I think I've been in favor of irreverence, in general, through most of my adult life. So, the whole issue of people tearing down statues, built with tax money, and placed on the government's stolen land conflicts me somewhat.
The thing is, if you're a person who is going to damage a statue of Lincoln, or defend the people doing it, you need to ask yourself why you're doing it.
My impression is that most people who are doing these things, or supporting the activities, not only think that they're more enlightened than these figures, but that they would have been better people in the same time.
Basically, it seems like a lot of people think that, if they were born in 1815, as a white man in America, they would be on the right side of history. They think that they would be the ultra-liberal of the time who would an abolitionist and have a few trans friends.
Gotta break it to ya -- no, you wouldn't have been that person. Most of us wouldn't have been that person. Fighting for liberal values (I'm using "liberal" in the classical sense) takes more courage than most of us have. It also requires irreverence for the authorities in your era. It requires a demand for heterodoxy.
Namely, if you're a person who thinks that, if you were born in 1815, that you wouldn't just be a Lincoln, or a William Lloyd Garrison, or a John Brown -- but that you'd be better than them -- and you aren't a free speech absolutist, you're a charlatan and a narcissist.
I think it's mostly related to boredom .an activist would leave a message there I think