• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What happened to monuments to fallen regimes around the world

Rogue Valley

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
94,171
Reaction score
82,449
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
What happened to monuments to fallen regimes around the world

By Jennifer Hansler and Deena Zaru
Sun August 20, 2017

AGcgk2HFYvmHjhr0CmXA1PykMDW9fVC2F9O4KanB6cHwmsOo5Iji10EmyoppA90W_hkgo2reLQ

Bust of Adolf Hitler removed from the ruins of the Reich Chancellery, Berlin. July 1945

While the United States grapples with how to deal with roughly 1,500 symbols of the Confederacy in the wake of the violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, other nations have taken more decisive action on the monuments of defeated governments. President Donald Trump this week made the argument that the removal of Confederate monuments could lead down a slippery slope to the taking down of monuments to the Founding Fathers; he also implied the removal of Confederate monuments was tantamount to changing history. However, many of those in favor of their dismantling argue that they represent a painful legacy of slavery and racism that should not be glorified. Monuments are traditionally erected while a particular regime is in power, but in the United States, Confederate monuments were erected only after the fall of the Confederacy with the spread of a sanitized, revisionist narrative of a noble South that should have won but for the overwhelming military power of the North, said Tyler Stovall, a professor of history at the University of California, Santa Cruz. And for some, that belief still lingers today, he said.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, the first spike in Confederate symbols is around the turn of the 20th century and the second spike is in the mid-1950s and 1960s during the height of the Civil Rights movement. "If you look at it from a world perspective, is that you'll have a regime that is overthrown, and one of the reactions to the overthrow is the destruction of symbols that represent it," Stovall said, citing the toppling of the Soviet Union and, more recently, the tearing down of the statue of Saddam Hussein in Iraq in 2003 and the destruction of images of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt in 2011 at the height of the Arab Spring. Here's a look at how other countries have handled their monuments to fallen governments.....

article continued @ link above
Click to expand...

Interesting. I know that 25+ years after independence, many former Soviet Republics (SSRs) and Warsaw Pact nations are still in the process of removing USSR naming conventions, memorials, and artifacts.
 
Rogue Valley said:
What happened to monuments to fallen regimes around the world



Interesting. I know that 25+ years after independence, many former Soviet Republics (SSRs) and Warsaw Pact nations are still in the process of removing USSR naming conventions, memorials, and artifacts.
Click to expand...

Hmm, what's that old saying mom's used to use caution kids with?

Oh yeah! Just because someone else jumps off a roof does that mean YOU have to? :doh

Don't whitewash history. Embrace it and remember it.

It would be better to leave the monuments, but change the descriptions to something more reflective of truth.

For example, in regards to confederate statues...something like "He fought for Southern Independence, and State's Rights. But this was in support of Slavery, and Justice Triumphed over this (insert preferred descriptor here) Institution."
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
Don't whitewash history. Embrace it and remember it.
Click to expand...
History need not tower above us to be remembered.

The sordid History of secession, brutal warfare, and cruel enslavement should be neither elevated nor propped up on a pedestal.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Hmm, what's that old saying mom's used to use caution kids with?
Oh yeah! Just because someone else jumps off a roof does that mean YOU have to? :doh
Don't whitewash history. Embrace it and remember it.
It would be better to leave the monuments, but change the descriptions to something more reflective of truth.
For example, in regards to confederate statues...something like "He fought for Southern Independence, and State's Rights. But this was in support of Slavery, and Justice Triumphed over this (insert preferred descriptor here) Institution."
Click to expand...

So in your opinion, when Germany removed all the Hitler statues they were "whitewashing history" and should embrace it, leaving the Hitler statues up in their country until the end of time?

That's complete bull****. There's nothing sacred about making a statue and putting it somewhere. There's no reason that foreign traitors who fought against the humanity of black people should be idolized until the end of time on public land. If they want to move the statues to private land they can come by and jerk off as much as they want, or whatever it is they do with these statues. Losers shouldn't get participation trophies and refusing to put gigantic pieces of **** on a pedestal is not whitewashing history.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
So in your opinion, when Germany removed all the Hitler statues they were "whitewashing history" and should embrace it, leaving the Hitler statues up in their country until the end of time?

That's complete bull****. There's nothing sacred about making a statue and putting it somewhere. There's no reason that foreign traitors who fought against the humanity of black people should be idolized until the end of time on public land. If they want to move the statues to private land they can come by and jerk off as much as they want, or whatever it is they do with these statues. Losers shouldn't get participation trophies.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. IMO they should have refocused the monuments to show the evil, rather than try to erase it entirely as if it never happened.

But that's just my opinion as an American. What they do in their nation is their business. :shrug:
 
Captain Adverse said:
Pretty much. IMO they should have refocused the monuments to show the evil, rather than try to erase it entirely as if it never happened.
But that's just my opinion as an American. What they do in their nation is their business. :shrug:
Click to expand...

So anytime a statue goes up on public land it really must stay there until the last star in the universe dies out? Can you give a compelling reason why these traitors absolutely must be permanently displayed on public land? Do you think the government should be representative of all of their constituents, or just the whites?
 
Captain Adverse said:
Hmm, what's that old saying mom's used to use caution kids with?

Oh yeah! Just because someone else jumps off a roof does that mean YOU have to? :doh

Don't whitewash history. Embrace it and remember it.

It would be better to leave the monuments, but change the descriptions to something more reflective of truth.

For example, in regards to confederate statues...something like "He fought for Southern Independence, and State's Rights. But this was in support of Slavery, and Justice Triumphed over this (insert preferred descriptor here) Institution."
Click to expand...

So Germany should embrace Hitler?
 
Tigerace117 said:
So Germany should embrace Hitler?
Click to expand...
I saw the odd statue of the Kaiser still in place, last time I was there.

Now I wouldn't equate him with Hitler at all, just that he did Germany not much good (his brainless politicos notwithstanding).

The French have Napoleon standing all over the place but that's maybe due to their being the only nation that can explain the difference between him and Hitler.:mrgreen:

Valle de los Caidos
still exists in Spain and despite ongoing controversies doesn't look to disappear all that soon.

Guess it's a question of case-by-case with truly objective parameters being virtually impossible.
 
joG said:
There are people everywhere that have an ax to grind.
Click to expand...


Yup. Like an axe to grind against those that took up arms against their own country, lost, than insist on glorifying themselves. Who'da thunk it?
 
bluesmoke said:
Yup. Like an axe to grind against those that took up arms against their own country, lost, than insist on glorifying themselves. Who'da thunk it?
Click to expand...

It is a good question how deeply a government can legitimately interfere with the rights of the citizens or groups thereof before violent defense is permissable.
 
These acts are simple Cultural Marxism. Busts and statues are not just for idol worship. They are supposed to encourage those who see them to inquire about the person and their deeds. Taking down statues of R.E. Lee for example, because he led the side which was 'pro slavery', is as absurd as removing a statue of Lincoln because he violated the First Amendment right of journalists by jailing them. This is a slippery slope as no man is without sin and the simple public are playing right into the Cultural Marxists playbook...kill your idols.
 
Cecil Rhoades no longer a desirable figure in S Africa

Black students celebrated the fall of a statue of British colonialist Cecil Rhodes at the University of
Cape Town Thursday, as some white groups protested what they see as threats to their heritage.

The university, which is regularly ranked as the best on the continent, was built on land donated by Rhodes,
university council, which voted to remove Rhodes after accepting that his statue
made black university students uncomfortable on campus.
 
slick said:
Cecil Rhoades no longer a desirable figure in S Africa

Black students celebrated the fall of a statue of British colonialist Cecil Rhodes at the University of
Cape Town Thursday, as some white groups protested what they see as threats to their heritage.

The university, which is regularly ranked as the best on the continent, was built on land donated by Rhodes,
university council, which voted to remove Rhodes after accepting that his statue
made black university students uncomfortable on campus.
Click to expand...
I like the idea of old Cecil having donated something that he stole in the first place.

Wonder whether he felt all Robin Hoodey at the time.:lol:
 
Chagos said:
I saw the odd statue of the Kaiser still in place, last time I was there.

Now I wouldn't equate him with Hitler at all, just that he did Germany not much good (his brainless politicos notwithstanding).

The French have Napoleon standing all over the place but that's maybe due to their being the only nation that can explain the difference between him and Hitler.:mrgreen:

Valle de los Caidos
still exists in Spain and despite ongoing controversies doesn't look to disappear all that soon.

Guess it's a question of case-by-case with truly objective parameters being virtually impossible.
Click to expand...

Thanks for bringing up the Valle de Los Caidos... I visited it some years ago and came away slightly terrified. I know it is intended to memorialize those who fought for Franco and died, but it was one of the scariest monuments I have seen. Great symbol of fascism: powerful, cold, unforgiving. You can almost hear the old Nazi era comment, "When I hear the word culture, I reach for my gun."

At that time Spaniards did not mention Franco by name, they might say "aquel" ("that one"), and there was a strange gesture they would make with their right hand to indicate the Generalissimo.
 
Nickyjo said:
Thanks for bringing up the Valle de Los Caidos... I visited it some years ago and came away slightly terrified. I know it is intended to memorialize those who fought for Franco and died, but it was one of the scariest monuments I have seen. Great symbol of fascism: powerful, cold, unforgiving. You can almost hear the old Nazi era comment, "When I hear the word culture, I reach for my gun."

At that time Spaniards did not mention Franco by name, they might say "aquel" ("that one"), and there was a strange gesture they would make with their right hand to indicate the Generalissimo.
Click to expand...
Yeah, whole thing is an absolute monstrosity but I'd personally opt against it being razed.

On account of what it actually DOES show (and reminds of) and that being the direct opposite of what Franco had in mind.

Some of the pampered juvenile "rebels" here of today (I live in Spain) should be sent there by force, just to educate them on what could still be.
 
Nickyjo said:
Thanks for bringing up the Valle de Los Caidos... I visited it some years ago and came away slightly terrified. I know it is intended to memorialize those who fought for Franco and died, but it was one of the scariest monuments I have seen. Great symbol of fascism: powerful, cold, unforgiving. You can almost hear the old Nazi era comment, "When I hear the word culture, I reach for my gun."

At that time Spaniards did not mention Franco by name, they might say "aquel" ("that one"), and there was a strange gesture they would make with their right hand to indicate the Generalissimo.
Click to expand...

I've never been to El Valle de los Caídos, and I've no intention of going, but there are many who are trying to reorientate the perception of it from a monument to Franco to a monument to the thousands of slave labourers who worked on building it. I think that's a losing battle, given its design and architecture.

What I'd like to see is it simply being left to decay, absolutely no public funds dedicated to its maintenance and allowed to crumble back into the red dust of Castile. As each part becomes decayed to the point of being unsafe, simply rope it off and let the decay progress. If the Catholic church is so enamoured of it, let them pick up the tab for its maintenance. That was the approach of Zapatero's PSOE government of 2004-2011. Of course, as soon as Franco's successors took control of government again they forgot all about national debt and austerity and ploughed vast amounts of public money into restoration.
 
Andalublue said:
I've never been to El Valle de los Caídos, and I've no intention of going, but there are many who are trying to reorientate the perception of it from a monument to Franco to a monument to the thousands of slave labourers who worked on building it. I think that's a losing battle, given its design and architecture.

What I'd like to see is it simply being left to decay, absolutely no public funds dedicated to its maintenance and allowed to crumble back into the red dust of Castile. As each part becomes decayed to the point of being unsafe, simply rope it off and let the decay progress.
Click to expand...
It'll all be happening, just long after you and I and any remaining Francoists are gone. In the meantime people will make of it whatever they want to. I didn't visit on account of having travelled there for expressly that purpose, I just happened to be passing for other reasons. Nevertheless I had the impression that other visitors at that time were perhaps awed, but not for the reasons that the designers had in mind. If there were any die-hard Falangists present at the time, they sure kept themselves under wraps.
If the Catholic church is so enamoured of it, let them pick up the tab for its maintenance. That was the approach of Zapatero's PSOE government of 2004-2011. Of course, as soon as Franco's successors took control of government again they forgot all about national debt and austerity and ploughed vast amounts of public money into restoration.
Click to expand...
As above, "tempus fugit - cicatrices sanantur".

Nope, that's not going foreign in an English language forum, it's Virgil, at least in the first part ;)
 
Captain Adverse said:
Pretty much. IMO they should have refocused the monuments to show the evil, rather than try to erase it entirely as if it never happened.

But that's just my opinion as an American. What they do in their nation is their business. :shrug:
Click to expand...

At one end of Whitehall is a statue of Oliver Cromwell, outside Westminster Hall where Charles I was tried before being beheaded. At the other end is a statue of Charles I. A fine illustration of the English talent for compromise. From which the erstwhile colonials might do well to learn.
 
Sweden said:
At one end of Whitehall is a statue of Oliver Cromwell, outside Westminster Hall where Charles I was tried before being beheaded. At the other end is a statue of Charles I. A fine illustration of the English talent for compromise. From which the erstwhile colonials might do well to learn.
Click to expand...
On the pretext that history cannot be erased by razing any man made reminders of it, I fully agree.

That quite apart from the wish to erase history at all (as often seems to exist) being rather a silly notion.
 
Slave laborers built it?
 
Nickyjo said:
Slave laborers built it?
Click to expand...
Mostly. But not exclusively.

Of course slave labor was forbidden even then as was forced labor of any other kind. But the law provided for convicts (many of them political and many simple POWs from the Civil War) to be offered the deal of "two days of conviction for one day of work". A redemption scheme of sorts.
 
Chagos said:
Mostly. But not exclusively.

Of course slave labor was forbidden even then as was forced labor of any other kind. But the law provided for convicts (many of them political and many simple POWs from the Civil War) to be offered the deal of "two days of conviction for one day of work". A redemption scheme of sorts.
Click to expand...

Probably a more just system than in many US states.
 
joG said:
It is a good question how deeply a government can legitimately interfere with the rights of the citizens or groups thereof before violent defense is permissable.
Click to expand...

Their right to human chattel slavery?
 
ataraxia said:
Their right to human chattel slavery?
Click to expand...

Yep. A slave rebellion would be considered quite legitimate by our society's conventions. Would a rebellion against high taxation be legitimate, if there were no other remedy? Or for reasons of national identity?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom