Elgin Mills wrote:Alien Overlord wrote:So, censor anything that you find distasteful? Gotcha.
A statue, the name of a school or a public plaza, none of that actually affects anyone in a meaningful way. Especially those who don't live around these things. As previously mentioned, these people are all DEAD. So who cares if the South wants to have a statue of them? Why does it honestly matter, and more so-why do some people feel it is justifiable to try and bring change on a community that isn't their own? The only people who should decide to take down the statue or rename the school are those actually living in the community where these things are. If people were as concerned about their own communities as they were about communities three states away, then our country would be a shining beacon of wealth and prosperity.
Removing statues is not censorship, because statues aren't speech. It's funny how no-one ever gets mad about Lenin statues getting torn down in 1991, but as soon as you go after our favorite band of Gentleman Slavers...
A painting isn't speech either, yet we would generally say that a regime that destroyed all paintings made by say, Jews, would be practicing censorship. Censorship, as the name implies is the censoring of ideas. A statue could very well represent an idea, and thus the destruction of a statue could represent the censorship of an idea.
I would be upset about a Lenin statue being torn down in 1991, if the community living around that statue didn't want it to be torn down. People were eager for those statues to go, and if people in the South wanted to get rid of all Confederate symbolism, then it would be the same case. But it should be their choice, a local decision and not a federal one.
i despite the Confederacy, but i recognize that not everyone feels that way. If states in the South want to celebrate the Confederacy, i'm not going to pretend to know better. That's a local decision and
should be a local decision.