He didn't actually end up saying to leave them in place. He talks about an open air display where Communist leader statues are displayed, IE A MUSEUM. The public square statue is a declaration of admiration and celebration and something to aspire to. Veneration as the one guy said. These statues are all enemies of the US of A. Can you imagine having statues of Rommel or Goebbels in Warsaw or Paris or London? Put them in a museum like the Holocaust museum so future generations can remember these people who were so dedicated to the cause of slavery that they were willing to kill their fellow countrymen and destroy the union. That the statues were allowed to be built and displayed in the first place is insanity. The first statue was built in 1890 and the last in 1929. These guys were heroes to people who firmly believed "The South will rise again" and the natural order of things would be restored. Plenty of people in Germany had and still have similar feelings, yet no statues of Himmler in Berlin "so we can remember history". I think that's a good thing.
@ there wasn’t really a union prior to the civil war. While it was called the United States, it really wasn’t. States rights were written into the constitution which Lincoln totally disregarded. I agree with the Rommel or Gobbels stuff. The people that propelled the south into the war were traitors. Absolutely. I’ve made that very argument myself. However, like so many wars, the common foot soldier tasked to fight it by and large was not.
He's exceptional, funny and well read/travelled. Who'd want to argue against this monster on TV? Idiots who never bothered to check him out I'm guessing
@crashthecat Agreed, he’s one of those people who could take either side of a debate and make his opponent look uninformed. Avoid him at all costs. LOL
These guys going on about Trump pardoning people, and here we have our sitting president pardoning his son, his friends, convicts of many different convictions, and the last person he will pardon will be himself before leaving office.
Bill Maher is really beginning to grow on me. He is more of an intellectual comedian than most, however, Douglas Murray is an intellectual heavyweight. There are few who can stand toe-to-toe with him in a good argument...maybe Niall Ferguson, but I'm not sure what they would argue about.
When they say the statues were built during Jim Crow is bs. They were built before and during the turn of the century when the Lost Cause was popular and the north reengaged the south. It was a conciliatory thing and slavery and oppression wasn’t a factor. The bald guy is a denier who’s awful in this debate.
Not true . There are public records from the US Geological Survey, the National Park Service, and the Dept of Education that show Confederate monument creation (statues, schools, streets, other buildings) spiked at times when civil rights legislation was considered or passed, throughout the first half of the 20th century and well into the mid-1960s.
@@shawnriffhardWhy demonise white people and the west for historical crimes when they could demonise their African brethren for crimes committed in the present?
Lived in Richmond when it was a great place . Not so much anymore
3 дні тому+2
Me too. I was born there. It was an interesting city because it wasn't like any other place. Now it's as boring as any other medium sized city. When you kill a city's history, it has nothing. If it wasn't for being the state's capitol, it would be even worse than it is now. It will be a mini Detroit in another 10 Years.
I live 20 minutes from there. My wife graduates from a residency at VCU in June. Can't wait to leave.
3 дні тому+4
@@shawnriffhard It's move than that. The whole culture of the city has changed. It's the worst of both worlds, the charm of Detroit and the efficiency of DC. The beautiful areas have been destroyed.
Common narrative that the South fought for slavery, the South fought for states rights to choose, kinda like abortion these days. Most Southern fighters didn’t own slaves, so clearly weren’t fighting for slavery.
You are wrong. The war was about slavery. You also make an illogical point. Just because one didn’t own slaves doesn’t mean he was indifferent to the practice.
The true history of Global Slavery began many centuries before Christ. Also, today, 9 African countries are still practicing slavery. Also, over 99% of us come from a lineage of slavery. Only the very bluest of blood may not have in within their lineage if they always maintain royalty lineage. So there is way more to slavery than the one where chieftains of African villages raided their village homes and sold their people to slaving countries. During the Ottoman Empire, they actually took Russian people and enslaved them in Turkey. Romans did the same thing, and Greece did the same thing. There isn't only African slavery. It is basically all of us! No clue why it is only African slavery we are taught! Blows my mind!
Just as the answer to bad speech is more speech to challenge-put an opposite statue. A pair of statues will tell the story better. There is room on those plinths.
I don’t understand envy. I have seldom met any American who feels bad because they are in the .01 percent highest living standards in history. The Taylor Swift example is perfect. It is so sad people are miserable because someone else has more than them.
Great that you are putting up these types of videos, thank you! But personally I think it would be even better without the commentary. Merry Christmas!
Nobody has any ability to truly put themselves in the shoes of history from an empathetic point of view and really understand what it was like living in a completely different world because nobody actually reads real history. They just get a basic "zoomed out" view of the key events and just have very basic, simplistic takes that don't paint an honest picture of the reality of the times. Everyone applies our modern sensibilities to a time that couldn't have been more different. Saying everyone in the Confederacy, or even our founders, supported slavery is such a gross, incorrect oversimplification of a monumentally complex issue. Hell, even Robert E. Lee believed that slavery was evil, but we really don't appreciate how complex of an issue it actually was; many (incorrectly) feared the economy couldn't even exist if slavery just abruptly ended and also many feared that slaves would suffer even worse fates if they were just turned loose without any kind of enfranchisement or citizenship in America (hence the 14th amendment's existence following the 13th which freed the slaves). There was no social security, there was no welfare, there were no homeless shelters. There were no entitlements or safety nets, people either worked and survived or they didn't. Freed slaves who had no family and nowhere to turn would have just been turned loose into the wild and told, "good luck!" - Now that's not to say noting could be done, but the idea of spending federal funds to completely support people's lives was not even a concept that existed in the minds of most people then. People were not each other's keeper and it wasn't normal to expect other people to foot the bill to support other people. There was not this obnoxious air of social justice about every little thing possible. Life was hard, people struggled. "Personal success" wasn't even really a concept, not in the way we view it, even though there were definitely varying degrees of wealthy folks. Most people who didn't live in a city, which was a lot of people, just worked their own land and raised huge families without slaves and many lived and died in the same place they were born. There were even black slave owners. Science at the time (not all of it, but a lot) said that blacks were a lesser species and this was very accepted almost dogma among many people and just like us, many people had faith in science. None of it justifies the institution existing, but people are products of their time and many, many Americans of all colors and races fought, and died, for the right side of history in the end. A great many of our founders knew that Slavery did not jive with the founding documents of America, and everyone looks at how they didn't just eradicate slavery when they founded the country and basically ignored it. But people, again, disregard the complex reality of history for those who lived it. Had they tried to address slavery during the Revolution, America would have never existed, the South would have said fuck off and America wouldn't have existed and slavery probably would have persisted for far longer than it ended up continuing and our Republic would have died in infancy. Also, and this is a very key point that I've heard very few historians even make, and that is the fact that while they didn't address slavery in the Declaration of Independence or the original Constitution, *they also did NOTHING to strengthen or perpetuate slavery, and that was intentional as well.* Slavery was viewed as a dying institution in late 18th century America, around the time of the Revolution, and leading into the early 19th century. Unfortunately it would see a resurgence in popularity, especially in the South, as America established itself and the South doubled down on their agriculturally based economy. That being said, as much as I understand and have read about our country's history and obviously deplore slavery, I also deplore people tearing down historical artifacts regardless of who they are or when they were made. I'm okay with not naming schools after Robert E. Lee and such, that does seem a bit crass in 2024, but it's a slippery slope and you HAVE to take the bad with the good or risk destroying your history entirely; history should be honest, not edited and revised for the sake of the feelings of people alive today who don't know shit about shit and are just looking for an obvious cause to fight because finding a real cause that actually has a real impact today is actually hard because we've gotten to a place of such commercial wealth that nobody really struggles in this country compared to the people who truly struggled before us to make our lives so rich and easy today. If we bury and destroy all signs and understanding of slavery, don't be shocked if long after we're gone people forget either side of the story and end up not even caring or knowing the truth of what really happened all because a bunch of self-absorbed, narcissistic sociopaths had to stroke their egos and throw temper tantrums over shit they didn't know anything about in the first place just so they could feel like they did something important with their miserable existences. People assume that trajectories of civilization will never change and things like slavery, once gone, are gone for good but not if you destroy History. Sometimes civilizations take errant paths before they get back on course and it is entirely possible that slavery could very well be far from dead, hell, it's still going strong on planet Earth today but again, it's not happening in our backyard so no one really cares. Funny, that. And, if you actually read up on Robert E. Lee, it's hard not to appreciate the man, slavery aside. He was not this evil, slave driving monster that some of the revisionist historians would have us believe. He was a complex, decent man who was a product of the times he existed in and I don't see a problem at least acknowledging that he was not just a Hitler-esque figure who shouldn't be banned from polite society. If people today, especially on the left, had half the scruples and principles of a man like Robert E. Lee, we wouldn't be in such a mess right now.
Sorry that's so long, but if anyone ever wants to really have a true grasp on History, you *have* to read. You're never going to have an honest, informed world view by watching videos, reading headlines and just understanding the key events of history and the dates on which they happen. You gotta dive in and really read these people to get a modern understanding of anything and it's hard to convey the nuance of many modern issues that relate to our history in short order.
@@podunkest All very true, but that's exactly what museums are all about. Not the public square. Black people in Richmond should have to look at these statues on their way to work or school every morning?
Re: On the destruction of these statues, one of the non-Murray guests said: "It's worth having a discussion about." (Applause.) What discussion? These mobs didn't "discuss," or want to "discuss" anything, they simply destroyed-which is what such mobs get off on, as even teenagers comprehend.
It's funny that, probably, some people who are all upset about people who were heroes(?) at the time their statues were put up, will erect statues of people that in generations who will be seen as horrible humans.
There are millions of slaves in Africa and across Asia present day 2024. Over 50 million. You hear very little about that. 150 years ago is the REAL issue.
2:20 - "The confederacy celebrated slave-owning... " Wrong. The civil-war wasn't about slavery, it was about Federal over-reach. It's easy to prove that, too, because less than 2% of whites owned a slave before the civil-war. So what motivated confederate soldiers to go fight when the overwhelming majority of them never did - _and never WOULD_ - own a slave? Also, Lincoln abolished slavery _AFTER_ the civil-war started, so again, it wasn't as simple as "slavery". This ignoramus talking at the 2:20 mark is a perfect example of the Dunning-Krueger effect: he's so confident in the wrong shit that he's saying. And yet the dates and numbers that I provided above are absolutely publicly available knowledge. You don't have to read people's accounts to understand their motivation when the dates and numbers tell it for you. And yet here he is, smugly saying dumb shit.
I would agree that the Civil War was far less about slavery and more about the souths attempt to secede due to principle of states rights. Slavery definitely played a role, but I don't think people realize that the debate over the institution of slavery had been in the spotlight going back to even the American revolution and formation of the country. I wasn't a fan of a lot of the monuments being torn down but I'm not sure how important they were in preserving our history either. It seems like the history taught in most class rooms is so watered down and simplified already, and to really understand a lot of these moments or some of these people requires a lot of personal research and learning to be done. Hence the widely held belief that the South fought for slavery and the north fought for freedom of slaves. I'm sure a lot of people would be shocked to learn that preserving slavery was probably the last thing on someone like Robert E. Lee's mind when he agreed to lead the southern army. I'm also not sure how much they actually care.
The sad thing is the very party these people belong to were the exact people that owned the slaves. Add to that once you remove statues of people who you/children/others may ask questions about will never be asked because no one will know to ask.
@wordword6039 who are "these people"? I have nothing but contempt for the Democratic party and for the statues. They belong in museums, so people can never forget the scummiest parts if our history. Not in public places to be venerated.
@@boondog8504 My point is they have never changed. They literally went from slavery, to Jim Crow, to KKK, to imprisoning Japanese Amerians, to Vietnam and at the same time working to put black Americans back on the plantations (which they have figuratively). They have NO ideas worth anything to the majority of our nation or its people. Their strategy is "Creat an issue where there is none. Then convince your voters YOU AND ONLY YOU. Have the solution to the issue they created. They could literally "out constitution the republicans" but they dont. They do all they can to circumvent the constitution, and line there own pockets while doing so. Both sides do this to a degree but NOT to the degree like the democratic party.
Laws About Treatment of Slaves in The Book of Exodus: 21 “Now these are the rules that you shall set before them. 2 When you buy a Hebrew slave,[a] he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. 3 If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out alone. 5 But if the slave plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’ 6 then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost. And his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall be his slave forever. 7 “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. 8 If she does not please her master, who has designated her[b] for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has broken faith with her. 9 If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her as with a daughter. 10 If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights. 11 And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money. 20 “When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. 21 But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money. 26 “When a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let the slave go free because of his eye. 27 If he knocks out the tooth of his slave, male or female, he shall let the slave go free because of his tooth.
We need to stop lying about history. Slavery is not Americas original sin. British slavery in the American colonies had existed for nearly two hundred years before the US Constitution was approved in 1790. It took nearly seventy five years and cost nearly 500K lives to end British slavery in the US . Maybe the UK should pay reparations ?
Two very different topics in the video. I'd like to mention the first. The statues. Such a clueless panel. While I don't disagree with the difficulty people may have with statues, I don't think people know much about the people who represented the south in the war. While it is true that many supported slavery, what isn't taken into account are those that were simply supporting their home states. In 1860 when the war broke out citizens weren't from the United States, they were from Virginia or Vermont or whatever state. When Robert E. Lee took command of the southern forces he did so because his state was being attacked. I doubt that Ulysses Grant or William Sherman cared much about the issue (slavery), they were supporting their army. It just happened that all these people fought under the banner of the country, Lee for the Confederacy Sherman and Grant for what became known as the union. Before the war, not much thought was given to it. The great historian Shelby Foote pointed out that what the Civil war did was changed the United States from an are to an is. It really made us all Americans. However, especially where the south was concerned, the majority of people fighting had no cause to fight other than that their homes were being invaded. Again, Shelby Foote recounted a story of a yankee soldier asking a rebel why he was fighting and he simply said, "because you're here." In point of fact it can easily be argued that the average white person in the south was hurt by slavery. Most people were highly uneducated as there was no compulsory education. And what do uneducated people do for a living but work with their backs. If all of that labor is being done by slaves, what are your options? Share cropping and scratch farming? In many southern states you can still see the remnants of this today. This is what drove hillbilly culture. The poorest areas of the United States are in nearly totally white southern states. This isn't an accident or coincidence. So, to simply say these people were traitors and slave lovers is absolutely incorrect and, like much else on the left, lacks the understanding that historical perspective and context can provide. I urge all these people to read Shelby Foote (who was consulted and highly featured in Ken Burns famous documentary on the Civil War). His three volume work on the war are great works.
3 дні тому+3
Yes, you know your history. I don't disagree with a word of what you have written. Most Americans today are simply clueless about there own history. It's amazing just how ignorant the average American is.
I disagree with a great deal of what you've written and little, if anything of it has anything to do with the question of Confederate statues in Richmond 150 years later, but let's let the vice president of the Confederacy speak for himself- In March 1861, Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederate States of America, gave his view: The new [Confederate] constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution - African slavery as it exists amongst us - the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution . . . The prevailing ideas entertained by . . . most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. . . Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of . . . the equality of races. This was an error . . . Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery - subordination to the superior race - is his natural and normal condition. - Alexander H. Stephens, March 21, 1861, reported in the Savannah Republican,
@ as I stated many in the south fought the war for slavery, you did’t have to go to the vice- president you could have found several quotes from Jefferson Davis himself. What I said was that there were also many, including Lee who was offered command of the northern forces but turned it down not to preserve slavery, but to fight for his state. Also, I fully understand wanting to remove the statues, however to say that the common southerner was fighting for the preservation of slavery is laughable. You say you don’t agree with anything I wrote I don’t think you bothered reading it all. Do you disagree that the majority of the south was illiterate? Do you disagree that the majority of the south didn’t own slaves? Do you disagree with the fact that the post poverty stricken areas of the US are solid white communities throughout the south? Look it up. I’m not defending the south in the Civil War, the right side won. But to blindly say everyone in the south felt this way is just not accurate.
@@ChangeYourLife_ I didn't say ANYTHING about the "common Southerner". You're intentionally mis-quoting me and intentionally missing the point. This discussion is about the statues and the validity of their public display. NONE of whom are "common Southerners". And, the more I think about it, the more f'n outrageous it is that they were erected 25- 64 years after the war. Absolutely deranged that it was thought to be a good idea in the first place and sadly astounding that anyone could possibly favor leaving them in place now.
In this video, some well reasoned, articulate discussions take place, continuously interrupted by a narrator who assumes you didn’t understand the last 30 second segment you just heard and spends 45 seconds re-explaining it.
I'm white. But I can understand the consternation of people who are desendants of slaves having to look at statues depicting the oppressors of their ancestors. Also, why do Southerners, three generations removed, still want to venerate men who tried to break the Union and caused untold carnage and death? The Civil War should be a memory of shame for the South, not one of pride.
I'm English and so on your logic would I be justified in still having a grudge against the German people for the fact that they bombed many English cities to the ground and killed thousands of innocent people in the process ? Should I still hold anger for the Japanese people for nearly killing my grandad when the ship he was on was sunk by them ? Or my great grandad who had his lungs wrecked after being gassed by Germans in world war 1 . Should I still have anger for the french people because of the wars caused by Napoleon? Or how about holding a grudge against Scandinavian people for raiding and enslaving my people with their viking raids and eventual invasion of my country or the the Italians for occupying and enslaving my country for nearly four hundred years . When it comes to history we can all play being the victim but my point is , no one alive today can claim to be effected or are some how owed a favour for stuff that never effected them in any way . There's not a black person alive today that can even claim that their grandparents were slaves it's that long ago now so how come you think they are justified to hold a grudge over slavery ? As for the American civil war why shouldn't the confederates be comemerated ? It was a civil war , a war that was fought over politics and nothing else , one side had to win and that side happend to be the union side and so all combatants should be comemerated , slavery had nothing to do with the war and the fact that slavery was abolished only happend because it became a political convince for president Lincoln many black people fought for the confederate army . History is the past , you forgive and move on .
Statues of Vikings don't bother me at all, and my ancestry is half Slavic. So what, you say? The word slave is derived from Slav, because the Vikings enslaved so many Slavic people that Slav became synonymous with slave.
@@lastchance8142 this is my second reply UA-cam really is becoming a censored waste of time . I am English and we have a long history of up's and downs , we as a people have been occupied and enslaved by Romans , Saxons , vikings , and Norman's we fought and raided and them like wise the Scottish for hundreds of years and yet we get along just fine , we've been at war with the french on an off for hundreds of years and yet we hold no malice for the french and by your logic the Germans should never be spoke to again , considering that people still walk this earth who experienced and suffered in the second world war , a claim that no one in America can claim in regards to slavery and yet you seem to think that their descendants are somehow owed a big favour ... For what ? A lot of you Americans need to get over yourselves , the past is past , we went there to get where we are today and no one deserves a free ride because of something that never effected them , we can all play the victim when it comes to history . As for the civil war dead , the dead of both sides deserve to be commemorated as all were simple players in a rich man's game , I get the impression that you have a poor understanding of your own civil war and why it was fought , it wasn't fought to free any slaves let's put it that way .
@lastchance8142 fighting Hitler is completely different to a civil war , a civil war is internal Americans fighting Americans so both sides should be commemorated , I'm not saying Jefferson Davis statues should be everywhere but the combatants deserve to be commemorated.
Why is the video reversed? The actual video, viewed from the viewer's perspective, has Bill in his usual seat on the right and Douglas sitting on the far left. Is this an attempt to make a 7 month old show more recent? Not sure why so many youtube channels just copy and paste and add a little blurb and believe this reposting is actual content. I could understand if the content wasn't available, but just look at Bill Maher's channel and you can watch the same video...
Isnt there a statue of Karl Marx in Portland or is it in Seattle. There is a Bust of Marx at his Grave where he is buried in Highgate Cemetery in London. I see statues of George Floyd so tell me what did he do in his miserable life that was worse than Jefferson or Washington.
heroes are a questionable idea, but you could not expect statues of Union soldiers in Atlanta, right? Part 2 they could be put there now, but I am against
Douglas babe 😘💋 i am crazy about you ❤ can't control my passion for you and my heart can't hide the love i hold for you ❤ love and yearn live with you and never let any second pass without enjoy you ❤
Douglas Murray can hold his own with anyone. He is full of facts.
Douglas is a brilliant journalist....
Douglas Murray is correct, leave the statues in place and have an open discussion about these historical figures.
He didn't actually end up saying to leave them in place. He talks about an open air display where Communist leader statues are displayed, IE A MUSEUM. The public square statue is a declaration of admiration and celebration and something to aspire to. Veneration as the one guy said. These statues are all enemies of the US of A. Can you imagine having statues of Rommel or Goebbels in Warsaw or Paris or London?
Put them in a museum like the Holocaust museum so future generations can remember these people who were so dedicated to the cause of slavery that they were willing to kill their fellow countrymen and destroy the union.
That the statues were allowed to be built and displayed in the first place is insanity. The first statue was built in 1890 and the last in 1929. These guys were heroes to people who firmly believed "The South will rise again" and the natural order of things would be restored. Plenty of people in Germany had and still have similar feelings, yet no statues of Himmler in Berlin "so we can remember history". I think that's a good thing.
@ there wasn’t really a union prior to the civil war. While it was called the United States, it really wasn’t. States rights were written into the constitution which Lincoln totally disregarded. I agree with the Rommel or Gobbels stuff. The people that propelled the south into the war were traitors. Absolutely. I’ve made that very argument myself. However, like so many wars, the common foot soldier tasked to fight it by and large was not.
It is odd how most of the statues are from the losing side.
@@georgeprchal3924yup, the winners always get to write history
And add other statues....
Envy, which used to be one of the seven deadly sins is now a virtue called social justice.
Douglas Murray is the last guy you want to debate.
He's exceptional, funny and well read/travelled. Who'd want to argue against this monster on TV? Idiots who never bothered to check him out I'm guessing
@crashthecat Agreed, he’s one of those people who could take either side of a debate and make his opponent look uninformed. Avoid him at all costs. LOL
He’s the last you would want to debate yourself, but he’s the first you want to see someone else debate! Always fun
Then come Konstantin Kisen and then Jordan Peterson and Shapiro- -off the of top my head, anyway
LOL Murray is terrified of debating Max Blumenthal or Dave Smith.
Douglas Murray is on another plateau with any talk show host or news host.
These guys going on about Trump pardoning people, and here we have our sitting president pardoning his son, his friends, convicts of many different convictions, and the last person he will pardon will be himself before leaving office.
Douglas Murray is so far above this panel intellectually.
Watched DouglasMurrays Uncancelled History such a great Series. Highly recommend it
Murray is cut above pretty much all other political commentators
Bill Maher is really beginning to grow on me. He is more of an intellectual comedian than most, however, Douglas Murray is an intellectual heavyweight. There are few who can stand toe-to-toe with him in a good argument...maybe Niall Ferguson, but I'm not sure what they would argue about.
So glad he said “plinths”
He is a word smith.
The main reason the statues were taken down was Richmond went from a white town to a black town.
When they say the statues were built during Jim Crow is bs. They were built before and during the turn of the century when the Lost Cause was popular and the north reengaged the south. It was a conciliatory thing and slavery and oppression wasn’t a factor. The bald guy is a denier who’s awful in this debate.
Not true . There are public records from the US Geological Survey, the National Park Service, and the Dept of Education that show Confederate monument creation (statues, schools, streets, other buildings) spiked at times when civil rights legislation was considered or passed, throughout the first half of the 20th century and well into the mid-1960s.
Love how everyone just pretends like slavery doesn't go on today particularly in Africa & Asia! 😂
@@matthewmclean6862 how does that have anything to do with statues in Richmond?
Yes!
For starters I’d say maybe you should pay more attention to suffering today as opposed to something happened 160 years ago.
@@shawnriffhardWhy demonise white people and the west for historical crimes when they could demonise their African brethren for crimes committed in the present?
D.M, debater, extrordinaire.
There are no traitors in a civil war!
Ya the losing side are the traitors
There are loosers.
@@qubeplaygaming699 Well,the winners write the history.
I appreciate the civil discussion. We need more of these kind of interactions of opposing opinions. Well done and a great example for others.
One cannot hurry the Murray.
love Douglas Murray on any subject
Lived in Richmond when it was a great place . Not so much anymore
Me too. I was born there. It was an interesting city because it wasn't like any other place. Now it's as boring as any other medium sized city. When you kill a city's history, it has nothing. If it wasn't for being the state's capitol, it would be even worse than it is now. It will be a mini Detroit in another 10 Years.
And this was caused by the removal of some statues?
Who killed Richmond's history?
I live 20 minutes from there. My wife graduates from a residency at VCU in June. Can't wait to leave.
@@shawnriffhard It's move than that. The whole culture of the city has changed. It's the worst of both worlds, the charm of Detroit and the efficiency of DC. The beautiful areas have been destroyed.
Empty plinths for empty minds, that empty the minds of future minds. Question-- Who then tells the history-- so that its the CORRECT one ??
Good point. It's like Nietsche said, there are no facts, only interpretations. So whose interpretation do we choose?
We should have a statue of the guy with horns, actually. He tried to get people to leave and behave peaceably. I think we should all be praising him.
Most southerners were dirt poor tenant farmers who fled workhouses and starvation in britain
Very well stated! Lots of food for thought.
Everything woke turns to sh1t
Common narrative that the South fought for slavery, the South fought for states rights to choose, kinda like abortion these days. Most Southern fighters didn’t own slaves, so clearly weren’t fighting for slavery.
Also that it was Democrats who wanted to keep slavery and Republicans who wanted to end it.
You are wrong. The war was about slavery. You also make an illogical point. Just because one didn’t own slaves doesn’t mean he was indifferent to the practice.
@ Think about it ….. It doesn’t mean you are willing to die for someone else to own slaves
@@stuartstuart866 clearly they were and they did. Why didn't they just pass laws outlawing slavery?
Imagine being envious of someone who paid a fortune to see Taylor Swift up close....LOL
The true history of Global Slavery began many centuries before Christ. Also, today, 9 African countries are still practicing slavery. Also, over 99% of us come from a lineage of slavery. Only the very bluest of blood may not have in within their lineage if they always maintain royalty lineage. So there is way more to slavery than the one where chieftains of African villages raided their village homes and sold their people to slaving countries. During the Ottoman Empire, they actually took Russian people and enslaved them in Turkey. Romans did the same thing, and Greece did the same thing. There isn't only African slavery. It is basically all of us! No clue why it is only African slavery we are taught! Blows my mind!
8:59 blaming social media and not the regular media is absolutely laughable
Grievance culture expresses it well.
City of Richmond is a shithole now after they removed the statues, let it go bankrupt, i boycott it.
I wanted more video and much less explanations.
The 1 loud clapper in the background 😂😂😂
Just as the answer to bad speech is more speech to challenge-put an opposite statue. A pair of statues will tell the story better. There is room on those plinths.
Douglas could run circles around Bill Maher and any of his lunatic guests.
I don’t understand envy. I have seldom met any American who feels bad because they are in the .01 percent highest living standards in history. The Taylor Swift example is perfect.
It is so sad people are miserable because someone else has more than them.
Great that you are putting up these types of videos, thank you! But personally I think it would be even better without the commentary. Merry Christmas!
Hearing Democrats talk about knowing your history is hilarious.
A saber among the scythes.
I despise iconoclast types.
Nobody has any ability to truly put themselves in the shoes of history from an empathetic point of view and really understand what it was like living in a completely different world because nobody actually reads real history. They just get a basic "zoomed out" view of the key events and just have very basic, simplistic takes that don't paint an honest picture of the reality of the times. Everyone applies our modern sensibilities to a time that couldn't have been more different. Saying everyone in the Confederacy, or even our founders, supported slavery is such a gross, incorrect oversimplification of a monumentally complex issue. Hell, even Robert E. Lee believed that slavery was evil, but we really don't appreciate how complex of an issue it actually was; many (incorrectly) feared the economy couldn't even exist if slavery just abruptly ended and also many feared that slaves would suffer even worse fates if they were just turned loose without any kind of enfranchisement or citizenship in America (hence the 14th amendment's existence following the 13th which freed the slaves). There was no social security, there was no welfare, there were no homeless shelters. There were no entitlements or safety nets, people either worked and survived or they didn't. Freed slaves who had no family and nowhere to turn would have just been turned loose into the wild and told, "good luck!" - Now that's not to say noting could be done, but the idea of spending federal funds to completely support people's lives was not even a concept that existed in the minds of most people then. People were not each other's keeper and it wasn't normal to expect other people to foot the bill to support other people.
There was not this obnoxious air of social justice about every little thing possible. Life was hard, people struggled. "Personal success" wasn't even really a concept, not in the way we view it, even though there were definitely varying degrees of wealthy folks. Most people who didn't live in a city, which was a lot of people, just worked their own land and raised huge families without slaves and many lived and died in the same place they were born. There were even black slave owners. Science at the time (not all of it, but a lot) said that blacks were a lesser species and this was very accepted almost dogma among many people and just like us, many people had faith in science. None of it justifies the institution existing, but people are products of their time and many, many Americans of all colors and races fought, and died, for the right side of history in the end.
A great many of our founders knew that Slavery did not jive with the founding documents of America, and everyone looks at how they didn't just eradicate slavery when they founded the country and basically ignored it. But people, again, disregard the complex reality of history for those who lived it. Had they tried to address slavery during the Revolution, America would have never existed, the South would have said fuck off and America wouldn't have existed and slavery probably would have persisted for far longer than it ended up continuing and our Republic would have died in infancy.
Also, and this is a very key point that I've heard very few historians even make, and that is the fact that while they didn't address slavery in the Declaration of Independence or the original Constitution, *they also did NOTHING to strengthen or perpetuate slavery, and that was intentional as well.* Slavery was viewed as a dying institution in late 18th century America, around the time of the Revolution, and leading into the early 19th century. Unfortunately it would see a resurgence in popularity, especially in the South, as America established itself and the South doubled down on their agriculturally based economy.
That being said, as much as I understand and have read about our country's history and obviously deplore slavery, I also deplore people tearing down historical artifacts regardless of who they are or when they were made. I'm okay with not naming schools after Robert E. Lee and such, that does seem a bit crass in 2024, but it's a slippery slope and you HAVE to take the bad with the good or risk destroying your history entirely; history should be honest, not edited and revised for the sake of the feelings of people alive today who don't know shit about shit and are just looking for an obvious cause to fight because finding a real cause that actually has a real impact today is actually hard because we've gotten to a place of such commercial wealth that nobody really struggles in this country compared to the people who truly struggled before us to make our lives so rich and easy today. If we bury and destroy all signs and understanding of slavery, don't be shocked if long after we're gone people forget either side of the story and end up not even caring or knowing the truth of what really happened all because a bunch of self-absorbed, narcissistic sociopaths had to stroke their egos and throw temper tantrums over shit they didn't know anything about in the first place just so they could feel like they did something important with their miserable existences. People assume that trajectories of civilization will never change and things like slavery, once gone, are gone for good but not if you destroy History. Sometimes civilizations take errant paths before they get back on course and it is entirely possible that slavery could very well be far from dead, hell, it's still going strong on planet Earth today but again, it's not happening in our backyard so no one really cares. Funny, that. And, if you actually read up on Robert E. Lee, it's hard not to appreciate the man, slavery aside. He was not this evil, slave driving monster that some of the revisionist historians would have us believe. He was a complex, decent man who was a product of the times he existed in and I don't see a problem at least acknowledging that he was not just a Hitler-esque figure who shouldn't be banned from polite society. If people today, especially on the left, had half the scruples and principles of a man like Robert E. Lee, we wouldn't be in such a mess right now.
Sorry that's so long, but if anyone ever wants to really have a true grasp on History, you *have* to read. You're never going to have an honest, informed world view by watching videos, reading headlines and just understanding the key events of history and the dates on which they happen. You gotta dive in and really read these people to get a modern understanding of anything and it's hard to convey the nuance of many modern issues that relate to our history in short order.
@@podunkest All very true, but that's exactly what museums are all about. Not the public square. Black people in Richmond should have to look at these statues on their way to work or school every morning?
@@podunkest
Outstanding post. Couldn't agree more.
Just present the debate without comment, which is rather lame.
Re: On the destruction of these statues, one of the non-Murray guests said: "It's worth having a discussion about." (Applause.)
What discussion? These mobs didn't "discuss," or want to "discuss" anything, they simply destroyed-which is what such mobs get off on, as even teenagers comprehend.
It's funny that, probably, some people who are all upset about people who were heroes(?) at the time their statues were put up, will erect statues of people that in generations who will be seen as horrible humans.
There are millions of slaves in Africa and across Asia present day 2024. Over 50 million. You hear very little about that. 150 years ago is the REAL issue.
Save the marxist jibberjabber…
define "jibberjabber" if you can....grandpa
@@kantraxoikol6914 Collins dictionary defines jibber-jabber as:
1. foolish or worthless talk; nonsense (noun)
2. to talk foolishly; babble (verb)
Bill Maher offen shows how little he knows. TDS
2:20 - "The confederacy celebrated slave-owning... "
Wrong. The civil-war wasn't about slavery, it was about Federal over-reach. It's easy to prove that, too, because less than 2% of whites owned a slave before the civil-war. So what motivated confederate soldiers to go fight when the overwhelming majority of them never did - _and never WOULD_ - own a slave? Also, Lincoln abolished slavery _AFTER_ the civil-war started, so again, it wasn't as simple as "slavery".
This ignoramus talking at the 2:20 mark is a perfect example of the Dunning-Krueger effect: he's so confident in the wrong shit that he's saying. And yet the dates and numbers that I provided above are absolutely publicly available knowledge. You don't have to read people's accounts to understand their motivation when the dates and numbers tell it for you. And yet here he is, smugly saying dumb shit.
Weird how south carolina mentioned slavery in its article of succession. Just an oversight. They didnt really mean it.
I would agree that the Civil War was far less about slavery and more about the souths attempt to secede due to principle of states rights. Slavery definitely played a role, but I don't think people realize that the debate over the institution of slavery had been in the spotlight going back to even the American revolution and formation of the country.
I wasn't a fan of a lot of the monuments being torn down but I'm not sure how important they were in preserving our history either. It seems like the history taught in most class rooms is so watered down and simplified already, and to really understand a lot of these moments or some of these people requires a lot of personal research and learning to be done. Hence the widely held belief that the South fought for slavery and the north fought for freedom of slaves. I'm sure a lot of people would be shocked to learn that preserving slavery was probably the last thing on someone like Robert E. Lee's mind when he agreed to lead the southern army. I'm also not sure how much they actually care.
Living in Richmond my entire life; No one in Richmond celebrates slavery, they remeber least not forget.
To keep the statues of traitorous and false is wrong. A statue is a veneration.
You don’t need a statue to learn history, there are things called books.
🗽🇺🇸🦅
England abolished slavery 50 years before the United States
Great Britain abolished the trans Atlantic slave trade (for everyone) 1807.
The abolishment of slavery act came into being 1833.
So
Edited debates then?
The sad thing is the very party these people belong to were the exact people that owned the slaves. Add to that once you remove statues of people who you/children/others may ask questions about will never be asked because no one will know to ask.
@wordword6039 who are "these people"? I have nothing but contempt for the Democratic party and for the statues. They belong in museums, so people can never forget the scummiest parts if our history. Not in public places to be venerated.
You equate the modern Democratic Party with that of the 1850s? What is your point?
@@boondog8504 My point is they have never changed. They literally went from slavery, to Jim Crow, to KKK, to imprisoning Japanese Amerians, to Vietnam and at the same time working to put black Americans back on the plantations (which they have figuratively). They have NO ideas worth anything to the majority of our nation or its people. Their strategy is "Creat an issue where there is none. Then convince your voters YOU AND ONLY YOU. Have the solution to the issue they created. They could literally "out constitution the republicans" but they dont. They do all they can to circumvent the constitution, and line there own pockets while doing so. Both sides do this to a degree but NOT to the degree like the democratic party.
can you his content? how do you do it? im trying to make something towards my medical bills, thanks
Isn't Exodus all about freeing slaves? Idk, that seems like a pretty strong statement against slavery in the Bible...
Laws About Treatment of Slaves in The Book of Exodus:
21 “Now these are the rules that you shall set before them. 2 When you buy a Hebrew slave,[a] he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. 3 If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out alone. 5 But if the slave plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’ 6 then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost. And his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall be his slave forever.
7 “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. 8 If she does not please her master, who has designated her[b] for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has broken faith with her. 9 If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her as with a daughter. 10 If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights. 11 And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money.
20 “When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. 21 But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.
26 “When a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let the slave go free because of his eye. 27 If he knocks out the tooth of his slave, male or female, he shall let the slave go free because of his tooth.
We need to stop lying about history. Slavery is not Americas original sin. British slavery in the American colonies had existed for nearly two hundred years before the US Constitution was approved in 1790. It took nearly seventy five years and cost nearly 500K lives to end British slavery in the US . Maybe the UK should pay reparations ?
Democrats haven’t been this angry since Abraham Lincoln abolished slavery.
"Traitors who supported slavery?"
What, like the Founding Fathers?😅
Two very different topics in the video. I'd like to mention the first. The statues. Such a clueless panel. While I don't disagree with the difficulty people may have with statues, I don't think people know much about the people who represented the south in the war. While it is true that many supported slavery, what isn't taken into account are those that were simply supporting their home states. In 1860 when the war broke out citizens weren't from the United States, they were from Virginia or Vermont or whatever state. When Robert E. Lee took command of the southern forces he did so because his state was being attacked. I doubt that Ulysses Grant or William Sherman cared much about the issue (slavery), they were supporting their army. It just happened that all these people fought under the banner of the country, Lee for the Confederacy Sherman and Grant for what became known as the union. Before the war, not much thought was given to it. The great historian Shelby Foote pointed out that what the Civil war did was changed the United States from an are to an is. It really made us all Americans. However, especially where the south was concerned, the majority of people fighting had no cause to fight other than that their homes were being invaded. Again, Shelby Foote recounted a story of a yankee soldier asking a rebel why he was fighting and he simply said, "because you're here." In point of fact it can easily be argued that the average white person in the south was hurt by slavery. Most people were highly uneducated as there was no compulsory education. And what do uneducated people do for a living but work with their backs. If all of that labor is being done by slaves, what are your options? Share cropping and scratch farming? In many southern states you can still see the remnants of this today. This is what drove hillbilly culture. The poorest areas of the United States are in nearly totally white southern states. This isn't an accident or coincidence. So, to simply say these people were traitors and slave lovers is absolutely incorrect and, like much else on the left, lacks the understanding that historical perspective and context can provide. I urge all these people to read Shelby Foote (who was consulted and highly featured in Ken Burns famous documentary on the Civil War). His three volume work on the war are great works.
Yes, you know your history. I don't disagree with a word of what you have written. Most Americans today are simply clueless about there own history. It's amazing just how ignorant the average American is.
I disagree with a great deal of what you've written and little, if anything of it has anything to do with the question of Confederate statues in Richmond 150 years later, but let's let the vice president of the Confederacy speak for himself-
In March 1861, Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederate States of America, gave his view:
The new [Confederate] constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution - African slavery as it exists amongst us - the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution . . . The prevailing ideas entertained by . . . most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. . . Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of . . . the equality of races. This was an error . . .
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery - subordination to the superior race - is his natural and normal condition.
- Alexander H. Stephens, March 21, 1861, reported in the Savannah Republican,
@ as I stated many in the south fought the war for slavery, you did’t have to go to the vice- president you could have found several quotes from Jefferson Davis himself. What I said was that there were also many, including Lee who was offered command of the northern forces but turned it down not to preserve slavery, but to fight for his state. Also, I fully understand wanting to remove the statues, however to say that the common southerner was fighting for the preservation of slavery is laughable. You say you don’t agree with anything I wrote I don’t think you bothered reading it all. Do you disagree that the majority of the south was illiterate? Do you disagree that the majority of the south didn’t own slaves? Do you disagree with the fact that the post poverty stricken areas of the US are solid white communities throughout the south? Look it up. I’m not defending the south in the Civil War, the right side won. But to blindly say everyone in the south felt this way is just not accurate.
@@ChangeYourLife_ I didn't say ANYTHING about the "common Southerner". You're intentionally mis-quoting me and intentionally missing the point. This discussion is about the statues and the validity of their public display. NONE of whom are "common Southerners".
And, the more I think about it, the more f'n outrageous it is that they were erected 25- 64 years after the war. Absolutely deranged that it was thought to be a good idea in the first place and sadly astounding that anyone could possibly favor leaving them in place now.
@ChangeYourLife_
Could you expand on all that?
Insurrection? BS
In this video, some well reasoned, articulate discussions take place, continuously interrupted by a narrator who assumes you didn’t understand the last 30 second segment you just heard and spends 45 seconds re-explaining it.
He said “consumer culture” = leftist
I'm white. But I can understand the consternation of people who are desendants of slaves having to look at statues depicting the oppressors of their ancestors. Also, why do Southerners, three generations removed, still want to venerate men who tried to break the Union and caused untold carnage and death? The Civil War should be a memory of shame for the South, not one of pride.
I'm English and so on your logic would I be justified in still having a grudge against the German people for the fact that they bombed many English cities to the ground and killed thousands of innocent people in the process ? Should I still hold anger for the Japanese people for nearly killing my grandad when the ship he was on was sunk by them ? Or my great grandad who had his lungs wrecked after being gassed by Germans in world war 1 . Should I still have anger for the french people because of the wars caused by Napoleon? Or how about holding a grudge against Scandinavian people for raiding and enslaving my people with their viking raids and eventual invasion of my country or the the Italians for occupying and enslaving my country for nearly four hundred years . When it comes to history we can all play being the victim but my point is , no one alive today can claim to be effected or are some how owed a favour for stuff that never effected them in any way . There's not a black person alive today that can even claim that their grandparents were slaves it's that long ago now so how come you think they are justified to hold a grudge over slavery ? As for the American civil war why shouldn't the confederates be comemerated ? It was a civil war , a war that was fought over politics and nothing else , one side had to win and that side happend to be the union side and so all combatants should be comemerated , slavery had nothing to do with the war and the fact that slavery was abolished only happend because it became a political convince for president Lincoln many black people fought for the confederate army . History is the past , you forgive and move on .
Statues of Vikings don't bother me at all, and my ancestry is half Slavic. So what, you say? The word slave is derived from Slav, because the Vikings enslaved so many Slavic people that Slav became synonymous with slave.
@@lastchance8142 this is my second reply UA-cam really is becoming a censored waste of time . I am English and we have a long history of up's and downs , we as a people have been occupied and enslaved by Romans , Saxons , vikings , and Norman's we fought and raided and them like wise the Scottish for hundreds of years and yet we get along just fine , we've been at war with the french on an off for hundreds of years and yet we hold no malice for the french and by your logic the Germans should never be spoke to again , considering that people still walk this earth who experienced and suffered in the second world war , a claim that no one in America can claim in regards to slavery and yet you seem to think that their descendants are somehow owed a big favour ... For what ?
A lot of you Americans need to get over yourselves , the past is past , we went there to get where we are today and no one deserves a free ride because of something that never effected them , we can all play the victim when it comes to history . As for the civil war dead , the dead of both sides deserve to be commemorated as all were simple players in a rich man's game , I get the impression that you have a poor understanding of your own civil war and why it was fought , it wasn't fought to free any slaves let's put it that way .
@@carolarmer1204 Your point is valid. But I don't see any statues of Hitler in Piccadilly Square.
@lastchance8142 fighting Hitler is completely different to a civil war , a civil war is internal Americans fighting Americans so both sides should be commemorated , I'm not saying Jefferson Davis statues should be everywhere but the combatants deserve to be commemorated.
Whoever controls the present controls the past, and Whoever controls the past controls the future- George Orwell
I think sharp wit is a bit of a stretch
Why is the video reversed? The actual video, viewed from the viewer's perspective, has Bill in his usual seat on the right and Douglas sitting on the far left. Is this an attempt to make a 7 month old show more recent? Not sure why so many youtube channels just copy and paste and add a little blurb and believe this reposting is actual content. I could understand if the content wasn't available, but just look at Bill Maher's channel and you can watch the same video...
They use a mirror image or change it in some other way so they won't violate copyright laws.
Isnt there a statue of Karl Marx in Portland or is it in Seattle.
There is a Bust of Marx at his Grave where he is buried in Highgate Cemetery in London.
I see statues of George Floyd so tell me what did he do in his miserable life that was worse than Jefferson or Washington.
Seattle
@@martinmasten4107: Thanks and I wonder why they didn't pull that one down...
Goddamn the condescending talking at- just let people think what they want, nobody needs your “teaching”
Talking to the channel commentator.🫠🫨
Bill should just retire and never be heard from aagin!
Wouldn't that be wonderful?
He’s helping turn the tide on woke capture of the left wing. So gratifying to watch him grow
Celebrat-ed not celebrat-ing
Everyone was NOT ok with slavery ,Maher. The entire north had no slavery. The vast majority of southerners didn’t own slaves.
Made the mistake of stating Bill has a sharp wit. Take away the applause sign and the canned laughter and the wit suddenly disappears!
"How are people going to know their history without statues?" Oh, I don't know. Read, maybe?
Who does that?
What statues honoring slavery?
'Have a conversation ' is such a meaningless cliché....they want to filibuster, and mandate
heroes are a questionable idea, but you could not expect statues of Union soldiers in Atlanta, right? Part 2 they could be put there now, but I am against
Maher is a nitwit.
Talk television, rubbish.
southerners believed in States Rights.....the emancipation proclamation was read in 1863
Don't like bill 😒
Yes its in the Bible, but in a different context. Slaves were paid and had to be treated very well.
Chat gpt
This video sucked
Stop talking. Sheesh!
Snooze
Douglas Murray is kinda woke now. DOnt like it.
Doug is GOATed
Murray the fraud
Can I not remark?
Those stone bases used to be American history good or bad it was American history
i came here for murray not some crap podcaster in the background tinny voiced, commenting on his STOLEN clip. yawn. disliked.
Douglas babe 😘💋 i am crazy about you ❤ can't control my passion for you and my heart can't hide the love i hold for you ❤ love and yearn live with you and never let any second pass without enjoy you ❤