ANTIFA – Call to Destroy Columbus Monuments Monday – Will There Be a Backlash?

Posted by Tina

“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, and every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.” – George Orwell “1984”

The senseless destruction of Confederate monuments was despicable to me. An open and hinest nation records all of it’s history. But the horrible attacks are typical of radical left elements in America; we’ve seen their kind before. The 60’s and early 70’s were filled with violence, chaos, and division. Are we headed down that ugly road again? More violence and chaos is bound to come as we move toward the next election. Debra Hein’s article at PJ Media, “Antifa Group Plans Nationwide ‘Deface Columbus Day’ Actions for Monday” shines a light on the radical left group, ANTIFA’s, next move. Look for thugs dressed in black out on the streets early next week.

What happens if these destructive thugs push enough buttons to incite an in-kind backlash from white supremacist groups? Could monuments to black Americans suddenly become targets to be defaced and destroyed? Would the left tolerate and defend it as they have tolerated and defended ANTIFA so far?

Nobody talks much about the historical civil rights record or the monuments and museums erected to remind us of our difficult past. Instead the left drags the dead corpse of slavery and racism around to use as political fodder. They don’t seem to mind the violence and division it inspires. We do have such monuments you know:

In 2003 the Smithsonian Institute opened the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington DC. A few years later a statue of MLK was dedicated on the Mall. And there are many others.

The top ten black monuments, according to NEWSONE, depict MLK, Malcolm X, Adam Clayton Powell Jr, Joe Lewis, George Washington Carver, Crispus Attucks, Harriet Tubman, W.E.B. Dubois, Medgar Evers, and, color me surprised, Tupac Shakur.

Atlanta is rich in civil rights history with many monuments to civil rights leaders, scientists and inventors.

The various sports Hall of Fame museums, as well as some ball parks and football stadiums, are loaded with memorial dedications to black sports figures. Giants stadium in SF is named AT&T Park but it’s also a monument to the famous and beloved Willie Mays and Willie McCovey.

And then there’s the Hollywood Walk of Fame which includes “star” monuments to honor the outstanding work of black celebrities.

The website, Black Past, lists the black historical sites that our nation acknowledged in the 20th Century:

National African American Historic Landmarks by State – Since the beginning of the 20th Century, the U.S. Government and most states have identified landmarks associated with African American history. Listed below are the African American National Historic Landmarks by state, as certified by the National Park Service’s National Register of Historic Places, as well as some state landmarks.

Other potential targets include the Negro Leagues baseball Museum, the Black History Museum and Cultural Center, the Alexandria Black History Museum, and several others, including the “College Museum in Hampton, Virginia, established in 1868.” I counted 176 dedicated historical sites.

A pictorial tour of black historical monuments is here.

How many streets and schools in America have been named after Martin Luther King Jr. to pay tribute to the fallen Civil rights leader? Yes, America is rich with black memorials and monuments. If we want to save our history from destructive elements then we must be prepared to defend all monuments!

ANTIFA began in Europe according to historian, Mark Bray who describes it as “a kind of ideology, an identity, a tendency or milieu, or an activity of self-defense.” I don’t see how the wanton destruction of inanimate statues…public property…can be described as a self-defense activity. Daniel Penny of the New Yorker describes the group as, “…a leaderless, horizontal movement whose roots lie in various leftist causes—Communism, anarchism, Socialism, anti-racism.” Will the activities of ANTIFA push some toward support of their historically European enemies…white supremacist Nazi groups?

ANTIFA will continue it’s campaign to divide and destroy America by defacing historical monuments of Christopher Columbus on Monday. Who knows what more they have planned as we approach another political season. They have appealed for support from liberals and progressives and gotten support from left leaders like Hillary Clinton. It doesn’t seem to matter how violent or destructive they are.

Those who believe in America and the principles of equality in our founding documents, regardless of party, should stand together to denounce the violence and anarchy of ANTIFA before push comes to shove…and before there’s even more blood and violence in the streets. Republicans rejected white supremacists long ago. Time for Democrats to loudly denounce radical leftist groups, including ANTIFA!

This entry was posted in Art, Civil Rights, Constitution & The Law, history, Humanity, Liberty, Patriotism, Protest and Agitation, Race Relations, Western Values. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to ANTIFA – Call to Destroy Columbus Monuments Monday – Will There Be a Backlash?

  1. Post Scripts says:

    I’m wondering if the RICO act might apply to ANTIFA? Then I looked up the elements and found that destruction of property doesn’t meet the federal stands. Even though one could argue they are a criminal enterprise, using threats and force, using extortion to get their way, they are conspiring to commit many illegal acts, they reach across vast distances and involve many people, yet RICO still doesn’t apply. Hmmmm? That’s frustrating. I think the law needs amending. However, there are still other federal laws involved, including conspiracy to commit an illegal act, that’s a felony, easy to prove too.

    The FBI should be clamping down on this group of criminals, whatever the charge/s may be, they need to be shut down.

  2. Chris says:

    The purpose of monuments is not to “record” history, it is to honor historical figures. Can you not see why many people feel that Confederate generals and people like Columbus should not be honored? I don’t agree with Antifa’s tactics at all, but I would support cities choosing to remove monuments to such figures legally. I was heavily misinformed about Columbus as a child in public elementary schools–he was portrayed as a noble explorer who discovered North America. I didn’t find out that he essentially invented the transatlantic slave trade, or about his brutality toward the native people, until much later. You’re right that we need better history education, but the monuments to Columbus don’t do that, nor do the monuments to Confederate generals; on the contrary, they were erected for the purpose of whitewashing history and spreading myths that glorified these people.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Chris, we can agree that whitewashing history is never a good idea. But, we disagree on your other point, that monuments are not designed to record history. Actually, they are. That is one of the main reasons monuments are created. They serve as a historical record or reference point in time or place. They are a symbol of our heritage. They are a means to identify and honor, a person, place or event that is important to a group of people. Some the most important areas of Egyptian history are the times when ancient Egyptians tried to erase (destroy) the own history as found in the monuments of the time.

      “A monument is a type of structure that was explicitly created to commemorate a person or event, or which has become important to a social group as a part of their remembrance of historic times or cultural heritage, or as an example of historic architecture. The term is often applied to buildings or structures that are considered examples of important architectural or cultural heritage.

      The origin of the word “monument” comes from the Latin moneo, monere, which means ‘to remind’, ‘to advise’ or ‘to warn’,[2] suggesting a monument allows us to see the past thus helping us visualize what is to come in the future.[3] In English the word “monumental” is often used in reference to something of extraordinary size and power, as in monumental sculpture, but also to mean simply anything made to commemorate the dead, as a funerary monument or other example of funerary art.

      Monuments have been created for thousands of years, and they are often the most durable and famous symbols of ancient civilizations. Prehistoric tumuli, dolmens, and similar structures have been created in a large number of prehistoric cultures across the world, and the many forms of monumental tombs of the more wealthy and powerful members of a society are often the source of much of our information and art from those cultures.[4] As societies became organized on a larger scale, so monuments so large as to be difficult to destroy like the Egyptian Pyramids, the Greek Parthenon, the Great Wall of China, Indian Taj Mahal or the Moai of Easter Island have become symbols of their civilizations. In more recent times, monumental structures such as the Statue of Liberty and Eiffel Tower have become iconic emblems of modern nation-states. The term monumentality relates to the symbolic status and physical presence of a monument.

      • Post Scripts says:

        Chris, not all monuments must be embraced because they make people feel good nor should they be destroyed because they make people feel bad. Germans preserved the Dachau Concentration that reminds Jews of horrible inhuman events, but it serves a purpose. Same could be said for the Berlin Wall. We don’t celebrate those things, but they serve a purpose as monuments. They should be remembered, like it or not, lest history repeat itself.

  3. Chris says:

    “Chris, we can agree that whitewashing history is never a good idea. But, we disagree on your other point, that monuments are not designed to record history. Actually, they are. That is one of the main reasons monuments are created. They serve as a historical record or reference point in time or place. They are a symbol of our heritage. They are a means to identify and honor, a person, place or event that is important to a group of people. ”

    The key word there is “honor.” There are plenty of ways to remember the horrible things that the Confederacy and Christopher Columbus did other than keeping up statues designed to honor them. Monuments designed to remind us of their sins would look very different from the monuments we’re talking about. Dachau is an example of the type of monument that really is designed to keep us from forgetting atrocities. But Germany doesn’t have statues to Hitler, and no rational German would argue that they should have statues to Hitler to avoid forgetting the Holocaust.

  4. Tina says:

    Politically choosing to destroy, deface or remove monuments is a mistake and this anarchist threat to monuments and statues in America is just that. The Confederate generals stood for many decades without being challenged by blacks and whites alike. Perhaps there’s a reason beyond the current political rhetoric to explain. Southern Whites are not the only ones who are proud of their Southern heritage, southern blacks are too. Their heritage includes much more than slavery and civil rights. Even the Civil War was based on more than the issue of slavery:

    Obviously, it’s difficult to separate slavery from any discussion on the Civil War. The peculiar institution hovers over the conflict specter-like. Indeed, it’s an apparition that still haunts modern American politics. But to say that slavery was the sole cause of the Civil War overlooks other stark differences that divided the North and South in the lead-up to it. Historians have speculated that even had the slavery question been resolved peacefully, war or secession still might have occurred during the westward expansion.

    Below are five other causes of the Civil War. To be fair, each of these causes was impacted by the institution of slavery to one degree or another. But each cause also existed apart from the institution of slavery. …

    Follow the link to read about the five other compelling issues which fall under the headings: “1. Sweeping Economic Changes, 2. The Union Was Rapidly Changing Amidst Political Upheaval, 3. There Was a Breakdown of Decorum and Civil Discourse, 4. Fundamental Disagreement on Constitutional Principles, 5. Different Nations, Different Dreams

    The Southern leadership were fighting for economic survival as well and that affected every man woman and child regardless their station.

    As Jack pointed out the Confederate generals are not one dimensional men. It is wrong to condemn them today on a point that was still controversial in their day.

    Once again, Chris, you observe through a single lens. If you’re going to do that, shouldn’t you include the men on the African continent that rounded blacks up and sold them into slavery? This is of particular importance when considering the “worth” of Christopher Columbus. Minorities would have us believe that they are somehow superior on this issue and we all know that’s a big fat lie. Blacks in Africa held slaves from other tribes …and then there were the cannibals. Natives in the America’s also made war on one another and took and held slaves…some also performed rituals of sacrifice with captured prisoners.

    Christopher Columbus is celebrated because America at the time was at loggerheads with England, not Spain, according to Live Science:

    What Columbus “discovered” was the Bahamas archipelago and then the island later named Hispaniola, now split into Haiti and the Dominican Republic. On his subsequent voyages he went farther south, to Central and South America. He never got close to what is now called the United States.

    So why does the United States celebrate the guy who thought he found a nifty new route to Asia and the lands described by Marco Polo? This is because the early United States was fighting with England, not Spain. John Cabot (a.k.a. Giovanni Caboto, another Italian) “discovered” Newfoundland in England’s name around 1497 and paved the way for England’s colonization of most of North America. So the American colonialists instead turned to Columbus as their hero, not England’s Cabot. Hence we have the capital, Washington, D.C. — that’s District of Columbia, not District of Cabot. …

    … While Columbus was wrong about most things, he did help establish knowledge about trade winds, namely the lower-latitude easterlies that blow toward the Caribbean and the higher-latitude westerlies that can blow a ship back to Western Europe. Also, while Columbus wasn’t the first European to reach the Western Hemisphere, he was the first European to stay. His voyages directly initiated a permanent presence of Europeans in both North and South America.

    News of the success of his first voyage spread like wildfire through Europe, setting the stage for an era of European conquest. One can argue whether the conquest was good or bad for humanity: that is, the spread of Christianity, rise of modernism, exploitation and annihilation of native cultures, and so on. But it is difficult to deny Columbus’ direct role in quickly and radically changing the world.

    Wikipedia…Sir John Hawkins is more a more likely candidate to be labeled someone who, “essentially invented the transatlantic slave trade.”

    Your newly discovered history on Columbus has been colored by political and emotional revelations that are also not entirely true. Minorities who victimize themselves and shut their eyes to all of history can easily be used for “revolution.” They become willing dupes in a much larger game and are being used by those elements seeking absolute power. Look at the history of communist influence in the world and find the real evil.

    • Chris says:

      Once again, Chris, you observe through a single lens. If you’re going to do that, shouldn’t you include the men on the African continent that rounded blacks up and sold them into slavery?

      Where are the statues of African men who sold blacks into slavery? I would support removing those too.

      • Tina says:

        What do statues have to do with your single lens thinking process?

        Forget the damn statues…expand your mind. Allow something other than “the struggle” to inform and enlighten!

        • Chris says:

          What? Your article is about statues. In order to support your argument that statues of Columbus should not come down, you deflected to talking about African slave traders, apparently to catch me in some kind of contradiction. So I explained I wouldn’t support keeping up statues of them either.

          • Tina says:

            Please distinguish between the content of the article and comments relating to it and my responses to you that address the narrow way in which you think.

            It’s possible to talk about both.

            Regarding how you think and the statues of Columbus…if you could think outside the box of discrimination and racism you wouldn’t have such a hard, negative attitude about historical figures because you would see that, a) the activities were not unusual in their time, b) those you assume were exploited or enslaved were not so angelic and innocent as you imagine and, c) this civil disobedience is not really about statues at all but about destroying the one nation on earth that aspired to bring about equality and freedom.

            Suggested reading

  5. Pie Guevara says:

    Related: Why I Love Black Lives Matter (They have the best chants.)

    “ACLU, you protect Hitler too.”

    “The revolution will not uphold the constitution.”

    “Liberalism is white supremacy.”

    • Tina says:

      Good heavens! The young people today haven’t learned squat.

      I’m particularly interested in this one, ““Liberalism is white supremacy.”

      How will the liberals in this country deal? Could set a few heads on fire.

      Tucker is the best!

    • Post Scripts says:

      And then I stumbled on this, you’re going to love it….

      • Pie Guevara says:

        Good lord.

      • Tina says:

        “Somebody needs to be held accountable”

        Good Lord indeed!

        Her own accountability began with her first child and multiplied thereafter. This is what dependency looks like. The woman hasn’t a clue. Her kids will likely follow in her footsteps since she sees this as her due.

        Democrats should be held accountable for crippling generations of poor!

        I can think of one positive. She din’t abort those beautiful children.

  6. Pie Guevara says:

    Re: “I didn’t find out that he essentially invented the transatlantic slave trade”

    This is sheer nonsense. History is replete with what Chris doesn’t know.

    Columbus was a slaver, but he did not invent the transatlantic slave trade. Columbus provided (or attempted to provide) what Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand demanded — gold and slaves. Slavery was not his invention, it was common practice. The engine driving the transatlantic slave trade was the Asiento contract, not Columbus. He was just the first to deploy it in the New World.

    Columbus essentially failed at both gold mining and slave trading enterprises. Hundreds of the transported slaves died before ever reaching Spain (although the first survivors were paraded naked through the streets of Seville) and not much gold was ever mined. Nevertheless, the indigenous population of Hispaniola was enslaved, treated with extreme cruelty and eventually decimated.

    • Chris says:

      Pie, you definitely seem to know more about this topic then I do, and I am glad we at least agree on one point: that Columbus was a brutal slaver.

      I am confused on one point. You say this:

      “He was just the first to deploy it in the New World.”

      Doesn’t that support my argument that Columbus essentially invented the transatlantic slave trade? Or am I misunderstanding the word “transatlantic?” If he was the first to bring African slaves to the New World, then that makes him the first to bring them across the Atlantic, no? I know you’ll correct me if I’m wrong here; all I ask for is a brief explanation as to why, if you can spare the time.

      • Pie Guevara says:

        Re: Doesn’t that support my argument that Columbus essentially invented the transatlantic slave trade?


        Another revealing lesson from Chris — we are dealing with an idiot here. The man hasn’t a clue. Rational thought escapes him completely. I should have expected this. Racist, sexist bigots and the left in general do not think rationally. It is really quite depressing.

  7. Tina says:

    The thing that grates me is the wholly invented meme that whites represent all that is evil in the world,”imperialism” is the worst of all sins following the slave trade, and indigenous peoples were simply peace loving innocents living in paradise.

    Articles to enlighten and inform:

    Taki Magazine, ”

    Although Islam and black nationalism share a flame-belching, sword-swinging hatred for Western Civ, it’s an odd pairing when you consider history. American blacks who dump Christianity and shack up with Islam seem to think they’re flipping the bird at the creed that enslaved their ancestors, but they’re only swapping it for a religion that has enslaved their ancestors for far longer.

    The idea of collective historical guilt is often wielded as a psychological weapon, and civilizations that allow themselves to be inoculated with the Guilt Germ can be conquered without a shot being fired. Islamic apologists and Western oikophobes scoff and spit and snort that anyone would dare draw equivalencies between the transatlantic and the Arab slave trades, yet the historical record laughs in their faces.

    Though many Westerners have no qualms assigning collective historical guilt to all Caucasians for the transatlantic slave trade, my fatally Western sense of fairness compels me to distinguish between “Arab” and “Muslim.” Just as most white Christians played zero role in transatlantic slavery, it’s safe to assume that most Arab Muslims were at best only passive observers of the Arab slave trade. …

    … But a giant distinction—one that flies right over the recently purchased hijabs and kufis of black American neo-Muslims—is the colossal one that Arabic Muslim slave traders made between themselves and sub-Saharan non-Muslim blacks. Depicting the latter as slow-witted alien infidels is what allowed Arabic Muslims to enslave, torture, and slay them in good conscience.

    Many historians harp about how the Arab slave trade was far more humane than the transatlantic slaving biz. If only for spite, I’ll focus on what was far worse about it.

    For starters, it predated the transatlantic slave trade by at least 800 years and has outlived it for 150 years and counting. Whereas the bloodthirsty hallucinating pedophile sandworm Muhammad (c. 570-632) owned both male and female black slaves, European explorers didn’t even begin dipping their beaks into the African human-cattle trade in large numbers until the 1500s.

    Roughly three centuries later, Europeans and their American descendants took it upon themselves to put the kibosh on slavery. In contrast with Christendom, there was never a concerted Arabic abolition movement, and slavery was only formally outlawed in the Islamic world due to intense outside pressure. But slavery still openly thrives in places such as Mauritania and, on the downlow, throughout much of Africa and the Middle East.

    If you count human bodies equally, the Arab slave trade likely shackled at least as many Africans as the transatlantic trade and possibly twice as many. Although early documentation is scarce due in part to a deafening lack of written languages below the Sahara, historical estimates range from a low of eight million to a high of 25 million. In contrast, the general consensus is that around 11 million Africans were transported to the New World—yet only a mere 5% of those wound up in what is now the USA, although the USA gets 100% of the guilt-tripping.

    Europeans bought their slaves from established African slave markets and did not make extended forays into the bush to raid villages for slaves, booty, and slave-girl booty. In contrast, Arab slave traders penetrated deep into Africa to kidnap their prey.

    If “sexism” bums you out, consider that two-thirds of transatlantic slaves were male, whereas two-thirds of those transported in the Arab slave trade were female.

    Though some have mislabeled the African experience in America as “genocide,” that’s an uphill climb considering that an original slave population of about a half-million has blossomed into nearly 40 million black Americans, nearly all of whom enjoy greater longevity and higher living standards than their hapless Western African brethren.

    The term “genocide” is more apt for what happened to Africans transported into the Middle East. Males who weren’t murdered in their African villages were routinely castrated—penis often included—whereas females were primarily used as sex slaves. When African concubines were impregnated, it was common practice to kill their infants at birth.

    Human beings are flawed…ALL human beings.

    We are fortunate to be living in a nation that respects individual liberty and rights…we are ALL fortunate no matter our color or creed.

    Creating resentment of the white man (and Christianity) is a political tactic. Radicals push false stories that are swallowed by the ignorant and uninformed. A militant group forms and regardless their immediate focus (Columbus, Capitalism, police “brutality”) the goal is the destruction of those constitutionally guaranteed freedoms and rights. The radical left is waging a destructive war we can’t afford to lose.

    • Chris says:

      The thing that grates me is the wholly invented meme that whites represent all that is evil in the world,”imperialism” is the worst of all sins following the slave trade, and indigenous peoples were simply peace loving innocents living in paradise

      I hope you realize that I have made none of those arguments.

      But what you describe at the end of your comment is a “culture war.” Columbus has nothing at all to do with constitutional rights, but you see an attack on his legacy as an attack on the Constitution. This is a result of cultural bundling and tribalism–you are signaling that you are against the tribe that is against Columbus because they are also against other values you hold dear. What with Antifa going around breaking the law and committing violence, I can’t even blame you for this any more. They bring shame on my “tribe,” and I can understand why you don’t want to associate with us in any way, shape, or form. But analyzing arguments on their merits, rather than signing on to whoever your tribe says is right, is more important now then ever.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *