Whoops, delete delete

Isn't the ideal way to deal with the part of history one doesn't like. This may be a bit outdated, but it's worth a look.

I'm sure those more eloquent than I have already made this comparison, but I don't see how the destruction of the Mount Rushmore sculptures is any different from the destruction of the Buddha sculpture. (Specifically the one at Bamiyan - now I've a name to go with the mental image.) Both are instances of one group destroying an icon belonging to another group out of sheer intolerance.

Except there is a difference, isn't there? If I remember correctly, the Bamiyan incident involved two separate groups, in religion, ideology, and possible nationality (that third point is something I'm not certain about). A sacred natural site to one people became a sculpture that reflected the ideals of another people - a destruction, yes, and insensitive, I'll grant. But Rushmore was a creation as well, and what's happening now destroys more than it creates. It'll be sad indeed if anything similar comes to pass for these heads that speak more than they talk, only this time, the sheer intolerance involved is applied by those who belong to the nation it represents. For that sort of thought to even cross the minds of those in the leadership of that nation is reprehensible.

I'll say it again - deleting a social media post in an age of screenshots doesn't change what happened. Neither will destroying Rushmore.

Though, if the reminder helps, they did find a fix for Bamiyan.

7/3 - If the land is still the legal property of the Sioux, then do they choose to destroy more of it or use it to highlight their own history? (Magellan.)