Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Get off my lawn!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Darkpriest said:

Undoubtedly the Marxist infiltration is making inroads.

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather have "Marxist" infiltration than bootlicking authority lover infiltration.

Honestly though, if I had known that anything Karl Marx related was a well painted target and riddled with falsehoods, misconceptions, and unhinged psychotic attacks from the right and center, I probably would have been more careful in my ideology participation.  These so called "anti-Marxists" are nuts.

'He who seeks to defend everything, defends nothing."

King Frederick the Great of Prussia

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ComradeMaster said:

I'd rather have "Marxist" infiltration than bootlicking authority lover infiltration.

Marxists are largely bootlicking authority lovers though, and those that aren't are anarchists in denial.

  • Like 1

"I am the expert, asshat." - Hurlshot

Link to post
Share on other sites

The unrest doesn't stem from Marxist ideology.  I personally find Marxism terrible, but it's a starting point for discussion.  KP is partly correct.  Some of these people in the streets are anarchists in denial.  Many of them are anarchists in Marxist clothing.  Then there are the fools who suggest that the real reason we have unrest is because of Trump.  Sure.  And the sheer amounts of credulous fools who spout this nonsense might carry the day.  Yeah, it's pretty grim for folks on our side.  We don't have quite such fabulous acoustics as the liberal echo chambers that surround us.  It is not impossible to win, though.  Remember, to steal from a great statesman, to endure is to conquer.  It's funny, the love trumps hate crowd carry on with a tremendous amount of personal attacks while completely overlooking or denying (and sometimes just lying) about the irony.  Not just incongruity, but steeped in layers of oddity.

I had a patient last week who started talking politics.  Now, I *never* lie about politics, but I refuse to discuss it at work.  It's simply unprofessional.  I get people who talk politics to me from both sides and I always smile and say that I won't talk politics until there is no need to talk healthcare.  ...And I'm home health, so I'm on my own.  Anyhow, this person says that he/she would throw me out of the house if I said I was voting for Trump.  The weird thing is that Trump supporters are often gregarious and loud, but anti-Trumpers are usually hostile in my experience.  You can say that's anecdotal.  :shrug:  A meaningless if true observation, but whatev.  Now, I was already getting along with this patient and I smoothed it over just fine, of course.  While I'm a competent nurse in terms of skills, my biggest asset is interpersonal in terms of de-escalation and convincing patients to agree to follow a treatment plan.  Now, since I'm an attentive guy who's concerned about patient health, this person came around nicely but the idea that you'd throw out a healthcare professional over politics makes you simply foolish.  Of course, I've also seen people bristle at getting care from Hispanic healthcare professionals, which is the epitome of at least xenophobia if not out and out racism.  Good thing my Hispanic heritage doesn't show.  The funny thing is, I've never seen someone act that way about black healthcare professionals, which is weird since some of them kind of act like they wouldn't like black people.  I think it's because it's easier to be anti-immigrant than racist in our society.  Both are simply terrible, of course.  Yeah, I know someone can make that statement a basis for attacking Trump.  To be clear, I think we should have stronger borders, but I don't think we should treat people poorly, and the majority of my patients have been minority.  A good number have been Hispanic illegal immigrants (mostly Mexican).  I'm not going to treat them like second class citizens just because I believe our immigration should be better enforced.  :bemused smile:  What a world we live in! 

  • Like 1

"Not for the sake of much time..."

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Darkpriest said:

I hope they put April in charge of replacing the mural: 

 

Really though, this is the important part of that article:

Quote

 

A photographer took pictures of the murals before covering them.

“Certainly, pictures of these murals will be included in any celebration of space and place that is the Memorial Union,” said Collins. “This is not at all to say that the dedication and the work that Dr. Sherman has done for this institution we recognize and we will always recognize that going forward.”

“Wouldn’t it be a mistake if we look back a hundred years from now and say, ‘Isn’t it a tragedy that we lost this artwork?’ said Sherman. “It’s like any work of art, especially a painting, seeing a picture of it there’s just no comparison with seeing it live.”

When asked what he thought about his murals being removed, he said, “That’s a good question. Time goes by and things change.”

 

So yeah, they are preserving the work. But they are also moving forward. This is a non-story.

As a history teacher, whenever someone talks about removing statues, murals, or whatever, I tend to laugh. First off, textbooks are way worse when it comes to 'erasing' history. They are a real mess.

Second, every mural I've ever used in a lesson is flawed by bias, and that is a big part of the lesson. From the Bayeux Tapestry to Diego Rivera's Tenochitlan, they are amazing visual examples of one artist's perspective frozen in time. So yeah, preserve that guys work.

Thirdly, the Bayeux Tapestry is in a museum. It doesn't need to be hanging on the wall of Buckingham Palace. It's all right to move forward as a society. You can preserve and progress at the same time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Except by their own admission, their plan is to destroy the mural and use photographs of the murals to represent what they destroyed.

So its not like the murals are being preserved in a museum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Amentep said:

Except by their own admission, their plan is to destroy the mural and use photographs of the murals to represent what they destroyed.

So its not like the murals are being preserved in a museum.

Yeah, it's not exactly a Picasso. I have a bunch of murals at my school as well. I doubt they are going to be there in 70 years and I doubt they are going to be preserved in a museum. 

I'm hoping I get a shelf in the library. But libraries may not exist in 70 years either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hurlshot said:

Yeah, it's not exactly a Picasso. I have a bunch of murals at my school as well. I doubt they are going to be there in 70 years and I doubt they are going to be preserved in a museum. 

I'm hoping I get a shelf in the library. But libraries may not exist in 70 years either.

I guess its safe to remove those ugly BLM murals as well then, and no one should blink an eye... 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

I guess its safe to remove those ugly BLM murals as well then, and no one should blink an eye... 

I sincerely doubt those will be there in 70 years. Ideally they will outlive their purpose of raising awareness about police brutality.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, KaineParker said:

Marxists are largely bootlicking authority lovers though, and those that aren't are anarchists in denial.

You may be right from a historical standpoint, but the problem here is that there's a lot of political capital in American right wing circles that depressed collage kids/ hipster libertarian artsy types are Marxists.  Therein lies the problem.  Orthodox Marxists in Europe from before the Red Revolution were actually closer to being Anarcho-capitalists then what's commonly attributed to Marxist-Leninism.

You could make an argument that orthodox Marxism originally envisioned is now irrelevant and left-leaning people should move on, but as long as ignorance of the matter remains politically energized it will be impossible to develop meaningful change in society.

'He who seeks to defend everything, defends nothing."

King Frederick the Great of Prussia

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hurlshot said:

Yeah, it's not exactly a Picasso. I have a bunch of murals at my school as well. I doubt they are going to be there in 70 years and I doubt they are going to be preserved in a museum. 

I'm hoping I get a shelf in the library. But libraries may not exist in 70 years either.

I was challenging your assertion they were 'preserving' the work, which was your argument as why it was okay. They are not.  They took a picture, which is recording its existence, not preservation. You phrased it like it was a statue being removed to a museum. It is not.

Now you're arguing it okay to destroy it because you're not a fan of the work itself. That's a different argument, and taste being the measure of artistic worth for preservation is a slippery slope, imo.

Note I don't object to them removing the mural, but I do bemoan the destruction of the artwork, like I do the destruction of any artwork.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, I get that. I would prefer it be preserved as well. I just think it was probably more a feasibility concern than "marxist erasing the past" that some folks are going on about.

I don't really have any opinion on the work. It's fine, I guess. I am a lot more passionate about Diego Rivera, which probably makes me a socialist or something.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MedicineDan said:

The weird thing is that Trump supporters are often gregarious and loud, but anti-Trumpers are usually hostile in my experience.  You can say that's anecdotal.  :shrug:  A meaningless observation.

fixed

btw, the trump strawman where you try and knock the stuffing out o' the President being blamed for riots position ignores what we believe is the more common and hard to refute argument that the President has exacerbated political and racial divisions and has done more than a little to make existing protests more violent with his inarguably extra Constitutional responses. on the long list o' causes and accelerants o' the protests, trump should figure prominent... save for in the fox news bubble.

as to the mural, everybody loves democracy, right up until people start asking for and doing things some o' us believe is stoopid. 

imagine into existence a jerk so offended by norman rockwell paintings and their saccharine americana that he buys every one he can get his hands on and then burns 'em. converse, another dirtbag buys original manuscripts and author notes o' maya angelou and uses the shredded paper as kitty litter. admitted vulgar uses o' wealth in both cases, no?

whether is groups or individuals, right to the quiet use and enjoyment o' private property or real property is one o' those basic rights @Guard Dog is gonna get his dander up regarding. just 'cause something is old don't mean it got some particular value to the public at large, unless the public so decides... and the public is then free to change their minds regarding the cultural worthiness o' such objects. democracy is fickle. 

one o' our +80-year-old aunts (though am wondering if black magic might be involved 'cause she could very well be 800 based on family stories) gots wallpaper in her home which predates the mural in question. no doubt the person who designed the wallpaper thought they were an artist or craftsman, and our aunt likes it.  is her wallpaper any less art than the mural? why? her wallpaper may be the last remaining example o' that particularly hideous design anywhere in existence. please, make it so. we need have the paper steamed off the walls and removed to a museum if our aunt finally decides to make decor change?

am personal thinking it is stoopid to destroy the mural. only thing such destruction proves is the lack o' character o' the folks bent on the destruction. that said, is not Gromnir's mural. the university owns the mural and is responding to the will o' what is effective their constituency. we would hope the university of rhode island could be as enlightened as university administrations is in our imagination. *snort* thanks in part to the polarization, fear and anger medicine dan don't wanna blame trump for at all, we got large sections o' the population who feels justified in their need for retribution. can't reach the real causes o' student anger? well, the mural represents one o' the evils they believe is being ignored... or somesuch. destroy it.

university o' ri has the right to do whatever they want with the mural. if destruction will foster a more healthy student learning environment, then they has an excuse for destruction, but somehow this feels to us like a teachable moment. there should be an opportunity to bring the community together and listen and educate. more than the mural itself, am disappointed the university don't appear to be doing more to take advantage o' an opportunity for learning... though given just how polarized and divided is our national population, expecting more from a university community may be naive on our part.

am eternal hopeful 'all those dumb university students who don't know enough to realize how pointless is their efforts will nevertheless manage to save us from ourselves. 

HA! Good Fun!

  • Thanks 2
  • Hmmm 1

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly don't disagree the university has the right to remove the mural. I just hate to see aetwork destroyed. My elementary school had a bicentennial mural, and I as preteen hated when they painted it over. Hated that Patricia Cornwall tore up a Sickert to try and prove he was Jack the Ripper. They're all entitled to destroy them, they owned them. It'll never sit well with me, even if sometimes destruction might be necessary.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Malcador said:

Undoubtedly the Marxist infiltration is making inroads.

Malc you have made similar comments when you ask questions like  " well its not like city xxx is Mogadishu " ....but thats one of the main reasons and point of the law and why we enforce the law. There is no need for any city in the world to deteriorate due to lawlessness and anarchy from a functional city to become an utter disaster like any city in Somalia

The enforcement of the law doesnt work  like that where you keep ignoring the breaking of the law until the institution collapses.....you enforce the law when its broken unless there are extenuating circumstances

Socialist movements have there own nebulous economic and political objectives and thats normal ...but they must adhere to the laws of the land when they do things like protest and demonstrate due to unpopular court rulings 

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point was what is going on in those cities is overblown by some, and one can make a decent guess as to why. 

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gromnir said:

 

am personal thinking it is stoopid to destroy the mural. only thing such destruction proves is the lack o' character o' the folks bent on the destruction. that said, is not Gromnir's mural. the university owns the mural and is responding to the will o' what is effective their constituency. we would hope the university of rhode island could be as enlightened as university administrations is in our imagination. *snort* thanks in part to the polarization, fear and anger medicine dan don't wanna blame trump for at all, we got large sections o' the population who feels justified in their need for retribution. can't reach the real causes o' student anger? well, the mural represents one o' the evils they believe is being ignored... or somesuch. destroy it.

university o' ri has the right to do whatever they want with the mural. if destruction will foster a more healthy student learning environment, then they has an excuse for destruction, but somehow this feels to us like a teachable moment. there should be an opportunity to bring the community together and listen and educate. more than the mural itself, am disappointed the university don't appear to be doing more to take advantage o' an opportunity for learning... though given just how polarized and divided is our national population, expecting more from a university community may be naive on our part.

am eternal hopeful 'all those dumb university students who don't know enough to realize how pointless is their efforts will nevertheless manage to save us from ourselves. 

HA! Good Fun!

This part of your  post I agree with particularly and aligns to certain concerns I have around how some institutions, like Universities, have become both political and ideological battlegrounds when in fact students should be focusing on there degree primarily and how they can become better people with a degree and then once you have your degree  you can  contribute  towards society and advocate  certain changes. As the erudite Jordan Peterson says " clean your own room first " ..to quote him

"My sense is that if you want to change the world, you start with yourself and work outward because you build your competence that way. I don't know how you can go out and protest the structure of the entire economic system if you can't keep your room organized."

https://bigthink.com/personal-growth/jordan-peterson-clean-your-room?rebelltitem=2#rebelltitem2

 

But we generally havent seen this around certain BLM  outcomes or objectives. Some protestors and activists are not interested in a debate or even the real contribution a particular person has made to the society. We see this sweeping objective of   " taking down all statues that ostensibly are racist and not inclusive " ...even if the statue represents the fact the country fought against injustice and real ideologies that are much worse in our modern world than historical injustice 

For example the recent failed objective to  " take down Winston Churchill statues " in the UK

 

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gromnir said:

fixed

btw, the trump strawman where you try and knock the stuffing out o' the President being blamed for riots position ignores what we believe is the more common and hard to refute argument that the President has exacerbated political and racial divisions and has done more than a little to make existing protests more violent with his inarguably extra Constitutional responses. on the long list o' causes and accelerants o' the protests, trump should figure prominent... save for in the fox news bubble.

as to the mural, everybody loves democracy, right up until people start asking for and doing things some o' us believe is stoopid. 

imagine into existence a jerk so offended by norman rockwell paintings and their saccharine americana that he buys every one he can get his hands on and then burns 'em. converse, another dirtbag buys original manuscripts and author notes o' maya angelou and uses the shredded paper as kitty litter. admitted vulgar uses o' wealth in both cases, no?

whether is groups or individuals, right to the quiet use and enjoyment o' private property or real property is one o' those basic rights @Guard Dog is gonna get his dander up regarding. just 'cause something is old don't mean it got some particular value to the public at large, unless the public so decides... and the public is then free to change their minds regarding the cultural worthiness o' such objects. democracy is fickle. 

one o' our +80-year-old aunts (though am wondering if black magic might be involved 'cause she could very well be 800 based on family stories) gots wallpaper in her home which predates the mural in question. no doubt the person who designed the wallpaper thought they were an artist or craftsman, and our aunt likes it.  is her wallpaper any less art than the mural? why? her wallpaper may be the last remaining example o' that particularly hideous design anywhere in existence. please, make it so. we need have the paper steamed off the walls and removed to a museum if our aunt finally decides to make decor change?

am personal thinking it is stoopid to destroy the mural. only thing such destruction proves is the lack o' character o' the folks bent on the destruction. that said, is not Gromnir's mural. the university owns the mural and is responding to the will o' what is effective their constituency. we would hope the university of rhode island could be as enlightened as university administrations is in our imagination. *snort* thanks in part to the polarization, fear and anger medicine dan don't wanna blame trump for at all, we got large sections o' the population who feels justified in their need for retribution. can't reach the real causes o' student anger? well, the mural represents one o' the evils they believe is being ignored... or somesuch. destroy it.

university o' ri has the right to do whatever they want with the mural. if destruction will foster a more healthy student learning environment, then they has an excuse for destruction, but somehow this feels to us like a teachable moment. there should be an opportunity to bring the community together and listen and educate. more than the mural itself, am disappointed the university don't appear to be doing more to take advantage o' an opportunity for learning... though given just how polarized and divided is our national population, expecting more from a university community may be naive on our part.

am eternal hopeful 'all those dumb university students who don't know enough to realize how pointless is their efforts will nevertheless manage to save us from ourselves. 

HA! Good Fun!

I agree, they have a right, but it doesn't always make it right. 

Behavior like this, trying to hide, erase the past, just becuase our current standards and opinions change, is just stupid. 

With that type of thinking, people will eventually try to dismantle Parthenon as a white supermacists monument, and grind Pyramids to the dust, because they serve as a monument of systemic oppression and slavery of black people... 

People fought hard for ability to make art, including a one that criticised religion and was non-conforming to a populace at large, now these people want to destroy someone elses art, because they are offended by their own feelings when looking at that? 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Elerond said:

People who think that the mural in the question should be reserved should offer to buy and reserve it. 

Sure, lets do it at the same time when people who want more immigration will start using their own assets to host, feed and be legally liable for immigrants actions

I'm all for that type of decision making, where I would directly decide where my portion of taxes would go. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

Sure, lets do it at the same time when people who want more immigration will start using their own assets to host, feed and be legally liable for immigrants actions

I'm all for that type of decision making, where I would directly decide where my portion of taxes would go. 

As murals current owner doesn't want it, so if you want to preserve it you should buy it and not force its current owner to preserve it because you think it should be preserved.  

You already decide how much taxes you pay and where portion of your taxes go, although you have one vote of millions when it comes to that issue, so weight of your decision is not that heavy if you can't get people around you agree with you.  

Would those people have also right part of all revenue that those immigrants generate? Considering that they are legally liable of their actions?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Elerond said:

As murals current owner doesn't want it, so if you want to preserve it you should buy it and not force its current owner to preserve it because you think it should be preserved.  

You already decide how much taxes you pay and where portion of your taxes go, although you have one vote of millions when it comes to that issue, so weight of your decision is not that heavy if you can't get people around you agree with you.  

Would those people have also right part of all revenue that those immigrants generate? Considering that they are legally liable of their actions?

You could ask them to particpate, by paying rent to you and so on, so sure, you just need to be able to execute that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Darkpriest said:

You could ask them to particpate, by paying rent to you and so on, so sure, you just need to be able to execute that. 

First you want people pay their rent and then you say that those who pay their rent could then collect that rent from them, how that should actually work?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...