"These Are the First Military Bases Whose Confederate Names" Topic

The Confederate states and their armies tried to kill some of my ancestors. I certainly do not wish to immortalize or commemorate their military leaders. Just like I don't wish to see Fort Howe, Fort Rommel, Fort Hindenburg, Fort Tojo, or Fort Uncle Ho. I don't know many people who would want to celebrate anyone that tried to kill their Fathers, Grandfathers, and et cetera.

An understandable view …

DJ, thanks for this perspective. It does not get much attention.
I have been struggling with all of this for years. Started off gaming the ACW, growing up during rosy era of the Centennial. Later, when I read the states' articles of secession, and the veil of the Lost Cause began to lift, I also learned about some of my family history, all from the North. I just stopped gaming ACW. Uncomfortable, not healthy fun for me. I have been trying to resume and come to terms with it.

A fair point, DJCoaltrain. But many Southerners could say exactly the same thing about the Union Army and forts named after its generals, couldn't they?

Some probably do … But the CSA lost, many of which supported slavery. And yet the US named forts after them for the reasons mentioned.

Note there were some in the Union that didn't care about slavery or even support the end of it.

There is obviously a lot of muddy water … so to speak.

You are right Legion 4. We have never really come to terms around the big picture and it is complex and emotional to say the least.

I love the United States, not just the state I was born in or live in. I am ashamed of slavery for many reasons, especially because it was part of the whole nation from its earliest days, and took far too long to end. That we followed it with Jim Crow and many other forms of discrimination only makes it harder to unravel. Clearly we are not done working through this….

Yes, we still have work to do … but I don't think things are as bad as some in the media, gov't, etc., does. If it fits their narrative and agenda. Whether it is true or not …

As I have posted before :

"The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history."
― George Orwell

"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past."
― George Orwell, 1984

"In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
― George Orwell

I'm concerned that the media, some in leadership positions, various movements, etc., have not read 1984. Or they did and they are using it as a "how to" manual …

I don't know which is worse …

I don't know many people who would want to …

You write that in the future tense, "want to…". No one today is naming any military installations as you suggested. The base names are over a hundred years old and have come to have meaning which have transplanted the original names. When I hear "Fort Bragg", I think Army Green Berets not some long dead confederate general.

Clearly we are not done working through this….

Oh, give it a rest already. A 150 years ago, millions of Americans sacrificed their lives to end slavery. America is the least racist country in the world.

"A 150 years ago, millions of Americans sacrificed their lives to end slavery."

This seems a little off to me. Millions died serving with the Union armies? And then our troubles ended?

I think I will give it a rest.

Come on man, since when do real numbers get in the way of emotions and feelings. 😂

So what happens to the monuments, memorials etc at say Gettysburg Park or Chickamauga? Are museum items to be also removed?

You write that in the future tense, "want to…". No one today is naming any military installations as you suggested. The base names are over a hundred years old and have come to have meaning which have transplanted the original names. When I hear "Fort Bragg", I think Army Green Berets not some long dead confederate general.

I think USAF has nailed it. Fort Bragg has transcended its original naming and has its own identity separate from the person it was named after. Most Americans don't even know who Bragg was in the ACW. And they don't care either. That is how it should be.

takeda AFAIK all the statues etc., at ACW Battlefields which are generally all Federal property. IIRC under the Nat'l Park Svc. And considered a "museum" type location. So AFAIK none were removed. However, some have been damaged. But quickly repaired AFAIK.

AFAIK I'm not sure if any items have been removed, however it would depend on the museum, I'd think. But there are local, state and Fed museums. So I'm sure it varies. Most likely I'm betting local museums e.g. in the South have probably changed nothing or little. For better or worse, it is local heritage, history, etc. The good, the bad & the ugly …

Most Americans don't even know who Bragg was in the ACW. And they don't care either. That is how it should be.

Agreed and I'm sure many Americans have little idea about the who, what, when, where and why of this conflict and most others in US history. I've seen journalists do "man on the street" type interviews and ask about the AWI, ACW, both WWs, etc. Some couldn't even tell you who the USA fought during e.g. the ACW(?!?), both World Wars, etc.

And I'm sure the vast majority of those criminals, thugs, etc. that defaced & pulled down statues last summer. Had little to no idea of who or why that statue was there. Only they were told that individual was "bad", evil, racist, etc. They were the definition of mob violence.

No statue should have been defaced or torn down for any reason. The local leadership were are/very weak, and should not have been in office to let this type of looting, rioting, destruction, etc. happen at all ..

So what happens to the monuments, memorials etc at say Gettysburg Park or Chickamauga? Are museum items to be also removed?

As said above (page 2):
"If HR7608 is passed into law then, in accordance with Section 442 of that bill then all Confederate commemorative works (statues, monuments, sculptures, memorials, and even plaques) will be removed by the National Parks Service for everything under their management and done so within 180 days. Basically, anything Confederate on the vast majority of battlefields will be removed."
Protests have already begun at Gettysburg by at least one group to have Confederate items removed.

Thanks for comments folks in helping me get a loose handle on this issue. Wondering if anyone has actually looked into who brought slavery to America? My ancestors were poor dirt farmers and just struggled to stay alive and raise their families. So many seem fixated on only their side as it plays to their self interest. Why??? And why now?

And why now?

Because they have an agenda, and this is just the beginning. They hate our country, it's history and everything it stands for.

No. This is not right. "They" ? "Just the beginning"?

I don't want Fort Bragg renamed either.

But I would like to know why Nathan Bedford Forrest gets statues. And not in Lost Cause jargon. I want to know why.

It's time to teach and learn, stop blaming, destroying property. We have fought too hard to make this country over generations. My guess is that almost nobody hates it. But it's not perfect on a lot of things. Work to do. . Now is as good a time as any…

But I would like to know why Nathan Bedford Forrest gets statues

Please share with us where you see Nathan Forrest statues going up today.

Did not know that Quaama, thank you. But I feared in the back of my mind this Orwellian rewriting of our history would occur. It is rampant in many parts of our society, etc.

Protests have already begun at Gettysburg by at least one group to have Confederate items removed.

Hope someone realizes what "folly" this is. Especially at places like Gettysburg, etc.

Wondering if anyone has actually looked into who brought slavery to America?

Well as we know the French, Spanish, Dutch and Great Britain[did I miss any ?] were all here in the "New World". During that phase of exploration, etc., in the Americas. Long before there was a nation called the USA.

My ancestors were poor dirt farmers and just struggled to stay alive and raise their families.

My people came here from Europe around 1905. We had nothing to do with anything before that. I.e. most of us never owed any slaves and many/most/all wanting reparations never picked any cotton, fruit, or any other produce. At least as slaves …

So many seem fixated on only their side as it plays to their self interest.

Yes, self interest along with their agenda is the bottom line. Regardless of the facts or truth of what actually happened.

Why??? And why now?

Look to our leadership at all levels, especially now. Local and State leaders showed weakness, in quelling violent protests, looting, etc. For a number of reasons beyond they were poor leaders. And they were many who were not up to the task, etc. And even the Feds last Summer had their hands tied, etc., by these poor examples of Local and State leaders. As well as some in certain places in DC.

We all need to fight these types that want to modify our past to suit their inaccurate, biased, skewed narratives, etc.

Of course there are no new statues of anyone going up today and it's a good point. But we do continue to honor him via his statues, do we not?

If we leave the statues, shouldn't we also be able to give another side to Forrest's story via an objective presentation, via signs perhaps, about his life?

Well as we know the French, Spanish, Dutch and Great Britain[did I miss any ?]

I think in the interest of full disclosure it would be fair to point out who sold the slaves to the European explorers. We both know the answer to that.

If we leave the statues, shouldn't we also be able to give another side to Forrest's story via an objective presentation, via signs perhaps, about his life?

Sure, no one here is arguing against that.

But I would like to know why Nathan Bedford Forrest gets statues. And not in Lost Cause jargon. I want to know why

Probably because he was the greatest cavalry commander born in America.

Also, Forrest was well regarded in his community and remained active in it after the war. There is this newspaper article where Forrest's name appears as a signatory with others in column 5 on that page (his name is on the left, sixth on the list). That public letter condemns the act as the wilful and deliberate murder of sixteen unarmed and helpless [black] citizens" and "in violation of every principle of justice and humanity".
Another example is his speech to the Independent Order of Pole-Bearers Association in 1875 where Forrest said:
"Ladies and Gentlemen I accept the flowers as a memento of reconciliation between the white and colored races of the southern states. I accept it more particularly as it comes from a colored lady, for if there is any one on God's earth who loves the ladies I believe it is myself. This day is a day that is proud to me, having occupied the position that I did for the past twelve years, and been misunderstood by your race. This is the first opportunity I have had during that time to say that I am your friend. I am here a representative of the southern people, one more slandered and maligned than any man in the nation.

I will say to you and to the colored race that men who bore arms and followed the flag of the Confederacy are, with very few exceptions, your friends. I have an opportunity of saying what I have always felt—that I am your friend, for my interests are your interests, and your interests are my interests. We were born on the same soil, breathe the same air, and live in the same land. Why, then, can we not live as brothers? I will say that when the war broke out I felt it my duty to stand by my people. When the time came I did the best I could, and I don't believe I flickered. I came here with the jeers of some white people, who think that I am doing wrong. I believe that I can exert some influence, and do much to assist the people in strengthening fraternal relations, and shall do all in my power to bring about peace. It has always been my motto to elevate every man—to depress none. I want to elevate you to take positions in law offices, in stores, on farms, and wherever you are capable of going.

I have not said anything about politics today. I don't propose to say anything about politics. You have a right to elect whom you please; vote for the man you think best, and I think, when that is done, that you and I are freemen. Do as you consider right and honest in electing men for office. I did not come here to make you a long speech, although invited to do so by you. I am not much of a speaker, and my business prevented me from preparing myself. I came to meet you as friends, and welcome you to the white people. I want you to come nearer to us. When I can serve you I will do so. We have but one flag, one country; let us stand together. We may differ in color, but not in sentiment. Use your best judgement in selecting men for office and vote as you think right.

Many things have been said about me which are wrong, and which white and black persons here, who stood by me through the war, can contradict. I have been in the heat of battle when colored men, asked me to protect them. I have placed myself between them and the bullets of my men, and told them they should be kept unharmed. Go to work, be industrious, live honestly and act truly, and when you are oppressed I'll come to your relief. I thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for this opportunity you have afforded me to be with you, and to assure you that I am with you in heart and in hand."

I feel like there is not much here that carries historical weight except as a rather classic romanticized Lost Cause political speech. Well regarded in your community means just that.

It is true that he left the KKK after serving as the first Grand Wizard, I believe.

At least one of his own soldiers documented in detail what they saw happen at Fort Pillow, a low point in American military history I feel, even if we debate the details. Just an ugly business.

Alexander Stephens tried to act as if he had never heard of his Cornerstone Speech after the war. This was understandable and not uncommon. But not enough for a statue, in my opinion.

Well to UASF 's point, the statue is there, let's leave it and add some perspective.

I feel like there is not much here that carries historical weight except as a rather classic romanticized Lost Cause political speech. Well regarded in your community means just that.

It is true that he left the KKK after serving as the first Grand Wizard, I believe.

At least one of his own soldiers documented in detail what they saw happen at Fort Pillow, a low point in American military history I feel, even if we debate the details. Just an ugly business.

Alexander Stephens tried to act as if he had never heard of his Cornerstone Speech after the war. This was understandable and not uncommon. But not enough for a statue, in my opinion.

The two examples were 'added extras'. The main reason is his exceptional performance as a military commander and the community went to the time and effort to ensure he was remembered. If some now desire to remove monuments to Forrest then they need to produce some justification for doing so. However, the attitude of some appears to be along the lines of 'the CSA had slaves, that is bad and therefore everyone who served their State for the Confederacy must be bad, and so bad that any trace of them (even their names) must be removed from public view'. Some then look around for other historical figures, find that one or more of their actions one or more centuries ago do not measure up to contemporary standards, so they are then targeted. Thus, you now see other Civil War (and earlier) personalities such as Lincoln, Grant and Washington being targeted for removal.

I'm happy to debate Fort Pillow but this thread would not seem the place for it. War is an ugly business. The Fort Pillow garrison was offered terms of surrender, their commander stupidly refused and they paid a heavy price. Pointless to try and surrender ad hoc once the enemy has you in their sights and on the point of a bayonet.

Conjecture regarding the KKK or later actions of Alexander Stephens must be supported by factual evidence or it can be justly disregarded.

Well to UASF 's point, the statue is there, let's leave it and add some perspective.

To add additional factual details sounds like a fine idea to me.

The historical ignorance in so many Americans is remarkable. The idea that Confederate generals were traitors to the United States is only true after the war, not before. There were two competing visions of the country embedded in the Constitution of 1787. The ACW was fought principally to decide which version of the country would triumph. Slavery was really a proxy for an even more foundational struggle that goes back to the original state conventions that ratified the 1787 Constitution and the ambiguity in that document.

The idea that Confederate generals were traitors to the United States is only true after the war, not before.

Sure, but once they're a traitor, why should they be honored for their previous achievements?

Similarly, no one wants to watch Cosby re-runs now.

The idea that Confederate generals were traitors to the United States is only true after the war, not before.

Sure, but once they're a traitor, why should they be honored for their previous achievements?

They were not traitors to their country, whichever State of the Confederacy they belonged.

Most officers in the CS armed forces, including Generals, who had previously been officers in the US armed forces resigned their commission with the USA as they were legally entitled to do.

Around the time of the Civil War, several Presidential proclamations were issued granting amnesty. The culmination was
Proclamation 179 which was issued on December 25 1868 and granted "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."

Sure, but once they're a traitor, why should they be honored for their previous achievements?

You comment begs the point. They weren't traitors. Unless we are going to completely ignore "intent" as an explanation for one's actions. Most southern officers simply saw their loyalty to their state as the higher responsibility. That was a very common view before 1860 throughout the country. The Northern victory was essentially an assertion that the country could not be divided and included all citizens. Shouldn't then any commemoration of the ACW include both sides? Why should southern generals be excluded from having bases named after them.

I think in the interest of full disclosure it would be fair to point out who sold the slaves to the European explorers. We both know the answer to that.

So very true … it is part of the history … But it does not fit the poorly researched CRT/1619 project(s) "facts", narrative and agenda. Note many, many much smarter and much more educated than I[albeit it wouldn't take much!] that I have said how very inaccurate, skewed, etc., these "projects" are.

As Joe Friday said, "Just the facts … just the facts …

"Most southern officers simply saw their loyalty to their state as the higher responsibility. " That is a very good point. One aspect of this whole discussion which moves past the simple political expediency of today's leftists is that the idea of being a citizen of a 'State' and the loyalty that entailed, was much different in the 1860s than it is today. Transportation was less advanced, geographic barriers posed bigger problems and many people were born and lived their whole lives in their home state. And I believe those who fought for the Confederacy (not just officers) considered themselves as much an American as anyone who fought for the north.

classic romanticized Lost Cause

Yes, that is "cover" for those of the CSA, etc., who don't get or want to get that slavery was wrong, etc. …

Grant as POTUS had to send and keep US troops in the South to stop the murder of freed slaves. By the likes of the KKK, etc. But it continued for decades … e.g. lynching …

Gadzooks and little fishes! This is still going on?

"Most southern officers simply saw their loyalty to their state as the higher responsibility. " That is a very good point.

Than their oath sworn to defend the U.S. government and the Constitution in becoming a United States Military officer or enlisted man?

They simply saw their loyalty to their state as greater than their loyalty and oath to the U.S. Fine. They fought against the United States to end the United States because their real loyalty resided elsewhere.

Regardless of their personal reasons or the logic of the times, that is no reason for the U.S. Government to honor them… none at all, and a lot of reasons NOT to honor men who fought against our form of government.

Well said, McLaddie, about the logic of the times. I get it. These men made a choice. They followed their convictions. But they did not chose to be loyal to the United States. Nothing about their lives or their accomplishments in battle can undo this choice.

I realized this when I saw the Confederate battle flag in the Capitol on 1/6, after so many in the past gave their lives to hold that line. This is not about PC or culture warfare.

The pain has not gone away on either side, it seems. Hpw do we get past it? Deep waters…

This is not about PC or culture warfare.

The fact that this is going on now and not during the previous 150 years means that it is entirely about PC and culture warfare.

With all that was going on in some of the streets of the USA last Summer, etc., etc. It appears this "situation" is not going away anytime soon …

CRT, 1619, etc., are a bit like classic Marxism. But instead of a class vs. class over money. It's race vs. race. As long as that is going on … there will be little "peace", etc., IMO …

The fact that this is going on now and not during the previous 150 years means that it is entirely about PC and culture warfare

It hasn't during the previous 150 years?? USAFpilot, you haven't been paying attention. It is just a matter of which views are winning politically at the moment.

This issue has been hot a number of times. All those confederate statues weren't planted in the 1870s, but the 1890s through the 1920s, to support and express particular views about what was PC AND the culture wars of the time. Folks died during those 'culture wars' in the 1870s through 1890s and beyond. The casualties of that period in the culture wars weren't statues.

All due respect USAF, I think PC culture warfare is about deflection and distraction. Used by media to drive ratings and profits, and by politicians to avoid real issues. I agree that it has gone on for many years. It just makes things harder.

Legion 4, you are right about peace. Its never easy to win it.

"The construction of Trajan's column in the Place Vendome. The column's imperial symbolism led to its being destroyed in 1814, replaced in the 1830s but destroyed again in 1871, and finally restored in 1875."

From a book on Napoleon. The idea of tearing down statues was ridiculous then, as it is now. Everyone who fought in those wars is long dead. Let's leave the statues alone. What a waste of time and money.

Seems the historical changes arrived to England too…

Students At Oxford's Magdalen College Vote To Remove The Portrait Of The Queen

See here
link

While in Canada…

Renewed calls to cancel Canada Day in wake of residential school gravesite discovery

link

Armand

Barbarians are at the gate, and few realize it until it's too late.

Good gawd, what's next? So many things…and yes magnolia leaves are still falling.

I think PC culture warfare is about deflection and distraction. Used by media to drive ratings and profits, and by politicians to avoid real issues.

Bingo ! The tail wagging the dog … I think they use the tactic … never let a "good crisis" go to waste. If there is not a crisis to use as cover, those in charge and the media will find/make one.

Legion 4, you are right about peace. Its never easy to win it.

It seems that is the standard.

"No matter how bad it gets, someone makes a profit."

"War is good for business … War is bad for business."

"Know your enemy … but do business with him anyway."

From a book on Napoleon. The idea of tearing down statues was ridiculous then, as it is now. Everyone who fought in those wars is long dead.

But that does not push the current narrative and agenda of CRT, 1619, etc.

Barbarians are at the gate, and few realize it until it's too late.

The Barbarians are now the new Romans …

History continues to repeat itself. But that is what happens if you don't study or understand it.

Again I have to quote Orwell …

Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.
― George Orwell, 1984

Seems CRT, 1619, BLM types, etc., may already know this … or just got lucky. Finally found a big enough square hole to fit their round peg … Or just use a bigger hammer … Someone will give you money to buy a larger one to do the job …