He didn't actually end up saying to leave them in place. He talks about an open air display where Communist leader statues are displayed, IE A MUSEUM. The public square statue is a declaration of admiration and celebration and something to aspire to. Veneration as the one guy said. These statues are all enemies of the US of A. Can you imagine having statues of Rommel or Goebbels in Warsaw or Paris or London? Put them in a museum like the Holocaust museum so future generations can remember these people who were so dedicated to the cause of slavery that they were willing to kill their fellow countrymen and destroy the union. That the statues were allowed to be built and displayed in the first place is insanity. The first statue was built in 1890 and the last in 1929. These guys were heroes to people who firmly believed "The South will rise again" and the natural order of things would be restored. Plenty of people in Germany had and still have similar feelings, yet no statues of Himmler in Berlin "so we can remember history". I think that's a good thing.
@ there wasn’t really a union prior to the civil war. While it was called the United States, it really wasn’t. States rights were written into the constitution which Lincoln totally disregarded. I agree with the Rommel or Gobbels stuff. The people that propelled the south into the war were traitors. Absolutely. I’ve made that very argument myself. However, like so many wars, the common foot soldier tasked to fight it by and large was not.
Lived in Richmond when it was a great place . Not so much anymore
9 часов назад
Me too. I was born there. It was an interesting city because it wasn't like any other place. Now it's as boring as any other medium sized city. When you kill a city's history, it has nothing. If it wasn't for being the state's capitol, it would be even worse than it is now. It will be a mini Detroit in another 10 Years.
I live 20 minutes from there. My wife graduates from a residency at VCU in June. Can't wait to leave.
7 часов назад
@@shawnriffhard It's move than that. The whole culture of the city has changed. It's the worst of both worlds, the charm of Detroit and the efficiency of DC. The beautiful areas have been destroyed.
These guys going on about Trump pardoning people, and here we have our sitting president pardoning his son, his friends, convicts of many different convictions, and the last person he will pardon will be himself before leaving office.
When they say the statues were built during Jim Crow is bs. They were built before and during the turn of the century when the Lost Cause was popular and the north reengaged the south. It was a conciliatory thing and slavery and oppression wasn’t a factor. The bald guy is a denier who’s awful in this debate.
It's funny that, probably, some people who are all upset about people who were heroes(?) at the time their statues were put up, will erect statues of people that in generations who will be seen as horrible humans.
Isnt there a statue of Karl Marx in Portland or is it in Seattle. There is a Bust of Marx at his Grave where he is buried in Highgate Cemetery in London. I see statues of George Floyd so tell me what did he do in his miserable life that was worse than Jefferson or Washington.
Nobody has any ability to truly put themselves in the shoes of history from an empathetic point of view and really understand what it was like living in a completely different world because nobody actually reads real history. They just get a basic "zoomed out" view of the key events and just have very basic, simplistic takes that don't paint an honest picture of the reality of the times. Everyone applies our modern sensibilities to a time that couldn't have been more different. Saying everyone in the Confederacy, or even our founders, supported slavery is such a gross, incorrect oversimplification of a monumentally complex issue. Hell, even Robert E. Lee believed that slavery was evil, but we really don't appreciate how complex of an issue it actually was; many (incorrectly) feared the economy couldn't even exist if slavery just abruptly ended and also many feared that slaves would suffer even worse fates if they were just turned loose without any kind of enfranchisement or citizenship in America (hence the 14th amendment's existence following the 13th which freed the slaves). There was no social security, there was no welfare, there were no homeless shelters. There were no entitlements or safety nets, people either worked and survived or they didn't. Freed slaves who had no family and nowhere to turn would have just been turned loose into the wild and told, "good luck!" - Now that's not to say noting could be done, but the idea of spending federal funds to completely support people's lives was not even a concept that existed in the minds of most people then. People were not each other's keeper and it wasn't normal to expect other people to foot the bill to support other people. There was not this obnoxious air of social justice about every little thing possible. Life was hard, people struggled. "Personal success" wasn't even really a concept, not in the way we view it, even though there were definitely varying degrees of wealthy folks. Most people who didn't live in a city, which was a lot of people, just worked their own land and raised huge families without slaves and many lived and died in the same place they were born. There were even black slave owners. Science at the time (not all of it, but a lot) said that blacks were a lesser species and this was very accepted almost dogma among many people and just like us, many people had faith in science. None of it justifies the institution existing, but people are products of their time and many, many Americans of all colors and races fought, and died, for the right side of history in the end. A great many of our founders knew that Slavery did not jive with the founding documents of America, and everyone looks at how they didn't just eradicate slavery when they founded the country and basically ignored it. But people, again, disregard the complex reality of history for those who lived it. Had they tried to address slavery during the Revolution, America would have never existed, the South would have said fuck off and America wouldn't have existed and slavery probably would have persisted for far longer than it ended up continuing and our Republic would have died in infancy. Also, and this is a very key point that I've heard very few historians even make, and that is the fact that while they didn't address slavery in the Declaration of Independence or the original Constitution, *they also did NOTHING to strengthen or perpetuate slavery, and that was intentional as well.* Slavery was viewed as a dying institution in late 18th century America, around the time of the Revolution, and leading into the early 19th century. Unfortunately it would see a resurgence in popularity, especially in the South, as America established itself and the South doubled down on their agriculturally based economy. That being said, as much as I understand and have read about our country's history and obviously deplore slavery, I also deplore people tearing down historical artifacts regardless of who they are or when they were made. I'm okay with not naming schools after Robert E. Lee and such, that does seem a bit crass in 2024, but it's a slippery slope and you HAVE to take the bad with the good or risk destroying your history entirely; history should be honest, not edited and revised for the sake of the feelings of people alive today who don't know shit about shit and are just looking for an obvious cause to fight because finding a real cause that actually has a real impact today is actually hard because we've gotten to a place of such commercial wealth that nobody really struggles in this country compared to the people who truly struggled before us to make our lives so rich and easy today. If we bury and destroy all signs and understanding of slavery, don't be shocked if long after we're gone people forget either side of the story and end up not even caring or knowing the truth of what really happened all because a bunch of self-absorbed, narcissistic sociopaths had to stroke their egos and throw temper tantrums over shit they didn't know anything about in the first place just so they could feel like they did something important with their miserable existences. People assume that trajectories of civilization will never change and things like slavery, once gone, are gone for good but not if you destroy History. Sometimes civilizations take errant paths before they get back on course and it is entirely possible that slavery could very well be far from dead, hell, it's still going strong on planet Earth today but again, it's not happening in our backyard so no one really cares. Funny, that. And, if you actually read up on Robert E. Lee, it's hard not to appreciate the man, slavery aside. He was not this evil, slave driving monster that some of the revisionist historians would have us believe. He was a complex, decent man who was a product of the times he existed in and I don't see a problem at least acknowledging that he was not just a Hitler-esque figure who shouldn't be banned from polite society. If people today, especially on the left, had half the scruples and principles of a man like Robert E. Lee, we wouldn't be in such a mess right now.
Sorry that's so long, but if anyone ever wants to really have a true grasp on History, you *have* to read. You're never going to have an honest, informed world view by watching videos, reading headlines and just understanding the key events of history and the dates on which they happen. You gotta dive in and really read these people to get a modern understanding of anything and it's hard to convey the nuance of many modern issues that relate to our history in short order.
@@podunkest All very true, but that's exactly what museums are all about. Not the public square. Black people in Richmond should have to look at these statues on their way to work or school every morning?
The sad thing is the very party these people belong to were the exact people that owned the slaves. Add to that once you remove statues of people who you/children/others may ask questions about will never be asked because no one will know to ask.
@wordword6039 who are "these people"? I have nothing but contempt for the Democratic party and for the statues. They belong in museums, so people can never forget the scummiest parts if our history. Not in public places to be venerated.
Two very different topics in the video. I'd like to mention the first. The statues. Such a clueless panel. While I don't disagree with the difficulty people may have with statues, I don't think people know much about the people who represented the south in the war. While it is true that many supported slavery, what isn't taken into account are those that were simply supporting their home states. In 1860 when the war broke out citizens weren't from the United States, they were from Virginia or Vermont or whatever state. When Robert E. Lee took command of the southern forces he did so because his state was being attacked. I doubt that Ulysses Grant or William Sherman cared much about the issue (slavery), they were supporting their army. It just happened that all these people fought under the banner of the country, Lee for the Confederacy Sherman and Grant for what became known as the union. Before the war, not much thought was given to it. The great historian Shelby Foote pointed out that what the Civil war did was changed the United States from an are to an is. It really made us all Americans. However, especially where the south was concerned, the majority of people fighting had no cause to fight other than that their homes were being invaded. Again, Shelby Foote recounted a story of a yankee soldier asking a rebel why he was fighting and he simply said, "because you're here." In point of fact it can easily be argued that the average white person in the south was hurt by slavery. Most people were highly uneducated as there was no compulsory education. And what do uneducated people do for a living but work with their backs. If all of that labor is being done by slaves, what are your options? Share cropping and scratch farming? In many southern states you can still see the remnants of this today. This is what drove hillbilly culture. The poorest areas of the United States are in nearly totally white southern states. This isn't an accident or coincidence. So, to simply say these people were traitors and slave lovers is absolutely incorrect and, like much else on the left, lacks the understanding that historical perspective and context can provide. I urge all these people to read Shelby Foote (who was consulted and highly featured in Ken Burns famous documentary on the Civil War). His three volume work on the war are great works.
9 часов назад+2
Yes, you know your history. I don't disagree with a word of what you have written. Most Americans today are simply clueless about there own history. It's amazing just how ignorant the average American is.
I disagree with a great deal of what you've written and little, if anything of it has anything to do with the question of Confederate statues in Richmond 150 years later, but let's let the vice president of the Confederacy speak for himself- In March 1861, Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederate States of America, gave his view: The new [Confederate] constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution - African slavery as it exists amongst us - the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution . . . The prevailing ideas entertained by . . . most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. . . Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of . . . the equality of races. This was an error . . . Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery - subordination to the superior race - is his natural and normal condition. - Alexander H. Stephens, March 21, 1861, reported in the Savannah Republican,
@ as I stated many in the south fought the war for slavery, you did’t have to go to the vice- president you could have found several quotes from Jefferson Davis himself. What I said was that there were also many, including Lee who was offered command of the northern forces but turned it down not to preserve slavery, but to fight for his state. Also, I fully understand wanting to remove the statues, however to say that the common southerner was fighting for the preservation of slavery is laughable. You say you don’t agree with anything I wrote I don’t think you bothered reading it all. Do you disagree that the majority of the south was illiterate? Do you disagree that the majority of the south didn’t own slaves? Do you disagree with the fact that the post poverty stricken areas of the US are solid white communities throughout the south? Look it up. I’m not defending the south in the Civil War, the right side won. But to blindly say everyone in the south felt this way is just not accurate.
@@ChangeYourLife_ I didn't say ANYTHING about the "common Southerner". You're intentionally mis-quoting me and intentionally missing the point. This discussion is about the statues and the validity of their public display. NONE of whom are "common Southerners". And, the more I think about it, the more f'n outrageous it is that they were erected 25- 64 years after the war. Absolutely deranged that it was thought to be a good idea in the first place and sadly astounding that anyone could possibly favor leaving them in place now.
Douglas Murray is the last guy you want to debate.
Douglas Murray is correct, leave the statues in place and have an open discussion about these historical figures.
He didn't actually end up saying to leave them in place. He talks about an open air display where Communist leader statues are displayed, IE A MUSEUM. The public square statue is a declaration of admiration and celebration and something to aspire to. Veneration as the one guy said. These statues are all enemies of the US of A. Can you imagine having statues of Rommel or Goebbels in Warsaw or Paris or London?
Put them in a museum like the Holocaust museum so future generations can remember these people who were so dedicated to the cause of slavery that they were willing to kill their fellow countrymen and destroy the union.
That the statues were allowed to be built and displayed in the first place is insanity. The first statue was built in 1890 and the last in 1929. These guys were heroes to people who firmly believed "The South will rise again" and the natural order of things would be restored. Plenty of people in Germany had and still have similar feelings, yet no statues of Himmler in Berlin "so we can remember history". I think that's a good thing.
@ there wasn’t really a union prior to the civil war. While it was called the United States, it really wasn’t. States rights were written into the constitution which Lincoln totally disregarded. I agree with the Rommel or Gobbels stuff. The people that propelled the south into the war were traitors. Absolutely. I’ve made that very argument myself. However, like so many wars, the common foot soldier tasked to fight it by and large was not.
It is odd how most of the statues are from the losing side.
I appreciate the civil discussion. We need more of these kind of interactions of opposing opinions. Well done and a great example for others.
Douglas Murray is on another plateau with any talk show host or news host.
Douglas is a brilliant journalist....
Watched DouglasMurrays Uncancelled History such a great Series. Highly recommend it
Lived in Richmond when it was a great place . Not so much anymore
Me too. I was born there. It was an interesting city because it wasn't like any other place. Now it's as boring as any other medium sized city. When you kill a city's history, it has nothing. If it wasn't for being the state's capitol, it would be even worse than it is now. It will be a mini Detroit in another 10 Years.
And this was caused by the removal of some statues?
Who killed Richmond's history?
I live 20 minutes from there. My wife graduates from a residency at VCU in June. Can't wait to leave.
@@shawnriffhard It's move than that. The whole culture of the city has changed. It's the worst of both worlds, the charm of Detroit and the efficiency of DC. The beautiful areas have been destroyed.
There are no traitors in a civil war!
So glad he said “plinths”
A saber among the scythes.
Everything woke turns to sh1t
Bill should just retire and never be heard from aagin!
Wouldn't that be wonderful?
He’s helping turn the tide on woke capture of the left wing. So gratifying to watch him grow
Love how everyone just pretends like slavery doesn't go on today particularly in Africa & Asia! 😂
@@matthewmclean6862 how does that have anything to do with statues in Richmond?
southerners believed in States Rights.....the emancipation proclamation was read in 1863
These guys going on about Trump pardoning people, and here we have our sitting president pardoning his son, his friends, convicts of many different convictions, and the last person he will pardon will be himself before leaving office.
When they say the statues were built during Jim Crow is bs. They were built before and during the turn of the century when the Lost Cause was popular and the north reengaged the south. It was a conciliatory thing and slavery and oppression wasn’t a factor. The bald guy is a denier who’s awful in this debate.
can you his content? how do you do it? im trying to make something towards my medical bills, thanks
It's funny that, probably, some people who are all upset about people who were heroes(?) at the time their statues were put up, will erect statues of people that in generations who will be seen as horrible humans.
Isnt there a statue of Karl Marx in Portland or is it in Seattle.
There is a Bust of Marx at his Grave where he is buried in Highgate Cemetery in London.
I see statues of George Floyd so tell me what did he do in his miserable life that was worse than Jefferson or Washington.
Nobody has any ability to truly put themselves in the shoes of history from an empathetic point of view and really understand what it was like living in a completely different world because nobody actually reads real history. They just get a basic "zoomed out" view of the key events and just have very basic, simplistic takes that don't paint an honest picture of the reality of the times. Everyone applies our modern sensibilities to a time that couldn't have been more different. Saying everyone in the Confederacy, or even our founders, supported slavery is such a gross, incorrect oversimplification of a monumentally complex issue. Hell, even Robert E. Lee believed that slavery was evil, but we really don't appreciate how complex of an issue it actually was; many (incorrectly) feared the economy couldn't even exist if slavery just abruptly ended and also many feared that slaves would suffer even worse fates if they were just turned loose without any kind of enfranchisement or citizenship in America (hence the 14th amendment's existence following the 13th which freed the slaves). There was no social security, there was no welfare, there were no homeless shelters. There were no entitlements or safety nets, people either worked and survived or they didn't. Freed slaves who had no family and nowhere to turn would have just been turned loose into the wild and told, "good luck!" - Now that's not to say noting could be done, but the idea of spending federal funds to completely support people's lives was not even a concept that existed in the minds of most people then. People were not each other's keeper and it wasn't normal to expect other people to foot the bill to support other people.
There was not this obnoxious air of social justice about every little thing possible. Life was hard, people struggled. "Personal success" wasn't even really a concept, not in the way we view it, even though there were definitely varying degrees of wealthy folks. Most people who didn't live in a city, which was a lot of people, just worked their own land and raised huge families without slaves and many lived and died in the same place they were born. There were even black slave owners. Science at the time (not all of it, but a lot) said that blacks were a lesser species and this was very accepted almost dogma among many people and just like us, many people had faith in science. None of it justifies the institution existing, but people are products of their time and many, many Americans of all colors and races fought, and died, for the right side of history in the end.
A great many of our founders knew that Slavery did not jive with the founding documents of America, and everyone looks at how they didn't just eradicate slavery when they founded the country and basically ignored it. But people, again, disregard the complex reality of history for those who lived it. Had they tried to address slavery during the Revolution, America would have never existed, the South would have said fuck off and America wouldn't have existed and slavery probably would have persisted for far longer than it ended up continuing and our Republic would have died in infancy.
Also, and this is a very key point that I've heard very few historians even make, and that is the fact that while they didn't address slavery in the Declaration of Independence or the original Constitution, *they also did NOTHING to strengthen or perpetuate slavery, and that was intentional as well.* Slavery was viewed as a dying institution in late 18th century America, around the time of the Revolution, and leading into the early 19th century. Unfortunately it would see a resurgence in popularity, especially in the South, as America established itself and the South doubled down on their agriculturally based economy.
That being said, as much as I understand and have read about our country's history and obviously deplore slavery, I also deplore people tearing down historical artifacts regardless of who they are or when they were made. I'm okay with not naming schools after Robert E. Lee and such, that does seem a bit crass in 2024, but it's a slippery slope and you HAVE to take the bad with the good or risk destroying your history entirely; history should be honest, not edited and revised for the sake of the feelings of people alive today who don't know shit about shit and are just looking for an obvious cause to fight because finding a real cause that actually has a real impact today is actually hard because we've gotten to a place of such commercial wealth that nobody really struggles in this country compared to the people who truly struggled before us to make our lives so rich and easy today. If we bury and destroy all signs and understanding of slavery, don't be shocked if long after we're gone people forget either side of the story and end up not even caring or knowing the truth of what really happened all because a bunch of self-absorbed, narcissistic sociopaths had to stroke their egos and throw temper tantrums over shit they didn't know anything about in the first place just so they could feel like they did something important with their miserable existences. People assume that trajectories of civilization will never change and things like slavery, once gone, are gone for good but not if you destroy History. Sometimes civilizations take errant paths before they get back on course and it is entirely possible that slavery could very well be far from dead, hell, it's still going strong on planet Earth today but again, it's not happening in our backyard so no one really cares. Funny, that. And, if you actually read up on Robert E. Lee, it's hard not to appreciate the man, slavery aside. He was not this evil, slave driving monster that some of the revisionist historians would have us believe. He was a complex, decent man who was a product of the times he existed in and I don't see a problem at least acknowledging that he was not just a Hitler-esque figure who shouldn't be banned from polite society. If people today, especially on the left, had half the scruples and principles of a man like Robert E. Lee, we wouldn't be in such a mess right now.
Sorry that's so long, but if anyone ever wants to really have a true grasp on History, you *have* to read. You're never going to have an honest, informed world view by watching videos, reading headlines and just understanding the key events of history and the dates on which they happen. You gotta dive in and really read these people to get a modern understanding of anything and it's hard to convey the nuance of many modern issues that relate to our history in short order.
@@podunkest All very true, but that's exactly what museums are all about. Not the public square. Black people in Richmond should have to look at these statues on their way to work or school every morning?
@@podunkest
Outstanding post. Couldn't agree more.
The sad thing is the very party these people belong to were the exact people that owned the slaves. Add to that once you remove statues of people who you/children/others may ask questions about will never be asked because no one will know to ask.
@wordword6039 who are "these people"? I have nothing but contempt for the Democratic party and for the statues. They belong in museums, so people can never forget the scummiest parts if our history. Not in public places to be venerated.
Two very different topics in the video. I'd like to mention the first. The statues. Such a clueless panel. While I don't disagree with the difficulty people may have with statues, I don't think people know much about the people who represented the south in the war. While it is true that many supported slavery, what isn't taken into account are those that were simply supporting their home states. In 1860 when the war broke out citizens weren't from the United States, they were from Virginia or Vermont or whatever state. When Robert E. Lee took command of the southern forces he did so because his state was being attacked. I doubt that Ulysses Grant or William Sherman cared much about the issue (slavery), they were supporting their army. It just happened that all these people fought under the banner of the country, Lee for the Confederacy Sherman and Grant for what became known as the union. Before the war, not much thought was given to it. The great historian Shelby Foote pointed out that what the Civil war did was changed the United States from an are to an is. It really made us all Americans. However, especially where the south was concerned, the majority of people fighting had no cause to fight other than that their homes were being invaded. Again, Shelby Foote recounted a story of a yankee soldier asking a rebel why he was fighting and he simply said, "because you're here." In point of fact it can easily be argued that the average white person in the south was hurt by slavery. Most people were highly uneducated as there was no compulsory education. And what do uneducated people do for a living but work with their backs. If all of that labor is being done by slaves, what are your options? Share cropping and scratch farming? In many southern states you can still see the remnants of this today. This is what drove hillbilly culture. The poorest areas of the United States are in nearly totally white southern states. This isn't an accident or coincidence. So, to simply say these people were traitors and slave lovers is absolutely incorrect and, like much else on the left, lacks the understanding that historical perspective and context can provide. I urge all these people to read Shelby Foote (who was consulted and highly featured in Ken Burns famous documentary on the Civil War). His three volume work on the war are great works.
Yes, you know your history. I don't disagree with a word of what you have written. Most Americans today are simply clueless about there own history. It's amazing just how ignorant the average American is.
I disagree with a great deal of what you've written and little, if anything of it has anything to do with the question of Confederate statues in Richmond 150 years later, but let's let the vice president of the Confederacy speak for himself-
In March 1861, Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederate States of America, gave his view:
The new [Confederate] constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution - African slavery as it exists amongst us - the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution . . . The prevailing ideas entertained by . . . most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. . . Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of . . . the equality of races. This was an error . . .
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery - subordination to the superior race - is his natural and normal condition.
- Alexander H. Stephens, March 21, 1861, reported in the Savannah Republican,
@ as I stated many in the south fought the war for slavery, you did’t have to go to the vice- president you could have found several quotes from Jefferson Davis himself. What I said was that there were also many, including Lee who was offered command of the northern forces but turned it down not to preserve slavery, but to fight for his state. Also, I fully understand wanting to remove the statues, however to say that the common southerner was fighting for the preservation of slavery is laughable. You say you don’t agree with anything I wrote I don’t think you bothered reading it all. Do you disagree that the majority of the south was illiterate? Do you disagree that the majority of the south didn’t own slaves? Do you disagree with the fact that the post poverty stricken areas of the US are solid white communities throughout the south? Look it up. I’m not defending the south in the Civil War, the right side won. But to blindly say everyone in the south felt this way is just not accurate.
@@ChangeYourLife_ I didn't say ANYTHING about the "common Southerner". You're intentionally mis-quoting me and intentionally missing the point. This discussion is about the statues and the validity of their public display. NONE of whom are "common Southerners".
And, the more I think about it, the more f'n outrageous it is that they were erected 25- 64 years after the war. Absolutely deranged that it was thought to be a good idea in the first place and sadly astounding that anyone could possibly favor leaving them in place now.
@ChangeYourLife_
Could you expand on all that?
Douglas Murray is kinda woke now. DOnt like it.
Talk television, rubbish.
Snooze
Maher is a nitwit.
Those stone bases used to be American history good or bad it was American history