Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Clemson University [monuments & names]

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by 18.99s View Post
    Nope. Accepting money or other assets from a scoundrel and then removing their name from a building is a good way to dishonor them. Pissing off their ghost like that is a minor form of the justice which wasn't meted out to their living self.
    Folks might quit contributing to institutions that do that sort of thing.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by user4 View Post

      That is why the civilized path to change is always preferred. Monuments should not be criminally destroyed. The town's and cities that erected them should call a referendum on their fate. Each town should determine what is proper for them. But mobs destroying things they don't own is not going to lead to greater civility. It will lead to the exact opposite.
      I agree with this. It's always better for these things to be done after due process rather than by mobs.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by user4 View Post
        That is why the civilized path to change is always preferred. Monuments should not be criminally destroyed.
        I agree with you there; I don't support individuals taking it upon themselves to deface or topple monuments which aren't their property.

        But I also don't support state legislatures telling local governments that they can't remove monuments which are the local government's property. Some states passed legislation like that as recently as within the past 5 years, in response to seeing some towns taking down or just talking about taking down Confederate monuments.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by 18.99s View Post
          I agree with you there; I don't support individuals taking it upon themselves to deface or topple monuments which aren't their property.

          But I also don't support state legislatures telling local governments that they can't remove monuments which are the local government's property. Some states passed legislation like that as recently as within the past 5 years, in response to seeing some towns taking down or just talking about taking down Confederate monuments.
          It can get in the legal weeds and states that pass such laws will face their own gordian knots. In such cases the town/city government should issue the referendum nonetheless and build the case for removal, by seeking all legal avenues they build a powerful case for removal in state and federal courts. By tacitly allowing mobs to destroy the property they are undermining the authority of their own office and city law enforcement.

          it is a bit of a chess match, does the state legislature want to force a governor to send state law enforcement to keep statues up that local populations have overwhelmingly voted for removal and sale? Behaving in a lawful way takes time and discipline but it leaves our progeny a civil prospering future. Mob violence gives only short term thrills for the mob.
          Last edited by user4; 06-21-2020, 03:05 PM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by jazzcyclist View Post
            Folks might quit contributing to institutions that do that sort of thing.
            Hubris will keep those moneys pouring in. People always assume that once their name is on something, they will always be remembered as 'great'.
            Nothing against my alma mater, the Red Tree Farm, but on my last visit there, there were dozens of new buildings crammed into what used to be nice green spaces, with the donors' names conspicuously displayed.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Atticus View Post
              Hubris will keep those moneys pouring in. People always assume that once their name is on something, they will always be remembered as 'great'.
              Nothing against my alma mater, the Red Tree Farm, but on my last visit there, there were dozens of new buildings crammed into what used to be nice green spaces, with the donors' names conspicuously displayed.
              What might happen is that future donors may ask for written commitments regarding future name changes of buildings named after them or their family members. "You want my money. Sign this contract."

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Atticus View Post
                And he was being kind!
                Florida has earned its late-night-comedians image.
                I have never met any of them yet, but there sure seems to be plenty of them (wading into alligator ponds, etc.).
                Scott Ostler did a pretty good job of trashing Florida in his SF Chron column this morning:

                story titled "Sunshine State Is Petri Dish For NBA"

                <<… But why Florida? Apparently there were no leper colonies available. Maybe because COVID-19 seems to be Florida's state disease. It's a place where corona virus warnings are like UFO sightings; charming and fun and a bit scary, but nothing to get worried about…>>

                Comment


                • And now Yale is in the hot seat. Turns out that Mr. Yale was a slave-trader, and a pretty heinous one at that.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by user4 View Post
                    It can get in the legal weeds and states that pass such laws will face their own gordian knots. In such cases the town/city government should issue the referendum nonetheless and build the case for removal, by seeking all legal avenues they build a powerful case for removal in state and federal courts.
                    Local governments shouldn't need to build a case with the state or federal courts to take down a statue if it's the local government's property.

                    Comment


                    • Timing is everything. For instance, if Virginians George Washington and Thomas Jefferson had been born 60 years later...

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by 18.99s View Post
                        Local governments shouldn't need to build a case with the state or federal courts to take down a statue if it's the local government's property.
                        I hear you!.. again 1) if the local government wants to take it down they need to do so with due process, referendum, etc. and then take it down. 2) state legislatures can make laws prohibiting the desecration or destruction of monuments by unauthorized mobs but they will fall flat in court trying to stop towns from lawfully changing the use of those spaces.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by dukehjsteve View Post
                          Timing is everything. For instance, if Virginians George Washington and Thomas Jefferson had been born 60 years later...
                          Yeah, we might not have a country.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Atticus View Post
                            And now Yale is in the hot seat. Turns out that Mr. Yale was a slave-trader, and a pretty heinous one at that.
                            Not good.....he was pretty awful...

                            https://www.news18.com/news/buzz/can...y-2679853.html

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by 18.99s View Post
                              Local governments shouldn't need to build a case with the state or federal courts to take down a statue if it's the local government's property.
                              Totally agree, but they would be wise not to use a cloaked mob riding at night to do unlawfully what they are cowards to do lawfully by referendum and due process.

                              Mob rule is no rule at all. We have seen this kind of rule for ages as tacit approval from city officials gives power to unlawful mobs to destroy other people's property and terrorize them and enforce an unwritten , unquestionable defacto rule.
                              Last edited by user4; 06-21-2020, 09:33 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by J Rorick View Post
                                Brundage was obviously a scumball. BUT his initial endowment of 8000 artistic pieces was the basis of the original Asian Museum and remain the centerpiece of the museum. It may have been the one positive legacy of his life. I don't know if Brundage has descendants, but they might consider removing those pieces from the museum. Which would take it from a 1st rate museum to just an ordinary one (based on my several trips there). How about removing the bust and creating a (large) plaque that recognizes his contributions to the museum?
                                Brundage had two sons outside of his marriage, who were not named in his will. (They won small settlements after a lawsuit.) His second wife passed away in 2003. I don't know anything about her family, but none of them is related to Brundage. So I don't think the museum would have to worry about any descendants.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X