'White Lives Matter' sprayed on Arthur Ashe memorial

Robert59

Robert59

Well-known Member
Location
Now I live in Tennesee. Did live in Michigan.
RICHMOND, Va. (AP) -- A statue of African American tennis legend Arthur Ashe on Richmond, Virginia's Monument Avenue has been vandalized with the words “White Lives Matter.”

Photos show the base of the monument tagged with white spray paint and the words “white lives matter" as well as the initials “WLM.” Those initials were then later painted over with “BLM.”

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/white-lives-matter-sprayed-arthur-ashe-memorial-180027789--spt.html
 

Tit for tat. It's a response to the desecration of Civil War statues. How do you separate the bravery, valor, and the Confederate lives lost, from the vile cause of the war. And from the century and a half of bitter, unbridled racism. It is a racism , which reaches all over the US, not merely in the South. What do the Confederate statues stand for valor, or racism? I believe the answer to that question may depend on your skin color.
 
Going far back in to human history when there have been reasons to form groups to protest there have always been a number joining to provoke and disrupt. It will never change.
 
I remember reading a book about sports stars and there was a short segment about Ashe. I think he had a heart attack and needed bypass surgery. During the surgery, he received tainted blood with AIDS present. He then contracted the disease and later died. I think he was very upset about contracting the disease in this fashion and had a hard time accepting it. Maybe this what started the hospitals to start testing the blood before transfusing it. I forget.
 
Warrigal said:
Good grief. What did Arthur Ashe do to deserve this? He was always a gentleman and a thoroughly good sportsman. Could it be that his skin happened to be a bit dark?
Click to expand...

Ashe was a Richmond native and indeed a model sportsman. (Also an activist and sports historian). His statue was put up some years back on Monument Avenue to provide some balance to all the statues of Confederate generals. So that made the statue a target for some right-wing fringe person or group. We have plenty of fringe elements on left and right here.

The Confederate statues may go eventually but the Ashe statue will remain.
 
On this and other current topics, I have strong opinions.
Post # 18, is all one needs to know.

Removal of Confederate Statues: Cool, when do we start burning books.
This was and is our history, it happened.
The removal of statues does not change history.

I've had the idea, if the statues were left in place: Could people of color point to the
statues and say:
"See this is what was and still is, this is what were fighting."

Statues are akin to a history book.
Are the vandals that defaced Ashe's Statue part of our history?
Indeed, it is, we need to know these people are lurking around.

(I think all statues lack importance-save war memorials honoring our dead.)
Okay, I'm through, now I will let others decipher and explain what I really meant-sheee- that too seems to be a virus.
 
Last edited:
jerry old said:
On this and other current topics, I have strong opinions.
Post # 18, is all one needs to know.

Removal of Confederate Statues: Cool, when do we start burning books.
This was and is our history, it happened.
The removal of statues does not change history.

I've had the idea, if the statues were left in place: Could people of color point to the
statues and say:
"See this is what was and still is, this is what were fighting."

Statues are akin to a history book.
Are the vandals that defaced Ashe's Statue part of our history?
Indeed, it is, we need to know these people are lurking around.

(I think all statues lace importance-save war memorials honoring our dead.)
Okay, I'm through, now I will let others decipher and explain what I really meant-sheee- that too seems to be a virus.
Click to expand...
No they're not. Statues are a way of honoring individuals- and in the case of confederates, individuals who should not be honored.
 
911 said:
I remember reading a book about sports stars and there was a short segment about Ashe. I think he had a heart attack and needed bypass surgery. During the surgery, he received tainted blood with AIDS present. He then contracted the disease and later died. I think he was very upset about contracting the disease in this fashion and had a hard time accepting it. Maybe this what started the hospitals to start testing the blood before transfusing it. I forget.
Click to expand...
That's the way I remember it, too.
I wasn't paying much attention because I hate tennis, but Mr. Ashe had many good qualities.
 
StarSong said:
What's incorrect about it?
Click to expand...
In leading up to the Civil War, the North offered to preserve slavery but to not yield on high tariffs and other economic policies that were detrimental to the South. Lincoln even said he was ambivalent on the institution.

To claim that the War was all about slavery is inaccurate. You can search to see the small percentage of households that actually held slaves. There were dirt-poor whites working the fields side-by-side with blacks, and those whites fought for the Confederacy.

From this site:

"My policy sought only to collect the Revenue (a 40 percent federal sales tax on imports to Southern States under the Morrill Tariff Act of 1861)." reads paragraph 5 of Lincoln's First Message to the U.S. Congress, penned July 4, 1861.

"I have no purpose, directly or in-directly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so," Lincoln said it his first inaugural speech on March 4 of the same year.
Click to expand...
 
In The Sticks said:
In leading up to the Civil War, the North offered to preserve slavery but to not yield on high tariffs and other economic policies that were detrimental to the South. Lincoln even said he was ambivalent on the institution.

To claim that the War was all about slavery is inaccurate. You can search to see the small percentage of households that actually held slaves. There were dirt-poor whites working the fields side-by-side with blacks, and those whites fought for the Confederacy.

From this site:
Click to expand...
But that doesn't answer the question.
 
History buffs have wrangled for over a century:
The Civil War was about slavery
The Civil War was about States Rights
As in all things political, you have to work to define what actually occurred.

In the Sticks says poor whites knew little of slavery.
These are the men that fought for the Confederacy.
This is what angers me:
The poor, disenfranchised, ignorant Rednecks (like me) died aping their betters
The same thing occurred in WW I-my Redneck grandfather's got their asses blowed up.

Vietnam, me and mine (Rednecks) had no idea where Vietnam was or why we should
be over there. The rednecks, the poor whites got their asses blowed up.

In Vietnam males of color also got their asses blowed up. They was no difference of the men serving as cannon fodder.

We are a slow learning species, but we are learning.
 
Also consider the possibility of something I very rarely encountered in the distant past but in recent years/decades seems much more common: individuals who simply cannot stand it when someone outdoes them in any way, some can get really skuzzy with resentment. Perhaps the vandals had that approach- an important, successful man, and an important, successful Black man at that.

(On a side note: more than a decade ago, the topic of jealousy vs. envy was addressed on a different forum by a person named Jim. I was under the impression he was a member here, too, but there've been so many Jims I couldn't be sure which one might be him.)
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top