Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Sprightly

Why Are So Many Fascist Monuments Still Standing in Italy?

308 posts in this topic

23 minutes ago, PinkFlamingo said:

Back to the op question...

I think because Italy acknowledges and accepts it's long history, both the good and the bad, and appreciates art and architecture. Simple as that.

 

 

Yes. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, EgyptKang said:

Were the fascists traitors to Italy?

It is always interesting when supporters of slavery and traitors to this country try to make correlations between American history and that of another country.

Who here on this thread supports slavery or traitors? Or do you mean people elsewhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sprightly said:

This is an interesting piece from The New Yorker. 

"As Rosalia Vittorini, the head of Italy’s chapter of the preservationist organization docomomo, once said when asked how Italians feel about living among relics of dictatorship: “Why do you think they think anything at all about it?”  Exactly!

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/why-are-so-many-fascist-monuments-still-standing-in-italy

During my visits to Rome, it has always interested me that people just don't make a big hoopla over the many fascist statues around the city, despite the history behind them. And, frankly, I am glad that they are permitted to stand. They are historical and they are beautiful despite the history that erected them.

 Rome, in particular, has more than its fair share of fascists, but by and large peacefully co-exist. It seems that Americans are particularly overly-sensitive and offended.

 

 

So NOW you care about how other countries handle their social issues?

Previously your posts have not done that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cameron said:

None of those union monuments honor traitors.

OK. So they were slave owners but not traitors. That's something to be proud of, I guess.

You can take all the Confederate statues down for all I care. Maybe replace them with some new Union statues.

The national battlefield parks would lose some significance if the Confederate monuments were removed. But there are at least 2 times as many Union monuments so you could just look at those when you visit.

I can see some old timer decades from now visiting Gettysburg with his grand kids trying to explain why there are only Union statues. LOL. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, FatBoy said:

OK. So they were slave owners but not traitors. That's something to be proud of, I guess.

You can take all the Confederate statues down for all I care. Maybe replace them with some new Union statues.

The national battlefield parks would lose some significance if the Confederate monuments were removed. But there are at least 2 times as many Union monuments so you could just look at those when you visit.

I can see some old timer decades from now visiting Gettysburg with his grand kids trying to explain why there are only Union statues. LOL. 

Battlefield parks are like Museums and I don’t think civil war monuments should be removed from there

But the monuments honoring people like Robert E. Lee in public spaces should go if citizens want them to go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, soulflower said:

Battlefield parks are like Museums and I don’t think civil war monuments should be removed from there

But the monuments honoring people like Robert E. Lee in public spaces should go if citizens want them to go

We all know the zealots that want the statues gone are not going to halt their march at the entrance of the battlefield parks. 

Take them all and dump them in the Atlantic. It will make for some interesting treasure hunting in a few generations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ivanbalt said:

So does Mount Rushmore.  The union didn't fight a war against the United State to keep slavery legal.

Neither did the CSA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cameron said:

None of those union monuments honor traitors.

If California seceded from the US would you consider them traitors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sprightly said:

Yes. Understandable. And some may be overly sensitive and offended about their southern female ancestors, both black and white, that were raped and murdered by Union soldiers. Maybe they think of that each time they look at a statue of the Union leader.

Could you provide an example of this? A descendant hurt by a Union statue because his or her ancestor was raped by a soldier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Smokey 1 said:

Neither did the CSA.

Of course not. Protecting slavery for expansion was the last thing on their minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, soulflower said:

Battlefield parks are like Museums and I don’t think civil war monuments should be removed from there

But the monuments honoring people like Robert E. Lee in public spaces should go if citizens want them to go

No, but they should be honest. The South Carolina statue in Gettysburg claims secession was over state's rights. That's just BS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 minutes ago, hst2 said:

Of course not. Protecting slavery for expansion was the last thing on their minds.

Slavery was already legal in those states and Lincoln stated that he had no intention to change that.  But yes, they were concerned about expansion and they decided to get out while the getting was good.

Edited by Smokey 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Smokey 1 said:

Slavery was already legal in those states and Lincoln stated that he had no intention to change that.

"Expansion"

Get a clue Smokey. Obama said you could keep your doctor. Where you born yesterday?

With the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln ended up doing just that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sprightly said:

Yes. Understandable. And some may be overly sensitive and offended about their southern female ancestors, both black and white, that were raped and murdered by Union soldiers. Maybe they think of that each time they look at a statue of the Union leader.

OOOOppppssss the truth be told. But the Union were the good guys....right....RIGHT? it is all 'fake news' never happened.

SARCASM......for the slow...just so you know,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 minutes ago, hst2 said:

"Expansion"

Get a clue Smokey. Obama said you could keep your doctor. Where you born yesterday?

With the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln ended up doing just that.

I already covered expansion in that post.  What was Lincoln's motivation for the EP?

If the states didn't secede do you think he would have tried to abolish slavery where it already existed?

Edited by Smokey 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 minutes ago, Guido2 said:

OOOOppppssss the truth be told. But the Union were the good guys....right....RIGHT? it is all 'fake news' never happened.

SARCASM......for the slow...just so you know,

Don't we all think of that when we see a Union statue?

Edited by hst2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, hst2 said:

Could you provide an example of this? A descendant hurt by a Union statue because his or her ancestor was raped by a soldier.

Can you provide evidence of a slave descendant being hurt by a Confederate statue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Smokey 1 said:

I already covered expansion in that post.  What was Lincoln's motivation for the EP?

You have no clue as to why Lincoln is considered to be one of the greatest politicians in US history.

You are so hung up on writing slavery out of the war, you miss the nuance of it all. Southern leaders were not so deluded. They started leaving the Union before he even took office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hst2 said:

Don't we all think of that when we see a statue?

Frankly, when I see a statue....I look at it and say; gee that looks really nice, or gee..how could they make something that detailed so long ago or gee the pigeons are having a field day on that one.

If there is a plaque there....telling something about it and the person it represents... I read it...and move on....mostly thinking ....that happened XXx years ago.....and this is important to me....?????????????????

Next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Smokey 1 said:

Can you provide evidence of a slave descendant being hurt by a Confederate statue?

That is not what I said..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hst2 said:

You have no clue as to why Lincoln is considered to be one of the greatest politicians in US history.

You are so hung up on writing slavery out of the war, you miss the nuance of it all. Southern leaders were not so deluded. They started leaving the Union before he even took office.

Because they knew he would oppose expansion which they believed would end up putting the slave states in a minority position where it would eventually be abolished nationwide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hst2 said:

That is not what I said..

No, it was a reverse example of what you said and it has the same validity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Smokey 1 said:

No, it was a reverse example of what you said and it has the same validity.

Not even close.

Mine read "A descendant hurt by a Union statue because his or her ancestor was raped by a soldier"

For your post to be relevant it would read "a descendant hurt by a Confederate statue because his or her ancestor was held in bondage by the society for whom the soldier fought."

The answer is plenty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

7 minutes ago, hst2 said:

That is not what I said..

No...but that is what he is asking.

To be candid.....most of the 'hurt' we are seeing is self inflicted and caused by those that just want to either 'stir the pot' for it's sake alone or to draw attention to themselves and their.....cause. Which mostly is derived from some notion that one or two people have stuck in their heads...and need to draw others into it.

I will be my house against a box of dougnuts. That if you went into BC five...even two years ago and did a poll and asked black folk about the statues that were eventually removed. They would have had NO CLUE....what the blip you were talking about in regard to the 'history' behind it.

 

 

 

Edited by Guido2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0