United States University to remove World War II murals because they show too many white people

LifeisTiresome

Well-known member
Found something on stupidpol on reddit:


These were some of the quotes on said reddit.

Students didn’t ‘feel comfortable’ sitting near the murals, administrator said

The University of Rhode Island recently announced plans to remove two murals depicting World War II veterans because it lacks “diversity and a sensitivity to today’s complex and painful problems,” according to the university.

Kathy Collins, vice president of student affairs, told CBS 12 she received complaints because the two folk-art murals portraying life in the GI Bill era of the 1950s “portray a very homogeneous population” and that most of the people depicted in the murals are “predominantly white.”

Collins also told the CBS news affiliate that some students told the school they “didn’t feel comfortable sitting in that space.”

She cited the controversial deaths and shootings of black Americans such as George Floyd and Jacob Blake as part of her decision:


I think we have to recognize the horrible incidents and the tragic murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and most recently Jacob Blake in Kenosha Wisconsin during this is heightened time and we as an institution have to look at the systems in place across this institution that maybe are not representing who we are today and representing the true diversity of URI today.

The public university announced the plans to cover up and replace the murals in the school’s Memorial Union in a September 3 news release. The murals are currently covered up and the school said it wants the paintings replaced before classes start. The student union is currently undergoing renovations.

At the request of the university, Arthur Sherman, a World War II veteran and alumnus of the university, painted the murals depicting students socializing and traveling to campus in 1953.

Student veterans raised the money to create the Memorial Union to honor the military service of students. Sherman also taught at the university, according to the school’s statement.

Sherman’s family is split on the murals. The now 95-year-old Arthur Sherman told CBS 12 that “[t]ime goes by and things change” when asked about the removal.

Pamela Sherman, his daughter, told CBS that university officials could preserve history while adding other artwork.

Sherman said the murals give URI an “opportunity for them to capture a moment in time in their history” and said the school should “maintain the timeline of that history over the many generations.”

“It’s an opportunity for the University of Rhode Island to embrace its history, it’s an opportunity for it to show a timeline, a progression and a change over decades and we never want to forget our past.”

More recently, there’s talk of preserving the murals in some way. The Providence Journal reports that the university is still exploring ways to relocate the murals.

The school said in its original announcement that the construction of the walls and murals “does not permit removal without damage to the murals and to the walls.”


Bold is what redditors quoted. I can't open the link myself. But if true. @Bacle See what I mean about how it will never end? IIRC, you didn't post in that thread where Washington wanted to be rid of the founders statues.

The precious fee fees are not feeling good and so everything has to be torn down!

Also, too many White people heh. I suppose that the only number of acceptable White people is 0?
 
I wonder how the University of Rhode Island would feel if all Federal funding were cut? No Federal grants, no Federal scholarships. No Federal money at all. Not even people going to it on the GI Bill?
Why would that happen? The University is merely doing what Bacle advocates. Protecting the feels of the precious POCs by taking down everything they don't like.

The precedent has been made. Its done.
 
A poster on here who was fully on board with removing the Confederate statues cause POC feels.

I'm not a white person nor have I ever lived in the US. I couldn't give a single fuck about the Confederate statues and in another time, I would say put them in a museum. But now? Doing that is capitulation and providing the left with a precedent to tear down the statues of everyone else cause all the things that can be claimed against the Confederate statues can also be said of the US founders or Churchill, etc.

Its very telling that he never posted in a thread where the left were talking about taking down the US founders. i suspect he will not post here too.
 
A poster on here who was fully on board with removing the Confederate statues cause POC feels.

I'm not a white person nor have I ever lived in the US. I couldn't give a single fuck about the Confederate statues and in another time, I would say put them in a museum. But now? Doing that is capitulation and providing the left with a precedent to tear down the statues of everyone else cause all the things that can be claimed against the Confederate statues can also be said of the US founders or Churchill, etc.

Its very telling that he never posted in a thread where the left were talking about taking down the US founders. i suspect he will not post here too.
I won't talk about him if he's not here, however on a related note i hope the admin and mod team are doing some through gate keeping, it only takes a few subversive lefties as we know.
 
I won't talk about him if he's not here, however on a related note i hope the admin and mod team are doing some through gate keeping, it only takes a few subversive lefties as we know.
What @Terthna says is correct. This is a forum apparently built on Free Speech and thus needs to follow that and allow leftists to speak. At any rate, its best to have them around so we can actually debate stuff and also prevents echo chamber.
 
Everybody stop sh*tting on Bacle, while I also disagree with his point of view and most definitely think that these people who felt 'uncomfortable' should f*ck off, you should stop treating him like he's the source of these problems, because he isn't, even if he agreed with your POV 100% it wouldn't have changed or stopped this.
 
You do realize doing that would entirely contradict the principles of free speech this forum was built upon, don't you?
What @Terthna says is correct. This is a forum apparently built on Free Speech and thus needs to follow that and allow leftists to speak. At any rate, its best to have them around so we can actually debate stuff and also prevents echo chamber.
Plus, not every leftist is the enemy; case in point, myself and Bacle.
I meant as far as admin and moderation goes, unless we want to lose yet another space to far left subversion? That 'peaceful acceptance' crap is going to see all of us banned for 'hate speech' one day and then we will have to go to another forum. I remember when sb was rightwing as fuck..........until it wasn't.
 
We are leaving the period of acrimonious public debate, and entering the era of public repression, private forums/email lists, and secretly-distributed samizdat literature. Eventually, once the algorithms are precise enough, Big Tech will be able to deplatform the samizdat distributors and remotely wipe any remnants through software backdoors, and we'll move into the era of small groups of close IRL friends meeting privately to complain.

Nobody will ever know when that era will end, at least not until their friends mysteriously don't return their calls anymore.
 
We are leaving the period of acrimonious public debate, and entering the era of public repression, private forums/email lists, and secretly-distributed samizdat literature. Eventually, once the algorithms are precise enough, Big Tech will be able to deplatform the samizdat distributors and remotely wipe any remnants through software backdoors, and we'll move into the era of small groups of close IRL friends meeting privately to complain.

Nobody will ever know when that era will end, at least not until their friends mysteriously don't return their calls anymore.

You make it sound like this is a foregone conclusion.

It isn't.

It certainly could happen, but things have not yet turned decisively one way or the other, the battle is still on.
 
I meant as far as admin and moderation goes, unless we want to lose yet another space to far left subversion? That 'peaceful acceptance' crap is going to see all of us banned for 'hate speech' one day and then we will have to go to another forum. I remember when sb was rightwing as fuck..........until it wasn't.
Considering that your plan would also end with me banned eventually, simply for expressing left-leaning opinions, I'm not convinced it's the right way to go. What killed SB wasn't "peaceful acceptance"; it was blatant favoritism and censorship. Which is what you're now advocating.
 
Considering that your plan would also end with me banned eventually, simply for expressing left-leaning opinions, I'm not convinced it's the right way to go. What killed SB wasn't "peaceful acceptance"; it was blatant favoritism and censorship. Which is what you're now advocating.
I never stated that, don't put words in my mouth. Ensuring that the admin and moderatorship remains ideologicaly consistent is simply inteligent. I personally support diversity of thought, echo chambers suck. That said the far left is alarmingly good at taking advantage of right wing fair play. Unless we want to do this whole song and dance again, every admin and moderator must support this forums values.
 
I never stated that, don't put words in my mouth. Ensuring that the admin and moderatorship remains ideologicaly consistent is simply inteligent. I personally support diversity of thought, echo chambers suck. That said the far left is alarmingly good at taking advantage of right wing fair play. Unless we want to do this whole song and dance again, every admin and moderator must support this forums values.
Considering that they founded it; it's probably a good bet that they already do.
 
Hello Everybody, it's the Boot! The Boot is just showing up for a few reasons. One, unless it is specifically against the Terms of Service we will not be banning anybody for their ideological orientation. Two, the Boot is scenting some Doom in here and will act if the Doom becomes too Doom-like. Three. The Boot will point out that tagging members who have asked you not to tag them is a bit impolite. You are free to reference them in regards to your argument, since this has been a long-running controversy between several posters, but tagging them should, at most, be done once unless they enter the thread.
 
Considering that they founded it; it's probably a good bet that they already do.
Does no one have reading comprehension any more? Yes the current admin and moderators believe in freedom of speech. However give it time and just like countless other forums if gatekeeping is not enforced this WILL become yet another commie hugbox.
 
I won't talk about him if he's not here, however on a related note i hope the admin and mod team are doing some through gate keeping, it only takes a few subversive lefties as we know.

The Lefties we’ve got are on average too smug and assholish to really take over

Or in say, OliverCromWell’s case, so predatory that he even got NameOfLove to leave the site

Hell, I think even without banning, they were all constantly frustrated at seeing people able to easily shut them down in debates

It’s when they’re better at pretending to be sane and balanced that they’re more likely to take over

Right now, when they’re here, they can’t help but constantly mock and harass and be smug and are FAR less likely to do much else

It’s NOT the outright screaming and armed hordes you must be wary of, it’s the ones who look much less frightening or obvious inserting themselves into certain positions and developing a sort of cult-of-personality in places like universities and unions, feigning moderation whilst upon closer looks they are anything but
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top