things the statues stand for and tear them all down. At least that way, when you go as a tourist to these cities, you get something artistically interesting rather than a generic white dude on a horse. You do realize that many of the "dudes on a horse" thingies are actually artistic masterworks that have existed for centuries?
Sure. I still find them boring; after you've seen 2 or 3 dudes on a horse, there's just not that much more to see. Classic statues from Roman or Greek times, for instance, are far more varied and are much more interesting to see, and they tend to be more 'conceptual' depicting scenes rather than celebrating some particular dude who was important at the time as you see in more modern statues.
Edit: There are some modern statues that are cool, these two are from my home-town and they were put in the 90's. Spoilered so it doesn't clog up the thread: + Show Spoiler +
|
On October 15 2020 22:51 EnDeR_ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2020 21:38 Biff The Understudy wrote:On October 15 2020 21:09 EnDeR_ wrote:On October 15 2020 21:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 15 2020 20:54 Velr wrote: Wanting to knock every statue down, is an extreme position, no matter how you spin it. It's not like they're bridges, they're statues. I'm actually with you on this one, I was merely pointing out that Lee and Napoleon statues are not equivalent. I'm all for making a monument for the good things the statues stand for and tear them all down. At least that way, when you go as a tourist to these cities, you get something artistically interesting rather than a generic white dude on a horse. You do realize that many of the "dudes on a horse" thingies are actually artistic masterworks that have existed for centuries? Sure. I still find them boring; after you've seen 2 or 3 dudes on a horse, there's just not that much more to see. Classic statues from Roman or Greek times, for instance, are far more varied and are much more interesting to see, and they tend to be more 'conceptual' depicting scenes rather than celebrating some particular dude who was important at the time as you see in more modern statues. Edit: There are some modern statues that are cool, these two are from my home-town and they were put in the 90's. Spoilered so it doesn't clog up the thread: + Show Spoiler + No offense but the fact you find their work boring is of little significance to the concept of wiping centuries of artworks by master sculptors.
As for "when you have seen two of them you have seen them all" it reminds me of people who say that dutch painting sucks because it's all people dressed in black with a hat. Maybe it's about you not knowing what to look and how to appreciate.
And yes, there are some shit statues and some amazing statues of dudes on horses.
|
Doesn't need to be wiped. Doesn't need to get center spots in the middle of town, either. Put it in a museum or something if it is really that artistically valuable, or in a box in the basement of a museum if not.
|
On October 15 2020 23:42 Simberto wrote: Doesn't need to be wiped. Doesn't need to get center spots in the middle of town, either. Put it in a museum or something if it is really that artistically valuable, or in a box in the basement of a museum if not. The more art is visible to everyone and integrated in life, the better.
If a statue is deliberately problematic, sure. That Roosevelt statue had to go. Otherwise, I find the whole idea absolutely barbaric.
|
On October 15 2020 23:52 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2020 23:42 Simberto wrote: Doesn't need to be wiped. Doesn't need to get center spots in the middle of town, either. Put it in a museum or something if it is really that artistically valuable, or in a box in the basement of a museum if not. The more art is visible to everyone and integrated in life, the better. If a statue is deliberately problematic, sure. That Roosevelt statue had to go. Otherwise, I find the whole idea absolutely barbaric.
Art is already integrated into life and visible to everyone. Its generally ust not appreciated. Whatever youre sitting in is art that was designed by a furniture designer, this forum's interface and graphics were made by artists, the structure you may or may not be in was designed by an architect, the fast food wrappers strewn on the street were designed by graphic designers, etc. etc.
Statues are impressive art, but BEING art hardly makes them uniquely worthy of occupying public space any more than anything else.
Plenty of other art that could replace them too, and doing so would require commissioning new art which would help local artists, maybe statues could use the museum treatment and experience rotation to allow space for living artists to contribute to their communities in their stead.
Anyways, just a public service announcement to whoever is interested in art to examine their surroundings more critically and perhaps appreciate how much of the world around you is art, even if it may be cynical or ugly in some/many cases, lol.
|
While the Russian "October surprise" was a giant flop, I now eagerly/anxiously await Barr's last ditch effort.
|
Small news roundup. The first item is pretty large and important, the other two are a lot smaller, I think?
According to the NYT, Trump admin premptively tipped off conservative investors in Feb that covid was going to crash the market. This would be a career ending scandal in a normal administration, for everyone involved.
The consultant’s assessment quickly spread through parts of the investment world. U.S. stocks were already spiraling because of a warning from a federal public health official that the virus was likely to spread, but traders spotted the immediate significance: The president’s aides appeared to be giving wealthy party donors an early warning of a potentially impactful contagion at a time when Mr. Trump was publicly insisting that the threat was nonexistent.
Interviews with eight people who either received copies of the memo or were briefed on aspects of it as it spread among investors in New York and elsewhere provide a glimpse of how elite traders had access to information from the administration that helped them gain financial advantage during a chaotic three days when global markets were teetering. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/14/us/politics/stock-market-coronavirus-trump.html
Giuiliani uploaded a racist impression he recently did to his own youtube channel, for some unknown reason (alcohol?). Giuliani's judgement appears to have become increasingly flawed over the past couple years, and this is just another sign of it (the Ukraine-Hunter thing got really bungled, butt calling reporters constantly, etc.)
After a few moments of small talk with an assistant who appears to be Jayne Zirkle, an animated Giuliani started affecting a stereotypical Chinese accent while telling Zirkle that she’s “going to be the most famous model in China.”
“Ah, get me Jayne Zirkle,” he said while using the accent.
After asking others in the room what they wanted for dinner, Giuliani continued to say Zirkle’s name in the mocking accent. He then started pantomiming a bow while repeating her name, laughing as his team tried to steer him back to talking about the interview. A few seconds later, the video finally cut out. https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudy-giuliani-posts-footage-of-himself-mocking-asians-to-youtube
Harris is canceling travel due to COVID spread among her travel group and doing only virtual events for 4 days.
One staffer and one flight member. No close contact with Harris and the individuals, but we know covid can spread like crazy. This is uh, much more responsible than the Trump campaign, but still indicates how ridiculously hard it is to campaign safely right now.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/15/politics/kamala-harris-campaign-travel-coronavirus/index.html
On October 16 2020 00:16 Mohdoo wrote: While the Russian "October surprise" was a giant flop, I now eagerly/anxiously await Barr's last ditch effort. Trump has said he may not keep Barr if he gets re-elected. Some WH people are reportedly very upset, saying that "everyone knows he saved Trump's presidency".
“The great irony in the president’s remarks is he is only in a position to complain because Bill Barr saved his presidency and everyone knows it,” a senior administration official told Fox News on Wednesday.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-bill-barr-criticism-administration
|
Given what happened with the collusion investigation, and the wrench it threw into the wheels of Trump's presidency for two years, it would be entirely just for any and all info on it to come out before the election. Transparency is good. The NYT is slow-rolling the release of Trump's illegally leaked tax returns, too, for election, I mean transparency purposes.
|
On October 16 2020 00:16 Mohdoo wrote: While the Russian "October surprise" was a giant flop, I now eagerly/anxiously await Barr's last ditch effort. There was that DoJ unmasking probe that found no substantial wrongdoing according to the WaPo. This new Hunter Biden "scandal" is comically bad with more holes in it than Swiss cheese (though the censorship by social media is questionable to me) and probably won't change anyone's mind either. Trump's campaign is fighting the last war down to the same oppo research, strategies and messaging, except Biden isn't struggling in likeability or trustworthiness as much as Hillary, and Trump is no longer this unknown quantity.
|
On October 16 2020 00:17 Nevuk wrote:Small news roundup. The first item is pretty large and important, the other two are a lot smaller, I think? According to the NYT, Trump admin premptively tipped off conservative investors in Feb that covid was going to crash the market. This would be a career ending scandal in a normal administration, for everyone involved. Show nested quote + The consultant’s assessment quickly spread through parts of the investment world. U.S. stocks were already spiraling because of a warning from a federal public health official that the virus was likely to spread, but traders spotted the immediate significance: The president’s aides appeared to be giving wealthy party donors an early warning of a potentially impactful contagion at a time when Mr. Trump was publicly insisting that the threat was nonexistent.
Interviews with eight people who either received copies of the memo or were briefed on aspects of it as it spread among investors in New York and elsewhere provide a glimpse of how elite traders had access to information from the administration that helped them gain financial advantage during a chaotic three days when global markets were teetering. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/14/us/politics/stock-market-coronavirus-trump.html
The extent of the scandal here is that administration officials were slightly more cautious in private than they were public. Kudlow said "we just don't know," and a hedge fund consultant who happened to be present at a meeting of a public policy think tank (Hoover) inferred from that that there were problems coming. He then wrote up a document that he shared with others. The NYT's framing, of course, is designed to get you to believe that there's an insider trading issue here. But really, the only thing that happened as far as the Trump admin is concerned is that Kudlow said "we just don't know" at a meeting of a public policy think tank. You really think that gives rise to an insider trading accusation? Liberal media misinformation at work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|