bookmark_borderPossible good news on Christopher Columbus statue in Columbus, Ohio

The statue of Christopher Columbus in the city that bears his name, Columbus, Ohio, could potentially be coming back to public view. 

The organization “Reimagining Columbus” (I don’t really consider this an appropriate name for such an organization, but that will have to be explained fully in another blog post if I ever have the time and energy to write one) has unveiled its plan for a new park that includes the statue. The park, unfortunately, will not be centered on the statue. And it will include informational text about Columbus, which unfortunately has a high likelihood of being disparaging, somewhat defeating the purpose of returning the statue to public display. Visitors will be able to reach the statue after walking along a path lined with art and inscriptions and, interestingly, will be able to view the statue either by looking up at him from the ground, or from a hill where they could look him in the eyes. 

All in all, this does not sound like an ideal situation, but it is better than nothing.

Source: We The Italians

bookmark_borderGreat post from Confederate Coffee Company…

…about Lee High School in Midland, Texas

Here is an excerpt:

We weren’t part of the vote — but we’re proud of the result. Respect. Heritage. Honor. That’s what this is about. Across the South, our story matters. Every community deserves its voice, its roots, and its rightful names. Let’s stop erasing. Start remembering.”

(emphasis added)

Amen to that. The story of the Confederacy matters. The story of Robert E. Lee matters. And so does mine. Minority viewpoints, perspectives, and stories matter, not just those of the majority. Not just those that line up with whatever happens to be popular. Just like the Confederates, I am unpopular, I am a rebel, and I am different from the norm. This is why the Confederates are so important to me. Their stories matter, and mine does as well. The Confederates, and myself, deserve to be honored just as much as anyone else does.

Read the rest of their post here.

bookmark_border“Don’t give up? That’s what you did at Appomattox.”

Um, yes.

The Confederates gave up at Appomattox.

So?

The Confederates gave up at Appomattox after four years of being outnumbered, outgunned, and out-supplied. After four years of fighting an enemy that had a larger population, more money, and a more industrialized economy than they did.

Yes, the Confederates gave up at Appomattox.

What is the moral significance of that fact?

What does that have to do with whether the Confederacy was good or bad?

How, exactly, does that reflect badly on the Confederates, as this commenter seems to be implying it does?

The correct answers to these three questions:

There is none.

Nothing.

It doesn’t.

bookmark_border“Twenty-five million Americans…”

 
 
 
 
 
View this post on Instagram
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A post shared by Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy)

Um, yes. And that is bad, how?

If force or violence is justified to advance an important political objective, that means that killing a person is OK if doing so is necessary to advance the political objective. I don’t get why it’s considered bad or surprising that someone who believes that violence is necessary would actually be willing to use it. And as the Firearms Policy Coalition points out, there absolutely are situations in which violence is justified to advance political objectives, with the Revolutionary War being just one example.

FPC’s caption in the post is so important that I am reproducing it below:

“We believe that natural rights are not granted by governments, a byproduct of majority consensus or majoritarian process, or mere privileges conferred by any government, group, or creation of man.”

(emphasis added)

bookmark_border“Proud of what?”

Proud of thinking for myself, rather than mindlessly following norms.

Proud of standing up for what is right, rather than what is popular.

Proud of recognizing that these are not the same thing.

Proud of resisting authority.

Proud of having demonstrated tremendous courage in the face of overwhelming odds.

Proud of having moral beliefs that are objectively correct.

That’s what I’m proud of, to give just a few examples.

The real question is, what do you have to be proud of?

Because the last time I checked, being a mindless bully and bigot didn’t really meet the criteria.

bookmark_border“Midland Legacy did last longer than the confederacy…”

So? And this is relevant, how?

Also, take this similar comment: “The Crunchwrap supreme lasted longer than the confederacy so we should name it after that”

And what exactly is the connection between how long something lasted, and how deserving it is of having a school named after it?

How exactly are these things related?

What exactly is the relationship between how long something lasted, and its goodness or badness?

If a child dies, say of cancer, or an accident, does that mean that the child wasn’t important, and doesn’t deserve to be memorialized, merely because their life didn’t last very long?

Or, if someone is raped, or has their limbs blown off in a terrorist attack, does that mean that these experiences weren’t important, and didn’t actually harm the person significantly, merely because they didn’t last very long?

I’m confused about the connection between how long something lasted, and it’s goodness or badness.

I’m confused about why people think that there is one.

Because logically, it doesn’t seem like there should be.

bookmark_borderA new batch of statues arrives…

Yet another bit of positive news regarding statues: a new batch of Confederate statues has arrived in the United States, thanks to the organization Monuments Across Dixie. 

They posted a reel of going to pick up the new monuments here, and a picture of the crates containing them here.

The new statues include one of Admiral Raphael Semmes, a heartwarming picture of which can be seen in this post from the SCV camp named after him. 

More details to come on the rest of the statues…

bookmark_borderGood news on Frank Rizzo statue

Another piece of good news relating to statues: the statue of Frank Rizzo, the first Italian American mayor of Philadelphia, will be reappearing in some capacity.

The statue, one of many murdered in 2020 in an effort by intolerant bullies to eradicate all public art depicting people who differ from the norm, used to stand outside the city’s municipal service building. He was damaged by racist vandals before being removed overnight by the cowardly city government in June of 2020. Disgustingly, the acts of vandalism included throwing noodles and gravy at the statue, attempting to set him on fire, and spray-painting the word “fascist,” which is ironic given that the people who did this were the people engaged in a campaign to obliterate from existence all people who differ from the norm.

But I digress.

Yesterday, the city agreed to return the statue to the Frank Rizzo Monument Committee, the organization that had originally created and donated it to the city. Unfortunately, under the terms of the agreement, the committee can only display the statue behind a fence on private property. However, this resolution is at least better than the statue being kept out of sight in storage, and it’s a good thing that Rizzo will be owned and displayed by people who actually like and respect him. Plus, the city will cover the cost of the repairs necessitated by their own cowardice.

A spokesperson for the committee said that they are “delighted with the Art Commission’s approval of the litigation settlement reached with the City’s lawyers. We get the Statue back, immediately, and the City will pay for all repairs. We will determine where it will be placed once repaired, and we are in active negotiations with the Parker Administration on its future location and hope to have an announcement soon.”

Sources: Italian Sons & Daughters of America, We The Italians, CBS News