I have had a lot of thoughts about this one and heard many opinions. My father wants them left alone, my wife is rather neutral, some friends say turn them to slag. I personally have wavered from take them down as they symbolize the slavery and oppression that was desired to be maintained by the confederacy as well as possibly one of the greatest anti-american symbols is the confederate flag. For many years it would have been considered treason to fly a confederate flag. On the flip side one of the greatest freedoms in the USA is the freedom of speech which does cover even burning the american flag or speaking out against whatever you feel is wrong.
As President Jones I would have the following plan for resolving the dispute for the removal or protection of such hot button confederate monuments: Put your money where your mouth is.
I would hold two opposing go-fund-me sites. Those who want the monument to stay and be preserved with a historic designation would be on one side, those that wish for the monument to be removed on the other. They would both have a set amount of time (two weeks or so) to collect as much money as possible and at the end the winner gets what they funded.
Now any privately donated money would be anonymous, if they so desired, but any company or organization would be public, including those damn super pacs. All donations over a small amount (under $100) would not be tax deductible, that way it would discourage groups and organizations from overpowering individuals with their donations. The goal would be to see which side could motivate the most people to part with their money to support their beliefs. I`ve always found it funny how many people I know will support an idea and debate it to death, but the moment they have to whip out their wallet they become ornithologists. I myself have been guilty of this I`m sure.
The money raised from both sides would go to the same state/city civic fund in addition to paying for the removal/upkeep. I`m thinking emergency services, or the parks department. It would be determined before the go-fund-me gets started but something neutral that could use the boost.
Now of course there would be protests one way or the other when the actual monument comes down or doesn't, but even the looser would have the satisfaction that they cost their opponents both time and money fighting them.
Where it goes from there is up to the states and cities facing similar issues. Some may elect the same process, others may not want to subject themselves to that level of conflict.
Now in response to the violence and the man who decided to ram into the protesters. That is taking it too far and should be judged in the harshest of terms. And while I cannot even fathom the hate and abuse that created those that believe in white supremacy, this is the United States of America, where you have the right to PEACEFULLY protest and express your beliefs. As long as everyone obey's the laws and doesn`t oppress others with the exact same rights then I as president cannot revoke that freedom. I will further discuss my thoughts on freedom of speech and what it should mean in another section. I further condemn anyone whose thought of peaceful protesting is showing up in riot gear with weapons and thoughts of fighting. Those that showed up with weapons and armor to fight in Charlottesville just because it is legal to do so does not make it right, and it only encourages further escalations as seen with the anti-fa (of whose tactics I hold in the same regards) that will only end in more bodies and further division.
More on the punishments for such actions under my thoughts about prison reform; Corrections Correction.
As President Jones I would have the following plan for resolving the dispute for the removal or protection of such hot button confederate monuments: Put your money where your mouth is.
I would hold two opposing go-fund-me sites. Those who want the monument to stay and be preserved with a historic designation would be on one side, those that wish for the monument to be removed on the other. They would both have a set amount of time (two weeks or so) to collect as much money as possible and at the end the winner gets what they funded.
Now any privately donated money would be anonymous, if they so desired, but any company or organization would be public, including those damn super pacs. All donations over a small amount (under $100) would not be tax deductible, that way it would discourage groups and organizations from overpowering individuals with their donations. The goal would be to see which side could motivate the most people to part with their money to support their beliefs. I`ve always found it funny how many people I know will support an idea and debate it to death, but the moment they have to whip out their wallet they become ornithologists. I myself have been guilty of this I`m sure.
The money raised from both sides would go to the same state/city civic fund in addition to paying for the removal/upkeep. I`m thinking emergency services, or the parks department. It would be determined before the go-fund-me gets started but something neutral that could use the boost.
Now of course there would be protests one way or the other when the actual monument comes down or doesn't, but even the looser would have the satisfaction that they cost their opponents both time and money fighting them.
Where it goes from there is up to the states and cities facing similar issues. Some may elect the same process, others may not want to subject themselves to that level of conflict.
Now in response to the violence and the man who decided to ram into the protesters. That is taking it too far and should be judged in the harshest of terms. And while I cannot even fathom the hate and abuse that created those that believe in white supremacy, this is the United States of America, where you have the right to PEACEFULLY protest and express your beliefs. As long as everyone obey's the laws and doesn`t oppress others with the exact same rights then I as president cannot revoke that freedom. I will further discuss my thoughts on freedom of speech and what it should mean in another section. I further condemn anyone whose thought of peaceful protesting is showing up in riot gear with weapons and thoughts of fighting. Those that showed up with weapons and armor to fight in Charlottesville just because it is legal to do so does not make it right, and it only encourages further escalations as seen with the anti-fa (of whose tactics I hold in the same regards) that will only end in more bodies and further division.
More on the punishments for such actions under my thoughts about prison reform; Corrections Correction.
Comments
Post a Comment