Restricted Instead of Removing Confederate Statues, Should We Add to Them?

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Location
berlin
When I was livening in Italy, they could never finish a construction project, due to the layers of history buried under piles of rubble: monuments, architecture -- you name it. The US is a very young country with a unique practice of freedom. It has not experienced hostile takeovers, regime changes, and on-site monarchies that would practice the ritual of wiping out the symbols of the previous regime, so that it almost became normal. It is unique to this country that the defeated were allowed to erect tributes and fly emblems that would otherwise be indentified as treasonous behaviour in many other places.
it's the same with battlefield preservation - if we preserved every battlefield we would hardly find space to build an outhouse
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bee

Andersonh1

Major
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Location
South Carolina
Because you've pointed out that the Union service of the men who were in the 1st Louisiana Native Guard doesn't count at all, doesn't deserve its own monument. Of all the units that were in the Civil War, they can only be honored if we find some Confederate unit--one that really wasn't even much of a military unit at all--and pair the 1st Louisiana with them.

That's just insulting to the memory of those men.
Sorry, I completely disagree. The Native Guard are a pretty remarkable story of persisting at attempts to be noticed and make a difference in a society that was pretty hostile. They deserve to have their story recognized and told, and it's insulting to pretend that their Confederate service meant nothing.

To put it another way, did the white majority have to approve of them before their attempts to achieve equality in the military meant something? Or did their efforts perhaps mean more because they were fighting an uphill battle?
 
Last edited:
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

matthew mckeon

Colonel
Retired Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Well, all I've got to say about this is, congratulations. Political Correctness run completely amok. Good for you.

The statue in question was provided as an offering after the Great Crash of 1987 to the spirit of an America that desperately needed it. Yes, it was delivered and placed by the artist, illegally. It's removal by police created a public outcry that brought the Mayor and the Parks Department Commissioner into action, to save it and so they did.

I don't know what the 'little girl' point is, but a bull is a sign of prosperity. Maybe a more Politically Correct artist may offer a new statue, of a bear, signifying downturn, recession and depression. All the bloggers will surely be happy with that.

http://chargingbull.com/chargingbull.html
I assumed that they were too cheap to spring for an actual golden calf.
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Location
berlin
Then that's unfortunate and wrong. Let them each speak for themselves.
i guess if i can't make addons i can't take them down either?

that might work in an underpopulated country like yours - wonder there'd be enough space left in berlin to park a single car with all those kings, kurfürsten (prince electors), emperors, führers, comrades (especially uncle joes)* - we're lucky the bloody romans never made it to this place

---

* there were more than one each
 

matthew mckeon

Colonel
Retired Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Sorry, I completely disagree. The Native Guard are a pretty remarkable story of persisting at attempts to be noticed and make a difference in a society that was pretty hostile. They deserve to have their story recognized and told, and it's insulting to pretend that their Confederate service meant nothing.

To put it another way, did the white majority have to approve of them before their attempts to achieve equality in the military meant something? Or did their efforts perhaps mean more because they were fighting an uphill battle?
I'm a little worried about getting off the fascinating topic of messing with pompous statuary.

But what the heck.

There was a fascinating photograph circulating, labeled "Native Guards." I believe it made still be found here and there. Some nefarious person had taken a photograph of a company of United States Colored Troops and altered it, then claimed it was a picture of African Americans in the Confederate cause.

And I thought. "That's perfect." It sums up the entire Native Guards and Black Confederate myth in a single image. A fraudulent attempt to use the achievement and courage of African Americans in their effort to destroy the slave owners' republic to spit shine the tarnished image of the Confederate project.

I can't wait for the statue.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

18thVirginia

Major
Joined
Sep 8, 2012
Sorry, I completely disagree. The Native Guard are a pretty remarkable story of persisting at attempts to be noticed and make a difference in a society that was pretty hostile. They deserve to have their story recognized and told, and it's insulting to pretend that their Confederate service meant nothing.

To put it another way, did the white majority have to approve of them before their attempts to achieve equality in the military meant something? Or did their efforts perhaps mean more because they were fighting an uphill battle?
If the Confederate Native Guards were special, something to be so proud of, why has no monument been previously dedicated to them in New Orleans, where there are plenty of Confederate monuments in prominent places in the city? There are monuments to generals who never lived in New Orleans, to Jefferson Davis who lived there when he was dying, to Confederate generals from Arkansas, to native son Beauregard, to Confederate priests with only a slight connection to New Orleans. Why none to this group--whose Confederate service you've extolled?
 

Andersonh1

Major
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Location
South Carolina
There was a fascinating photograph circulating, labeled "Native Guards." I believe it made still be found here and there. Some nefarious person had taken a photograph of a company of United States Colored Troops and altered it, then claimed it was a picture of African Americans in the Confederate cause.
I've seen the picture you describe turn up a number of times, with the Union officer cropped off of course, and every time either I or someone else will point out that it's actually a picture of the Union Native Guards. I think some people pass it on out of ignorance, while some are probably pushing a fake version of history. There's not always a way to know which is which. I don't know who originally decided to push the fake version, but there are attempts to correct the record among the various Southern heritage groups by those of us who care about the truth.

If the Confederate Native Guards were special, something to be so proud of, why has no monument been previously dedicated to them in New Orleans, where there are plenty of Confederate monuments in prominent places in the city? There are monuments to generals who never lived in New Orleans, to Jefferson Davis who lived there when he was dying, to Confederate generals from Arkansas, to native son Beauregard, to Confederate priests with only a slight connection to New Orleans. Why none to this group--whose Confederate service you've extolled?
I can only give you my opinion of them. But I would say that views change over time, and sometimes people were not recognized in the past who should have been. There's no reason not to correct that omission now.
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Location
Long Island, NY
I recall watching the news one day several years ago as journalists filmed the Taliban shooting rockets at ancient desert monuments carved into the cliffs a thousand years ago by a people with a vision and they were blowing them to pieces. I thought at that time, someone will be at war with these people before long. Anyone with so little regard for history must also have a similarly small regard for human life.
Is there a proposal to fire missles at the statues? I definitely oppose that, as, I am sure, does everyone here.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Location
Long Island, NY
as far as i know those buddhas were destroyed with c4 or semtex, anyway
Longhall says he watched it on TV, so perhaps the articles from the period saying that explosives were attached to the Bamiyan statues rather than missles are incorrect.

In any event, moving a statue is not the same as blowing it up.
 

huskerblitz

Captain
Joined
Jun 8, 2013
Location
Nebraska
i guess if i can't make addons i can't take them down either?

that might work in an underpopulated country like yours - wonder there'd be enough space left in berlin to park a single car with all those kings, kurfürsten (prince electors), emperors, führers, comrades (especially uncle joes)* - we're lucky the bloody romans never made it to this place

---

* there were more than one each
The US is underpopulated???

The problem with add-ons instead of new stand-alones is the same as taking an author's work and merely changing the ending and publishing it. Write your own **** story and allow me to take away what I want to take away from the piece of art (which they basically are). I don't need someone else dictating their narrative to me. Nor do other Americans. We are perfectly capable on our own. People on this site gripe all the time about biased history. All this would do flip one biased point of view to another biased point of view. Of course I get that for some it's the point of view they want to ram down other's throat. So add their own at a respectful distance and tell both stories.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Joined
Aug 30, 2016
Location
Bartlett, TN
This is a difficult subject to answer. I personally agree with @ucvrelics.com , as I'm a huge fan of Forrest, especially of his statue here in Memphis. I want to say it should boil down to there being a vote of the city populace, but I can't help the fact that some are ignorant of the history behind a monument. Forrest for example, was tarnished by his "fellow" Confederate comrades for befriending blacks as was done to Longstreet, and is now remembered for finding a hate group based off of hatred for blacks. The truth is that he never found it, however, he joined it and became the Grand Wizard for his nickname "Wizard of the Saddle" in the Civil War.

'After only a year as Grand Wizard, in January 1869, faced with an ungovernable membership employing methods that seemed increasingly counterproductive, Forrest issued KKK General Order Number One: “It is therefore ordered and decreed, that the masks and costumes of this Order be entirely abolished and destroyed.” [63]

In August 1874, Forrest “volunteered to help ‘exterminate’ those men responsible for the continued violence against the blacks.” After the murder of four blacks by a lynch mob after they were arrested for defending themselves at a BBQ, Forrest wrote to Tennessee Governor Brown, offering “to exterminate the white marauders who disgrace their race by this cowardly murder of Negroes.” [64]


By the end of his life, Forrest’s racial attitudes would evolve — in 1875, he advocated for the admission of blacks into law school — and he lived to fully renounce his involvement with the Klan that he headed and abolished.'


I by no means am defending Confederate monuments, but I'm defending monuments based on their back story. Confederate or Union, I think it depends on their actions, including before or after the war.

I don't want to ramble on about Forrest as I love to do, but I'm all for defending his monument.

P.S. : I just want to express my opinion that some of these groups are embarrassing to me that defend Forrest's monument. Some of those who fly a bunch of CSA battle flags down town during his birthday don't know that after the war he loved the Union as anyone else, and offered services to William T. Sherman if war were to break out with Spain during the Virginius Affair.

"In his letter, Forrest told Sherman he was sure he could bring one to five thousand of his former troops with him. Sherman respectfully declined his offer because he did not think any ground forces would be necessary should war come.
He did, however, forward the letter to the War Department with a flattering endorsement. Sherman's letter stated that was Forrest was

'one of the most extraordinary men developed by our Civil War, and were it left to me in the event of a war requiring cavalry, I would unhesitatingly accept his services and give him a prominent place. I believe now he would fight against out national enemies as vehemently as he did against us, and that is saying enough.'"
https://books.google.com/books?id=0MvlfHVwVNwC&pg=PA474&lpg=PA474&dq=nathan+bedford+forrest+offers+services+to+sherman&source=bl&ots=bCih0lmWwh&sig=OSMtiIFWsrpFQlrT1EVieUXyRvQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=_AXDU7-0DZSlyASm-IDwBQ&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=nathan bedford forrest offers services to sherman&f=false

If every southern acted that way, reconstruction would have been a piece of cake.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2016
Location
Bartlett, TN
As for space for battlefield preservation, we have plenty of space. Much, much more than needed. In fact, it's possible to fit all of the world's human population into one state if we wanted to, if we used the same population density as Shanghai. The problem is that Americans are greedy for land, and for some reason we all create these short story wide buildings that take a ton of space. And suburbanization? What a joke created by idiots. Humans, am I right?
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

huskerblitz

Captain
Joined
Jun 8, 2013
Location
Nebraska
As for space for battlefield preservation, we have plenty of space. Much, much more than needed. In fact, it's possible to fit all of the world's human population into one state if we wanted to, if we used the same population density as Shanghai. The problem is that Americans are greedy for land, and for some reason we all create these short story wide buildings that take a ton of space. And suburbanization? What a joke created by idiots. Humans, am I right?
It all depends on density. Actually, all the humans on earth standing shoulder to shoulder would only take up the area of Los Angeles. But of course we start adding houses and buildings (and monuments) and things spread out.

compared to any other continent (besides australia of course) it is - according to the cia germany is slightly smaller than montana but has nearly 81,000,000 inhabitants
Shrug. Depends on how you want to view it. One could say China is underpopulated if you look at their land area. I prefer having elbow room around me.
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Location
Long Island, NY
The problem with add-ons instead of new stand-alones is the same as taking an author's work and merely changing the ending and publishing it. Write your own **** story and allow me to take away what I want to take away from the piece of art (which they basically are). I don't need someone else dictating their narrative to me. Nor do other Americans.
We are not talking about books on a shelf, we are talking about statues in public spaces. When a statue is placed on public land, the person or entity placing the statue assumes the risk that later generations might not agree with the narrative the statue erectors imposed.
 

Riggs

Private
Joined
Sep 29, 2016
Location
Annapolis
We are not talking about books on a shelf, we are talking about statues in public spaces. When a statue is placed on public land, the person or entity placing the statue assumes the risk that later generations might not agree with the narrative the statue erectors imposed.
Is there a narrative being imposed? Seems not all that far from burning books; you know, items in public places where future generations may not agree with the content
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Andersonh1

Major
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Location
South Carolina
Moving a statue from a public space it has occupied for a century accomplishes the same thing as destroying it: it erases it from that public space and from public consciousness. The only difference with moving it is that the erasure can theoretically be reversed, but for all practical purposes, it still boils down to nothing more than destructive censorship.
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Location
Long Island, NY
Moving a statue from a public space it has occupied for a century accomplishes the same thing as destroying it: it erases it from that public space and from public consciousness. The only difference with moving it is that the erasure can theoretically be reversed, but for all practical purposes, it still boils down to nothing more than destructive censorship.
Statues and other monuments have been moved without being destroyed many times. Often they are moved to facilitate traffic flow or for other prosaic reasons. Is that censorship?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top