Most confederate statues are cheap crap bulk built all over the place sometime after the civil war as a sort of long term propaganda. They aren't historical, they are reputation management.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 16 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

You should add that the "sometime after" was also often sometime after WWII, so they are not very historical, look ugly and take space.

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz 4 points 10 months ago

I didn't want to be more specific than my memory lol, thanks for the detail.

[–] vox@sopuli.xyz 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

like the lenin statues that used to be all over ukraine and other post-soviet countries.

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I actually don't know anything about those. Were they put there while the soviet union still existed/built by the soviet union themselves, or were they put there later after by some fan of the soviet union? If the goal is to keep what is historical, regardless of political context, that would be the key distinction in my opinion.

[–] vox@sopuli.xyz 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

soviet union (mass-produced and) placed them literally everywhere.
there's at least one lenin or stalin statue per major street, some countries are just starting removing them, but it's a really long process due to sheer amount of them, regulations and stuff.
the amount of these things is somewhat absurd

[–] callouscomic@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago

I'd argue most statues are some form of propaganda that likely don't tell whole stories.