I don't want to erase history.

[Weekend Warrior]

That's One of the white nationalists main arguments. We are trying to erase history. There are concentration camps that are preserved. South Africa has historical museums of extremely dark times. Those dark memories are physically kept and we are just a bunch of snowflakes trying to erase history.

The fact is I don't want to erase history. I am fully accepting to preserve our history, including with physical symbols at State Houses across the south depicting generals and soldiers of the Confederacy.

My problem is that most of the statues and monuments across the south glorify the individual on the monument. They make these losers of the war out to be righteous in their actions. That couldn't be further from the truth. They are not a reflection of history. Many, but not all, are even a disturbing reaction to the civil rights movement in the fifties and sixties.

If they want to preserve history these monuments need to undergo drastic changes. General Robert E Lee's statue in Virginia that was ground zero over the weekend is a glorification of him.

What I find to be acceptable in it's replacement is simple historical accuracy over false glorification.

A statue of General Lee surrendering to General Grant at the Appomattox Court House. General Lee's dead horse on the ground beside him. The plaque should read: "General Lee was an American traitor who fought on the losing side of the Civil War. He fought to keep slavery alive in the south. His trusty horse Traveller died after stepping on a rusty nail."

They don't want to preserve history. They want to rewrite it and fight the war again.

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

1. Someone gave my husband that argument on Sunday.

I couldn't believe it when he told me. What a load of BS that is.

[freddyvh]

2. most do need to go

When I lived down south, I saw many that were honoring traitors to this nation....generals etc.
I do not begrudge memorials listing area residents who died in the Civil War.
Those are honoring the people who really didn't have a choice.

But....
these shrines to racism need to be taken down the right way.
I feel the one taken down last night by protesters was wrong. Use your laws and lawmakers to get rid of them.
When people break the law to do it...it will give the alt-right fuel to add to their own fires. These actions will spread hate in the alt-right faster than doing it legally. it could help recruiting and it WILL make them hold more "rallies".


When the left (the protesters) take the law into their own hands....why should the alt-right follow the laws?

[Amishman]

38. I agree, it has to be done right or else it just creates more problems

Let them be taken down peacefully and I'd be open to allowing them to be relocated to private property.

Laws such as NC's monument removal prohibition are a problem, but there are ways around it. Nothing stops the cities from covering the statues and/or putting up displays adding proper historical context.

[ck4829]

3. There's history to preserve records and there's history to create a (false) narrative

To them, the high point of their collective existence was when their ancestors owned other people and anything after that can only be an imitation of that at best.

[Weekend Warrior]

4. "There's history to preserve records and there's history to create a narrative"

Well said. Exactly. I would put the word "false" in front of narrative but that is assumed as you have written it anyway. I've noticed parsing of words is a big deal.

Thanks for the reply.

[ck4829]

5. You could do it with all history really

That's the Foucault-inspired thought in me, being able to define history is power. We all do it, all cultures and nations do it, there are parts of our history we focus on and there are parts we gloss over. But I think the far right takes it to an extreme, to them, this geographical area their ancestors controlled was the reclaimed Garden of Eden and when black people got uppity and when those northern people started getting nosy, it was like losing it a second time.

[Weekend Warrior]

10. I'm now looking forward to reading up on Michel Foucault this evening.

Thank you.

[Orsino]

6. I want to end the official reverence for our worst actions. n/t

[Weekend Warrior]

9. Reverence and the creation of a narrative that does not equate to the reality of the time. nt.

[Hugin]

7. Many of those monuments weren't Civil War era.

Most were erected during the 1960's Civil Rights era... So, I say rip 'em down.

[Weekend Warrior]

8. From the op.

"Many, but not all, are even a disturbing reaction to the civil rights movement in the fifties and sixties. "

[TexasProgresive]

11. I would like to see statues like this all over the south

[nuxvomica]

12. when people cry "but history!" tell them about this

There is a monument to Benedict Arnold, commemorating his sacrifice, a leg wound, at the Battle of Saratoga. It's called the "Boot Monument" because it memorializes his boot and does not mention him by name. That is the appropriate glorification for a traitor and weren't all the Confederates traitors?

http://www.pbs.org/ktca/liberty/popup_arnoldsleg.html

[Weekend Warrior]

13. Perfect. nt.

[JonLP24]

31. History has been a lot kinder to the Confederates than they ever were with Benedict Arnold

From my point of view I could understand why Arnold crossed over well because people took credit for his accomplishments among other things but I always felt the two sides weren't much different than each other but he didn't do much damage. They caught John Andre with plans to Fort Arnold (West Point) though Arnold escaped to the other side they rejected most of his demands and the one battle they let him fight was a victory but it came at such a bloody cost that Clinton regretted even going through with it.

The confederate soldiers & officers never received the kind of treatment Benedict Arnold has.

[LeftInTX]

14. What happens when it is mistaken history?

San Antonio Councilman Robert Trevino is promoting a measure that would remove the Confederate statue at the center of Travis Park, where for years people have mistakenly identified the figure as being that of Col. William Travis, a Texas hero who died at the Alamo.

Duh...Travis Park...everyone assumed it was a statue of William Travis....The statue is not conspicuously confederate. There is some writing at the base of the statue, but it is on one side and no one reads the base. Everyone notices the pointing "westward-ho or commanding the troops at the Alamo pioneer" at the top.

[Weekend Warrior]

15. Clearly labeling things is important.

If it's being mistaken, it's not clear.

[dalton99a]

16. Truth in Labeling of Statues

[LeftInTX]

18. LOL!!!!!

[LeftInTX]

17. My husband is Tejano born and raised in San Antonio

He isn't a stupid guy and his family was involved a bit in local politics.

Travis Park is where he and his family would reserve their annual seats to watch parades.

For his entire 58 years, he just assumed the statue was William Travis.

[NightWatcher]

19. Put all the statues in a museum called the Hate & Ignorance Museum

Don't leave them in squares where they can be rallied around.

[Weekend Warrior]

20. Now that's a great idea.

Still, they can just be put in other Civil War museums and properly identified with respect to historical context. What? That is already the case all over the place. lol.

[haveahart]

21. Preserve that shit in museums. Get it off public properties.

[TexasBushwhacker]

44. That get's my vote

Plus, the museums should be built with private funds. No taxpayer dollars.

[Wounded Bear]

22. We're going against an old axiom from Napoleon...

He said, "History is written by the victors."

Now, the losers are trying to rewrite our history.

[Initech]

23. No!!! Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it!

If we forget the Civil War, we are doomed to repeat it.

If we forget the holocaust, we are doomed to repeat it.

If we forget 9/11, we are doomed to repeat it.

If we forget WWII or any major wars, we are doomed to repeat them.

We must not forget history!

[Weekend Warrior]

24. Who wants to forget history?

Not sure I get the "No!!!" compared to your follow up comments.

[Initech]

26. Isn't that the conservative talking point?

I would place double emphasis on the "no" part to any conservative who thinks we want to erase history. I've been hearing that one since the Clinton years and it hasn't happened yet. This is one of those things that conservatives get wrong about us every time.

[Weekend Warrior]

27. Thank you for clearing that up. That was my point. Agree.

Not sure what the eye roll is for. I thought my reply was polite. Seems to be the in thing to do.

[Initech]

29. Fixed it.

[HopeAgain]

28. Those who re-write history are doomed to repeat it without knowing it.

Monuments aren't history, they are glorification of individuals. The best monument I have ever seen was the anti-violence Knotted Gun in Caen, put there by the allied victors.

[JonLP24]

25. It isn't like those monuments mention much history

especially in how it pertains to slavery.

Basically I agree.

[WhiteTara]

30. And I don't want it repeated.

I agree that the plaque should accurately reflect historical events. Poor Traveller!

[Lotusflower70]

32. It's not erasing history

This is glorification of traitors. We have history books and documentaries for history.

[Weekend Warrior]

33. "This is glorification of traitors."

Exactly.

[Lotusflower70]

35. I don't want that

I was reading a conservative forum, they were minimizing, justifying and rationalizing slavery. Or attempting to anyway. Talk about revisionist history which they accuse us of. I am not surprised but I was appalled. They were saying we should take down the statues of Civil Rights figures as well. False equivalents. Also their take on genocide is skewed. We are not trying to get rid of white people but these supremacists want to get rid of us.

[Weekend Warrior]

36. I don't know anyone on our side who does want to glorify traitors. nt.

[Lotusflower70]

37. True that

But I also don't want to erase history. That's why the history is in books, documentaries and museums. No erasure of history or glorification of traitors. That's my perspective.

[Turn CO Blue]

34. In 1989 the east and west Germans tore the Berlin wall down.

Was there anybody saying "oh, but history" for the sake of preserving that freaking wall? The people who kept pieces of the wall were keeping souvenirs only for the sake of the satisfaction of destruction of the IDEA of the wall, not just the actual boundary of the wall.

As for the concern trolls expressing outrage about destruction of the sculptor's artwork in these bronze statues -- I will say it like they tell the hoarders concerned about their piles of stuff on the TV show -- take a picture. That's your "memory" now and the act of destruction is the new history we need to always remember. Anyway, there are detailed schematics and photos of the statue as "artwork" for history or art buffs.

Some of these more well-known monuments are being relocated to Civil War museums. If it's only one - well, that's more than enough, but I think there will be several preserved. I hope those museums will also add exhibits of photos and film of some of the other statues being torn down recently and turned to rubble or upcycled into something more useful than some local government's pisspoor decision to spend town funds years ago lionizing hateful, wrong-headed men who were on the wrong side of humanity and the wrong side of history.

[Nevernose]

39. General Lee was opposed to Confederate monuments

Because they glorified traitors and rebellion. It's not all that complicated, really.

[Weekend Warrior]

40. I really don't care what his opinion on them are.

Other than historical reference I'm not sure why anyone would use his opinions to shape their views.

The common sense part would be why he felt that way. He thought he knew how he would personally be portrayed. He didn't think the confederacy would continue.

[Nevernose]

41. If the discussion is "statues of General Lee"

Then I think General Lee's opposition to statues glorifying him or the Confederacy is extremely relevant. I think it's kind of weird that you don't.

“I think it wiser moreover not to keep open the sores of war, but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavoured to obliterate the marks of civil strife and to commit to oblivion the feelings it engendered,” he wrote.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/even-robert-e-lee-wanted-the-confederate-flag-gone

[Weekend Warrior]

46. I don't think it holds any reference at all. nt.

[Weekend Warrior]

47. If Obama is asked about the possibility of receiving the Medal of Freedom.

And he says "No, I think things like that should be reserved for others." You think that would be the end of the conversation.

It would hold no relevance down the road if a President were go give him such an honor. None.

[maxsolomon]

42. Corral them in a museum of American Racism.

they don't belong on pedestals.

Let Ta-nehisi Coates write the interpretive labels.

[grantcart]

43. Lee was against slavery, against rebellion, and against the idea of Confederacy

http://www.civilwarhome.com/leepierce.htm

From a letter in 1956

There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil. It is idle to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it is a greater evil to the white than to the colored race. While my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more deeply engaged for the former.

He fought because he had more allegiance to his homeboys than he did to the principles to the country that raised him and embraced him as a general. He was a strategic failure and engaged in battles that were guaranteed to hand him loss ratios that no general should have found acceptable. He was betting on Northerners being weak and sentimental and unable to bear substantial loss.

He did wear his uniform with astonishing grace.

[LexVegas]

45. Same with generals and leaders that had a hand in the genocide of Native Americans?