About Me

My photo
Nazareth, Pa., United States

Friday, August 18, 2017

How Do You Feel About Confederate Statues?

I deleted a number of comments in yesterday's post about Authoritarian Donald Trump's attempt to create a false equivalency between KKK and neo-Nazis on the one hand, and liberal counter protesters on the other. Most of them were arguments about whether we really need to tear Confederate statues. Some people feel they have historical significance. Others may have ancestors who fought for the south in the Civil War. They complain that it's unfair to judge these men by today's standards, and ask where it ends. Should we tear down the Washington monument because he owned slaves? Should we destroy statues in honor of Ulysses S Grant, who once stopped a train to eject every Jew who was on board?

Here's how I feel. I think these are primarily local, not national, decisions. People who live in New Orleans or Charlottesville understand their communities better than I and are entitled to deference. Also, it matters when a Confederate memorial was built. The sculptures in New Orleans and Charlottesville existed long before the Civil Rights movement, while the monuments in Baltimore were built right after WWII, during a time of racial unrest.  

I'd prefer to see statues to Christopher Columbus destroyed. He was a monster who practiced genocide and was so brutal to native Americans that Spanish locked him in chains.

I'd prefer to see Allentown, which is named after a Tory who would have hung George Washington if he could, renamed.

But these are primarily local decisions. I don't consider Allentown residents to be secret British spies, and understand that most Italians honor Christopher Columbus because they share a common heritage.

75 comments:

Anonymous said...

Our country's leftists, fueled by the media, have lost their collective minds over this issue. Two years ago no one was offended by these statues and monuments. People would walk by them every day and not give a hoot. Now they must all come down because of left-wing hysteria. Confederate soldiers were our brothers who fought for a bad cause. They were not traitors, they were rebels. The words of President Lincoln at Gettysburg were words of healing and reconciliation. He welcomed the confederate brothers back into the union. And since the, memorials to those confederate leaders were erected without objection by Republicans and Democrats at the time. But now, the leftist demagogues, wHo object to "hate speech" but are full of seething hatred themselves want to erase a part of our nation's history. Perhaps the most important other than our nation's founding. The Civil War was the bloodiest in our history, but it was necessary to end the evil practice of slavery and to make us a more perfect union. We should preserve memorials of our history, even those that may offend some people.

Anonymous said...

I believe they should be moved to appropriate places - either a confederate cemetery, a battlefield that is now a park, or a museum. Lacking that or a similar place, destroy them. They should not be in city centers, in front of court buildings, etc.

It is not "erasing" history to remove them. Not at all. How much history do we have perched on pedestals? It isn't in these places, it is in books and taught in school and by our parents, and now the internet. Suggesting that removing a statue is changing or rewriting history or ignoring it is just inaccurate - and in my opinion an excuse to retain them.

Anonymous said...

There are so many major roads all over the South - named for various generals and other leadership of the confederacy. Public schools, too-many of them. Confederate figure statues are honestly the least of it. Notice that absolutely no-one has publicly called to re-name all the hundreds of streets in Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Florida, Alabama, etc. There are thousands of streets, avenues, schools, housing developments that would be affected.
My opinion was always that it was distasteful and hurtful (to my sensibilities) and I always wondered why the public never objected to these place-names and street-names. People of Color who ran for office never made confederate naming conventions a point of their campaigns-nor did the Democratic Party or Republican Party. The public seemed completely indifferent and oblivious to it all.
However the advent of cell phone evidence of police brutality, upset over the 2016 Presidential Election, the continuing extraordinary implosion and cultural insensitivity of the current White House administration, fresh memories of Baltimore burning, a galvanized street-level activism and a still-lagging economic recovery have created a climate of anger over inequities and injustices still borne by minority people and immigrants. The 24 hour news cycle loops the horrors of the day- car bombings, riots, police-related deaths, and now this fresh wound in Charlottesville.
I wouldn't miss statues that in my eyes should not have been erected in the first place. They aren't even great public "art". There was a concerted effort to name airports and other major public facilities after distinguished Black patriots and historic figures such as Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall (BWI Airport). Why don't we replace confederate statues with commemorative public art that celebrates American Indian historic persons, Black American heroes and Latino persons of historic significance? Why not now?

Anonymous said...

I agree with Bernie that this is a local issue and should be handled by the community. Having said this I do not see the removal of statues and monuments as erasing history. History cannot really be erased. It can be misunderstood, mangled, misinterpreted and even lied about but history is history. It is neither bad nor good, it is the rerecord of the past. Many of these confederate monuments were not erected to celebrate the average confederate soldier who fought for what he felt was his country, primarily his state. They were erected a part of the Jim Crow era to let the freed slaves know that reconstruction was over and that in the old confederacy things were not going to change.

Museums are great repositories of history. The civil war is part of American history and not honoring confederate generals will not cause anyone to forge the war or its causes and costs.

Personally I see the confederate cause as the greatest tact of treason in this nations history. The leaders were traitors. In Lincoln's intelligence he saw the need to reunite the nation and not punish. In line with that. after the surrender confederate soldiers who pledged allegiance to the United States government were free to go home. Most confederate leaders were not prosecuted. That was for the good of the reunited country and not any reverence for their actions.

The symbolism of these statues means less to me than African Americans who were their intended target. Given the horrors of slavery and the deep roots of injustice in our nations history, we should consider their concerns.

Museums, libraries ands schools cover the history of the civil war quite well. If all of that still bothers you consider putting the statues on your property or joining like minded individuals and house them in your own building.

Anonymous said...

It is interesting to watch America, a nation that is obviously contemplating its collective navel, self destruct. I see that a lack real challenges, real difficulties like WW2 and the great depression and has now exaggerated insignificant issues. It will not be long till the nation will have real challenges and real crisis. It will be interesting how the most coddled, self absorbed people in history of the earth will handle it.

Peter J Cochran said...

The Confederates were an 'evolutionary process ' in a relatively new country. For god's sake the Brits were back on the shores of Maryland in less than half the lifespan of most old people . Remember-- War of 1812 ,James and Dolly Madison had pack up the White House and move ! Well 'evolutionary revolution ' I would say . HISTORY- you don't fix it but can learn from it . Take down 'iconic ' figures and then they are out of site so no one can ask about the issue! Be carful what you wish for. Take down Columbus and who will know about Portuguese navigational tech at the time ,held close to the vest as assurance they had corner on shipping trade - thats why he was hired. Gen.Lee at --------U.S.MIlitary Acmy after the war 1865 ran the school that trained officers corps of U.S.Army ,a grad alumni,like Gen Grant himself.

Anonymous said...

We now see that Washington and Jefferson need to be removed, calling for the removal of Mt. Rushmore, the destruction of stained glass windows at Yale that depicted Blacks picking cotton, I guess all copies of Gone with the wind or any other movies that depict Blacks as slaves or servants need to be destroyed. Don't be surprised at the call to ban removal of religious symbols from public view as they may offend atheists. While we contemplate the secession movement of the past, is it now time for a peaceful voluntary transition to 2 Americas. I see no peaceful future on the road we are on.

Ron Beitler said...

1.) Public monuments in local parks and spaces are LOCAL issues. This is first and foremost. These decisions ought to be allowed to be made at that level without outsider agitation or meddling.

2.) Context is everything. A statue in a position of prominence in a public park is a monument meant to be revered. Statues in a museum or battlefield like say Gettysburg can serve a different purpose or multitude of purposes. In the same theme of context, I also agree with Bernie that the history of the statue relative to when it was built ought to be considered. Blanket and clumsy one size fits all positions aren't appropriate. Consider individual cases in individual places.

3.) An example. As Baltimore starts it's removal process one monument I've seen in person before is the "spirit of the confederacy" statue. It depicts a rank and file mortally wounded confederate soldier (certainly not a thought leader of the treacherous rebellion). A boy of probably 20 years old or less. An angel is depicted carrying him off. The statue is inscribed with "glory to the defeated". The obvious theme not being a celebration of the confederacy but rather the horror of war and the need for reconciliation. It also reminds us that the honorable don't gloat in the misery of vanquished enemies.

The monument was vandalized Monday. I just read it will probably be removed. What a shame. I remember to this day the emotion I had looking at it because of the impression it made. Lawless, self righteous mobs apply what they believe to be justice unthinkingly. I fear that.

Anonymous said...

Remember on the campaign trail when Ttrump said the Confederate Flag needs to come down? He said put it in a museum and LET IT GO. Was he race baiting? What will he say now?

BTW, Anon 601...do you have an arm band?

Anonymous said...

where will all the birds shit?

Anonymous said...

The only things that should memorialize politicians and public figures are sewage plants, dumps, and restrooms.

Anonymous said...

Once again, President Trump, at his recent New York City press conference, said EXACTLY what Bernie and Ron Beitler are REPEATING here now. Funny how that works. When asked in the lobby of Trump Tower, Trump clearly answered the matter of statues in public space is for each locality to decide.

I believe too many folks aren't prepared, or willing, to hear and understand what this President says. Some already KNOW Trump's message without having to hear it! Then, they run with what is in their mind, not Trump's.

Bernie O'Hare said...

Too many of the comments here indluge in identity politics,sweeping generalizations about leftists. I am deleting them. They are unhelpful and donot contribute to anything but hate.

Anonymous said...

There is NO DOUBT, elected and appointed officials in Virginia did a terrible job managing this event.

Local officials erected a low-fenced gauntlet on the streets that led would-be participants at the park rally site through an easily accessible channel with counter protesters, armed with makeshift weaponry, lining the "cattle chute." Many are seen being beaten on their way to the podium!

Next, a local police officer is seen and heard on video claiming they were told to stand-down. Video of police standing directly behind physical assaults, doing nothing.


Anonymous said...

We should eliminate Arlington National. After all it was once Lee's home.

Jojo said...

I'd like to see more statues to questionable historical figures. Like one for Mayor Pawlowski built in the NIZ with tax payer money honoring the unstoppable forces of private greed using government to enrich itself. Admission to see it would be charged and all proceeds would go to J.B. Reilly.
After that the statue of Saddam should be put back up to because that's historical too. I mean statues are not about honoring people are they? No they're about educating the public about history.

Anonymous said...

History is history and you can't erase it. Charlottesville, Virginia is the true culprit in this terrible debacle. Poor legal advice, poor planning, poor policing and very poor management led to this crisis. We should bring all these extremist groups, [from the right and left], into Lincoln Financial Field and let them battle it out like the Roman gladiators. We can sell tickets for the show and the proceeds can go for one unity party.

Anonymous said...

Group hysteria is being created. There really IS an organized propaganda and civil unrest effort underway. It's all happened before in world history. I'm afraid America is headed for more serious trouble.

Shame on our Members of Congress who are more concerned about protecting their personal careers. They are found everywhere throughout that building.

Ned Beatty's pig said...

I want Allentown renamed Otisburg.

Anonymous said...

Bernie, you gotta ask yourself, what would happen if civil rights leaders statues would be knocked down to as well as renaming the streets to eliminate these great civil rights leaders from history too?

Anonymous said...

One unity party?

Sounds a lot like communism.

Anonymous said...

Confederate Monuments were not built for historical reasons, they were constructed as a negative response to Reconstruction, in celebration of the rise of the Second KKK (and a movement known as the Invisible Empire), and a negative response to the Civil Rights Movement.

They were constructed in places that never were part of the Confederacy (like Ohio and Indiana), in white enclaves that wanted a symbol to keep out economically mobile black citizens.

Much of this born of the Lost Cause movement that has been romanticizing the Confederacy as plucky rebel under dogs who fought heroically for their way of life. The truth though is that the Confederacy was started by wealthy plantation owners so that they could maintain their slave work force. And to a large extent it was not fought by those families but by conscripted poor farmers, tradesmen and immigrants right off the ship.

You will often hear the terms Neo-Confederate and Neo-Nazi used interchangeably, that is because they both come from the same school of thought which classified the races in a hierarchical ladder of "fitness" which gained popularity in the 1890's and was used to convince people of the evolutionary superiority of the "white race".

It was during this time that the roots of Nazism started to form, and the Neo-Confederate Movement (KKK, Invisible Empire, etc) started to gain influence in the United States. While Nazis had few decades to really get a foothold, the Neo-Confederates quickly latched onto white resentment against economically successful minorities and were able to gain considerable political power. While those monuments started going up all over the South (and other places) the State Houses began passing Jim Crow laws and setting the stage for what came to be known as the Civil Rights Movement.

In conclusion, these monuments have nothing to do with the history of the Civil War, they are Totems of Racism. They have nothing to do with heritage, they are rallying points of White Supremacy. They have no place in our society if we want a culture of inclusion and equality.

Anonymous said...

Let's go all the way, 8:44 AM. Form a commission to list and remove EVERY symbol and artifact that ANY "enlightened" person finds offensive.

We already have people who feel Old Glory represents many awful behaviors throughout history. Others can't stand the sight of Christian religious symbols. Still others cringe when they see the New England Patriots logo. Drives 'em nuts! Don't get me started Wedding Rings!

We simply MUST be permitted to walk down streets, go through our daily lives without seeing representations of whatever we simply can't endorse. Paint over EVERYTHING!

A better history begins NOW!

Anonymous said...

Well said, 8:44.

Geoff said...

As many have already said--these monuments are about politics, not history.

There's a big difference as well between a genuine monument to mourn and commemorate--and putting a statue of Jefferson Davis in the Capitol or in front of a court house.

I don't know of many nations that commemorate its traitors in this manner. The process that led to these being installed should be a source of national shame. Leave them standing and cluster them together in a park to show the folly of fighting for racism.

Anonymous said...

@8:44 All of the Confederate monuments at the Gettysburg Battlefield, along with other national battlefields such as the one in Antietam Maryland were erected long before the era you are referring to. Should those be destroyed as well ?

Anonymous said...

If President Trump is a racist and a Nazi, does this mean the 63 Million Americans that voted for him and support him are racists and Nazis also ?

Bernie O'Hare said...

Why must you posit what you must know are illogical questions? Authoritarian Donald trump is neither racist nor Nazi. He is a calculating politician who will give winks and nods to hate groups as he did here. He may actually be worse.

Bernie O'Hare said...

I responded to a direct question about Trump. I did not open the door for you to attack Obama.

Anonymous said...

Let's not confuse Confederate symbols with the Founding Fathers or Arlington Cemetery. You are making a false comparison to fit your twisted, UnAmerican agenda. Stop trying to twist the issue at hand. We really need to look at the origins off these statues (when and why they were built)to determine their current location and context. Gettysburg is an historical site celebrating a Country coming together. What is the context of the inscriptions? If a statue was emplaced to incite racial tensions or intimidate, then it needs to be relocated to a historical site and rebranded in a fashion that celebrates history and not hate. Even descendants of these Confederates Generals suggest statues are out of place.

Bernie O'Hare said...

My answer to a direct question about trump doesNOT open the door to attacks on others. They are OT and will be deleted.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Bernie O'Hare said...

This post is not about Trump's Tuesday news conference or how you feel about the peurile press. When I posted about that, you wanted to talk about statues. i did a post about the statues,and now you want to talk about Trump. Stick to the subject. Stop being peurile.

Anonymous said...

Washington and Jefferson did not raise and lead an army to overthrow the United States of America. Those of you who think this issue is ONLY about slavery are sadly mistaken.

You cannot conflate Washington and Jefferson with the generals who led the insurrection that killed 620,000 Americans.

Jeffrey Anthony said...

@6:29 *Very* well considered comment, Mr. Beitler.

Without the kind of common-sense you've presented, Orwellian revisionists will next want to start rewriting Shelby Foote's books...

Anonymous said...

However, it was perfectly fine with you that the Anonymous at 7:07 posted about that same press conference as long as it shit on the President of the United States whom you hate.

Anonymous said...

“History is history and you can’t erase it.”

Sure, you can. Through naivety or neglect, you may not know or care to know what happened in history. Yesterday, Bernie O’Hare extolled the rich history of the Northampton County Sheriff’s Department. What he didn’t mention (and I believe he was unaware of it) is that, during the 18th century, the Northampton County Sheriff would auction off slaves to satisfy a personal property judgment. Often, if you look in the Archives, slave families were torn apart, by the Sheriff’s Sale. The description of “property” usually read, “One negro male, age 15, named Tom.”

Not one Northampton County official has published a rebuke of practices within the history of its own making. In a huge step forward, today’s Sheriff can make strides in race relations within our own community by addressing injustices of the past. Judges, whose predecessors ordered the Sheriff’s Sales to take place, could also contribute to the dialogue of the important issues of injustice.

Anonymous said...

Claiming that the Civil War was fought over slavery is a drive by approach to analyzing history. The Southern states held the power as our economy was driven by agriculture, cotton being the focal point. The North (i.e. Lincoln Admin) was trying to reign in the Southern states and they would have none of it claiming that the 10th Amendment (states rights) gave them autonomy for those things not enumerated in the Constitution. Slavery was but one issue of many and unfortunately a small issue at the time.

Slavery as a means to support an economic endeavor is horrid. Along with being a profound human rights violation it's a practice that involves risk from volatility. The average person of the 1840s/50s/60s didn't get their panties in a bunch about slavery. Unfortunately it wasn't a cultivated moral outrage (sad that it wasn't).

The notion that the Civil War was faught over slavery is predicated on a moral outrage that was not present in enough places to incite a war. There were many more domestic issues at stake. Lincoln rightfully declared slaves emancipated more as a tactical move to weaken the South's economic dominance than because keeping slaves is morally wrong.

I wish I could go back in time and kill the people in Africa selling their own people into slavery. Human trafficking is an absolute blight on humanity. Unfortunately it's still very prevalent in many countries yet we are focusing on statues that don't really harm anyone. The same stupidity that lashes out at a statue is the same stupidity that overlooked slavery as a morally reprehensible act so many years ago.

We are indeed screwed. It's why the political movement that masquerades as a religion will overtake us. By the way, that political movement engages heavily in human trafficking.

Anonymous said...

It took a little longer than George Orwell thought, but we finally made it here!
Welcome to 1984.

Anonymous said...

"Authoritarian Donald trump is neither racist nor Nazi."

He is racist. He has a history of incendiary comments, housing discrimination, promoting birtherism, calling Mexicans rapists.... and the list goes on. His entire campaign hinged on racial resentment and fear.

To the commenter who asked if those who voted for him are also racist.... in some cases yes, in others maybe not. But they either weren't paying attention to or are not bothered by his racism. And if they still can't see it then some deep self reflection is in order...

Bernie O'Hare said...

10:59, I am unaware of any sheriff's sale of slaves. I will look into this, and if it is true, will write about it. But as of this moment, I do not know it to be true and tend to doubt it. Pa abolished slavery in 1780. Franklin was a fervent abolitionist and helped pave that path. Because existing slaves were not freed, they had to be registered. Fifty slaves were registered,owned by 34 people. Northampton County reported slaves in both the 1790 and 1800 censuses, but it was less than 0.01 of the population. Given this small number, I find a sheriff sale of a slave to be highly unlikely. I note that you have provided no documentation to support your assertion and do not identify yourself. That just makes things harder for me and makes you less believable, but I will check.

LVCI said...

Anonymous (11:00 AM)
"Claiming that the Civil War was fought over slavery is a drive by approach to analyzing history."

This is an old argument that the civil war was driven by economics. That there was jealousy of the South using slaves thereby undercutting the Northerners business profits. Problem with that theory is the North could have just as easily began using slaves to compete. They chose not to.

Anonymous said...

11:24, exactly. Southern states wanted to sucede to preserve the institution of slavery. Lincoln wanted to preserve the union. Slavery wasn't a "small issue", it was the main issue that caused the civil war.

Anonymous said...

11:48 -

There WAS a element of preserving State's Rights within the overall nation, too!

Anonymous said...

From 10:59 - I will assist in making things less difficult for you. I will personally revisit Archives, get duplicate photographs of the levies (since you cannot photocopy them because of possibly deteriorating the old paper) and personally hand them to you. I know where to look. At least give me the benefit of the doubt, and if I prove that there were Sheriff's Sales of slaves, that you write about the circumstances of the times, in your usual prose. Thanks.

Bernie O'Hare said...

I will give you the benefit of the doubt since you obviously know where to look. I can't say I'd be happy to write about it, but can say I will write about it.

Anonymous said...

11:24 Slavery was a contentious issue that the founders faced when writing the Constitution in 1787, and before that when writing the Articles of Confederation. It was decided to sidestep it as the formation of a central government for the new United States was more important than the political divisions it caused. Then there was the Missouri Compromise, the deal to bring in the Republic of Texas as a "slave" state and the admittance of California as a "free" state and additional issues such as the Fugitive Slave Act that led up to the 1860 election in which Lincoln was not on the ballot of five southern states and the bringing of the Republican abolitionists into power in Congress.

Slavery was a major issue that caused the revolt of South Carolina and later the rest of the southern states that formed the Confederacy. Yes, the tenth amendment was also an issue, but it was slavery that was the real powder keg that led to the Civil War.

Honoring those men who divided our nation in the 1860s is simply not appropriate, as they were simply guilty of treason against our republic. End of Story.

Anonymous said...

12:00 PM - End of Story?

Why must we never discuss our past? The good and the bad. Can we still learn from the experiences of others when all the books are burned?

Anonymous said...

12:11. Burning books is the burning of ideas. I don't believe anyone is wanting to limit freedom of speech by burning books. Removing the statues of men who fostered rebellion in the United States which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousand people is quite another issue.

Anonymous said...

The point is, if the image of these "misguided" individuals is wrong on every measure, we must realize our nation's libraries are FILLED with their teachings. Many were voluminous writers. You cannot step into a Public Library without encountering their images and written justifications.

Censorship is already happening, and it is increasing. Purging the shelves of libraries will soon be considered, I'm sure.

Anonymous said...

12:30 Who is advocating book burning ?

Anonymous said...

12:30 I oppose political correctness, as that is simply nothing but putting limits on our first amendment freedom of speech. It isn't popular speech that is protected by the first amendment, but those thoughts and ideas that are NOT popular. I'm sure that there are tens of millions of books in libraries that someone doesn't like something in them. That includes book burning, to address your point.

Removing statues of traitors against the United States from public display is another issue entirely. That includes any statues of Benedict Arnold and Aaron Burr, I suppose as well.

Anonymous said...

12:34 -

No one that I know, yet. I do see a connection here, that's all. You do not.

Anonymous said...

New York was named after a man who was one of most prolific slave traders in our history. Where should the racist history cleansing stop? This should be a lesson in how frought with controversy any namings of things or monuments are. I say we go all the way and make statues illegal. I'm worried about crosses and crucifixes and stars of David, though. They serve to trigger many and they'll be next. First they came for the Lincoln statue, and I did nothing ....

Geoff said...

@11:00 I don't think you know history well. Nearly every major political crisis from 1814-1865 was directly over slavery, from Kansas-Nebraska to the Fugitive Slave Law. Hardly a minor issue.

Anonymous said...

It's not "history cleansing" to remove a monument of a man whose only memorable contribution was fighting against the union to protect the evil that is slavery. No one is proposing that we forget the past. On the contrary, we should always remember and strive to learn from it. In books, museums, at historical sites...these are appropriate places to display depictions of a man whose name you wouldn't even know but for his intense dedication to the protection and expansion of the institution of slavery. Local parks, town squares, in government buildings and other public spaces are not. The slippery slope argument is lazy and is a logical fallacy.

Anonymous said...

The slippery slope argument is lazy and is a logical fallacy.

Anonymous said...

Bernie, if I may. Much is made about the confederate states and history. I have read remarks about how slavery was not at the root of the southern rebellion. If I may, please read the "Cornerstone Speech of 1861 by Alexander Stephens, confederate vice president. It is rather long but a few quotes.
"African slavery as it exists amongst us; the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution"
Also, "the negro is not equal to the white man, that slavery, subordination to the superior races his natural and normal position."

It is fair to say that had the south not tried to extend slavery into the new territories and had the south not fired on Fort Sumner and had it not even seceded from the Union the Civil War may not have occurred when it did. That however, is speculation. What we know is the institution of slavery while profitable to both the northern and the southern capitalists was destined to be the greatest threat to America, just as it was predicted to be by the founding fathers in 1776.

Thank you Bernie for this forum.

Anonymous said...

"and has now exaggerated insignificant issues'

apparently not insignificant to Americans of African descent whose ancestors were bought here in chains. White folks need to take a step back and consider the social dynamics of that.

Anonymous said...

August 18, 2017 at 8:44 AM .....> Has it right.

August 18, 2017 at 6:50 AM....> Expresses the level of concern we should have concerning statue removal.

All statues to men are stupid... get over yourselves... wont be to long before you look like an ape compared to what follows you. That's what's happening here.

Very few statues of men of any sort, that if alive today would not be breaking current laws. They'd all be radical criminals. Move on, be humble, you're a hand full of top soil.

Anonymous said...

"First they came for the Lincoln statue, and I did nothing ...."

Get a grip! Oh the pathos, the drama.

Anonymous said...

What's next... the burning of books! The forced removal of these historical markers is akin to what the Taliban and ISIS have done throughout Afghanistan and the Middle East. The markers are there because people in the past wanted the future to remember the good, the bad and the ugly so as to have us and the people that will come after us think long and hard as to what a "Civil War" can do to a country. Keep the markers. Teach your children what they mean and encourage them to live their lives without hate and exude tolerance.

Peter j. Cochran said...

Anon 10:38 your full of crap. Sign you name . The Generals didn't kill people off as you infur! You are probably living in your mothers basement too ! How's that . You cant sign your name because you have never been on a Army shitter ,because you can get in there either .

Anonymous said...

-9:22

"You cant sign your name because you have never been on a Army shitter"

Your qualifications are impressive. Thank you for your service.


It's true, Generals don't kill or die... that's what the ranks are for.

Anonymous said...

The Civil War was ALL about slavery from the beginning to the Confederacy. Lincoln came around a bit later. Just read each state's succession documents. Maintaining slavery is prominent in every single one. Civil War monuments are disgusting. They're in a whole other category compared to founders' monuments. Any that feature horses always have the ass facing north. They waged war against the United States in order to keep humans as property. They were defeated and those who were liberated shouldn't have to support the care and maintenance of monuments to their bitter, defeated oppressors. If they want to keep monuments in private institutions, have at it and enjoy. It's a free country they rebelled against and lost to. But not a public cent should go to these disgusting things.

Anonymous said...

Thats interesting that a human pays more attention to a horses ass and which way it's pointing than American history? Was that a subliminal that American historians were sending into the future to politically pandered because of indifferences?

Anonymous said...

They should have never allowed to be put up in the first place they represent Treason against the United States. Lee lost his us Citizenship because of that treason and Died a Man without a country

Jeff Fox said...

For being residents of a country, which was bloodied and sacrificed many to fight slavery and for being residents of a country which has made great strides and come a long way in attempting to ensure equal rights for all citizens and for being a nation doing more than most, if not all, others, in the fight against human trafficking and human rights around the globe and for being a nation who believes race should not matter or be our focus in how we treat others; we are sure fixated on it. Love/hate are "heart" issues, not political issues. We cannot legislate love. We can learn from history. We should not focus on the past, but on the future. Perspective. Forward.

Anonymous said...

There is one Confederate General who statue is safe...

Brigadier General Albert Pike.


http://dcist.com/2017/08/confederate_statue_councilmember.php

Jeff Fox said...

https://youtu.be/FN_YIBr0ELM

Anonymous said...

Wow! Did not know post reconstruction confederate statues were such a vital link in understanding our nation's past. WE should condemn Germany for no Nazi statues or Japan not having enough statues of Tojo. Seriously, do you really equate a few statues to "losing our history". Time to get out of the paranoid bubble. Sorry but 1800's America is gone and if you were black it sucked big time. As did much of the e20th century. Now you are just rubbing it in.

Bernie O'Hare said...

Good link, Jeff.

Anonymous said...

First we could not have a Christmas tree in a public building/place because it was offensive to non Christians, now statues of historic figures (good bad or indifferent). Grow the hell up! I guess we want a society where everything is grey, where there is no colors, streets are all numbers or letters, buildings only have an address and can't be addressed by their name, everyone gets a paticipation medal and no one gets their feelings hurt. When does it stop? All of the sudden these statues that have been around for decades are an issue? There are a few out there that just look for something to bitch about and do so until they get their 15 minutes of fame. When all the statues are gone and Christmas trees are down what's next churches/temples/synagogues will have to be knocked down because they are a symbol of a religious belief. Over the last 15-20 years it sickens me how much this world and specifically this country has gone to hell.

Anonymous said...

Referendum votes..by city residents. Democracy rules. They are for the most part..the statues.. attempts to rewrite history so the white South would look better than they really were. Lee was a traitor but Lincoln was not vindictive. Let him off easy. Their was no..Noble Cause. It was all about retaining slavery. Honor the dead but do not glorify the sanitized reason for the war under the guise of factual history from the south's point of view.

Anonymous said...

See, here's the thing. Slavery - an abomination - was LEGAL at the time. Secession, the Constitution being silent on the matter, was not a power "prohibited by it to the States" and therefore also legal.

Their was no "insurrection". Though Jeff Davis considered an attack on DC to quickly end the war, there was never any desire to "overthrow the US government." They said goodbye, and assumed a defensive posture knowing Lincoln would never let go of the golden goose. Lincoln, as you should know, supported the Corwin Amendment and repatriation. He did not go to war to end slavery.

Virginia did not secede over slavery and would have stayed in the Union had Lincoln not chosen war as his means to preserve power and control. Like OJ with Nicole, he who believed he was "Cloaked in immense power" would see them dead before he would let them leave.