After the flag

[unionblue]

Sorry I can't in good conscience put a "like" on your post. I agree with you wholeheartedly but can't bring myself to like where all this is going...

MRB1of 863,

You don't have to agree with me, but I think we all have just gotten on the roller coaster of the debate over Confederate symbols and monuments. We'll just have to wait and see if we are thrilled or sick after the ride.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[diane]

UB is right and so is KHale. We can't leave our grandkids a Swiss cheese heritage. Here you go - we cut out all the bad spots. It has to be the whole thing - and that includes all the history from all the different peoples.

 

[M.Warren]

I share your concern, unionblue. I worry that we're teaching our children to remove any symbol, idea or history of any group of Americans because we find parts of that history displeasing. Not that by doing this they're setting a dangerous precedent which may very well be used against them in the future and that they should consider this before they act on emotion. Not that removing parts of history we aren't proud of from view will not delete them. Not that hiding past mistakes opens the door for those mistakes to be repeated. I tend to think that long after this is done and over with, that we along with future generations will look back on it as a tragic mistake.

 

[unionblue]

UB is right and so is KHale. We can't leave our grandkids a Swiss cheese heritage. Here you go - we cut out all the bad spots. It has to be the whole thing - and that includes all the history from all the different peoples.

I share your concern, unionblue. I worry that we're teaching our children to remove any symbol, idea or history of any group of Americans because we find parts of that history displeasing. Not that by doing this they're setting a dangerous precedent which may very well be used against them in the future and that they should consider this before they act on emotion. Not that removing parts of history we aren't proud of from view will not delete them. Not that hiding past mistakes opens the door for those mistakes to be repeated. I tend to think that long after this is done and over with, that we along with future generations will look back on it as a tragic mistake.

diane and M. Warren,

Let me make myself perfectly clear to both of you, as I feel you both deserve to know my meaning.

There are instances where I feel symbols and monuments SHOULD be removed. There are others I feel should not be touched.

In my own view, what is desperately needed, is a factual accounting for the reasons a monument or flag is placed at a location.


If accurate and factual depictions are included at each monument or symbol, I have no problem keeping a monument at a location. If the monument was placed there to reinforce **** or give a false account of history, I have no sympathy for its placement. This will take a monument-by-monument evaluation, in my opinion. We of this generation will have to decide on such, but such should also be determined by factual, verified, historical fact. There should be no hysterical rush to judgment nor last ditch defense of heritage fanatics.

We should decide, as every generation has decided, what represents history and what we need to preserve of it.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[MRB1863]

If the monument was placed there to reinforce **** or give a false account of history, I have no sympathy for its placement.

Then this monument in question is not at all a part of History, anyway. IMHO we are not removing history if a monument or flag or anything else is removed that is falsely represented. But let's not re-write our Nation's History in pandering to those who cannot accept the fact that there have been grand mistakes made that are part of our History. To remove them is akin to one not accepting ALL our History, whether it is good, bad or ugly. I am confident there were widows and orphaned children a century and a half ago in many states both North and South that wished some parts of History never happened, too.

 

[Stony]

This country is as much or more divided today as it was 152 years ago. You can take down all the flags, all the monuments, change the names of all the schools, dorms, mascots, museums and everything else, and people will still complain. If we take down the southern monuments then we should also take down the northern monuments. Otherwise, our school children will not understand the relationship of our history.
And another thing... I see that some people are enjoying this whole process way too much.

 

[M.Warren]

diane and M. Warren,

Let me make myself perfectly clear to both of you, as I feel you both deserve to know my meaning.

There are instances where I feel symbols and monuments SHOULD be removed. There are others I feel should not be touched.

In my own view, what is desperately needed, is a factual accounting for the reasons a monument or flag is placed at a location.


If accurate and factual depictions are included at each monument or symbol, I have no problem keeping a monument at a location. If the monument was placed there to reinforce **** or give a false account of history, I have no sympathy for its placement. This will take a monument-by-monument evaluation, in my opinion. We of this generation will have to decide on such, but such should also be determined by factual, verified, historical fact. There should be no hysterical rush to judgment nor last ditch defense of heritage fanatics.

We should decide, as every generation has decided, what represents history and what we need to preserve of it.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

Thank you for your response, unionblue. To clarify my position. I think this issue started in 1961 with the placement of the CBF on the state house in SC. That should have never happened. I think this could have been avoided by doing the right thing to begin with and removing it from any state ground that represents the government of that state. Meaning placement of that flag in a state cemetery where Confederate soldiers are buried is appropriate. I don't think monuments are a misrepresentation of history but the exact opposite. They are reminders of history for generations to come of specific points in time during the evolution of our country. This entire situation has gotten way out of hand. It could have easily been avoided with cool headed decisions made at the right times, by both sides of the debate, by considering others feelings and acting on those considerations in a reasonable timely manner. Mistakes have been made by everyone outwardly involved in this situation and no one group is at fault. Both sides have valid concerns and make valid points. This subject has gotten far more publicity and attention than it deserves or was necessary. I feel that unfortunately both sides of this debate have been misrepresented by the minority of each side, and I find that regrettable. Cooler heads would have prevailed..

 

[Henry Whitworth]

Don't these people have anything of value to do? As a for instance...studying history? This country is far from perfect, and the struggle to make it what it is today was far from perfect. We need to accept this as a United Nation instead of polarizing in an effort to see "who wins this one". I think we as a younger country have proven that "A Nation divided does not stand..."

And when ****s were putting up statues in public spaces who was there asking, "Don't these people have anything of value to do?"

Now that the things have been sitting there for decades we're supposed to have some reverence for them? Because they're sort of old? When did they stop being defiant gestures against civil liberties and those who dared insist on equality? Or are we still pretending that's not what went on?

 

[CMWinkler]

This sounds like you'd prefer to be defined and bound only by the parts of your heritage that you like, and not by the rest. The heritage thing cuts both ways.

You prefer to be bound by the negative parts of history? We all, well, I thought all of us, tried to emulate and raise up the good while recognizing the bad but refusing to let it define us. I actually thought that was the American way, immigrants coming to this country with nothing and making it a nation. If we only focus on the bad we have nothing in which to look forward.

 

[CMWinkler]

CMWinkler,

And I tend to look at my grandchildren, so young and so full of hope, and worry about the nation and world WE are leaving them with.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

Amen.

 

[MRB1863]

And when ****s were putting up statues in public spaces who was there asking, "Don't these people have anything of value to do?"

Now that the things have been sitting there for decades we're supposed to have some reverence for them? Because they're sort of old? When did they stop being defiant gestures against civil liberties and those who dared insist on equality? Or are we still pretending that's not what went on?

I think we are still on the same page. Let me paste from a post above. Please read it in the unbiased and untainted spirit in which it was written.
"Then this monument in question is not at all a part of History, anyway. IMHO we are not removing history if a monument or flag or anything else is removed that is falsely represented. But let's not re-write our Nation's History in pandering to those who cannot accept the fact that there have been grand mistakes made that are part of our History. To remove them is akin to one not accepting ALL our History, whether it is good, bad or ugly. I am confident there were widows and orphaned children a century and a half ago in many states both North and South that wished some parts of History never happened, too."

Thank you!

 

[R. Alex Raines]

Besides, what will the pigeons do without these statues?

Let them eat squab.

 

[Mild53]

Since I didn't suggest that, I have no problem. We weren't talking about when the Dixiecrats and their usurpation of the flag for political purposes (a move denounced by the UDC but not the SCV) and its use by them from the 1948 campaign. I'll be happy to talk about if you want, but that was not our discussion. You asserted the flag went up on the State House in the 50s for a specific purpose and I pointed out you were in error. A later poster supplied the record supporting my position. When you point out a specific event and attempt to use it to prove a larger point and you are in error about that event, it undermines your larger point.

Please tell me if you want to discuss the Dixiecrats and their misuse, for political purposes, the rectangular version of the CBF.

If you think that you can dismiss my reasoning and use of facts by saying I was off by two years, think again.

Lets get back to the subject of your initial posting.

After many years of use of the CBF by groups as a symbol of resistance to protecting the civil rights of African Americans, and after many years of use of the CBF by racist organizations, Americans have had enough of the CBF.

If having enough also means that confederate statues, monuments, and names go too, you have only the segregationists and racists to blame. Why not wail about these misuses of your ancestors flag?

 

[diane]

diane and M. Warren,

Let me make myself perfectly clear to both of you, as I feel you both deserve to know my meaning.

There are instances where I feel symbols and monuments SHOULD be removed. There are others I feel should not be touched.

In my own view, what is desperately needed, is a factual accounting for the reasons a monument or flag is placed at a location.


If accurate and factual depictions are included at each monument or symbol, I have no problem keeping a monument at a location. If the monument was placed there to reinforce **** or give a false account of history, I have no sympathy for its placement. This will take a monument-by-monument evaluation, in my opinion. We of this generation will have to decide on such, but such should also be determined by factual, verified, historical fact. There should be no hysterical rush to judgment nor last ditch defense of heritage fanatics.

We should decide, as every generation has decided, what represents history and what we need to preserve of it.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

That's what I thought you meant! I don't mind - in fact, think it should be done - removing these in-yer-face type things. That's not about anything but irritating people. But removal, as you say, of other memorials and figures isn't necessary and does what the irritation monuments do - in-yer-face, we can do this. And I'm all for correcting poor to bad information on these items. For instance, I'm pleased that it isn't Custer's massacre anymore but the Battle of Little Bighorn. It was a battle.

 

[K Hale]

And when ****s were putting up statues in public spaces who was there asking, "Don't these people have anything of value to do?"

Now that the things have been sitting there for decades we're supposed to have some reverence for them? Because they're sort of old? When did they stop being defiant gestures against civil liberties and those who dared insist on equality? Or are we still pretending that's not what went on?

When the KKK adopted the CBF as a symbol of terrorism and hatred, why weren't these heritage groups loudly objecting then? Why are they suddenly telling us only NOW that that isn't the flag's true meaning?

Their anger is misplaced.

 

[K Hale]

You prefer to be bound by the negative parts of history? We all, well, I thought all of us, tried to emulate and raise up the good while recognizing the bad but refusing to let it define us. I actually thought that was the American way, immigrants coming to this country with nothing and making it a nation. If we only focus on the bad we have nothing in which to look forward.

Too disingenuous to respond to.

 

[K Hale]

I think we are still on the same page. Let me paste from a post above. Please read it in the unbiased and untainted spirit in which it was written.
"Then this monument in question is not at all a part of History, anyway. IMHO we are not removing history if a monument or flag or anything else is removed that is falsely represented. But let's not re-write our Nation's History in pandering to those who cannot accept the fact that there have been grand mistakes made that are part of our History. To remove them is akin to one not accepting ALL our History, whether it is good, bad or ugly. I am confident there were widows and orphaned children a century and a half ago in many states both North and South that wished some parts of History never happened, too."

Thank you!

Nope, it's very much a part of history. The part the heritage groups keep trying to whitewash and erase.

 

[CMWinkler]

If you think that you can dismiss my reasoning and use of facts by saying I was off by two years, think again.

Actually, I am perfectly free to do so.

Lets get back to the subject of your initial posting.

After many years of use of the CBF by groups as a symbol of resistance to protecting the civil rights of African Americans, and after many years of use of the CBF by racist organizations, Americans have had enough of the CBF.

Actually it was used by those groups consistently for only about 25 years. Be that as it may, may I see your commission? Who appointed you spokesman for the American people? Polls indicate quite to the contrary of your assertion.

If having enough also means that confederate statues, monuments, and names go too, you have only the segregationists and racists to blame. Why not wail about these misuses of your ancestors flag?

I have. So because of some stupid racists, I'm expected to roll over and just let my heritage be destroyed because you think it's deserved? While I appreciate your advice, I think I'll take my own positions.

 

[CMWinkler]

Too disingenuous to respond to.

I said what I thought. Your decision not to respond is certainly up to you. I am perfectly happy with my heritage, but thanks just the same.

 

[CMWinkler]

When the KKK adopted the CBF as a symbol of terrorism and hatred, why weren't these heritage groups loudly objecting then? Why are they suddenly telling us only NOW that that isn't the flag's true meaning?

Their anger is misplaced.

To whom do we complain, Ms. Hale. The SCV has long had a policy of denouncing them and everything for which they stand. What, exactly, should they have done differently?