Restricted Confederate Monuments under review - New Orleans

LoriAnn

Retired User
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
From the article:

"Rather than removing this history, some advocate adding more monuments or markers, to promote a broader understanding of the past.

Clancy Dubos, a New Orleans columnist and chairman of a weekly newspaper, suggested turning Lee Circle into "Generals Circle" by adding a statue of Union Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman, and making Jefferson Davis Parkway into "Presidents Avenue" by adding a statue of Abraham Lincoln."


What do you guys think of this? Could this be a possible compromise?

The overall discussion has been an eye opener for me. Prior to this, I had never considered that someone would look at a Confederate monument as something offensive as opposed to something historical and educational. Chalk that up to naiveté.

I understand the opposition to it now. But I confess I am also sympathetic to the pro-monument group. I get that it's an emotional issue and hope people work towards respectful compromises.

"The University of Mississippi took down the state flag because it includes the Confederate emblem."


Has the Mississippi state flag itself come under fire? If not, think it will eventually?
 

bdtex

Major General
★★ Sr. Moderator
Silver Patron
Annual Winner
Regtl. Quartermaster Chickamauga 2018 Vicksburg 2019
Joined
Jul 21, 2015
Location
Texas
From the article:

"Rather than removing this history, some advocate adding more monuments or markers, to promote a broader understanding of the past.

Clancy Dubos, a New Orleans columnist and chairman of a weekly newspaper, suggested turning Lee Circle into "Generals Circle" by adding a statue of Union Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman, and making Jefferson Davis Parkway into "Presidents Avenue" by adding a statue of Abraham Lincoln."


What do you guys think of this? Could this be a possible compromise?

The overall discussion has been an eye opener for me. Prior to this, I had never considered that someone would look at a Confederate monument as something offensive as opposed to something historical and educational. Chalk that up to naiveté.

I understand the opposition to it now. But I confess I am also sympathetic to the pro-monument group. I get that it's an emotional issue and hope people work towards respectful compromises.

"The University of Mississippi took down the state flag because it includes the Confederate emblem."


Has the Mississippi state flag itself come under fire? If not, think it will eventually?
From what I understand,private funds were used to erect the monuments that are under threat of removal and were erected long ago. The question then would be who would pay for the new monuments.
 

Jamieva

Captain
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 7, 2006
Location
Midlothian, VA
From the article:

"Rather than removing this history, some advocate adding more monuments or markers, to promote a broader understanding of the past.

Clancy Dubos, a New Orleans columnist and chairman of a weekly newspaper, suggested turning Lee Circle into "Generals Circle" by adding a statue of Union Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman, and making Jefferson Davis Parkway into "Presidents Avenue" by adding a statue of Abraham Lincoln."


What do you guys think of this? Could this be a possible compromise?

The overall discussion has been an eye opener for me. Prior to this, I had never considered that someone would look at a Confederate monument as something offensive as opposed to something historical and educational. Chalk that up to naiveté.

I understand the opposition to it now. But I confess I am also sympathetic to the pro-monument group. I get that it's an emotional issue and hope people work towards respectful compromises.

"The University of Mississippi took down the state flag because it includes the Confederate emblem."


Has the Mississippi state flag itself come under fire? If not, think it will eventually?

Ole Miss still allowed confederate flags to be waved in the stadium up until the late 90s.
 

LoriAnn

Retired User
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
The question then would be who would pay for the new monuments.
Ah. Interesting to think about.

My first thought would be private money from those of us in the North, as a gesture of goodwill to both sides of the issue. Whose wallets exactly? Totally unrealistic? Perhaps. But it's a nice thought and not totally out of the realm of possibility. (Just mostly. :unsure: Welcome to the way I think.)

Might be more realistic (and cheaper?) to move monuments to private land.
 

civilwarincolor

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Oct 27, 2012
Location
California
I have no personal interest or support for any flag other than the US flag, but I think it is sad that the Confederate flag and ultimately much of Confederate symbology was hijacked to represent a racial divide. Those that see this as a touchstone to their past and heritage are having it taken away due to actions of those from 50-60 years ago. We cannot forget what happened in the 1950's and 60's, but the answer is not to try and erase what happened 150 years ago.
 
Top