August 15, 2017

Scott Adams — wearing his Pope hat to make a moral ruling — says that the Confederate statues should come down.

The brand is "America" and it's working against your brand — even if only 20% of the people are feeling offended and excluded. It doesn't matter that you think it doesn't.



He didn't really need his Pope hat for that, because he's not talking about his own moral vision. He's taking a businesslike, corporate view, discussing a branded product called America and noticing the moral opinions of the consumers of the product.

There's also some interesting discussion in there about the internment of persons of Japanese descent during WWII and whether statues of FDR should come down. If I understand Adams's standard correctly, if 20% of Americans are offended — based on serious reasons — then Americans as a group should want to update the American brand and remove the monument, which is just decoration.

ALSO: Pope-hatted Adams makes the moral ruling that the mob's pulling down of a statue of a Confederate soldier is "a moral gray area." There was no violence against persons, only property, and it "comes very close to free speech." It's destructive, but only of "a racist symbol." I'll give this post the "civil disobedience" tag. Adams doesn't use that term, but he briefly acknowledges that the destruction is against the law and that the protesters probably need to be arrested and prosecuted and given a light sentence. In standard civil disobedience thought, the disobeyers accept the legal consequences.

AND: Adams is very funny talking about the notion of gathering America's Confederate statues in a museum: "It would be the world's worst museum." You'd be saying "There's a statue of Robert E. Lee" and then "There's a statue of Robert E. Lee," etc. I'd just note that the sculpture was designed to fit in a park, so how about something outdoors, something like Grūtas Park (AKA "Stalin's World)(discussed in this post of mine from last May (about the removal of the Jefferson Davis statue in New Orleans)).

AND: Let me repeat something from that May post, this image "The Sons of Liberty pulling down the statue of George III of the United Kingdom on Bowling Green (New York City), 1776":

213 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 213 of 213
Roughcoat said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Roughcoat said...

I'm so boringly Midwestern in my outlook. For example: I'm against racism and all of its attendant cruelties not so much because od moral and religious considerations(although those do obtain) but mostly because racism is bad manners. I am the product of a Lace Curtain Irish family on my mother's side and a stolid yeoman German family on my father's side, and that's how we roll. My sainted Irish grandmother, daughter of an Irish Catholic father and Civil War veteran (cavalry) and a Church of a Ireland mother supported the civil rights movement in the 60s because she felt that oppressing black people was bad manners on the part of the oppressors. That was no small thing. Indeed, it was the just about the worst thing she could say about a person. The only thing worse than bad-mannered people, in her view, were the English.

I'm confident that she would consider people bad-mannered who pull down statues of Confederate soldiers. Sure, but it's s rowdy behavior and rowdy is bad-manners -- something characteristic of shanty Irish, the Travelers, and drunken Englishmen.

I share her view.

My German grandfather probably would have shrugged his shoulders and said, "Don't they have something better to do?" Whereupon he would go back to reading his newspaper.

Bad Lieutenant said...

From
O SHEPHERD,
SPEAK!

BY

UPTON SINCLAIR

1950

...

V

They wanted to talk, first about Roosevelt and then about
Truman. Rick had meant every word of his verses, and more ;
it was a tragedy without parallel in history; like seeing the
driver of a team of wild horses drop dead while they were at
full gallop, Lanny said, ** Trio of wild horses,” and told his
friend what F. D. R. had said at their first meeting, comparing
himself to the driver of a Russian troika. His three horses
were the Southern Democrats, a whole generation behind the



212’ O SHEPHERD, SPEAKI

rest of the country in their thinking; the hierarchy of the
Catholic Church in the great cities, such as New York, Boston,
Chicago, and Los Angeles ; and, finally, the labour unions and
their intellectual sympathizers. Three of the wildest
steeds imaginable, each desiring to travel to a different goal ;
yet the Democratic party could never win a victory without
all three, and it had been Roosevelt's task to keep them in
harness and on the highway.

“ And now they will fly apart! " exclaimed the Englishman.

Lanny could only say, I fear so; but I don't think the
reactionaries, if they come back, will dare repeal more than a
small part of the New Deal. That's the way America travels,
two steps forward and one step back."

Lewis Wetzel said...

Althouse wrote:"Scott Adams tells talks about racist statues."
Not statues of racists, or statues created and installed by racists, the statues themselves are racist?
Holy cow.

Anonymous said...

Come on, Resistance Fighters! What are you going to do about Ft Bragg?
Ft Gordon, Ft Benning, Ft Hood? Camp A P Hill? Quit having pillow fights with cities. Get it on with the Feds, you pussies.

JamesB.BKK said...

"But statues in the public square honoring the other side in a war? Why are we doing that? It's very strange!"

That war was an invasion by the federal government and the states under the sway of Massachusetts of states which at the time had departed the union, about tariffs. It is revisionism by regime historians that makes it about freeing slaves - the Emancipation Proclamation (Sept. 1862) followed the commencement of war by more than one year (April 1861). That proclamation's purpose was to foment revolt in the seceded states, and it did not cover states (or parts of states) that had not seceded. Remnants of federalism following that war meant that some states could recognize what remained of their sovereignty and history and they have done so. "We" are not doing that.

Quaestor said...

Inebriated Time Waster wrote: Why don't Germans have statues of Hitler?

Because it's illegal. A typically fascistic solution to fascist ideology — make it forbidden.

JamesB.BKK said...

"There's a good argument that FDR himself was solidly racist."

Wilson and Lincoln too. Wilson re-segregated the federal government separating many from employment. Lincoln til his dying day was working hard on deporting or at least relocating a good portion of the non-white population of the US. Both improperly and illegally or stupidly increased federal government power and Executive Branch power.

Don't care much about statues and shrines and their names on stuff, but would prefer to reverse a number of their changes for the benefit of the living and those yet to live, in the US and abroad. The Executive Branch is too powerful and destructive.

Oso Negro said...

Ah, Yankees. Forever in favor of the right of people to political self-determination. Except, of course, their fellow Americans.

MikeR said...

I don't know if I represent 20% of the American people, but the Jewish religion forbids graven images. All the statues have to come down. Then they need to be smashed into small pieces and the pieces thrown into the sea.
Get to it!

ken in tx said...

Charlottesville is named after Charlotte of Mecklenburg, George the III's wife. It should be renamed. This honoring of Extreme Right Wing Monarchism has no place in America's public life.

Professional lady said...

I am planning a trip to Poland next year and am reading up on it. The tallest building in Warsaw, the Ministry of Culture and Science Building represents all things Soviet to the Polish people. It's the typical grandiose ugly communist architecture. It was built in 1955 by Stalin as a "gift." The Poles have not torn it down but have called it "Stalin's penis" as an insult since the very beginning. Seems like a good approach to me.

hstad said...

OK, after all the statues are all destroyed, like the Taliban, what will the Alt-Left attack next? AA your reporting is quite topical but light on historical experiences and the consequences let loose by the statue brigade. They will come for people, at which point some people will take umbrage to such actions, and respond in kind with violence. The Charlottsville episode is just the beginning of this trend. If the Left pushes everyone into race tribes, please be careful, for the "White Race" is still the majority in this country. A very scary proposition for the end of America!

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 213 of 213   Newer› Newest»