Tuesday, July 04, 2017

It's OK to destroy some memorials but not others

Or so the Leftist Boston Globe says below.  The Left did not apparently consider that pulling down Confederate monuments in the South might lead to a payback

EMMETT TILL has been dead more than 60 years, and they still won’t let him rest in peace.

Someone again vandalized a memorial to the African-American teenager who was kidnapped, mutilated, and murdered by two white men in Money, Miss., in 1955. Originally installed in 2011, the marker was scratched with a blunt tool in May, but an attack in late June attack left far more damage. Panels featuring Till’s image and the story of his killing were peeled off. All that remains is the logo for the Mississippi Freedom Trail, of which the memorial is part.

Whoever destroyed that marker wanted to erase history.

This isn’t the only memorial to the Chicago boy that’s been marred in Mississippi. Last fall, someone shot up a marker at the Tallahatchie River, where Roy Bryant and J.W. Milam dumped Till’s brutalized body. (An all-white jury acquitted the two men; later, they gave a detailed confession to Look magazine.) In 2006, an Emmett Till Memorial Highway sign was defaced with the initials “KKK.”

Do not equate the desecration of these memorials with the recent removal of Confederate monuments in New Orleans. Those statues of Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis remain intact but out of public view.

Till was not an activist. He was a 14-year-old kid spending the summer down South with relatives, but his murder galvanized the civil rights movement.

On the flip side, memorials to the Confederate dead sanitize history, portraying those who favored human bondage as men of valor. The desecration of memorials to slavery or civil rights is just another attempt to eradicate this nation’s troubling past.



Anonymous said...

It is only to be expected that if the left wish to erase history that others will seek to erase the history that the left revere. History is history, leave it alone. You can agree with it or disagree with it but for God's sake LEAVE IT ALONE. It is up to the individual to decide what history means to them not for ideological groups to decide for them. Interference may create the opposite reaction that those that seek to hide or change history seek. There is something in the leftist psyche that is prevalent to altering the truth.

Bird of Paradise said...

How would the left react if someone took that statue of CHE in CENTRAL PARK and dumped it into the Hudson River or just allowed the birds to leave their calling cards on it

Anonymous said...

Surely it is possible to be BOTH a man of valor and someone who supported slavery.
Or, to be a man of valor and someone who abhorred slavery but was dedicated to states'rights and your home state in particular?
Washington was a slave owner and actively acted to prevent his slaves from acquiring their freedom. Are all representations of Washington, Jefferson et al to be torn down too?

Anonymous said...

The left have no respect for history other than the version they create.

Spurwing Plover the fighting shorebird said...

Anon 12:37 Yeah why else is the leftists NEA rewritting history to acheve their goals of a Soviet America as wanted by Marx and Lenin

Mark Liveringhosue said...

Liberals need to be careful when censoring speech, trying to re-write history or try to re-write the constitution and take out parts they don't like.

Because, some day, someone, is going to use those same tactics to remove things THEY agree with, then watch them scream bloody murder!