"Robert E. Lee statue melted in secret, 'symbolic' ceremony," Topic

to be remade into 'inclusive' public art.

Lee statue's proposed removal sparked 'Unite the Right' rally in 2017

More here:

link

Quite sickening really

Who owns the (former) statue?

This is a travesty.

While I am no fan of statues of Confederate general, neither am I of secret ceremonies – although to be fair given the current political climate there are legitimate safety concerns

I'm fine with the metal from it being repurposed into a new public monument. It was a propaganda piece promoting the lost cause donated to the city of Charlottesville.

I wouldn't say it was a secret ceremony either, the location was kept confidential due to the obvious reasons.. It was covered by media outlets.

link

Good

Wanna bet the "inclusive" art is at least as much propaganda as the original statue? And won't demonstrate the same skill?

+1 Robert P.

Down the memory hole with him! 1984 is a how-to-do-it manual.

Destruction of art is censorship.
Totalitarians love censorship.
Just like when the Taliban destroyed the ancient Buddhas in Afghanistan.

If you accept a donation and don't want it anymore then return it to the giver, don't destroy it.

At the time of the Civil War the USA and CSA were both slave nations.

Many people were loyal to their state rather than to the nation, in both the USA and CSA. I sen nothing wrong with the commemoration of Confederate generals, or Native Americans, they are all part of our common heritage, even though they fought against the USA.

Many of these statues were erected between 1890 and 1930 as a way to express the healing, forgiveness and unity of the nation. Apparently those things are no longer fashionable for some.

When the government has to do these things in secret then even they know they are wrong. Reporting about it afterwards is hardly what I expect from an open and transparent government.

Mike Bunkermeister Creek
Bunker Talk blog

Although I don't agree with your argument Bunkermeister, I do agree with you that it should have been returned to whoever donated it if possible.

Is it okay to have a Lee statue of his pre ACW service?

How many WWII games use Lee and Stewart tanks or have them in museums? How about Sherman, the father of Total War and a confirmed 'negro' hater? Any issues there? I just want to know where we stop drawing lines because I'd hate to think the wrong thoughts and face re-education.

Eh, I'm just an old guy now.

Why didn't they just donate it to an ACW museum?

Oh, that's right, they want to destroy the past. I guess they don't realize that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

Very interested to see what the new ‘inclusive' artwork is as it will be some feat to produce a piece of art that offends no- one.

Whilst here in UK some statues or memorials of people involved in slavery have been removed from their original sites, they have not been wantonly destroyed, as far as I know.

I suspect Robert P. and BillyNM are right!

If you have to do it in secret, its either illegal or immoral.
When the Federal troops burned down the family farm, they at least did it in the open and laughed about it. Of course my families crime was obvious, since they lived in the wrong county.

The winners of wars write the history. Has the Left won the war?

Or you could believe there might be reactions affecting your personal safety, as at Charlottesville. I think the statue should have gone to a museum. It symbolizes many things, offers a lot of food for thought. It's an historic artifact. While I get the idea of changing its representation to "All men are created equal" somehow, that could be done by the statue in a museum as a part of our history. And I agree, any end product will just stoke more division.

But I dislike the spin and tone of the opinion -style reporting from a network that has declared its own digital Nation. No one can tell the difference between its opinions and it's reporting anymore. Watching a group of people acting out roles, acting offended, and spouting outrage is just another way to make money. No attempt at an informative discussion.

JMcCarroll the real issue is not about the "Left", IMO.

It has taken decades of research and writing to correct "Lost Cause" histories and restore more accurate accounts of slavery and the war. Grant is a great example of how the past was buried. The Chernow and White biographies finally brought some truth and justice to his story, IMO. Lee may still need some similar objective work.

+1 Bunkermeister, I couldn't say it any better.

"Whilst here in UK some statues or memorials of people involved in slavery have been removed from their original sites, they have not been wantonly destroyed, as far as I know."

Wasn't the statue of Colston thrown into Bristol Harbor? While it wasn't destroyed, it wasn't for lack of trying.

True, a mob tried to destroy Colston's statue. I was referring to the situation where a statue is removed officially and legally.

"Wanna bet the "inclusive" art is at least as much propaganda as the original statue?"

They'll put up a statue of Lenin, then act all clueless when questioned about it…

The problem is that the Civil War has been revived today. Confederate statues were put up between the turn of the twentieth century and WWII to restore the "Lost Cause" and double down on discriminatory laws. Today there are many people in this "land of the free" that espouse white supremacy and nationalism. This is not good. Especially after the recent racially induced violence and the assault on the Capitol. The lost cause should be denounced for what it is--unabashed bigotry of one group of citizens against another. We can and must do better than that in order to remain the flagship of democracy.

Legionarius, no. The left's demand for "white supremacy" to be against far exceeds the supply of it. Most racism today comes from the left, and from one particular political party which depends on racial animosity.

I beg to differ. A certain party has become anti- democratic and a dangerous personality cult. It's leaders espouse ideas and values that would make the likes of Lincoln and Eisenhower turn in their tombs.

+1 eindecker. Only one party has members in congress espousing genocide against the jews.

Anti-democratic is using the justice and intelligence agencies to silence and destroy an opposing candidate. That is banana-republic stuff.

How some beliefs continue to thrive with so little data, fact-based evidence etc. is a continuing tragedy. I have often wished for the return of Eisenhower, who had a way of telling the truth that left no doubt. The antithesis of cult figures asking us to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

As with the Lost Cause, fear of change is a driving force. Today Eisenhower would have to defer to others or be called a RINO and destroyed.

The truth is too uncomfortable so we turn to those who tell us whatever we want. We grant them power without looking too much under the hood. But then we double down on the choice and join the cult so we don't have to be wrong. Find a scapegoat and we think we find the answer. What fools these mortals be! The Civil War lives on.

+1 Fitzovich

It wasn't a Civil War but a War of Secession, although the reason was still vile. I believe the statues can and should be "repurposed" without being destroyed but haters gotta hate.

People seem to forget that statues became popular as the 1st generation of witnesses, ie. veterans, started dying off. While I don't doubt that there were political reasons for putting up the statues they were primarily commemorative in tone. To reduce their purpose to a Lost Cause narrative is to miss why they were popular in the early 20th century.

People seem to forget that statues became popular as the 1st generation of witnesses, ie. veterans, started dying off.

Those veterans fought to destroy the USA and preserve slavery. Thus, no one is forgetting anything.

While I don't doubt that there were political reasons for putting up the statues they were primarily commemorative in tone.

Aside from the KKK and Daughters of the Confederacy joining hands in promoting a Lost Cause narrative, what political reasons would those be?

To reduce their purpose to a Lost Cause narrative is to miss why they were popular in the early 20th century.

They were popular at that time because the KKK was at its zenith and their crafted nostalgia caught fire.

If there is a point missed here it is that the statues were erected on Federal, State or public property of some type at a time when African Americans couldn't express their opinions or vote.

IIRC the state with the highest KKK membership was Indiana, don't recall many confederate statues in that state.
At this point the installation of Confederation statues occurred in the 100 year range, making it history. If we don't want them on public streets they should be consigned to museums where their historical significance can be explained. Melting them down is an act of propaganda, not justice.

Marcus and Murvihill +1. The monuments have been torn down and the last military camp renamed as of yesterday. Nothing has changed with racial issues in the country nor the call for more. Nor will it. But keep believing if it makes you feel better about yourself.

How many of you people are minorities? I am. Have you or your family ever experienced racism? I have and so have members of my family. Yet I stand against any possible kind of censorship wherever it may raise its ugly head. You old white guys really don't have an opinion on racism because you have never experienced it. Now stop erasing my country's history and go back to playing with your toy soldiers because that is what we're here to do.

IIRC the state with the highest KKK membership was Indiana, don't recall many confederate statues in that state.

They might still have a higher membership than most Southern states today. However, if you read what I actually wrote, you'd see that part of the mix was also a Daughters of the Confederacy chapter. The two bodies often worked hand in hand to erect monuments to the Confederacy.

I only mentioned it because Marcus tantalized us with possible political motives for erecting Confederate statues without enumerating any. I thought I'd get the ball rolling with one of the more salient political reasons, you are free to add a few.

Incidentally, Indiana DID erect a Confederate monument…but now it is gone.

link

At this point the installation of Confederation statues occurred in the 100 year range, making it history.

Yes but those statues are often not tribute to the history of military service but rather the history of racism.

If we don't want them on public streets they should be consigned to museums where their historical significance can be explained. Melting them down is an act of propaganda, not justice.

Secret propaganda? The removal and the treatment of the statues after their removal are two different acts. It could be that the art is sometimes subject to a fit of revenge or neglect by individuals which is unfortunate but if the Federal/State government and the taxpayers want them off public property, then they have to go.

It's an odd viewpoint that you see motives in everyone who wanted to take the statues down and none in the original path to their erection. Even Marcus suggests there were political motives behind putting up the statues but then left us hanging.

It is also hard to believe that some of those who lament the loudest about statue removal are actually art fans. I suppose it's possible but from what Ive seen of the loudest Confederate Statue defenders on here, I somehow doubt it. Are we really supposed to believe that no one ever intended the statues to represent White Supremacy, rebellion and the destruction of the USA? Are we supposed to believe that no one still approves of those continued ideals as embodied by these statues?

I've noticed that some of the pro statue crowd have, on another several threads, imputed motives without supporting evidence and without any hint of reading or analysis; just pure indulgent, confirmation bias.

It would be a very subjective, self serving reality if Speech only meant the most positive of messages when the observer wanted them too and when they disapproved, speech only meant the the most negative of messages. Remember that Statues and symbols are forms of speech.

There may be no silver bullet for this problem but bear it in mind that when you want to shut down someone else's speech that there is also corresponding force trying to do the same to you.

Choctaw +1

We have not allowed the Japan or Germany to put up monuments to their second world war machines. To this date they still do not (yes, they do have a have peace memorials for their civilian dead.)

I have seen with my own eyes a memorial to the men of a Japanese kamikaze squadron in the Philippines. It would appear the Philippine government and citizens do not object a monument that honours the sacrifice of brave men, even though they were the enemy.

Subject: Chiran Peace Museum for Kamikaze Pilots – Wikipedia


link

I have seen with my own eyes a memorial to the men of a Japanese kamikaze squadron in the Philippines. It would appear the Philippine government and citizens do not object a monument that honours the sacrifice of brave men, even though they were the enemy.

This is a tone def analogy for many reasons. One of those reasons is that it's a different country dealing with invaders and not traitors. Another is that those invaders were pretty much eliminated from the island at the end of the war and dont have a lot of present day supporters. It wasnt the Japanese or the Kamikazes or even pro Kamikaze groups that erected the statue.

If youre suggesting that the USA shouldve killed everyone in the Confederacy, then maybe a statue to an extinct foe couldve been relatively harmless like a statue of a DoDo bird. However the DoDo's equivalent in this country still walks around getting big ideas from Confederate monuments which are almost all oddly in Southern states…except for Indiana where someone pointed out that the KKK was super powerful. There are a few other scattered ones in the North placed during a time when both the KKK and the UDC had broad national influence.

I was replying to the point made by dapeters, not trying to make 'a tone def analogy' with the Robert E Lee statue – which I think is being rather rude.
The memorial to which I referred was not a statue, as your reply seems to suggest. Do you know for sure that no Japanese were involved in the erection of that memorial? If so, please share your evidence.
I'm not sure exactly what a 'pro-Kamikaze' group would be. IMHO, it is perfectly possible to respect the bravery of such men to die for their country – just as I respect the men who marched under Napoleon's eagles – without being a supporter of the cause for which they fought. If then, you care to regard me as 'pro-Kamikaze' on that basis, I shall not object.

Arthur1815 +1 😉

The memorial to which I referred was not a statue, as your reply seems to suggest.

Do you mean this one?

link

Looks rather like a statue, doesnt it?

Perhaps you were referring to one of the many other kamikaze memorials in the Philippines?

Do you know for sure that no Japanese were involved in the erection of that memorial? If so, please share your evidence.

Not only am I not sure, I didnt say anything of the sort.

I'm not sure exactly what a 'pro-Kamikaze' group would be.

It would be like a pro CSA group which would be like an anti American group still trying to pretend that theyre patriots.

IMHO, it is perfectly possible to respect the bravery of such men to die for their country

Sure is. But please explain why those statues are always CSA Big shots or memorials? They just all accidentally decided to praise the CSA and ignore the Union soldiers? How many memorials to the war in the South pay homage to the brave soldiers of the Union?

– just as I respect the men who marched under Napoleon's eagles – without being a supporter of the cause for which they fought.

Are there lots of Memorials to Napoleon in the UK?

If then, you care to regard me as 'pro-Kamikaze' on that basis, I shall not object.

I do not consider you pro Kamikaze. I do however think you should read the article about the Philippines Kamikaze statue or memorial. All of it.

"Sure is. But please explain why those statues are always CSA Big shots or memorials? They just all accidentally decided to praise the CSA and ignore the Union soldiers? How many memorials to the war in the South pay homage to the brave soldiers of the Union?"

Well, On almost every civil war battlefield in the south.

Also actually in quite a few southern states and Scotland.

Subject: List of Union Civil War monuments and memorials – Wikipedia


link

APDC,
Thank you for that article about the Philippine Kamikaze memorial; I found it very interesting, but I don't think it can have been the one I saw.

I asked how you could be sure no Japanese were involved in the creation of the memorial, and you replied:

"Not only am I not sure, I didn't say anything of the sort."

But, unless you use language in a very strange way, when you
wrote:

"It wasn't the Japanese or the Kamikazes or even pro Kamikaze groups that erected the statue."

that was exactly what you said.

Since I had never made any point about the erection of statues to CSA soldiers, but was simply responding to dapeter's suggestion that there were no memorials to Japanese combatants by quoting a contrary example, I shan't respond to your comments on that issue.

@arthur did you notice that my monument link was a kamikaze monument on Japanese soil?

Yes I have. But has dapeters, I wonder?

I've knowingly used both the "N" and "C" words…

So I've happily eliminated myself from holding public office and / or having a statue erected of me in a public place.

You read it here first folks…