Cherokee Street Native Statue Removed - NextSTL
By - southsidestl
Yeah, it wasn't a very good statue, technically/artistically speaking. Nor does it have any historical significance. Not going to cry any salty tears about the loss.
Replace all public statuary with fiberglass dinosaurs.
I would love to see a bunch of statues go up that are just completely random things from pop culture.
TV show characters, expired memes, giant Loch Ness monster that asks for tree fiddy
There was a Steve from Minecraft statue near the Fox Theater. Not sure if it’s still there
I miss when the Voltron statue was up in the CWE for a while
Milwaukee has a statue of the Fonz and I hate them with jealousy for it.
I like that second thing what you said.
But also toss in some inflatable crazy wavy guys too.
Only if it's this Avengers
There’s an amazing dinosaur statue in Jacksonville that can serve as a model (I just moved back to StL after 6 years in FL)
I'm thinking statues of Nurses and Doctors, but I love the idea of dinosaurs. lol
The article's quote from the original sculptor doesn't make it sound like he's particularly proud of the work. I thought the statue was supposed to be Sequoyah (who created the written form of the Cherokee language) rather than just a dime store Indian statue but I don't see any confirmation in the article here. The statue's bare chest and feathers tend not to match historical paintings even its the tablet does invoke the syllabary.
Right, most of the imagery of Sequoyah have him rocking a cool ass turban.
The quote from the owner is from 2007 and doesn't really give much context as to why he didn't like it.
he doesn't like it because he thinks it looks bad. "It's more anatomically incorrect than it was political," -[ the guy who made it.](https://www.stltoday.com/suburban-journals/cherokee-street-sculptor-is-his-own-worst-critic/article_c1a4b734-e38e-506b-a85e-5e2bede43963.html)
Lots of tears in this thread from people feigning outrage over what they think is feigned outrage. A local community decided a statue was tacky and no longer reflects the values of their businesses, so they decided to remove it. It’s really no big deal. And probably for the best, it was kind of a shitty statue to begin with.
Apotheosis Comics moved? Didn't they used to be on South Grand?
They opened a second location
I bet it's the beer sales.
Yes, yes it is. My kid and I would go there on Sundays to play D and D. A couple of slices at Pizza Head (what a shitshow that turned out to be) and a couple of hours at Apotheosis. Root beer for him, beer for me.
Ah are you from my dnd group? We've been trying to get back together. We had Dylan as the dm and I played the corgi cleric.
No, we just played the newby games done by the Level Zero guys. The fun for me is over. My kid found his own group of friends to play with as well as the group at his high school.
TIL there's a local comic book store that sells booze, thanks!
Oh wow, good for them!
why is it that anytime anyone in St. Louis has a half good idea, or a successful shop/restaurant, they feel the need to open as many locations of said place as they can? such a nightmare.
Um, to try to make more money?
I mean, it worked for McDonalds.
yeah I get that. I guess I'm letting naivety get the better of me, but if you have the money to open up additional locations in the first place, why not do something different? something that will enrich the fabric of the city instead of a bunch of copy/paste bullshit?
Because finding a winning small business is hard, expanding to a new location with a winning formula is easier. I don’t see how having two comic book stores I’ve never heard of is an affront to the “fabric of the city.”
Damn thing was ugly, looked out of place and apparently the creator wasn't too fond of it as well.
Lol what are we even doing anymore? This isn't a slight at Native Americans, it makes zero sense.
I just find it hilarious that a white store owner gets to tell us all what Cherokee St. represents lol. If the statue was at all offensive to indigenous people than I fully back that up but I can’t help to think this was a decision made by white tears.
to be fair, white business owners decided to put it there in the first place. And not to honor natives, but to drive business.
the guy who sculpted it worked with a cherokee group to avoid offensive imagery, [but he's not proud of his work](https://www.stltoday.com/suburban-journals/cherokee-street-sculptor-is-his-own-worst-critic/article_c1a4b734-e38e-506b-a85e-5e2bede43963.html).
Fair point. I think it would be nice to see something go up honoring the minorities that made Cherokee what it is today. Completely designed and erected by the community themselves.
Hire a Cherokee artist to sculpt something new. Problem solved
@moonchic333 Please don't call us "the minorities....."
Ok firstly don’t act like I’m someone who’s going around saying “the minorities this and the minorities that”.. it’s a generalized term that I used to describe the different groups of people who aren’t white men. I said it would be awesome if the minorities of Cherokee erected something in its place and made all the decisions about it, etc. I didn’t assign the term “the minorities” to describe any one group of people. I didn’t want to use the term POC because there’s some minorities who aren’t POC or list off every group of people I could think of that owns businesses on Cherokee so what would be a better word to use then? I’m a minority too and don’t think of term offensively and I would never just describe one group of people as “the minorities”. I’m sorry it looks offensive because when the sentence is picked apart and “the minorities” is highlighted I guess that doesn’t look good. The term “minority” refers to any group of people whose race, religion, or ethnicity is not of the majority.
Secondly, if you or anyone else was offended by me saying that I think all the non white men of Cherokee should erect a new “face of Cherokee” statue then I am truly sorry. Please know that it wasn’t meant to be a harmful statement.
@moonchic333 Just own that there’s better language out there and own your humility. Google why minority and PoC are used less and less, for your own sake. I'm not here to school you. I got better things to do than play into your fragility for being called out. So I'm calling you in now. Google global majority. Bc calling anyone a minority gives power to those who want it and make statues. Bye. 👋
Lol.. “I got better things to do” just say you wanted to be confrontational and some sort of pc police and move along. It’s semantics. Nothing wrong with using the terms minorities/majority especially in the context I used it in. You telling me to google something just tells me you don’t have a leg to stand on.
>honoring the minorities that made Cherokee what it is today
You mean, high crime and a place where white people try to open up businesses and revive the street only to shut them down later because people don't want to go to high crime areas to shop/eat.
I'm not saying that's the whole street, the mexican restaurants are great but the street and surrounding area need to be cleaned up. Drinking coffee at FOAM and watching drug deals go down at 10am isn't how most people want to start their day.
Man, you are completely out of touch and dead wrong in defense of white business owners. I wonder why?
You telling me I'm wrong and me actually being wrong are two different things. What's your proof?
I know the majority of the white business owners on Cherokee personally. They are fully invested in the neighborhood. The street is already revived, it doesn’t need white people to save it
What part of Cherokee are you talking about? The antique row or west of jefferson/Cherokee?
West of Jefferson. The antique row side is dominated by crazy white boomers who would add a piccaninny statue if they could
and 99 out of 100 people would say the east of jefferson is the nice part. You'd be the 1 person who would say otherwise.
According to the article, it wasn't the store owner, it was the Cherokee Street Community Improvement District, which is made up of, from what I can tell by looking at their website, 4 white women, 4 black men, 2 Asian/Indian man and 3 white men.
According to the meeting minutes, it isn't clear who all voted or gets a vote (since it shows 23 votes but, again, only 13 people on the board/staff), but the vote was 18-4 with 1 abstaining.
Native American imagery is being erased from American culture at the behest of white people.
Where have you been? Native American groups have been decrying society's use of them as mascots for DECADES. Your comment is factually wrong and a poor attempt to hide your saltiness at society's attempt to address its historical racism.
Um you new to America?
Soon white people won’t have any political control and thus lose the ability to do things like this. Another couple 10-20 years. Should be interesting how much political attention Native American groups get in a minority majority political situation.
Wont somebody think of the white people?! /S
Can’t be blamed for decisions they can’t make - it isn’t far off.
Who fucking cares?
It’s Reddit - who fucking care about anything?
You seem to care about white supremacy. So that's something.
If white people having political power is white supremacy then white supremacy is ending.
Is that bad
Far less than they get now, I would imagine.
Likely will lose the reservations I assume. Why would new America care about some agreements old America kind of sort of made.
The naming of streets, towns, sports teams, etc... after groups of people that had just been or were actively being murdered and their land stolen is one of the more grotesque physical relics of the Native American Genocide we still see every day. Suggesting something like this statue, or even the street's name, somehow pays tribute or is an honorific to Native Peoples in general or a particular Tribe/Nation is absurd.
What's almost on equal footing, absurdity wise, is this idea that Native people have to somehow show proof of offense or damage. Who are you to call these people to account? What about this statue or even the name of the street is meaningful enough to you to suggest that a contingent of Native People's must somehow show standing to be either offended or actively hurt by this? Isn't it obvious?
Are you implying that naming streets, towns, and sports teams (things usually reserved to honor people) after groups of people who have been oppressed was intended to further oppress and embarrass them? Who gets to make that decision?
I respectfully disagree. With the same logic, we should remove the Martin Luther King's name from all these streets too.
If in doubt, they can ask the tribal council to get permission. That would have made everybody happy.
I'm not native Indian, so I can't speak for them, but from my perspective it is respect for their heritage. Is it enough? Obviously not.
I think most people just take issue with names like "Redskins". I don't think that too many natives/first nations are huge on that term.
Please tell me you see the difference between naming a street after an entire tribe or ethnic group and naming a street after a specific person.
I'm Zacatecos descent. I would find it really annoying if that name started being stripped off of things named after the Zacatecos. For me personally, I am glad that acknowledgement of existence is there. Doesn't have to be a tribute or honor. It *is* an acknowledgement.
White people have decided otherwise.
I am assuming you are one of the white people he is speaking about lol quit projecting your white guilt on everyone around you
I never said an indigenous person should prove their offense. I simply said if that were the case I back up the removal. I’m impartial to the removal it doesn’t affect me but I just find it very ironic that the white business owners of Cherokee street are calling all the shots. The same Cherokee street that got all of its charm from the minorities in the area. It’s completely gentrified now.
You are bothsides-ing this: Making provocative statements, finding it all hilarious, then claiming to be impartial when called on any of it.
I encourage you to challenge yourself just a bit here, maybe read the other comments contrary and hostile to mine and consider whose side your bolstering.
I am impartial to it because it doesn’t affect me. Does it bother you that it doesn’t bother me? My issue isn’t really with the statue being removed it’s with the white store owners gentrifying the block and hiding their hands by doing things like this. You didn’t call me out on anything and “finding something hilarious” is a figure of speech now why would you even say I’m finding the whole thing hilarious? What a way to really twist someone’s words and make yourself sound real sensational.
You say “gentrifying” it like they ran a bunch of existing businesses out of there. “Reviving” a business district is what you are looking for, and the Mexican community that brought that area back from the dead is still thriving there. I guess it doesn’t affect you because you don’t know the area?
Apparently *you* don’t know the area. So you really think the influx of white middle class people into the Cherokee street area hasn’t displaced any poor people?? Ok..
I’d say Cherokee st. offers a pretty diverse range of minority owned and white owned(which you have a bug up your ass about) business that this city desperately needs. To me, who lives in this area and has for a long time, it’s refreshing to see an area come back and not be so segregated. Maybe if you knew what that neighborhood looked like 15 years ago you’d see the difference as a positive as well.
I do know what it was like 15 years ago. I live off Cherokee and have lived in south city my whole life. Gentrification is a real problem [for some] in a lot of urban cities. I’m not making this up. I’m not saying that all white shop owners are gentrifiers or have ill intentions of running out poor people from the area but some people definitely do think that way. There was actually a comment on this sub not that long ago where someone said they can’t wait until gentrification has taken completely over Cherokee so that crime goes away. When will we as a society learn that you can’t just push your problems around? St. Louis has a long history of using gentrification to push the demographics around. Maybe you’re ok with it but I don’t have to be. There are people who have lived there entire lives in south city who at this point can no longer afford to rent let alone buy a home in south city. That’s a problem for me.
Edit to add an afterthought.. so many white shop owners along Cherokee have come and then gone off to more affluent areas of the city. They don’t have love for the neighborhood, the people in it or truly want to see Cherokee thrive. They come in use up the aesthetics of the area to gain a customer base and then skidaddle because like I said they don’t understand the different culture of the area. Those people can kick rocks.
So what is your proposition here? That there should be no positive development so a once thriving business district can stay in decline? Neighborhoods change, It’s inevitable. It can either change for the better or for the worse. I’d rather see the places of my childhood back on the upside with people making something of their community rather than it settling into an irreparable state with no choice other than to wipe it clean with an urban renewal plan. You want stagnant growth, go live in East St. Louis. I want to be able to do stuff in my community, I want places to go to eat, independent businesses I enjoy supporting, families that don’t want to live in a war zone not having to flee to the comfort of suburban sprawl. I want people to live here and I want our infrastructure to grow. I want city schools to have funding and for our youth to not go through school like it’s a fucking prison with nothing to offer them like I did. That is a healthy community, it grows and becomes desirable. You either grow with it, or move on.
A Trail of Tears?
Funny, I just visited STL and saw this statue like two weeks ago and I was surprised that it wasn’t removed
Everyone wants to tear something down - no one proposed a damn thing to put in its place. If the community will vote that it's offensive then fine, it's not my neighborhood, but why not have something ready to put in its place? Make a statue that celebrates the Native population through different means.
Actually, many business owners were excited to have their storefronts more visible. The statue was just weird where it was and narrowed a sidewalk in front of an area with lots of bus pedestrian traffic and storefronts so now it's more customer friendly.
Such ignorance and not even enough decency to fully defend the removal just "times are changing" no, you are just scared of the mob.
It appears to have an honest history and so far I can't find any reason for it to have been removed, might as well change the name of the street as well if they want to act like children.
"Well before Cherokee Street was even a rut in the mud, history tells us the Peoria tribe camped between modern-day Russell Boulevard and Arsenal Street. In the Carondelet neighborhood at 4420 Ohio Avenue, two miles from present-day Cherokee Street, sits St. Louis’s last prehistoric 40-foot mound associated with Woodland or Mississippian peoples (A.D. 400-1500). Sugarloaf Mound is the oldest man-made structure in the City. "
The 13′ tall fiberglass statue was created by local artist and owner of Joe’s Cafe, Bill Christman. He was quoted in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch in 2007 saying “To my everlasting mortification I was the sculptor of that.”
doesnt seem like the creator is proud of the work, who care if it comes down. It wasnt put there to honor the local heritage. It was just simply a road side oddity.
I agree with creator's own conclusion, but art is in the eye of beholder, may be others find it tasteful, or abstract representation of something.
And they can still view it any time they wish. There wasnt an out cry to remove it, just a desire, it was simple as that and that desire was fulfilled. The person who had the right to take it down, took it down. Things change, its alright.
I'm very progressive but yeah this statue thing has gone from "holy shit the lost cause confederate monuments are *finally* coming down" which I fully supported from growing up in South Carolina and truly seeing a direct relationship between the false historical narrative about the Civil War and Southern "honor" to this stuff. I went to the protests to celebrate the Confederate soldier monument being removed. And I would love nothing more than to have a USCT monument to replace it.
They took down Columbus in Tower Grove Park and now this, which fine I'm not really for or against but fuck I walked by the Columbus statue for years, no one was actually paying attention to it. That 15 year old in the article expresses how this issue now comes across to the average person. No one actually cares and the statue wasn't really causing anything. It's kind of like when they went after the Saint Louis statute on Art Hill. I fully agree that the Catholic Church was in the wrong on the Crusades but its a statue celebrating the city of St. Louis since it happened to be named that by Frenchmen centuries ago. It's not an artistic statement truly in support of the crusades, which is why you saw the huge backlash to taking that statue down.
Like so many progressive political issues this is another one just swirling the toilet to irrelevancy because the people pushing it as a project have lost sight of the substance underneath the issue in the first place.
Not everything has to be some big sign of the culture war. Sometimes tastes change, for the better. If I take down my lawn gnomes because I don't like them anymore, please don't write me a letter.
It was tacky, it was a caricature, I wouldn't want it to be the emblem of my neighborhood either.
Yeah just like Columbus it's not like I'm going to miss it. But when the average person is questioning the decision of this stuff, it adds up over time. I don't think the average person still sees the monument removal in the same light as even 5 years ago.
I typed my comment knowing progressives would dislike it. But PR matters and I wish they did a better job of framing this issue. And I'm a little tired of what I consider no brainer issues constantly seeming like the peter out. It's been going on since Occupy Wallstreet. We're good at getting issues started but then they always peter out in the broader public over stuff like this.
How is a local council supposed to more positively frame this? They want it removed, it's their right to do so, and it's probably the right thing to do, too.
The news(well... nextstl) covered it, and that's their right to do as well.
Nothing in the article was like "liberal outrage dethrones beloved racist icon," but that's the spin a conservative media outlet would put on it.
"Locals decide they don't want this statue anymore" isn't as eye catching, for either side.
What annoys me is when progressives just accept internet outrage and conservative bluster as any kind of representation of reality.
\>What annoys me is when progressives just accept internet outrage and conservative bluster as any kind of representation of reality.
Fair enough. And trust me I feel the local news in the St. Louis area (eh let's admit the country) sucks and doesn't really inform the public.
I will say they have the 15 year old girl expressing her opinion which I think is what motivated my statement.
I'm just expressing that I no longer feel a sense of victory or justice when these things come down. I see it play as a substitute for more substantive policies in progressive culture and ideology. Earthbound is about the only business I visit on Cherokee, I couldn't tell you where this statue is in relation to that (don't go to Cherokee often). Same deal with the Columbus statue. I remember when I moved close to the park seeing it, but then it left my conscious entirely for 2 years. Then I saw the sign to take it down and saw it be taken down.
Where is the "lost cause" for Columbus or this Statue? Sure it's a statement than I feel similar to your sentiment. I'm not really sad to see them go since I don't care about them and I can nominally acknowledge the arguments against them. But I also see it as a lack of focus on priorities. Which *does* absolutely dog progressive politics. We *need* to get rid of charter schools which are an avenue for private business to tear down the education system of this city and have conservative christian principles taught in the charter school. If we got that accomplished I would feel much more comfortable with actually raising a family in the city. The reason why its so hard to convince people about the history of things like racism in this area is because the schools are so lackluster. That's an issue that would make me stay in the city and raise a family here. In comparison I could care less about the statues, they're just a non-issue in comparison to stuff like that for me.
I get where you're coming from. A lot of times issues like this come up and get covered like this is progressivism in its entirety. Removing a statue isn't a policy, it won't change anyone's life. It won't reform the police, or fund the schools. It's the lowest rung on the ladder, but I think there's a lot of people pushing the narrative that this is all progressives care about. It doesn't mean it shouldn't be done, but it's low hanging fruit.
My only critique with your sentiment is if you go into activist or protest social circles for a while. I don't see a comprehensive plan to move beyond the low hanging fruit. That's what's missing. I see plenty of utopian statements made about how eventually with just enough gumption and protest the world will finally change, but no actual real world plan or strategy to get there.
The rhetoric about the system being oppressive and immoral and thus we can't make change through it really holds back and self sabotages a lot of progress. I really think there needs to be a push to reform the flaws of progressive politics that got baked into activist culture after Occupy Wallstreet. And I don't see that happening to be honest.
What do you recommend? Organizing support for progressive politicians? Running for office? Donating to campaigns and PACs? Enacting progressive policies through legislation?
All of those are part of what people have been doing, but any progressive who actually gets elected gets tarred as showboating the minute they try to draw attention to any of the issues. That's the conservative narrative: that everything progressive is drum circles and signaling.
Organizing is hard, winning is harder, and governing is harder still but it all starts with people getting involved at the bottom.
\>Organizing is hard, winning is harder, and governing is harder still but it all starts with people getting involved at the bottom.
I've been to my fair share of protests. I see statements like this as tautological and ignoring the problem to a certain extent. I've been to die ins. I've walked on highways. There is something missing. Going to a protest doesn't change policy.
I think progressives need to give up the trope that moderates are the enemy and just as bad as Republicans for one. They need to shift their rhetoric choices. We are the 99% was great. Defund the Police literally scared people. Stuff like that matters.
I'm tired of the revolutionary rhetoric saying half measures aren't enough. But the reality is what I quoted above. Real revolutionary change is hard, and every movement people reference like the civil rights movement of the 50s took decades to come to fruition. So there's this demand for action now, and yet they sabotage moderates in the meantime.
I do not think enough progressives have truly looked in the mirror after 2016 and reanalyzed the assumption of their politics. They talk about systemic change and I was debating people until red in the face that we needed to vote for Hillary so we could get a favorable Supreme Court. ALL of the tautological rhetoric was thrown against me. We can't miss opportunities like that and progressives do.
Just look at CHAZ in Portland last year, we're bitching about the St. Louis statue, what the fuck was that waste of time energy and effort? Too often I sat at protests feeling that if you could just convince the leaders to go knock on doors it would be a more useful way to spend the volunteer man hours. Yet you see plenty of anarchists who have entire set ups and medic bags, shields helmets etc who have never knocked on a god damn door in their life but would happily spend another weekend in jail as martyrs wasting time and bailout money.
Look at the Stockley protests. The "ask" was stop shooting us. Sure great demand, it was also a complete failure of a strategy. That is your moment to have well vetted, well researched policy and legislation you can hand legislators to vote on. "Stop shooting us" is not a training policy, a hiring policy, a judicial principle to guide judges overlooking police cases. You protest for specific defined goals, not esoteric empty demands that preach well to the choir but wouldn't actually change anything. Yes politics and change is hard, but I think we say that to ourselves to the point that we accept ineffective politics. So it turns into "well shit why aren't we accomplishing anything, well I guess it's hard, let's not change strategy or let certain ineffective principles go."
I voted for Cori Bush, but the absolute vitriol I heard against Jill Schupp was annoying as hell. And I'll say it here. We didn't vote for Hillary, lost the Supreme Court, so we couldn't end gerrymandering and actually draw Ann Wagner's district more fairly so she would lose. Progressives celebrated Cori beating Lacy Clay but I'm sorry a political scientist would sit down and we would have shifted the overton window more to the left if Cori had lost to Clay but Schupp had won. (This isn't an actual argument against Cori, I would prefer both wins, but one was more important and that was Schupp) Were people pounding the street for Schupp? Not that I saw.
The framing of racism and bigotry is far too subjective. It creates an insular culture that honestly does do a lot of drum circles and virtue signaling over actual political work. But they gate keep to all hell and keep anybody out who isn't already a part of the culture. The leadership of different activist groups felt more of a schoolyard popularity contest than people I truly felt were competent and thinking broad strategy and rather were often the most ideological of the group essentially. You have to have a political culture that reaches out to people, it wasn't doing that and was more concerned with purity testing. "Oh you don't like police shooting people, but you're not for abolishment? Well you're not for abolishment if you just hate the regular police, hate ICE, also hate National Park Rangers." I've had to listen to people gatekeep over National Park Rangers, like the people at fucking yellowstone with the smokey the bear hats. Like what? Can we focus on the biggest problem first.
I blame a warped version of intersectionality on issues like that. Must we always let intersectionality water down and diffuse a movement? Oh I guess moving the ball forward a few yards isn't worth it. Let's keep running touchdown plays and never get a first down because at any point we move the ball forward you have ten people saying how it leaves a marginalized group behind. It just creates the bucket and crab effect in progressive politics.
And oh I've had to deal with people yelling in my face when I was bringing this up a few years ago. But it was great that despite all their care for people's "rights" and their clear moral posturing over you as if you're some uncommitted fuckwad to progressive change, Well aren't they bitching about the Texas abortion law now?
Shit like that needs to change. And it needed to have changed immediately after 2016 but I see the same patterns. Take that for what you will. But I know I'm not alone among progressives in feeling some radical change in protest and activist culture needs to change and face these things.
I'm with you here. I slightly disagree re Columbus: while I agree that most people prob didn't even notice it was there, I can understand why some native activists would still harbor strong feelings related to Columbus and other Spanish/English/French explorers. But the St Louis statue was the greatest storm in a teacup I have ever seen; I lost a great deal of respect for many notable St Louis people who supported this movement at the time.
Yeah I'm from a Catholic family (not from St. Louis specifically). I had a bishop great uncle, multiple priests and nuns in the family. One of those priests is a known and identified child rapist, who was protected by the church, they bounced him around and into Germany for example and Germany pursued legal action against him for fuck sake and they had to put him back in America. My mother was abused, she committed suicide from her life long mental illnesses which started with the Catholic Church. I got to grow up around my aunts and uncles all traumatized by the abuse and the gaslighting cover up.
I say that to say I'm clearly not a fan of the Catholic Church. It was the largest pedophile ring *on Earth* for decades and decades. I'm an anti-theist atheist who finds it ridiculous that people can even take the Bible seriously. I seriously don't give a shit about a fucking catholic saint.
But when the St. Louis statute controversy came up and you had people talking about bigotry against Muslims from a *millennia* ago at this point. It was just ridiculous, no one thought of the statue in that light, it wasn't put there to express that message when it was installed. It's a huge piece of art representing the city for said art museum. And all it did was enrage conservative pro-life Catholics to "defend" Saint Louis and turn it into a symbol on their side. It was a dumb political move.
There is just too much navel gazing in progressive political movements. And you see it seep into so many different issues and just tie our political shoes together and prevent a more effective politics.
Wow, that is a lot of words condemning progressives. Be a real shame if they did any of the shit they didn't do here.
Yeah the St. Louis statue I just pulled out of my ass. Completely made up.
literally a one off attempt organized by one of St. Louis' most insane and outcasted "activists" umar lee who regularly moves between STL and dallas. That would have gone no where had it not happened at the height of america's most hyper politicized summer in recent memory with most of the "supporters" coming out only after right wing pundit Jim Hoft called for "All Catholic and Christian men and their allies" to attend a counter (prayer rally) on the same day as Umar's protest.
Umar then signale boosted this call to action to further gain support for his outlandish pet project by asserting the call to action as a dogwhistle for white supremacists probably correctly identifying the dogwhistle considering Stl's local proud boys Mike Lasater and Luke Rohlfing heeded Jim Hoft's call to action.
all of that to amass a crowd that didn't even fill up the surrounding area of the statue...
for all purposes this was a media circus organized and executed in two parts by two of ST. Louis's most laughable political figures.
I am begging people to either learn the truth about or forget about this laughing stock and quit pretending it was at all a part of the wider movements within the city be they BLM or "progressive politics"
>I am begging people to either learn the truth about or forget about this laughing stock and quit pretending it was at all a part of the wider movements within the city be they BLM or "progressive politics"
I know this is a common trope in progressive politics. "Go educate yourself." But seriously where are people supposed to go to look up Umar Lee.
This just isn't an effective solution to the problem. You can't expect everyone to be educated on the protest movements social networks and infighting.
You can keep repeating this failed strategy. Or progressive activists can control the PR of their movement and that includes outcasts like Umar Lee who clearly had an outsized negative impact.
I'm googling for and cannot find a single statement from Black Lives Matter or other leading activists in the city speaking against the protest. If you have links I'm more than happy to read them.
You can't just expect people to frame the narrative the way that you want. And you have to respond to people like Umar Lee if they are pretending to represent activists at large.
You can't just blame a biased media all the time, if its biased then you have to work your politics and activism to overcome that hurdle and I didn't see it in my time rubbing elbows with activists. There isn't an overall focus or strategy, the institutional organization isn't there and its a big reason why it flounders so much. There are some fundamental flaws in political thinking from activist leaders that help create problems like this within activist culture. I know that if someone spoke up about Umar Lee there's just as likely someone saying they're "tone policing" and there you have it, there's no mechanism to guide a comprehensive strategy for the whole region. Which there should have been after Michael Brown.
The political messaging of progressive politics is more aimed at virtue signalling to the ideology than to the average person's understanding of the issues. That's not just an Umar Lee problem.
I tend to agree with what you comment here. I guess thats part of the reason why i get so personally frustrated when people bring up this protest. I wish there had been a more critical response to umar during his calls to rename the city and remove the statue. but there wasn't. they were pretty much widely ingnored until Jim Hoft's call to action. There was simply too much going on for large organizers like you said to condemn him or put effort into putting someone else down. For better or worse like you say thats how unorganized activist circles operate.
If i can help clear up that message even a year later even in my own small way through comments like the above. I'm going to continue to do that. I apologize for the go educate yourself tone of my comment. I do recognize that most people are not as intuned to the local activist ongoings to the extent of being able to witness the live evolution from ignored pet project to counter-protest of a right wing rally or capable of spending the hour or 2 it takes to get to the bottom of who exactly organized the protest the counter protest and the counter to the counter protest.
But if i have that information. I'm going to put it out there lol.
\>If i can help clear up that message even a year later even in my own small way through comments like the above. I'm going to continue to do that.
How dare you add facts to a discussion! How rude! lulz. I mean I didn't know about Umar Lee, though when I looked him up I remember the articles from last year.
I think the issue about addressing people like Umar is that progressives, in general, do not define their movements. It happened with Occupy, it happened with Defund last year. But ideologically the movements can't define themselves and come up with a cohesive policy. This has been a fact since Occupy Wallstreet and again, the movement has never reformed this major flaw.
To define your goals and your message is inherently to compromise on *something or some issue.* And the utopian politics of the most extreme members of activists prevent that from happening. Why? Because often times the most ideologically extreme members are the ones going to protests the most, they become the leaders so they're the ones calling the shots. And honestly I don't believe a lot of them deserve the positions of respect they hold in my personal opinion. But you aren't actually going to blow up Wall Street in 2011, and you aren't actually going to abolish the police in 2020. So to actually write some legislation or bills or to lay out and define your policies you can write stuff which acknowledges those facts and helps you at least accomplish some important goals and get the ball moving. But inherently the leaders don't want it, so they keep the protesters out in the streets for weeks on end, sometimes months, pursuing bigger goals as if they're going to happen.
This is why you have seen the repeated pattern of protest movements kicking off with HUGE support from the broader public and they just peter out. You had Occupy Protests still going in 2012 of the hard core activists. You had George Floyd Square in Minneapolis, and CHAZ in Portland. Both of which accomplished nothing of any note. But don't say that at a left wing meeting! But seriously, so many activists studied social sciences like I did. This pattern of tent cities essentially keeps popping up of the never ending protest that boils down to accomplish nothing. It at once fails to actually use the broad support these movements initially have to at least move the ball forward on these very important issues. We might have gotten something passed for Wall Street reform. We could have gotten much more accomplished on policing last year. And to get those wins, validates the movement and helps it win further fights when another flash point hits.
I can't tell you how many people would get into protesting and politics and then just burn out. Or after a few months you could see them kind of "wake up" and look around and see they weren't really doing anything but chanting. And I don't blame those individuals. I blame the leaders of these movements who's ideology causes this to happen.
Idk for a book to read. Hegemony How To by Jonathan Smucker I think really expresses a lot of the points I'm expressing. And he's speaking from a leftist perspective.
Well, more misguided PC activity. In reality, they’re simply removing Native Americans from the collective conscious. They’re helping to further erase the people who suffered and were mistreated. Now they get to be forgotten. Once they change that pesky, problematic street name from Cherokee to Oak Ln, then no one will have to think about or be faced with the remnants of native culture and people can just finally be obliviously happy! Utopia.
You know what would be a better way to help indigenous people than holding onto performative satues. Actually listening to and engaging with their current concerns instead of putting on a crybaby act in response to precieved "PC activity"
Feel free to take time this weekend to reach out to your local representatives and tell them about your support for indigenous communities in their fight to stop line 3.
possibly throw some support behind osage nation as they try to reclaim a recently sold picture cave loosing the bid by 200k short of the sold price of 2 million dollars. It would do you well to signal your support for their cause to your representatives as well.
all of this would take maybe slightly longer than it would take you to comment on this reddit post.
> Actually listening to and engaging with their current concerns instead of putting on a crybaby act in response to precieved "PC activity"
I'm not OP here nor am I defending him. I'm fine with the statue coming down.
I just want to push against this notion that the people taking the statute down ARE listening to indigenous people either. Which it seems to be what you're implying. Correct me if I'm wrong. I highly doubt the Cherokee Council has indigenous people or really asked their opinion first. This is about modern progressive politics enacting its values. Which is fine in and of itself, but let's also not pretend like it somehow represents indigenous people at the same time. I highly doubt natives on reservations truly give a shit about some dumb statue in St. Louis since that's not really impacting their life.
I've seen progressives ignore minority voices like in the St. Louis American who want policing and don't want to abolish policing. I've seen progressives ignore minority voices that vote for moderate Democrats like during the 2020 election.
I think we need to dispense with the notion that progressive politics always represents minority voices. It simply doesn't as a matter of fact. This isn't an argument against progressives stances, you don't necessarily need minority voices to stand against oil pipelines.
I just don't think it's healthy that people try to validate their politics through minority voices as if thats some moral justification. We should just make your arguments and values independently and let them speak for themselves.
Your reading into my comment. I never said the statue or the street name are ongoing issues for indigenous people. I said if you want to put on a crybaby concern for "the erasure of native americans" than you should look towards indigenous groups and see what they are currently struggling with.
and then listed two of the ongoing struggles i know of.
because your exactly right. they (likely) dont give a shit about this statue in St. Louis and neither should the commenter above.
It's clear to me from engaging with you in more than one thread now that you have your own agenda in the comments today. Pointing out the flaws within activist circles or progressive politics is fine (would be a lot cooler if you did it in explicitly left-wing circles instead of a place where right-wingers could internalize your points to justify their own worldview). but lets stay on topic here. I was critiquing right-wing outrage not defending performative removal of statues.
>would be a lot cooler if you did it in explicitly left-wing circles instead of a place where right-wingers could internalize your points to justify their own worldview
I mean fair enough I clearly have an "agenda" of sorts. At least a bone to pick. But I do think its important.
As far as addressing this in explicitly left-wing circles. Sorry no can do. I tried and got shouted down. You get labeled as racist, sexist, neoliberal, pick your label tautologically applied to you. I tried listening, there would be times I was literally the only straight white male that showed up to the meetings I went to. Nothing won people over. I tried in good faith. They aren't listening. So why don't you go to your left wing circles and start correcting that toxic gate keeping culture?
People say what you say. Then then just bulldoze you. If you object you're not supporting minority voices. It's just a way to rationalize their "my way or the highway" mentality to progressive politics.
To me that shows that a lot of progressive culture are more concerned with preserving their vision of what the culture should be like over actually accomplishing political goals. And it's also a way to control protest movements. And at least in St. Louis there's a strong anarchist bent to it. And honestly in my experience it kind of manipulates more moderate protesters to a certain extent.
I also think it's a problem that there's this constant push to respond to conservative critiques. Haters gonna hate conservatives gonna conservative. We need to look at these critiques and stop ignoring them because "it feeds a conservative narrative" of some sort. It prevents people especially the most ideological activists from looking at issues and strategy objectively since the conservative narrative looms so large in their mind they feel if they validate or concede any point of fact within a biased conservative narrative they're betraying the cause so you're left with some ridiculous conversations I've had where their beliefs are more defined by what is not conservative than rational discussion or interpretation. "Conservatives said X in 1953 so it must not be true!" Is pretty much how it behaves.
\>I was critiquing right-wing outrage not defending performative removal of statues.
Yeah I acknowledge that. I am just kind of bitching here. In my first comment that's why I said I wasn't defending the comment you were responding to. Since I agree with telling conservatives to go fuck themselves and their snowflakism about statues. But it just reminded me of how in 2020 I was listening to Bernie supporters chastise Biden supporters for not listening to minority voices (which is a trope in progressive politics) but for like the last 5 years I've been like "well most minorities voted for Hillary and Joe the last two presidential elections. Are we not going to listen to them then for some reason? Like wut?
This is no more controversial than if they took down the big Amaco sign. "It needs to stay up because...because it's been there a long time...so that makes it important, I guess. And if it's not there anymore I'll be mad and confused."
Thankfully we still have history books, and stories, and songs , and movies, and aaaaaaaaall sorts of other media that will do a far, far better job of getting to know them than a stupid statue could ever possibly even hope to do - but you go off lol, very valuable use of your time. Definitely doesn't make you look foolish at all.
Let's rename the street, too. SMH ...
Too much soy down there, smh
Stop looking at your dingus, dingus.
I dont think dingus applies here, all good
What is dingus?
**This word/phrase(dingus) has a few different meanings.**
More details here:
*This comment was left automatically (by a bot). If I don't get this right, don't get mad at me, I'm still learning!*
[^(opt out)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot/comments/ozztfy/post_for_opting_out/) ^(|) [^(report/suggest)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot) ^(|) [^(GitHub)](https://github.com/TheBugYouCantFix/wiki-reddit-bot)
I wish they could have figured out a way to honor native Americans instead of just white washing the neighborhood. Why is the creative process not present when they seek to destroy these things?
Didn't anyone actually native vote to remove their history? Or is this some kind of culture stunt
It isn't that long an article. You could look less stupid real easy.
It was a rhetorical question. Thank you for joining my Ted talks.
“I don’t read. Thank you for thinking my uninformed opinion warrants a response while pretending it’s equivalent to a TED talk”
Someone gets it
Apotheosis comics.......!!!! (Shakes a fist at them)...Are you a comic villain or hero? History will discover it evidently.