Ever since the Charlottesville attack, discussions of removing statues is now a hot topic. It all started with the removal of confederate statues, but now they're doing this with our presidents in the past. They even support taking down Mount Rushmore. The whole reason was to censor out all traces of racism and slavery.
Do you support this process, or are you against the censorship of our history?
My opinion:
I did start supporting the removal of Confederate icons from public view since I wanted the white nationalists to be punished, but when they're doing this to the presidents (George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt), this is when I can't follow anymore. Yes, Washigton and Jefferson owned slaves, but they are two of the first three presidents. The fact that they put their relations to slavery in front of everything else and use that excuse to remove them from public view is ridiculous. First, they didn't want Donald Trump to be included in the legacy of presidents. Now they want to wipe out the legacy altogether, at least the more famous members. If you want to remove all traces of slavery from the world, you might want to get rid of some famous historical sites that are popular. Plus, slavery played a very large role in our history, and it's not all racial either. Heck, slavery in the United States wasn't even supported for racial reasons. The South supported it because of agricultural reasons while the North opposed it because they see slaves as people rather than property. Even so, I am against slavery and would not defend it, but I wouldn't let ownership of slavery taint Washington's and Jefferson's legacy forever.
They also got to realize that if they want to stop honoring our founding fathers because of their relations to slavery, then they shouldn't honor the presidents they like more (i.e. Barack Obama). I felt that Obama did worse than everyone in the past, but would I be opposed to seeing people build a monument of Obama? My answer is no. Even if Obama was my least favorite president as I felt America has gotten worse under him, I believe statues of him is history. Censorship of history is cowardice, and each step of removing historical landmarks is another step towards a government like seen in the book 1984. Is this what they want? They can't change the past. Once something is done, it's stuck in the past forever, as some of these actions (even natural ones) may lead to an unchangeable future regardless of consequences, but the other actions wouldn't. The purpose of history is to tell people not to repeat the wrongs that has happened, and by censoring it, you're allowing it to be repeated.
Do you support this process, or are you against the censorship of our history?
My opinion:
I did start supporting the removal of Confederate icons from public view since I wanted the white nationalists to be punished, but when they're doing this to the presidents (George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt), this is when I can't follow anymore. Yes, Washigton and Jefferson owned slaves, but they are two of the first three presidents. The fact that they put their relations to slavery in front of everything else and use that excuse to remove them from public view is ridiculous. First, they didn't want Donald Trump to be included in the legacy of presidents. Now they want to wipe out the legacy altogether, at least the more famous members. If you want to remove all traces of slavery from the world, you might want to get rid of some famous historical sites that are popular. Plus, slavery played a very large role in our history, and it's not all racial either. Heck, slavery in the United States wasn't even supported for racial reasons. The South supported it because of agricultural reasons while the North opposed it because they see slaves as people rather than property. Even so, I am against slavery and would not defend it, but I wouldn't let ownership of slavery taint Washington's and Jefferson's legacy forever.
They also got to realize that if they want to stop honoring our founding fathers because of their relations to slavery, then they shouldn't honor the presidents they like more (i.e. Barack Obama). I felt that Obama did worse than everyone in the past, but would I be opposed to seeing people build a monument of Obama? My answer is no. Even if Obama was my least favorite president as I felt America has gotten worse under him, I believe statues of him is history. Censorship of history is cowardice, and each step of removing historical landmarks is another step towards a government like seen in the book 1984. Is this what they want? They can't change the past. Once something is done, it's stuck in the past forever, as some of these actions (even natural ones) may lead to an unchangeable future regardless of consequences, but the other actions wouldn't. The purpose of history is to tell people not to repeat the wrongs that has happened, and by censoring it, you're allowing it to be repeated.