Today it's the Confederate monuments, tomorrow...

[ratfink]

...the Alamo, then the Jefferson and Washington Memorials, and finally the Spanish missions they'll be taking a **** on.

You West Coast guys ready for your own history revision?

The Spanish missions in California comprise a series of 21 religious outposts or missions established between 1769 and 1833 in today's U.S. State of California. Founded by Catholic priests of the Franciscan order to evangelize the Native Americans, the missions led to the creation of the New Spain province of Alta California and were part of the expansion of the Spanish Empire into the most northern and western parts of Spanish North America.

Following long-term secular and religious policy of Spain in Latin America, the missionaries forced the native Californians to live in settlements called reductions, disrupting their traditional way of life. The missionaries introduced European fruits, vegetables, cattle, horses, ranching, and technology. The missions have been accused by critics, then and now, of various abuses and oppression. In the end, the missions had mixed results in their objectives: to convert, educate, and transform the natives into Spanish colonial citizens.

 

[GromsDad]

The left despised the Vietnam war and the soldiers who fought that war. We may see the left target the Vietnam War Memorial someday. 150 years from now it could be 9/11 memorials........could be sooner given how the left sucks up to Islamic Terrorists.

 

[Gnudz]

The differences is, the missions weren't built in the 1920's. The missions weren't built to send the message that some of these statues, erected decades after the south lost the civil war, were designed to send to certain residents of the south.

The missions represent the part of history, both the good and bad of it, that they were built in.

That being said, I'm not sure we should do away with statues of civil war leaders either.

Perhaps we could just repurpose them as toilets.

 

[Billy Ocean]

Well

I've actually come around on the confederate statues

I'm not a leftist

Also

I grew up in a home where we had portraits of Robert e Lee and stonewall Jackson on the wall

My great grandfather's middle name was lee (after Robert) as was the middle name of his 12 siblings

So my family was pretty deep in the southern heritage sh!t

Still

I have to admit

It is impossible to dismiss that, for blacks, these are symbols of slavery

I truly believe that to the old timers in my family, they do not think of them as monuments to slavery

For them, they are proud of their culture, and the rebel flag and the civil war are part of that

But that that stuff is not more important than the justifiable anger/ sadness blacks feel from these symbols

So I think it is time for them to go

 

[hal9000]

Confederate monuments were the first participation trophies.

 

[manbearpig]

It's ok guys, life will go on. You'll be ok, the worlds not ending

 

[GromsDad]

The Left is already on it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/three-dc-monuments-damaged-with-graffiti-over-holiday-weekend/2017/02/21/2f01610a-f842-11e6-bf01-d47f8cf9b643_story.html?utm_term=.e4699dcbaf93

 

[ratfink]

The missions represent the part of history, both the good and bad of it, that they were built in.

That is a familiar quote.

I'm listening closely to the demands of antifa and the rest of the current faux revolutionary guard. Their beef is not just about slavery in the South. It's more. It's about oppression wherever it leads. I think we can agree the Conquistadors murdered and enslaved far more indigenous peoples than the KKK/Confederate South did to African Americans.

 

[sirfun]

...the Alamo, then the Jefferson and Washington Memorials, and finally the Spanish missions they'll be taking a **** on.

You West Coast guys ready for your own history revision?

who will show up with torches chanting

"blood and soil" ?? )

 

[GWS]

The differences is, the missions weren't built in the 1920's. The missions weren't built to send the message that some of these statues, erected decades after the south lost the civil war, were designed to send to certain residents of the south.

The missions represent the part of history, both the good and bad of it, that they were built in.

That being said, I'm not sure we should do away with statues of civil war leaders either.

Perhaps we could just repurpose them as toilets.

What was the good part for the missions? They slaughtered and enslaved Indians at a horrific rate. That's like looking at the good done in Nazi concentration camps.

 

[GromsDad]

The differences is, the missions weren't built in the 1920's. The missions weren't built to send the message that some of these statues, erected decades after the south lost the civil war, were designed to send to certain residents of the south.

The missions represent the part of history, both the good and bad of it, that they were built in.

That being said, I'm not sure we should do away with statues of civil war leaders either.

Perhaps we could just repurpose them as toilets.

What was the good part for the missions? They slaughtered and enslaved Indians at a horrific rate. That's like looking at the good done in Nazi concentration camps.

Got a link? I admit complete ignorance of the topic of these missions you speak of. Guess its not part of an East Coast education.

 

[Gnudz]

The missions represent the part of history, both the good and bad of it, that they were built in.

That is a familiar quote.

I'm listening closely to the demands of antifa and the rest of the current faux revolutionary guard. Their beef is not just about slavery in the South. It's more. It's about oppression wherever it leads. I think we can agree the Conquistadors murdered and enslaved far more indigenous peoples than the KKK/Confederate South did to African Americans.

Nobody listens closely to antifa.

Over 600,000 Americans died in the civil war. I don't think there were nearly as many killed in battles over the California missions.

What quote does my statement remind you of?

 

[GWS]

Google it. Start with the opposition to the canonization of Father Serra. That's like making nominating Dr Mengele for sainthood.

 

[Woke AF]

It's a paranoid argument. You can keep gong back to the beginning of known history to point out 'great leaders; who happened to be butchers on the way to greatness.

why a Texan s concerned about Ca missions, laughable. why anyone but middle school students who have to write a report on one is even thinking about it...

 

[Billy Ocean]

Winners write the history books

 

[Gnudz]

The differences is, the missions weren't built in the 1920's. The missions weren't built to send the message that some of these statues, erected decades after the south lost the civil war, were designed to send to certain residents of the south.

The missions represent the part of history, both the good and bad of it, that they were built in.

That being said, I'm not sure we should do away with statues of civil war leaders either.

Perhaps we could just repurpose them as toilets.

What was the good part for the missions? They slaughtered and enslaved Indians at a horrific rate. That's like looking at the good done in Nazi concentration camps.

I don't think that's true, at least not in CA's missions. I'm not praising the Jesuits, Franciscans, or Dominicans, but I don't think they slaughtered or enslaved in great numbers.

 

[GWS]

Start here

https://www.google.com/amp/s/hoodline.relaymedia.com/amp/2016/03/the-lesser-told-story-of-the-california-missions

"But according to journalist and author Elias Castillo, this couldn't be further from the truth. Castillo calls Serra “a madman” who, blinded by his single-minded goal of saving souls, oversaw the enslavement and deaths of thousands of California Indians. (The California Indians we spoke to for the story preferred that term over "Native American.") In “A Cross of Thorns: The Enslavement of California’s Indians by the Spanish Missions,” published last year, Castillo draws on seven years of research to present a scathing history of the mission period between 1769 and 1833 and the subsequent Mexican and American rule."

I'm on my phone at the moment, my wife is one of the few surviving California Indians. If you look up the CNN article regarding opposition to the canonization of father Serra, you will see a lot of the quotes coming from one of my family members

 

[sirfun]

It's a paranoid argument.

its a lazy argument !! )

elsewise he would have to show up with a torch and chant !! )

 

[Woke AF]

The differences is, the missions weren't built in the 1920's. The missions weren't built to send the message that some of these statues, erected decades after the south lost the civil war, were designed to send to certain residents of the south.

The missions represent the part of history, both the good and bad of it, that they were built in.

That being said, I'm not sure we should do away with statues of civil war leaders either.

Perhaps we could just repurpose them as toilets.

What was the good part for the missions? They slaughtered and enslaved Indians at a horrific rate. That's like looking at the good done in Nazi concentration camps.

I don't think that's true, at least not in CA's missions. I'm not praising the Jesuits, Franciscans, or Dominicans, but I don't think they slaughtered or enslaved in great numbers.

I have gone through a few reports and my small sample says forced labor, conversion, and re-education into non indigenous living was the norm. Great numbers? Not sure the Indian population would be considered large.
There was a lot of CA Indian slaughter when the Americans stating coming here.

 

[GWS]

The differences is, the missions weren't built in the 1920's. The missions weren't built to send the message that some of these statues, erected decades after the south lost the civil war, were designed to send to certain residents of the south.

The missions represent the part of history, both the good and bad of it, that they were built in.

That being said, I'm not sure we should do away with statues of civil war leaders either.

Perhaps we could just repurpose them as toilets.

What was the good part for the missions? They slaughtered and enslaved Indians at a horrific rate. That's like looking at the good done in Nazi concentration camps.

I don't think that's true, at least not in CA's missions. I'm not praising the Jesuits, Franciscans, or Dominicans, but I don't think they slaughtered or enslaved in great numbers.

I have gone through a few reports and my small sample says forced labor, conversion, and re-education into non indigenous living was the norm. Great numbers? Not sure the Indian population would be considered large.
There was a lot of CA Indian slaughter when the Americans stating coming here.

Actually by that time there weren't very many of them left. After the missions were done the Mexicans took over and during their brief possession of CA continued what Spain/Catholic church started. More history they didn't teach you in school no doubt