Narrow Search

Comment Archives: Stories: Last 7 Days

Re: “Mayor: Memphis Situation Different from New Orleans on Confederate Statues

So my question is, where do we draw the line? I'm not advocating one way or another here--at least not intentionally--however when we start to judge historic figures by the changing standards of time, we begin a process we cannot stop.

Someone said for example that we don't put up monuments to losers. Really? Geronimo has a monument at his grave, and despite his best efforts, Native Americans lost. The Trail of Tears is a monument to a lost cause. No other president was as disgraced as Richard Nixon, yet he has a presidential library. So saying we don't honor "losers" isn't quite true.

Another pointed out that George Washington was a slave holder. Many of the founding fathers were. Some changed their mind and at least freed their slaves at their death, others did not. Even Lincoln, in writing the Emancipation Proclamation, only applied it to the states in rebellion. In other words, if you were unlucky enough to be a slave whose owner lived in a state that has not seceded from the union, YOU WERE STILL A SLAVE. Yet that imperfect executive order is celebrated throughout the country as the beginning of the end of slavery.

What if in the ensuing 100 years we discover aspects of MLK's life that future generations find abhorrent? Would you agree that if their standards change, that in 100 years it will be okay for them to tear down the many monuments erected to his memory, not to mention renaming all the schools, public buildings, and streets that currently bear his name? I for one couldn't fathom granting future generations that permission, yet our great-, great-grandchildren may be arguing that very issue, and we will be unable to prevent it.

The fact is we do not know how things will change in the future, and how what society views as correct may change. And if we spend our time trying to erase hate from the past, don't we risk having that hate be forgotten...and even repeated?

My personal preference. Leave the monument, but add to both its interpretation (like our National Battlefields do constantly in light of changing attitudes and increased knowledge) and include other monuments in the park that recognize the progression of history since the time it was erected. Don't cover it over, show it as the starting point for the changes to come. In that context, it will serve as a vivid reminder of how important it was to change, as well as how far we have come, and how much further we have to go. We might even include a monument that reflects this 21st century discussion, and the consideration of tearing down all Confederate Monuments, and why that was an important discussion. But simply erasing it as if it never happened--no, I don't agree with that. I don't want my descendants thinking a few hundred years from now that the Civil War never happened.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Spirit11 on 06/27/2017 at 12:49 PM

Re: “MemphisFlyer.com to require Facebook or Google account for comments

"Lack of anonymity may not lead to less racism, I mean."

Or, it might.

Posted by DaveClancy on 06/27/2017 at 12:33 PM

Re: “MemphisFlyer.com to require Facebook or Google account for comments

Sounds good in theory, but Facebook is probably one of the most uncivil places I once had the displeasure of visiting regularly. Lack of anonymity may not lead to less racism, I mean.

2 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by jersyko on 06/27/2017 at 12:15 PM

Re: “MemphisFlyer.com to require Facebook or Google account for comments

It's pretty easy to register Google accounts for pseudonyms. The motivated trolls probably aren't going anywhere.

3 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by register_account on 06/27/2017 at 11:53 AM

Re: “MemphisFlyer.com to require Facebook or Google account for comments

Logical and sensible decision IMO.

4 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by DaveClancy on 06/27/2017 at 11:52 AM

Re: “Watergate II

Brichy, you always said I reminded you of a really young Ingrid Bergman, not this guy.

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by :) on 06/26/2017 at 9:40 PM

Re: “Watergate II

R,

See "Projection" and "Gaslight". Perhaps you'll gain, after some period of self reflection, personal insight on your behavior.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Bric-a-Brac on 06/26/2017 at 6:53 PM

Re: “Confederate Group Promises 'Swarthy Convict' Cellmate for Those Removing Statues

Funkbrs, NBF certainly sold children to child molesters, so sorry, I'd have to say you are wrong, otherwise spot-on.

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Nick R on 06/26/2017 at 6:08 PM

Re: “Watergate II

so who wins this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ec8XZLAck…

USA USA

Posted by Nick R on 06/26/2017 at 6:05 PM

Re: “Policy Needs to be Set for Memphis Sand Aquifer

Memphis has access to some of the best water on the planet and they want to add poison to it before they send it to the resident's homes. Hydrofluorosilicic acid, extracted from the exhaust stacks of phosphate fertilizer plants, is extremely toxic but is added to Memphis water without regard for its safety. Memphis should be trying to keep its amazing water as PURE as possible instead of ruining it by adding unnecessary and poisonous additives.

Posted by jmiles on 06/26/2017 at 5:17 PM

Re: “Watergate II

Your commentary, however, certainly reminds me of a couple of my favorite quotes... Socrates said, When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. One more, from my grandpa, yes, my grandpa, "Son, the ones hollering the loudest are usually the ones holding the weakest position."

2 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by noulteriormotive on 06/26/2017 at 3:25 PM

Re: “Confederate Group Promises 'Swarthy Convict' Cellmate for Those Removing Statues

Depends.

Did Gump commit a massacre?

If he did, then yes.

I bet if it came out NBF was a child molester, everybody would turn their back on him. Instead he kills people who'd already surrendered in cold blood, and he gets a historically inaccurate statue.

What did Stalin say? One death is a tragedy, but many is just a statistic?

Of course, they tore those statues of Stalin down....

1 like, 3 dislikes
Posted by FUNKbrs on 06/26/2017 at 3:20 PM

Re: “Watergate II

Austin 3:16

4 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by still living in berclair on 06/26/2017 at 1:08 PM

Re: “City Receives Grant to Enhance Diversity of City Vendors, Contractors

Roger Clegg,
Just curious, you may not be old enough, but if you were around back when this was the norm benefiting white males, were you or would you have been as aghast? And can you think of some means to interrupt the past discrimination that continues in momentum for those companies once so benefited?

1 like, 2 dislikes
Posted by CL Mullins on 06/26/2017 at 12:49 PM

Re: “City Receives Grant to Enhance Diversity of City Vendors, Contractors

How would you like it if you owned a company and lost out on a bid because you were the wrong color or the wrong sex? Why do race, ethnicity, and sex need to be considered at all in deciding who gets awarded a contract? It's good to make sure contracting programs are open to all, that bidding opportunities are widely publicized beforehand, and that no one gets discriminated against because of skin color, national origin, or sex. But that means no preferences because of skin color, etc. either--whether it's labeled a "set-aside," a "quota," or a "goal," since they all end up amounting to the same thing. Such discrimination is unfair and divisive; it breeds corruption and otherwise costs the taxpayers and businesses money to award a contract to someone other than the lowest bidder; and it's almost always illegalindeed, unconstitutionalto boot (see 42 U.S.C. section 1981 and this model brief: http://www.pacificlegal.org/document.doc?id=454 ). Those who insist on engaging in such discrimination deserve to be sued, and they will lose.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Roger Clegg on 06/26/2017 at 12:09 PM

Re: “Confederate Group Promises 'Swarthy Convict' Cellmate for Those Removing Statues

FUNK, if your last name was Gump, would you also change it?

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by LoveBC on 06/26/2017 at 11:13 AM

Re: “Mayor: Greensward Deal Is a 'Win-Win-Win'

You libs are in a state of constant & ever-changing tirade about something. There goes that perception of daily cannabis users as being chill, relaxed, & easy-going. Let the grown-ups run things; y'all are free to loot, protest, & run about nekkid to your heart's content with Bob Marley's "No Woman, No Cry" blaring directly into your craniums.

3 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Long Duck Dong on 06/26/2017 at 9:58 AM

Re: “Confederate Group Promises 'Swarthy Convict' Cellmate for Those Removing Statues

LoveBC,

Gotta tell you, I'm sitting on about 500 years of familial Southern Heritage, very little of it involves shooting at US troops.

Posted by crackoamerican on 06/26/2017 at 9:33 AM

Re: “Confederate Group Promises 'Swarthy Convict' Cellmate for Those Removing Statues

If my last name was Forrest, I would change it.

You don't see any of the Hitler family in Germany running around being proud of anything.

2 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by FUNKbrs on 06/26/2017 at 9:18 AM

Re: “Mayor: Greensward Deal Is a 'Win-Win-Win'

Mayor does absolutely nothing to protect one of Memphis's best cultural assets, losing most of it in negotiations he had nothing to do with...

Calls solution "Win-Win-Win" and takes all credit.

Brilliant at the Bullshit indeed, just as promised in his campaign.

When are we going to hold the people behind the #turnofftheAC smear campaign accountable for getting this nashville-shill in office?

We could elect a barbecue sammich for mayor that would be better for the city, and it would probably be healthier than Strickland, too.

3 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by FUNKbrs on 06/26/2017 at 9:14 AM

ADVERTISEMENT
© 1996-2017

Contemporary Media
460 Tennessee Street, 2nd Floor | Memphis, TN 38103
Visit our other sites: Memphis Magazine | Memphis Parent | Inside Memphis Business
Powered by Foundation