To me, personally, there are no differences between a historical statue and a historical book.
They are both there to remind us of our past, good or bad. The book tells the story, the statue is a reminder that it happened.
We do enjoy the good because we prevailed. But the bad is there to remind us of a lesson to be learned.
To remove statues because they are reminders of a bad event or situation or person is like burning the book that tells the story.
And often times, the way a statue or a book is perceived is based on ideology or personal opinion, due to one's culture or background.
Here is where it gets tricky: Where does one draw the line?
They are both there to remind us of our past, good or bad. The book tells the story, the statue is a reminder that it happened.
We do enjoy the good because we prevailed. But the bad is there to remind us of a lesson to be learned.
To remove statues because they are reminders of a bad event or situation or person is like burning the book that tells the story.
And often times, the way a statue or a book is perceived is based on ideology or personal opinion, due to one's culture or background.
Here is where it gets tricky: Where does one draw the line?
~ Today is the youngest you'll ever be again ~