T1B

To stay or not to stay...

Three months from now my wife and I will be moving from California to South Carolina. I want to have an opinion on this subject before we move, but have yet to make up my mind. Should the South's statues of Civil War heroes be taken down or should they stay? I think statues are important. They mean a lot to people. And removing statues is nothing new (Bill Cosby at Disney World, Joe Paterno, Lenin, Stalin, Sadam, etc.) Times change, and our heroes change. Should statues reflect history, or should they reflect current beliefs and knowledge? I've always wondered how blacks in the South feel when they go to parks and see statues of men who fought tooth and nail to keep slavery legal. How would New Yorkers feel if a statue of Bin Laden was put up in one of their parks? Is that even a relevant analogy? Killing three thousand people versus owning four million slaves?

I think statues of treasonous racists like Lee should stay up with the stipulation that no vandalism charges can be brought for defacing them.

You are moving from CA to SC? You are dumber than I thought. Where in CA do you live? Delano? Blythe?

Statues don't do much for me. Leave them up take them down, meh whatever. What is more concerning to me is the attempt to re-write history or at best soften it. That is a bad idea.

Most of these statues were:

1. Made in New England
2. Not of particularly good quality
3. Erected between 1910 and 1930 not particularly as a memorial to any Civil War "heroes," or to honor "history," but in support of Jim Crow in the south

I can see why they would offend a lot of people, and I can see why racist white trash would still venerate them. Personally I don't care if they keep them or trash them. I've never been one to worship graven images, and I won't ever be moving to South Carolina, thank God and GOD.

Your analogy sucks, BTW.

Mikey wrote:I can see why they would offend a lot of people, and I can see why racist white trash would still venerate them.

You don't have to be white trash to be a racist. I've met a lot of people in California who are racists, and I wouldn't categorize them as white trash. They drive BMWs, drink white wine, and take off work for MLK day...but they get ulcers as soon as a black family moves into their neighborhood. True, the South has had serious problems, but they've made a lot of progress. And one of the best things about moving to the South is that I'll no longer be living in California. I've lived in the state for 62 years, and I've had enough. It's a lousy quality of life for a lot of money.

In some cities it's a lousy standard of living for the money. If you live in the likes of Delano or Blythe.

If they are to be taken down, which who really cares anyways, it's fitting that they be taken down by the same party affiliation that erected them in the first place. :wink:

ML@Coyote wrote:

Mikey wrote:I can see why they would offend a lot of people, and I can see why racist white trash would still venerate them.

You don't have to be white trash to be a racist. I've met a lot of people in California who are racists, and I wouldn't categorize them as white trash. They drive BMWs, drink white wine, and take off work for MLK day...but they get ulcers as soon as a black family moves into their neighborhood. True, the South has had serious problems, but they've made a lot of progress. And one of the best things about moving to the South is that I'll no longer be living in California. I've lived in the state for 62 years, and I've had enough. It's a lousy quality of life for a lot of money.

I've also been in California for 62 years (minus an unfortunate 5 year stretch in Henderson, NV) and would't think about leaving. My mom was born here, her father was born here and my kids were born here. Sure it's not the same as it was in the 60s and 70s, but what is? It's too crowded (unless you know where to go) and too expensive (unless you know where to go), but I'll be staying to the bitter happy end. I'm still discovering new places to go and things to do, and it's all good once you get through LA and/or the Bay Area. If I ever move it would be north to get out of the heat (Ft Bragg is nice), but my wife won't do that.

It will be interesting to see if I get homesick. :wink:

I don't know how people drive in that crap everyday. I get stuck in it a few times a month and even that is too much.

Moving Sale wrote:I don't know how people drive in that crap everyday. I get stuck in it a few times a month and even that is too much.

^^^
This

ML - you can leave LA without leaving California. Maybe you just need to get out more often.

Mikey wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:I don't know how people drive in that crap everyday. I get stuck in it a few times a month and even that is too much.

^^^
This

ML - you can leave LA without leaving California. Maybe you just need to get out more often.

Truth is that I've loved living in California. I just have had enough of it, and I need a change of scenery. We plan to take a lot of road trips and explore the east half of the country. We also need land for my wife's horses. Her equestrian center here is gradually being razed to build...more houses. For less than the value of our California home we will be getting five acres, a comparable house, and a barn.

I will miss living near my sons. Although it might make it a little more difficult for them to swing by our house and borrow money from me.

ML@Coyote wrote:

It will be interesting to see if I get homesick. :wink:

Probably preferable to being carsick.

I'm a few years behind you fossils, 54. Not quite at that point as I need to remain productive for a while longer.

Born and raised in Ct. Spent 6 years away while in the Navy and 3 years in Nashville. Wish the hell I had stayed there, but, momma wasn't happy being away from family and I was too lazy to go find another piece, so we moved back.

There is a lot to like about living in a small town in New England, but, given the way this state is being run, I could see myself selling and moving south for a similar house, more land, for way less money and probably about 1/4th the property taxes.

I have discussed it with the OL. We are both gainfully employed in well paying jobs and in the OL's case, a job she actually likes. That is an accomplishment for her, but that's another discussion.

The way I see it, we either get out of dodge in the next decade or so and hopefully get decent money for our place or we say fuggit, we'll die here, so it won't really matter what resale value is.

If I lived in a nice place like mikey's racoon preserve AND I was in a financial position that even if everything went to hell, I'd likely be OK, I would prolly stay. I mean why leave? You aren't going to find better weather and if the place descends into anarchy, you build a perimeter wall hire a few guards.

I'm not quite there yet and I suspect ML might not be either, so selling high and moving to a place where you can get a nice spread for 10 cents on the dollar, is a pretty good move. And guess what mikey, I know you think every place in the south is like a dukes of hazard episode, but you'd be mistaken. I loved living in Nashville. Southerners, on average are pretty good folks, even the republican ones. I'll take them any day over fake ass cali assholes.

Another thing to look at is each place's future. South Carolina's economy is likely to improve as more damn yankees move there and bring their money with them. Cali? Not so much. Not to go all right wing racist and all, but cali is slowly but surely gaining poor brown folks and losing not so poor whitey. This means they the remaining people there are gonna get squeezed harder and harder. Not all have your cali or nowhere view on life. He won't be the last one to throw up his hands and say fuggit.

The Carolina's are beautiful.
If I wasn't stuck in this godforsaken dung heap that's where I'd be.
But to the question, I don't give five fat fucks to any of that shit.
I don't let my man-pussy get puffed up about feelings.
Actually, I have none and that's probably why.

My question is... what's the deal with that guy who waits to hold the door open for you when you're like 20 paces behind? Just go through the fricken door, man. Don't make me do that awkward jog up to the door thing while you hold it open with that goofy looking grin on your face like you're doing me some huge favor. I mean, what's the deal?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:My question is... what's the deal with that guy who waits to hold the door open for you when you're like 20 paces behind? Just go through the fricken door, man. Don't make me do that awkward jog up to the door thing while you hold it open with that goofy looking grin on your face like you're doing me some huge favor. I mean, what's the deal?

Worlds are colliding, Mgo. WORLDS ARE COLLIDING!

The statues should never have been displayed. Statues are for winners.

Statues aren't always for the winners.

At least ML's guys were patriots.

Yes, they were. But it's hard to win a war in a country where 80% of the people you're trying to "help" are against you. The soldiers were awesome, but our political and military leadership was shit. Maybe that's why you won't find any bronze statues of LBJ or Creighton Abrams around the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

Left Seater wrote:Statues don't do much for me. Leave them up take them down, meh whatever. What is more concerning to me is the attempt to re-write history or at best soften it. That is a bad idea.

Really, Fake Seat? You're concerned with history being rewritten? Like 757s disappearing into tiny holes--with massive wars resulting?

How do you dare to pretend to even exist, let alone look into a mirror, you utterly disgustingly filth..

I find it hilarious how many people who haven't lived down south have these set-in-stone opinions of what it's like there, as if they've gotten their entire worldview of the Southeast from watching Joe Dirt and Cannonball Run. Here's the funny thing-- one of those glorious liberal/progressive cities, Boston, is far more overtly and covertly racist than any hick Nowhereville, SC town that I've either lived in or visited. The one facet of the South that would unquestionably surprise Northerners, West Coasters, and foreigners is just how little race means to most Southerners. Both blacks and whites have learned to live with the other and generally keep to themselves.

this^^^^^

I've lived both places.

Southerners deal with it much better. You see many more middle class balcks in the south than the north.

^^^^^^^^^^^

Third. I have lived in both Boston and Philly. Both of these cities are far more racist than any place I have lived in Texas. On top of that these cities are also divided by country of origin. For example the Italians live apart from the Portuguese and they defend their turf.

Rooster wrote: Both blacks and whites have learned to live with the other and generally keep to themselves.

Well put. :doh:

Two comments -
Don't think I ever saw Joe Dirt or Cannonball Run. Maybe the latter. I was thinking Mayberry RFD Deliverance and Cool Hand Luke

I'd never move to Boston either.

Anywhere inside 495, you better be making well into the 6 figures before you will be anything close to middle class. It is ridiculous.

Actually, I guess you could live in Lawrence or Brockton. Good luck with that and make sure your life insurance is paid up.

Mikey wrote:

Rooster wrote: Both blacks and whites have learned to live with the other and generally keep to themselves.

Well put. :doh:

Same thing is true in California. Same thing is true everywhere. Groups of nationalities and races tend to hang around each other. I don't think it's because they're racist or otherwise. People just tend to feel more comfortable being around their own kind.

DiT wrote:I don't let my man-pussy get puffed up about feelings.
Actually, I have none and that's probably why.

My mother in law was a tough old broad. I visited her once when she was in her nineties, and I asked her, "How do you feel?" She said, "I feel with my fucking fingers." You would've liked her.

ML@Coyote wrote:

DiT wrote:I don't let my man-pussy get puffed up about feelings.
Actually, I have none and that's probably why.

My mother in law was a tough old broad. I visited her once when she was in her nineties, and I asked her, "How do you feel?" She said, "I feel with my fucking fingers." You would've liked her.

I woulda been your father in law :)

Aiken.

So, which is worse - the Catholic Church's use of slave labor or their use of little boys?

88 wrote:I am presently in Rome, and have been visiting monuments built with slave labor, which are cherished world wide. The Catholic Church had no problem with the use of slave labor, which was common around the world during the same time the US abolished it. The Pyramids were also built with slave labor. Do we tear these things down too on grounds that they glorify slave owners? Or do we incorporate the contribution of slaves in our explanation of the history as they do here?

I understand what you're saying, but the difference I see between the monuments you're talking about and civil war leader statues in the south is that the monuments are great feats of history and architecture while the civil war statues are not. The civil war statues are run-of-the-mill likenesses installed to pay homage to the short-sighted men who sought (wrongly) to enslave a race of people for financial gain. They were not visionaries or heroes, but rather they were men determined to protect an institution that was cruel, inhumane, and often evil.

ML,

You make it sound as if Robert E Lee and company were just sitting around one day and said "ya know what, Cletus, I'll be if we just round us up some mvscals and make them work for nothing, we'll make hella money!!!!!"

That wasn't the case. They were born into that system. If they had been born in Ohio or New Hampshire, they would have fought for the other side.

In the end, these are statues that were erected by local people. The decision to take them down should be made by the same. Anyone who goes down their and tries to tell them what to do needs to fuck the fuck off and mind your own business. You wanna help black folks, go to the south side of Chicago and call out the gangbangers. You won't do that because you know that unlike statues, they are armed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

smackaholic wrote:You wanna help black folks, go to the south side of Chicago and call out the gangbangers.

Why not go to the south side on Thanksgiving morning and pass out sandwiches?

Put that on your calendar.






:)

smackaholic wrote:They were born into that system. If they had been born in Ohio or New Hampshire, they would have fought for the other side.

I agree with this. But I think that in this day and age most southerners know their ancestors were in the wrong. I guess it's complicated for the native southerner to feel pride in his ancestors (as we all like to do) and reconcile this pride with what was a barbaric way of life.

In the end, these are statues that were erected by local people. The decision to take them down should be made by the same. Anyone who goes down their and tries to tell them what to do needs to fuck the fuck off and mind your own business. You wanna help black folks, go to the south side of Chicago and call out the gangbangers. You won't do that because you know that unlike statues, they are armed.

Ha! It's funny how bad the racial problems are in non-south states, yet these people still feel compelled to pick on the south and go after easy targets. I haven't lived in any state besides California, but I can tell you there's a lot of racism in California. If people really feel compelled to do something about racism, they ought to start in their own backyards.

88 wrote:ML, have you ever been to Gettysburg? The monuments there are very similar to those being demolished around the country. They stand for the same thing. Men from a particular area came together to fight for and with each other and their land. I doubt there were many dudes wielding rifles in the civil war who owned slaves. Most were poor dudes fighting because their brothers were fighting.

There are no philosophers in foxholes. Olnly dudes who do not want to die.

You're right. This is true of most wars. Maybe it can be said for all wars. I've never been to Gettysburg. Did they honor the soldiers, or did they honor the men who wrongly led them into battle? I would have a lot easier time with statues of the men who gave life and limb than with statues of the men who led them.

Have you been to the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial? There they honor the soldiers. This makes more sense to me. Vietnam was a stupid war waged by idiots. Yet the idiots are not honored; instead, the soldiers are honored.

There might be a lot of racism in CA but there is about to be a little less.

And at least one of those monuments "honors" a treasonous unit, correct?

Do you consider the Declaration of Independence to be a "treasonous" document?