of history is to understand the past as a guide to understanding the present and future history should not be seen as feel good nostalgia because a lot of history is painful and shame so how should we find the right now once it's statue side the right answer. to. cross knocking statues side i'm joined by my guest cleo voluntary in new york she is founder of the company there have been tammany which teaches social emotional learning in schools as well as diversity and inclusion in companies and government agencies and in las vegas we are it he is an assistant professor of african-american and african diaspora studies at the university of nevada las vegas all right crosswalk rules in effect that means you can shop and how you want her house reach greatly let me go to you in new york how this taking down statues and we can talk about which ones changed the condition of people of color in the united

states and does that something is it just a political statement because we're in a great recession we're in a pandemic and working people or people been horrendous lee hit by this and i just have to ponder is statues the 1st thing we should be banking about go ahead . well sure i mean i think i would defer to the former mayor of my state in new orleans mitch landrieu who courageously took down the confederate statutes in new orleans a few years ago and his argument was essentially that you know we are a melting pot as a city and we really celebrate that but we should not force our citizens to look up to have to look up at you know monuments of confederate soldiers whose goal was to uphold slavery and this is a thing certainly a traumatic experience for someone to see and someone especially someone of color

will inevitably see that and wonder well am i actually in a place where i belong culturally does this place actually represent my values if it's willing to you know have a monument that celebrates my ancestors and slaves meds and i think that culturally and psychologically it is important to make sure that those kinds of monuments do not remain going to those those that are using monuments came down after a broad community discussion correct sure because they would see this is well you know i have no attachment to confederate statues and monuments 0 i don't i simply don't i was born that outside boston massachusetts ok and so i don't have that kind of. on the ground cultural history however tyler my point in asking this was that you know it should be communities that decide because people come together and they make a decision if they want to remove it have it moved someplace else as a historical artifact because we all except the fact that slavery did exist in the

united states and we should never forget that it did and ensued through history particularly at it after the civil war there were political reasons why these statues were put up some i'm reading but i'm during the civil rights movement as a as a protest and we need to understand we have to understand where these statues came from i don't think they should. destroyed i think we should preserve them and understand them. well i think that the us has a lot of reminders of the consumer see out the monuments now on the one hand or tribune our demand that. you know our friends in arms are saying america's a history wasteland a lot of people prefer to just get rid of things rather than deal with them and there's some debate to suggest that is what's going on with what we call the martinet wars not on the other hand i advise for people who want to tear down these monuments simply because a case example being the university of north carolina there is a structure called silent sound which was supposed to represent all of those who

fought for the confederacy that attended that particular school and if you look at the history behind i mean the speech that was given when it was read to us actually horrendous and recent it made it very clear what the intention was an honoring confederacy and it was deliberately white supremacy now when the protesters asked for it to be removed or when they actually removed it themselves there was a deal struck between the university administration and a local group of those who were sympathetic to the confederacy is not very so wish it was going to be over a $1000000.00 to essentially preserve the monument that was going to be i think it are the tax payers expense is or through that's a wish and it was paid by the students so i understand the argument that communities should decide but on the other hand it seems that it's a number of people who are at the top who are making these decisions are more interested in just getting the problem away and willing to donate money for that which i don't think represents the community's interests and i think that's

a disservice to history is well ok i mean like i said in my introduction we don't remember things just fairness 1000 to feel good about something we actually remember most things because they're very painful and i think the if i go out i think it's really important you know when this actually that was just mentioned here i think that and i want in your opinion of course to preserve that and explain why. why it was put up what the meaning was there and how we should interpret it now i think that's it i history lesson on it all in itself so i can't speak to that particular statue but i will say that i do agree with putting confederate statutes in museums so all that we can still preserve that history and understand that history in the proper context but to have those statutes put on pedestals and to have the confederacy and its value celebrated and glorified is an obvious problem and i would echo the professor's point that there is an issue when you have you

know institutions claiming to be for justice and for equality but really they're just trying to silence people from protesting more sort of divert attention away from what's going on by whether it's donating money to people who are interested in preserving the can or glorifying the confederacy is legacy. of perpetuating other issues so i hear what you're saying about community input and i agree obviously this is what happened successfully in new orleans but i do think that the statute should be put in museums and that is the proper context that they should be observed there it's going to go step through the current let's say look at robert e. lee ok one of the most important about the most important very general during the civil war but he also was commandant of west point before the civil war and he's renowned for reforming it in some of those reforms stand to this day should his legacy and west point for example be wiped away disappear well i think what's interesting about robert e.

lee's ugly she said himself shortly after civil war to not correct i mean. for concern or something he was he was very clear that what happened was a treatise add to the fact for us for jews and so many others it is reflective of how i think a number of people want you gone now with the monuments being read to that was a deliberate act much of the beauty you know. daughters of the confederacy in the early 20th century as an expression that they expected and wanted to maintain america as a white supremacist country in the intro it's black people throughout all of these airlines was never considered and i just want to go on this point of you know culture is she i mean we talk about the wrecking of culture all the time and i think that's a misunderstanding of the term culture is not static i mean what we believe now versus 100 years ago i think is drastically different and has progressed to a large degree and i think that's a good thing and so when people talk about preserving heritage well we have to be

honest about what that heritage just and since the mid 20th century america is a very different place as far as diversity than it was prior to $965.00 so the degree to which any of these monuments represents the communities under which they were placed is now questionable and i think within this particular moment communities are rising up because they feel that they have an actual voice and input that is now salyut those who are leading clear how how can we can't with physical culture remember this is a whole war what is a way what is an to do that without glorifying or without dividing us so i think there can be an educational approach to this and addition to putting these confederate statutes in museums there should be an educational push to have folks really esteem those who fought on the side of the union who learn we can learn so

that we can learn more about these individuals. and really uphold though the values of those individuals this summer actually read team of rivals which was about you know the political sort of strategizing of abraham lincoln and his character and what what shaped him and as a president as well as his you know upbringing and it seems to me that we don't actually teach that much about these intimate. again who fought on the side of the union so i think that if we could have an approach our education system by emphasizing the values of the union and emphasizing those soldiers who died on behalf of america and who did not you know prove to be a traitor so the country i think that that would provide a good balance and again to reiterate putting those confederate statues shouldn't be destroyed but should be put in his and so that they can place in the proper context colors should we read to actively judge people 100 years ago by their words and their way their way their viewpoints but equally on race i mean even at abraham

lincoln if you look at very closely i mean he he he believed ending slavery was in principle as a christian thing but he didn't particularly like black people ok but he did it on principle all right and if you go to his leg recent things like that it doesn't come off as this you know this squeaky clean abolitionist ok i mean he had he did it on principles and i think are universally agreed now i mean obviously but he was a pioneer and particularly the president of the united states well i think as far as judging people who passed under present circumstances i think most historians and most people who think about this would generally agree that it's not if you really believe that in the end in that kind of atmosphere that we live now i mean the statues are being 2 faced abolitionists are being defaced ok francis scott key ok i'm sorry to interrupt but i think that you know we have to be very careful that's why we're doing this program well i think it's an indictment against women are chemistries traditionally hot degeneres and that we've been doing i think ever

since we've been attached to monuments throughout the u.s. as we valorize individuals and i think that's always a problem i mean if you're going to position marty minute around a particular individual's memory the idea behind that is this is a mess this is a person's message histories to how do you suppose to perceive them now i can't speak for all protesters or people who are facing monuments but one thing that i would see. just as you chianti judge people based upon the circumstances of their own time and what i or i'm seeing with you know discussions about washington or jefferson is not that what they eventually did was a terrible thing as far as writing the constitution or the declaration of independence which eventually will open up freedom and liberty to numerous people is that they were talking about freedom and liberty while it's so the the indictment against them is that they were hypocritical in their entire process how

they conceptualize freedom and what's asked suggest to descendants of slaves people or descendants of indigenous people or anyone else who's been marginalized in the press this country is that there were a number of men who were not willing to extend the full benefits of all that really they were talking about to start. and they were aware of that at the time and if you look at the debates they look at the federalist papers you look at the they hit the bases even of the declaration of independence i mean basically we're going to kick the can down the road they were over where they can say they didn't know any and they were very strong abolitionists and there were those there of course works on that jump in here we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue work its question on statutes that say. throughout its history how does this with the self-proclaimed islamic state a terrorist group ever had up to 30000 foreigners from all over the world to fight

for them. were worthless if you are or 5. 1000 of russian citizens left their country to join the terrorists often bringing wives and children with them. from the gulf that is the 1st i knew. that some who thought. all new to the. hundreds of children and widows were held captive all disappear at. play dates. back. to. back in russia those children's families might have such home. is you'll be via reflection of reality.

in a world transformed. what will make you feel safe. isolation full community. are you going the right way or are you being led so. what is true what is faith. in the world corrupted you need to descend. to join us in the depths. or a mate in the shallowest. used as a war of the more fleecing of the polluted more the major issue here the. time to put it on the guy. was only as a name for

a list of the most. of the news is so. those of you saw. the point was moved to used to move the book with their skulls discovered that those with use of this is a 1000000000 here soon. well you know the media of course is. welcome across all things are considered i really don't remind you we're discussing statues i. was going to chloe in new york. at the very end of the 1st part of the program we're talking basically about the founding fathers they the framers in your mind in

this atmosphere is the whole bill of rights in question now because some of the. signatories and writers of those of the bill of rights were slave owners now and i have to say i think on this point i disagree with the professor i don't think i think if the standard is do not put up statutes of any human being period i think that's a consistent standard but if the standard is do not put up statutes steaming the founding fathers because they were hypocrites i think that's a bit of a slippery slope because who knows that we will be able to esteem our own values and 2020 and moving forward who knows that we were not also proved to be hypocrites and trying to esteem the values of morality and equality moving forward and i think that the statues that were put up to honor jefferson and washington and the founding fathers in contrast to those put up to honor the soldiers of the confederacy were not put up just all of break their vices law to celebrate their

virtues and to celebrate the ideals that they represented in spite of the fact that they fell short of those ideals and i don't think that there's anything wrong with that and i also don't think that there's anything wrong with putting up a plaque next to them to highlight the hypocrisy and to expand upon the complexity of their of their lives and what they did in the brutality that they did uphold but . again if the standard is to not put up statutes of people who are hypocrites then there will be no statutes of anyone and perhaps that is the way we should move forward and that's an argument that that's worth making perhaps but again i don't personally have a problem with statutes that were put up or not of the founding fathers but total sex a lot of people do and this is one of the things like i said at the very outset i don't need it out to be can can better it's that isn't and money means that all their own but a lot of it there are people that do it and what bothers me is that it would seem

during the last few weeks is that this is kind of bled over to all spout views that are somehow. a day are going to fight with the establishment or traditional history and it seems to me this is a slippery slope that people are going down i mean some of the graffiti written on some of these statues of it's written by people that are illiterate i mean do they know what they're doing or is this just some kind of rage go ahead well i think once again in my view in time he goes through american education system and then i think a lot of younger people still lie to him that they have not received the full context of what the u.s. has done and allowed people to do i mean the fact that a traitorous region was then reclaimed and descended in their envisions to put up consider monuments to not just within that region but all over the united states i mean there are reflections of this in california you must figures for our lives to the degree that what we are seeing is

a number of people feel that this is something that should have been it should have been reckoned with and it should not it's should not have been tolerated it's rather early 20th century in the war was over a number of people wanted there to be alive and even in the textbooks of that time that for trade a very benign version of slavery and so when i say that we have a lot of reminders of the confederacy invest in france. in american history now in regard to the degree to which they should be moved to museums i sense we also have to recognize that moving these to museums requires a lot of money and a lot of museums and suggested that they receive calls from state legislatures who say look we want to reduce marna keepsake and they say no we're not equipped we don't have the finances so if the state wants to actually invest in the preservation of monuments and build museums tell the truth about the confederacy i'm all for it it's just that i think what's happened within the united states is that government funding has not been sufficient to actually sell the history of the

united states for those who go to these places to try to learn about it so what i see with what young people are doing is that they might be destroying monuments as a way to get attention to i think larger issues this might be symbolic and literal toppling the confederacy in its nunnery but also ensuring that structural change is actually implemented by the government it's clearly what about the federal statues because we've been talking all about statues that are in cities and. they're under a local administration in control and this is turning into a really heated debate right now because some of these that she is are are federally owned and they're protected in the taxpayer subsidises them how do we deal with that i mean would you like to see congressional action an executive order how would you see this play out. yeah i mean it's an interesting question in terms of the process that would need to be embarked upon to take down problematic

statutes that are put up under the jurisdiction of the federal government i'm sure that's a conversation we can have in congress we've had congressional testimony is what's a guide to reparations for example i'm sure there can be another kind of session in congress that where we can talk about this and perhaps secure that finding that for us or just mentioned to put that in place i don't see why it should be such a barrier in theory just because we're talking about statutes that are held under federal jurisdiction why do we stay with you why is this so how can he now i mean. here. i mean we just got to see i think it's been a complete 23 years that we've been talking about now is often only very very i mean we are living in an extremely charged political environment and obviously we're going to win elections is this part of this also keep going well yes i think it's the election cycle it's also the case that we are a nation that has been dealing with the adverse effects of coal that 19 we've been

you know trapped in our homes many of us are unemployed many of us are trying to figure out where we're going to get food where we're going to get work and then we have these racial tensions that are sort of put into the spotlight because of the murder of george floyd the murder of almost arbor a the murder of brown and teller and so this creates a cascading effect where i many people feel that enough is enough the compounds the situation and people go out and they many of them rightfully protest because this is just too much to deal with but on the other hand i would have to caution against how some of those protests might manifest themselves in some nihilistic pathological tendencies whereby we are saying to your earlier point folks try to pull down not only sections that belong to the confederacy but that's just actually represent emancipate. actually represent the antithesis of the confederacy west of jess that for some of the people who are pulling down these statutes there is no

moral ethic at all i mean it begs a question as to how one can claim a promote the taking down of a statue of jefferson davis for example and also promote the taking out of a statute that celebrates the emancipation of slavery or of slaves or other that is a contradiction in terms that suggest and illiteracy as you say and actually supports the professor's point that there has been or there doesn't need to be an indictment of the educational system in this country 'd but but much more much more consistently and much more thorough than perhaps we thought of not just to the extent that we critique obviously and condemn the confederacy but to the extent that people are even aware that you know frederick douglass and dr martin luther king jr invoked thomas jefferson in order to criticize thomas jefferson and so we need to be educated not only on the historical facts on the complexity and nuance of our statesmen and women who lead us so i agree with them for sometimes of the education that men but it's far more reaching that well i think all 3 of those are

uniformly. even one of the reasons why a very different reason if i may let me go he. said on fox news he's a black man who here he said if change doesn't float we will burn this system. well agree with the rhetoric i mean i think he's probably talking metaphorically i mean burning the system could connote a number of things i mean if the system is an equal if it does mistreat people and it does marginalized people then that is a system that you want to get rid of and so i'd have to hear the whole concert so what mr newsome was saying but i think a lot of people have a similar sentiment that if if our education our health care systems are failing if our political process is failing certain groups that is a system you want to get rid of now burn the system i think has maybe some rhetoric used to invoke

a seriousness of the nature of what i assume that he needs is that you bring the system by placing leaders in place that are actually going to change or rather than what we might call the corporatists who have made a number of promises but as soon as they get into congress the senate or the presidency they essentially just align with the same people who are there who have made laws that are largely been some in social change rather than literal so i agree with the sentiment that burning the system might be 11 way forward in actually remedying the process and you know america will no longer just be the history wasteland in which people for sweep things under the rug which rather than actually deal with them in the classroom well being a train has part of his story when i hear things like you know we will burn the system it's revolutionary rhetoric and i'll tell you in the modern period at least revolutions usually go well they never work out they end up getting their own right

but i just that i feel like i understand what you're saying but i think that many people saw the civil rights movement as a wake suburban system going to you know what as it was going to burn jim crow was going to overthrow it it was going to eradicate it and so i think there is a certain social context that we always have to be mindful of what people say. i mean but there was a goal i mean like the voting rights act i mean these are positives babies ok i don't know what the goals are except for burning down and people are angry and there's some people use it for criminal activity ok that's something that i find i'm exactly will but i agree with you that the civil rights movement is a model that had positive goals and they were achieved and we should all be proud of that leader if the movement remains under sharia and there are reasons for people to question that that aren't true so if people are saying we're going to bruce of sumburgh not replace it with something that is

a problem is not going to be changed when we finish up for us no i mean i would i would echo tyler's last comment i think that there needs to be a moral ethic at the heart of a movement and it needs to be very clearly defined because without that this will just have as you said a tendency to eat itself to the center and to nihilistic rage when i actually hear the term burn the system i am reminded of the film black panther and let's kill mongar also wanted to burn the system down and by that may have destroying everything that his ancestors have created and that was obviously a problem and didn't end so well for him so i agree that we must you know and it's us and our and and those who are protesting for right but we must also make sure that they're educated out and literate enough to uphold that moral ethic of justice and equality and high regard and to access to it that you know when i when i hear burn burn it down i reminds me of a place where i live here in russia and that's when the pollster dick said it and

they earned it down and they brought a. totalitarian regime that lasted for 70 years so be careful what you wish for i guess ok that's all the time we have i want to thank my guests in new york and in las vegas i want to thank our viewers for watching as iraqis see you next time remember. she stressed to. listen and i'm going to ask at the middle of the turnout that you have to. the other question was to your shame that that is the case that is she's a c.e.o. which quite a lot of. damage which she never happened now look what you've

seen in the investments you took a moment a man or to share. or to close an issue if you're my if you're going to contribute . to the mr ellsworth support of. what i'm. for fishing to be a valuable piece that it's a studio actually a personal leave home for sure it's just the same spirit. expressed.

court hearing gets under way in moscow supporters of alexina. for failing to open a probe into his alleged poisoning the nerve agent. says it's waiting for germany to hand over. back with a vengeance france. called for covert infections which is facing the virus spread faster than any other country. in american media raises the russian meddling alarm again after u.s. intelligence report is nixed last minute by the department of homeland security.