Restricted Largest Confederate Monument In The South Is Coming Down

GwilymT

Sergeant Major
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Location
Pittsburgh
How does the removal of a monument or statue equate to erasing history? I really don’t get it. All throughout history monuments have been erected and taken down for a multitude of reasons given the time and place yet none of that equates to erasing history. It equates to who and what the folks actually living in the area want to memorialize. If folks in Richmond no longer want to memorialize Marse Robert then be gone statue to Marse Robert. It’s not as if everyone will forget who he was and what he did.

In all of the United States if there were no monuments celebrating and venerating the slaveholders rebellion of 1861-1865 would everyone forget that there was a terrible civil war for the worst reasons ever? Would this website no longer exist for folks to discuss McClellan or Lee? Or, would it just be that as a society we finally recognize that the cause of the CSA (not the individual soldier or ancestor but the rebellion as a whole) is not a cause to be celebrated?
 

JerryD

Private
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
How does the removal of a monument or statue equate to erasing history? I really don’t get it. All throughout history monuments have been erected and taken down for a multitude of reasons given the time and place yet none of that equates to erasing history. It equates to who and what the folks actually living in the area want to memorialize. If folks in Richmond no longer want to memorialize Marse Robert then be gone statue to Marse Robert. It’s not as if everyone will forget who he was and what he did.

In all of the United States if there were no monuments celebrating and venerating the slaveholders rebellion of 1861-1865 would everyone forget that there was a terrible civil war for the worst reasons ever? Would this website no longer exist for folks to discuss McClellan or Lee? Or, would it just be that as a society we finally recognize that the cause of the CSA (not the individual soldier or ancestor but the rebellion as a whole) is not a cause to be celebrated?
This is the point I make again and again to the people who make the claim we are erasing history. Statues are not history! They are memorials. And each generation gets to decide what we want to memorialize. We are not stuck with the decisions of prior generations.

Until very recently there was no statue memorializing James Longstreet, but guess what? He was still very prominently remembered in history. Amazing, isn't it?
 

Philip Leigh

formerly Harvey Johnson
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Those who argue that Confederate statue removals don't erase history fail to appreciate that there are two sides to every war. Destroying the memorials to one side undeniably erases a part of that side's history.

Although it is increasingly common within academia and the media to assume there is only one side to the Civil War, it should not be that way in an online discussion forum.
 

AshleyMel

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Oct 26, 2016
I can offer up a small example. Recently, my UDC Chapter was contacted by someone who had found one of our markers out in someone's old shed. There is virtually no information on this piece to help identify it. The person who found it had no idea where it came from or who it used to belong too. Thankfully, it was returned to us and now the hunt for the history of this piece is on. Hopefully, we will be able to track down something on where this piece came from. So, in a way, until we can uncover it's past, at the very least the history of this item is unknow. Lost until it is found (if at all). So while the actual events surrounding this article will never be erased form existence (because they happened and meant enough for someone to want to remember them), we today have no knowledge of it. Memorials and markers are tangible evidence. Something we can see, touch and feel. I have a picture of myself with another marker that is no longer on public display. I remember the day the picture was taken and how it felt touching it. Now, in the empty spot where it used to be, there is no remembrance of that time in history for anyone who might travel that space. For some, that was something to rejoice in, but for others, there was a loss of connection. One is not more important than the other and arrangements should have taken place for the benefit of all.
 

GwilymT

Sergeant Major
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Location
Pittsburgh
Not to mention that if a monument has stood somewhere for a century, it seems to me that it has certainly been there long enough to be considered part of history itself. It is a relic of a past generation that tells us something about them.
Yes, but past generations aren’t always something to be revered and celebrated. A monument is a celebration of someone, something, or an idea. When it is in a public square or before a courthouse it very clearly states “this person and their cause is what this community values.” Most folks no longer want to celebrate those who rebelled against our country for the self expressed cause of protecting slavery. Thems the breaks.
 

Rebforever

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Yes, but past generations aren’t always something to be revered and celebrated. A monument is a celebration of someone, something, or an idea. When it is in a public square or before a courthouse it very clearly states “this person and their cause is what this community values.” Most folks no longer want to celebrate those who rebelled against our country for the self expressed cause of protecting slavery. Thems the breaks.
Most folks? Prove it. You are misleading with your statement.
 

Stone in the wall

2nd Lieutenant
Asst. Regtl. Quartermaster Antietam 2021
Joined
Sep 19, 2017
Location
Blue Ridge Mountains, Jefferson County WV
Yes, but past generations aren’t always something to be revered and celebrated. A monument is a celebration of someone, something, or an idea. When it is in a public square or before a courthouse it very clearly states “this person and their cause is what this community values.” Most folks no longer want to celebrate those who rebelled against our country for the self expressed cause of protecting slavery. Thems the breaks.
Were "most folks" able vote on statues removal? The writing is already on the wall Richmond failed to protect the statue because they didn't want to. They didn't clean them up because they didn't want to. But they wasted no time cleaning up the Arthur Ashe statue.
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2021
History is not safe. Signs that denote an event or person are being removed, books removed from libraries, celebratory/commemorative events cancelled, dead bodies exhumed, museum relics sold or stored away from visitor access, lies about people or events purposefully spoken or written and allowed to perpetuate until the lie becomes fact ---history is not safe
 

JerryD

Private
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
Those who argue that Confederate statue removals don't erase history fail to appreciate that there are two sides to every war. Destroying the memorials to one side undeniably erases a part of that side's history.

Although it is increasingly common within academia and the media to assume there is only one side to the Civil War, it should not be that way in an online discussion forum.
Ok, so now that Lee's Statute in Richmond has been removed, what, exactly, has been erased. Cause I just went back and checked some of my history books, and everything is still there.
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2021
Your history book is at your house and safe - what about the history book in your schools library? In the past, a tourist to Richmond might pass by the Lee monument and ask who is that? And then take time to find out (good or bad) who he was. The existence of history for OTHERS - THE PUBLIC - to learn, explore and make their own opinions requires that the monument, book, sign, etc be present so the opportunity could exist.
 

DanSBHawk

Captain
Joined
May 8, 2015
Location
Wisconsin
Those who argue that Confederate statue removals don't erase history fail to appreciate that there are two sides to every war. Destroying the memorials to one side undeniably erases a part of that side's history.

Although it is increasingly common within academia and the media to assume there is only one side to the Civil War, it should not be that way in an online discussion.
And the motivations of both sides can be included in the same history book. History is simply history, and it's not being erased.

Public glorification of the confederacy is propaganda, not history.
 
Top