Statuary Rape

From iGeek
(Redirected from Category:Statuary Rape)
Jump to: navigation, search

There is no "hate speech" exclusion for the first amendment (1A). Destroying public property (vandalism) because it "offends you", is no exception. And if you start destroying others tributes, then why should any be allowed? Before you grease any slippery slope, you might be wise to ask, "what's at the bottom?"

The recent example was about Robert E. Lee, if you ignore all the other things the liberals have tried to ban in the past (from Washington Redskins, to mascots and so on).

Robert E. Lee
Bigots are everywhere, be afraid: like those that don't want to destroy statues of Robert E. Lee. Of course those with a clue know things like:
  • Lincoln offered to let the South have slaves forever (Constitutional Amendment), if the South came back. He was also a racist and an anti-Semite (along with Grant).
  • Robert E. Lee was actually against slavery (maybe more so than Lincoln). Lee gave up his slaves before the war, Grant kept his until the end.
  • Arlington National Cemetery was named that way, because that's what Robert E. Lee called it, before the U.S. government stole it from him. He sued and won, and then sold it back for millions (in today's money). So it's a tribute to his victory over the U.S. government.

So how was Lee fighting for slavery when he had personally given it up, and he could have kept slavery if he gave up the war, yet he fought on? Lee fought for southern independence, and the Constitution, not slavery. It was not technically a civil war, since that's a fight for control of one country, the South didn't want to control the North, they just wanted independence from it, like they were promised they could have at any time, when they ratified the Constitution.

I only wish this was unfairly taking one incident out of context, but it's one of hundreds, and a milder one. (This wasn't a liberal professors smashing people over the head with bike-locks, because he disagreed with them, or the dozens of other examples). The problem is you can't reason with SJW's once they're sure of something. And they are sure of everything, long before they studied the topic. They just know what they should be triggered by, especially when they have no clue on what they're talking about.



Democrats don't really care about this stuff, or they'd complain about people on both sides. They just want to use the ignorance of their base as a tool to teach people to reflexively hate (and react violently and destructively) against whomever or whatever they're told to hate.

The Left Is Now Engulfed in Full Blown Hysteria instituting and celebrating mob violence against statues. Those are effigies that they are destroying, so that if conditions become right, they can embark on a full-blown Reign of Terror -- and actual living people will be killed. (Like happened with BLM shooting cops, or Bernie Sanders supporters shooting up Republicans playing baseball (the media gave that story 1/10th the attention as a guy driving his car into a crowd after he was assaulted). If the Democrats get their way, and we have another leftist Cultural Revolution, will the executions be televised on YouTube? Or are people going to realize who is the greater threat to civility and pull back?



But while these things generate a lot of attention and churn in the short term, Democrats have lost most statehouses and major elections in the long term. Other than on the coasts and those that watch CNN, most of the nation just can't be duped (for long). The truth leaks out, and the rational realize how irrational and uneducated the DNC and media that celebrates their acts of intolerance, really is.

The good news is that most people aren't as gullible as the left thinks they are.

NPR and PBS conducted a poll to see who supported removal of Confederate Statues. Most people, blacks, whites and latinos didn't want them removed. The groups that most supported the removal are divisive politicians and those in the "strong democrat" category. Everyone else, understood history and tolerance.

A cynic might assume this means the crusade against confederate statues has nothing to do with white supremacy, and a lot to do with leftists picking fights so they can call people Nazis.[1]

Ban all the things

  • Mascots with names that resemble other famous animals. [2]
  • Civil War Re-enactors [3]
  • Gone with the Wind [4]
  • Just refer to genetic biology, and some want to made that criminal abuse of gender pronouns. [5]
  • Everything else: Plastic bags, Happy meal toys, goldfish, insensitive words (bossy, welfare, illegal, etc), Books, Pledge of Allegiance, Candles, Football, Goldfish, Prayer, Guns, Toy Guns, hold your fingers to look like a gun, bottled water, sugary drinks, Horse-drawn Carriages, Barbie, and a few hundred more. [6]
  • Will Antifa be triggered by Sheila Jackson Lee's name and demand she be removed from Congress?

Statuary Intolerance

❝ It seems like the world is full of two types of people, builders and destroyers. I pretty much always side with the builders, and oppose the destroyers. ❞

Like most toxic things the progressives "gave us", their divisive demands for tolerance (by attacking everything they didn't like), seeks only to tear down, and rarely to create (unless creating paves over others sacred places). Their attacks on Confederate Statues is a small example that lead exactly where most warned, and the progressives ignored.

The basics:

  • If Statuary offends you, don't look at it.
  • If you demand it is removed you're demanding not only that other people's free speech (Freedom of expression) be suppressed, but you're trying to whitewash and revise history.
  • It doesn't matter if YOU like, it is a fact that your predecessors put it up because THEY liked it, making it a part of history.
  • You not liking it is probably based on a historical fallacy called "Presentism", or another one called bigotry (meaning bias, probably programming into you by your college professors, or your party). Your assumptions of the meaning of the statue probably are not the same as those that put it up. Or certainly shouldn't supersede others that like it.
  • Eliminating it, is not free speech, it's against it. If you want to put up another statue (create something and a counter-narrative), is fine. You wanting to suppress theirs and destroy, is the same that motivates all the haters who want to destroy the past, and it's very much in line with Fascism

Some used socratic questioning:

❝ If the Washington Monument, the Jefferson Memorial or Mount Rushmore were blown up, would you guess it was the jihadists or ANTIFA/BLM? ❞

They were mocked... at first. But their warnings were taken as suggestions.


Here's some examples:

  • No revolutionary war heroes are safe [7]
  • Activists demand Natural History Museum must remove Teddy Roosevelt Statue [8]. Of course this isn't new, they've defaced it before (back in 1971) [9]
  • Must rename Faneuil Hall [10]
  • Sharpton demands the removal of the Jefferson memorial [11]
  • Stone Mountain [12]
  • Heck, why not Mount Rushmore? [13]
  • Even Joan of Arc isn't safe [14]
  • Lincoln was torched in Chicago [15]
  • Santa Barbara Missionary (Junipero)[16]
  • Asheville, North Carolina Four women were arrested for vandalizing a Robert E. Lee plaque. [17]
  • Durham, North Carolina: Confederate Statue Toppled [18]
  • Arizona, a roadside monument to Jefferson Davis was tarred and feathered[19]
  • Texas man tries to blow up confederate statue. [20]
  • Baltimore: Oldest Monument to Columbus is vandalized (on Video)[21]
  • Baltimore tries to be more anti-free speech (and history) than their worst vandals [22]
  • And DeBlasio is talking about removing Columbus statues in NYC [23] Of course I'm not sure he needs to, as asshats are running around vandalizing public property, and making sure we can't have nice things. [24] I don't think they get it, if they won't let others have their monuments, what are the chances that others will apply tit for tat to their idols back? Either we respect each others things, or burn it all down.
  • I joked that Ghandi was next (since he was a bit of a racist), turns out I was prophetic (though this happened in Ghana) [25]
  • Atlanta Peace Monument Destroyed, because it looked like a Confederate Statue to the ignorant [26]
  • Confederate re-enactors get pepper-sprayed for marching in a parade [27]
  • Shatner attacked for having contributed to a horseman statue (by a guy that once served in the Confederate Army, and later the U.S. Army) [28]

Thought Crime

Leftist tolerance...
  • Hot Dog Vendor fired for exercising freedom of expression in private time [29]
  • Is it right to do so? [30]
  • Trying to deny free speech to those they don't like via a to-be-doomed Twitter-Coup (acquiring enough shares to get Trump thrown off). [31]
  • ACLU decides that free speech doesn't apply to gun-owners (they've always been selective supporters of the Constitution) [32]
Daily Stormer can't find a host: while I would never host them, the problem for me is that Google and GoDaddy will host just about anyone. But they'll selectively take up left wing causes and not host people that are unpopular WITH THE FAR LEFT! If they were applying the same standards to the SPLC or BLM or various hate groups on the left, I'd have no problems with it. Apply a standard equally, and we're good, and publish what those standards are. But the hypocrisy of claiming you're for an "open internet", and NAMBLA, Antifa, and so on, are all fine. But a couple of racists playing dress-up are intolerable, is mock-worthy. Not because businesses shouldn't have a choice over they host. But they shouldn't be able to claim they're doing it for morality reasons, and cry "net neutrality" on one hand, and be flaming hypocrites with a double standard on the other.

And Google's anti-free speech views run a lot deeper than one obnoxious hate site:

Progressive Religion

The left could care less about this issue (Confederate statuary), as they could care less about any of their issues. The issue is never the issue, the issue is always the agenda.

  • They hate America (as in past and present), they only care to remake it into something they wish it had been or will be.
  • So they have to destroy idols of the past that was, in order to achieve their ultimate goal of outlawing everything but progressivism (thou shall not have any God's before me, and progressivism is thy name). They can't rewrite history with people being taught nuances like people on the wrong side were noble, people on the right side might not have been.
  • Each step, is towards their goal of remaking Western Civilization in that image: where Government decides what you can't do, say and think... and they decide what Government gets to decide (based on what they're telling people to take offense to, today).

Of course glorifying slavery is bad. But if it was about slavery, then their idols must fall too. Should we not then tear down the Pyramids? How about the IRS building? No not THAT!

But they can use their game of guilt by association to destroy everything that offends them (and everything offends them). No Castle in Europe, no Church, no book or document (look at what they did to Mark Twain). If you allow them that tool, they're only limited by their imaginations:

  • Whites had slaves: they're bad
  • Christianity/Judaism tolerated it: burn down the temples
  • the rule of law didn't always work: we should get rid of it and replace it with "Social Justice"
  • Hitler drank water: do you want to be like Hitler?

The only thing that will remain sacrosanct is their One True Religion (The Progressive State, and it's iconography). Totalitarian ideology goes under the banner, "Join or Die" -- progressivism is totalitarian, just with a better PR campaign.

❝ Black people who were never slaves, are fighting white people who were never Nazis, over a confederate statue erected by democrats, because democrats can't stand their own history anymore, and their identity politics and media has divided us and polarized us, and somehow it's all Trumps fault? ❞

Margaret Sanger

Margaret Sanger

Progressive activist racist eugenicist founded Planned Parenthood to exterminate as many inferior (brown) babies as possible, to advance white protestantism. The party that loves to hate and remove Confederate heroes and statues has no problem worshiping at the feet of their bigots: proving all standards don't apply equally.

Main article: Margaret Sanger

This is where the slippery slope goes weeeee.... the backlash gets it's stride.

If the democrats care about Slavery and horrible people being celebrated, then there's going to be a party while we remove the names of the DNC leaders/idols that gave us Slavery, Indian Extermination, the KKK, and Nazi Eugenics. But Margaret Sanger would be a great start.

There's far more justification for removing Sanger, than Robert E. Lee, for those who know history. Lee gave up his slaves (before the war) and said "slavery as an institution, is a moral & political evil in any Country". He didn't fight for slavery, since Lincoln offered the Corwin Amendment to guarantee slavery if the South came back. They refused.

On the other hand, it was the American Eugenics that inspired the Nazi's to copy the Americans (and then some). And Hillary's idol, Margaret Sanger of Planned Parenthood was one of the vocal and enthusiastic Eugenicists (who corresponded with Adolf) and besides calling lesser races weeds, had quotes like the following, “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,” as she was recruiting a pastor to help her side do exactly that.

(NOTE: While I'm pro-choice, it's for completely different reasons than Sanger.)

What about Moses?

So let's say that Racism, Slavery and Gennoacide is bad (because they are), so everyone who ever participated in it should never have a temple or monument in their name (we should strike their history from the record, like we're Stalin). So what about Moses? (Lookup the Amalekites). Moses was by all accounts successful in his genocidal campaign against them, and they no longer exist.

So how can you have freedom of religion, and strike Moses and the Torah from the record, since both celebrate that event? So you're either an antisemite, or you have to tolerate it for the Jews. And if you do for them, then you're a hypocrite to attack anyone else's idols, just because you don't like everything they did. (Of course recognizing their hypocrisy isn't a strong suit of the left, which is why we have to remind them of it).



If destroying all things tied to something bad is right, then I expect all lefties to burn their VW's (and BMW's). Or they're hypocrites with double standards: pick one.

But of course, this isn't about what the left is complaining about, this is always a test to see how compliant/gullible/teachable the public is. Are they willing to follow without question or thinking? If so, they're good Democrats. If not, they're bad people.


  1. Poll:
  2. Ban Animal Names:
  3. Civil War re-enactors:
  4. Gone with the Wind:
  5. Criminal abuse of gender pronouns:
  6. Ban it:
  7. Vandals hitting Revolutionary War Heroes:
  8. Teddy must go:
  9. 1971 Teddy:
  10. Faneuil Hall:
  11. Jefferson memorial :
  12. Stone Mountain:
  13. Rushmore:
  14. Joan of Arc:
  15. Lincoln:
  16. Santa Barbara:
  17. Robert E. Lee:
  18. Confederate Statue:
  19. Jefferson Davis:
  20. Texas:
  21. Columbus:
  22. Baltimore vandalizes themselves:
  23. DeBlasio/Columbus:
  24. Vandals:
  25. Ghandi:
  26. Atlanta:
  27. Confederate re-enactors:
  28. Shattner:
  29. Hotdog firing:
  30. Thought crime:
  31. Twitter Coup:
  32. ACLU: