"General Lee Statue removed?" Topic

"By the logic of some of the posters here, the Germans should be celebrating their Nazi heritage with statures and commemorations. After all, Hitler is arguably the most famous part of their heritage. They should be proud of that, right?"

Ta-DA! The argument known as 'reducto ad hitlarium' If you can't win your argument through reason and facts, compare your opponent to Hitler.

Actually, Jackson, it seems pretty obvious that I'm comparing Neo-Nazis and Klan members to Hitler. Apples to apples. Ding! Ding! Ding! Care to try again?

As for your previous question:
link

Dn Jackson it's already been said. Around the time of Jim Crow, statues go up. Around the time of the Civil Rights movement, statues go up. There is a placard in Arizona. What Confederate regiments were from Arizona?

As another poster said, why aren't there public monuments to Longstreet?

Help me understand the equivalence between a statue put up to honor a civil rights icon and a statue put up to try to revise history and subjugate a race of people.

Well Wolfgang, MLK opposed homosexuality and the concept of homosexual/gay marriage. In the agenda of today's "progressive left", that labels him as being "Intolerant" and "Hateful, Mean-Spirited, Prejudiced and Bigoted".
So to follow the agenda of the "current progressive tolerant left" that has dedicated themselves to removing all "statues" of intolerance…MLK has to come down also…

Now…you wanted to know…You've been told…Time to play by your own 'effin' rules ….

"TBH..after reading some of your last posts, and seeing how your method of debating is going, I am realizing that you are sounding very similar to someone that used to be on this site but was banned."

Dunno who you're talking about, don't care. Deffo' wasn't me mate.

P.S.: What I meant by that was I don't know what cursing anyone means. I'm sharp tongued, but I've been holding back the real salt. Even though some of you guys really deserve to have your proverbial hides tanned.

Also dunno where "intolerance and insults" came from, not anywhere on this thread. Is that an AP style guide thing?

what you said wolfgangbrooks is totally false..
Its the Northern Union behaviour, if you really wanted to make a comparison , should be compared to nazism …also because they waged a war of agression VS pacific States and against civilians..i've never heard about Confederacy brutality while i did , as everybody , about Northen one…

Italwars- I'm going to give you a break on this gem (afterall, you weren't raised on that glorious crock of a myth called the "Lost Cause").

Raw and ugly… The south fought to maintain slavery. Its in the articles of secession of most (if not all) of the seceded states. Its an oft mentioned goal by the leading lights of the south of expanding slavery beyond the south (once they won, of course). If you don't think maintaining and expanding the institution of slavery (with all that entails), at a time when every civilized nation had banned it, isn't brutality writ large, then I can't help you.

P.S.: What I meant by that was I don't know what cursing anyone means. I'm sharp tongued, but I've been holding back the real salt.

Then if you truly don't know, let me clue you in. It's rude and unnecessary.

Also wb..you want to talk about Nazi's? Fine…

I've met them.
And I don't mean these white laced Doc Martin wearing, skinheaded, stormfront reading, losers.
I've met REAL Nazis, (including members of the Waffen SS).
Most of them weren't a very pretty bunch even after all those years.
But I CAN tell you this. The majority of those losers in C-ville, had they met REAL Nazi's would've soon learned that the REAL Nazi's would've lined them up against the wall and shot most of them.

wolfgangbrooks wrote: "The bare fact of the matter that so few of you seem to want to come to terms with is that American history has glossed over centuries of oppression and genocide that rivals Nazi Germany."

So, once again you have shown your total ignorance of history. Six million Jews, herded into gas chambers. Homosexuals and gypsies as well. Political opponents killed. The 'mentally defective' sterilized. All that is the same as holding people in bondage.

By the way, concerning your rant about Germans keeping their heritage. Take a look at the, formally, West German, army. They kept their battle honors from WWII.

Are there no monuments anywhere to the german soldiers who fought and died in WW2? Or the Japanese soldiers? I'm not talking Hitler or any NAZI party leaders, but just the soldiers who fought and died for their country? Would it be so terrible to recognize their sacrifice?

If not, do we take down the Vietnam war memorials if enough people decide that we were in the wrong there? The soldiers didn't get to decide whether or not to participate. They simply choose to fight for their country's interests, and others get to decide how to use them to further those interests.

Jackson, can you make your point without becoming personal? No one appreciates being made into a straw man. Perhaps you could actually read my posts, rather than look for something on which to nurture your rage regarding current events. I'm not taking down any statues.

As regards the Germans, I'm sure you already know that Nazi regalia, songs, and signs are illegal in Germany, as is the Nazi Party itself. An American white supremacist was just arrested there the other day for making a Nazi salute while drunk. Why would that be? Its offensive and hateful, and the average German doesn't want to be associated with it.

My point, located on page three of this thread, I think, is that the Confederate Battle Flag was used by the Klan at lynchings and cross-burnings. When Southern Patriots allowed their flag to be used in that way, they allowed it to be dishonored and to take on a meaning that was not honorable. The fault is their own.

If Southern Patriots allow their monuments to be associated with Neo-Nazis and the Klan, then, once again, they are surrendering something they love to a new cause which dishonors those symbols, and affiliates them with something strictly unholy. Christ isn't a White supremacist.

If you feel that allowing Nazis and Klan members to use southern symbols is okay, then why not just admit it? We'll all know how you really feel. Otherwise, if you don't feel that way, stand up to the bad guys and reclaim your symbols.

Until Southerners disown the hate groups, as Wolfgang is trying to do, it would appear that they are in tacit agreement with them. Its not a nice spot to be in, I think. I wouldn't want to carry that burden. However, attacking anyone who questions those associations isn't going to be convincing.

There simply isn't a moral equivalent between Neo-Nazis and white supremacists, and those who stand up to oppose them. My dad fought in Normandy and at the Bulge. He was a Goldwater conservative, and I can assure you, he hated Nazis of any stripe or flavor.

Again, if you feel that Nazis and white supremacists are just wonderful Americans and Christians, and you want them to claim southern monuments as their own, that's on you. But that's not how you feel, right?

Albino Squirrel; yes there are statues and monuments to German soldiers that fought in WWII and "IN" Germany. Many towns have them. They are local memorials that usually have the names of the hometown men that never made it back. Kind of like the memorial stones listing the dead from the wars we had that are sitting in courthouse lawns all across the country.

Dear Wolfgang.

I am impressed that you consider my post childish.

It is not I who advocate these things but God. He told us on the Mount that we ought to love our enemies, do good to them who hate you and spitefully use you. Pray for our enemies. He admonished the Pharasees when they noted that he sat down to eat with sinners and prostitutes and tax collectors, that the Son of man was sent to save them, and who better should he sit down with.

If my idea is childish and inane, then so be it. It is only by kindness and love that hate can be overcome. It is only by care for our fellow man that cruelty to our fellow man can be abolished. likewise to the Neo-Nazis and the KKK and the White Nationalists I would advocate the same thing.

There is only one way we will get out of this dilemma and it is not by more demonstrations or counter demonstrations. It is by tolerance, (that is living that which you hate) trying to see to the human being in "the other" and in ameliorating suffering.

I don't want to bore you and make you angry with recounting my experiences, but the method that God reccommended works. I have seen it work too often to doubt it. I do not mean reading people the bible, but doing what God said.

In all these things we should be guided by what the Carpenter from Nazareth said. I remember he once said "By their fruits (deeds) ye shall know them. For a good tree produces good fruit and a bad tree produces only bad fruit and is fit only to be pulled out by the roots and burned." Close to that he counselled patience and hard work. He told the parable of a lord who went through his orchard and commanded his steward to cut down a tree which had gone six years with bearing no fruit. The Steward begged time and worked with it for a year, manured around it pruned it, and doted on it, and in the next year it produced much fruit.

Dear Albino Squirrel

I recommend to you the little known field "In Foreign Fields." I is a little gem of a film which seems quite pedestrian and ordinary but builds up to a powerful finish. Every role is filled by a big name actor from Lauren Bacall to Alex Guiness, Leo Mckern, Jacqueline Bisset, Geraldine Chaplin and others. It is a film which is funny, silly, maudlin and tragic. There is no fighting. It is about veterans of D Day who bring their families to view the beaches and the adventures they fall into. It is perhaps the most powerful novel of war and rememberance and forgiveness I have ever seen.

Murphy: And those would not be memorials people want to see taken down as people have said over and over again.

"Then if you truly don't know, let me clue you in. It's rude and unnecessary."

And again, I don't see you going after anyone else in this thread.

""Hey I'm supporting the Nazis!" or "Hey I'm in favor of slavery!"

They refuse to see the Nazis and won't talk about slavery in the South except to then say 'but…but… they were brave soldiers and that's all that matters'.

"The majority of those losers in C-ville, had they met REAL Nazi's would've soon learned that the REAL Nazi's would've lined them up against the wall and shot most of them."

And none of them will realize that until they put the real bastards in power, which they will only be too happy to do. You think the real Nazi movement started with the SS?

DN Jackson: "By the way, concerning your rant about Germans keeping their heritage. Take a look at the, formally, West German, army. They kept their battle honors from WWII."

Let them keep their battle honors, acknowledge the sins and the lies they fought for.

"So, once again you have shown your total ignorance of history. Six million Jews, herded into gas chambers. Homosexuals and gypsies as well. Political opponents killed. The 'mentally defective' sterilized. All that is the same as holding people in bondage."

Merely bondage…..Sigh.

How many slaves died, just in the voyage to the Americas? HOW MANY? The lynch mobs were just tickle parties right? The forced sterilization of blacks and hispanics didn't happen? ALL OF IT, every single thing you said happened in Nazi Germany had it's equivalent in the South with the tacit consent of the government and often the people. All that and more. I did not make the comparison lightly.

"Actually, Jackson, it seems pretty obvious that I'm comparing Neo-Nazis and Klan members to Hitler. Apples to apples. Ding! Ding! Ding! Care to try again?"

Actually, read your own post. You compared those you disagree with to Nazis. Secondly, did you even read the article you linked to? What it basically says is that the south was for slavery, so these statues must be for slavery too. No one has been able to counter the argument that the statues were put up to honor their dead.

As for Longstreet, there are no statues of him because no one wanted to honor him. How hard is it to figure that out? The reason no one wanted to honor him was because he sided with the Republicans after the war. Again, not hard to figure out.

Charlie 12 wrote, " If you don't think maintaining and expanding the institution of slavery (with all that entails), at a time when every civilized nation had banned it, isn't brutality writ large, then I can't help you."

No offense, but do a bit of reading. Here's a list from Wikipedia that might be a bit enlightening.

link

Some highlights:
1860 The British end indentured service in India
1861 Russia ends serfdom
1863 Netherlands ends slavery in its colonies
1864 Serfdom abolished in Poland
1869 Portugal abolishes slavery in its colonies
1873 Puerto rico abolishes slavery
1879 Bulgaria abolishes slavery
1882 Ottoman Empire abolishes slavery
1895 Egypt abolishes slavery
1924 Iraq abolishes slavery
1952 Quatar abolishes slavery
1962 Saudi Arabia abolishes slavery
1970 Oman abolishes slavery
1981 Mauritania abolishes slavery

So, as you can see, not every 'civilized nation' had abolished it. And you'll note, its not a southern thing, not a western thing, not a white thing. Every civilization, every country that I know of, has practiced slavery at one time or another. The big difference is that western nations ended it.

"The reason no one wanted to honor him was because he sided with the Republicans after the war. Again, not hard to figure out."

And again, who really put those statues up? It wasn't a spontaneous show of affection from local people it was a concerted effort by what we would call today Political Action Committees. If it was about heritage why not celebrate the loyal and high ranking son who served faithfully until the end? We're not talking about Benedict Arnold here. Hell, he was singled out with Lee and Jefferson Davis by Andrew Johnson as someone who shouldn't receive amnesty.

Why won't you even admit there's a chance he was pushed out, even in part, for defending blacks and leading black troops. If it's about heritage and reconciliation he should've been up there before Lee. But he was demonized and lied about until quite recently. Not that hard to see why.

Hate not Heritage.

"Are there no monuments anywhere to the german soldiers who fought and died in WW2? Or the Japanese soldiers? I'm not talking Hitler or any NAZI party leaders, but just the soldiers who fought and died for their country? Would it be so terrible to recognize their sacrifice?"

As a matter of fact, yes, I have seen monuments to the fallen in Germany. The ones I saw were small plaques on the walls of the town square. Listing the fallen from the town.

"Again, if you feel that Nazis and white supremacists are just wonderful Americans and Christians, and you want them to claim southern monuments as their own, that's on you. But that's not how you feel, right?"

Wow. Just, wow. It is not possible to have a rational conversation with someone who can't make a cogent argument, but only insinuates that if you don't agree with him, you agree with the Nazis.

Wolfgangbrooks

You asked why there's no statue of Longsteert. I told you. He allied with the Republicans after the war. Why is that so hard to understand?

Murphy: And those would not be memorials people want to see taken down as people have said over and over again.

Yeaaaah you might wanna try that again if you don't think that they are going after graves and grave memorials. Right now in Indy there is a "discussion in the city council", about removing a grave memorial for the Confederate POW War Dead. The original cemetery where they were was closed and the marker was moved to Garfield park where it has been sitting quietly since 1928…..Now we have a city council woman threatening the parks system funding if they don't "evaluate relocating it".

You think the real Nazi movement started with the SS?

Where did I say that it did WB?

And again, I don't see you going after anyone else in this thread.

"Everybodys doing it so why not me?" sigh…

I don't mind a few cuss words, lord knows I've said them, but when your posts are having numerous snips because of them, and we are still seeing the ones (quite a few) that aren't snipped out, well…yeah…I'm gonna tell it to you. And if someone else gets nuts with it also, I'll call them on it also..

No need to play "He's picking on me" here….

Hell, he was singled out with Lee and Jefferson Davis by Andrew Johnson as someone who shouldn't receive amnesty.

*Ahem*…

"Now, therefore, be it known that I, Andrew Johnson President of the United States, by virtue of the power and authority in me vested by the Constitution and in the name of the sovereign people of the United States, do hereby proclaim and declare unconditionally and without reservation, to all and to every person who, directly or indirectly, participated in the late insurrection or rebellion a full pardon and amnesty for the offense of treason against the United States or of adhering to their enemies during the late civil war, with restoration of all rights, privileges, and immunities under the Constitution and the laws which have been made in pursuance thereof."
Presidential Proclamation 179, December 25th, 1868

And on that note WB…good evening.

@DN Jackson: Why is what I'm saying so hard for you to understand? I notice you haven't even tried to defend your remarks dismissing the comparison between Germany and the South.

"No one has been able to counter the argument that the statues were put up to honor their dead."

We have. You refuse to entertain the notion.

Murphy: "Yeaaaah you might wanna try that again if you don't think that they are going after graves and grave memorials."

Ah, I almost apologized for that until I read more about it. They are wanting to move the monument to the site of the new graveyard, it was separated in 1928 during the cemetery move and placed in a public park . Quotes from the Indy Star:

…'There have been no protests over the Garfield Park monument.'…

…"The monument serves as a painful reminder that slaves were forced to fight for the Confederacy in order to perpetuate their own slavery," she said. "The black soldiers who died at Camp Morton are identified on the monument's plaques as 'Negro Slave.'"…

…"Although the Garfield Park monument may be less offensive than others, it still merits a thoughtful and peaceful conversation about whether Garfield Park is the best location for it."

Maybe you read it from some sensationalist right-wing news site and didn't do due diligence, I don't care.

"Where did I say that it did WB?"

You said they couldn't be real Nazis. I noted the Nazi movement didn't start with the hardcore s.

"numerous snips because of them"

One snip because I called out right wing politics. A bunch of censorship because I quoted a relevant twitter thread from someone who has a reason to swear.

If I'm getting 'snippy' it's because I'm getting personally attacked. You don't have a leg to stand on.

Maybe you ought to take your own advice and face me on the merits of my arguments and stop trying to nitpick me to death like this was some formal debate club farce.

"*Ahem*…"

Sorry Murphy, both are true. One came before the other, that's how time works.

There was a reference earlier about Britian/UK have "moved on" while this is not entirely true, there are recent statue/building/street name issues here too, there are substantial differences.

Firstly, while Britian organised the slave trade into a profitable industry (hence the issues I just mentioned) slavery in the US context never took place here.

Yes, pretty much every everyone who lives here of Afro-Caribbean heritage could trace their line back to slavery but none of them could see their ancestors living in the UK, once rated as 3/5ths of a person, nor being bought and sold in the country they and their parents were born and raised in.

Secondly, the non white population of the UK has really only existed in substantial numbers in my life time and although it may not seem like it to some, that has helped in terms of education of the overall population. Note, I say "helped" sweetness and harmony does not prevail – people have faults.

Thirdly, the English Civil War wasn't about slavery, States Rights, or the maintenance of the superiority of one race over another. Sorry if you don't agree about that last part but that was the effect.

The absence of all of this baggage has made a massive difference.

However, many Brits still have no idea about national wealth and slavery and no small part of the vote to leave the EU last year was from a generation who bitterly resented the influx of Black and Indian/Pakistani immigrants in the 50's, 60's and 70's and used the opportunity to project this onto the Eastern European workers of the past decade.

Even with only light skimming, this has obviously gotten horribly out of hand.

One thing I can't understand, however, is people who pretend an interest in history not comprehending the racist milieu and motivation behind the two waves of Confederate statue building in the USA before WWI and after WWII. People decrying "Where is your evidence?" have to be trying very hard to turn a blind eye to what is a matter of practical fact. Three seconds of googling will fix you up, if you've managed to avoid any disagreeable reading on the subject:

Wash Post:
link

"Almost none of the monuments were put up right after the Civil War. Some were erected during the civil rights era of the early 1960s, which coincided with the war's centennial, but the vast majority of monuments date to between 1895 and World War I. They were part of a campaign to paint the Southern cause in the Civil War as just and slavery as a benevolent institution, and their installation came against a backdrop of Jim Crow violence and oppression of African Americans. The monuments were put up as explicit symbols of white supremacy."

History.com
link

"Most of these monuments did not go up immediately after the war's end in 1865. During that time, commemorative markers of the Civil War tended to be memorials that mourned soldiers who had died, says Mark Elliott, a history professor at University of North Carolina, Greensboro. Eventually they started to build [Confederate] monuments," he says. The vast majority of them were built between the 1890s and 1950s, which matches up exactly with the era of Jim Crow segregation. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center's research, the biggest spike was between 1900 and the 1920s.

Vox:
link

"The Confederate monuments in New Orleans; Charlottesville, Virginia; Durham, North Carolina, and elsewhere did not organically pop up like mushrooms. The installation of the 1,000-plus memorials across the US was the result of the orchestrated efforts of white Southerners and a few Northerners with clear political objectives: They tended to be erected at times when the South was fighting to resist political rights for black citizens. The preservation of these monuments has likewise reflected a clear political agenda."

This is akin to people trying to argue that slavery wasn't the primary motivator behind secession and the creation of the Confederacy. It's in their written statements of secession, it's in their political speeches. The only "states rights' they were defending was the right to both keep slavery *and* expand it to non-slave states and territories.

If you are going to argue the merits of actual history, then know the actual history. I see very little of that here, but more than a little of a disappointing modern perspective on the Lost Cause.

Jackson, I'm comparing Neo-Nazis and Klansman to Nazis. I've bent over backwards to not judge or condemn the motives of southern patriots. Read the posts. What you desire here is a straw man. I'm not interested in that job.

Well for better or worse, slavery has been part of human history, the human condition, etc., well … forever, AFAIK, worldwide. It was mention in many "ancient texts" of various sources, etc.

Which as we see as humanity "evolved"/is evolving the concept is being seen less and less. However, it still exists in some locales, cultures, etc. Even in places like the Americas and Europe, etc. I.e. human trafficking/kidnapping, etc. is still a horror that modern LEOs, nations, etc. are in a constant battle to stop it.

And I could be wrong, e.g. but since the formation of the colonies in the "New World" slavery was based on "economic" needs. Very cheap labor if for nothing else. Regardless, slavery is wrong for any reason, but as I said, it is still with us in a big way in some cases.

CA TenWolde; nailed it my friend.

NAILED IT.

Ah, I almost apologized for that until I read more about it. They are wanting to move the monument to the site of the new graveyard, it was separated in 1928 during the cemetery move and placed in a public park . Quotes from the Indy Star:

"Almost apologized" yeah right…
Unfortunately due to the spacing issues of Crown Hill, there is NO place to put the original monument where the CS prisoners that are buried there are resting. So please…don't give me that.

…"The monument serves as a painful reminder that slaves were forced to fight for the Confederacy in order to perpetuate their own slavery," she said. "The black soldiers who died at Camp Morton are identified on the monument's plaques as 'Negro Slave.'"…

Actually if you look at the plaque on the 10 stones at Crown Hill, you won't see the words "Negro Slave".

Councilwoman Maggie Lewis who is leading this "discussion" (and the park and statue isn't even in her district), has made more errors and fouls in her statements on this subject than you'd see in an early season Cubs game.

…"Although the Garfield Park monument may be less offensive than others, it still merits a thoughtful and peaceful conversation about whether Garfield Park is the best location for it."

You lied. Maybe you read it from some sensationalist right-wing news site and didn't do due diligence, I don't care. You still lied.

Show me where I lied WB.
You read one piece from the Indystar which has more errors in it than an early season White Sox game, and you can accuse me of "wanting to read from a sensationalist point of view", or that "I lied" but you can't tell me what I lied at?…

I'll ask you a simple question WB.
Have you ever been to the Confederate Mound at Crown Hill?

"Where did I say that it did WB?"

You said they couldn't be real Nazis. I noted the Nazi movement didn't start with the hardcore assholes.

No…once again, you can't get your what you say and what you mean straight. You asked me "If I thought it started with the SS.."

"numerous snips because of them"

Maybe you ought to take your own advice and face me on the merits of my arguments and stop trying to nitpick me to death like this was some formal debate club farce.

You're getting "personally attacked?"
Really? We have TMP'ers coming to your house and beating you up?
Or are you just involved in a keyboard battle and thus your sensitivities are under siege?
Maybe if you didn't decide to act like the way you are acting towards people then you wouldn't feel the need that you are being personally attacked.

Maybe you ought to take your own advice and face me on the merits of my arguments and stop trying to nitpick me to death like this was some formal debate club farce.

Merits of your argument? Here…here's a participation ribbon for you. You can show it to your mom and hang it proudly on your wall. We're out of participation trophies for the year. Funds were tight, sorry.

And I'd rather this be a "debate club" than the cuss fest that you seem to want it to be.

Tell you what WB. If you ever want to learn about the dead CS at Crown Hill, by all means, please let me know and I will be happy to show you the place as it's 10 miles from where I live and I am there 3-4 times a year.

I'm an American, and I'm proud of my country while I also acknowledge its mistakes. While it has undoubtedly done wrong, I believe on balance it has done more good. I'm also from Colorado, a State that did not exist as a State when the Civil War happened. I don't have any ties to a Southern heritage or upbringing.

I have a hard time seeing why the Confederacy – not the South, but the Confederate States – would be an institution anyone would want to celebrate.

Remember it? Certainly. It existed, it happened. I have a degree in History, I don't believe in forgetting the past. But remembering it takes the form of study, of reading and researching, of learning what it did and why it did it.

Remembering it does not mean flying its flag. Remembering it does not mean promulgating its values. Remembering it does not mean deliberately repeating its mistakes.

Why would anyone want to do this? What does the Confederacy uniquely represent that the United States does not? Why fly that flag instead of the flag of the USA?

as said in other circumstances those few ones that are spitting hate vs symbols of the past and history of their Nation..and Confederacy with his resistance to invaders is one of the best and most glorious symbol.s..those few ones don't care a bit about slaves, slavery of XIX c. and today's few supremacist nerds?….. .they just spread hate because they want to be aknowledged and admitted as retainers or better serfs in that small clique a supposed to be self appointed cultural élite that drain economical resources from working class and common people maintaining them under a true modern cultural slavery ….in the name of politically correct

"Even with only light skimming, this has obviously gotten horribly out of hand"

Really? I thought it's been pretty tight. Strong argument and counters. Several people looking toward things they haven't previously considered, others actually admitting to learning something. An outstanding Post to Dawghouse ratio for a potential train wreck subject.

OK one or two invidual posters getting a bit heated with each in the last couple of pages but again, it's not like they are discussing ice cream

Only a small disagreement CAT, your main post was solid gold.

Yes, let's hope this is a "new" standard. A good, interesting, useful discussion with little to no vitriol, etc., …

Regardless … there will always disagreements to some level. It is the nature of this sort of topic. But generally civil … for the most part.

Why would anyone want to do this?

To some people, it represents their culture, their group, their place of belonging.

I was stuck in traffic this week behind a vehicle flying a quite large Confederate flag. In New York state! Seemed quite out of place…

I have lived in the South, and I consider many Southerners my friends. If I were a Southerner, I hope I would not fly that flag. It is time to let it retire to history. It is too divisive and offensive. Leave it for historical reenactors and miniature battlefields.

CATenWolde,
I'm going to continue to disagree with you on the reasons these monuments were put up. No one has been able to show me that they were put up to reinforce Jim Crow and racial supremacy. Your post quotes several people who infer that because they were put up when they were, then they MUST have been put up to reinforce anti-black feelings. They state that since they didn't go up immediately after the war, were put up in the early 20th century, and again in the 1950's-60s this MUST be the case. I disagree.

There were o monuments put up right after the war because there was no money for it. The south was devastated, its major cities mostly burned to the ground, 10% of the white males dead, social upheavel due to the newly freed slaves trying to find their way, the states occupied by the Federal armies, and the economy in shambles. No one could afford to put monuments up. Even the Lee quote people keep using notes that this isn't a good idea at this time.

The monuments spiked between 1895 and the 1920s according to SPLC. Why, because the generation that fought the war was dieing off. The boys of '61 were now in their 60s – 80s. The World War II memorial was built in Washington DC starting in 1993 and opened in 2004. This is the same rough time frame after the end of the war. Was it built to reinforce some secret US oppression over the rest of the world, or was it built because that generation was getting old and people thought they needed to be honored while they were still alive. It was the same thing in the 1920s.

As for them being put up in the late 50s and early 60s, that was the centennial. The 100 year anniversary was coming up and people were commemorsting it.

I'll note that the memorials were up for 100+ years and suddenly became an issue within the last few years. Apparently generations of people lived, walked past them on a daily basis, worked, and played around them not knowing they were supposed to be offended. It's very much a case of, "I didn't know I was offended until Antifa told me I was."

I think this issue has more to do with left wing political parties losing massively at the polls over the last few years and needing to fire up their base rather than genuine offense.

Bill wrote: "I have lived in the South, and I consider many Southerners my friends. If I were a Southerner, I hope I would not fly that flag. It is time to let it retire to history. It is too divisive and offensive. Leave it for historical reenactors and miniature battlefields."

Several people have noted that southerners should take their symbols back from the Nazi/skinhead/KKK scum. Maybe that's what he was trying to do.

Well, Dn, I doubt I'll ever sway someone of such apparently hard founded beliefs, and unfortunately the internet is ill suited to such a venture in any case.

However, the simple fact remains that you have to squint willfully into the historical sun in order see the situation as you want to, attributing only the best motives to those who funded, planned, and supported an obvious program of political and cultural propaganda, while attributing only the worst to those who now have the power and voice to disagree with and dismantle that program.

I'm not sure how much more evidence you would like, other than: 1) the monuments were overwhelmingly funded by white supremacist groups which came out of the shadows of Reconstruction at exactly that time, 2) were planned as public statements of white supremacy in conjunction with the controlling Jim Crow political establishment which arose at that exact time, 3) were placed in glaringly public power spaces such as in front of court houses or congress buildings or in public squares to reinforce that message, rather than battlefields where their military valor would have been the central message, 4) have had as their main supporters since that time white supremacist groups who have increasingly used them as a rallying point in conjunction with pushing the myth of the Lost Cause, 5) have in fact always been a point of protest by elements of their local communities, whose black population and progressive elements only in this past generation were able to gain the local power to take any action, and 6) the extent of which was largely unknown in the north until the advent of a more mobile population and social media allowed the sharing of such knowledge.

The end result of this process today is a mirror of the swing in political and cultural control that first gave rise to the monuments – where before white supremacist views were either openly or tacitly supported by those in power, now they are increasingly denounced by those in power and by populations with a growing awareness of their cultural responsibility.

Attributing the process to simplistic Trumpist talking points like antifa butt-hurt and pity at the polls is a further retreat from reality – the process is only possible and peaceful today *because* of local success at the polls which has brought progressive elements to the fore.

I don't think this is the argument you want to be making. Instead, support battlefield memorials and museum studies, where such questions should indeed have their place. Individuals with a real knowledge of the period can have a real and positive impact in such places.

Question for those saying that proud southerners (or whoever) should not have allowed white supremacists to turn Confederate monuments into symbols of their ideology…

What exactly do you suggest anyone do to prevent that?

I would suggest publicly condemning white supremacists using them, instead of calling those who protest against them 'snowflakes' would be a good start.

but the supremacists, racists, nationalist or whathver you want to call them if they protest for a right cause…and not supporting illegal ideas (racism/nazism) they have the same right as you to protest..considering the fact that those against the law and against their country are the ones who want to remove, in fact destroy, statues of fathers of the nation (i'm speaking also about Conderacy generals) ..i'm not sure if the supremacist are worst than them…

anyway there is a good aspect..
with all those protests and agressions vs traditions, values, cultures made by a violent minority…as always happen in a great country ..it will backfire..because, as we have seen in this very forum, majority of people still have sound ideas

Albino Squirrel, those supportive of southern heritage should a) preserve their history on battlefields and in museums as Catenwolde has suggested, B) make some clear statements against the Neo-Nazis and Klan marchers, which has famously NOT been done, thus inflaming the controversy even more, and C) engage in peaceful protest against those white supremacists who are trying to claim monuments as their own.

Perhaps there are other ways to preserve history in a positive way that I can't think of because my brain is old and not as nimble as it used to be. There are a lot of bright and experienced people on TMP. Perhaps they have some other ideas.

I understand that these are difficult things to do, that they require a lot of time and effort, and may even require some agreement with those of a different political persuasion because we have a common cause. However, getting involved, even through writing to our governmental representatives, is the only way forward.

ItalWars, I like your last point. Here's hoping that we will not let our future, or our past, be shaped by a white supremacist perspective. To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, we can either win together or we can lose separately.

a vehicle flying a quite large Confederate flag. In New York state!

I live in NE Ohio, and often see the old Rebel flag/Stars & Bars. In various forms. If we were a little farther North we'd be in Canada !

And for the record, I don't or wouldn't show the Rebel flag, etc. For a number of reasons. My people didn't come over from Europe to the US until @ 1900. So we had "no dog in that fight"/no ancestors, etc., … And being from Ohio all my life. If I was here in the mid 1860s. I'd have most likely been in the Union Army. As would have been most of my kin.

My Father told me when he was young, Crosses were burned in front of houses, like his familie's because they were Italian Catholics … in NE Ohio.

And of course in WWII, he was an INF SGT and fought the Nazis in France after Normandy. And yes I know all Germans were not Nazis per se. But in researching his unit's history, the 90ID. They were in combat with SS/Nazi units, in some actions.

And I believe, again, all forms of slavery is not acceptable.

a little outside topic ..but i wuold like to know..if somebody will be to patient to write me his opinions…if, in reality, they were, proportionally, more black people fighting for the Union or for the South…if logically the answer should be that they fought for Union..i try to imagine, maybe i'm totally wrong, that a certain bound of friendship and fidelity and will to defend their land, would have been possible between Southern States family that sent their sons fighting to defend their land and the people who work for them?