Statue of Confederate General R.E.Lee Removed.

a reply to: Kali74

Hmm... I cannot see the benefit of these things being in private hands.

They are part of the history of a nation, not a possession to be hoarded.

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Spider879
More valid that the other ones comment. Let´s take it from this angle:

Shouldn´t history be preserved, to not repeat again? Isn´t that the exact same justification others use to tell us Germans when we dare to complain, because we are fed up hearing about what our fathers and grandfathers did wrong, although, aknowledging it was wrong.

Sure, my comparision lacks a bit, but it has a core to think about.

Preserving history is one thing, glorying monuments with personage on the wrong side of history is another, I had heard it said that General Lee was a good man, even if to me he sounded condescending and believe the enslaved population were better off being chattel in a brutal slave system than in their ancestral home land is besides the point, he choose the side that would render the United States in twain..that's called treason!!, his side lost no coffee for him , they don't get a statue so generations later ppl still make use of it for division, and I get it some folks really believe it's a heritage thing with nothing else to add, but on the flip side there is this.


This led to 70yrs of freaking hell called Jim Crow that retarded the social ,economic and political mobility of AAs. to date, it's a heritage we can move past,.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I believe it just means that the statues won't be on government property. I don't think it means that they will be in someone's back yard. They will probably be view-able in a privately-run museum.

The main point being, they aren't being destroyed and history isn't being erased. Memorials to slavery just aren't being promoted by the government.

a reply to: Kali74

Where were the monuments to slave rebellions, to the slaves that died fighting for their freedom? What about black southern history and culture?

Right! Lets remove and bury statues of white Southern heros and erect monuments to black Southern heros!

Only problem with that is.........whites are still the majority population in the South, southern black history is irrelevant to the white population. But that doesnt matter. Because this isnt about history at all............its about subjugation. And with that comes oppression.

So sad.

Robert E. Lee was one of the greatest generals the world has known.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: strongfp

The real problem I have with all the confederate stuff is 2 fold..

A) from an americans pov it is glorifying treason...

If the plaque read..

"Rebeled against his native country leading to the deaths of thousands of US service members, while being a pretty damn good tactician ..except for that whole gettysburg fiasco .. he totally blew that..."

That is patriotically remembering your history..

However that's not what we have here.. which leads me perfectly into ...

B) if you look at the dates on all these schools, monuments and parks "creation date" or date of the name change..

They ALL started and usually can be directly traced to the push back from civil rights..
No one glorified the confederacy before then.. they had just rebelled leading to tens of thousands of deaths..

As a middle finger to segregation and civil rights you had revisonist history statues and monuments pop up like weeds..



So there isn't a glorious history to protect.. it is protecting a very specific FU meant to tell the world they will not intergrate quietly.

From an American pov my friend, the only treason committed was by President Lincoln by betraying the Constitution which he swore to uphold by not allowing the states their right to awfully secede when they saw that the federal government was no longer acting in their behalf.
As for being a patriot, well Lee’s home was Virginia, not the US. America at the time was still under its original conception of ‘These United States’ which means separate nations/states which come together in a mutual union for self preservation, much like the European Union today which is a poorly designed copy of the US.

And I honestly don’t care why a statue is put there. As a historian, it saddens me when people attempt to change or erase history simply because they don’t like that part of it.
It is part of history and that is a fact, and as such it should be memorialized.
Most Americans don’t and didn’t agree with the Vietnam War, but I don’t see anyone trying to tear down ‘The Wall’.

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: strongfp

I am not surprised anymore considering the complete dumbing downing of three generations of adults that will never grow up.

We may as well get rid of Mount Rushmore while we are at it to, I am sure they will find it offensive.

What a shame.

They might as well tear down Rushmore, they’re attempting to destroy Stone Mountain which is not only historically significant depicting Gen Jackson, Gen Lee, and Pres Davis, but also significant because it is the largest bas relief in the world.
Not to mention that you could make the same statements about the gentlemen on Rushmore as you could the ones on Stone Mountain (well except for Roosevelt).


Well, I guess you all know my views. I say we keep every single monument out there and require that each of them hold a time capsule that should be opened every 25 years perused over in order to remember past views of it and what it meant to others and then we add to the capsule before replacing it. Therefore we could turn them all into living history pieces.

Ultimately it's still a States Rights issue. If the people of the State of LA don't want the statues on state land, it's their call isn't it?

See your disconnect....?

originally posted by: JDeLattre89
From an American pov my friend, the only treason committed was by President Lincoln by betraying the Constitution which he swore to uphold by not allowing the states their right to awfully secede when they saw that the federal government was no longer acting in their behalf.

Before these statues got removed and impaired my ability to remember history I believe I recall that Lincoln did not call for prosecution of war until the Confederacy determined to seize Federal land inside of their borders and that they had actually seceded prior to that point.

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

  Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read:

Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.

  I now reiterate these sentiments, and in doing so I only press upon the public attention the most conclusive evidence of which the case is susceptible that the property, peace, and security of no section are to be in any wise endangered by the now incoming Administration. I add, too, that all the protection which, consistently with the Constitution and the laws, can be given will be cheerfully given to all the States when lawfully demanded, for whatever cause—as cheerfully to one section as to another. Some guy named 'Lincoln's' inaugural address.

The biggest disconnect though in my opinion is that people seem to think that they can erase history because they are afraid of it, instead of learning from history in order to change the future.

originally posted by: JDeLattre89
The biggest disconnect though in my opinion is that people seem to think that they can erase history because they are afraid of it, instead of learning from history in order to change the future.

Oh my God, did they burn all the books too?

originally posted by: olaru12
Oh my God, did they burn all the books too?

Right before they torched the internet.

originally posted by: JDeLattre89
The biggest disconnect though in my opinion is that people seem to think that they can erase history because they are afraid of it, instead of learning from history in order to change the future.

Except that no one is erasing history. The government will no longer be promoting memorials to slavery and white supremacy.

The horrors of the South's past will still be taught in schools. There will still be museums that will hold all of our history - good and bad.

History is not being erased.

Geez, talk about fake news.

Now if they could just get rid of the statue of Confederate General Albert Pike and the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC ...

a reply to: kaylaluv

No, it's being modified.

Filtered through modern perceptions of what that history had to be to fit modern sensibility. You guys really need to go convince Egypt to blow up the pyramids. They are the single largest monuments to slave labor on the planet.

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: strongfp

I am not surprised anymore considering the complete dumbing downing of three generations of adults that will never grow up.

We may as well get rid of Mount Rushmore while we are at it to, I am sure they will find it offensive.

What a shame.

Are you referring to the Boomers, Gen X, and Millennial?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: JDeLattre89
From an American pov my friend, the only treason committed was by President Lincoln by betraying the Constitution which he swore to uphold by not allowing the states their right to awfully secede when they saw that the federal government was no longer acting in their behalf.

Before these statues got removed and impaired my ability to remember history I believe I recall that Lincoln did not call for prosecution of war until the Confederacy determined to seize Federal land inside of their borders and that they had actually seceded prior to that point.

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

  Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read:

Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.

  I now reiterate these sentiments, and in doing so I only press upon the public attention the most conclusive evidence of which the case is susceptible that the property, peace, and security of no section are to be in any wise endangered by the now incoming Administration. I add, too, that all the protection which, consistently with the Constitution and the laws, can be given will be cheerfully given to all the States when lawfully demanded, for whatever cause—as cheerfully to one section as to another. Some guy named 'Lincoln's' inaugural address.

Touche. But may I remind you that these were his words coming into office, whilst his actions as President spoke much higher volumes.

You know, if we are going to have a monument of people from the Civil War, I say put one up for Alexander Stevens (I'll just let you all research him yourselves).

originally posted by: ketsuko
They are the single largest monuments to slave labor on the planet.

Stop making things up, the pyramids were built by a dedicated paid workforce of Egyptians.

originally posted by: JDeLattre89
Touche. But may I remind you that these were his words coming into office, whilst his actions as President spoke much higher volumes.

I covered that. There would not have been war if the Federal forts were not seized.

You know, if we are going to have a monument of people from the Civil War, I say put one up for Alexander Stevens (I'll just let you all research him yourselves).

It's Stephens, and I know who he is.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: ketsuko
They are the single largest monuments to slave labor on the planet.

Stop making things up, the pyramids were built by a dedicated paid workforce of Egyptians.

From what I understand, the workers were very well taken care of. Not slaves by any stretch of the definition.

What????

The pyramids, but no mention of the great wall?