Time to tear down that statue? We need calm, respectful debates about removing monuments

We’re familiar with the figure of speech, “putting something on a pedestal.” It means to adore, idolize or desire to emulate. But it also carries a literal definition that implies the act of creating a statue and placing it on public display.

Usually those two definitions are compatible. We erect a monument honoring a person or event that we’d like to frequently recall.

However, sometimes those actions and values conflict.

A certain historical figure might be considered offensive. Or a monument might commemorate a moment in history now deemed shameful.

It’s easy to see why this happens. Cultures evolve. Behaviors that were once commonplace —think putting a dunce cap on a struggling student’s head — seem barbaric when viewed from today’s standards.

Meanwhile, previously voiceless populations are flexing their collective muscles, demanding the equal treatment they are promised under the law.

The process is similar to our personal metamorphosis. We’re all at some point along the conveyor belt of life, passing through childhood, teenage years, young adulthood, middle age and beyond.

With each phase our thought processes shift. Experiences challenge and fine-tune our morals. Emotional maturity allows us to process events from a novel perspective.

The statue controversy doesn’t signify malice or evil. Rather, it’s a signal we’ve grown and should re-evaluate which societal norms are relevant and which should go out with the trash.

It’s time to channel our patriotic Marie Kondo and ask, “Does this statue or monument bring me and my community joy? Or has it outlived its usefulness?”

To this end, I propose the creation of Small Taskforces Assessing True Underlying Excellence (STATUE). Teams consisting of bipartisan members would gather to rate each monument on a scale of 1 to 3, focusing on the following questions:

• Is this person or event considered admirable by today’s generally held standards?
• Does it represent inspirational values?
• Is it free of ethnic bias?

The aim is rational, apolitical consideration rather than mob-incited tear-downs.

After all, it’s never advisable to make decisions in the midst of blinding rage. High-scoring statues and monuments are welcome to stay.

Those that score poorly should be dismantled or removed.

Of course, there’ll always be differing opinions. But with STATUE, all viewpoints are welcome. Calm, respectful debate is encouraged.

The very process of arriving at a conclusion can be an avenue for fostering dialogue and healing cross-cultural divide.

To those who plead historical significance no matter how heinous the acts, I hear you. Your views count as much as any others.

Still, the past can’t be allowed to ruin the present. It must hobble to the sidelines so that compassion and acceptance run the show.

While some evaluations will be easy, others could drag on for years.

Not to worry. It simply means they’re more complex and can’t be solved in a snap.

Extra thought and debate are needed before a verdict is announced. Even then, no decision is perfect.

We’re flawed humans, after all. Being open-minded, kind and civil is often the best that we can do.