Month: April 2021

bookmark_borderThe statue genocide in Delaware

Posted on by Marissa

Last June, the city of Wilmington, Delaware cruelly removed two beautiful statues: one depicting Christopher Columbus and the other depicting Caesar Rodney. Intolerant bullies had threatened on social media to destroy the statues, and had also vandalized a memorial to police officers by hacking it with an axe and placing urine-soaked flags on it. Naturally, instead of punishing them, the city decided to give them exactly what they wanted by removing the statues so that the bullies didn’t have to. 

“We cannot erase history, as painful as it may be, but we can certainly discuss history with each other and determine together what we value and what we feel is appropriate to memorialize,” Mayor Michael Purzycki said at the time. “In this period of awakening for our City, State, and country, we should be listening more to each other and building a more just City and a better America.”

I’m not sure how taking away statues makes a city more just or a country better. Having statues of a diverse collection of historical figures is a crucial part of what makes the world a good and beautiful place. Taking this away makes the world a bad and unjust place, the opposite of what the mayor said. Additionally, for everyone to determine together what to memorialize is not the right solution. Not everyone has the same values or the same opinions about who or what is appropriate to memorialize, and if consensus or popular vote is used as the method for deciding, then those with a minority view will end up having no statues that reflect their values. This is unjust and discriminatory, and is the exact opposite of listening to each other. It amounts to telling those with unpopular views, or any views that differ from those of the establishment, that they have no voice and that their feelings and perspectives do not matter. 

According to the same article, Joe Sielski of a group called “It’s Time to Remove the Columbus Statue” said, “I would rather give the City the chance to have mature conversations and do this the polite way instead of just crashing in on the statue with a bunch of hammers.”

These comments are disgraceful. There is nothing “mature” or “polite” about violating the rights of other people or inflicting pain and harm, which is exactly what statue removal does. The fact that Sielski would even mention “crashing in on the statue with a bunch of hammers” as an option is beyond reprehensible. Neither the city nor a mob of protesters with hammers has the right to remove the Columbus statue or the Rodney statue, because doing so violates the rights of people who like those statues. It is horrible that a person would consider himself entitled to demand the removal of a beautiful work of art that brings joy to people’s lives, and to threaten to violently destroy it if he does not get his way. This demonstrates a complete disregard for the rights, feelings, and perspectives of others.

The events in Wilmington were in the news again recently because this month the City Council voted on a non-binding resolution about whether or not to make the statues’ removal permanent. Six members voted to permanently obliterate Columbus and Rodney, one named Nate Field bravely voted against the idea, and six simply voted “present.” Therefore, the resolution did not win majority support and did not pass. 

According to local news station WDEL, Trippi Congo, the City Council President and also a bully and a bigot, “said there’s no decision to be made.” I agree with that statement, but in the opposite way that Congo meant it. Congo continued: “There’s no place for those statues in any public place in our city. They are not heroes. America has never taught true history, so I don’t think we can depend on that happening. If those statues go back up, it’s definitely going to instill mental trauma on our residents.”

These comments are absolutely infuriating. How could someone think that there is no place for a statue of Christopher Columbus or Caesar Rodney in any public place in their city? Having statues of a diverse group of historical figures is crucial for having a world that is worth living in. Therefore, Congo is demanding that the world be stripped of everything that makes life worth living. It is utterly incomprehensible that someone could consider this a good thing.

Also, how dare he state that Columbus and Rodney are not heroes? Columbus came up with a revolutionary idea all on his own and risked his life to do something that had never been done before. Rodney rode overnight through a storm to help America declare its independence from Britain, and also battled cancer. And Trippi Congo, who has never accomplished anything even remotely close to what these two men did, has the audacity, the ignorance, and the disrespect to insult them, flatly stating, as if it is obvious, that they are not heroes. Nothing could not be more wrong. Instead of recognizing these two individuals as human beings with remarkable lives and rich and interesting stories, Congo chose to flippantly condemn them merely because Columbus came to America from Europe and Rodney was born into a family that owned slaves. This is mean-spirited, ignorant, cruel, vicious, stuck-up, arrogant, bigoted, and intolerant.

As for Congo’s claim that restoring the beautiful statues would “instill mental trauma on our residents,” that statement is beyond ridiculous and demonstrates an appalling lack of empathy. Statues are not traumatic; the removal of statues is traumatic. Restoring these statues to their rightful places after they were so brutally and cruelly taken down would provide some small measure of comfort and healing to those who have been hurt. Providing comfort and healing is the opposite of trauma. Congo’s comments are a slap in the fact to me and to all people who were traumatized by the removal of the statues. He is a bully and a bigot, and his comments, like the ones I discussed above, demonstrate a complete disregard for the rights, feelings, and perspectives of other people. 

In conclusion, Mayor Purzycki owes everyone who loves art and history an apology for ordering the removal of the Columbus and Rodney statues, and City Councilor Congo owes us an apology for for his appalling comments. Returning the statues to their original locations is the only acceptable outcome in this situation. Because of the recent City Council vote, there is theoretically some hope that this may happen, but due to the fact that only one councilor voted for this and six voted against it, it seems doubtful. Hearing about these terrible happenings and reading politicians’ comments about them is mentally exhausting, demoralizing, and infuriating. Existing statues must be left alone, and every statue that has been removed must be returned.

bookmark_borderCuomo stands with Columbus & Italian-American community

Posted on by Marissa

I don’t agree with New York Governor Andrew Cuomo on many things, and I have even criticized him on this blog. But I wholeheartedly agree with his statement on a recent disgraceful act of vandalism perpetrated against a Christopher Columbus statue. Cuomo’s statement can be found at this link or as follows: 

I was disgusted to learn of the offensive, vulgar graffiti that was found spray painted on the Columbus Monument in Manhattan recently, a source of pride for the Italian American community for 130 years.

When New Yorkers encounter acts of hate, we don’t remain silent. One attack on any culture is an attack on all cultures, and we will stand united in condemning all acts of bigotry and intolerance.

I am directing the State Police hate crimes task force to provide the NYPD with assistance in its investigation and to hold the criminal responsible to the fullest extent of the law.

I am pleasantly surprised that Cuomo chose to stand with Columbus and the Italian-American community instead of with the vandals, as many politicians have done when similar acts of vandalism have taken place. This was indeed an act of bigotry and intolerance, and it is encouraging that this is being investigated as a hate crime. Thank you Cuomo for defending a historical figure who has been under constant, vicious assault and for providing a small measure of comfort to a community that has really been hurting.

bookmark_borderBLM activists threaten to turn memorial chair into toilet

Posted on by Marissa

One of the arguments frequently made by the intolerant bullies who oppose Confederate monuments is that battlefields, museums, and cemeteries are more appropriate locations for these statues than city parks and town squares. But now, the existence of anything Confederate-related, regardless of location, has become intolerable for BLM supporters. A group of them stole a Jefferson Davis memorial chair from a private section of the Old Live Oak Cemetery in Selma, Alabama. These idiots sent a letter to the United Daughters of the Confederacy, telling them that they would turn the chair into a toilet unless the organization displayed a banner with a quote by black supremacist terrorist Assata Shakur, who murdered a police officer. 

“The rulers of this country have always considered their property more important than our lives,” the banner read. Fortunately, the UDC did not display it, and police managed to recover the chair unharmed. Stanley Warnick, Kathryn Diionno, and Stanley Pate were charged with the theft. 

The thieves explained their actions as follows: “The common thread between now and then is the criminal justice system. That’s where the racial caste system is preserved today, much like these monuments. Why did we steal a chair? To make a point. To redirect the conversation back to what matters, people, not property.”

These statements make no sense. First of all, I’m not sure what any alleged racial caste system has to do with Confederate monuments. Second, the BLM movement and those who share their politically correct, intolerant way of thinking are the rulers of this country, while those who support the Confederacy are an unpopular minority with no power, so the vandals have that completely backwards. Additionally, statues and monuments are what matters, yet they are being treated as if they are completely worthless, so the vandals have that completely backwards as well. Technically, memorials are property, but they are essential parts of a world in which life is worth living. Without beautiful statues and monuments honoring a wide range of viewpoints and causes, the world is dull, bland, and empty and there is no point in people being alive. Statues and monuments are also the physical representations of now-dead historical figures, and harming them is an attack on those heroes’ lives and legacies, just as harming a living person is an attack on that person. Historical statues and artifacts are what matters, they are what it is important, and they are what the conversation should be about. They deserve far more respect and protection than they have been given.

Comments on Twitter about this unfortunate incident are, as usual, infuriating:

In the one instance in which someone actually made a reasonable comment, another individual, apparently thinking he/she was being clever, made a completely nonsensical reference to Mein Kampf. What does Hitler’s autobiography / manifesto have to do with a memorial chair to Jefferson Davis? 

Also, they did nothing wrong? Seriously? The thieves most definitely did so something wrong.

As for the call to get the sledgehammer… really? The fact that someone would take delight in the prospect of a historical artifact being smashed to pieces with a sledgehammer is beyond reprehensible. I cannot understand how someone could be so filled with hate and cruelty that he/she would demand the violent destruction of another person’s property that is located on private land and not hurting anyone, merely because it is related to the Confederacy.

These people, and their vicious hatred for anyone who is different from them, are sickening. 

bookmark_borderIndiana legislature passes bill to protect statues

Posted on by Marissa

New protections for statues may be coming in Indiana. The General Assembly passed a bill that directs the state police to investigate and prosecute people who destroy or vandalize “a private or government monument, memorial, statue or other commemorative property” and allows the state government to withhold funding from cities and towns that fail to stop these crimes. 

State Senator Eric Koch, who sponsored the bill, said: “This summer we all watched with disdain and grief attacks that were made around the country on historic monuments, memorials and statues by rioters and angry mobs – in many cases where the leaders of those communities instructed law enforcement to stand down – and in essence, let it happen. This bill is brought to address that situation going forward.”

In Indianapolis, for example, BLM supporters damaged approximately 80% of the city’s war memorials, including the large Soldiers and Sailors Monument, in a senseless destruction-fest over the weekend of May 29-31, 2020. According to the Shelbyville News, “police officers who were on the scene that weekend have said they were told to move away from the protesters, and then were told to stay away from them, and to stay in their cars.” Under the new bill, cities and towns could face financial penalties for giving cops such instructions. 

This bill is a small step in the right direction, and all states should follow suit. But naturally, there are those who object to even this modest step to protect statues. According to the article, State Senator Greg Taylor complained that the bill “focuses on protecting property, and not people.” This simplistic viewpoint disrespects the importance of statues to the people who love them. A statue is not just property; it is the physical manifestation of a historical figure. To destroy a statue is to destroy the memory and the legacy of a person from history. This is just as bad as physically harming a living person, if not worse. Additionally, for people like myself who love history, the destruction of statues inflicts enormous emotional harm, and emotional harm is just as bad as physical harm, if not worse. Therefore, this bill is very much needed, and the objections from the politically correct crowd are unfounded.

bookmark_borderRachel Maddow on the Covid vaccine

Posted on by Marissa

MSNBC host Rachel Maddow had some pretty disturbing comments about the Covid-19 vaccine, that demonstrate that she does not understand the concept of people having the right to make their own decisions based on their preferences.

“It is OK to feel reluctant or oogey or scared, and not want to get it,” Maddow said. “That is nothing to be ashamed of. But feel the fear and do it anyway. Get it. Because most of all, it is not for you. It is to keep you from getting the virus and then spreading it.”

First of all, Maddow assumes that the only reason someone would not want to get the vaccine is because he or she is “oogey” (whatever that means) or afraid. This presumes the truth of what Maddow is trying to prove – namely, that everyone should get the vaccine. It presumes that getting the vaccine is the rational thing to do, and any desire not to get it must be based on an irrational emotion such as fear. There are a variety of reasons why someone might not want to get the vaccine, many of which have nothing to do with fear. For example, I’m currently undecided about whether or not to get the vaccine, partially because I think it’s wise to wait until I know more about the side effects and how long the protection lasts, and partially because I am unlikely to become seriously ill if I get Covid, so I simply don’t think adding another medical procedure to my life is necessary.

More importantly, whatever a person decides with regards to the vaccine, that decision should be his or her own. Each person has the right to make decisions about his or her body without bullying, pressure, or coercion from anyone else. As liberals like Maddow say so frequently with regards to abortion (but completely forget about whenever any other issue is being discussed): my body, my choice. Hearing people like Maddow tell me I must get the vaccine makes me feel insulted and attacked, and therefore less likely to get it.

She is essentially saying, it’s OK to have preferences that are different from mine, as long as you don’t act according to them, and act according to mine instead. This is incredibly patronizing and condescending. The whole purpose of having preferences is to use them when making decisions. What is the point of having preferences if you are supposed to disregard them and make decisions according to someone else’s preferences? If someone does not want to get the vaccine, that means that they do not want to get the vaccine. Why should someone get the vaccine when their preference is to not get it? What Maddow is saying makes no sense. 

A final note: actually, the vaccine is for you, not to keep you from getting the virus and then spreading it. The vaccine is a benefit that people should be able to avail themselves of, if they wish. It is not something that people should be forced or pressured into doing. It is not something that people have a right to order other people to get, as Maddow is doing.

So no, choosing not to get the vaccine is not about being “oogey” or scared. It is about the principle that people are not morally obligated to get a medical procedure for the benefit of other people. 

If you want to get the vaccine, you should get it. If you don’t want to get the vaccine, you shouldn’t get it. It really is that simple. 

bookmark_borderFighting back: Italian-American civil rights lawsuit

Posted on by Marissa

Italian-Americans are fighting back against the politically correct bullies’ assault on Christopher Columbus. In a federal civil rights lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for Philadelphia, the Conference of Presidents of Major Italian American Organizations, the 1492 Society, and City Councilmember Mark Squilla are suing Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney and his administration for replacing Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples’ Day, removing a statue of Mayor Frank Rizzo, and attempting to remove a statue of Columbus. 

“While both groups’ ethnicity deserve recognition, Mayor Kenney may not take action that discriminates against Italian Americans to exalt another ethnic group in its place,” says the lawsuit, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer. “The canceling of Columbus Day is the most recent — but probably not the last — act in a long line of divisive, anti-Italian American discriminatory actions taken by Mayor Kenney during his Administration.”

“Even if you don’t agree with whether Columbus was a genocidal maniac who started the slave trade or whether he was the first civil rights leader who came to the new world, there still should be a process,” said Squilla.

In a separate, but somewhat related, piece of good news, the Joint Civic Committee of Italian Americans is fighting back against Chicago’s removal of Columbus statues. Through a FOIA request, they discovered a contract in which the city’s Park District promised not to make any changes to the statue without the organization’s permission. The city’s decision to remove the statue in the middle of the night seems to blatantly violate this agreement.

“We are hopeful that the Chicago Park District will honor what we feel to be a solid, enforceable contract with us,” said JCCIA President Ron Onesti. “These statues are very important to our community and represent generations of traditions, including the one day of the year that we celebrate our culture on the federal Columbus Day holiday. We know the original intention of removing the statues was one of safety, but that was months ago, and it is time to return them. I look forward to a dialog towards a resolve of the Park District obtaining the statues from the city and putting them back to their original locations.”

bookmark_borderPossible justice for statues in Arizona

Posted on by Marissa

In Arizona, there is hope that some semblance of justice may finally be meted out for those who have brutally destroyed statues. State Rep. John Kavanagh introduced a bill that would make it a felony – punishable in some cases by more than 3 years in prison – to damage any statue or monument.

“A statue to somebody, a gravestone of a relative, a statue to an event, is an edifice that either one person or for most of these now an entire community put up,” said Kavanagh. “It’s a statement by the community… and that is what is being desecrated.”

In Arizona, a Confederate memorial at the state capitol building was tragically removed, as was a statue of Jefferson Davis near the Jefferson Davis Highway. 

The AP article on this topic characterizes the statue destroyers as “civil rights protesters,” a characterization with which I strongly disagree. By physically destroying irreplaceable works of art that memorialize people from history, these protesters are not standing up for rights but trampling on the rights of not only the people who love the statues, but also the people whom the statues represent. 

Naturally, these “civil rights protesters” and their ideological allies have expressed opposition to the bill that would represent a small step towards justice. “Instead of targeting the community who want these statues gone, who have watched their ancestors’ perpetrators be admired for centuries, let’s work with them and create an America we all can celebrate,” said Shelby Young of the Arizona Coalition for Change. 

But an America without Confederate statues is not an America that I could ever celebrate. History is my passion, and the Confederacy is a crucial part of that. What I love about history is its diversity. I love to learn about and celebrate people from a wide range of time periods, nationalities, and cultures, with varied ideologies, personalities, and viewpoints. Honoring only one side in a war is not diversity. An America without Confederate statues is an America stripped of its diversity, beauty, and character, a soulless expanse of land with a mindless, conformist populace and no national identity. Watching America turn into such a place breaks my heart, makes my blood boil, and makes me feel sick each and every day. That anyone would consider this an America worthy of celebrating is incomprehensible. To consider this an America that everyone can celebrate is not only incomprehensible but utterly lacking in empathy. 

The destruction of Confederate statues is the destruction of what makes life worth living. Those who destroy statues are trampling on the rights of people who feel differently than they do. These intolerant bullies do not deserve cooperation; they deserve punishment. They deserve to be targeted, because their actions are despicable. 

“A lot of these monuments are ones that have a very bad history and those are the only ones that are being targeted right now,” said Sen. Martin Quezada. “What this does is it further criminalizes the efforts of a community to make a better statement, a counterstatement, to say that we no longer celebrate those types of values. We no longer celebrate slavery, we no longer celebrate veterans of Confederate history. We have multiple monuments in the state of Arizona that do continue to celebrate that, and my preference is that we all join together to tear those things down.”

These comments completely miss the point. What constitutes a “very bad history” is a matter of opinion, as it what constitutes a “better” statement. The claim that “we no longer celebrate those types of values” is bigoted and intolerant. Different people have different values, and that is exactly the way it should be. There is no requirement that everyone celebrate the same values, and the world would be a far worse place if there was such a requirement. To some people, Confederate monuments are a good thing, and the actions of the BLM movement are a step in the wrong direction. Those who destroy Confederate statues are attempting to impose their own values on everyone. They are attempting to eradicate from the earth anything that represents any set of values other than their own. This is bigotry, this is intolerance, this is bullying, and this is trampling on the underdog. These actions demonstrate a complete disregard for the rights of minorities. These efforts deserve to be further criminalized, because they are despicable. 

As for Quezada’s preference that we “all join together to tear those things down”… forgive me if I don’t care one iota what his preference is. Quezada’s preference is that the world be stripped of everything that makes life worth living and that people who love Confederate history be sentenced to a lifetime of heartbreak and agony. And then, adding insult to injury, he has the gall to express his hope that we join together with him to make this happen. Obviously, Quezada does not care a whit about my preferences, so why should I care about his? Call me crazy, but I prefer a world that actually contains goodness, beauty, and diversity, a world in which life is worth living. That’s why I strongly support this bill and pray that it becomes law.

bookmark_borderPeople who destroy statues should not be honored with statues

Posted on by Marissa

This summer, intolerant bullies destroyed a statue of Col. John Chivington at the State Capitol building in Denver, Colorado. Native Americans are now advocating that the statue be replaced by one of a Cheyenne woman in a pose of mourning, which would serve as a memorial for the Sand Creek Massacre that Chivington was allegedly involved in.

In my opinion, this is the wrong decision, because it would reward the vandals who destroyed Chivington’s statue. While I am not sure of the identity of the exact people who tore the statue down, the people and organizations who advocated for and praised its destruction are the same ones advocating for the Native American statue to take its place. Those who destroy a statue, or are complicit in its destruction, should not be allowed to dictate its replacement.

The AP article on this topic discusses the “historical trauma” that Native Americans suffered and the “chance to right previous wrongs” that the new statue represents. But the real wrong in this case is the epidemic of brutal destruction that has been perpetrated against countless beautiful, historical statues and monuments. The real trauma is that which has been inflicted on people who love history, people such as myself who have seen nearly everything that makes life worth living destroyed in the span of less than a year. Yes, Native Americans have suffered trauma and unjust treatment, but statue destruction is not the solution to this. Destroying statues inflicts trauma and injustice on the people who love them. And rewarding those who destroy statues sends the message that the trauma and suffering of people like me does not matter.

Plus, there already is a memorial to the Sand Creek Massacre at the location where it took place in southeastern Colorado. It reduces diversity to remove the only statue of Chivington that there is and to replace it with a second memorial to something for which a memorial already exists. The only appropriate replacement for a statue of Chivington is a statue of Chivington. He was not perfect, but he was a human being, and no human being deserves to have their statue brutalized and their memory erased.

bookmark_borderAttack of the anti-Italian bigots

Posted on by Marissa

The town of Wellesley, Massachusetts recently made the disgraceful and unjust decision to replace Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples’ Day. Even more disgraceful than the decision itself are the comments made on social media by Kisha James, an anti-diversity activist who advocated for the holiday change, and her mindless sycophants.

Here I will rebut the statements made by James and her sycophants one by one. Warning: so many disgusting and reprehensible statements were made that this blog post is going to be pretty long.

First of all, James and her allies treat the debate about whether or not Columbus should be honored as a joke. Their primary way of addressing an issue is to ridicule those who think differently than they do. Instead of expressing their views in a respectful manner, they personally attack and ridicule their opponents. I don’t understand what her comment about saying something “with your whole chest” even means, but it is clearly an attempt to ridicule her opponent’s statement. This is what bullies do. Also, “lmao”? I am not sure what James finds humorous about this situation. A beautiful, courageous, and brilliant man is being brutally obliterated from the world. As someone on the autism spectrum who loves history, the destruction of historical statues, place names, and holidays that has taken place over the past year has been nothing short of heartbreaking. Because history is my passion, history-related things such as Christopher Columbus statues and Confederate statues make my life worth living. James and those who think like her have deliberately destroyed the things that make my life worth living. Therefore, most days I am filled with rage, grief, and despair, unsure if it even makes sense to go on living. Maybe I’m just a debbie downer with no sense of humor, but I don’t find this particularly funny.

Continue reading “Attack of the anti-Italian bigots”

bookmark_borderBiased article about statue genocide in Richmond

Posted on by Marissa

This article is old but still biased and inaccurate enough to merit blogging about. The article in the Richmond Free Press, from last June, describes the brutal and heartless destruction of a statue of Christopher Columbus and a statue of Williams Carter Wickham as follows:

Decrying police brutality and white supremacy, Richmond protesters have taken an active approach to removing symbols of oppression by pulling statues of Christopher Columbus and Confederate Gen. Williams Carter Wickham from their pedestals in public parks.

The Columbus statue in Byrd Park was brought down with ropes, briefly set on fire and dragged into Fountain Lake on Tuesday evening following a protest and march down Arthur Ashe Boulevard led by members of Richmond’s indigenous community.

During a a peaceful protest in Byrd Park, demonstrators reaffirmed a commitment to inclusivity and solidarity with all marginalized and oppressed peoples.

“We no longer leave behind people in this movement,” said Joseph Rogers, a member of the Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality.

Taking an active approach? That’s an interesting way of describing the brutal and vicious destruction of beautiful works of art that are not yours to destroy.

Additionally, the statues destroyed were not symbols of oppression; they were symbols of freedom, liberty, diversity, independent thinking, and fighting back against authority, all of which are the opposite of oppression.

Furthermore, the author describes the actions in question as a “peaceful protest,” despite the fact that in the previous sentence, the author wrote that the statue of Columbus was brought down with ropes, set on fire, and thrown into a lake. (Just typing those words makes me feel like my heart is being ripped out of my chest.) These actions are anything but peaceful.

Plus, the claim that demonstrators “reaffirmed a commitment to inclusivity and solidarity with all marginalized and oppressed peoples” is blatantly false. Destroying statues is inherently non-inclusive, particularly when those statues represent unpopular minorities, which the Columbus and Wickham ones did. And destroying statues that represent marginalized and oppressed people, as these statues did, is an attack on marginalized and oppressed people, which is the opposite of expressing solidarity with them. So the demonstrators actually did precisely the opposite of what the article characterizes them as doing. The quote by one of the protesters that “we no longer leave behind people in this movement,” is preposterous. This movement, by destroying statues that represent cultures and viewpoints other than their own, is actively attacking and trampling on people who do not think the way they do. That is inherently leaving people out and leaving people behind. The name of the organization is also preposterous: by destroying statues of unpopular minorities, the organization’s members are actively advocating against freedom, justice, and equality.

Later in the article, the author inaccurately describes the events in Charlottesville in 2017 as a “deadly white supremacist rally.” The rally was actually to express opposition to the removal of a Robert E. Lee statue, which has nothing to do with white supremacy. Additionally, the rally was not deadly; it was the counter-protest by intolerant bullies that caused violence.

The article also describes Edward Colston, whose statue was viciously destroyed in a similar incident to Columbus, as a “17th century slave trader.” This is an inaccurate characterization. Colston was a merchant. He bought and sold a variety of goods participated in many different industries, of which the slave trade was only one.

Finally, even the article’s headline – “Columbus and Wickham statues come down” is biased. The brutal, vicious, disgusting, and intolerant destruction of statues should never be treated as something even that is remotely acceptable. This headline completely fails to capture the moral wrongness of the actions described within it. Any article needs to characterize the deliberate destruction of statues as the atrocity that it is.