first it was taking down monuments to traitors. now...

[John Galt]

lmao

so what exactly did McKinley do that warrants his removal? i can't think of anything. and no one says any actual things about what he actually did htey just say he's bad because they feel that way.

so, why was the statue there anyway? NOW THIS IS REAL A STORY OF TRIALS AND TRIBULATIONS

the statue was commissioned by a man who was impressed by McKinley, "the first modern president", before a radical minority terrorist ended that great man's life. it was being sculpted in san fransico when it was toppled in the earthquake. the plaster model cushioned its fall and saved it from severe damage, but it still fell into a foundry. the sculptor couldn't move it himself, as it was too heavy, and was trying to figure out how. a week later the foundry owner told him he had melted it down (finders keepers)

BUT the guy across the street from the foundry at a machinist shop had seen it, and saved it from destruction along with some random help from people cleaning up the city. relieved, the benefactor moved it to Eureka and then presented as a gift to the city of Arcata for ALL TIME and was kinda like Arcata's first big thing, considering more people came to the city than had ever been there before: 2,000 people

this statue has seen real struggles just to be there, struggles these people who want to remove it can't even imagine. and it's something that the city agreed to have for all time. now a bunch of people say a bunch of bullshit that doesn't even make sense. at most, McKinley was an imperialist but this has to do with people in far off lands. i read quotes about how children were sold as slaves in that square. lmao. and that was related to McKinley. rofl

[exploited]

His actions re: the "Five Civilized Tribes" are well-known, and directly resulted in the loss of 90 million acres of sovereign land. He destroyed any ability they had to self-govern, which I'm told is an important concept in American history, by breaking up their courts, governments and land. He did this without gaining any semblance of real consent from the tribes, and all the while, did nothing as settlers murdered and pillaged entire communities.

Your obsession with statues mirrors your obsession with guns. It is tied up in some weird personal bullshit and doesn't make any sense, which is why you are literally talking about a statue as if it were a human being who suffered. I am half-way expecting you to start saying that your grandpa gave you a McKinley statue or something, and that's why you can't stand the idea of people being denied their McKinley statue.

[Spider]

Never really gave a shit about McKinley before this thread...but now spending a bit of time scanning through some stuff on him, I have to say the good outweighs the bad by a mile. There's simply no justification for any of this, at least not if we're going to have any consistency whatsoever with those coming before and after. <-- That is the key issue. Makes no goddamn sense. Someone just needs some cause to be outraged over, as per the usual.

There needs to be some sort of a logical consistency here. Tearing down statues of treasonous filth confederates I'm fine with. Shouldn't have been there in the first place. But this? People just flailing.

[Kane]

But aren't statutes supposed to be something with which to revere a person for their accomplishments and deeds? How do we feel about manifest destiny?

[exploited]

[John Galt]

[Spider]

Ehh. That expansion would have happened anyway, just as a consequence of economic pressure. No overarching philosophy needed.

[John Galt]

[Spider]

Aw. Look at exploited stomping his little feet. Would have missed it.

[exploited]