:/
Quote from: ALIE on April 20, 2016, 06:30:35 PMQuote from: Azumarill on April 20, 2016, 06:03:37 PMim of the opinion that just about everyone currently immortalized on american coins and dollars needs to be replaced.This is ridiculous. You don't start changing historical artifacts and memorials to suit the social climate of the time. For better or worse, those we honor through currency and names on buildings were important figures of the nation.their stories should be taught to the people within their contexts. we shouldnt celebrate genocidal maniacs like jackson by spreading their image around via currency. this isnt like sandblasting the memorial on stone mountain. youre retarded.
Quote from: Azumarill on April 20, 2016, 06:03:37 PMim of the opinion that just about everyone currently immortalized on american coins and dollars needs to be replaced.This is ridiculous. You don't start changing historical artifacts and memorials to suit the social climate of the time. For better or worse, those we honor through currency and names on buildings were important figures of the nation.
im of the opinion that just about everyone currently immortalized on american coins and dollars needs to be replaced.
Quote from: Azumarill on April 20, 2016, 06:35:23 PMQuote from: ALIE on April 20, 2016, 06:30:35 PMQuote from: Azumarill on April 20, 2016, 06:03:37 PMim of the opinion that just about everyone currently immortalized on american coins and dollars needs to be replaced.This is ridiculous. You don't start changing historical artifacts and memorials to suit the social climate of the time. For better or worse, those we honor through currency and names on buildings were important figures of the nation.their stories should be taught to the people within their contexts. we shouldnt celebrate genocidal maniacs like jackson by spreading their image around via currency. this isnt like sandblasting the memorial on stone mountain. youre retarded.I'm retarded? I'm not the one who sincerely thinks having someone's representation on a government artifact means the government condones what they did. We have an officially maintained Robert E. Lee memorial, because he was a big part of a huge, defining moment in our country's history. Andrew Jackson is no different.There's no difference between a representation on a government bill and representation on a government memorial. If you think one necessitates acceptance of the person as a whole, then the other would also have to.
Quote from: ALIE on April 20, 2016, 06:39:20 PMQuote from: Azumarill on April 20, 2016, 06:35:23 PMQuote from: ALIE on April 20, 2016, 06:30:35 PMQuote from: Azumarill on April 20, 2016, 06:03:37 PMim of the opinion that just about everyone currently immortalized on american coins and dollars needs to be replaced.This is ridiculous. You don't start changing historical artifacts and memorials to suit the social climate of the time. For better or worse, those we honor through currency and names on buildings were important figures of the nation.their stories should be taught to the people within their contexts. we shouldnt celebrate genocidal maniacs like jackson by spreading their image around via currency. this isnt like sandblasting the memorial on stone mountain. youre retarded.I'm retarded? I'm not the one who sincerely thinks having someone's representation on a government artifact means the government condones what they did. We have an officially maintained Robert E. Lee memorial, because he was a big part of a huge, defining moment in our country's history. Andrew Jackson is no different.There's no difference between a representation on a government bill and representation on a government memorial. If you think one necessitates acceptance of the person as a whole, then the other would also have to.It's most definitely an implicit approval of his person. And yes, you are retarded, I dunno why you asked.
If you held everyone in the 1800s to today's standards, history textbooks would be blank.
Deci, Jackson was taught in California history classes. Maybe you should try paying attention next time.
It's most definitely an implicit approval of his person.
Quote from: Azumarill on April 20, 2016, 06:42:07 PMIt's most definitely an implicit approval of his person.Not necessarily. YouTube^supportive argument
Quote from: THE BOAT ecks two on April 20, 2016, 06:58:12 PMQuote from: Azumarill on April 20, 2016, 06:42:07 PMIt's most definitely an implicit approval of his person.Not necessarily. YouTube^supportive argumentthats a solid video; he makes good points and i pretty much agree completely. i already addressed this sort of; i think the issue of representing "heroes" (i like that he used it in the classical sense and i do think the term is applicable to jackson in this context) on currency is distinct from things like artistic monuments. for instance, i dont think the stone mountain monument should be sandblasted. i just think its a bit odd to have genocidal maniacs like jackson immortalized on symbols of value. i think we can memorialize him and properly contextualize his actions without associating his likeness with money/prosperity/value/grams of weed/what have you.
also, apparently hes just moving to the back of the bill. tubman on the front and a slaveowning murderer on the back. weird.
Quote from: Azumarill on April 20, 2016, 07:08:30 PMQuote from: THE BOAT ecks two on April 20, 2016, 06:58:12 PMQuote from: Azumarill on April 20, 2016, 06:42:07 PMIt's most definitely an implicit approval of his person.Not necessarily. YouTube^supportive argumentthats a solid video; he makes good points and i pretty much agree completely. i already addressed this sort of; i think the issue of representing "heroes" (i like that he used it in the classical sense and i do think the term is applicable to jackson in this context) on currency is distinct from things like artistic monuments. for instance, i dont think the stone mountain monument should be sandblasted. i just think its a bit odd to have genocidal maniacs like jackson immortalized on symbols of value. i think we can memorialize him and properly contextualize his actions without associating his likeness with money/prosperity/value/grams of weed/what have you. That's a fair enough view.Quotealso, apparently hes just moving to the back of the bill. tubman on the front and a slaveowning murderer on the back. weird.Now that is pretty weird... have we ever had portraits on both sides of a circulated note before?
Quote from: Verbatim on April 20, 2016, 02:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on April 20, 2016, 02:05:27 PMCan't remember if I like or dislike Jackson, can't really think of anything Tubman has done.πLV
Quote from: challengerX on April 20, 2016, 02:05:27 PMCan't remember if I like or dislike Jackson, can't really think of anything Tubman has done.πL
Can't remember if I like or dislike Jackson, can't really think of anything Tubman has done.π
ALSOi could be wrong, but wasn't andrew jackson, like, super against paper currency anyway?didn't he plan to abolish paper currency when he was elected, or some shit?
so he wouldn't have wanted to be on the twenny anyway
Why is anybody even upset over this?
i'm convinced that no one actually is--it's just that it's so much more fun to be "ironic," and to pretend that everything is backwards, because circlejerks are boringeveryone already knows people like hitler were evil, so it seems silly to even discuss it--so you pretend he was actually doing humanity a favor. why? because the reactions you get from people when you say that are pretty funnyif we all sat around talking about how bad people like hitler were, it would be boring--it's an insult to your intelligence, so we come up with other, more interesting ways of expressing that, like "hitler was actually a great man"which essentially translates to, "of course hitler was bad, you 10 year old--allow me to offend you as much as you're offending me by stating such an obvious fact"that's why i'd describe our sense of humor as "post-ironic"some people (like das) almost make a game out of this sort of thing, glazing their entire body of beliefs with a thick layer of post-irony, because liberals today have a tendency to state the obvious a lot, and it gets annoying
Andrew Jackson is 100% getting replaced by Harriet Tubman on the 20 dollar bill
