Wrangor
Go Deacs
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2011
- Messages
- 12,413
- Reaction score
- 1,376
Does the Holocaust Museum inflame Germans and Italians?
Sometimes I feel like you can't read, like honestly can't read.
Does the Holocaust Museum inflame Germans and Italians?
Big difference in a historical marker (IE: a sign) and the construction of a lynching Gallow. No? One informs, the other inflames.
Timing can mean a lot. Seems to me that racial tension (hatred) is way up right now. Even if this is a good idea I don't think now is a good time to do it.
exactly which lynchings of black people weren't racially motivated?
Sometimes I feel like you can't read, like honestly can't read.
Many of us understand when you can't defend a response you blame the messenger.
You got me. Outwitted once again. You do realize that i am arguing that Museums are an excellent resource for educating the public about history. In fact that is probably my main point. That a Holocaust museum is a great way to educate the people of Germany about the horrors of the Holocaust. While I am not German, nor Jew I would postulate that it might not be AS wise to set up a gas chamber in a neighborhood in Germany where there are already high tensions between native Germans and a high Jewish population. Perhaps that might end up in unintended consequences of inflaming the tensions between the two groups, rather than serving to move both groups forward towards honesty and reconciliation. Perhaps those consequences would set racial reconciliation back and end up with both sides digging more into their respective corners rather than being willing and open to learn and progress.
So when you post something as unaware as asking me a question about Museums when I specifically mentioned that a museum would be a great idea in my original post, I don't always feel like you deserve an intelligent response, because it seems clear that you aren't reading what I post anyway. You have already formed formed your opinion, and you are rip roaring to argue against an 'opinion' of mine that simply doesn't exist.
You got me. Outwitted once again. You do realize that i am arguing that Museums are an excellent resource for educating the public about history. In fact that is probably my main point. That a Holocaust museum is a great way to educate the people of Germany about the horrors of the Holocaust. While I am not German, nor Jew I would postulate that it might not be AS wise to set up a gas chamber in a neighborhood in Germany where there are already high tensions between native Germans and a high Jewish population. Perhaps that might end up in unintended consequences of inflaming the tensions between the two groups, rather than serving to move both groups forward towards honesty and reconciliation. Perhaps those consequences would set racial reconciliation back and end up with both sides digging more into their respective corners rather than being willing and open to learn and progress.
So when you post something as unaware as asking me a question about Museums when I specifically mentioned that a museum would be a great idea in my original post, I don't always feel like you deserve an intelligent response, because it seems clear that you aren't reading what I post anyway. You have already formed formed your opinion, and you are rip roaring to argue against an 'opinion' of mine that simply doesn't exist.
The reality is you don't treat the victimizers with respect. They don't deserve it.
The way you help to deter some potential events is to show that the public won't stand for it and you will be held responsible in public. Name the people who did it on the monument for all people to see for as long as that monument lasts.
Yep, it's better to keep such events in the dark or in a museum that most people will never enter.
I'm not sure I said that. First of all the bridge in Selma is an actual bridge. Nobody built it to be a memorial. The JFK assassination isn't a controversial totem either. There was one (or a couple of guys if you believe the theories) that killed a sitting president and pretty much the entire world wept.
Lynchings were the systematic culmination of hatred between one group of people against another. Our efforts as a country should be to solve this problem that clearly still exists today, although not to the same impact of public executions. I'm not sure what you are getting at but I can assure that erecting a lynching monument is not going to help race relations anywhere.
It important to remember the past so that we can use it to move forward. It is also important to use some wisdom and common sense. Your correlations are pretty ridiculous. When considering the actual impact of these monuments in the community it is going to be a net loss and be used to inflame tensions not heal them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The reality is you don't treat the victimizers with respect. They don't deserve it.
The way you help to deter some potential events is to show that the public won't stand for it and you will be held responsible in public. Name the people who did it on the monument for all people to see for as long as that monument lasts.
I'm genuinely curious about your perspective, so I hope you don't think I'm piling on. Shouldn't the purpose of a memorial be dual - to remember and to educate? If you disagree, and a memorial is only meant to commemorate, then I suppose erecting one in an outside location is plausible (though I'd still disagree).
If you agree that memorials are meant to also educate, then wouldn't the logical conclusion be that the areas in which the original events occurred are the most likely to require said education? In which case, the original location is the only viable option?