Quote:
Originally Posted by tschock
I think "a statue has been moved" is quite a polite way to refer to the destruction of public (and private) property by a mob of people. Should they be moved or removed? Perhaps. But I'm hoping your not condoning that the ends justifies the means in how some of these have been 'moved'.
As to the original OT question. I'm not sure I buy the Braves name change. This gets back to the question of who takes offensive and how many need to be offended to be classified as 'offensive'. Sometime in the 1987-1994 time frame (as I remember where I was living at the time), this was brought up with regard to the Braves (among others). There were a number of Native Americans that were fine with the team name of the Braves as it was a symbol of strength, courage, and nobility. The Redskins and Indians would be a different matter.
|
Of course, I don't agree with mobs destroying statues.
I live in New Orleans. The city removed the 4 most prominent Confederate statues in this city. It was a move that I would say the great majority of the residents of the city approved of.
I'm not in favor of destroying art. The statue of P.T. Beauregard in particular was a very beautiful statue of him riding on a very beautiful horse. I think these statues belong in museums, in a proper setting, with the proper context.
The city has placed them in storage, no one knows what will happen to them eventually.