Restricted Do Rebels deserve new monuments?

cash

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Right here.
My question would be" Do Yankees deserve new monuments?" The men who fought for the south deserve to be remembered by their respective states as much as the oh so saintly and unsullied men who served the Union.

Sounds like a different thread.

To ignore or lessen their courage or fortitude over some current slight by certain groups does them and history a disservice
You're not required to pay tribute too or agree with cause,but you can't ignore history just because it dose'nt give warm fuzzies and make you think all has always been right with the US.

Monuments aren't history books. If every confederate monument disappeared tomorrow not a single person would forget there were confederates who fought in the Civil War. If every confederate monument disappeared tomorrow, no one would be ignoring history.
 

Anna Elizabeth Henry

1st Lieutenant
Silver Patron
Joined
Feb 15, 2015
Location
New York, New York
So would you not have known about your ancestor if it weren't for monuments in the South? If the monuments disappeared tomorrow would you no longer know about your ancestor? Does it take a monument to Robert E. Lee for someone to remember they had an ancestor who fought in the Civil War? My point is that it doesn't take a monument to remember those who came before. Monuments are a statement of who or what is worthy of being honored. In the case of many confederate monuments they are a reminder to African Americans to remain in their "place" because the power structure that erected those monuments was a white power structure that didn't care what they thought.

Are you suggesting we should remove monuments for Confederates, whether for generals or ordinary soldiers simply because it's not politically correct anymore? Should we then also remove monuments honoring people like General Sheridan since he's known for saying some derogatory things about Native Americans? (he denies saying it, but its a stigma that follows his memory nonetheless). Should we then also remove monuments of our founding fathers since many owned slaves? They aren't worthy of honor either since they created the Constitution that allowed slavery to perpetuate when they had a chance to end it. Monuments are not just erected just for those who are 'worthy' of being honored. They are erected for commemorating people and events and to honor those who died, great or small. And who gets to decide who is worthy?

And to answer your question of do we need monuments to remember those who came before us, well, someone must think its important since cemeteries are full of tombstones and town squares across America are dotted with various memorials honoring local fallen soldiers from all wars across history. So, I would say while you don't need it to remember a person or event, its still a vital part remembering those who came before us.
 

cash

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Right here.
Are you suggesting we should remove monuments for Confederates, whether for generals or ordinary soldiers simply because it's not politically correct anymore?

Was it okay to put them up simply because it was politically correct to put them up? Then why isn't it okay to take them down when they're no longer, to use your term, "politically correct?"

For the record, I'm not suggesting we remove monuments to confederates; however, I empathize with those who believe those monuments should be removed. I think instead of being removed monuments should be, if possible, interpreted to tell us about the generation who erected those monuments. But if a community decides they no longer want those monuments to be present, then it's their decision to make.

Should we then also remove monuments honoring people like General Sheridan since he's known for saying some derogatory things about Native Americans? (he denies saying it, but its a stigma that follows his memory nonetheless).

If he denied saying it, then wouldn't it be up to those who claim he said it to prove he said it? If proven, then it would be up to the communities in which his monuments are located to make that determination.

Should we then also remove monuments of our founding fathers since many owned slaves? They aren't worthy of honor either since they created the Constitution that allowed slavery to perpetuate when they had a chance to end it.

Seems to me that's also up to the communities in which those monuments are located.

Monuments are not just erected just for those who are 'worthy' of being honored. They are erected for commemorating people and events and to honor those who died, great or small.

So then where are the monuments to the 9/11 hijackers who crashed aircraft into buildings? They certainly died for their cause, didn't they? Where are the monuments to mass murderers, serial killers, serial rapists, etc.?

Monuments are solely for those who are judged to be worthy of being honored.

And who gets to decide who is worthy?

The community in which the monument is to be erected, and that community retains the right to decide if that person is no longer worthy of being honored.

And to answer your question of do we need monuments to remember those who came before us, well, someone must think its important since cemeteries are full of tombstones and town squares across America are dotted with various memorials honoring local fallen soldiers from all wars across history. So, I would say while you don't need it to remember a person or event, its still a vital part remembering those who came before us.

So how many monuments are there to your ancestors, other than tombstones?

If we didn't have a monument to Robert E. Lee, would we not know today who he was? If we didn't have a monument to confederate soldiers in southern towns, would we have forgotten there were confederate soldiers in the Civil War?

I disagree that monuments are a vital part of remembering. Monuments don't allow us to remember people; however, they play a role in how we remember people or events by what they say about them. The monument tells us that person or that event was worthy of being honored.
 

1SGDan

Captain
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Location
New Hampshire
I would think that given the current push the best effort should be made to save the already existing monuments. The Confederate soldier was honored with these. New ones in the current political climate seem a losing cause.
In 2008 I had the opportunity to do some traveling around Vicksburg, MS. In Raymond there was a monument to Confederate soldiers in front of the elementary (Middle) school. I found that it pleased me to have those soldiers remembered and wasn't concerned at all about anything other than they were good soldiers. I wonder if that monument is still there?
 
Last edited:

Anna Elizabeth Henry

1st Lieutenant
Silver Patron
Joined
Feb 15, 2015
Location
New York, New York
Was it okay to put them up simply because it was politically correct to put them up? Then why isn't it okay to take them down when they're no longer, to use your term, "politically correct?"

I didn't suggest it was politically correct 100 years ago or not when they erected the monuments, but that the world is very different today compared to that era and everyone now is worried certain aspects of history are offensive and shouldn't be displayed as a result. If they want to take monuments down in a fair manner with voting or whatever the jurisdiction deems adequate, than by all means take it down since majority rules.

So how many monuments are there to your ancestors, other than tombstones?

Since you asked, Private W. Kresse who was drafted and died in Vietnam at age 19 was my second cousin. His named is etched on the Vietnam War Memorial. I'm still researching my Civil War ancestors, so I'm unsure if any of them will turn up on memorials in the South.
 

cash

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Right here.
I didn't suggest it was politically correct 100 years ago or not when they erected the monuments, but that the world is very different today compared to that era and everyone now is worried certain aspects of history are offensive and shouldn't be displayed as a result. If they want to take monuments down in a fair manner with voting or whatever the jurisdiction deems adequate, than by all means take it down since majority rules.

And that's what's happening.


Since you asked, Private W. Kresse who was drafted and died in Vietnam at age 19 was my second cousin. His named is etched on the Vietnam War Memorial. I'm still researching my Civil War ancestors, so I'm unsure if any of them will turn up on memorials in the South.

And I bet you would know about Pvt. Kresse had there been no Vietnam Memorial. As to your CW ancestors, you seem to know about them without having to have consulted a monument. So monuments aren't necessary or even vital to remembering people who have come before us.
 

Bee

Captain
Asst. Regtl. Quartermaster Gettysburg 2017
Joined
Dec 21, 2015
I watched this video last night and one of the things I learned was how it came to pass that only less than 5% of U.C.V. chapters approved Resolutions of Tribute when Longstreet died in 1904, thanks to the one-man smear campaign of Jubal Early. I looked up Gettyburg monuments and saw that James Longstreet was one of the last statues erected. Really? Are there any others at the park besides the 1998 statue? I ask this because now the whole "who gets honored (and when)" discussion has been turned sideways (for me).

EDIT: I just noticed that cash's avitar includes the 1998 Longstreet statue


 
Last edited:

Andersonh1

Brigadier General
Moderator
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Location
South Carolina
than by all means take it down since majority rules.

It's not the majority wanting these monuments to come down. It's a politician here, a city council there, or an activist group badgering them to do it. It's very much a minority in any given location trying to have Confederate monuments removed. The exception would be the removal of the battle flag from the SC state house grounds, but that happened after the media managed to tie it to Dylann Roof and the murders in Charleston, so that's an exceptional instance.

The activists and the media are trying to keep using Roof and those murders to justify all the other attacks on Confederate memorabilia. They're going to ride that horse as long as they can. I've probably read two or three dozen articles about taking down some monument somewhere since June of last year, and without fail they ALL reference Dylann Roof and the murders in Charleston. Months later, and that's still being referred to.
 
Last edited:

Anna Elizabeth Henry

1st Lieutenant
Silver Patron
Joined
Feb 15, 2015
Location
New York, New York
It's not the majority wanting these monuments to come down. It's a politician here, a city council there, or an activist group badgering them to do it. It's very much a minority in any given location trying to have Confederate monuments removed. The exception would be the removal of the battle flag from the SC state house grounds, but that happened after the media managed to tie it to Dylann Roof and the murders in Charleston, so that's an exceptional instance. They're trying to keep using Roof and those murders to justify all the other attacks on Confederate memorabilia. They're going to ride that horse as long as they can.

I do think the Roof murders didn't help people's already changing views of things Confederate related. A similar example locally, the mayor of NYC wants to remove a portrait of George Washington from Gracie Mansion, the mayors official reidence because he owned slaves. It would be nice to include portraits of African Amercians & women along with immigrants who made NYC the amazing city it is today but not at the expense of taking Washington down.

I watched this video last night and one of the things I learned was how it came to pass that only less than 5% of U.C.V. chapters approved Resolutions of Tribute when Longstreet died in 1904, thanks to the one-man smear campaign of Jubal Early. I looked up Gettyburg monuments and saw that James Longstreet was one of the last statues erected. Really? Are there any others at the park besides the 1998 statue? I ask this because now the whole "who gets honored (and when)" discussion has been turned sideways (for me).



Thanks for including the video, I'm planning on watching it over the long weekend! Looks interesting. Poor Longstreet got maligned because he dared to criticize Lee. That always bugs me since Longstreet had valid points.
 

cash

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Right here.
It's not the majority wanting these monuments to come down. It's a politician here, a city council there, or an activist group badgering them to do it. It's very much a minority in any given location trying to have Confederate monuments removed. The exception would be the removal of the battle flag from the SC state house grounds, but that happened after the media managed to tie it to Dylann Roof and the murders in Charleston, so that's an exceptional instance.

The activists and the media are trying to keep using Roof and those murders to justify all the other attacks on Confederate memorabilia. They're going to ride that horse as long as they can. I've probably read two or three dozen articles about taking down some monument somewhere since June of last year, and without fail they ALL reference Dylann Roof and the murders in Charleston. Months later, and that's still being referred to.

Do you have evidence that only a minority of people in New Orleans want to remove their monuments?
 

sonofboth

Private
Joined
Feb 20, 2015
The one friend of Roof who met him before the murders said Roof was greatly angered over the Zimmerman affair which of course generated tremendous hate from many in the black community and then from white racists .Those murders were the direct result of the racial foment generated by the media during that trial.
Longstreet was a Republican and as such that caused as much hate and discontent as as his criticism of Lee. Similar feelings were directed toward Col Mosby for the same reason. There are few if any statutes of confederate Generals at Gettysburg mostly monuments to Confederate Soldiers by their respective States.
George Washington is my second cousin eight times removed and Martha also on my mothers side. I do not think George would want to be in the same room with the greasy mayor of New York.
 

Aussie Billy Sherman

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 29, 2015
I watched this video last night and one of the things I learned was how it came to pass that only less than 5% of U.C.V. chapters approved Resolutions of Tribute when Longstreet died in 1904, thanks to the one-man smear campaign of Jubal Early. I looked up Gettyburg monuments and saw that James Longstreet was one of the last statues erected. Really? Are there any others at the park besides the 1998 statue? I ask this because now the whole "who gets honored (and when)" discussion has been turned sideways (for me).

EDIT: I just noticed that cash's avitar includes the 1998 Longstreet statue


Good video Bee. I've always enjoyed the Gettysburg NPS seminars and tours
 

Georgia Sixth

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Location
Texas
the mayor of NYC wants to remove a portrait of George Washington from Gracie Mansion, the mayors official reidence because he owned slaves. It would be nice to include portraits of African Amercians & women along with immigrants who made NYC the amazing city it is today but not at the expense of taking Washington down.

Excellent.
 

Horace Porter

First Sergeant
Joined
Apr 4, 2009
Location
Absoltely Nowhere Now, MA
How so? Please elaborate and use the Washington Monuments as the example.
I didn't realize that you were playacting as a school teacher.

That said, the monument in question tells us nothing about Washington. If anything, its interrupted status and the inscription on the interior stones tell us something about what people saw in Washington and how their interest flagged for years.

Now counter this and prove me wrong. Thank you.
 

Georgia Sixth

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Location
Texas
I didn't realize that you were playacting as a school teacher.

That said, the monument in question tells us nothing about Washington. If anything, its interrupted status and the inscription on the interior stones tell us something about what people saw in Washington and how their interest flagged for years.

Now counter this and prove me wrong. Thank you.

This is what I hate about this forum. There is no interest or intent on my part in proving you or anyone else wrong or right. I wanted to see your thought process as related to the topic of the significance of memorials and monuments. I specifically requested the example I did because it is unrelated to the civil war and any other baggage related to that subject. If I came across like a school marm, it was unintentional.
 

Georgia Sixth

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Location
Texas
Oh
I didn't realize that you were playacting as a school teacher.

That said, the monument in question tells us nothing about Washington. If anything, its interrupted status and the inscription on the interior stones tell us something about what people saw in Washington and how their interest flagged for years.

Now counter this and prove me wrong. Thank you.

Oh,.... and thanks for responding to my request.
 

NedBaldwin

Major
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Location
California
...The good, the bad and the ugly parts all deserve to be remembered. ...
What does 'remembered' mean? Should the good be remembered as good, the bad be remembered as bad? and who decides between good and bad? Or is remembering less judgmental?

I don't see Confederate monuments as a way of glorifying the south or the Confederacy or what it stood for...
You seriously dont see this as glorifying:
RobertELee-NOLA-768x1024.jpg


or this:
E7EFB431-169E-4F01-BD62-5982160958C8_mw1024_s_n.jpg
 

Attachments

  • RobertELee-NOLA-768x1024.jpg
    RobertELee-NOLA-768x1024.jpg
    90.1 KB · Views: 12
  • E7EFB431-169E-4F01-BD62-5982160958C8_mw1024_s_n.jpg
    E7EFB431-169E-4F01-BD62-5982160958C8_mw1024_s_n.jpg
    141.5 KB · Views: 10
Top