It's easy to say peronages in history were monsters or terrible people, expecially when they were allies of a cause that supported slavery. I highly doubt Stonewall Jackson or Robert E lee were terrible people. Stonewall taught a slave how to read, despite it being illegal, becuase he wanted to pine knots to burn so he could study even at night. Hell, African Americans liked the man.
Anachronisms in history are tough because they put up a barrier when trying to study it when an academic eye. But we're not talking about the academic study of history here: we're talking about huge, world shaking events that are still felt and remembered today. The memory of these events, and who that public memory especially, belongs to, is the issue. And just because his slaves liked him doesn't excuse the fact that Jackson has slaves to begin with. Let's not equivocate for a second that the Confederates didn't want to keep legal slavery in this country, and that the Nazi's didn't want to exterminate the Jews and others. The memory of those periods of history belongs to everybody, but we need to honor those most affected, not put up ugly, cheap statues 100 years later to scare black folk.
If an ugly cheap statue scares black folks nowadays, maybe they should realize they are scared of a past that can no longer hurt them. Otherwise, they deserve to be afraid of their own shadows. Grow a spine and the world no longer becomes as intimidating as it once was.
My point was that the majority of the statues honoring Confederate soldiers were put up with the specific intent to intimidate those fighting for civil rights, which wasn't all that long ago. And telling somebody to "grow a spine" is pretty cruel. How about we don't honor people who rebeled against the United States and wanted to keep people as property instead?
Then instead of forcefully taking them down without permission apply to have them removed instead. It's a public space, but it doesn't mean you can just decide without a elected committee that you can destroy public property. And @myfuckinggod the statues were put up with the intent of scaring and intimidating bu platypus' words, to frighten black folks from using their right to vote for who was in their government. Those statues no longer intimidate anyone from using their right to be able to vote in elections. They are just reminders of terrible times, and why they were terrible times, and while I do not mind statues being taken down by vote or public demand, regardless of the message they send, destroying or vandalizing statues of any kind is a crime. No matter how strongly you feel about something, it does not allow you to be a destructive individual. Due process isn't just a right, it's a necessity.
Im not for tearing down monuments but most of the conderate ones where erected during the Jim Crowe era to intimidate black people. Even Robert E. Lee didnt want them out up.
24Reply
deleted
· 6 years ago
I don't have the link on my phone, but try googling "empty pedestals teach lessons" or something like that.
There was a great piece about how we can still remember the history without continuing to oppress the people.
The confederate statues in the south aren't there to remind people of the horrors of slavery; they're there to honor slave owners and traitors. There's a pretty big difference.
That's the opinion of some its about equal to saying that Auschwitz is there to celebrate how close it came to wiping out the dirty Jews. Im betting if you wanted to tear it down you would get a bunch of skin heads protesting. That's part of the problem in this country rite now people see things from only there side and think any one that doesn't see it that way are wrong and the statues are the same there racist and any one that doesn't see it that what is a Nazi. You could have a professor in the crowd who wants to save the statues for history sake but he will be called a Nazi because he isn't going with the group.
Maybe traitor to you that's your opinion Maybe hero to others. But if we take down that history because some don't like it what's next Should we knock down the pyramids the pharaohs had slaves what about the traitors at the Boston tea party should we ripe up all the history for that incident to? If we had lost they would be traitor but we won so they are patriots as for the south who were the bad guys and traitors the ones fighting to keep America the way it was for years or the ones betraying the American way of life. What about a statues of Hitler should we leave it up so we don't forget what he did or take it down because of what he did? You want to start ripping down history because you don't like it or it offends some one then your a fool.
According to the Constitution, "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." The members of the Confederacy waged war against the United States. Therefore they committed treason, therefore they are traitors. It's not my opinion that they're traitors, it's what they are according to the Constitution.
Its looked at as treason because they lost if they won there would be holidays for them and Lincoln would be called a traitor for trying to free the slaves and destroy America. History is writing by the victors but that's not the point its about tearing down history the men the statues are of went up against a government that they thought was wrong and fought with bravery some cold and hungry some times brother against brother to the death and now all that history is boiled down to a bunch of window lickers with there fingers in there noses going duh slavery wrong tear statues down, its really sad.
That's probably because slavery is one of those issues where things are actually pretty cut and dry: slavery is bad. It is bad all the time, from 1776 to 1865 to now. We don't need vast amounts of historical context to understand that. We also don't need statues dedicated to men who betrayed their country so that they could continue to own slaves. "Duh slavery wrong tear statues down" is actually a pretty good summation of things. Thanks for supplying it.
As a MEMORIAL REMINDER Not something to flaunt and humiliate to make people feel unwanted. You people are something else. Only in America. You TORTURED PEOPLE NOW YOU DONT APOLIGIZE YOU Wanna glorify the defeated revolutionaries. SMH
▼
deleted
· 6 years ago
And the people who want to tear down Robert E Lee's grave are fine to do it right? Because desecrating a grave is okay as long as they were a Confederate.
Reply
deleted
· 6 years ago
Check out Grutas Park in Lithuania.
Their take on remembering the dark past is a statue garden of dismantled Soviet art, with brief descriptions of where the statues once stood.
It's like a museum, in that it doesn't destroy the artwork, but preserves the past.
https://www.goworldtravel.com/travel-lithuania-grutas-park-reminder-of-dark-past/
Auschwitz isn't in the middle of a public park, if it was it would be moved to a museum, just like almost all of the confederate statues. Is moving dinosaur bones into museums instead of leaving them in the ground "destroying history?" No of course it's not. Moving something to a museum shows it's historical significance while also allowing it to be put into context.
3Reply
deleted
· 6 years ago
If the "final solution" was proposed in 1943 and the European theatre of war ended in 1945 how were millions of people executed and disposed of in this facility?
There was a great piece about how we can still remember the history without continuing to oppress the people.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/why-i-changed-my-mind-about-confederate-monuments/537396/
Neat.
Their take on remembering the dark past is a statue garden of dismantled Soviet art, with brief descriptions of where the statues once stood.
It's like a museum, in that it doesn't destroy the artwork, but preserves the past.
https://www.goworldtravel.com/travel-lithuania-grutas-park-reminder-of-dark-past/