Removing monuments of the Confederacy: Yay or Nay?

[mindlessobserver]

Most of the monuments in question were a direct shitlord response to the Civil Rights act. The narrative is that these statues and monuments have existed for generations. They haven't. I don't even care about political correctness and things of that nature, but trying to tie this to history is lame. I also don't really care if they stay or go.

Some of them are. There were two waves of monuments. Most of the soldiers memorials and the super famous ones in Richmond VA predate the civil rights mess by 50-60 years.

 

[wellthathappened]

Some of them are. There were two waves of monuments. Most of the soldiers memorials and the super famous ones in Richmond VA predate the civil rights mess by 50-60 years.

I'm fine with the preservation of actual historical monuments. Shitlord statues just not much sympathy for.

 

[Commander Keen]

I'm fine with the preservation of actual historical monuments. Shitlord statues just not much sympathy for.

What makes someone a shitlord? They fought on the losing side? They had different beliefs than you?

I'm no socialist, but I can still relate to the IRA and INLA and their efforts to defeat a foreign government ruling them. The songs and markers dedicated to Irish nationalists should stand, even if they thought Marx had good ideas.

And if you throw out the slavery argument then we have a lot more monuments to tear down and a shitload more crap to rename than what we are currently doing.

 

[Toucan]

Sometimes I like to think of the fall of Baghdad and those people who tore down the statue of Saddam and then I like to think of Dave Rubin appearing in the crowd and saying "Hey look you guys you shouldn't tear down his statue just because you dont like the guy. If you want to register your protest you should unveil a plaque across the way that states how you politely disagree with him. That is how we do things in the free marketplace of ideas" Cue stoning.

I also think that if Americans were to erect a statue of someone like John Brown across the way from a confederate statue many of the people who support the maintaining of the confederate statue would go apeshit and demand the other be torn down.

Ultimately its just a symbol. If the symbol becomes representative of evil then it should be destroyed and/or replaced. But you should bare in mind that those statues didnt appear by themselves. People wanted them to be there because they believe in what they represent. If you destroy the statue you will not destroy the sentiment that put it there.

 

[millais]

Sometimes I like to think of the fall of Baghdad and those people who tore down the statue of Saddam and then I like to think of Dave Rubin appearing in the crowd and saying "Hey look you guys you shouldn't tear down his statue just because you dont like the guy. If you want to register your protest you should unveil a plaque across the way that states how you politely disagree with him. That is how we do things in the free marketplace of ideas" Cue stoning.

I also think that if Americans were to erect a statue of someone like John Brown across the way from a confederate statue many of the people who support the maintaining of the confederate statue would go apeshit and demand the other be torn down.

Ultimately its just a symbol. If the symbol becomes representative of evil then it should be destroyed and/or replaced. But you should bare in mind that those statues didnt appear by themselves. People wanted them to be there because they believe in what they represent. If you destroy the statue you will not destroy the sentiment that put it there.

The destruction of the Saddam Hussein statue in Baghdad was not a spontaneous event. It was a calculated photo-op. The statue was pulled down by an American vehicle crew, and the large onlooking crowd was photoshopped in after the fact.

 

[Boss Bass]

Pulling down monuments is a really great way to continue the narrative that the North had nothing to do with slavery. “Who me? Oh no, I was one step up the supply chain and profited richly. But I’m totally innocent!”

 

[Pop-Tart]

Remember when this was the pressing issue that everyone was saying "We need to have a conversation about right here and now you Nazi fucks." , acting like these old statues the most important issue in current America? Where the only correct action was the predetermined answer to destroy or remove the statues?

When most people never even notice them or care about some random statue in the middle of town?

How easy the 24 hour news cycle makes everyone forget their righteous indigation.

 

[This+]

Ones that were made just to spite black people, to "put 'em back in their place," and to intimidate them, absolutely. If Britain won the Revolutionary War and constructed a statue of Benedict Arnold or other loyalists in Charlottesville just for the purpose of putting the colonists back in their place, I think many Americans would want those taken down.

So really, it's just a matter of perspective. If you're white and you consider yourself a true Southerner while referring to the Civil War as "A War of Northern Aggression," you'd obviously want them to be left alone. If you're a black American and/or understand the implications of racial oppression in the United States, you'd likely want them gone. Obviously it won't be as black and white as I wrote it, but that's just how it goes. To me, the "we need to preserve historical monuments because we'll all forget about the past!" is just a meme. Germany did a rather extreme job of censoring Nazi symbols and what have you, but they all know how much devastation the Nazis brought on Europe. They don't need statues of Himmler, Rommel, and/or Manstein to remind themselves of their past during that time.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Ones that were made just to spite black people, to "put 'em back in their place," and to intimidate them, absolutely. If Britain won the Revolutionary War and constructed a statue of Benedict Arnold or other loyalists in Charlottesville just for the purpose of putting the colonists back in their place, I think many Americans would want those taken down.

The majority of them were made to put poor white people back in their place and remind them that they should be voting Democrat and not for Republicans/Populists/Progressives, since heroes like Robert E. Lee, Jeff Davis, and the rest of them would totally have been down with the ideology of turn of the 20th century Southern Democrats.

Except for the ones they put up during the Civil Rights era of course, those were definitely made to tell black people to get back in line.

 

[Krokodil Overdose]

Ones that were made just to spite black people, to "put 'em back in their place," and to intimidate them, absolutely.

So what are you going to do, measure the statues' thetan levels? Dissect a chicken underneath them? Maybe cast their horoscopes? Because if you're trying to determine "intent" from a chunk of stone without resorting to divination, I have some bad news for you.

So really, it's just a matter of perspective. If you're white and you consider yourself a true Southerner while referring to the Civil War as "A War of Northern Aggression," you'd obviously want them to be left alone. If you're a black American and/or understand the implications of racial oppression in the United States, you'd likely want them gone.

What if you're a white Northerner with a Union Army predigree who can't help but notice how his ancestors' sacrifices have been thrown down the memory hole in favor or racialized rent-seeking? If we're assuming that all this stuff is heritable, aren't we the ones who should be deciding, since we're the ones who actually fought and won that war?

 

[This+]

So what are you going to do, measure the statues' thetan levels? Dissect a chicken underneath them? Maybe cast their horoscopes? Because if you're trying to determine "intent" from a chunk of stone without resorting to divination, I have some bad news for you.

Back to my example you failed to include in that quote, we should then keep that Benedict Arnold statue up in Richmond, as it's impossible to determine intent from a chunk of stone.

What if you're a white Northerner with a Union Army predigree who can't help but notice how his ancestors' sacrifices have been thrown down the memory hole in favor or racialized rent-seeking? If we're assuming that all this stuff is heritable, aren't we the ones who should be deciding, since we're the ones who actually fought and won that war?

I don't understand that portion of your post, I'm just saying what two of the many American demagogues might think about the removal of Confederate statues.

 

[Joan Nyan]

Back to my example you failed to include in that quote, we should then keep that Benedict Arnold statue up in Richmond, as it's impossible to determine intent from a chunk of stone.

Benedict Arnold was a hero and we should have statues to him though.

 

[Pinup Paracelsus]

I think we should just move them into historical museums. We can teach future generations and not destroy the hard work of talented artists.

 

[Syaoran Li]

As a self-described Civil War sperg, I thought I'd weigh in on the issue.

Despite the fact that my ancestors fought for the North during the Civil War, I respect the common soldiers who made sacrifices on both sides, as well as certain generals both Northern generals such as Ulysses S. Grant and Confederate generals such as Robert E. Lee, the only Confederate leader to actually believe in the concept of States' Rights and not just use it as a cover to justify slavery.

Now, specific statues erected during the 1950's and 1960's to spite the Civil Rights Movement? Okay, I can see maybe getting rid of those very specific statues, but even then I am conflicted.

However, the majority of Confederate monuments were built in the 1900's, 1910's, and 1920's as a means to guilt poor whites in the South to vote Democrat, as others in this thread have already mentioned.

Removing Confederate memorials and symbols from actual Civil War battlefield sites and cemeteries? That actually is erasing history and I am firmly opposed to that. The worst part is that a lot of leftists and SJW's are proposing just that (and in some cases, it has happened. You can no longer display Confederate imagery at Gettysburg nor buy Confederate-related souvenirs at their gift shop) and that angers me as a historian, particularly as a Civil War history enthusiast.

It also angers me that a lot of the SJW's and Antifa types who want to remove Confederate memorials and ban the Confederate Flag are usually support Communism, Anarcho-Communism, or idealize the Soviet Union in the same way that a lot of Southern conservatives idealize the Confederacy.

As bad as the Confederacy may have been in the Left's perspective, the Soviet Union was a whole lot worse in terms of overall human rights abuses. That's not even taking the atrocities of Maoist China, North Korea, Pol Pot, and other Communist states into account.

Yeah, slavery was bad. But so was the Gulag and the atrocities committed during the Bolshevik Revolution, to say nothing of other crimes committed by Lenin and Stalin.

Don't be hypocrites. If you are going to ban the Confederate Flag and vandalize Confederate monuments because of slavery, you should also ban the Hammer and Sickle along with the Red and Black Anarcho-Communist flag and other Soviet or Communist imagery for their crimes as well.

Of course, I think you shouldn't ban any symbols at all or vandalize historical monuments to push your political agenda. I believe in freedom of speech and freedom of expression, regardless of how asinine the stance may be.

I don't support banning Confederate imagery. I don't even support banning Nazi or Soviet imagery, and while I may have mixed opinions on the Confederacy, I utterly hate Nazis and Communists. Despite the groaning of SJW's and Antifa thugs, the First Amendment still exists in this country.

I don't want America to turn into a self-hating SJW shithole like Germany or Sweden.

 

[jebsurge]

Confederates are technically considered American Veterans, so there's that.

"(e) For the purpose of this section,
and
section 433, the term
'veteran' includes a
person
who
served
in the military or naval forces
of the Confederate States of America during the Civil War, and the
term 'active, military or naval service' includes active service in such
forces."

 

[Replicant Sasquatch]

What makes someone a shitlord?

Erecting monuments to a war your side lost a hundred years ago because you're assmad about niggers getting to vote in your state is a good qualifier.

Personally, I say keep the TRUE and HONEST monuments. I'm indifferent to the 60s ones but taking those down feels like it's coming from the same kind of pettiness which put them up. Historical revisionism is for chumps.

It may just be my Yankee blood but I find the people who lionize the Confederacy either forget or ignore the fact the South seceded because they wanted to preserve slavery. This isn't librul propaganda, half those states outright fucking said so in their declarations of secession. I can't find myself sympathizing with their fight for liberties when those "liberties" mostly involved owning other human beings. This doesn't make them bad guys because the war itself was more complicated than that, but it makes this Rebel Spirit shit pretty suspect.

 

[Dolphin Lundgren]

I think the ones at battle grounds should stay. This is different but still kind of the same but a school that I went to is named after a Confederate man and a year back some teacher tried to get the name changed. The school kept the name.

 

[The Telomerase Truth]

Nay because it's a waste of time and money. There are far more important things to worry about than some old monuments and some of those things actually involve racism happening today and not years ago.

Taking the monuments down isn't going to change the past. Hate what they represent? Fine. Instead of taking them down you should use them for your benefit. Use them to educate your children or grandchildren on racism. They are historical monuments so use them for history lessons.

In my opinion, the only reason they should ever be removed is for preservation reasons.

 

[Commander Keen]

Erecting monuments to a war your side lost a hundred years ago because you're assmad about niggers getting to vote in your state is a good qualifier.

Personally, I say keep the TRUE and HONEST monuments. I'm indifferent to the 60s ones but taking those down feels like it's coming from the same kind of pettiness which put them up. Historical revisionism is for chumps.

It may just be my Yankee blood but I find the people who lionize the Confederacy either forget or ignore the fact the South seceded because they wanted to preserve slavery. This isn't librul propaganda, half those states outright fucking said so in their declarations of secession. I can't find myself sympathizing with their fight for liberties when those "liberties" mostly involved owning other human beings. This doesn't make them bad guys because the war itself was more complicated than that, but it makes this Rebel Spirit shit pretty suspect.

Did you even read the rest of my post? The Provos assassinated people and were deemed a terrorist organization, but they still keep up the markers for their heroes. The IRA is outlawed in Ireland but you can't throw a stone without hitting a mural dedicated to some mick or another who died in a hunger strike or got shot down by the black and tans and their political arm, Sinn Fein, has seats in government.

So is "erecting monuments to a dude who was too stupid to eat food while in jail for gun crimes because you're assmad about your nation's capitol being London" ok?

But I do despise double standards and hypocrisy, so if we're tearing down monuments to great men because they fought on a losing side because slavery...we need to tear down a lot more and rename a lot more shit. Maybe we can start by getting some white-out and removing John Hancock off the Declaration of Independence.

 

[JustStopDude]

This is local issue that should be decided by community.