As the threshold for ‘offensive material’ continues to expand, there’s very little doubt that it occurs without some deliberate force; comprenez-vous?

Offense that is “manufactured” is not offense — n’est-ce pas?

Also, I see your point but it’s irrelevant to the argument, as those who disapprove of Confederate anything generally wield rather considerable social and political power. Those who defend the notion are generally restricted to 7 states and are most heavily concentrated amongst the rural poor.

I’m of the firm and full belief that the burden for change remains with the accusers

This assumes that the accusers have the same institutional power as the accused and are in an equal position to effect change.

But — to take an example from the moment of the Confederacy — this is obviously not always the case. Slaves in the antebellum South had no legal standing and could only effect change by violent insurrection, which always failed because special measures were taken to ensure that slaves could not organize. They could not effect change because they were specifically and violently oppressed.

To give another example, in the present moment, the power of the poor to affect legislation directly pertaining to their lives is limited, because their access to information is curtailed by lack of internet access and newspaper or magazine subscriptions. Their leisure time is also limited by having to work at multiple jobs or work long hours at a low wage in order to make rent; additionally, they tend to have have less access to conveniences like dishwashers, laundry facilities inside the home, and reliable cars. It is therefore difficult for the poor to enter political life precisely because they are poor.

So it’s a little bit ridiculous to say that the burden of change is on the accusers. Don’t those of us who are standing around watching also have a moral obligation?

I’m also confused as to why finding something offensive is insignificant to you — but that is another issue.