South Carolina NAACP rally covers statue of George Washington to not offend anybody

C.M. Sullivan, writing at Free North Carolina writes: "The annual MLK observance at the state house in Columbia, SC, had an interesting twist this year. The event was held on the north side steps of the statehouse. Prominent at that location is a large bronze statue of George Washington. This year, the NAACP constructed a 'box' to conceal the Father of [our] country from view so that participants would not be offended by his presence."

The leadership of the South Carolina NAACP orchestrated a protest against the 150th anniversary of South Carolina's secession from the United States at the start of the US Civil War and the flying of the historical Confederate Flag at a monument to Confederate soldiers who died in the conflict; the worst loss of American life due to war in our nation's history.

The South Carolina NAACP leadership also rolled the issues of education spending and anti-illegal immigration laws into the content of their rally; a rally that was supposed to commemorate the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., a man who preached peace, tolerance, inclusion and the need for America to judge individuals on the "content of their character" instead of the color of their skin.

South Carolina NAACP president Lonnie Randolph called the celebration of South Carolina's secession an insult similar to celebrating "the massacre of Native Americans at Wounded Knee, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or holding a 9/11 party," The State reported.

“The NAACP is not going to allow South Carolina to insult them,” he said.

Columbia, SC, had an interesting twist this year.

The event was held on the north side steps of the statehouse.

Is it unusual for them to hold the event on the north steps?

If so perhaps they specifically choose this location to cover the statue.

www.newmediajournal.us...

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


That's true he did, but as I stated a page or so ago, he freed them in his will upon the death of wife. Even after he freed them, his will specified that they were to be cared for, the older ones were to receive food and clothing until their death, and the younger ones received education and job training so they could support themselves. There were legal reasons why he couldn't release them while he was alive, but he did provide for them.

Like I said before, I am in no way stating that slavery is acceptable, however he was from a cold hearted bigot. It is part of history, it is the way it was, not right, but that was reality.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic



Freedom is not anarchy. Your bill of rights is a bill of rules. Rules protecting a brand of freedom that the founding fathers felt was good. You may want to include the idea forcing all to be PC in the bill, but I have not found it in there.
If freedom is the right to do whatever you want and call it freedom...well, that is NOT what was intended concerning the founding of this country.
The NAACP is absolutely NOT concerned with freedom or making sure that all men are treated equal. If you feel that the actions of the NAACP is somehow exercising their freedom in doing the things they do.. you do not know much about the organization.

Covering statues is NOT freedom for Gods sake. Teh ability to have the rally in any location you wish is. Freedom doesnt extend to changing what you may find offensive in that location. Some need to get off of this ego trip and figure out that being professionally offended is a sickness as much as demands for PC and calling it freedom is.

reply to post by Advantage


I agree, I don't think cover of the statue was necessary and I don't think that it would have been allowed here, I would consider it defacing public property, in a way.

Okay, this is irking me.. I live this.. whites DONT.


Lets pretend Im white for a minute. I live close and the area is perfect for my rally.. at the Booker T Washington National monument. I need to cover this black guy because I dont want to offend anyone at the monument names "lifting the veil". I will even cover my ass and say that I was intending to protect the statue. SO I cover it and have my rally.

#1.. white guys, you would NOT be allowed to do so. Claiming protection or not.
#2 Youd not be allowed for ONE second to claim freedom to do so as protected in the bill of rights
#3 youd be branded the worst kind of racist on the planet immediately with NO questions.
#4 your organization would be investigated and vilified in your precious media,.. with all kinds of "facts" Im sure.

So white guys.. hows that kind of freedom working for you??

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by Advantage

 

I agree, I don't think cover of the statue was necessary and I don't think that it would have been allowed here, I would consider it defacing public property, in a way.

Look, Im not white.. Im one stinking generation off of the Rez.. a story for another day.. but I swear in my adult life I have been screaming from the rooftops about racial equality in the US.. Its really driving me up the wall. Im basically a non-white outsider who was raised a hell of a lot different. If I can see the flaw in my own people and their slavery to the feds.. I can see it plain as day with the blacks and how the whites act like they are too scared to say " Hey.. wait a minute.. thats BS!" and they never do anything about it.. even though they are the majority!
Whites really have the numbers and power to make the change.. to make a positive change for the country. I really honestly wonder why they are so scared to. Trust me.. if we tribes could get together and be in your numbers with representation.. youd be changed. Maybe in ways youd not really like, but what Im speaking of is the WILL. Why dont whites have the will? If I could pass for it.. Id claim I was white in a heartbeat and stomp my feet. The problem is my brown ass couldnt fool a soul and Id get laughed off the planet for being a wanna be! No one wants to hear some blackfeet idiot preach the problems between the blacks and whites.. and demand some sanity.

Originally posted by Advantage
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

If freedom is the right to do whatever you want and call it freedom...well, that is NOT what was intended concerning the founding of this country.

I am not suggesting that freedom is the right to do whatever you want.

Covering statues is NOT freedom for Gods sake.

Why not? If it's an expression of one's beliefs, it's a first Amendment right.
www.usatoday.com...

Freedom doesnt extend to changing what you may find offensive in that location.

Really? Can you show me that restriction on our freedom?

Some need to get off of this ego trip and figure out that being professionally offended is a sickness as much as demands for PC and calling it freedom is.

But... YOU are the ones offended here. YOU are the ones demanding the politically correct solution of uncovering the statue so others won't be offended.

You're simply not willing to support other people exercising their freedoms when it offends you. That's clear.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Advantage
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

If freedom is the right to do whatever you want and call it freedom...well, that is NOT what was intended concerning the founding of this country.

I am not suggesting that freedom is the right to do whatever you want.

Covering statues is NOT freedom for Gods sake.

Why not?
www.usatoday.com...

Freedom doesnt extend to changing what you may find offensive in that location.

Really? Can you show me that restriction on our freedom?

Some need to get off of this ego trip and figure out that being professionally offended is a sickness as much as demands for PC and calling it freedom is.

But... YOU are the ones offended here. YOU are the ones demanding the politically correct solution of uncovering the statue so others won't be offended.

You're simply not willing to support other people exercising their freedoms when it offends you. That's clear.

When whites are afforded these same freedoms.. like we natives and blacks are.. then I might buy into your thoughts of "freedom". I have NO idea what angle of this you are looking at it from, but it obviously isnt from mine.

I married a white guy and have 3 kids...white ones.They can pass for whites with a tan. I refuse to lay down and allow you whites to keep sucking up to this BS without saying how stupid it is and how delusional you are for calling this one sided bs freedom.. because it is going to effect MY children and my grandchildren. Read my above post telling how YOU , white person, will be treated if you plan a rally and cover a statue. Great freedoms you have here... theyre completely skewed and one sided. One side receives carte blanche and the other better take it and never whisper a word in defiance of it because its just our freedom ya know. Somehow , thats not freedom to me.

Originally posted by Advantage
When whites are afforded these same freedoms.. like we natives and blacks are.. then I might buy into your thoughts of "freedom".

Look at the link I posted.
John Ashcroft is a white man.
He covered a statue so people wouldn't be offended.

I have NO idea what angle of this you are looking at it from

I thought I was being pretty darn clear.

Originally posted by Advantage

Look, Im not white.. Im one stinking generation off of the Rez.. a story for another day.. but I swear in my adult life I have been screaming from the rooftops about racial equality in the US.. Its really driving me up the wall. Im basically a non-white outsider who was raised a hell of a lot different. If I can see the flaw in my own people and their slavery to the feds.. I can see it plain as day with the blacks and how the whites act like they are too scared to say " Hey.. wait a minute.. thats BS!" and they never do anything about it.. even though they are the majority!

I'm not sure what sort of will you're talking about, but I'll take a shot and if I'm heading the wrong direction I'm sure you'll correct me . Are you saying that blacks are discriminated against and whites are too afraid to stand up for them? I don't know if that is the case where I live, Chicago. I can't speak for all of society but in work situations I have seen black people get a heck of a lot more breaks than white people. That's not to say that hard work shouldn't be rewarded, it absolutely should. But I have a severe issue with people getting a job, promotion, raise, etc because of the color of their skin instead of merit. As to standing up for someone in the face of racism, I have done that as well. As I see it, wrong is wrong and I don't agree with racism whether it is in or against my benefit, people should be awarded or punished based upon their own merit and nothing else.

Whites really have the numbers and power to make the change.. to make a positive change for the country. I really honestly wonder why they are so scared to. Trust me.. if we tribes could get together and be in your numbers with representation.. youd be changed. Maybe in ways youd not really like, but what Im speaking of is the WILL. Why dont whites have the will? If I could pass for it.. Id claim I was white in a heartbeat and stomp my feet. The problem is my brown ass couldnt fool a soul and Id get laughed off the planet for being a wanna be!

No one wants to hear some blackfeet idiot preach the problems between the blacks and whites.. and demand some sanity.

The will to do what exactly? Totally lost on this one.

Good lord.. I cant believe you mentioned Ashcroft...

I should know by now.. you wont see it until it destroys you and your culture. Its destroyed mine.. I guess Im the bad guy for having the opinion I do.

Have at it. Pretend you are free to do as you wish in this country I will pretend that I want real freedom for EVERY man regardless of his color or culture. I have dog vomit to clean up.. kids feeding the stupid thing table food again.

Heretic, great conversation BTW. I can see the position you hold better. I will definitely fit in your words and add it into my ever evolving concept of this whole mess. I do look forward to speaking with you again.. I have several questions.. mainly on this freedom issue. I honestly understand it differently, perhaps do to my background. If I can learn more.. Im all for that even if I dont fully agree. Unfortunately at the moment vomit calls.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


I don't know for sure if this is where they have the rally annually but on the north side is the confederate memorial also. For years there has been bickering back and forth between the NAACP and politicians about the confederate flag being on the statehouse grounds. As some of you may remember it used to fly at the top of the statehouse but 10 or so years ago it was moved to a monument......which never made any sense to me because now its only 30 ft above the ground and easily seen. I'm not sure how that was supposed to stop the arguing.

The NAACP could have been trying to make some sort of statement by covering the Washington Statue but i bet the main purpose of having the rally on that side was to specifically protest the confederate monument and flag.

reply to post by searching4truth


No read above.. my previous posts.. you said "Are you saying that blacks are discriminated against and whites are too afraid to stand up for them?" and thats a big hell no.. whites cant even stand up for themselves is what irks me. If its freeedom it should be as much for whites as the rest of us who receive more freedoms of expression and etc. Its the opposite of what you are thinking in my opinion. I gotta run.. BBL.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by filosophia
... it's kind of funny when you do something to not offend anyone and half the country (if not the whole country) becomes offended.

If you guys are correct and they did this so as not to offend, they didn't do it for the whole country. They did it for those in attendance at the rally. So, it doesn't really matter what the country thinks.

So how would you feel if I held an all-white rally and covered up a statue of Malcom X or Martin Luther King Jr? I guess since you say it doesn't matter what the country thinks I can do whatever I want right?

Hmmm? Is the statue of our founding father holding a whip and smiling over the fresh crop of cotton? Is there a caption under the statue which states "This cotton isn't going to pick itself!!"

Because if not, I haven't the slightest idea as to why anyone would be offended.
I guarantee all the members of the rally have never been offended by these same founding fathers that appear on their money.

Wait. That George Washington is green and not white. I so didn't think that one out.

Originally posted by Advantage
I guess Im the bad guy for having the opinion I do.

Not at all. You are entitled to have and express your opinion. I strongly support your right to do so, even though I MAY disagree with it.

Pretend you are free to do as you wish in this country

I understand that our freedoms are in trouble. That's the very reason I stand up for them. But I support freedom for all people, including the ones with whom I disagree.

Heretic, ... Unfortunately at the moment vomit calls.

I can relate, sadly.

Originally posted by filosophia
So how would you feel if I held an all-white rally and covered up a statue of Malcom X or Martin Luther King Jr?

How I FEEL, is irrelevant to the rights of my fellow countrymen. But this wasn't an all-black rally and the reasons for covering the statue are unknown. But in your scenario, I would absolutely support you temporarily modifying your surroundings to suit the audience and the event for whatever reason.

I guess since you say it doesn't matter what the country thinks I can do whatever I want right?

Wrong. I never said that, nor do I feel that way. Covering a statue isn't "doing whatever you want". Destroying the statue would be "doing whatever you want", and that, I would not support. The statue is fine.
.

This whole slavery thing needs to be taken into context. Was it wrong yes. How many today even talked to a relative who was a slave lately? Not many I'd bet. Fact is less than 1% of the population owned more than 200 slaves. It was mostly for agricultural production much like illegal immigrants today. The stereotype that everyone in the south owned slaves is not correct. Where is the outright anger for the slave traders from Africa who sold their own people in the first place? I never hear that. I doubt many would want to have grown up in the turmoil and violence of Africa anyway I sure wouldn't.

Sorry back to the topic now.

I read the pros and cons of the postings here and my conclusion is that this is the first step of having the statue removed from state property.

Let's don't offend anyone especially a group that finds everything offensive!

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I think it does matter what the country thinks. It's just common sense not to do something like that to America's first president. Sure, they have the freedom of expression to cover up a statue of george washington and I have the freedom of expression to call them...oh wait, I don't have that freedom. Maybe next time.

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

Sure, they have the freedom of expression to cover up a statue of george washington and I have the freedom of expression to call them...oh wait, I don't have that freedom.

Excuse me? You don't have the freedom to call them something? Since when? You can call them whatever you want.