PC Gone Too Far

We should preserve the bad AS BAD, not on an equal footing with the good. How many times do I have to repeat it? Objectivity is a bad idea when it comes to remembering history. Objectivity will have you getting your calculator out to decide whether or not to buy a slave to wash your driverless car. All we have to remember about slavery is that it's a bad thing because we wouldn't want it to happen to us. The only feelings relevant to what WE commemorate are OUR feelings.

One more time: the only use for objectivity in history is to determine what happened. We have no disagreement about the events of slavery, so we're done with objectivity. Objectivity has no place in deciding what to commemorate or what to repeat.

As I have said more than once, it doesn't matter what they thought they were fighting for. The slave system that they were fighting to preserve was a genocidal system, whether they understood it or not, whether you understand it or not. Evildoers typically don't think they're doing evil.

I have said repeatedly that once the events of history have been established there is no place for objectivity. Why are you surprised every time I say it? No. I'm in favour of remembering history as it was, remembering evil as evil, not just preserving the evildoers' viewpoint. By your logic, putting the ravings of a serial killer away in the police evidence room is "removing history".

And the USA thought it was a crime to help fugitive slaves. When it comes to right and wrong, they're a bit slow on the uptake.

It's up to the people who have charge of those jurisdictions to make the decision. You're welcome to whine about it.

"We" - the people who are in charge of the monument - are apparently deciding to preserve it somewhere else. You are complaining that any change is an affront to history. I suppose you don't want the pigeon droppings removed from it either because they're also a part of its history. I am prepared to fight the Civil War all over again, though not necessarily by killing people. If you're not prepared to fight again and again for what's right, then you're doing exactly what Santayana feared.

What on earth are you talking about? Where have I EVER advocated force or vengeance? YOU are the one who advocates forcing monuments on people who don't want them because you're afraid of "losing history".

Percy has admitted that the definition of genocide is "controversial" - i.e. not as simplistic as you insist. We'll wait for you to catch up.

The whole point of the thread seems to be that they "shouldn't".

On the contrary, it's letting people get away with evil that brings more conflict. Are you suggesting that we should have just let the fascists run wild? Are you suggesting that we should think of fascism as something that "just happened", something that "could have happened to anybody"? I'm suggesting that we stomped the fascists because they were doing evil and we should never forget that what they did was evil. We should never set them up on a pedestal as equal to every other soldier. If we don't learn from history, the eventual result is that people like you "objectively" decide to bring back slavery. If we can prevent that from happening by branding slavers as evil, then we can avoid having to kill slavers in the future.

In Message 525 you said:

quote:

---

I haven't read any Canadian articles about this....

---

I have.You went on to say:

quote:

---

But entering "Canada genocide" into Google provides little support for you. Most of the links on the first page use the term "cultural genocide" or attempt to distinguish between that and actual genocide. And some links point to discussions about whether it's appropriate to refer to what happened as genocide. The situation in Canada seems much more equivocal than you characterized.

---

"Little support", not none. "Most of the links", not all. "Attempt to distinguish", not distinguish. "Some links", not all.I'm gonna stick with controversial, not absolutely carved in stone as you claim.We need to broaden our understanding, not narrow it.

What I'm really saying is what I'm really saying, not what you make up. And I'm saying that slavery is as goddamn close to universally evil as anything you can think of. There are no "sound decisions" that support slavery. Since we're drawing a parallel between slavery and Nazi Germany in this thread, why do you support monuments to the Confederacy but (presumably) not to the SS? Aren't you afraid we're "losing history" when we take down the swastikas from every building in Germany? I'll continue to attack objectivity in this context until you can show us the objective criteria that would justify re-instating slavery. All of life is a battle between good and evil.

Uh, that's what I'm saying. That's why objectivity is not applicable.

We're coming to that understanding. You can quibble all you want about whether there is a consensus yet or not. I, for one, have not heard anybody arguing against it being genocide even if some of us are still a little reluctant to admit it. So, if it's being debated, there's a controversy. Bing-fucking-go! Dictionaries don't lead; they follow.