• 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!

Should the KKK Confederate mural on Stone Mountain, Georgia be destroyed?

Should the KKK Confederate mural on Stone Mountain, Georgia be destroyed?

  • Yes, it is government property. Destroy it.

    Votes: 25 30.5%
  • No, but close the park permanently.

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • No, it is history. Plaques could tell the true history

    Votes: 43 52.4%
  • Other

    Votes: 13 15.9%

  • Total voters
    82
The Klan didn't exist during the Civil War. These generals and others had nothing to do with the Klan, even if many held similar beliefs. The generals were amazing in battle, on both sides.

But to get to the point, annihilating these statues would serve nothing more but to, in a way, destroy the history associated with them. Keep them around.
 
The page-long gaslighting is hysterical.


"The Confederates were actually the good guys!"

Save that for a compound.

Few great americans have had their renderings prominently displayed in the oval office by admiring US presidents.
Eisenhower generally considered our best president after WWII by historians demonstrated his admiration of
Robert E Lee in that very manner.

Eisenhower defense of Lee:
Dwight D. Eisenhower in Defense of Robert E. Lee – Civil War Profiles

General Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation.
He believed unswervingly in the Constitutional validity of his cause which until 1865 was still an arguable
question in America; he was a poised and inspiring leader, true to the high trust reposed in him by millions
of his fellow citizens; he was thoughtful yet demanding of his officers and men, forbearing with captured
enemies but ingenious, unrelenting and personally courageous in battle, and never disheartened by a reverse or obstacle.
Through all his many trials, he remained selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his faith in God. Taken altogether,
he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history.


From deep conviction, I simply say this: a nation of men of Lee’s calibre would be unconquerable in spirit and
soul. Indeed, to the degree that present-day American youth will strive to emulate his rare qualities, including
his devotion to this land as revealed in his painstaking efforts to help heal the Nation’s wounds once the bitter
struggle was over, we, in our own time of danger in a divided world, will be strengthened and our love of freedom sustained.'

I'll side anyday with the thoughts of the Supreme Allied Commander of World War II, five-star general, and President of the United States verse the dopey wannabe destroyers of history.
 
Last edited:
The Klan didn't exist during the Civil War. These generals and others had nothing to do with the Klan, even if many held similar beliefs. The generals were amazing in battle, on both sides.

But to get to the point, annihilating these statues would serve nothing more but to, in a way, destroy the history associated with them. Keep them around.
.'

I'll side anyday with the thoughts of the Supreme Allied Commander of World War II, five-star general, and President of the United States
verse the dopey wannabe destroyers of history.


This was created during 1965, not the Civil War, so they have absolutely nothing to do with history. Refusing to honor traitors to America is not erasing history. They were still traitors and the war still happened regardless of what happens to this carved rock.

If you two jokers want to honor traitors to the US, I assume because you hate America, do it on your own property with your own money.
 
Few great americans have had their renderings prominently displayed in the oval office by admiring US presidents.
Eisenhower generally considered our best president after WWII by historians demonstrated his admiration of
Robert E Lee in that very manner.

Eisenhower defense of Lee:
Dwight D. Eisenhower in Defense of Robert E. Lee – Civil War Profiles

General Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation.
He believed unswervingly in the Constitutional validity of his cause which until 1865 was still an arguable
question in America; he was a poised and inspiring leader, true to the high trust reposed in him by millions
of his fellow citizens; he was thoughtful yet demanding of his officers and men, forbearing with captured
enemies but ingenious, unrelenting and personally courageous in battle, and never disheartened by a reverse or obstacle.
Through all his many trials, he remained selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his faith in God. Taken altogether,
he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history.


From deep conviction, I simply say this: a nation of men of Lee’s calibre would be unconquerable in spirit and
soul. Indeed, to the degree that present-day American youth will strive to emulate his rare qualities, including
his devotion to this land as revealed in his painstaking efforts to help heal the Nation’s wounds once the bitter
struggle was over, we, in our own time of danger in a divided world, will be strengthened and our love of freedom sustained.'

I'll side anyday with the thoughts of the Supreme Allied Commander of World War II, five-star general, and President of the United States verse the dopey wannabe destroyers of history.

I didn't read that but I wanna say: not surprised.
 
If you don't know history, you're doomed to infinitely repeat it. Orwell made a point of including statues on the list of things that had been altered or destroyed.

A pretty bold claim, saying that I hate America. It's the best nation on earth, the last and only bastion of freedom in the world. Passive censorship through annihilating statues threatens that. At the most I would agree too would be moving it to a museum.

Also, how are you an American refugee in Europe? America isn't embroiled in any conflict.
 
If you don't know history, you're doomed to infinitely repeat it.

What kind of a ****ing moron learns about the existence of The Civil War from monuments? Must be some homeschooling crap.

Don't worry. It'll still be in books for those that read.
 
Last edited:
A kid might ask who Stonewall Jackson or Jefferson Davis is. It's also a reminder to the general populace of the fight against the South to preserve the union and abolish slavery in the US.

What kind of a ****ing moron learns about the Civil War from monuments? Must be some homeschooling crap.

Actually I'm self taught, but nice try with the insult. Now piss off please.
 
Removing a mural or a statue made in 1965 is not destroying history, nor does this have any historical significance. Not every statue or monument is worth preserving. Comparing this to the Taliban shows how desperate and uneducated you are.
So now you are only for removing murals and monuments erected in 1965 or later? As that is not what you wrote, dodging to change goal posts isn't very sporting of you.

But if that is your very limited point, please explain why something created in 1965 and later is the "right date" to remove just confederate murals and statues? Do you believe that other statues and murals of other bad acting people, personalities, or events are only in the south?

And if that is not your very limited point, then why did you offer this as your only transparently lame defense of removing any statue that you think no longer reflects your own approved values?

Finally, comparing your original point to the Taliban does not show "how desperate and uneducated" I am, but it does show that you are unable to comprehend the comparison. Simply stated: the Taliban, Isis (etc) wish to destroy statues that reflect other ideologies, beliefs, peoples, and cultures they consider evil; so do you. Got it?

You may not be comparable to the degree of their fanatical application, but in kind you are two peas in a pod.

If the civil war was all Democrats and not conservatives, you should have no problem with us no longer glorifying these traitorous democrats.
Please avoid knee-jerk statements of emotional protection; it not only is irrelevant to your inability to provide a principled argument, but it also exposes you to added ridicule. The South was "all Democrats" whose political beliefs (from aristocratic plantation owners to Jacksonian populist democrats) were unified on only two issues in this order; southern political independence and preservation of slavery.

As the contemporary political divide does not exist on these two issues, imbuing the past with current meanings is nonsensical.
 
Last edited:
A kid might ask who Stonewall Jackson or Jefferson Davis is. It's also a reminder to the general populace of the fight against the South to preserve the union and abolish slavery in the US.



Actually I'm self taught, but nice try with the insult. Now piss off please.

It's stupid beyond belief to pretend monuments represent our historical knowledge. Those monuments were built to intimidate minorities, pretend scum was righteous and placate losers. They're not our history books. Pretending they are is dismally stupid or grotesquely bigoted.

You're rewriting history in pretending the monuments have value. Critical historical value? Don't make me laugh. That's idiotic.
 
Last edited:
Yes, it absolutely is about the fact that treasonous slavers and domestic terrorists should not be honored.

It is about a century of brutal persecution and abuse being handwaved away becaus because conservatives have a love affair with the time period when minorities and women “knew their place”.

The day BLM actually starts a massive uprising then your silly fantasy would be equivalent to what the Confederacy did. Until then, your fantasy is nothing more than a bad joke....as usual.

Again, the people in the 1860s knew slavery was a great evil! You can’t use “moral relativism” arguments when the society of the time period knew and rejected the ideology!

Typical leftwing hatred of the USA as you explain slavery was just fine and A-OK everywhere in the world throughout all of history EXCEPT the USA - claiming everyone in the world accepted slavery everywhere EXCEPT in the USA - and in that twisted false opinion you declare morality is nothing more than a popularity contest, nothing else.

It also is an absurd claim since virtually all Confederate troops were volunteers plus their elected officials voted for sedition - meaning IN FACT the majority in the Confederacy did support slavery.

I do understand why you want the history of the Democratic Party erased to pretend it was not the party of slavery, just like it remains the party of racial and ethnic segregation.
 
It's stupid beyond belief to pretend monuments represent our historical knowledge. Those monuments were built to intimidate minorities and pretend scum was righteous. They're not our history books. Pretending they are is dismally stupid or grotesquely bigoted.

Mount Rushmore is a book? The Jefferson memorial is a book? Pretending they are books is dismally stupid or grotesquely bigoted.
 
It's stupid beyond belief to pretend monuments represent our historical knowledge. Those monuments were built to intimidate minorities and pretend scum was righteous. They're not our history books. Pretending they are is dismally stupid or grotesquely bigoted.

Even if they were built to intimidate former slaves and Republicans, they don't anymore, and any black person or republican who's still terrified of them is an idiotic leftist trigtard.

They are history. They are a look back into the past. Destroying them, you destroy a telescope into the Antebellum Era, Civil War, and Reconstruction. But hey, you do you. You're entitled to think the things you do. Even if they are, as you so eloquently put it
dismally stupid
 
Even if they were built to intimidate former slaves and Republicans, they don't anymore, and any black person or republican who's still terrified of them is an idiotic leftist trigtard.

They are history. They are a look back into the past. Destroying them, you destroy a telescope into the Antebellum Era, Civil War, and Reconstruction. But hey, you do you. You're entitled to think the things you do. Even if they are, as you so eloquently put it

They are bull****. They glorify scum. They were created to marginalize minority American citizens and placate inbred scum.

They are of no historical value beyond the history of malevolent propaganda.

Read a book instead. And get that garbage off my land.
 
They are bull****. They glorify scum.
To you. But now they're history. I suppose the Aushwitz Camp should be destroyed as well? It's a massive monument to Hitler and the Nazis after all.

And get that garbage off my land.

I don't believe it's on your lawn, sir.
 
I think that the people in the city should hold a measure on this, let the people decide.
 
To you. But now they're history. I suppose the Aushwitz Camp should be destroyed as well? It's a massive monument to Hitler and the Nazis after all.

If there's an appropriate Godwin, it's Confederates. The last stand of Western slavers, and the North scraping the scum out of our barrel.
 
The USA totally failed/lost in the objective of the Vietnam war - a war the USA injected itself into. Millions of civilians died - all for a failed intervention.

So, how many months or years at the most before the leftwing is demanding the Vietnam veteran's memorial wall be demolished too? After all, it honors soldiers of a lost war in which millions of innocent people died.
 
If there's an appropriate Godwin, it's Confederates. The last stand of Western slavers, and the North scrapping the scum out of our barrel.

If Godwin is a reference to something, i don't get it.

And you are aware every nation on the planet has practiced slavery in some form, right? Rome did it, Britain did it, America did it, Arabia and the rest of the middle east still do it. Germany used 'nonaryans' for slave labor.

I love how you danced around my question. So I'll restate it. Do you think Aushwitz and other death camps should be destroyed given they're now monuments to the holocaust?
 
I think that the people in the city should hold a measure on this, let the people decide.

No, the deal for the land given to the government included completing the mural. The government should give it to the Daughters of the Confederacy if it isn't going to keep the deal for the land. This land-grabbing stunt the government pulls of making promises if given land - and then absolutely breaking the deal - needs to end.
 
They are bull****. They glorify scum. They were created to marginalize minority American citizens and placate inbred scum.

They are of no historical value beyond the history of malevolent propaganda.

Read a book instead. And get that garbage off my land.

It's not your land.
 
To you. But now they're history. I suppose the Aushwitz Camp should be destroyed as well? It's a massive monument to Hitler and the Nazis after all.

I guess you don't know this...

The monuments were built long after the Civil War to intimidate black people. They weren't built following the war. If it's history you're looking for, it's the history of propaganda you'll find.
 
This was created during 1965, not the Civil War, so they have absolutely nothing to do with history. Refusing to honor traitors to America is not erasing history. They were still traitors and the war still happened regardless of what happens to this carved rock.

If you two jokers want to honor traitors to the US, I assume because you hate America, do it on your own property with your own money.

So sayth the "RabidAlpaca" so loved America that he fled to live in Europe.

LOL...
 
And you are aware every nation on the planet has practiced slavery in some form, right?

Slavery was banned in Europe, on the seas, in new territories and in the North. You want historical context? Try something meaningful: The last stand of Western slavers. It was banned all around, but they were willing to die and murder Americans to enslave others. Just like ISIS and counter to everything it means to be American.
 
Back
Top Bottom