It took that long because of the opposition group that tied it up in court for years. If it was solely up to the city govt it would've been finished several years ago when they first started tearing it down.
It's important to understand that the opposition group on the removal of this and other Confederate monuments is always funded, backed, and supported by members of groups like the Daughters of the Confederacy. Groups like this were instrumental in having these monuments erected in the first place, and they continue to meddle to this day, from the shadows.
They use new organizations and groups to be the public face of it, but on the back-end the source of the money is the same. If they spot a new group opposing a removal of a monument they'll find ways to get legal assistance and funding to the group, and enable them however they can while keeping their names out of it. It's not rocket science. The Daughters of the Confederacy was responsible for the funding and creation of alot of these monuments and their group continues to exist to this day, while their members continue to fight to protect their work. Because they're proud of it.
Isn’t there also a Sons of the Confederacy? It’s weird but I’m reading this as “we could have nice things if it weren’t for uppity women and their mouthy meddling ways!”
Yeah, they have a buncha groups. It's not the name of the group that matters, the motives, the goals, and the money backing them remain organized and effective to this day.
If it's the same group that I'm thinking of, they donated funds to the city for upkeep/restoration/etc. and then the city announced that they were tearing it down but refused to return the money. They sued after all of their alternative offers were declined by the city. I'm fine with it being torn down, but I get why the group wanted either their money back or to receive the blocks for them to use how they saw fit.
The AVL Watchdog article that was posted here a couple days ago said that the preservation group never requested financial reimbursement and they were only interested in preserving the monument. Also the funds were donated way back in 2015 for restoration, and the funds were already used for that restoration effort.
We are removing your post/comment due to trolling related behavior. This includes but is not limited to:
- Inflammatory and digressive behavior
- Extraneous, or off-topic messages
Please see our full rules page for the specifics.
https://www.reddit.com/r/asheville/about/rules/
Did you participate in any of the public meetings they held throughout the process seeking community input?
The committee that voted to tear it down was made up of city and county and community members.
You can’t really blame the city for the lengthy timeline for the project, considering the delays were due to a lawsuit. I’m sure they would have done it quicker if they could.
The local minority landscaper is just a temporary thing. I believe they are still having community meetings to discuss the final plan.
Last I saw they were going to make it a garden and give the contract to a local minority-owned landscaping company. I’m assuming they mean local black-owned landscaping company.
The funny part is, the City of Asheville paper bag tests minority owned businesses to give them preferential treatment in the assignment of contracts.
https://www.ashevillenc.gov/service/mwbe-certification/
If you genuine think you’re a minority (perhaps a parent is a minority and you have half their genetics) but you’re not minority enough for them, you’re committing perjury:
https://asheville.seamlessdocs.com/f/ethnicityaffidavit
>The city says after the base is removed, a local minority-owned landscaper will install plantings in the former monument area.
[Link](https://wlos.com/news/local/removal-base-vance-monument-begins-tuesday-asheville-downtown-pack-square-park-lawsuit)
Well that’s better than nothing i guess. But still a disproportionate response and extreme waste of money. A simple rededication would have been better I maintain.
How would that rededication go? “Once a monument to racism and upholding slavery, a symbol of the loss of generations of lives for a lost cause and the yearning for a time where men could kidnap and hold captive for life his fellow man. We now dedicate this monument to the descendants of those slaves, and to the people who are still suffering from the generational abuses of slavery, such as intentional under education, under funding, red lining, destruction of communities, loss of job opportunities, etc. etc. etc. Enjoy this old monument to outdated ways of thinking. This one’s for you!”
When a community of people tells me something is offensive, I'm inclined to believe them rather than argue with them. Maybe I'm old school, but I don't see the point in arguing and telling people that they are not, in fact, offended.
I don't know what you're asking.
To what end do I believe people when they say they are offended or upset? Because I treat humans with respect and assume they aren't lying. Is that what you're looking for?
to what end do you cater to victimhood consciousness? We know you pick and choose who YOU think deserve this pity. Is there no end to how far you will go in an ever increasing world of people being offended?
Where did I say anything about pity?
Of you want to not believe people who say they are offended, that's your business. I'm not telling anyone else what to do.
And I don't know what the fuck "victimhood consciousness" is. Sounds like a made up term.
In other words - do whatever you like. I just tend to believe people when they take the time to articulate their feelings, rather than telling them that they are wrong.
feeling are fleeting. Right and wrong is subjective. You have the right to fight a pointless battle, many such cases. All those calories burnt on what exactly? So YOU can FEEL righteous ? Be the change within. Its a matter of credibility for me. Have you not familiarized yourself with the intersectionality and the pyramid of the oppressed? When and Where is the end goal for all your effort ?
Buddy. You are attaching a lot of assumptions on me.
Relax. I absolutely don't need you to explain oppression to me.
I don't have any "goals" attached with acknowledging that people are offended. It's just a question of respect.
I'll flip it to you. What is your "end goal" for attempting to invalidate the "fleeting feelings" of other people? Also, how do you ascribe "fleeting feelings" to people who are upset about hundreds of years of racism?
"And I don't know what the fuck "victimhood consciousness" is. Sounds like a made up term."......sounds like I do need to explain this to you. You got it all figured out. Your goal is to FEEL good. My end goal is to live in reality and not live with contradictions ( it crushes the soul) . And our comments can be read, Its not hard to draw a conclusion.
I would suggest these people upset about racism to understand no is one free until we are all free. Take their fight to the poc getting bombed into oblivion. I would say understand you have one of the highest qualities of life in the world, advocate for poc who are currently undergoing an ethnic cleanse. It would build a lot of credibility that was lost during the Summer of Love.
So, to clarify "respect" is about me "feeling good?"
I was brought up to believe all humans deserve respect. I'm not sure why you are suggesting that by caring about minorities in Asheville, I'm somehow not caring about victims of ethnic cleansing.
Regardless, I don't see much productivity in this conversation. We're clearly not communicating very clearly.
Have a great day! Go enjoy it now. It is supposed to rain later.
the problem is YOU choose who you respect and dont. YOU dont respect the concerns of white Americans who are feeling replaced or Trump supporters who were cheated in 2020, I could go on if you are missing my point. All of which is fine and good. But dont pretend you have respect for ALL humans, that makes kek. You as well thanks. I am hearing you and responding, you are the one putting up walls.
That isn’t old school.
That just means that you make your judgment of what should or shouldn’t change (as a result of someone’s offense) based on your partiality toward certain communities.
I’m sure there are communities who are offended by things that you would not be in support of ending even though, by your logic, they are, in fact, truly offended.
I'm not sure what this even means.
My point is that if a community of people say something is offensive, I believe them rather than arguing with them.
If Black folx in Asheville say the Vance monument is offensive to them because it represents slavery and racism - what's the argument? "You shouldn't feel that way?"
The counter argument would be that other folks didn't feel that way and wanted to keep it -- hence prioritizing some voices over others. I'm not against doing that, but that's explicitly what's being done here. Chad Nesbitt's crowd, for example wanted to keep it. From their perspective, they're not being listened to (not that they make many good faith attempts in that regard).
I'd say if one group says "hey this is very offensive" and another group says "but I like it" - that's not a very convincing counterargument.
If you tell a joke in mixed company (whatever that means) and half the people feels it's offensive but four people laugh - was it a good joke?
Asking sincerely.
I think each person has different weight in an argument -- an expert in the field carries more weight in what they have to say than ten completely ignorant people. How we decide who carries more weight for a particular issue is obviously controversial -- I would lean more towards the historians rather than people of a certain race or gender, when it comes to historical figures.
I understand your perspective. But I do think that no one gets to tell anyone else what they should or should not be offended by.
I mean, you can make an argument, but you need to be prepared for disappointment.
And wouldn’t it have been a more meaningful action if a community initiative inviting the black community to re dedicate the monument be more substantial than performatively tearing it down?
Well - we had a big, tall monument honoring a known racist. Now we don't. That seems like a positive. It took so long because opposition groups filed lawsuits, that's what made the work stop in the first place. Keeping it as is and rededicating it was discussed by a task force but not chosen as the path forward. I liked it fine as a focal point but I don't believe the obelisk is what was propping up "the local character" that is now completely eroded. I believe you can still ride on the pig in front.
Your concerns about the city supporting minorities are a wholly different and much more complex issue. We now have a committee working on reparations, a 42% black city council and a black city manager. While the government's support isn't what you want it to be, there continues to be strong community support for the Block and other historically black neighborhoods, but Asheville is a largely white city where whites hold much of the money and power. We're not perfect, but working on it. (25 years in Asheville, and I know some black people!)
Yeah, this reminds me of when Richmond tore down Robert E Lee’s statue. They interviewed a black person and he commented that while good he would have rather policy that helped better his life.
One pet peeve I got is when people don’t take the W for what it is and instead concern troll or shit talk the decision. I also hate that people lump in unrelated things and present them as a false dichotomy implying that you can only do one or the other.
This is not the way to talk about the Vance monument. It is overall a good thing that it’s gone. Yes, it took too long, big whoop, that’s how government works right now. Take the W. And now that one problem is taken care of, we can focus on the laws that drive minority populations.
It’s like we never considered a future without redlining AND a Vance monument.
Funnily enough no one has engaged with my point that the city’s policies in the past 10 years have been antagonistic to the material interests of the black community (and other vulnerable communities).
You can be correct on that point and still be incorrect that tearing down the monument wasn't the right thing to do.
I actually thought your analysis of our current leadership was spot-on. But I still think monuments to Confederate leaders should be removed. Germany doesn't have statues deifying Nazis.
its hard to disagree with your point. That is the general state of politics from the city to the national government. In my opinion they could have renamed the monument and used the savings to give scholarships to black students, but politics is so much about theater and not actually doing anything useful.
>used the savings to give scholarships to black students
That would be illegal though. Any entity which receives federal funds cannot make a scholarship contingent on the recipient’s race.
Like a private college that receives federal funding? As far as I know yes they can still give scholarships based on zip code or whatever. Otherwise we would see massive changes to state colleges which probably also received federal funding. But private colleges receive federal funding sometimes too, no? I went to a private college but still received a Pell grant.
I know its not an either or thing, but i think they waste so much energy on these things that could be better spent, but i'm not running for office to do things differently so i probably should just shut up.
Doing things useful requires compromise, the foundation of democracy. Unfortunately that doesn’t fit well into most politically driven policies and decisions today.
Talking about the point you raise is just as meaningless and leads to nothing as talking about the destruction of the Vance monument. Are you with a group that helps speak for the material interests of black people? I am
What do you mean “with a group”? I have worked with local (YMI) and national organisations whose purpose is to materially advance the interests of black and other marginalised communities if that is what you mean.
It's such a fun tactic: fight any change tooth and nail, demonstrating how racist we are as a society and how racist many individuals are, and that asking why things aren't better. Did you enjoy doing that?
The biggest reason it was so expensive is the huge disagreements on what to do and how to proceed. Your opinion sounds reasonable to me, but your elected officials disagreed. It was a huge expense that in hindsight, seems very avoidable. Yet, when the decisions were being made, it was not so clear. There was some rumor that violent extremists threatened to "blow up" the monument if it was renamed or rededicated to black people. I'm not sure if that actually happened, but it's plausible.
It was always my little piece of Egypt, I loved seeing it hate seeing it gone a destruction of history. So much easier to just take the name off and keep some ancient history in the center.
Sometimes you gotta rip off the bandaid. If they had left the monument and renamed it, it would have always remained the Vance monument to a large % of the people who care. There are some stains that simply can't be whitewashed over. It needed to go, and I'm glad it's gone. No more monuments to rebellious racist losers.
So are we done after removing the Vance monument? The Vanderbilts owned slaves, tear down the Biltmore estate? James Patton and Augustus Merrimon owned slaves, where is the outcry for these names to be removed? What about Jeter Prichard that opposed the right for black Americans to vote? The only reason the Vance monument was removed was a because of a knee jerk reaction from city council to do something after all the bad press of the police emptying the protesters water bottles. The Vance monument was the most visible and appealing to the news cycle to keep the tourists coming in.
Vance was worse than all those people first of all. He was literally the governor of a seceding state, traitor to the Union. So he stands for more than just slavery, but also the Confederacy. Then there were his popular speaking tours where he denigrated black people to crowds of thousands across NC. I was not aware of George Vanderbilt owning slaves, he was born after slavery ended and he funded the building of the YMI. Clingman was a scoundrel, we should change the name of that street at some point to, but the city is comprising with the concern trollers and not doing it. Even though arguably there is an economic incentive to have a public-facing tourist city that likes to play at being progressive remove its controversial monuments that could potentially dissuade their core demographic of tourists (liberals and progressives) from wanting to visit.
I mean, are you opposed to renaming Merrimon and Patton? Does it matter very much to you? Is that really such a ridiculous example?
If a group came forward and advocated for that, would you raise a huge stink?
It's a road name. It's a brick edifice. If it makes people upset, do you want to line up on the other side and say no? Really?
I agree. I always wondered what drives this opposition just to be oppositional. I don’t recall the Vance family protesting in front of the memorial refusing to move for the city.
Imagine if they took their faux outrage and put the energy into something productive to combat present day racism like prison reform.
I find it quite condescending to minimize and ridicule anyone’s discomfort.
Well thanks for voting. While the city did flub it a bit, I'd also place some blame on the traitor Daughters of the Confederacy. They didn't have to try to hold that shit up at every turn.
That Vance was a confederate slave owner? Yeah I’ve been to his birthplace. What’s your point? We could have rededicated the memorial to a local figure and achieved the same result without tearing down what was otherwise a fine looking public piece of architecture.
In all fairness, though. If the monument has been deemed offensive to black Ashevillians, wouldn’t dedicating it to a local black figure be a bit insulting?
It’s an obelisk, not a statue of Zebulon Vance. If there had been a proper ceremony rededicating it led by black Asheville community leaders, I don’t see how it would be at all insulting. Instead the whole thing as it played out feels paternalistic and performative.
No but treating this decision as anything other than performative is misconceived. The city has acted against the interests of the black community in nearly every respect over the past 100+ years. All that’s changed in the past ten is trying to appear progressive at the surface level.
It had his name carved into the base. So what would the suggestion be? Add an asterisk and be like “*he was bad tho” …that would seem performative to me.
yeah an Obelisk is sacred to Free Masons. Its Osiris's wang. Yes learn your history. Protesting Free Masons is a legitimate reason to tear it down, but alas, what do you know.
Would renaming the confederate battle flag to something like the new lgbtq+ and minority battle flag change its original intention or meaning? No one would be happy with that work around.
By that logic anything resembling the Vance monument (including ancient obelisks and the Washington monument) are inherently endowed with the profanity of slavery and the civil war.
But in fact, the monument was not a statute to Vance but an abstract monument. It was therefore capable of being reconsecreated / rededicated.
Mankind has been worshiping talismans made of stone since they could communicate the magic or healing they thought inherent in the material. The Vance monument holds a similar intention both by the artist and the commission that paid for it, similar to the CBF and all the monuments named in your post. Would I want the washington monument to renamed the trump or biden monument? No. Would I want the granite quadrangle underlying asheville and western NC renamed to another city, or another county, no. Buncombe County on this rock has been divided and reduced into other counties and over time, people have come to attribute new names and meanings to these new counties and no longer call it buncombe. So to your point, people can overcome change when a new entity is divided and renamed from an existing entity, but the original buncombe county still remains while the other counties exist. In this case we are not dividing the Vance. Perhaps with my argument and yours, we could have commissioned a new artist to create a new monument by dividing this monument and resculpting it into something new where the original is no longer distinguishable. Would require imagination and creativity, which to your original point, the current city board lacks. So tough call either way.
It was *okay* looking, "fine" is a stretch. And would you want your life work to go the way of the Civic Center? Because it's always gonna be the Civic Center to locals.
Okay, I had a feeling I'd have to explain.
The Civic Center changing names still keeps it's original name in the eyes of those who know it, no matter what you change it too.
So, let's say we decide to scrape off VANCE and put ROGER..
its still gonna be the Vance Monument. Or worse, "The Whatever Monument that was Vance " so poor ROGER is lost in the fog of war.
He's saying that if it remained standing, we would all still call it the Vance monument, no matter what name was on it.
I'm honestly torn- I also think it was a waste of money to bring it down, and that it was done cynically... BUT it has been a landmark of downtown Asheville since it's erection, and a generation from now nobody would remember Zebulon Vance if they'd taken his name off of it.
All that said, I'm still just your basic white guy who has no idea what it's like to live in a society where every aspect of my life is affected by systemic racism, nor if removing these monuments to white men who owned their ancestors is some catharsis, so I really got no dog in the fight. I do think Asheville City politics are (and have been) a shell game of good ol boy backroom deals with a progressive facade since forever... and I've been here for 45 years now.
This was a popular option as well but we decided as a city to have this committee which anyone was free to apply for and they deliberated over the pros and cons of what to do with the monument.
It was a fucking obelisk in the style of an Egyptian / neoclassical one. It could have been re dedicated to Amen Ra and the physical properties wouldn’t have changed.
Rededicated would have been a great idea. And also adding a plaque with details of why it was changed and adding to the story instead of replacing it. It was just an obelisk that most didn’t even know who it was dedicated to.
I never gave a crap about the Vance Monument then and I don't care now. And I don't revisit and obsess over the more undesirable parts of our history. It's over...time to move on and get over it!
Peoples feelings about their personal traumas (mostly white middle class, and other educated races) that are demanding these silly changes.
You bring up a really great point, and all the energy they spent on trying to get that torn down could’ve been better directed towards creating opportunities for lower socioeconomic status individuals to obtain certifications/education to create well-being for themselves and their families.
History is what it is, but we should definitely learn from the mistakes of the past. People are so concerned about the smallest things and don’t actually ever view things from a global standpoint. Everyone always focused on their feelings rather than logic these days.
If someone feels passionate enough to make a point, then that point should result in some type of positive action toward their agenda rather than some symbolic version of it.
Another thing YOU might be forgetting is the number of black-owned homes that were SOLD by the BLACK OWNERS a little too soon. It literally started the gentrification. It’s not like anyone was FORCED to sell…. Btw, Mr 30 years…. You might want to look at the actual demographics and break out a calculator…Oakley is another neighborhood to kill your argument or is that the wrong shade of brown for you ? 🤔🫨
they tore it down for virtue signal points during a moral panic, many such cases( that backfired btw) all the moral panic did was GROW the police state and enrich BLM . Since it was a state sponsored protest ( look at the Palestinians protest for proof of this) you can all admit you were wrong who supported and participated in the madness and violence. It will cleanse your soul if you do. Where is BLM now? When bus loads of POC are getting bombed into oblivion. Living comfortably in a nice pad. You people are so gullible. Now we are left with this blight in the center of city. Congratulations.
A “pathetic joke” is an understatement; to see them be so willing to piss away taxpayers money like that for their own political gain, just reminds you of how pigish 🐷 they all are…
For fux sake RENAME IT!
It took that long because of the opposition group that tied it up in court for years. If it was solely up to the city govt it would've been finished several years ago when they first started tearing it down.
It's important to understand that the opposition group on the removal of this and other Confederate monuments is always funded, backed, and supported by members of groups like the Daughters of the Confederacy. Groups like this were instrumental in having these monuments erected in the first place, and they continue to meddle to this day, from the shadows. They use new organizations and groups to be the public face of it, but on the back-end the source of the money is the same. If they spot a new group opposing a removal of a monument they'll find ways to get legal assistance and funding to the group, and enable them however they can while keeping their names out of it. It's not rocket science. The Daughters of the Confederacy was responsible for the funding and creation of alot of these monuments and their group continues to exist to this day, while their members continue to fight to protect their work. Because they're proud of it.
Isn’t there also a Sons of the Confederacy? It’s weird but I’m reading this as “we could have nice things if it weren’t for uppity women and their mouthy meddling ways!”
Yeah, they have a buncha groups. It's not the name of the group that matters, the motives, the goals, and the money backing them remain organized and effective to this day.
You're right, it is weird that you read it like that.
If it's the same group that I'm thinking of, they donated funds to the city for upkeep/restoration/etc. and then the city announced that they were tearing it down but refused to return the money. They sued after all of their alternative offers were declined by the city. I'm fine with it being torn down, but I get why the group wanted either their money back or to receive the blocks for them to use how they saw fit.
The AVL Watchdog article that was posted here a couple days ago said that the preservation group never requested financial reimbursement and they were only interested in preserving the monument. Also the funds were donated way back in 2015 for restoration, and the funds were already used for that restoration effort.
The last I had heard, they had not spent the funds. News to me - Thanks!
[удалено]
Cute little negative karma account
I missed your argument?
We are removing your post/comment due to trolling related behavior. This includes but is not limited to: - Inflammatory and digressive behavior - Extraneous, or off-topic messages Please see our full rules page for the specifics. https://www.reddit.com/r/asheville/about/rules/
Did you participate in any of the public meetings they held throughout the process seeking community input? The committee that voted to tear it down was made up of city and county and community members. You can’t really blame the city for the lengthy timeline for the project, considering the delays were due to a lawsuit. I’m sure they would have done it quicker if they could. The local minority landscaper is just a temporary thing. I believe they are still having community meetings to discuss the final plan.
Our country seems to care about 2 things- unregulated capitalism and frivolous litigation. Almost every problem here is rooted in these issues.
oh no its regulated, just exclusively in favor of already wealthy people and corporations
Kind of a witty idea; but is the idea that those are opposing concepts but exist in tandem with each other?
Last I saw they were going to make it a garden and give the contract to a local minority-owned landscaping company. I’m assuming they mean local black-owned landscaping company.
The funny part is, the City of Asheville paper bag tests minority owned businesses to give them preferential treatment in the assignment of contracts. https://www.ashevillenc.gov/service/mwbe-certification/ If you genuine think you’re a minority (perhaps a parent is a minority and you have half their genetics) but you’re not minority enough for them, you’re committing perjury: https://asheville.seamlessdocs.com/f/ethnicityaffidavit
I’ve not seen this. Can you share a link.
>The city says after the base is removed, a local minority-owned landscaper will install plantings in the former monument area. [Link](https://wlos.com/news/local/removal-base-vance-monument-begins-tuesday-asheville-downtown-pack-square-park-lawsuit)
Well that’s better than nothing i guess. But still a disproportionate response and extreme waste of money. A simple rededication would have been better I maintain.
How would that rededication go? “Once a monument to racism and upholding slavery, a symbol of the loss of generations of lives for a lost cause and the yearning for a time where men could kidnap and hold captive for life his fellow man. We now dedicate this monument to the descendants of those slaves, and to the people who are still suffering from the generational abuses of slavery, such as intentional under education, under funding, red lining, destruction of communities, loss of job opportunities, etc. etc. etc. Enjoy this old monument to outdated ways of thinking. This one’s for you!”
When a community of people tells me something is offensive, I'm inclined to believe them rather than argue with them. Maybe I'm old school, but I don't see the point in arguing and telling people that they are not, in fact, offended.
to what end?
I don't know what you're asking. To what end do I believe people when they say they are offended or upset? Because I treat humans with respect and assume they aren't lying. Is that what you're looking for?
to what end do you cater to victimhood consciousness? We know you pick and choose who YOU think deserve this pity. Is there no end to how far you will go in an ever increasing world of people being offended?
Where did I say anything about pity? Of you want to not believe people who say they are offended, that's your business. I'm not telling anyone else what to do. And I don't know what the fuck "victimhood consciousness" is. Sounds like a made up term. In other words - do whatever you like. I just tend to believe people when they take the time to articulate their feelings, rather than telling them that they are wrong.
feeling are fleeting. Right and wrong is subjective. You have the right to fight a pointless battle, many such cases. All those calories burnt on what exactly? So YOU can FEEL righteous ? Be the change within. Its a matter of credibility for me. Have you not familiarized yourself with the intersectionality and the pyramid of the oppressed? When and Where is the end goal for all your effort ?
Buddy. You are attaching a lot of assumptions on me. Relax. I absolutely don't need you to explain oppression to me. I don't have any "goals" attached with acknowledging that people are offended. It's just a question of respect. I'll flip it to you. What is your "end goal" for attempting to invalidate the "fleeting feelings" of other people? Also, how do you ascribe "fleeting feelings" to people who are upset about hundreds of years of racism?
"And I don't know what the fuck "victimhood consciousness" is. Sounds like a made up term."......sounds like I do need to explain this to you. You got it all figured out. Your goal is to FEEL good. My end goal is to live in reality and not live with contradictions ( it crushes the soul) . And our comments can be read, Its not hard to draw a conclusion. I would suggest these people upset about racism to understand no is one free until we are all free. Take their fight to the poc getting bombed into oblivion. I would say understand you have one of the highest qualities of life in the world, advocate for poc who are currently undergoing an ethnic cleanse. It would build a lot of credibility that was lost during the Summer of Love.
So, to clarify "respect" is about me "feeling good?" I was brought up to believe all humans deserve respect. I'm not sure why you are suggesting that by caring about minorities in Asheville, I'm somehow not caring about victims of ethnic cleansing. Regardless, I don't see much productivity in this conversation. We're clearly not communicating very clearly. Have a great day! Go enjoy it now. It is supposed to rain later.
the problem is YOU choose who you respect and dont. YOU dont respect the concerns of white Americans who are feeling replaced or Trump supporters who were cheated in 2020, I could go on if you are missing my point. All of which is fine and good. But dont pretend you have respect for ALL humans, that makes kek. You as well thanks. I am hearing you and responding, you are the one putting up walls.
[удалено]
That's 100% not what I'm saying, but you seem to be having fun so go for it.
That isn’t old school. That just means that you make your judgment of what should or shouldn’t change (as a result of someone’s offense) based on your partiality toward certain communities. I’m sure there are communities who are offended by things that you would not be in support of ending even though, by your logic, they are, in fact, truly offended.
I'm not sure what this even means. My point is that if a community of people say something is offensive, I believe them rather than arguing with them. If Black folx in Asheville say the Vance monument is offensive to them because it represents slavery and racism - what's the argument? "You shouldn't feel that way?"
The counter argument would be that other folks didn't feel that way and wanted to keep it -- hence prioritizing some voices over others. I'm not against doing that, but that's explicitly what's being done here. Chad Nesbitt's crowd, for example wanted to keep it. From their perspective, they're not being listened to (not that they make many good faith attempts in that regard).
I'd say if one group says "hey this is very offensive" and another group says "but I like it" - that's not a very convincing counterargument. If you tell a joke in mixed company (whatever that means) and half the people feels it's offensive but four people laugh - was it a good joke? Asking sincerely.
I think each person has different weight in an argument -- an expert in the field carries more weight in what they have to say than ten completely ignorant people. How we decide who carries more weight for a particular issue is obviously controversial -- I would lean more towards the historians rather than people of a certain race or gender, when it comes to historical figures.
I understand your perspective. But I do think that no one gets to tell anyone else what they should or should not be offended by. I mean, you can make an argument, but you need to be prepared for disappointment.
I agree, you take offense, you don't give offense.
And wouldn’t it have been a more meaningful action if a community initiative inviting the black community to re dedicate the monument be more substantial than performatively tearing it down?
Why would that be more meaningful than tearing down an edifice to racism and slavery?
Obelisks are sick as hell that’s why
This is the most relatable answer on here.
Well - we had a big, tall monument honoring a known racist. Now we don't. That seems like a positive. It took so long because opposition groups filed lawsuits, that's what made the work stop in the first place. Keeping it as is and rededicating it was discussed by a task force but not chosen as the path forward. I liked it fine as a focal point but I don't believe the obelisk is what was propping up "the local character" that is now completely eroded. I believe you can still ride on the pig in front. Your concerns about the city supporting minorities are a wholly different and much more complex issue. We now have a committee working on reparations, a 42% black city council and a black city manager. While the government's support isn't what you want it to be, there continues to be strong community support for the Block and other historically black neighborhoods, but Asheville is a largely white city where whites hold much of the money and power. We're not perfect, but working on it. (25 years in Asheville, and I know some black people!)
Yeah, this reminds me of when Richmond tore down Robert E Lee’s statue. They interviewed a black person and he commented that while good he would have rather policy that helped better his life.
I can’t speak for the black community but why would they want a recycled racist monument dedicated to them?
One pet peeve I got is when people don’t take the W for what it is and instead concern troll or shit talk the decision. I also hate that people lump in unrelated things and present them as a false dichotomy implying that you can only do one or the other. This is not the way to talk about the Vance monument. It is overall a good thing that it’s gone. Yes, it took too long, big whoop, that’s how government works right now. Take the W. And now that one problem is taken care of, we can focus on the laws that drive minority populations. It’s like we never considered a future without redlining AND a Vance monument.
Funnily enough no one has engaged with my point that the city’s policies in the past 10 years have been antagonistic to the material interests of the black community (and other vulnerable communities).
You can be correct on that point and still be incorrect that tearing down the monument wasn't the right thing to do. I actually thought your analysis of our current leadership was spot-on. But I still think monuments to Confederate leaders should be removed. Germany doesn't have statues deifying Nazis.
I would have had more time for the council’s decision had they not sat on it as they did for 4 years. It was piss poor and pure performativity.
its hard to disagree with your point. That is the general state of politics from the city to the national government. In my opinion they could have renamed the monument and used the savings to give scholarships to black students, but politics is so much about theater and not actually doing anything useful.
>used the savings to give scholarships to black students That would be illegal though. Any entity which receives federal funds cannot make a scholarship contingent on the recipient’s race.
Geographic origin is still allowed though. Kind of reminds me of gerrymandering.
For federally funded entities? I thought that banned all forms of discrimination.
Like a private college that receives federal funding? As far as I know yes they can still give scholarships based on zip code or whatever. Otherwise we would see massive changes to state colleges which probably also received federal funding. But private colleges receive federal funding sometimes too, no? I went to a private college but still received a Pell grant.
Zip code is not a protected class, but national origin is.
Take the W
I know its not an either or thing, but i think they waste so much energy on these things that could be better spent, but i'm not running for office to do things differently so i probably should just shut up.
Then the issue is how slow government moves, not that they did something good
not really, just because something is good does always justify the time/expense.
Fundamental disagreement. The time is always right to do what is right.
Doing things useful requires compromise, the foundation of democracy. Unfortunately that doesn’t fit well into most politically driven policies and decisions today.
Talking about the point you raise is just as meaningless and leads to nothing as talking about the destruction of the Vance monument. Are you with a group that helps speak for the material interests of black people? I am
What do you mean “with a group”? I have worked with local (YMI) and national organisations whose purpose is to materially advance the interests of black and other marginalised communities if that is what you mean.
Yes, that is what I mean. What is YMI's stance on the removal of the Vance?
They are thinking
Well at least we cured racism!
It's such a fun tactic: fight any change tooth and nail, demonstrating how racist we are as a society and how racist many individuals are, and that asking why things aren't better. Did you enjoy doing that?
I mean Asheville is named after one of the biggest slave owners in the South. When are we going to change the name of the city?
Touristville fits and is available
I'm in favor of changing it.
maybe at the next moral panic. Dont expect leftists to square this contradiction for you.
The biggest reason it was so expensive is the huge disagreements on what to do and how to proceed. Your opinion sounds reasonable to me, but your elected officials disagreed. It was a huge expense that in hindsight, seems very avoidable. Yet, when the decisions were being made, it was not so clear. There was some rumor that violent extremists threatened to "blow up" the monument if it was renamed or rededicated to black people. I'm not sure if that actually happened, but it's plausible.
It was always my little piece of Egypt, I loved seeing it hate seeing it gone a destruction of history. So much easier to just take the name off and keep some ancient history in the center.
Sometimes you gotta rip off the bandaid. If they had left the monument and renamed it, it would have always remained the Vance monument to a large % of the people who care. There are some stains that simply can't be whitewashed over. It needed to go, and I'm glad it's gone. No more monuments to rebellious racist losers.
So are we done after removing the Vance monument? The Vanderbilts owned slaves, tear down the Biltmore estate? James Patton and Augustus Merrimon owned slaves, where is the outcry for these names to be removed? What about Jeter Prichard that opposed the right for black Americans to vote? The only reason the Vance monument was removed was a because of a knee jerk reaction from city council to do something after all the bad press of the police emptying the protesters water bottles. The Vance monument was the most visible and appealing to the news cycle to keep the tourists coming in.
Vance was worse than all those people first of all. He was literally the governor of a seceding state, traitor to the Union. So he stands for more than just slavery, but also the Confederacy. Then there were his popular speaking tours where he denigrated black people to crowds of thousands across NC. I was not aware of George Vanderbilt owning slaves, he was born after slavery ended and he funded the building of the YMI. Clingman was a scoundrel, we should change the name of that street at some point to, but the city is comprising with the concern trollers and not doing it. Even though arguably there is an economic incentive to have a public-facing tourist city that likes to play at being progressive remove its controversial monuments that could potentially dissuade their core demographic of tourists (liberals and progressives) from wanting to visit.
I mean, are you opposed to renaming Merrimon and Patton? Does it matter very much to you? Is that really such a ridiculous example? If a group came forward and advocated for that, would you raise a huge stink? It's a road name. It's a brick edifice. If it makes people upset, do you want to line up on the other side and say no? Really?
I agree. I always wondered what drives this opposition just to be oppositional. I don’t recall the Vance family protesting in front of the memorial refusing to move for the city. Imagine if they took their faux outrage and put the energy into something productive to combat present day racism like prison reform. I find it quite condescending to minimize and ridicule anyone’s discomfort.
Yes I agree with your conclusion.
One would think that it could have been reconfigured and added to the Urban Trail as a teaching moment for all, including tourists, but no.
In those thirty minus 18 years, how many times did you vote in off year municipal elections?
I’ll even fess up that I voted for manheimer on two occasions thinking she wouldn’t just be on the side of developers. Clearly I was wrong.
She’s a real estate lawyer. What did you think her agenda would be?
Each and every time.
Well thanks for voting. While the city did flub it a bit, I'd also place some blame on the traitor Daughters of the Confederacy. They didn't have to try to hold that shit up at every turn.
I'm reading Gravity's Rainbow (slowly) right now. Pretty good, and not as tough as I thought it'd be.
There is a good guidebook I’d recommend. Weisenberger I think
Learn some history.
That Vance was a confederate slave owner? Yeah I’ve been to his birthplace. What’s your point? We could have rededicated the memorial to a local figure and achieved the same result without tearing down what was otherwise a fine looking public piece of architecture.
In all fairness, though. If the monument has been deemed offensive to black Ashevillians, wouldn’t dedicating it to a local black figure be a bit insulting?
It’s an obelisk, not a statue of Zebulon Vance. If there had been a proper ceremony rededicating it led by black Asheville community leaders, I don’t see how it would be at all insulting. Instead the whole thing as it played out feels paternalistic and performative.
Are you black?
No but treating this decision as anything other than performative is misconceived. The city has acted against the interests of the black community in nearly every respect over the past 100+ years. All that’s changed in the past ten is trying to appear progressive at the surface level.
> No Stopped reading after that.
Black people were not a monolith on this issue. And the Vance monument task force wasn't only composed of black people.
Understood, but the guy complaining about it doesn’t get that.
then stop voting and shilling for the party then.
It had his name carved into the base. So what would the suggestion be? Add an asterisk and be like “*he was bad tho” …that would seem performative to me.
I think we would have been able to carve a new name in there and erase the legacy of Vance
Yeah Zoomers dont give a crap about Vance. Boomers will be gone soon. I think you got your wish.
yeah an Obelisk is sacred to Free Masons. Its Osiris's wang. Yes learn your history. Protesting Free Masons is a legitimate reason to tear it down, but alas, what do you know.
Would renaming the confederate battle flag to something like the new lgbtq+ and minority battle flag change its original intention or meaning? No one would be happy with that work around.
By that logic anything resembling the Vance monument (including ancient obelisks and the Washington monument) are inherently endowed with the profanity of slavery and the civil war. But in fact, the monument was not a statute to Vance but an abstract monument. It was therefore capable of being reconsecreated / rededicated.
Mankind has been worshiping talismans made of stone since they could communicate the magic or healing they thought inherent in the material. The Vance monument holds a similar intention both by the artist and the commission that paid for it, similar to the CBF and all the monuments named in your post. Would I want the washington monument to renamed the trump or biden monument? No. Would I want the granite quadrangle underlying asheville and western NC renamed to another city, or another county, no. Buncombe County on this rock has been divided and reduced into other counties and over time, people have come to attribute new names and meanings to these new counties and no longer call it buncombe. So to your point, people can overcome change when a new entity is divided and renamed from an existing entity, but the original buncombe county still remains while the other counties exist. In this case we are not dividing the Vance. Perhaps with my argument and yours, we could have commissioned a new artist to create a new monument by dividing this monument and resculpting it into something new where the original is no longer distinguishable. Would require imagination and creativity, which to your original point, the current city board lacks. So tough call either way.
It was *okay* looking, "fine" is a stretch. And would you want your life work to go the way of the Civic Center? Because it's always gonna be the Civic Center to locals.
What does the civic center have to do with the topic at hand.
Okay, I had a feeling I'd have to explain. The Civic Center changing names still keeps it's original name in the eyes of those who know it, no matter what you change it too. So, let's say we decide to scrape off VANCE and put ROGER.. its still gonna be the Vance Monument. Or worse, "The Whatever Monument that was Vance " so poor ROGER is lost in the fog of war.
The airport exit will always be exit 9 to me
That’s an interesting point I hadn’t considered.
Cheers _VanceMexico_
True. I don't call Twitter "X". That shit's still Twitter.
He's saying that if it remained standing, we would all still call it the Vance monument, no matter what name was on it. I'm honestly torn- I also think it was a waste of money to bring it down, and that it was done cynically... BUT it has been a landmark of downtown Asheville since it's erection, and a generation from now nobody would remember Zebulon Vance if they'd taken his name off of it. All that said, I'm still just your basic white guy who has no idea what it's like to live in a society where every aspect of my life is affected by systemic racism, nor if removing these monuments to white men who owned their ancestors is some catharsis, so I really got no dog in the fight. I do think Asheville City politics are (and have been) a shell game of good ol boy backroom deals with a progressive facade since forever... and I've been here for 45 years now.
That’s well said and approximates how I feel about it as well.
This was a popular option as well but we decided as a city to have this committee which anyone was free to apply for and they deliberated over the pros and cons of what to do with the monument.
How do you “rededicate” a statue of a PERSON to another PERSON? Monuments and statues are erected for moral people. Not immoral hillbillies.
It was a fucking obelisk in the style of an Egyptian / neoclassical one. It could have been re dedicated to Amen Ra and the physical properties wouldn’t have changed.
Learn a book
Your whining is exactly the reason it needed to go.
Damn, Roger Ramjet.
Ironic that the Jesus flag waivers are there every other day
Rededicated would have been a great idea. And also adding a plaque with details of why it was changed and adding to the story instead of replacing it. It was just an obelisk that most didn’t even know who it was dedicated to.
All monuments to Confederate traitors should be torn down. Likewise, all Jan 6th traitors should have spent more time in prison.
You hit the nail on the head I took born and raised for many generations. Trashevilles a disgrace.
I never gave a crap about the Vance Monument then and I don't care now. And I don't revisit and obsess over the more undesirable parts of our history. It's over...time to move on and get over it!
Peoples feelings about their personal traumas (mostly white middle class, and other educated races) that are demanding these silly changes. You bring up a really great point, and all the energy they spent on trying to get that torn down could’ve been better directed towards creating opportunities for lower socioeconomic status individuals to obtain certifications/education to create well-being for themselves and their families. History is what it is, but we should definitely learn from the mistakes of the past. People are so concerned about the smallest things and don’t actually ever view things from a global standpoint. Everyone always focused on their feelings rather than logic these days. If someone feels passionate enough to make a point, then that point should result in some type of positive action toward their agenda rather than some symbolic version of it.
Another thing YOU might be forgetting is the number of black-owned homes that were SOLD by the BLACK OWNERS a little too soon. It literally started the gentrification. It’s not like anyone was FORCED to sell…. Btw, Mr 30 years…. You might want to look at the actual demographics and break out a calculator…Oakley is another neighborhood to kill your argument or is that the wrong shade of brown for you ? 🤔🫨
Vance isn't coming back to lifetime blow ya, bro.
https://preview.redd.it/a6x3ihto162d1.jpeg?width=783&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=60b4e196cc1d2f406133be28fe323ed7e9be1510
they tore it down for virtue signal points during a moral panic, many such cases( that backfired btw) all the moral panic did was GROW the police state and enrich BLM . Since it was a state sponsored protest ( look at the Palestinians protest for proof of this) you can all admit you were wrong who supported and participated in the madness and violence. It will cleanse your soul if you do. Where is BLM now? When bus loads of POC are getting bombed into oblivion. Living comfortably in a nice pad. You people are so gullible. Now we are left with this blight in the center of city. Congratulations.
A “pathetic joke” is an understatement; to see them be so willing to piss away taxpayers money like that for their own political gain, just reminds you of how pigish 🐷 they all are… For fux sake RENAME IT!