Confederate Monuments

[floplag]

46 minutes ago, Thomas said:

Bullshit it being a red herring. If you want to remove the sins of the past the confederacy is only the tip of the iceberg. Washington is nothing but a celebration of conquering a land from previous tenants and the achievements built on the back of slaves.

As is almost literally every other nation on the planet, frankly im sick of this argument, its bullshit.  

Virtually every modern nation began as a tribe of peoples somewhere that banded together for whatever reason and grew beyond its limits.  Almost all of the time that growth has been painful and some other peoples have been lost to history.  This is every nation on every continent of the world, literally.   This argument that we are somehow the bastards of the world is so invalid its not even worth consideration.  In fact you could easily argue that we were more humane to the native Americans than most as we gave them land and their own sovereignty, something most conquering peoples did not.    

Oh and slavery was not what built this nation, that is the grossest of gross exaggerations.   You pick one horrific part of our history that lasted for less than 50 years of the almost 250 we have had as a nation and thats all you count?  ridiculous 

[Jason]

4 minutes ago, Adam said:

We should get rid of all statutes, flags, etc... 

awwwwwww

[mtangelsfan]

Just now, Jason said:

awwwwwww

I hate country music.  I'm offended, take it down.

[mtangelsfan]

5 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

Imagine being black and going to a court house, hoping for justice.  How would you feel about your chances if you had to march confederate shit being displayed as respectable symbolism. I feel like I wouldn't feel great about my odds. 

This doesn't seem like a difficult excerxise to me MT.  Put yourself in their shoes.  That stuff doesn't belong on public property. 

Feelings are not facts.  There are a lot of things that could offend me if I let them.  What is next after statues?  

[UndertheHalo]

Just now, mtangelsfan said:

I hate country music.  I'm offended, take it down.

Come on man.  You are over simplifying this in such an incredible way.  Some things have more  meaning then others.  

Do you really accept that the black position on the confederacy is the same as someone generally being offended by something ?

[UndertheHalo]

1 minute ago, mtangelsfan said:

Feelings are not facts.  There are a lot of things that could offend me if I let them.  What is next after statues?  

Fine then.  The Jews shouldn't let nazi stuff offend them.

i think you're really on the wrong side of this. 

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

I wonder how people would feel if any foreign country wanted to tear down a US monument that's in their country.  I'm sure somebody in one of the countries we've erected a monument in doesn't want it there.  I definitely understand opposing any new confederate monuments being put up but I don't quite see why now it's a big issue to take down ones that have been up for decades.  I realize to some it's a sign of oppression yet to others (some, not all) it's a sign of something else that has nothing to do with slavery.  

 

[Thomas]

27 minutes ago, floplag said:

As is almost literally every other nation on the planet, frankly im sick of this argument, its bullshit.  

Virtually every modern nation began as a tribe of peoples somewhere that banded together for whatever reason and grew beyond its limits.  Almost all of the time that growth has been painful and some other peoples have been lost to history.  This is every nation on every continent of the world, literally.   This argument that we are somehow the bastards of the world is so invalid its not even worth consideration.  In fact you could easily argue that we were more humane to the native Americans than most as we gave them land and their own sovereignty, something most conquering peoples did not.    

Oh and slavery was not what built this nation, that is the grossest of gross exaggerations.   You pick one horrific part of our history that lasted for less than 50 years of the almost 250 we have had as a nation and thats all you count?  ridiculous 

So there were no slaves prior to the management change in 1776?  Regardless my issue is more the hypocrisy of singling out the Confederacy. If we're going to ban the celebration of their leaders there are a whole list of others past leaders that would seem similarly worthy of such treatment. If however we cherry pick, with an unsurprising correlation to specific geography, historic regional rivalries and current voting patterns, it would seem to value one historically oppressed population over others. I have no trouble the government being accommodating for historical sensitivities. But it really has to be much more universal in approach. Some on here seem more interested in scratching the vendetta itch than making positive changes.

But how do you approach such an endeavor. To say it would be politically subjective is an understatement. Would you still celebrate FDR despite placing Americans in camps? Would you feel hesitation to punish him because you support the policies he supported or the overall good he did and would be concerned that him falling out of favor would be detrimental to how history views these factors?  Would we keep renaming airports back and forth depending on who is in office? It would seem common sense how to memorialize soldiers on each side without glorifying the politics and motivations that lead to the war. It however seems far more complicated than it would initially appear. Especially when all sides are reducing themselves to the lowest common denominator.

[Thomas]

Also 1865 - 1776 != less than 50 years.

[red321]

American history is challenging, men who are celebrated for doing great things, also did things that when viewed from a historical perspective paint a less than rosy picture.

The Confederacy and Civil War is not one of those moments. The statues and monuments to those moments in our history were not designed to celebrate a great moment in our history. They were erected to instill fear in a large segment of the population. They were erected to spin history as part of the "Cult of the Lost Cause" and to try and turn a war about maintaining the enslavement of people into something heroic.

We don't put up monuments celebrating Manzanar and Japanese internment. They put up a memorial and education center discussing it in a frank and open manner. It's a sobering place. We don't put up a monument celebrating the trail of tears. 

I posted the video of Mitch Landrieau previously, who had spoke about why New Orleans was removing those monuments. It was a powerful statement. For those who prefer to read, here is a link to the transcipt. I've cut out some passages as well

http://pulsegulfcoast.com/2017/05/transcript-of-new-orleans-mayor-landrieus-address-on-confederate-monuments

But there are also other truths about our city that we must confront. New Orleans was America’s largest slave market: a port where hundreds of thousands of souls were brought, sold and shipped up the Mississippi River to lives of forced labor of misery of rape, of torture.

America was the place where nearly 4,000 of our fellow citizens were lynched, 540 alone in Louisiana; where the courts enshrined ‘separate but equal’; where Freedom riders coming to New Orleans were beaten to a bloody pulp....

...And it immediately begs the questions: why there are no slave ship monuments, no prominent markers on public land to remember the lynchings or the slave blocks; nothing to remember this long chapter of our lives; the pain, the sacrifice, the shame … all of it happening on the soil of New Orleans....

There is a difference between remembrance of history and reverence of it. For America and New Orleans, it has been a long, winding road, marked by great tragedy and great triumph. But we cannot be afraid of our truth.

As President George W. Bush said at the dedication ceremony for the National Museum of African American History & Culture, “A great nation does not hide its history. It faces its flaws and corrects them.”....

....These statues are not just stone and metal. They are not just innocent remembrances of a benign history. These monuments purposefully celebrate a fictional, sanitized Confederacy; ignoring the death, ignoring the enslavement, and the terror that it actually stood for. After the Civil War, these statues were a part of that terrorism as much as a burning cross on someone’s lawn; they were erected purposefully to send a strong message to all who walked in their shadows about who was still in charge in this city....

....Another friend asked me to consider these four monuments from the perspective of an African American mother or father trying to explain to their fifth grade daughter who Robert E. Lee is and why he stands atop of our beautiful city. Can you do it?

Can you look into that young girl’s eyes and convince her that Robert E. Lee is there to encourage her? Do you think she will feel inspired and hopeful by that story? Do these monuments help her see a future with limitless potential? Have you ever thought that if her potential is limited, yours and mine are too?...

....And in the second decade of the 21st century, asking African Americans — or anyone else — to drive by property that they own; occupied by reverential statues of men who fought to destroy the country and deny that person’s humanity seems perverse and absurd....

....The Confederacy was on the wrong side of history and humanity. It sought to tear apart our nation and subjugate our fellow Americans to slavery. This is the history we should never forget and one that we should never again put on a pedestal to be revered.

[Thomas]

Just now, red321 said:

We don't put up monuments celebrating Manzanar and Japanese internment. They put up a memorial and education center discussing it in a frank and open manner. It's a sobering place. We don't put up a monument celebrating the trail of tears.

[Thomas]

2 minutes ago, red321 said:

We don't put up a monument celebrating the trail of tears.

[Tank]

3 hours ago, Kevin said:

As a big civil war history nerd, I struggle with this a lot. 

The only solution I can come up with is not so much a removal completely but a relocation to battlefields, museums, or confederate cemeteries. They might already be doing this but I haven't followed too closely on what happens after the removal. 

The ironic thing about the removal of  General Lee's statue is, although he fought for an unjust cause (he was supportive of blacks being educated after the war but opposed to them voting) ,he was a great example of trying to reconcile a divided country, not constantly trying to tear it down. 

Also a good read. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/updates/robert-e-lee-opposed-confederate-monuments

i'm right on board with you on this, kevin. 

i don't like seeing the confederate flag flying over state capitols or incorporated into a state flag. put flags and statues in the appropriate places you've mentioned and i think that's a reasonable solution.

[Thomas]

How do we deal with Thomas Jefferson? The man who wrote the Declaration of Independence, held practically every meaningful office, doubled the size of the country. Oh and was a slave owner, now considered by many a serial rapist, and of course the inconvenient aspect of the native population who would be affected by the expansion.

[Jason]

A little off topic but this is in Seattle

[Jason]

1 minute ago, Thomas said:

How do we deal with Thomas Jefferson? The man who wrote the Declaration of Independence, held practically every meaningful office, doubled the size of the country. Oh and was a slave owner, now considered by many a serial rapist, and of course the inconvenient aspect of the native population who would be affected by the expansion.

Don't worry. We will work our way towards that one

[red321]

24 minutes ago, Thomas said:

 

25 minutes ago, red321 said:

American history is challenging, men who are celebrated for doing great things, also did things that when viewed from a historical perspective paint a less than rosy picture.

The Confederacy and Civil War is not one of those moments. The statues and monuments to those moments in our history were not designed to celebrate a great moment in our history. They were erected to instill fear in a large segment of the population. They were erected to spin history as part of the "Cult of the Lost Cause" and to try and turn a war about maintaining the enslavement of people into something heroic.

When they put a big giant statue to Roosevelt at Manzanar, that might be relevant.

 

 

[red321]

31 minutes ago, Thomas said:

[Thomas]

2 minutes ago, red321 said:

When they put a big giant statue to Roosevelt at Manzanar, that might be relevant.

Just verifying. So you have little to no problem with FDR being celebrated?

[Thomas]

2 minutes ago, red321 said:

Thanks for proving my point. It's not like I need the help but every bit does help.

[UndertheHalo]

aren't we muddying this discussion a bit by trying to compare Jefferson and FDR to confederate icons ?

[Thomas]

3 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

aren't we muddying this discussion a bit by trying to compare Jefferson and FDR to confederate icons ?

History is nothing but muddy. If those that want to take down the monuments can't even answer the question of where the line is drawn, how will it seem to be anything but another example of partisan and regional antagonism?

[mtangelsfan]

27 minutes ago, red321 said:

 

When they put a big giant statue to Roosevelt at Manzanar, that might be relevant.

 

 

So by that reasoning a confederate flag in South Orange County would be no problem.

[floplag]

2 hours ago, Thomas said:

So there were no slaves prior to the management change in 1776?  Regardless my issue is more the hypocrisy of singling out the Confederacy. If we're going to ban the celebration of their leaders there are a whole list of others past leaders that would seem similarly worthy of such treatment. If however we cherry pick, with an unsurprising correlation to specific geography, historic regional rivalries and current voting patterns, it would seem to value one historically oppressed population over others. I have no trouble the government being accommodating for historical sensitivities. But it really has to be much more universal in approach. Some on here seem more interested in scratching the vendetta itch than making positive changes.

But how do you approach such an endeavor. To say it would be politically subjective is an understatement. Would you still celebrate FDR despite placing Americans in camps? Would you feel hesitation to punish him because you support the policies he supported or the overall good he did and would be concerned that him falling out of favor would be detrimental to how history views these factors?  Would we keep renaming airports back and forth depending on who is in office? It would seem common sense how to memorialize soldiers on each side without glorifying the politics and motivations that lead to the war. It however seems far more complicated than it would initially appear. Especially when all sides are reducing themselves to the lowest common denominator.

Didnt say that but considering that prior to that date we were not America... its splitting hairs.  
I agree on the hypocrisy though and it isnt even political considering all we see today isnt politics but subjugation to the SJW crowd.  Its pandering votes in my opinion.
when i was a kid we celebrated our forefathers, now all i hear is how evil they were and how we should give the land back to the native population and go live somehwere else, as though that makes any damned sense. 
I take issue with commemorating what we must view as traitors, but i also take issue with the timing of it all as being largely disingenuous 

[floplag]

38 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

So by that reasoning a confederate flag in South Orange County would be no problem.

A confederate flag in SoCal is completely different than one in SoCarolina, one you could argue both sides, the other, not so much.