Protesters Destroy Another North Carolina Statue And Post Pictures Of Celebration On UNC Campus

downloadEarlier this year, I was critical of the handling of the prosecution of various protesters in North Carolina who torn down a statue in public and then celebrated their criminal acts in broad daylight. Because the statue of a civil war memorial, the act of property destruction was condoned by many and Durham District Attorney Roger Echols caved to the pressure in dropping all charges against everyone.  It was effective immunity for a popular criminal act — a dangerous concept in any legal system.  Not surprisingly, others are now claiming the right to unilaterally destroy property. The latest were protesters on the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s campus who took it upon themselves to destroy the controversial Silent Sam Confederate statue. 


Silent Sam has stood at the spot since 1913 as a memorial to the “sons of the University who died for their beloved Southland 1861-1865,” according to UNC’s website.

There has been simmering debate over these statues, including Silent Sam. The college community was debating its removal when these protesters decided that they did not have to wait for any decision or permission.  Given Echols’ earlier action, it is not surprising that they viewed themselves as immune from criminal laws.

What is astonishing is that this took hours but the college and police did nothing.  Protesters started during the day and then finally destroyed the statue by nightfall.  They then filmed themselves celebrating and kicking the statue with no concern for arrest as shown by the CNN affiliate WRAL-TV.

One person was arrested and that person was not arrested for the destruction of the statue but “concealing one’s face during a public rally and resisting arrest.”

Last November, Maya Little, a second-year PhD student in UNC’s History Department, appeared at a public meeting to call for the statue’s removal.  Months later, she took matters into her own hands and smeared her blood and red ink on the statue.  At the time, she faced expulsion and criminal charges for the incident.
There is a good-faith debate over the removal of civil war memorials, though I have been critical of the increasing calls for the removal of a wide array of memorials and statuary across the country from images of Columbus to Jefferson.  The merits of this debate however are irrelevant to the immediate question of whether citizens now have license to violate criminal law when such crimes are popular with the majority.  The destruction at UNC is the natural consequence of the decision of people like Echols who yield to public pressure to protect those who take the law into their own hands.  This is simply a form of vigilante justice.  The  government enable such conduct by portraying criminal destruction of property as excusable or remain passive in the face of such destruction.  The media also contributes to this growing problem by portraying such actions as a form of free speech as opposed to criminal conduct.
Again, I think that this is a debate worth having and that reasonable people can reach different decisions on the criteria and conditions for the removal of statues and memorials.  However, we should all agree that none of us has a right to make such decisions unilaterally or to claim immunity from criminal laws because our cause is just.
What do you think?

194 thoughts on “Protesters Destroy Another North Carolina Statue And Post Pictures Of Celebration On UNC Campus”

  1. You show your ignorance everyday. I’m sure a black American who is acting in a civil protest and gets his or her head bashed in would disagree. Or people of color that were pulled off lunch counters. The racists that did those things were acting in civil disobedience of the law with violence.

    1. Original intent of the American Founders:

      Naturalization Act of 1790

      “…free white person(s)…”

      Reiteration of Original Intent:

      “Crazy Abe” Lincoln:

      “If all earthly power were given me,” said Lincoln in a speech delivered in Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854, “I should not know what to do, as to the existing institution [of slavery]. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia, to their own native land.” “…he asked whether freed blacks should be made “politically and socially our equals?” “My own feelings will not admit of this,” he said, “and [even] if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of white people will not … We can not, then, make them equals.”

      Imposition of Unconstitutional Marxist Social Engineering:

      Compulsory Unnatural Integration

      Oil and Water Do Not Mix – Artificial Mixture is Forced by an Emulsifier

      Even when you mix oil and water together they still separate. The oil always floats to the top because it is less dense than water. Oil and water don’t mix because water molecules are more attracted to each other than to oil molecules. Detergent molecules are attracted to both water and oil. When you add the detergent, one end of each a detergent molecule attaches to a water molecule and the other attaches to an oil molecule. The detergent creates a mixture of water with droplets of oil spread through it.

      Molecules of water are strongly attracted to each other because they are polar. Oil and water molecules are not attracted to each other because oil molecules are non-polar and hydrophobic or ‘water-fearing’. Oil has a lower density than water, so it always floats on top.

      Detergent is attracted to both oil and water because one end is hydrophilic (or ‘water-loving’) and sticks to water and the other end is hydrophobic and sticks to oil. When we add detergent to oil and water and shake the mixture, the liquids are held to each other by the detergent molecules and form an emulsion. An emulsion is a stable mixture of two or more liquids that would not normally mix.

    2. “The racists that did those things were acting in civil disobedience ”

      No they weren’t. They were committing a battery.

  2. No it isn’t you cretin. They’re not gaining standing to challenge statutory law. They’re just breaking things that other people like that you don’t.

        1. I don’t care for the adulation granted Jane Fonda, either. She won’t be around forever, though.

            1. “How relevant is Jane Fonda?”

              Relevant enough to demonstrate where the left’s head was during the Vietnam War. I’m not talking about what side of the war she stood on rather her actions against the United States. Seems rather typical of many on the left.

        2. Fishy:

          Of course, they were all pardoned by a Republican so they’re aren’t traitors anymore. These monuments honor the courage of the participants not the cause. Honor and courage are foreign concepts to most radicals.

          It’s why they implode so g.d. always.

        3. “Show me another country that glorify their traitors to their own country.”

          You should be spending your time reading “History for Dummies”.

            1. Fishwings, it is obvious to most that I have some understanding of history and it is equally obvious that you have almost none. I leave the color by numbers to you and warn you not to eat the crayons.

  3. Call me stupid. I thought only California had been conquered and subjugated by the alien invasion. Looks like the Trojan Horse replete with xeno-incursion forces is inside the gate and commencing deployment. Throughout history, it has been usual and customary for nations to vigorously defend against being vanquished by vile and malevolent intruders. America has submitted without a whimper.

  4. I do not think that people who tear down statues should be shot. No. But their cars should be beaten with sledge hammers out on the parking lot by the home of the statue while they are destroying the statue. And their homes egged and the windows broken out with rocks. Tit for tat.

    1. Liberty 2nd: another American vigilante

      We’ve turned on each other and become a nation of predators and thugs.

      (Most Americans don’t know the half of it, yet.)

      1. The left has turned on everyone that steps off their plantation. That is why almost always whenever political violence occurs it is almost always the left that is violent and destructive. Some crazies on the extreme right act similarly but they are not cheared on by others on the right like the left does with groups like Antifa and BLM. A good number of those considered alt right are actually leftists and espouse lefist socialist causes.

        Many on the left are nothing more than predators and thugs.

      1. In Britain until circa the 13th century,

        the penalty for high treason such as that of

        Obama’s Coup D’etat in America was

        Drawing and Quartering in the public square.

        I’d buy a ticket.

  5. A classic case of civil disobedience, when the nation drags it’s feet on something that is a clear example of racism and division then it’s only a matter of time pointing out the injustice.

    1. @fishwings

      Would you support as an act of “civil disobedience”, a rightist who destroyed a statue of some lefty icon? Or the actions of pro-lifers who block abortion clinics?

      Bet you don’t and wouldn’t. Let’s just be honest, you support violence against the property or persons who you regard as “haters”. Of course, a “hater” is anyone with whom you disagree.

      1. Civil disobedience has been used as non-violence or violence. Sitting on a lunch counter and being the wrong color I’m sure would get you upset, firing on a military post in a harbor, I’m sure you would be OK with right? Get a grip.

        1. Civil disobedience has been used as non-violence or violence.

          There is no such thing as violent civil disobedience. You put the moron in oxymoron.

        2. No, the purpose of civil disobedience is to gain standing to challenge laws. The rest is merely trumpery to excuse petty crime.

        3. @fishwings

          “Sitting on a lunch counter and being the wrong color I’m sure would get you upset”

          You are an absolute moron and know nothing about my background, actually, I’m Hispanic so stop. Now if I were a b##ch and moan, victim Hispanic you would be ki##ing my a## and trying to suck up to me, wouldn’t you?

    2. when the nation drags it’s feet on something…

      This is progressive arrogance defined. Your ilk likes to behave as if paradigm shifts in our culture will happen by force. There is a legitimate legal process to affect cultural transformations. The moment you substitute a just process with an unjust process to force change, you have lost any legitimate defense against retribution.

      Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.

      It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all. Frederic Bastiat

  6. For those who love phrases like “American Taliban” — like good ol’ Nick Spinelli (and those piling on):

    From HBO’s “Newsroom” — a description of the Tea Party:

    “Ideological purity, compromise as weakness, a fundamentalist belief in scriptural literalism, denying science, unmoved by facts, undeterred by new information, a hostile fear of progress, a demonization of education, a need to control women’s bodies, severe xenophobia, tribal mentality, intolerance of dissent and a pathological hatred of the U.S. government.

    “They can call themselves the Tea Party. They can call themselves conservatives and they can even call themselves Republicans, though Republicans certainly shouldn’t. But we should call them what they are. The American Taliban.”

    Terms like “American Taliban” are divisive and dangerous. And as I noted downthread: inflammatory and irresponsible.

  7. I agree that the statues need to go, but to a museum dedicated to those who were willing to put their lives on the line in support of slavery. There are museums dedicated to that time; one documents the Black people who were hanged; another collects items of “colored”; statues of the slavery supporting military leaders is fitting It’s important that all the history is preserved, including the efforts of white women 50 years after the end of the war to honor those trying to preserve slavery.

    Although it doesn’t directly benefit those households that could now afford to buy a slave, slavery is still doing just fine in the prisons across the country that use inmates as slaves to make them a profit from corporations. The inmates, some not even convicted of a crime, are provided food (chosen by the jailers), clothing (provided by the jailers), a bed (in a place and of a quality chosen by the jailers), a routine (chosen by the jailers), and a job where the wages ($1 an hour for those putting their lives on the line fighting fires) generally end up back in the hands of the jailers at the “commissary” . Perhaps there should be another group commissioning statues of the new purveyors of slavery: the CEOs of the buying corporations and of the private prisons. Let’s add the legislators who allow this injustice to go on.

    1. I don’t agree the statutes need to go. I reject all iconoclasm whether it’s the Taliban destroying the Bamiyan Buddhas or this nonsense.

    2. Oh, I’m a good old rebel
      Now thats just what I am
      And for this yankee nation
      I do no give a damn
      I’m glad I fought against her
      I only wish we’d won
      I ain’t asked any pardon
      For anything I’ve done
      I hates the Yankee nation
      And eveything they do
      I hates the declaration
      Of independence too
      I hates the glorious union
      ‘Tis dripping with our blood
      I hates the striped banner
      And fought it all I could
      I rode with Robert E. Lee
      For three years there about
      Got wounded in four places
      And I starved at Point Lookout
      I caught the rheumatism
      Campin’ in the snow
      But I killed a chance of Yankees
      And I’d like to kill some more
      Three hundred thousand Yankees
      Is stiff in southern dust
      We got three hundred thousand
      Before they conquered us
      They died of southern fever
      And southern steel and shot
      I wish they was three million
      Instead of what we got
      I can’t take up my musket
      And fight ’em down no more
      But I ain’t a-goin’ to love them
      Now that is certain sure
      And I don’t want no pardon
      For what I was and am
      I won’t be reconstructed
      And I do not give a damn
      Oh, I’m a good old rebel
      Now that’s just what I am
      And for this Yankee nation
      I do no give a damn
      I’m glad I fought against her
      I only wish we’d won
      I ain’t asked any pardon
      For anything I’ve done
      I ain’t asked any pardon
      For anything I’ve done…

      1. Mr. Kurtz.
        It took courage to post that, which puts you miles above the likes of Antifa, who hide behind masks……… and the childish race-baiting toddler taliban, who have hissy fits, and destroy helpless monuments, knowing the authorities have their backs.
        I am so sick of those people!

    3. The law is the law. I find you dissertation somewhat lacking in historical knowledge. Let’s keep our hands off of that which does not belong to us.

  8. I think the government should be more focused on crimes that pose a danger to the public like white supremacists firing a gun in downtown Charlottesville.

    Tearing down a statue is vandalism but it is a victimless crime.

    Criminal justice should be focused less on victimless crimes. And I say that as an EMS dispatcher.

    1. Would you say the same if someone tore down a statue of Martin Luther King? Bet you dollars to donuts, you wouldn’t.

      Let’s just be honest, you think destroying property ok, if that property is unacceptable.

      1. As a matter of fact, I wouldn’t care if the statue was on public property.

        I do not support vandalism.

        I just don’t think valuable police resources should be focused on victimless crimes.

        This is a low priority crime. There are many unsolved murders and rapes in the country we should focus our resources on.

          1. It made national news because the media love to sensationalize small crimes into big problems when they involve young people.

            At most the perpetrators would face a fine and a few weeks in jail.

            1. Vandalism is not a crime punishable by more than a year in the USA.

              We should reserve our prison space for robbers, murders, rapists, etc.

              1. We should reserve our prison space for robbers, murders, rapists, etc.

                Why? You think Bernie Madoff belongs on probation?

              2. Aside from getting people off the streets, the reason we incarcerate people for crimes is to disuade other people from doing the same thing.

                Your analysis and conclusion of the problem leads to more of the problem and expansion of the problem into areas of physical dispute. You close your eyes until the problem effects your life. That is a very selfish and foolish attitude.

              3. Wrong. Vandalism is defacing, not destruction. Destroy a work of art and see if it’s vandalism. Or take a bulldozer to your house. Or sledge hammer your car. Not vandalism.

              4. @MarryAMinority&AngerTrumpVoters

                You never answered my question. Would you support a misdemeanor punishment for a rightist who destroyed a statue of some lefty icon?

                I would respect you more if you were honest and said “no”. From your posts, you undoubtedly believe the punishment should depend on who committed the act, what or whom it was committed on and their political motivation for doing so.

                As for your name, I have a question. I am a Hispanic who voted for Donald Trump, what does that make me? BTW – I love playing the ethnic card with s**tlibs. They aren’t sure if they are supposed to salute or shoot me. Want to hate me but really can’t, I am a member of their victim class.

        1. Vandalism and the destruction of property is not a victimless crime. It is a crime aganist society and you support vandalism if it agrees with your politics. When it disagrees there will be violence and potentially death. The day people are arrested, fined or jailed is the day such crime stops.

          “Black Pastors Demand Removal of Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger Statue
          Robert J Wright August 16, 2017

          With leftist protests demanding the removal of Confederate monuments across the country, a group of conservative black pastors are making themselves heard by saying that a bust of Planned Parenthood founder and abortion and eugenics advocate Margaret Sanger be removed from the Smithsonian in Washington.

          “The museum has the Sanger bust in their ‘Struggle for Justice’ exhibit, which is supposed to honor those of the past who were ‘champions of justice.’ A sign beneath the sculpture says that Sanger was “profoundly affected by the physical and mental toll exacted on women by frequent childbirth, miscarriage and self-induced abortion.”

          The pastors wrote the institute a letter explaining that Sanger was far from a champion for their race because of her strong ties to the eugenics movement. The black pastors, along with other pro-life advocates rallied outside the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery to demand the removal of the statue.

          They say Sanger supported eugenics to rid the nation of those she deemed ‘defective’ and ‘feeble-minded’ by stopping the growth of their populations, particularly blacks and other minorities.”

          Officials at the Smithsonian have rejected the request, defending the inclusion of Sanger in their exhibit, describing her as someone who “fought to achieve civil rights for disenfranchised or marginalized groups.”

          But the pastors say they will not be dissuaded, saying “Margaret Sanger was a racist who wanted to end the black population through birth control and abortion.””

          1. This effort to demonize Margret Sanger is being encouraged by the very stupidest conservatives. Sanger was one of this country’s greatest civil rights leaders and deserves to be recognized as such.

            When Sanger began her activism more than 100 years ago, it was illegal to provide women with even the most basic information on birth control. Sanger was jailed several times for distributing pamphlets on the subject.

            Sanger is now demonized for promoting ‘eugenics’. But one has to realize that 100 years ago, children were prone to numerous deformities that are much rarer today. Incest, fetal alcohol syndrome, dwarfism, retardation, and freak abnormalities were all common; especially among the poorest classes.

            As a volunteer Social Worker to New York’s poorest slums, Sanger routinely saw the most depraved households where children with abnormalities lived horrific lives. It was in that context that Sanger developed views now labled as ‘eugenics’.

            Sanger believed that through birth control and legal abortion, women could achieve smart family planning that would eventually eliminate untold suffering by people born with severe abnormalities. And again, this issue had urgent relevance to the poorest classes.

            The current effort to demonize Sanger is directed by anti-abortion dead-enders. The same conservatives who want to cut social safety nets are telling Blacks that Sanger was a ‘Nazi’ who ‘hated Blacks’. Ironically these conservatives are using Nazi-like lies to smear one of the 20th Century’s greatest women. These liars deserve to be called out for what they are.

            1. Peter, you just called some black people among “the very stupidest”. You have your opinion and those other persons have their own since how many millions of their babies have been or are to be killed? They believe this baby killer (their opinion) should be forgotten and her statues destroyed. They actually have a claim.

              “Sanger is now demonized for promoting ‘eugenics’. But one has to realize that 100 years ago, children were prone to numerous deformities that are much rarer today. Incest, fetal alcohol syndrome, dwarfism, retardation, and freak abnormalities were all common; especially among the poorest classes.”

              You seem to espouse the eugenics movement which in part was a basis for Hitler’s atrocities and mass killings of those that didn’t fit his picture of the Germanic race. Are you supporting HItler’s ideas?

              Your ideas sound awful.

              1. Allan, you said yourself you support a womans right to choose. Why this phony support for dead enders??

                1. Decent societies do not kill their young. Something liberals understood prior to 1965.

            2. Sanger is now demonized for promoting ‘eugenics’. But…

              There is no but you dolt. Damn, how you can go from claiming Sanger as one of this country’s greatest civil rights leaders, when she was openly advocating culling the herd of those she characterized as defective is morally unconscionable. What part of unalienable don’t you accept?

              Your natural right to Life, Liberty and Property are the only anchor around which any civilized nation can reasonable expect to swing. Pull up that anchor and your rights could be next.

        2. I just don’t think valuable police resources should be focused on victimless crimes.

          Victimless? How do you know there weren’t victims? Do you believe every student at UNC supported this action? What do you believe the outcome would have been had there been counter-protesters trying to stop them?

          Speeding. Drunk Driving. Throwing rocks off of overpasses, just to name a few are victimless crimes, until those behaviors create victims. If history has proven anything, it’s that the worst evils humans have inflicted on others arises out of a culture increasingly apathetic to the small injustices.

        3. The point is this: whether any particular statues is to be removed or remain in place is a matter that can be determined through democratic processes. These SJW dick heads are essentially usurping authority to make decisions that have not been delegated to them. Think about this when you are cheering on these people, or when you imagine that this is a “low priority crime,” and ask yourself who the real authoritarians are.

    2. Victimless crime? No way. The message that is sent is once again that that LAWS in America don’t matter. These little snots who have to have their safe spaces chose to attend college at this University. These University Officials who knew exactly what they were to yesterday since they draped the statue before tearing down, should be fired. If I had a kid at one of these ANTIFA Universities, the child would be picked up this morning to never return to that college.

        1. descendants of Confederate Veterans. of which there are still millions in this country

          what’s next will they be desecrating tombs?

          because they’re all over the South

          Lawless behavior will eventually be met with violent counterforce. You can bet on it.

          1. The descendants don’t own these statutes because they’re on school grounds.

            You can argue that society was victimized by the action but the US overwhelmingly opposes the Confederacy.

    3. I guess MAM according to your theory any decoration on any public property can be destroyed for any reason whatsoever. That is a victimless crime.

      Maybe since you are a dispatcher you would support the statue in the middle of the roadway to the hospital being torn down while the ambulance carrying the sick individual waits for those perverted minds to finsh downing the statue and pulling it away.

      Your name is interesting and it demonstrates a fundamental flaw in your understanding of interracial relationships. It sounds racist and a bit out of touch with reality.

      1. @ Mr. Kurtz

        The black guy wielding a flamethrower was a righteous fighter for justice thus his actions were commendable and exemplary.

          1. And assuming Antifa comes after me all that “love in their hearts” it will have a new, warm but pointy friend to commiserate with. Maybe several if my monthly target practice is any indicator.

    4. Individuals do not get to make that decision. What if the statute of limitations was destroyed. Or a copy of the declaration of Independence or Constitution was destroyed, that kept slavery. Or I went to your house and ripped it apart cuz you were a pedophile. Where does it end. And don’t give me the garbage argument it wouldn’t. Mob rules are just that, mobs.

    5. MarryAMinority&AngerTrumpVoters said:

      “Tearing down a statue is vandalism but it is a victimless crime.”

      It is absolutely not a victimless crime. Do you honestly believe this type of abject anarchy is ignored by small children – who then have to process the chaos allowed on the streets?

      We reap what we sow, and the garbage-level behavior we are seeing by superannuated teenagers is corrosive to small minds.

      Think about it, the next time you hear about a 4th grader smashing things in a classroom and getting himself handcuffed.

      Get a grip, please.

    6. If it were victim less, it would not be called a crime. A careless permissive society is soon to fail. Keep your hands of that that does not belong to you. It is clear that the local governments are failing to address such vandalism’s. Such officials are failing to address their fiduciary responsibilities. OH! And this coming from a 50 year police veteran.

  9. The determining factor whether someone is going to be prosecuted for the criminal destruction of property is who the perpetrators are and what they are destroying. Destroy a statute of someone beloved by the left and see how quickly you get arrested. Destroy a statute of St. Martin Luther King and you will be charged with a hate crime in addition to the destruction of property charge.

  10. I do hope there are alum from UNC who fondly remember Silent Sam and will be taking their donations elsewhere.

    1. The Trustees are useless and the apparatchiks who run these places are indifferent to alumni opinion about anything but the athletic program (in part because alumni with money don’t care much about anything but the athletic program).

    2. Paul C…………I hope so too. If it were my alma mater, I would not stay silent……and would tell them to refrain from sending me any fundraising letters!

  11. Confederate Statues Seem Cheap

    Because They’re So Numerous

    Last year, when this issue was first covered, I read that between the 1890’s and Workd War I these Confederate statues went up all over the South. They were generally funded by the grandchildren of Confederate veterans to honor them as the oldsters were aging out. There was then a smaller, second wave of statues erected in the 1950s as a symbol of resistance to integration.

    While I personally oppose the destruction of public monuments, these statues are widely perceived by Millennials as glorfying a lost, racist cause. And the fact that these statues are so numerous makes them seem cheap. One suspects this trend will continue until these statues become rare enough that people then perceive them as curiosity pieces.

    1. ” One suspects this trend will continue until these statues become rare enough that people then perceive them as curiosity pieces.”

      We note Peter Shill that you blame the violence and destruction on there being too many statues and seem willing to tolerate such violence at least until the statues are rare and curiosity pieces. Nowhere do you demonstrate any belief that such violence should be stopped.

        1. No one asked you to stop the violence.

          It was simply mentioned that your statement in some part blamed the violence and destruction on too many statues and that you were willing to tolerate such violence and destruction at least until the statues were reduced in numbers and became rare and curiousity pieces.

          In other words the particular damage and violence we are seeing does not seem disagreeable to you. It seems to be part of your ideology though you distance yourself from actually taking part in the violence and destruction.

          I think these people that engage in violence and destruction need to be treated like any other individuals that damages public property and is violent. Apparently, you support groups like the KKK that take the law in their own hands. Your ownly problem with the KKK is they have a different ideology than you though I see a lot in common with you.

        2. @peter hill

          You probably think it is ok to assault people for wearing a MAGA hat because they are “Nazis”.

      1. Allan,
        Shill has no appreciation for the importance of the rule of law in civil society. He is woefully incompetent in understanding the danger that not actively condemning mob justice presents to himself. It’s as though Shill and his ilk need to suffer a significant emotional event, or a multitude of them, to snap them out of their ignorance.

        This one statement from him is telling:

        And the fact that these statues are so numerous makes them seem cheap.

        Apparently Shill finds no value in ubiquitous things; that is until the mob comes after those things he does value. Of course by then he will have no moral, ethical or legal leg to stand on.

    2. I agree, Pete. Then, there’s the simple fact that the statutes won’t be taken down voluntarily without a fight because the racist whites wouldn’t allow it because as Pete points out, they are, indeed, signs of a racist past. Glorifying those who fought to the death to keep other humans in bondage is just plain wrong. I’m sure that southerners would claim that they’re just honoring their ancestors who felt patriotic to their southern roots, but those ancestors were willing to die to enslave other people. They really don’t care how the descendants of those who were enslaved feel about maintaining reminders of that shameful chapter in American history.

        1. it’s intended to terrify white people.
          it’s intentionally lawless behavior but a thing they will get away with predictably. because they are weaklings. if they were strong they would get on with CW2. but they are working up to that, you can be sure. in their own demented minds.

          here is their logic:

          ” It’s impossible for words to describe what is necessary to those who do not know what horror means. Horror! Horror has a face, and you must make a friend of horror. Horror and moral terror are your friends. If they are not, then they are enemies to be feared. They are truly enemies.”

      1. you guys are fools. every nation that was stronger than another nation was sending men to die to stay stronger. all in life is struggle. equality is a dream and always will be.

        and the left knows that. if the blacks here were strong enough do you think they might be doing what they do in fka Rhodesia nka Zimbabwe, or RSA?

        in a way the vandalism of these statutes is very good

        it teaches the white youth what will happen to them if they continue to be weak and disorganized

    3. I agree with Pete. These statutes are constant reminders of a shameful chapter in America’s past, and are painful to the descendants of those who were enslaved. The statutes would never be taken down voluntarily or moved to a museum in North Carolina because racist whites wouldn’t allow it.

      1. What is shameful of standing up for states rights? The north was not the “night in shining armor” like you were taught.

        1. Maybe not, Jim, but the north didn’t enslave people, either. Were the descendants of slaves asked about whether it was OK to erect this statute in the first place, or was this shoved down their throats like slavery was?

          1. Why would the descendants of slaves be asked if they were fighting for state rights? One would think a newly freed slave would be happy to see that there were people willing to fight for their new citizenship’s constitution.

        2. It seems that at the time it was states in the north that were using states rights to ignore federal law. The federal law was that runaway slaves were to be returned to their southern owners. It was northern states that told the southern states and the feds to stuff it.

    4. maybe one day, the plentiful antifas walking on two legs today, will be rare curiosity pieces too, as you say, kept around in zoos like rhinos to stave off their utter extinction.

      who knows. only time will tell.

      for my money if I compare the antifa today of the marxists and communists of yesterday, I would say the marxists were a hell of a lot more socially constructive than these lawless rabble.

      now i fully understand why Marx had to put the boot to Bakunin and his gaggle of garbage.

      1. Reminds me of Mao’s Red Guards trying to destroy anything from the traditional China during the 1960’s. Of course, the Red Guards were only trying to “build a better world”, so that makes it ok.

        1. i often wonder what was the more despicable incident, the foolishly induced famine or the cultural revolution. both very shameful episodes in the PRC history.

          1. Why Mr. Kurtz, didn’t you know that the people who starved during the “Great Leap Forward” were actually counterrevolutionaries and thus were deserving of their fate? Kind of like the Boer farmers (and other Whites) in South Africa. They deserve whatever fate which befalls them.

          1. very apt comparison you just dont get it

            iconoclasm always happens in a social political context. it’s the very definition of the word.


            Definition of Iconoclasm
            Iconoclasm literally means “image breaking” and refers to a recurring historical impulse to break or destroy images for religious or political reasons. For example, in ancient Egypt, the carved visages of some pharaohs were obliterated by their successors; during the French Revolution, images of kings were defaced.

            In the Byzantine world, Iconoclasm refers to a theological debate involving both the Byzantine church and state. The controversy spanned roughly a century, during the years 726–87 and 815–43. In these decades, imperial legislation barred the production and use of figural images; simultaneously, the cross was promoted as the most acceptable decorative form for Byzantine churches. Archaeological evidence suggests that in certain regions of Byzantium, including Constantinople and Nicaea, existing icons were destroyed or plastered over. Very few early Byzantine icons survived the Iconoclastic period; notable exceptions are woven icons, painted icons preserved at the Monastery of Saint Catherine on Mount Sinai, Egypt, and the miniature icons found on Byzantine coins, including those of Justinian II (r. 685–95; 705–11).

      1. Inflammatory and irresponsible.

        Well done anonymous. For those that weren’t clear what Nick meant by American Taliban, you’ve provided a concise definition.

        Keep up the good work.

  12. If the white, voter suppression, gerrymandered, racist southern politicians cannot see to it that these glorifications of slavery are a constant reminder to blacks and other minorities that the Confederate idea is still valid, then it’s time for the people to do what their slave loving politicians will not do.

    Maybe Nazis should be able to erect a Hitler statue in NYC, or how about a US Cavalry statue on Native American grounds, or perhaps a statue of two gay people holding hands at Liberty U would be acceptable? Seems outrageous, but having statues of slavery promotion is just fine? Put those items in a museum and take them off the public square.

    1. Lloyd, you seem to have things backward. Municipalities voted in by those that live there put up those statues and sometimes they vote to take such statues down. Apparently you believe in self help when members of a community do not agree with you. In fact it seems you even support violence and destruction of property if it suits your fancy.

      If you recall, before the left started to control so many immature minds there was a NAZI march in Skokie Illinois despite protests that were non violent and non destructive but represented those that believed in freedom of speech. There is something very wrong with society and people that cannot respect the right of others to disagree and are willing to use violence.

      Maybe all artifacts of the DNC should be torn down for it was the DNC that promoted slavery, fought against the rights of African Americans, had an army, the KKK to defend the white nationalist supremacist,

      1. Go to any KKK meeting, of the 9 people there, 4 will be government informants. I am sick of hearing about these losers.

        The average black person has much more to fear from other blacks than from the “KKK” or police officers. Of course, our heroes in BLM could care less when blacks are killed by other blacks.

        1. I agree SJW, the Democratic army of the KKK has almost completely disappeared and doesn’t pose much of a threat. Today there is Antifa and BLM that many leftists rally around and one notes the Antifa folk cover themselves just like the KKK did.

        2. the kkk does not have 10 person meetings anymore, and they can’t even manage to light a cross in one of their own privately owned fields for fear of contrived prosecution.

          the SPLC baddy list is made of a bunch of Post Office Box fuehrers

    2. My grandfather who was a descendant of Confederate Veterans jumped into Normandy the morning of D-Day with the 82nd Airborne. I am absolutely sick of this comparison. If he knew that he would be fighting for grown men to be able to use the bathroom with little girls, he would have turned around and gone home.

      I WANT A DIVORCE!! And if people who think like me are as bad as you believe, you should gladly let us go.

    3. @lloyd blankfien – bankster

      My grandfather who was a descendant of Confederate Veterans jumped into Normandy the morning of D-Day with the 82nd Airborne. I am absolutely sick of this comparison. If he knew that he would be fighting for grown men who mistakenly believe they are females to be able to use the bathroom with little girls, he would have turned around and gone home.

      I WANT A DIVORCE!! And if people who think like me are as bad as you believe, you should gladly let us go.

    4. no but actually Germans absolutely should be able to honor the valor of the fallen soldiers of world war 2. in spite of the Holocaust, yes.

      they are weak now, too self hating to stand up for the fallen.

      the Germans are being eaten alive by the rapugees as a consequence of their inability to resist after decades of demoralization

  13. The stupidity of these people and yes they are left, but so far off the beam that they occupy the Zone Of The Idiots (ZOTI) along with the alt right and extremists coming the other way. The two extremes should be allowed to perform in arenas. This would stand as examples of what appears before the end.

    The only way to deal with these statues and other memorabilia is to attach the factual history along side or to the base; explaining what happened.

    This cancer is everywhere. In my home town of Victoria BC a group of ‘First Nations’ politicos just had the statue of John A MacDonald removed from in front of the City Hall. As was the case at the time, MacDonald advocated the subduing of the indigenous peoples, a practice that went on well into the 20th Century. He also helped create Canada as a sovereign nation without bloodshed, ushering in the British Commonwealth which took the place of the Empire. There isn’t one historical leader that is entirely without a stain.


    1. “The stupidity of these people and yes they are left, but so far off the beam that they occupy the Zone Of The Idiots (ZOTI) along with the alt right and extremists coming the other way. ”

      Very true Issac, but go to a left wing university campus and you see this type of action represented all the time in different forms. Go to a right wing campus (not many) and you don’t see violence.

      Many presumed on the right are actually leftists. They may be nationalists but they carry all the leftist garbage.

      Take Richard Spencer a white nationalist presumed to be on the right. What does he believe?

      He denounces corporate capitalism. That is leftist.
      He is for some type of socialized medicine. That is leftist.
      He is for a type of guaranteed income. That is leftist.
      He is antisemitic. That is leftist as well and we even see that attitude by some on this blog.
      Misogyny exists and we see it existing on the left as well despite their protests in favor of women, which are protests in favor of the “correct” woman.

      Issac, much of what you blame on the right is coming from the left but your tunnel vision doesn’t permit you to see the complete picture.

  14. “The media also contributes to this growing problem by portraying such actions as a form of free speech as opposed to criminal conduct.”

    One has to wonder how the media and social media approach the idea of free speech. Will those objecting to the destruction of such monuments and recommending jail for the lawbreakers be considered to be engaging in hate speech and have what they say removed from Facebook and Twitter?

  15. You only have a civilization if you enforce it. UNC has fallen and so has its milk toast governor. Serves them right for abdicating. Maybe I’ll put a statute up in my yard.

          1. I am sure mespo and would be comfortable meeting you without his two frineds. You have his address. Go meet him but don’t be one of those that sends his wife.

      1. This is a much better picture representing real Americans instead of the garbage that has despoiled the land of the brave and the free.

  16. Another example, in case we needed one, that gliberal and leftoid politics consists of status games all the way down. It’s completely devoid of any practical idea for social improvement.

    1. Teaching……….That there is bumper sticker material. It would have to be a big bumper, but what a message.

Leave a Reply