Heritage activist David Duke reportedly to defend Andrew Jackson monument in New Orleans...

(Image courtesy of David Duke)





Well now. It's really going to start getting difficult now. Duke is more or less forcing Heritage defenders to side with him by attaching himself to their fight. How will they respond? (Note: I did not say Confederate Heritage.) Via David Duke's personal website (I'm not providing a link):




"Dr. David Duke has announced his intention to personally defend the iconic Andrew Jackson statue in New Orleans against “Black Lives Matter” hate in downtown New Orleans on Saturday morning, September 24.
The “Take ‘Em Down Nola” group, which has aligned itself with the Black Lives Matter movement, has publicly threated to “tear down” the statue, located in Jackson Square, New Orleans, this weekend.
“I am going to go down there in person to protect our heritage,” Dr. Duke said.
“Andrew Jackson was one of America’s greatest presidents, and hero of the 1815 Battle of New Orleans,” Dr. Duke said.
“There is no reason for the Black Lives Matter hate group to target this statue, other than as part of their national hate campaign against European-Americans,” Dr. Duke continued.
“Nowhere in this country are there groups of Europeans going around seeking to destroy any vestiges of any other peoples’ heritage. This is a purely one-way street of hate against white people,” he continued.
Dr. Duke will, therefore, he said, be at the Andrew Jackson statue in Jackson Square to personally defend his peoples’ heritage."





(Image courtesy of Twitter)






My own feelings on this are in line with those expressed in this excellent opinion piece by Jarvis DeBerry at NOLA.com:




"I can only speculate, but I think it's clear that by labeling the Andrew Jackson statue offensive Take Em Down NOLA is signaling that its members will not be satisfied with the removal of monuments to Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, P.G.T. Beauregard and that group of police murderers that called itself the White League. That's a way of yanking an issue of importance to black people – or at least some black people – away from the white mayor who officially brought it up.  Beyond that, by calling out Jackson, Take Em Down NOLA is making a charge of white supremacy against the United States of America and not just the Confederate States of America.
The group's vow to bring down Jackson is sure to push many people – even people who are eager to see the Confederate monuments gone – well past their comfort point.  It pushes me past the place where I'm comfortable, but it's in those uncomfortable places that I am prompted to figure out what I think and feel.
I need no convincing that Jackson was an awful human being.  But I don't think that sabotage is the way to make one's point in a democracy.  Take Em Down NOLA's Malcolm Suber said at a Sept. 15 meeting that the monuments to white supremacy were put up when black people had no say so in the matter.  He's right. But by arguing that they were put up when black people didn't have the vote, Suber is unintentionally reminding us that now black people do. Because this is a majority black city, if enough black people were aggrieved by Jackson's statue, they could demand that the mayor and City Council do something about it.
Or if those elected officials thought it was in the best interest of their constituents, they could take the lead.
When the Lee, Davis, Beauregard and Battle of Liberty Place monuments are finally removed, nobody will be able to question the process.  A duly elected mayor brought the issue before a duly elected City Council, which voted 6-1 for removal.
Nor will anybody be able to argue that anybody who benefited New Orleans was dishonored.  Supporters of Beauregard like to point out that he later supported an integrated government, but his monument depicts him in his Confederate uniform.
If Take Em Down NOLA pulls down Jackson's statue, the democracy argument goes out of the window. So does the argument that the statues were put up to celebrate white supremacy.  Don't get me wrong, Jackson was an incredibly violent white supremacist, but because he protected New Orleans, it's more difficult to make the argument that his statue was put up because and only because he was a white supremacist."






Restoring the honor!






Comments

  1. EPIC FAIL! Jackson Statue still standing....
    And it has absolutely nothing to do with David Duke.
    Do you think these monument targeters REALLY believe it will make a difference in their lives to have these monuments gone? That the drugs will become less addictive? That bullets from a gang gun will miraculously swerve around their target? That crime will magically disappear and there will be no need for cops?

    This all-for-show activism is why I don't take crap like this seriously. The people spending so much time and effort on monument removal could better use their time helping feed the hungry, helping kids stay out of gangs, helping themselves get an education... But they'd rather do battle with inanimate objects.

    http://www.wbrz.com/news/jackson-statue-remains-despite-protest-to-remove-monument

    ReplyDelete
  2. Quote from article: "The Andrew Jackson is the iconic image of the city of New Orleans," Suber said. "There are more people that visit that statue than any other in this city, and so especially given that he was a slave owner and the architect of the Trail of Tears that murdered more than 5,000 native people, we think he is not deserving of any place of respect."

    Never mind that he saved New Orleans from the Redcoats... but really, when you get down to it, there haven't been that many really admirable presidents... Lincoln had the blood of 700,000 Americans on his hand... Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon the blood of 58.000 US soldiers in Vietnam... and on and on and on... Thus, Andy seems no worse that lots of others...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jefferson Davis has the blood of over 800,000 Americans on his hands as did every person who advocated for secession.

      Just another lie from KKKonnie The Racist.

      Delete
    2. See, Dimmy, this is the sort of thing that makes you earn the reputation of "dim." Advocating secession is not a violent or military act. Even seceding is not a violent or military act...it is a political act. You show your hatred when you lie this way.

      Davis and the Confederates were defending their territory from an invading army. The invaders and their leader were the killers with blood on their hands.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Shaun Winkler becomes unglued over the Sons of Confederate Veterans "pet monkey"...

Hate Not Heritage: Black Confederates reportedly enroute to Tupelo rally, armed white nationalists and Klansmen slated to attend...

Aryan Nations Throws Its Racist Support Behind Dylann Roof | Hatewatch