"Confederate Park no more" Topic

link

Shame on Memphis. Glad I don't live there. It's not about racism, it's about remembering service and sacrifice, misguided or not

More PC nonsense.

That is wrong in so very many ways.

Come now,everyone knows that denying the existence of history will bring all the dead back to life and erase the institution of slavery and all of its affect. In fact, we will all be better off if we pretend nothing bad ever happened and speak of it no more. Just think of how wonderful the world will be once we all speak and act in all manners P.C.

Memphis is off my list now too.

Yeah, what's that saying about those who forget history ? Memphis should not have done that … what next … removing CSA grave markers ?

This is insane! To erase history is to erase the memory of those who served this country.

Eventually we will get to the point where we deny that the Civil War and slavery ever happened because those are racially divisive subjects.

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it"

(sits back to watch the fireworks)

"To erase history is to erase the memory of those who served this country."

To be fair, if you mean the United States of American by "this country" one of the people so honoured did not serve it. He, in fact, served against it.

I don't think anyone here is saying that you can't teach about the South and slavery but that they no longer want to honour people who fought to preserve the bondage that their ancestors found themselves in. One of whom may have been part of a terrorist organization after the war ended and involved in the murder of the citizens of "this country" that were trying to exercise their newly granted right to vote or helping their fellow citizens to do so.

Pictor, you are eloquent as always and stated my feelings on the matter very well.

Back to the beer and popcorn.

Well said, Pictor.

Pictor, you paint with a broad brush.

Judging the past by todays standards is "JUST WRONG". TIG

"Judging the past by todays standards is "JUST WRONG"."

Precisely. That is why some of these people seem to want to judge someone from today, not the past. Whether they are honouring someone or discrediting them they are still judging, judging being the act of passing a judgment good or ill.

It seems that by this statement:

""I don't care if the name is Nathan Bedford Forrest, he's a dead man," Councilman Harold Collins told MyFoxMemphis.com. "We need to be focusing on the living."

one of the members of the council agrees with you.

Another city I shall drive through without stopping.

I'm with Pictor.
Are there "Wermacht Parks" in Germany? With statues of Rommel?

It seems all kinds of judgements have been made. It's the same all over some people don't like your opinion and if they have current politics in their corner you're out of luck.

Remind me, where are all the parks for AWI loyalists like Simon Girty? I agree the new names are pretty lame, though. I would have preferred something like "Y'all lost, get over it already park".

Better get to Gettysburg to view all the Confederate monuments before they start removing them….
link

link

Replace 'em with slot machines, most likely.

Memphis isn't Gettysburg or Richmond. Memphis probably brings in much more tourist money from Elvis fans and people visiting the place where MLK was shot who might be offended by the names of the parks.

"….that they no longer want to honour people who fought to preserve the bondage that their ancestors found themselves in."

I can see the potential for this sentiment to come back around again in another form. While no one is calling for Buffalo Soldier monuments to be taken down, I can't help but wonder how the descendants of Plains tribes view a symbol of how the "West was won".

Again, they are renaming a park, not exhuming Forrest and burying him in an unmarked grave. They aren't destroying any history. There wasn't even a mention of taking the statue down or any of that. No one is even calling for the Forrest statue to be taken down.

I wouldn't name a park after the founder of the Klu Klux Klan either.

Yet it IS a slippery slope.

The victors write the history. I find it amazing it has taken this long for the names to be changed. To be clear -- in my mind, no black hats and white hates (for instance, I don't think that Lee was a bigot by any standards). It was OUR civil war and I figured that WE embraced all of it the good the bad and the ugly.

I grew up in Richmond, went to grad school in TN, worked in Charleston SC… so I lived in the shadow of Confederate monuments for more than half of my life.

People always say that forgetting the past is such a terrible thing… but one of the things that makes Americans capable of living with each other, is the fact that they not only forget, but also forgive, the past.

If we were as obsessed with vengeful historical remembrance as some other countries, we'd be in deep trouble. Think: Kosovo/Serbia/Albania, for instance… or the Russians reviving Stalin at the moment, or the Turks and Armenians, or Northern Ireland for decades, etc, etc. etc.

"These three parks have a racial history that should be erased," said Van Buren, who is black. "These parks are an embarrassment to our city."

That seems to be rather clear intent to me that some plan on more than just a name change on a park; he does use the word 'erase'.

For what it's worth, I wouldn't name a park after Forrest either. I would, however, keep the one I have to generate discussion on why he's important in shaping the post Civil War cultural landscape in the US. Someone thought highly enough of him to put the monument up in the first place. The story of how and why we got to the decision to put up a monument to Forrest and to the Confederate cause in the first place is worth telling.

Embarrassments aren't always a bad thing either. The Germans have kept some concentrations camps as a reminder/warning. My counterpart in Germany last December spent several days encouraging (nagging) me to visit one of them. Keeping these parks keeps people talking about what happened, even if we don't like what we did. History doesn't have to be comfortable to be important.

-"Again, they are renaming a park, not exhuming Forrest and burying him in an unmarked grave. They aren't destroying any history. There wasn't even a mention of taking the statue down or any of that. No one is even calling for the Forrest statue to be taken down."

Exactly they are renaming the park to that which holds no historical significance at all. Soon no one will remember that the statue or grave is even there except those that live near it. I'm not saying he needs to be glorified but what is the harm in remembering and teaching about him. We learn from our mistakes but if we don't remember what those mistakes are what can we learn.

-"We should be grateful that we live in a place where the victorious side's first impulse was to get over it, not to drag it out interminably."

What do you call Reconstruction?

Are we gonna start bashing people who play miniature war games because they have a German or Confederate Army? "I'm sorry Sir, you can't play with that figure depicting Forrest because it offends me."

Cheers, Pictors.

Well, one thing is for sure – the current crop of most "Americans" (I use the term loosely, as they don't believe in the Constitution, or free speech, or personal rights, etc..) won't have to worry about this problem, as no one will build statues or name parks honoring people who do absolutely nothing.

Look at any major U.S. city where the historical parks have been renamed. Places once named after great military men or ideas like 'Liberty' have now turned into giant trash receptacles for .25 cent chip bags and 'lil hug containers. And usually broken glass. All to placate a group of peoples who are so intolerant to any idea or notion of independent thought – simply because they have none. They would rather get free TV, Gov't jobs, and a free phone then have freedom. Completely incapable of self determination.

In fifty years, maybe less, the U.S.A. will be nothing. And they will be ripe fruit for the picking to some tyrannical power. Hopefully, this will make for a great game, at least. Old Glory could release a set of 'U.S. urchins'.

p.s. There are some great citizens still, but they will be squeezed until the last drop of money and blood is gone to support the growing parasitic majority.

-"We should be grateful that we live in a place where the victorious side's first impulse was to get over it, not to drag it out interminably."

What do you call Reconstruction?

I call Reconstruction a noble attempt to keep the Southern states from oppressing the newly freed black slaves.
It is notable that one of the results of the Hayes Tilden Compromise of 1876 was the withdrawal of the so-called "carpetbaggers" and the Army. This allowed the white governments of the Southern states to impose Jim Crow laws. They could not reimpose slavery, but this was the best they could come up with.
It is also of note that the very first gun control laws in the US were designed to disarm Negro freemen, AFTER Reconstruction was abolished. It is very hard to oppress an armed community, so disarming the newly freed slaves was a top priority.

Note that whenever we hear of a newly elected African American Senator or Congressman in the South, it is hailed as "the first since Reconstruction." That's no coincidence.

As far as I am concerned, Reconstruction was a Good Thing, and all the bad press it received was equivalent to the propaganda of "Birth of a Nation".

I will not go into the roles of Democrats and Republicans, except to say that it was NOT a Democratic President who freed the slaves, and that flaming racist Woodrow Wilson was not a Republican.

Can I be DHed for commenting on the politics of 1876 or 1916?

Pictor Thanks for saying what should be said, in such an eloquent way. My only comment is why did it take a city of Memphis this long to get around to rename the park?

Bedford Forest was, a slaver, racist, traitor and a war criminal, who murdered American soldiers after they surrendered. His name should only apper in history books,as an example of what evils some men are capable of.

Bravo John, well said.

No one complains about the plethora of US Army instalations named after CSA Generals. Should we change those too?

"The story of how and why we got to the decision to put up a monument to Forrest and to the Confederate cause in the first place is worth telling. "

That is a good point. It probably does generate some discussion to have the monument and the park there. It has certainly generated discussion on this thread for one thing.

If that is the goal then one way to increase the discussion would be to redo the statue so that it would generate more discussion. What if they depicted Forrest with a typical Klan hood on?

That seems like it would focus the discussion on:

"why he's important in shaping the post Civil War cultural landscape in the US."

People would certainly wonder why a member of the Klan had his own statue in the park, it would draw a lot more attention than this:

Certainly someone walking through the park could just ignore that, but if we captured a different moment of the man's life, a less positive one perhaps. It certainly could be the basis of people learning from mistakes made in the past.

Well, it depends on which Klan hood Forrest was depicted with; if you chose one from 1916 or so, it would surely invite discussion from wargamers whatever their stripe.

Are we going to start renaming military bases as well that are named after Southern generals???

Bob C.

"…then one way to increase the discussion would be to redo the statue [with a hood] so that it would generate more discussion."

LOL. That certainly would generate discussion and take people out of their comfort zones. Are you going to put the petition forward for that? :)

I think the monuments and parks are worth keeping around (as they are) because they generate some discussion. 'Erasing' them leads to no discussion. I'm all for generating more discussion, even if it's uncivil at a few points so long as it leads back to the core values US citizens hold, how they were developed, and the price we paid collectively for them. I'm not sure putting a hood a Confederate general gets us there anymore than re-imaging the Buffalo Soldier or US Cavalryman to view of their role in suppressing/subjugating native cultures. History can be subjective and there's a danger in erasing the parts this person or that one finds offensive. We do that enough times and we won't have a history or identity left.

President Roosevelt should never have allowed Japanese Americans to be sent to internment camps. I move that his name be expunged from history.

" I'm not saying he needs to be glorified"

isn't building statues for people, and naming public spaces after them, the very definition of "glorified"?

I can't think of any examples of historical figures who got statues or places named after them, except to honor them. Am I forgetting any?

but what is the harm in remembering and teaching about him.

Some people get very angry when he is remembered in ways they don't approve.

What should be taught about him, then? To put this in perspective, imagine yourself – today, in 2013 – writing the one paragraph summary of Nathan Bedford Forrest for some US History textbook. What would you write?

We learn from our mistakes but if we don't remember what those mistakes are what can we learn.

What do you consider to be his mistakes?

Again, imagine yourself as the teacher. What would you say to the students, pointing at this man, that they could reasonably "learn" for their own lives?

If it's just an example of courage, dash, service to one's state, etc… then surely we can think of a lot more useful and less controversial examples than to honor a slave dealer and domestic terrorist who founded an organization designed to deny constitutional rights to American citizens, by murdering them if necessary.

Good one Esquire.
I have never been a Confederate sympathizer. Probably because I grew up a Yankee in Pennsylvania. But when I read of people wanting to "erase" history, I think we have to be careful of how far it will lead.

Can you blame them?

For two centuries black Americans were held in slavery. Now, 150 years after the war, and with all Americans equal, many majority black Americans communities don't want to see the reminders of their oppression held up to any type of reverence. I don't know the racial make-up of the Memphis City Council. It doesn't really matter. The same thing applies to any majority black government across the South, or the US.

You can argue heritage vs. hate all you like. You can say it "brings up discussion" until your face turns blue.

However, earnestly, I ask again. Put yourself in their shoes. Can you blame them? If you are intellectually honest with yourself, the only civilized answer is, no.

It happens all the time with things such as street names and school names. I'm not advocating eliminating battlefield parks, or tearing down any statues. Or getting rid of other park space. Remembering the past is an individual thing, and an individual responsibility. So no, I do not blame any government for wanting to erase any in-your-face reminders of their historical cultural bondage.

As a Southerner (and one who was cheerfully painting 10mm Confederate infantry this past week), I don't think it's unreasonable to question the veneration of Forrest.

Creating/maintaining a Forrest Park is not really any different than the "Joachim Peiper Malmady Massacre Memorial Park", except I don't think Peiper created any anti-Semitic terror groups after the war.

Good point Cleburne1863, who can blame them.

Racism is alive and well today only because many feed off of it. If its not one thing, its another:

link

"Only because"? Racism exists only because some folks seem to be looking for it? You must be kidding.

And no, the VW ad wasn't "racist". But just because some (thin-skinned?) individual might think so doesn't make racism a phenomenon that only exists because we believe it does. That's Tinker Bell you're thinking of.

Well, it looks like the ghosts of the ACW are still with us … more than most of us may have imagined …

You must be kidding.

Thin-skinned attitudes and constantly dwelling on superficial differences perpetuates the problem.

Racism IS ALL perception. If noone perceives the difference, the rest pretty basic. The constant Equality & Fairness Bean-Counting doesn't do the matter any good.

Beast – to you racism's all perception and good on you that it's so simple a matter. But that's also the problem – to most white people it's all perception – I'm not racist, therefore there is no racism. To those who still live with it, however, racism is very structural, pervasive and real. A couple years back I tour managed an all black band across the US. I sure learned a lot spending 9 weeks walking in somebody else's shoes…I normally tour manage punk bands so I thought I knew what overzealous cops, instantly nervous hotel managers, truck stop tension and general hassle were all about. Not even close. Go to a bank to deposit a little too much money – drug dealers, obviously. Go as a group into a restaurant or bar – gang bangers, obviously. Happen to need gas at 1:00am – robbers, obviously. Stay in a cheap hotel – drug dealers, pimps and gangbangers, obviously. Cops checking your vehicle, running your plates, watching you load in and out. Stay in a nicer hotel – a threat to public safety, obviously. Cops doing a room check because they got a call of "suspicious activity", aka you just don't belong there.

Sure, maybe all that was perception. Lots and lots of constant perception. But couple it with decades – centuries – of racist laws, red lining, segregation implicit and explicit, etc. etc. etc. and I began to get a glimpse of what people mean when they talk about white privilege and how deeply favored, and how utterly clueless about it, most of us Euro-Americans still are.