there was some discussion about how the saint louis arch was a symbol of white supremacy and like sure, tear the fucker down, but like it dont even make the top ten list for places in the us that should be taken down. heres my list, feel free to disagree.

  1. stone mountain. its like confederate mt rushmore.

  2. mt rushmore. i dont even need to explain this one.

  3. the national mall. the whitehouse, congress building, washington monument, lincoln monument, jefferson monument, arguably the arlington cemetery and mt vernon, basically just all of dc and the parts of virginia that used to be a part of it. the whole city is a monument to white supremacy and i would love to see the majority black residents vote on what should be torn down

  4. the ivy league universities. harvard, yale, princeton, etc. the ivy league schools in particular created a class of ultra wealthy white upper class that can only be gotten rid of by abolishing the schools that created them.

  5. guantanamo bay, technically in cuba, de facto under american control. now that i think about it critically this is probably worse than mt rushmore but like im not changing the orders, I already committed.

  6. the alamo. the people who died here fought for slavery, like nations are bad and all but the land stolen from mexico in 1848 has caused a lot of material harm to the latine community and the american south west should be returned to mexico.

  7. hoover dam. im not saying hydro power is entirely bad, but like the whole region its sustaining shouldnt exist, las vegas shouldnt exist, even if you got rid of the livestock that makes up the majority of the farming along the colorado, growing vegan food here wouldnt be worth it. this region of the united states sustained by hoover dam is overcapacity, mexico doesnt get nearly enough water, not trying to make a malthusian argument here but maybe dont build suburbs in the desert?

  8. niagra falls. total shithole, stripmalls everywhere, the place should be a national park, the canadian side is actually worse. not even opposed to the hydropower here, just think everything else about it is just awful, no wonder why so many people commit suicide here.

  9. la river. YOU TURNED A RIVER INTO CONCRETE! im sure theres a lot of shit in la that deserves destruction for its societal or historical harm, but like this shit is worse than anything i can think of in la. the car culture there is too abstract to put on the list, the beverly hills are fine with me because hasan lives there, maybe skid row, but yall literally paved a river.

  10. disneyworld. i had to mention florida. im glad the state is going to be submerged underwater due to climate change. there's just so many bad places here that deserve to sink. the villages, the maralago, jacksonville, the cuban expat community that left during castro. the whole state is like a nursing home having a rave on vicodin. but disneyworld, it elicits a poisonous amount of nostalgia, look at the star wars, and look at the amusement ride based off the song of the south, go see anamatronic trump that was clearly made to be hillary clinton and had to be redesigned last minute, eat the food that would be illegal to sell in any civilized country, adults that go here for fun need re-education, like something is broke in them.

well thats my list.

  • GarbageShoot [he/him]
    ·
    11 months ago

    I hate Mt. Rushmore, but tearing it down seems like not a good solution when the main issue was that it was a sacred site stolen from Native Americans and defaced. I defer to whatever the Sioux say on the matter.

    • NewHexbearNewMe [they/them]
      ·
      11 months ago

      “We are now being forced to witness the lashing of our land with pomp, arrogance, and fire, hoping our sacred lands survive,” Frazier said. “This brand on our flesh needs to be removed, and I am willing to do it free of charge to the United States, by myself if I must.”

      https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/02/us/cheyenne-river-sioux-tribe-mount-rushmore-trnd/index.html

      • GarbageShoot [he/him]
        ·
        11 months ago

        That reads to me as "remove the faces, maybe the whole recognizable shape of the heads, leave the rest of the physical location as intact as possible."

        Oh, so you thought OP meant 'tear down the whole mountain?'

        I don't know, but "Mt. Rushmore" is the name of the mountain, not just the faces on it.

        If Stone Mountain was on that scale and not just a shitty little relief (and assuming it's not like a heritage site otherwise like Rushmore is) and people wanted to just cut off the mountain and put a little school or a community center on the plateau, I'd support it. Since it is just a shitty little relief, it would make more sense to level the relief and maybe carve a new one.

        • NewHexbearNewMe [they/them]
          ·
          11 months ago

          I don't know, but "Mt. Rushmore" is the name of the mountain, not just the faces on it.

          I mean technically but in context I felt it was pretty clear. When has anyone ever seriously advocated for leveling a mountain because they didn't like something that was built on top of it

          But yeah, point being I agree, leave it to the people whose land it is