What is the logical conclusion to this iconoclastic binge that the looney left is imposing on us of late? Why, the removal of ALL commemorative statues, literature, namings and artwork from the public square. By ALL I mean ALL ... for what is one man's (or woman's) genius is some other's goat. There are always two ... or three ... or more sides to every historic event of import. So the removal of Robert E. Lee's statue to be replaced with Stokely Carmichael's will only survive as long as the later's followers outnumber his detractors. Then, down his marble memorial comes ... to be replaced by some other nouveau. At some distant pint we are bound to run out of marble ...
And, of course, there must also be the book burnings and the defacing of artworks and the renaming of locations, etc. All in the name of correcting history. United States of Vespucci anyone?
4 comments:
Agreed. I am not sure where this all got started... seems to me Dylann Roof looking deranged and holding a confederate flag was seminal. But you are on point that anyone named Lee ought to get their name changed like Adolphs after WWII. I have been so appalled at ISIS destroying world heritage sites and here we are at home doing it ourselves. I am not sure whose statue will survive. Maybe Ralph Kramden and Bobby Orr...
The tyranny of the weak of mind ...
Chill, I agree too, when it comes to works of sculpture or other artistic renditions, we should not be like ISIS. I have no problem destroying symbols such as flags or banners (swastika) or hate graffiti.
That's a bold statement. I guess that an unexpected painting of "love" on a bridge abutment would be love graffiti.
Post a Comment