Restricted What is the rationale behind the current wave to remove Confederate statues and Monuments?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Location
Long Island, NY
Stone Mountain was a tremendous disappointment when I was there about 20 years ago. Tiny figures scratched on the side of the rock face, and a tired looking amusement park. Its obviously trying to ape Mount Rushmore, but it just comes across as pathetic. Leaving aside none of the folks were even from Georgia.
Confederate Disneyland.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Honored Fallen Comrade
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Laurinburg NC
But didn't Lincoln go to Richmond? Sit in Davis's chair at the Confederate white house?

Is there a monument in Washington to Jefferson Davis, the US Secretary of War 1853 – 1857? It seems to me that a monument to Davis, a US politician in Washington, D.C. would be far more appropriate than a monument to a leader of a hostile power in Richmond, Virginia.
 

chellers

Lt. Colonel
Retired Moderator
Honored Fallen Comrade
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Location
East Texas
To All,

The topic is about the rationale behind the current wave to remove Confederate statues and monuments.

Please stay on this topic.

Violators will be deleted, thread banned, or otherwise disciplined.

We will appreciate your cooperation.

Respectfully,
Chellers
 

Rebforever

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Rebforever, if you are going to say I am factually wrong, how about you back it up with some actual evidence. That link that you posted isn't proof of anything. I say that because it has no actual attribution to original sources for any of its claims. Meanwhile, here is a copy of the actual order making him General in Chief, not Commander in Chief.
Well, I am sorry you don't believe what I posted in the thread. The information you suggest I post for you can be found in any book about General Robert E. Lee.

Here would be a good place to start.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_n...rt+E.+Lee&rh=n:283155,k:General+Robert+E.+Lee
 

Rebforever

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
To All,

The topic is about the rationale behind the current wave to remove Confederate statues and monuments.

Please stay on this topic.

Violators will be deleted, thread banned, or otherwise disciplined.

We will appreciate your cooperation.

Respectfully,
Chellers
Sorry. Had not seen this before posting. My bad.
 

kholland

Captain
Retired Moderator
Joined
Feb 13, 2011
Location
Howard County, Maryland
The question can't be truthfully answered due to forum rules because the question violates forum rules. Everyone is dancing around and avoiding the real issues.
No it doesn't ! This has been posted in the "Battlefield Preservation" forum which inherently is going to have some kind of "modern politics"(one of the few forums where it is allowed). What is happening is that we keep on getting sidetracked with posts about slavery and the war, what type of General class Robert E. Lee was and others not germaine to the OP. Follow the reading of the thread title and answer in kind.
 
Last edited:

ForeverFree

Major
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Location
District of Columbia
With all the recent talk of removing all reminders of the Confederacy, Confederate statues and Monuments seem to be threatened. I am curious as to the rationale for this movement and the criteria for removal. This is intended to be simply that discussion without modern politics or distractions to other topics.

I think a better discussion of this is in the thread Monuments Board votes to remove Confederate monument from Linn Park - AL. It might be worthwhile to combine this thread with that one.

In any event, I will try to revise and summarize some of the comments from that thread:

• Historical commemoration is not a necessary and inherent government function. The decision to engage in commemoration activities is a political decision. Commemoration decisons advance an "agenda," if you will, of politicians.

• Up until the 1970s, decisons about the commemorative landscape in the South were made under segregated regimes. Social, political, and financial conditions inhibited or prevented African Americans from have access to the public space. As a result, a commemorative landscape was built up that mispresents the Civil War experience of southerners. Specifically, the experience of African Americans southerners, who were 40% of the population in the Confederate States, was negligible or even invisible.

• Many people, with southern African Americans at the forefront, have been more visible and vocal in protesting Confederate monuments. Many African Americans, African American southerners in particular, are upset that these are monuments to people whose government, to use the words of CSA VP Alexander Stephens, was founded "upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition... (t)his, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth." Many African American southerners are upset that, for example, their children have to walk by monuments to people whose government was dedicated to keeping their ancestors in bondage.

• The federal, state, and local governements spend millions of dollars on commemoration and preservation. For example, many of the battlefields that many of our members enjoy are preserved and interpreted by the National Park Service. It was noted in the other thread that FEMA spent $17.2 million to rebuild the Davis Presidential Library; that was in addition to the $4.5 million that was allocated by the State of Mississippi originally to a private organization to build the "Presidential Library."

Many southerners, African Americans in particular, perceive they paying into a commemorative landscape that in their minds seems to glorify people who founded a government that was "the first in the history of the world" to be based upon the notion that "the negro is not equal to the white man; and that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition."

• Many people feel they have the right to decide how the public landscape of their cities should look. They feel no need or duty to accept the political decisions of segregationist governments that constructed a whites only/Confederates only version of the Civil War, in monuments that are on muncipal property.

• Thus we have a debate now about how to proceed with the look of the public space going forward. One comment I have heard in regard to the CBF's presence on public ground is that the flag "represents our past, but not our future"; and that the symbols used on public property should reflect the values of a forward thinking southern society, that is, values which posit that this is, indeed, a society where all men and women are created equal, where all are endowed with rights and liberties, and all will have these rights and liberties regardless of race, color, creed, origin, or social preference.
******

I think this is where we stand. I have stated my own preference for creating a fair and balanced commemorative landscape, as opposed to simply removing the unfair and unbalanced lanscape we have now. We will see what happens down the road.

- Alan
 
Last edited:

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
***deleted message quote removed*** by jgg

Jefferson Davis gave up his right to have a monument in Washington the day he resigned from the Senate and decided to lead a rebellion against the nation he once served. No statue for him.

Abraham Lincoln defended his nation by defeating the forces led by Jefferson Davis whose sole function was to protect and enshrine slavery, even at the expense of 'states rights' into the fabric of this nation forever.

Lincoln and Tad's statue in Richmond in the nail in the coffin of that effort and deserves to be there.

IMHO,
Unionblue
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
***deleted message quote removed*** by jgg

Jefferson Davis gave up his right to have a monument in Washington the day he resigned from the Senate and decided to lead a rebellion against the nation he once served. No statue for him.

Abraham Lincoln defended his nation by defeating the forces led by Jefferson Davis whose sole function was to protect and enshrine slavery, even at the expense of 'states rights' into the fabric of this nation forever.

Lincoln and Tad's statue in Richmond in the nail in the coffin of that effort and deserves to be there.

IMHO,
Unionblue

I am not in full agreement with this sentiment, but it is an expression that ultimately monuments are first and foremost political expressions not historical or artistic. The only historical element is the context of the political expression.

Therefore as political sentiment changes, then their fate is determined for good or evil by the new political environment.
 

BillO

Captain
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Location
Quinton, VA.
***deleted message quote removed*** by jgg

Jefferson Davis gave up his right to have a monument in Washington the day he resigned from the Senate and decided to lead a rebellion against the nation he once served. No statue for him.

Abraham Lincoln defended his nation by defeating the forces led by Jefferson Davis whose sole function was to protect and enshrine slavery, even at the expense of 'states rights' into the fabric of this nation forever.

Lincoln and Tad's statue in Richmond in the nail in the coffin of that effort and deserves to be there.

IMHO,
Unionblue
I'm still surprised that it has lasted as long as it has. I did note that they put it in a protected place. You can't see it from the river and it is surrounded by buildings.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Honored Fallen Comrade
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Laurinburg NC
I'm still surprised that it has lasted as long as it has. I did note that they put it in a protected place. You can't see it from the river and it is surrounded by buildings.

I understand there is a lot of security cameras and lighting around it. :frown:
 

Drew

Major
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
I'm still surprised that it has lasted as long as it has. I did note that they put it in a protected place. You can't see it from the river and it is surrounded by buildings.

War memorials (and presumably Davis) are protected by Virginia law from desecration, removal, etc. All of them, all wars and including memorials to Union Soldiers in the War Between the States. I don't see the Commonwealth's legislature bending by the current madness to change that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top