Philosophy Now Forum

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 1:44 am I could not care less about the statues.

If I wanna learn about R. E. Lee, I'll get myself a book.

I have, however, a problem with the way the statues are comin' down.

Seems to me: the voters of a community ought to be decidin' whether a statue in their community stays or goes. They're, after all, payin' for it.

And, understand: when I say voters, I mean voters, not their elected reps on the city council or in the state house. Those folks are mainly motivated by re-election and their loyalties shift with the wind. Not a one is trustworthy. Nor should protestors be allowed to pull them down in the heat of passion (or, on the direction of those financin' the protestors).

No, if the statue of historical figure X becomes problematic, let the voters decide what they wanna do about it by way of the democratic process everyone claims to love so damn much.


As for team names: these are privately owned organizations/businesses. They can call themselves whatever they like (or allow employees [the players] to promote their dumbass politics by kneelin' during the pledge). Me: I decide where I spend my money. If I don't care for sumthin' a business does, I'm not obligated to spend a dime on their products or services.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 2:45 am you believe that if 51% of people want something that is detrimental to 49%, then that's OK?

No. Gimme an example (not the statues...those things aren't detrimental to anyone ['cept mebbe the idiot who pulls one down on himself]).


You'll stick up for the 51%.

Not really. I'm not the one who claims to love democracy. I'm the one who holds them to their own standard.


But if 51% of people voted for socialism in your neck of the woods, I assume you would not say, "let the voters decide what they wanna do about it by way of the democratic process everyone claims to love so damn much."

Absolutely, if the majority wants communism (and let's not fuck around with words...communism is what we're talkin' about) then they should have it.

I, however, will not abide.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 2:54 am

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 2:45 am you believe that if 51% of people want something that is detrimental to 49%, then that's OK?

No. Gimme an example (not the statues...those things aren't detrimental to anyone ['cept mebbe the idiot who pulls one down on himself]).


You'll stick up for the 51%.

Not really. I'm not the one who claims to love democracy. I'm the one who holds them to their own standard.


But if 51% of people voted for socialism in your neck of the woods, I assume you would not say, "let the voters decide what they wanna do about it by way of the democratic process everyone claims to love so damn much."

Absolutely, if the majority wants communism (and let's not fuck around with words...communism is what we're talkin' about) then they should have it.

I, however, will not abide.

What do you mean by "communism", though?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 3:04 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 2:54 am

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 2:45 am you believe that if 51% of people want something that is detrimental to 49%, then that's OK?

No. Gimme an example (not the statues...those things aren't detrimental to anyone ['cept mebbe the idiot who pulls one down on himself]).


You'll stick up for the 51%.

Not really. I'm not the one who claims to love democracy. I'm the one who holds them to their own standard.


But if 51% of people voted for socialism in your neck of the woods, I assume you would not say, "let the voters decide what they wanna do about it by way of the democratic process everyone claims to love so damn much."

Absolutely, if the majority wants communism (and let's not fuck around with words...communism is what we're talkin' about) then they should have it.

I, however, will not abide.

What do you mean by "communism", though?

The leash around the neck; the direction of others, for others; the subsuming of one into the many; the diminishment of man and elevation of men; turning person into cog; community as entity, man as cell.

I coulda gave you some dry definition, but mine is to the point.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 3:20 am If someone created a sports team called the "Henry Quirk (insert something you would find slanderous or insulting here)", would you be upset if the name got changed?

If I had a team, I'll name it whatever the hell I want & change the name as I please. If someone used my name to make a buck and weren't payin' me: I'd sue their asses good (or, mebbe, bring my complaint to their doorstep).


Or if someone erected a statue of Karl Marx in your neighborhood, would you complain if it got torn down? Or would you think the people finally came to their senses?

If my neighbor, on his dime, erected a statue of Karl: that's his business.

If my town wanted to erect a statue of Karl: I'd vote against it, if I had the chance. And if they actually erected one: I finagle it so I wouldn't pay for it (yes, tax evasion/cheatin' is wrong: I don't care).

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 3:22 am ...I don't think we should complain about the people who are putting this kind of pressure on sports teams or toppling statues of people who tried to literally divide our country over something that defies our very constitution. It seems like we should be approving of it.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 3:37 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 3:22 am ...I don't think we should complain about the people who are putting this kind of pressure on sports teams or toppling statues of people who tried to literally divide our country over something that defies our very constitution. It seems like we should be approving of it.

I ain't complainin', Gary.

Team names: I don't care.

Statues: I don't care (just don't promote democracy then indulge anti-democracy impulses, cuz then you're a hypocrite and a hooligan).

I'll say this, in conclusion: history is what is it...the men and women who do and did remarkable things weren't saints, they were, they are, just people. Take them as they are and were.

And: if you really believe the nonsense goin' on today has anything to do with statues or history or black lives or anti-fascism, well, good luck to you.

commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 2:15 pm America was founded on beliefs and values, among which is the belief that all are created to be on equal footing. The founders intended to include only men who were white, but along the way we have become woke to the rightness of including women and peoples of color.

Name-changing and statue-displacing are consistent with America’s founding values. Opposition to the replacement of team names and the removal of Confederate statues is not supported by the beliefs and values of America.

Because such opposition is not patriotic, those who are so inclined—even if they are the majority—are living in the wrong place. They should shut up, or leave, or work to get the values of our nation officially changed.