Connect with us

Culture

Virginia Counties Vote to Keep Confederate Monuments

American history lives on for now.

Published

on

Not talked about much during the electoral mayhem of the last week has been the decision by several counties in Virginia vto keep their Confederate monuments in place.

Sophie Mann of Just the News reported that this was conducted through ballot measures in rural counties during Election Day. Mann did call attention to the fact that these resolutions are not legally-binding but are resolutions that signal voter preferences to boards of supervisors.

Votes to keep the monuments reached over 70 percent in four of the counties. The levels of support ranged from 55 percent in Charles City County to 87 percent in Tazewell, according to initial results.

Trending: HMM: Michelle Obama was Desperate Not to be Photographed in a Bikini as First Lady

The ballot measures that were approved will have local authorities provide residents 30-day notice for any public hearings where officials plan on taking down monuments. In addition, the resolution would require officials to offer monuments they plan on removing to local organizations.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Prior to 2020, local governments in Virginia were prohibited by law from taking down Confederate statues. Earlier in the year, new Democratic majorities in the General Assembly scrapped this policy by passing a bill that gives localities the power to take down the memorials. In addition, the bill provides localities the ability to hold local referendums that give voters the opportunity to decide if they want to keep the monuments.

Cities such as Norfolk and Richmond were quick to take down these monuments during the protests that followed the death of George Floyd. The six rural counties of Charles City, Franklin, Halifax, Lunenburg, Tazewell, and Warren were the ones who let the voters decide this question, which ultimately led to the monuments’ preservation.

“We as a board want to hear the citizens. We can hear and see what the will of the constituents is,” Travis Hackworth, the Tazewell county supervisor, said to a local outlet.

“Whatever citizens say is where I am going,” Tazewell Supervisor Mike Hymes told the Bluefield Daily Telegraph.

Republicans voters in these areas were satisfied with the county’s decision to preserve American history. “I voted no on that — leave it where it is,” stated Steve Thompson, a Republican voter living in Franklin. “That’s our history. Too many people are trying to remove our history, either through the courts or through violence. This is the proper way to do it — put it on the ballot.”

The Biden/Harris ticket has allegedly won the election, which will likely be litigated in the courts due to suspect cases of voter fraud and irregularities. Should the Biden/Harris results hold, Americans should expect a massive assault by cultural radicals on virtually all artifacts of America history.

Localities should proactively pass resolutions to preserve monuments from these cultural radicals.

Free Speech

YOUR NEW MASTER: Twitter’s Head of Conversational Safety, a “Young, Queer Asian-American Businesswoman,” is “Rethinking” the Concept of User Safety

Do you trust someone like her to make Twitter “a safer place”?

Published

on

The media company Protocol, a sister site of Politico, recently published an article about Twitter’s new “head of product for conversational safety,” Christine Su. It claims that Su, a “young, queer Asian-American businesswoman,” is revolutionizing what “user safety” on social media means.

Twitter hired Su around six months ago to be in charge of “what might be the most difficult task on Twitter,” despite having no apparent experience in politics, programming, and media relations. But Twitter seems to like her for her “creative” and “somewhat radical new ideas” about user safety.

“As a queer woman of color who is an Asian American in tech in rural America, that experience is a very intersectional one. I’ve had plenty of experiences moving through spaces where I wanted more safety,” Su said.

Protocol writes that Su’s vision incorporates “transformative and procedural justice.” Transformative justice ostensibly refers to a non-retributive form of repairing harm done to someone and preventing it from happening again; procedural justice to enacting a set of rules that “make harm rarer in the first place.”

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

This all sounds nice and dandy—but beware. So-called transformative and procedural justice will not benefit you, but will crush you. Anything that’s perceived as “harmful” against “women and people from marginalized groups” can and will be used to censor you. Christine Su may reassuringly claim that “the point is not to make the entire world a safe space,” but she’s open about the fact that she will help give the Coalition of the Fringes more control over what people are allowed to do and say on Twitter.

Examples from the article:

  • Creating an audio hangout feature called “Spaces,” which will allow users to determine who is allowed to participate, as well as who can speak and when. (Note that it’s being tested on “women and marginalized groups of people” first.)
  • Potentially doubling down on functions that “encourage people to read content before reposting it.” (Which is exclusively done to censor or limit the reach of conservative and other right-wing content.)
  • Building tools that “create private pathways for apologies, forgiveness and deescalation.” (The finer details are still a work in progress according to Su.)
  • Defining what a “meaningful conversation” is. (Would people like Su think that anything right-wingers say or believe belongs in a “meaningful conversation”? Let’s just say I wouldn’t bet money on it…)

You know full well that a company like Facebook would shortly follow suit. After all, it’s not just Twitter that Su is “revolutionizing,” but the concept of social media itself. Figure out where all this is heading.

Now is as good a time as ever to plug our Parler:

Follow Big League Politics on Parler: @BigLeaguePol

Follow Evan James on Parler: @CatholicEJames

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending