No, Removing Confederate Monuments Does Not "Erase History"

[TexasTiger 12,947]

4 hours ago, japantiger said:

More faux outrage from the outrage industry.   I don't expect anyone to celebrate my ancestors.....ignore them....I don't care; just don't ask me to pretend they didn't exist...

Statues celebrate people. Public statues are public statements of societal celebration.

[japantiger 4,051]

2 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Statues celebrate people. Public statues are public statements of societal celebration.

 

So  let's tear down Tecumsah's statue at the NAval academy...after all, he formed a confederacy of tribes that aligned with the British and fought against us in the War of 1812....a pox upon him and his memory.... 

or how about this murderous bastard. !!!!!...Little Big Horn ring a bell...?    

The celebration is in the eye of the beholder....

 

 

[AU64 10,122]

2 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Statues celebrate people. Public statues are public statements of societal celebration.

True and they help us know which people are celebrated ,,,kind of a statement of what we as a people value.....

Which probably explains why the statues on the Auburn campus are of football players rather than former university presidents or noted graduates who made significant  contributions to America's greatness.  

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

I really don't care about monuments or statues. They can do whatever they want with them, keep them or take them down. I don't identify with the monuments, statues, or the confederate flag. I've never connected to the civil war/old south stuff. I've never owned a confederate flag, or even worn shirts that had a confederate flag on it. I just don't connect to it other than it's just a part of the past here in the south, although it's a negative part of the past. If you want to remove those symbols, go right ahead. You can celebrate their removal and I'm sure some(no one on this forum at least) would even like to see the monuments destroyed. But the big picture view on this is it's likely not going to mean anything after it's done. Things will still be the same way they were before those symbols are removed. What changed after they took down the confederate flag from the capitol in Montgomery? ................ Nothing really ........... Now it's the statues/monuments........... 

As someone who works in Montgomery, and lives just outside of it, I can attest that taking down the statues is a only a symbolic action that doesn't really accomplish anything. I wish it would actually do something but those behind this aren't really doing it for any type of unity outreach, it's only the next item on the list of grievances that are prioritized ahead of actually fixing a current problem and those behind the push to remove the monuments will be able to tell their districts and constituents that they did something for them. You can bet the same black leaders calling for the removal of the monuments will still be antagonizing white council-people and blaming whites for the ills of the black community in Montgomery and in Alabama even if all the symbols, names, and remnants of the confederate era are removed and changed.  

Is taking down the statues suddenly going to improve the public schools in Montgomery, or improve violent crime? Will it "unite" the black and white population? This is a way to avoid solving real problems by finding an object of oppression to say we're "moving forward". Re-naming the schools in Montgomery will probably be one of the next things they want done. 

You can label me whatever you want after reading this but this how I feel deep down with my experiences with Montgomery and having spent time around the people of Montgomery. We could cover the whole city of Montgomery in Civil Rights monuments, markers, re-name all the schools, and paint every building with artwork of the Civil Rights movement but the majority of the citizens in Montgomery(blacks, more specifically black leaders) will still find fault and blame whites(who are the minority) for the problems and for not fixing them. There are parts of Montgomery I'm afraid that are just never going to prosper because the leaders aren't willing to address the problems of violent crime or trying to improve the public schools. There's been several school shootings in Montgomery within the last year. It's not just a financial issue with the schools, it's the community issues, violent crime issue, and wanting things done a certain way, which hasn't worked, that have made for a difficult challenge in actually trying to fix problems in Montgomery. 

Until the attitudes of the leaders change, taking down statues, re-naming schools, and blaming others is not going to make Montgomery better. If taking down confederate flags didn't move the needle, the idea that we'll "move forward" by removing more oppression symbols is going to accomplish something, then that seems to be all this is, symbolic. Which is why I'm not attached to either side, whether it's keeping it or removing it. It's not going to really matter I'm afraid, and I wish it wasn't like that because it's more than just a "white people need to change" and let go of the past.

And here's something else for folks to chew on, some of the black leaders and their constituents don't want to re-name the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma even though the person the bridge is named after, Edmund Pettus, a leader in the KKK. You know why they don't want to rename it?  ..................... Because it's a reminder of the oppression and struggle the Civil Rights movement faced ...........

 

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/06/edmund_pettus_bridge_renaming.html

U.S. Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Birmingham:

Quote

"The bridge is an iconic symbol of the struggle for voting rights in America, and its name is as significant as its imposing structure. Changing the name of the bridge would change the course of history and compromise the historical integrity of the voting rights movement. As inheritors of the legacy surrounding the historical events that took place in Selma, we must safeguard that history--good and bad and resist attempts to rewrite it."

 

So basically the bottom-line is that they can pick and choose what gets changed and what doesn't? ........ Now that's something I do have a problem with. It really shows hypocrisy to want to keep certain things you want, but the other stuff needs to be changed. All because it's based on "historical integrity". So who gets to define "historical integrity"? And what exactly are they defining as "historical integrity"? Anything they pick or choose to be?

[SaltyTiger 7,816]

My first thoughts 91. Rename schools, etc..... ugly drive through old Montgomery.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

3 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

My first thoughts 91. Rename schools, etc..... ugly drive through old Montgomery.

I guess while we are at it we should change the names of all counties called Lee County

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

5 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Red herring.

JFK, whatever his faults, was the President of this country.  Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee were not.

Neither was Sherman. So if we want to remove all statues reminding us of the horrors of the Civil War surely the one of the ruthless Sherman should be removed in D.C.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_William_Tecumseh_Sherman_Monument

 

 

[SaltyTiger 7,816]

14 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

I guess while we are at it we should change the names of all counties called Lee County

Absolutely, destroy Pine Hill Cemetery on Armstrong in Auburn. The monument to the unknown Confederate soldier stands above several graves. It has to go. Then tear down Samford Hall. It served as hospital for the soldiers that died in Auburn according to the monument. 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

18 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Absolutely, destroy Pine Hill Cemetery on Armstrong in Auburn. The monument to the unknown Confederate soldier stands above several graves. It has to go. Then tear down Samford Hall. It served as hospital for the soldiers that died in Auburn according to the monument. 

And thank you for making the point of how ridiculous it is to pick and choose which symbols should be tossed.

[TexasTiger 12,947]

2 hours ago, AU64 said:

True and they help us know which people are celebrated ,,,kind of a statement of what we as a people value.....

Which probably explains why the statues on the Auburn campus are of football players rather than former university presidents or noted graduates who made significant  contributions to America's greatness.  

We agree.

[TexasTiger 12,947]

24 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Absolutely, destroy Pine Hill Cemetery on Armstrong in Auburn. The monument to the unknown Confederate soldier stands above several graves. It has to go. Then tear down Samford Hall. It served as hospital for the soldiers that died in Auburn according to the monument. 

Samford Hall wasn't built yet. No wrecking ball for you-- too loose with facts to be entrusted with that responsibility.

[homersapien 11,386]

2 hours ago, japantiger said:

 

So  let's tear down Tecumsah's statue at the NAval academy...after all, he formed a confederacy of tribes that aligned with the British and fought against us in the War of 1812....a pox upon him and his memory.... 

or how about this murderous bastard. !!!!!...Little Big Horn ring a bell...?    

The celebration is in the eye of the beholder....

 

 

Where they rebeling in order to preserve and advance chattel slavery? 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

8 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Samford Hall wasn't built yet. No wrecking ball for you-- too loose with facts to be entrusted with that responsibility.

But the bricks of Old Main were used in the construction of Samford so it carries forward the tradition. Heck, the whole college shut down during the Civil War so the men could join in support of the Confederacy so let's just close Auburn because it's heritage may be offensive to some.

[homersapien 11,386]

58 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Neither was Sherman. So if we want to remove all statues reminding us of the horrors of the Civil War surely the one of the ruthless Sherman should be removed in D.C.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_William_Tecumseh_Sherman_Monument

 

 

Actually the horrors of the civil war- and slavery - are something to be remembered. 

[homersapien 11,386]

1 minute ago, Proud Tiger said:

But the bricks of Old Main were used in the construction of Samford so it carries forward the tradition. Heck, the whole college shut down during the Civil War so the men could join in support of the Confederacy so let's just close Auburn because it's heritage may be offensive to some.

The irony here is what a terrible personal example you present for the case of preserving Auburn.

[japantiger 4,051]

30 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Where they rebeling in order to preserve and advance chattel slavery? 

So it's OK to build a monuments to murderers of US citizens and soldiers but not slave holders?   Got it....glad I understand the rules now...

[homersapien 11,386]

7 minutes ago, japantiger said:

So it's OK to build a monuments to murderers of US citizens and soldiers but not slave holders?   Got it....glad I understand the rules now...

Were they murderers or where they simply fighting for their very existence? 

No, I don't think you understand at all.

 

[japantiger 4,051]

Just now, homersapien said:

 Were they murderers or where they simply fighting for their very existence? 

No, I don't think you understand at all.

 

To the dead Americans,  and their families; I'm sure that fine point is lost on them.  Custer's wife wrote a great deal about her loss....screw her....Again, you've simply chosen a side that fits your current strain of radical political thought and decided that apparently anyone ever involved in slavery is unworthy of memorializing .... other capital crimes are OK (murder, dismemberment, scalping, etc.)... as long as you perceived them as, what, freedom fighters?   So we need to memorialize the 9-11 hijackers I guess....they were just poor misunderstood downtrodden not radical   undocumented immigrant muslims coming here to avenge, well, something I'm sure...

I know, we just need to tear down any monument erected to an American prior to 1865.... they were all tainted by slavery...or that matter; you'd even have to challenge the Lincoln Memorial as Lincoln didn't care whether slavery was eliminated or not...by his own words.  How about tear down all monuments to anyone born before 1865...I know, all memorials to white-folk.... that's it?  We're all unjust, tainted by the stain of slavery, we didn't build that, horrible people, that need to be brought low by the righteous indignation of you, Tex and Kathy Griffin....so much love...so much tolerance....

[TexasTiger 12,947]

1 hour ago, Proud Tiger said:

But the bricks of Old Main were used in the construction of Samford so it carries forward the tradition. Heck, the whole college shut down during the Civil War so the men could join in support of the Confederacy so let's just close Auburn because it's heritage may be offensive to some.

Let's say ridiculously stupid stuff instead of making reasonable arguments.

[TexasTiger 12,947]

3 hours ago, japantiger said:

 

So  let's tear down Tecumsah's statue at the NAval academy...after all, he formed a confederacy of tribes that aligned with the British and fought against us in the War of 1812....a pox upon him and his memory.... 

or how about this murderous bastard. !!!!!...Little Big Horn ring a bell...?    

The celebration is in the eye of the beholder....

 

 

That was not a bust of Tecumseh. It's been "renamed" by Midshipmen.

https://siris-artinventories.si.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?session=12618P12436QL.9129&profile=ariall&source=~!siartinventories&view=subscriptionsummary&uri=full=3100001~!10941~!26&ri=2&aspect=Browse&menu=search&ipp=20&spp=20&staffonly=&term=Outdoor+Sculpture+--+Maryland+--+Annapolis&index=OBJEC&uindex=&aspect=Browse&menu=search&ri=2

Crazy Horse is on private land as part of a museum.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crazy_Horse_Memorial

Move all these confederate  statues to museums and let's talk about their history.

[TexasTiger 12,947]

26 minutes ago, japantiger said:

To the dead Americans,  and their families; I'm sure that fine point is lost on them.  Custer's wife wrote a great deal about her loss....screw her....Again, you've simply chosen a side that fits your current strain of radical political thought and decided that apparently anyone ever involved in slavery is unworthy of memorializing .... other capital crimes are OK (murder, dismemberment, scalping, etc.)... as long as you perceived them as, what, freedom fighters?   So we need to memorialize the 9-11 hijackers I guess....they were just poor misunderstood downtrodden not radical   undocumented immigrant muslims coming here to avenge, well, something I'm sure...

I know, we just need to tear down any monument erected to an American prior to 1865.... they were all tainted by slavery...or that matter; you'd even have to challenge the Lincoln Memorial as Lincoln didn't care whether slavery was eliminated or not...by his own words.  How about tear down all monuments to anyone born before 1865...I know, all memorials to white-folk.... that's it?  We're all unjust, tainted by the stain of slavery, we didn't build that, horrible people, that need to be brought low by the righteous indignation of you, Tex and Kathy Griffin....so much love...so much tolerance....

So much ignorance.

[homersapien 11,386]

9 hours ago, japantiger said:

To the dead Americans,  and their families; I'm sure that fine point is lost on them.  Custer's wife wrote a great deal about her loss....screw her....Again, you've simply chosen a side that fits your current strain of radical political thought and decided that apparently anyone ever involved in slavery is unworthy of memorializing .... other capital crimes are OK (murder, dismemberment, scalping, etc.)... as long as you perceived them as, what, freedom fighters?   So we need to memorialize the 9-11 hijackers I guess....they were just poor misunderstood downtrodden not radical   undocumented immigrant muslims coming here to avenge, well, something I'm sure...

I know, we just need to tear down any monument erected to an American prior to 1865.... they were all tainted by slavery...or that matter; you'd even have to challenge the Lincoln Memorial as Lincoln didn't care whether slavery was eliminated or not...by his own words.  How about tear down all monuments to anyone born before 1865...I know, all memorials to white-folk.... that's it?  We're all unjust, tainted by the stain of slavery, we didn't build that, horrible people, that need to be brought low by the righteous indignation of you, Tex and Kathy Griffin....so much love...so much tolerance....

Nevertheless, none of those people fought specifically to preserve and extend chattel slavery, which by definition, promoted a sub-human status for a large percent of our fellow citizens.  

And yes, our country's history is most certainly "tainted" by slavery.  Maybe it's time we stopped deliberately celebrating the rebellion meant to preserve it by maintaining memorials on our common, public spaces. It does not reflect the values we supposedly represent as a country.  

That's reason enough to remove them.   

[SaltyTiger 7,816]

10 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Samford Hall wasn't built yet. No wrecking ball for you-- too loose with facts to be entrusted with that responsibility.

Beg your pardon Brother Tex? Please note the part re-civil war

http://www.auburn.edu/communications_marketing/150/history/samford.html 

[homersapien 11,386]

1 minute ago, SaltyTiger said:

Beg your pardon Brother Tex?

http://www.auburn.edu/communications_marketing/150/history/samford.html 

It doesn't matter.  No one claims we as a country didn't have a racial past.  When I enrolled in Auburn in 1969 the student body contained many racists.

That doesn't mean we should celebrate it with memorials.

[I_M4_AU 7,853]

Interesting thread.  Like all the threads in this particular forum, the sides are divided into extremes.  The ones that state "remove all monuments of the Civil War/slavery" and the "if you remove the monuments, you erase history" side of the equation.  No middle ground, no real debate just my thoughts are what really count.

After Memorial Day, I happened to look into the Arlington National Cemetery and its origin.  I don't know if many know, but there are 482 confederate soldiers buried in section 16 known as the Confederate Memorial.  This portion of Arlington was approved by congress in June 1900 in this spirit of national reconciliation. Later, the United Daughters of the Confederacy petitioned for a memorial and it was granted in 1906.  The article follows:

http://www.arlingtoncemetery.mil/Explore/Monuments-and-Memorials/Confederate-Memorial

Even more interesting is how Arlington came to be.  The land was originally owned by Robert E. Lee, whose wife's family owned the property (George Washington Parke Custis was GW adopted son and passed on to Mary Custis Lee) and the land was illegally confiscated by the US government.  Through the courts, Lee's descendants were properly compensated for the property and is now legally government land.  The land was basically a "potter's field" of casualties of the war, the first burial was in May of 1864 as General Meigs decided to use the property of Robert E. Lee as a cemetery so the land would be uninhabitable after the war.  Evidently, Meigs didn't like Lee's decision to fight for Virginia and the South during the war.  If you are interested in the origin of Arlington National Cemetary, link below is a very interesting read.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-arlington-national-cemetery-came-to-be-145147007/

The bottom line is, in the spirit of national reconciliation section 16 was established back in 1900.  I am sure congress felt back then that they were doing the right thing, for the greater good.  The phrase "for the greater good" has become obsolete in this "all about me" world.  And that is a shame.  Let them RIP.

JMO, I could be wrong.  Fire away.