Why Is There Controversy Over Confederate Monuments?

[wjmacguffin]

Seriously, why can't you just leave them alone?

Better question: Why are they even there? Why did we spend public money on monuments to people who killed US soldiers over a state's right to enslave people?

The civil war was a terrible time in our history. What's even more terrible is lying about who and what it was about.

Since you obviously know nothing about American history, I am not going to waste my time on you.

But if you really care, get on google and bring up the civil war, read all you can on it, not just the current BS from the left who are trying to rewrite history.

The people represented by those statues fought and died for what they believed in. Taking them down is no better than when muslims destroy Buddhas in Afghanistan.

We cannot learn from history if we destroy it or lie about it.

I have a degree in US History. I've taught US History. I've read primary and secondary sources. I'm not infallible by any means, but if you want to wade in here and accuse me of being ignoring and lying, either present some facts or STFU.

Yes, they fought and died for what they believed in. That doesn't mean they're justified. Having a belief is not the same as being correct, and honoring those who killed US soldiers in battle is just plain weird.

 

[JohnnyApplesack]

People fought and died in the civil war for what they believed (and it was NOT about slavery).

oh yes it was

what the hell are you talking about?

It was about a State's right to secede, not slavery per se. That said, the reason state's seceded was due to the slavery issue, but it was secession itself which caused the North to invade the South.

wrong again

On Dec. 24, 1860, delegates at South Carolina’s secession convention adopted a “Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union.” It noted “an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery” and protested that Northern states had failed to “fulfill their constitutional obligations” by interfering with the return of fugitive slaves to bondage. Slavery, not states’ rights, birthed the Civil War.

South Carolina was further upset that New York no longer allowed “slavery transit.” In the past, if Charleston gentry wanted to spend August in the Hamptons, they could bring their cook along. No longer — and South Carolina’s delegates were outraged. In addition, they objected that New England states let black men vote and tolerated abolitionist societies. According to South Carolina, states should not have the right to let their citizens assemble and speak freely when what they said threatened slavery.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oh, you are edumcated, wjmacguffin? That won't go down well here with those who are not edumacated.

 

[wjmacguffin]

...But IIRC (and please post links if I'm wrong so I can admit that clearly), the South started the Civil War because they believed Lincoln would dismantle slavery. ....

The maxim that "the victors write the history books" is exemplified by the so-called "history of the Civil War".

The South didn't start the Civil War. Southern states seceded from the Union over slavery. President Lincoln attacked the South to drag them back into the Union against their will. This is shown by the fact that most battles took place in the South. If the South had started the war, wouldn't most battles have been in the North?

President Lincoln's letter to Horace Greeley is a confession to this fact.

You mean Lincoln attacked *before* South Carolina attacked Fort Sumter?

 

[Weatherman2020]

New Orleans has begun taking down Confederate monuments, moving them from public spaces to museums. Why is this controversial?

First, let's be honest: Taking up arms against the lawfully-elected government of the United States is treason. Sure, one man's treason is another man's freedom fighter. But IIRC (and please post links if I'm wrong so I can admit that clearly), the South started the Civil War because they believed Lincoln would dismantle slavery. Not because he said he would, because he didn't, but because they believed he would.

This isn't the case of a downtrodden, abused people rising up against a cruel, despotic government. IMO, that makes rebellion morally justified. But this is a case of people rising up against a democratic republic because they were worried the gov't would take away their slaves.

And I get that some folks want to change the Civil War into a noble struggle for state's rights. But let's remember two facts: 1) This is about the right to own black people as slaves, and 2) the feds hadn't trampled on that right when the South started war.

Now, I appreciate that the US Civil War is part of our history. We shouldn't ignore it or whitewash it. And there's nothing wrong with loving your state or respecting your ancestors. But why do some people want to keep statues and monuments dedicated to people who fought and killed US citizens? Would it be okay if a Muslim-American community built a statue of Nidal Hasan (the guy who killed 13 people at Fort Hood) and claim it's part of their heritage?

Seriously, why is removing these monuments to put into a museum so controversial?

Because Democrats want to erase their history so they can pretend they don't support racism.

 

[wjmacguffin]

Oh, you are edumcated, wjmacguffin? That won't go down well here with those who are not edumacated.

I know. I'm waiting for these same folk to start calling me a snowflake, libturd, communist, socialist, nazi, racist, and more. You know, what these ignorant people do when they have no facts to support their ill-formed positions.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Progressives aren't through trying to piss people off yet.

*****SAD SMILE*****

Conservatives aren't through playing the victim card and defending treason.

The one's playing the victim card are those demanding that the monuments be torn down and that Confederate soldier graves be desecrated against the laws that exist to honor those soldiers as US soldiers. All because progressives are snowflakes who have to find something to take offense too as they run for their safe place.

Just another slap in the face to the military by the progressives.

*****SMILE*****

 

[Divine Wind]

People fought and died in the civil war for what they believed (and it was NOT about slavery).

oh yes it was

what the hell are you talking about?

Don't make yourself look more stupid than you already do. The civil war was not about slavery, there were slaves in the union states AFTER the war ended.

Agreed. The Emancipation Proclamation only freed the slaves in Southern states, not elsewhere.

The Emancipation Proclamation
The proclamation declared "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebellious states "are, and henceforward shall be free."

Despite this expansive wording, the Emancipation Proclamation was limited in many ways. It applied only to states that had seceded from the Union, leaving slavery untouched in the loyal border states. It also expressly exempted parts of the Confederacy that had already come under Northern control. Most important, the freedom it promised depended upon Union military victory.

 

[wjmacguffin]

New Orleans has begun taking down Confederate monuments, moving them from public spaces to museums. Why is this controversial?

First, let's be honest: Taking up arms against the lawfully-elected government of the United States is treason. Sure, one man's treason is another man's freedom fighter. But IIRC (and please post links if I'm wrong so I can admit that clearly), the South started the Civil War because they believed Lincoln would dismantle slavery. Not because he said he would, because he didn't, but because they believed he would.

This isn't the case of a downtrodden, abused people rising up against a cruel, despotic government. IMO, that makes rebellion morally justified. But this is a case of people rising up against a democratic republic because they were worried the gov't would take away their slaves.

And I get that some folks want to change the Civil War into a noble struggle for state's rights. But let's remember two facts: 1) This is about the right to own black people as slaves, and 2) the feds hadn't trampled on that right when the South started war.

Now, I appreciate that the US Civil War is part of our history. We shouldn't ignore it or whitewash it. And there's nothing wrong with loving your state or respecting your ancestors. But why do some people want to keep statues and monuments dedicated to people who fought and killed US citizens? Would it be okay if a Muslim-American community built a statue of Nidal Hasan (the guy who killed 13 people at Fort Hood) and claim it's part of their heritage?

Seriously, why is removing these monuments to put into a museum so controversial?

Because Democrats want to erase their history so they can pretend they don't support racism.

Le sigh. Yet another conservative who cannot comprehend how political parties shifted over the years.

Back then, Dems were conservative and Reps were liberal. That's not 100% true because our definition of those labels has changed somewhat, but it still fits.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yup, mac called out DE for sure, and DE walked right into it.

Doan' matuh no how no moah. The statues are going away.

 

[Camp]

What will Lee circle be without Lee's statue? A roundabout with grass and a mound in the middle of it.

Who exactly is offended by these historical monuments that have stood for hundreds of years? Who and why? And why all of a sudden did they become offensive?

I am offended that every city in the country has to have a MLK boulevard. I am offended that Cape Canaveral was renamed Cape Kennedy and that Washington national airport was renamed Reagan airport.

WTF are we trying to accomplish with this foolishness?

How much could you possibly know or care about the Civil War and the tributes put up for Confederate soldiers and leaders? You think the monuments have stood "hundreds" of years.
Statues are tributes. A decreasing number of citizens believe the Confederates deserve tributes. A growing number are embarrassed and or offended that their communities pay tribute. The end result is that the government entities responsible for maintaining these statues and monuments no longer want that responsibility or to in any way endorse what the subjects of the statues and monuments represented.
Ironic that the Confederate supporters allege the war was about states rights are now objecting about a state's or communities right to who and what it pays tribute to'

 

[Redfish]

Seriously, why can't you just leave them alone?

Better question: Why are they even there? Why did we spend public money on monuments to people who killed US soldiers over a state's right to enslave people?

The civil war was a terrible time in our history. What's even more terrible is lying about who and what it was about.

Since you obviously know nothing about American history, I am not going to waste my time on you.

But if you really care, get on google and bring up the civil war, read all you can on it, not just the current BS from the left who are trying to rewrite history.

The people represented by those statues fought and died for what they believed in. Taking them down is no better than when muslims destroy Buddhas in Afghanistan.

We cannot learn from history if we destroy it or lie about it.

I have a degree in US History. I've taught US History. I've read primary and secondary sources. I'm not infallible by any means, but if you want to wade in here and accuse me of being ignoring and lying, either present some facts or STFU.

Yes, they fought and died for what they believed in. That doesn't mean they're justified. Having a belief is not the same as being correct, and honoring those who killed US soldiers in battle is just plain weird.

have you ever heard of the Washington monument? How about the Jefferson memorial? They both are very prominent in our nations capital. Monuments to slave owners. Should we take them down so as not to offend the decendents of slaves who if not for American slavery might be dinner for some African war lord?

 

[Redfish]

What will Lee circle be without Lee's statue? A roundabout with grass and a mound in the middle of it.

Who exactly is offended by these historical monuments that have stood for hundreds of years? Who and why? And why all of a sudden did they become offensive?

I am offended that every city in the country has to have a MLK boulevard. I am offended that Cape Canaveral was renamed Cape Kennedy and that Washington national airport was renamed Reagan airport.

WTF are we trying to accomplish with this foolishness?

How much could you possibly know or care about the Civil War and the tributes put up for Confederate soldiers and leaders? You think the monuments have stood "hundreds" of years.
Statues are tributes. A decreasing number of citizens believe the Confederates deserve tributes. A growing number are embarrassed and or offended that their communities pay tribute. The end result is that the government entities responsible for maintaining these statues and monuments no longer want that responsibility or to in any way endorse what the subjects of the statues and monuments represented.
Ironic that the Confederate supporters allege the war was about states rights are now objecting about a state's or communities right to who and what it pays tribute to'

do your comments apply to Washington and Jefferson?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Much of old Washington D. C. was built with slave labor, fishyred. We keep Lincoln's monument up so that he overlooks their failure.

 

[Divine Wind]

...Having a belief is not the same as being correct, and honoring those who killed US soldiers in battle is just plain weird.

They were all Americans. A fact you should know if you really are a well-rounded history teacher. The fact that war killed off 2% of the US population and is still a point of contention should tell you something about how deep this issue runs through American culture.

 

[JohnnyApplesack]

Progressives aren't through trying to piss people off yet.

*****SAD SMILE*****

Conservatives aren't through playing the victim card and defending treason.

View attachment 123226


The one's playing the victim card are those demanding that the monuments be torn down and that Confederate soldier graves be desecrated against the laws that exist to honor those soldiers as US soldiers. All because progressives are snowflakes who have to find something to take offense too as they run for their safe place.

Just another slap in the face to the military by the progressives.

*****SMILE*****

The confederates were not 'US soldiers' except for the fact they committed treason inside US

don't be ridiculous

 

[JakeStarkey]

wj probably knows ten times what you know about the CW, D W, and understands its issues far more clearly.

 

[Redfish]

Yup, mac called out DE for sure, and DE walked right into it.

Doan' matuh no how no moah. The statues are going away.

'

If you don't like history, rewrite it, pretend it never happened, refuse to learn from it. But get the votes of your far left base at all costs.

you dumb shit, this is not about statues its about Landrieu trying to get another term as mayor.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yup, mac called out DE for sure, and DE walked right into it.

Doan' matuh no how no moah. The statues are going away.

'

If you don't like history, rewrite it, pretend it never happened, refuse to learn from it. But get the votes of your far left base at all costs.

you dumb shit, this is not about statues its about Landrieu trying to get another term as mayor.

See, fishyred, you know nothing about this.

 

[wjmacguffin]

Progressives aren't through trying to piss people off yet.

*****SAD SMILE*****

Conservatives aren't through playing the victim card and defending treason.

View attachment 123226


The one's playing the victim card are those demanding that the monuments be torn down and that Confederate soldier graves be desecrated against the laws that exist to honor those soldiers as US soldiers. All because progressives are snowflakes who have to find something to take offense too as they run for their safe place.

Just another slap in the face to the military by the progressives.

*****SMILE*****

It's sad that you need to change the subject in order to try and claim victory. This thread is discussing removing MONUMENTS, not graves. It's also sad that I predicted the snowflake charge before you made it.

But hey, I get it. You know you're wrong, and that ol' cognitive dissonance gets the better of you. So you need to turn a statue in a public space into a grave, and chance removal into desecration. Again, victim card. "Wahh, I wants my statues to Lee and Davis! It's my heritage and I'm all offended and stuff! Leave the South alone!"

Last point: You cannot factually or morally say Confederates are US soldiers. Because they weren't. They were CSA solders. Again, it's sad that you need to lie to feel better about yourself. But whatever helps you get through the day.