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

Didn't Eisenhower mention that Lee was a 'great American'?

For all of you who still live in the wacko States (glad I left in 1999); please let me know how racial attitudes have changed because of the removal of statues and the renaming of military bases. I'm sure the 'racial utopia' that BLM and the wacko Left want is coming along any day now – it's just around the corner.

Out of curiosity, how many people did the statues kill?

The kowtowing of the majority to a very tiny, vocal minority of lunatics is mind-blowing and I'm sure it'll solve all the racial problems in the States.

I see that there were some people saying the statue should have been donated to a museum. The sad thing is that it was donated to a museum, The Jefferson School African American Heritage Center (JSAAHC). The JSAAHC refers to themselves frequently as a museum on their website. The JSAAHC was the main body that spearheaded the proposal to melt the statue. The Executive Director of the JSAAHC was present at 'the melting'.

The statue had a rich history. Here's a newspaper article from near the time of the statues unveiling which describes how it depicts a specific instance shortly before Lee's surrender to Grant. Here's the relevant extract:
"Lee divined the plan of his opponent to move to Spottsylvania courthouse. and forestalled him in it. Lee offered to lead his troops in person, but the officers and men alike refused to go into battle until Lee rode to the rear. Gen Gordon, as he rode down the lines with Lee said reassuringly to him; "These men, general, are the brave Virginians." Lee said no word, but removed his hat and rode bare headed along the lines. His silence was a most eloquent address to those valiant men. One young soldier, as he ran crying into battle, loading his musket, shouted through his tears: "Any man who wouldn't fight after that speech would be a **** coward."

It would have been nice if the monument could have remained where it was originally placed. It would have been better if the context of the sculptor's art had included the story on what he was depicting.
Sadly, that is not now possible, and everyone is the lesser for it.
It is deeply shameful that a museum should have been the instigator of the destruction of that historical artwork. It can never be seen by anyone, ever again.

LOL I stand correct, of course you guys also missed this one
link
Chiran Peace Museum for Kamikaze Pilots, you guys were so right a nothing says proud heritage monument like a "peace Museum".
Or maybe this also qualifies as a monument to the Kaiser was machine of the first world war
link
The Philippines really, just goes to show I guess how money works in some parts of the world, though I suspect that the better know this get will spell it end.

As I keep saying:

"Doing right ain't got no end."
Saint "Redlegs" Terrill
Patron Saint of this movement

😂🤣
Subject: Some Bird Names Are Changing Because They're 'Exclusionary,' 'Harmful'


link

@35thOVI

I like the link. It reminded me of an article I read a couple of months ago that mentioned that a beetle in Slovenia is now close to extinction due to its name. The name of that species of beetle is Anophthalmus hitleri. It was named after Adolf Hitler. Collectors of beetles and Third Reich memorabilia have driven it to the brink of extinction solely because of its name.

quaama, I'm sure the beetle understands the necessity of its extinction. It's for The betterment of all mankind. 😉

I suppose sometime in the future Manx cats will have to be renamed because references to the Isle of Man are sexist?

Arthur, of course, that goes without saying. 😉

The Isle of Persons or those of indeterminate Sexuality.

Who are we to slam a sexual designation on an isle? 😂

I am waiting for the name America to be changed.

"Vespucci wrote his will in April 1511. He left most of his modest estate, including five household slaves, to his wife."

Ha! Good one 35th! How about the Isle of They/Them?

That to is appropriate. 😉

@dapeters

Although Im not sure its possible to figure out exactly what point he was making, Arthur1815 did prove that it is rare to find any sort of statue to Japanese soldiers (The Sons of the Kamikazes must have a strong lobby)in Japan and impossible to find Nazi soldiers in Germany. Therefore, Confederate statues in the USA are a glaring inconsistency with how most countries handle periods of their history where madmen temporarily take over and shame the nation.

Please note he believes we should honor the enemy but didnt produce evidence of a Napoleon statue in the UK. Although, there is one in a museum! link

That Outlaw Jose Wales quote is another example of a tone def reaction to removing a statue on public land. The insinuation is that the quote sneers at false morality and virtue signaling (pretty rich considering the source) but it is completely misapplied because removing statues hasn't killed anyone (let alone 750,000 someones) hasn't destroyed the USA or democratic government, or attempted to preserve slavery. Meanwhile, some how, some way, I get the feeling the CSA stood for all those things. To be unable to assess those salient and obscene differences between statue removal and traitors killing Americans and trying to destroy the nation is alarming.

No comment on all those Union statues in the south? 😂 doesn't fit the old narrative huh?

How is the battle on those renaming the birds going? Please keep us informed with a weekly update after the meetings. Does everyone wear masks in the meetings? You know like they do when they are out there shouting "From the river to the sea", for the genocide of all the Jews in Israel.

Can't have those "evil white Jews", oppressing the minority population of Palestine? Right? I know, those Jewish babies climbed into those ovens and turned up the heat on 7th. It was all Israeli AI right?

No comment on all those Union statues in the south? 😂 doesn't fit the old narrative huh?

I was going to spare you the embarrassment but they're the mostly a result of Federal funding not KKK/UDC/SOC funding. Most of them were erected on public property to remind black people who couldn't vote that even if the Confederacy lost, they were still in charge. But then the absence of context and focus is a continuing issue for some on here.

How is the battle on those renaming the birds going?

You tell us, it's no doubt raging inside of you. The only bird around these parts seems to be the Dodo :)

Please keep us informed with a weekly update after the meetings. Does everyone wear masks in the meetings?

Is this what you stand against, masks and information? Honestly, I dont understand your meaning here.

You know like they do when they are out there shouting "From the river to the sea", for the genocide of all the Jews in Israel.

I dont understand this reference either, please explain.

Can't have those "evil white Jews", oppressing the minority population of Palestine? Right?

This is completely unhinged from the discussion here. What is this about? Is this your viewpoint?

I know, those Jewish babies climbed into those ovens and turned up the heat on 7th. It was all Israeli AI right?

Now Im concerned about you, might I suggest therapy?

You understand completely. 🙂 As I'm not, nor ever advocated the removal of any statue or name change. Can you say the same?

Also not my Allies from the colleges, out there marching and supporting Hamas and the Palestinians, after they killed over 30 US citizens and took others hostages. Also threatening Jews and advocating they be exterminated from Israel. Wouldn't supporting those who killed our citizens make them traitors? No statues for them.😉

These are the same ones who marched for monument removal and name changes previously. I'm sure many were also in Portland, Milwaukee, and elsewhere. "Doing right ain't got no end." Right?

I dont understand this reference either, please explain.

"It is fundamentally a call for a Palestinian state extending from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, territory that includes the State of Israel, which would mean the dismantling of the Jewish state."

link

You understand completely. 🙂 As I'm not, nor ever advocated the removal of any statue or name change. Can you say the same?

I have never advocated for the removal of any statue.

Also not my Allies from the colleges, out there marching and supporting Hamas and the Palestinians, after they killed over 30 US citizens and took others hostages. Also threatening Jews and advocating they be exterminated from Israel. Wouldn't supporting those who killed our citizens make them traitors? No statues for them.😉

Yes, I know what you mean, you give off an anti higher learning vibe and are kinda soft on the Confederacy. But this is confusing, it it looks like you're saying that by analogy, if a group kills Americans they shouldnt get a statue and anyone who continues to support that group is a traitor to the USA. That fits the CSA to a tee.

These are the same ones who marched for monument removal and name changes previously. I'm sure many were also in Portland, Milwaukee, and elsewhere.

You think the students in Northern schools are responsible for CSA statue removal?

"Doing right ain't got no end." Right?

That film was set in Kansas, right?

Dont forget to click your heels together three times. :)

"I have never advocated for the removal of any statue."

But you do seem to take great glee in it.

"You think the students in Northern schools are responsible for CSA statue removal?"

Actually I'm saying the same indoctrinated and brainwashed youth from "all colleges", who advocated for the removal and destruction of statues and the renaming of buildings and land, are the same ones today, advocating for the elimination of the Jews of Israel as a people.

As they say:
"From the river to the sea"

The Hitler Youth were indoctrinated from their youth in the superiority of the Aryan race and Germany was the representation of pure Arianism. All others were Untermensch.

We have at least 2 generations that have been indoctrinated to despise all things white. The white race is the source of world suffering. The whites have subjugated all other minorities. If they too are white, They have been thought to self loath. They see the Israelis as just another white oppressor. Is it any wonder they do what they do?

This belief leads to an endless chain of hate without an end.

But I'm sure you will join me in condemning those in this country who support Hamas and the Palestinian cause of removal and or elimination of all Israeli Jews. Right?

"Out of curiosity, how many people did the statues kill?"

Not sure if anybody was killed, but I heard that a few people were injured when the statues they were pulling down fell on them… ;-)

@Steve Wilcox

"It is fundamentally a call for a Palestinian state extending from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, territory that includes the State of Israel, which would mean the dismantling of the Jewish state."

Thank you. I understood it but not how it related to the thread topic. At least at the time it was posted. Now I think I recall that the poster doesnt think any of this happens in a vacuum but rather is all part of a cosmic effort to destroy Western culture by the obviously disgusting but somehow also attractive enough to claim one billion members leftist movement.

"Out of curiosity, how many people did the statues kill?"

Not sure if anybody was killed, but I heard that a few people were injured when the statues they were pulling down fell on them… ;-)

During the Revolution, our people melted down statues like George III to make shot, thus maybe statues do indeed also kill.

APDC, since you've mentioned the Revolution, I'll remind you that there is a statue of Washington – an enemy who would also have been condemned as a traitor had he not won – in Trafalgar Square in the UK.

There are also statues of Charles Edward Stuart, who fought against the British Crown, in Scotland and in Derby, England; and several of William Wallace, who also fought the English, in Scotland. These were erected after Scotland had become part of Great Britain, later the UK, yet no one seems to have objected to them; rather, they are seen as expressions of Scots' pride in their past – not unlike Southerners' pride in their brave Confederate soldiers, perhaps?

Similarly, there are statues to Owain Glyndwr in Wales.

There are also statues of traitors, such as Thomas More and Oliver Cromwell in London.

So there are statues of traitors and enemies in this country.

I said I can respect the bravery of those who fought for Napoleon, not that there necessarily should be a statue of him in the UK – but actually, I wouldn't mind if there were.

APDC, since you've mentioned the Revolution, I'll remind you that there is a statue of Washington – an enemy who would also have been condemned as a traitor had he not won – in Trafalgar Square in the UK.

How many Washington's do you have up? One? We have a couple thousand Confederate monuments. Do you think degree and frequency matter?

When we are down to one Confederate monument, would that be the same degree here as your Washington example?

There are also statues of Charles Edward Stuart, who fought against the British Crown, in Scotland and in Derby, England; and several of William Wallace, who also fought the English, in Scotland. These were erected after Scotland had become part of Great Britain, later the UK, yet no one seems to have objected to them; rather, they are seen as expressions of Scots' pride in their past – not unlike Southerners' pride in their brave Confederate soldiers, perhaps?

The least the UK government could do after hanging, drawing and quartering a lot of those men. If we had hanged drawn and quartered all the confederate officers, maybe we'd be more nationally amenable towards honoring them with statues too.

I dont think anyone cares that much about pride in Confederate soldiers, the problem is placing the statues in public spaces.

There are also statues of traitors, such as Thomas More and Oliver Cromwell in London.

So there are statues of traitors and enemies in this country.

I dont know what point youre making here. We have many more statues to traitors here than you have there.

I said I can respect the bravery of those who fought for Napoleon, not that there necessarily should be a statue of him in the UK – but actually, I wouldn't mind if there were.

That's very big of you but Im not sure Napoleon would approve.

I think somewhere in this thread, but I really can't be bothered to check back, it was suggested that other countries did not contain statues to enemies or traitors and so by implication that the USA should not.

I was pointing out that in the UK there are such statues and that they don't cause problems.

BTW, there is a statue of Napoleon in the UK, in Apsley House, Wellington's London house and a museum that can be visited by the public today.

I think somewhere in this thread, but I really can't be bothered to check back, it was suggested that other countries did not contain statues to enemies or traitors and so by implication that the USA should not.

Im getting a good idea of what you can and cant be bothered with. I dont know why "never" has to be zero percent, it's a superlative we use approaching but not necessarily needing to hit zero.

I've noticed you do this quite a bit. Is there anything useful apart from throwing one offs in someone's face? Should we run out and build more CSA monuments because Britain has one Washington?

Again, the fact that you have to dig up examples and that they are so rare is the opposite of what I think you think youre proving. We have thousands of traitor statues, you have what, 10? Who is actually more tolerant of traitors, the UK or the USA?

I was pointing out that in the UK there are such statues and that they don't cause problems.

That's really not quite true now, is it? Looks like Cromwell bothers lots of people. For the record, I dont like him either.

link

BTW, there is a statue of Napoleon in the UK, in Apsley House, Wellington's London house and a museum that can be visited by the public today.

I mentioned that Napoleon already. He really is quite sexy, dont you think?

I hesitate to speculate on other people's beliefs, but I think it is probably reasonable to suggest that the majority of people in the South in 1861 did not consider that leaving the Union was an act of treason. The North of course took a different view and because it won the war was able to impose its interpretation upon the act of secession. Had the South won the war, there would have been no question of its actions being regarded as treason. 'Treason never succeeds…' as the saying goes.
I also suspect that many Southerners today, seeing a statue of a Confederate soldier, do not think 'There's a traitor,' just as Scots do not when seeing a statue of William Wallace, or Welsh, one of Owain Glyndwr.
This movement to remove all memorials to Confederates risks causing a backlash that will cause more harm than good.

" I dont know why "never" has to be zero percent, it's a superlative we use approaching but not necessarily needing to hit zero."

I understand. Yet another example of two nations divided by a common language.

I hesitate to speculate on other people's beliefs, but I think it is probably reasonable to suggest that the majority of people in the South in 1861 did not consider that leaving the Union was an act of treason.

Some did, some didnt. I dont think the Lee statue has anything to do with what Southerners thought in 1861.

The North of course took a different view and because it won the war was able to impose its interpretation upon the act of secession. Had the South won the war, there would have been no question of its actions being regarded as treason. 'Treason never succeeds…' as the saying goes.

This is complex but there is a stronger Constitutional argument that Unilateral Secession was always prohibited.

I also suspect that many Southerners today, seeing a statue of a Confederate soldier, do not think 'There's a traitor,

Well, then let's replace it with a Union soldier.

just as Scots do not when seeing a statue of William Wallace, or Welsh, one of Owain Glyndwr.

I think you have something here and I predict that, just like in Merry Old England, in 800 years we will bring our CSA personalities back.

This movement to remove all memorials to Confederates risks causing a backlash that will cause more harm than good.

It could be. I dont know that leaving those monuments in public places is justified but it could be that it creates nostalgia for the CSA where none before existed.

However, I still don't know what point you're trying to make overall. There is enough controversy over CSA statues on public property and the reasons they were initially erected that Taxpayers often dont want them there anymore in sizeable enough numbers that that the statues get removed.

In a democracy, minorities sometimes lose. There was push back when they erected the Lee statue but those voices got ridden over because they had no power.

My people served in the Union Army. The Confederate Army tried to kill them. I'm not willing to celebrate those that tried to kill my kin. I'll also not support any statues to Osama bin Laden in the US.

Arthur1815…Scots do not see Wallace as a traitor because – unlike confederates – he never betrayed his country. Both you and Au pas de Charge seem to to have somehow mistaken England and Scotland for being the same thing.

The Confederates didn't betray their country, they left it.

Marcus Brutus; there was no mechanism for doing so and the whole notion was for the benefit of a handful of rich men. They betrayed their fellow southerners as well as their country.

Uglyfatbloke, my point – perhaps I did not make it clearly enough? – was precisely that Scots would not regard Wallace as a traitor, although the English executed him as one, because he had not betrayed their country; similarly, Southerners would not regard Confederates as traitors because they fought for their own states.

Are Scottish and Welsh people who seek independence for their countries 'betraying' the United Kingdom?

Hmmm. OK.
The UK has failed Scotland and the Union needs dissolving. I've no opinion on Wales, but the UK has only two constituent parts constitutionally; the kingdoms of England and Scotland – hence it is the 'UK of Great Britain and Northern Ireland'. Northern Ireland is a province and Wales is – constitutionally – part of England. Since the 2014 referendum Scots have repeatedly elected a majority of pro-independence representatives for both Holyrood and Westminster, which is the correct vehicle, however the English parties won't play ball and there's not really much Scotland can do about that in our pseudo-democracy. Constitutionally Wales is part of England. Edward executed Wallace as a demonstration of power to his own subjects and in the hopes (however fanciful) that the act would bring 'closure'. As a jurist of some ability he would have been well aware that the charge of treason was without foundation in law.

Wales may – as a matter of constitutional law – be 'part of England' (as a result of military conquest, not choice) but if in the future Scotland were to gain its independence, that legal technicality would hardly convince the Welsh people that they did not have an equal – moral – right to independence, and to take that line would be political suicide for the Westminster government.

Similarly, I suspect legalistic arguments about whether or not states had a right to leave the Union cut little ice with many Southerners. If a state could choose to become a member of the United States, it would seem not unreasonable that it should have a right to choose to leave.

I quite agree; though the Westminster parties have in fact already agreed to refuse a Scottish referendum – doubtless since they hold a tiny handful of Scottish seats between them they feel they have nothing to lose.

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

Wow! There could not be a more incorrect/inaccurate statement. Many arguments could be made for removing/keeping statues and memorials to Confederate soldiers and I can see good points on either side. But to make a blanket statement like this exhibits a total failure to even try to understand an historically complex period in history.

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

95th Division: Wow! There could not be a more incorrect/inaccurate statement. Many arguments could be made for removing/keeping statues and memorials to Confederate soldiers and I can see good points on either side. But to make a blanket statement like this exhibits a total failure to even try to understand an historically complex period in history.

My statement was made in response to this statement by Marcus Brutus:

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.

Marcus Brutus does not believe that the Lost Cause ideology exists and sees the Confederacy and its legacy as a legitimate government. If you agree with that, let us know.

Marcus Brutus: The Confederates didn't betray their country, they left it.

Here you go, MB believes the Confederacy was just like France or Britain or Canada.

Except that he needs to tell us what he would consider one million Canadians if they were to go fight for a foreign cause against Canada; would they simply have left Canada and not betrayed it?

For those interested in history rather than ideology, one must bear in mind that the Confederacy dissolved the Union and thus my statement is correct.

@arthur1815 and uglyfatbloke

There is no threat to Southern monuments overall, there is simply some removal on public property where enough people find them to be offensively in our faces. For a variety of reasons, no justification needs to be offered for their removal including but not limited to the defiant message they were intended to send to the country and certain demographics and the fact that it costs the Nation tens of millions to maintain them. But the bottom line is if people want them out, they're out. No one has to prove anything because it's a matter of aesthetics and symbolism. And if neither of you think those things matter, then ask yourselves what prompted the monuments to be erected in the first place?

The Confederacy did not 'destroy the Union' because those states that wished to remain in the Union were free to do, and did. Just as the UK did not destroy the European Union by leaving it. The membership of both unions changed, but they did not cease to exist.

If the Confederacy, merely by seceding, had 'destroyed the Union' how was it that the President of the United States and the Union Army was able to conduct a war against it and defeat it?

The Confederacy did not 'destroy the Union' because those states that wished to remain in the Union were free to do, and did. Just as the UK did not destroy the European Union by leaving it. The membership of both unions changed, but they did not cease to exist.

The Confederacy wasn't free to leave unilaterally. They did dissolve the Union.

The UK's association with the EU isn't remotely similar to the situation in the USA but I do note that in contradistinction to the CSA, the UK voted on leaving in a legal fashion and triggered a mutually accepted legal clause for an exit from the EU.

If the Confederacy, merely by seceding, had 'destroyed the Union' how was it that the President of the United States and the Union Army was able to conduct a war against it and defeat it?

I didn't say they destroyed the Union, I said they tried to destroy the USA.

And the reason the Union was able to defeat the CSA is because the CSA was a poorly thought out, immature, short sighted, greedy, corrupt, self serving bucket of maggoty compost which thought the whole world would applaud their cause and found out they were the only ones listening to their detachment from reality.

Au pas De Charge…..I never suggested otherwise.

@arthur1815

This is an interesting talk surrounding the creation and ultimate placement/dedication of the Lee Statue and all the controversy it stirred up. This isnt a new controversy. At the turn of the 20th Century, it was a problem to allow statues to traitors; in fact, if anything, it was even more of a national outrage back then.

If nothing else, it'll disabuse those holding Marie Antoinette level reconciliation fantasies that never did exist and are eminently part of the Lost Cause narrative. Frankly shocking.

YouTube link

Wow, folks still willing to beat the bones of this dead horse. I can't even imagine how many post have been made about the culture and politics of the ACW. The only thing this post really resolves is that human nature has not and will not change.
Guys…..there where good and bad folks on both sides, each side did things that future generations can learn from, both to do and not to do. The rest is just details down in the weeds. The ACW story is not unique to human history, just one sentence in a book still being written and I have 10,000+ years to back up that statement:) Happy gaming all:)

Wow, folks still willing to beat the bones of this dead horse.

Which horse is having it's bones beaten? Seems like plenty around here dont know the story around the statue's erection.

Guys…..there where good and bad folks on both sides, each side did things that future generations can learn from, both to do and not to do.

Oh? Who were the good folks on the side of the Confederacy? And what can we learn from the Confederacy and their commanders?

Au pas de Charge "The Angel of Marye's Heights" read up on it, only one example.
One thing you might need to learn about human nature is everyone has both good and bad in them. I'm sure there are things we all have done we are proud of and things we have said and done we would not want everyone to know about us.