Do you personally agree with taking down confederate monuments? (1 Viewer)

[timschochet]

sick to death of this canard 

 I love the word canard. Nobody ever uses it anymore. Or poppycock. Damnation, we need to bring these words back! 

 

[MarvinTScamper]

used correctly, even better.

 

[timschochet]

I'm not so sure of "much more quickly" - maybe a year or two at most.  But it still would have been a lengthy war with hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of lives lost.  For all we know had Lee not joined, Jefferson Davis (or Braxton Bragg) would have fought even longer than Lee had - and may have throw every single soldier they had command of (roughly 1.3m or so) into the fold before surrendering.

This is doubtful. In addition to his amazing offensive victories in 1862 and 1863, Lee revolutionized defensive strategy after Gettysburg. Without him the South would have lost much more quickly. 

 

[Jayrod]

 I love the word canard. Nobody ever uses it anymore. Or poppycock. Damnation, we need to bring these words back! 

I wasn't aware of canard until now, but I use poppycock regularly.

 

[Thunderlips]

Yes, that's true, it's up to the individual how to perceive it. But you can be aware of how other people will inevitably perceive things as well. Also there is a huge difference IMO between monuments or tributes to men who owned slaves but are being honored for other things they did, and men who are being honored largely because they fought to secede from the union and protect slavery.  That's just my opinion but it seems like a pretty big distinction and one that lots of others make too.

Anyway, it's nice that you think see Lee differently, but like I said that doesn't mean you get to tell other people how to feel either, and lots of other people see a statue honoring a guy for his fight to secede and protect slavery ... and thus a city/state that made the decision that this effort was worth honoring.  It's not my place to tell other parts of the country who they can honor or not honor, but the people who live there also don't get to tell other people how to feel about those decisions, either.

Also, there's nothing invalid or inaccurate about pointing out that anything that honors the confederacy honors traitorous losers who were fighting primarily to protect slavery. That is the truth. They seceded from the union, and then they lost the war for which they are being honored. It may be an incomplete description in some cases, but it's still an accurate one.

To boil it down to the snarky "get rid of their monuments....they lost,....they're losers" (something that I myself troll with sometimes) would invalidate monuments and recognition of Native American tribes that fought against the United States.

 

[squistion]

 I love the word canard. Nobody ever uses it anymore. Or poppycock. Damnation, we need to bring these words back! 

Canard is a clunky word and not everyone knows its meaning. I'd guess a few people here think it is something found in the deli section of the market. 

I prefer to use falsehood or false meme.

 

[TobiasFunke]

To boil it down to the snarky "get rid of their monuments....they lost,....they're losers" (something that I myself troll with sometimes) would invalidate monuments and recognition of Native American tribes that fought against the United States.

I consider those to be memorials as well as monuments. The idea is to recognize what was done to an aggrieved people, partially in the hope that it doesn't happen again. Similar to holocaust memorials and whatnot.  That obviously doesn't apply to the South, which chose to wage the war they subsequently lost.

Also the snark is particularly amusing here because of the overlap between "people who defend Confederate flags/monuments" and "people who hate participation trophies."

 

[knowledge dropper]

Some dumb arguments here per the usual suspects.  Statues are participation trophies because the south lost?   I would argue we didn't win Vietnam, but I dare you to go to the memorial in DC and call it a "participation trophy."

The hatred and blatant racism against the conservative south is embarrassing in here.  

 

[Sand]

I consider those to be memorials as well as monuments. The idea is to recognize what was done to an aggrieved people, partially in the hope that it doesn't happen again. Similar to holocaust memorials and whatnot.  That obviously doesn't apply to the South, which chose to wage the war they subsequently lost.

When these issues surfaced about tearing these things down I had hoped that there would be a middle ground that could be found.  I would have much rathered seeing a lot of written explanation around these monuments that talk about these characters in a "Speaker of the Dead" type manner.  In that way these could be turned into teachable moments rather than whistle past the graveyard and pretend they never existed.

Of course, in New Orleans, that was never going to happen.  In the panoply of politicians in the US the ones on NO are universally the worst.  This mayor is no exception.  

 

[Don Quixote]

I find it hard to get riled up either way on this.  It does seem like a local/context question.  Some monuments commemorating horrific people/acts should stand for history's sake -- I don't think anyone would argue for removing the Arch of Titus in Rome, for example, even though it celebrates the sacking of Jerusalem.

While the monument has been there for a 100 years, considering Lee never even visited New Orleans (as far I know), I don't think the history is strong enough to create a compelling case to overcome the decision of the mayor/city to remove it. So, I'm fine with removing that one.

But, as a graduate of Washington & Lee University, I'd oppose removing Lee stuff from there, since Lee was President of the school after the Civil War and remains the figure most associated with the school.

 

[Thunderlips]

I consider those to be memorials as well as monuments. The idea is to recognize what was done to an aggrieved people, partially in the hope that it doesn't happen again. Similar to holocaust memorials and whatnot.  That obviously doesn't apply to the South, which chose to wage the war they subsequently lost.

Also the snark is particularly amusing here because of the overlap between "people who defend Confederate flags/monuments" and "people who hate participation trophies."

Situations like these make for strange bedfellows.

I don't particularly have a problem with opposition to ideological/societal/political monuments that extoll the virtues of the Confederacy. I'd imagine there should be more pressing issues to be on an individuals/organizations plate....but maybe those people have more energy, can multi-task better than me or don't put as much importance in the things I view as important to future health of the country.

I would be opposed to seeing monuments/statues honoring specific soliders from The South (or the more abstract, Common Fighting Man of the South) eliminated from battlefields, museums, etc.* as I do think there is a time and place for things of that nature. 

* slippery slope and all that...as I could see Organizations press the front to eliminate the Confederate "honor" footprint across all facets of our society. 

 

[AAABatteries]

I tell you what.  They can keep the statues but right next to each one we put a 50 foot tall one of these with a plaque that says 

"TALK ####, GET HIT"

--The good Americans

I know some of your comments are schtick but you do know the Sherman was fairly racist too, right?

 

[OrtonToOlsen]

I know some of your comments are schtick but you do know the Sherman was fairly racist too, right?

wat

 

[Sand]

* slippery slope and all that...as I could see Organizations press the front to eliminate the Confederate "honor" footprint across all facets of our society. 

The Confederate honor footprint, as you put it, has no real idea what the Confederate footprint really was.  Those (and I'm in the deep south and see lots of this) that are the most fervent know the least.  

That doesn't mean that erasing these monuments is going to have much of an effect with those folks (probably the opposite, to be honest).

 

[OrtonToOlsen]

Some dumb arguments here per the usual suspects.  Statues are participation trophies because the south lost?   I would argue we didn't win Vietnam, but I dare you to go to the memorial in DC and call it a "participation trophy."

The hatred and blatant racism against the conservative south is embarrassing in here.  

Guys.  knowledge dropper just schooled us all.  I think it's time to lock this thread.  

 

[matttyl]

This is doubtful. In addition to his amazing offensive victories in 1862 and 1863, Lee revolutionized defensive strategy after Gettysburg. Without him the South would have lost much more quickly. 

I really meant "longer" in terms of more deaths added to the toll before full and total surrender. 

 

[AAABatteries]

wat

Sherman was not an abolitionist before the war and, like others of his time and background, he did not believe in "Negro equality."[85][86] Before the war, Sherman at times even expressed some sympathy with the view of Southern whites that the black race was benefiting from slavery, although he opposed breaking up slave families and advocated teaching slaves to read and write.[29] During the Civil War, Sherman declined to employ black troops in his armies.[87]

NOTE - I'm fine with removing the statues, this was just a side comment

 

[squistion]

Guys.  knowledge dropper just schooled us all.  I think it's time to lock this thread.  

Yeah, he didn't get that name for nothing. Hard to argue against the logic of equating our nation's participation in Vietnam to the Civil War.

 

[Ilov80s]

Racist against southern conservatives? How does that work? 

My entire argument is that to black people, Confederate monuments are monuments to hate and slavery. Black people are fellow citizens, neighbors, friends, heroes, etc. I don't want them to have to see a statute of Jefferson Davis and question whether they are wanted there. I don't want a black child to see a Confederate monument and wonder if they really are a 2nd class citizen in today's America. Making fellow citizens feel welcome and being respectful to their history is more important to me than honoring certain events of history. We have museums and books to remember the legacies of the Confederacy, but in the middle of a public park isn't the place to do it. 

 

[OrtonToOlsen]

Sherman was not an abolitionist before the war and, like others of his time and background, he did not believe in "Negro equality."[85][86] Before the war, Sherman at times even expressed some sympathy with the view of Southern whites that the black race was benefiting from slavery, although he opposed breaking up slave families and advocated teaching slaves to read and write.[29] During the Civil War, Sherman declined to employ black troops in his armies.[87]

NOTE - I'm fine with removing the statues, this was just a side comment

Yeah, I know.  Just messing with you.  

 

[timschochet]

Sherman was not an abolitionist before the war and, like others of his time and background, he did not believe in "Negro equality."[85][86] Before the war, Sherman at times even expressed some sympathy with the view of Southern whites that the black race was benefiting from slavery, although he opposed breaking up slave families and advocated teaching slaves to read and write.[29] During the Civil War, Sherman declined to employ black troops in his armies.[87]

NOTE - I'm fine with removing the statues, this was just a side comment

And you didn't even mention his treatment of native Americans. 

 

[Dedfin]

Some dumb arguments here per the usual suspects.  Statues are participation trophies because the south lost?   I would argue we didn't win Vietnam, but I dare you to go to the memorial in DC and call it a "participation trophy."

The hatred and blatant racism against the conservative south is embarrassing in here.  

Go ahead then.  Argue it.

 

[cockroach]

I wasn't aware of canard until now, but I use poppycock regularly.

Balderdash

 

[timschochet]

The more Indians we can kill this year the fewer we will need to kill the next, because the more I see of the Indians the more convinced I become that they must either all be killed or be maintained as a species of pauper. Their attempts at civilization is ridiculous... Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman

 

[OrtonToOlsen]

 

Now we're going to talk about Sherman.  

 

[OrtonToOlsen]

Lincoln wasn't exactly a saint either

 

[AAABatteries]

Lincoln wasn't exactly a saint either

 

 

[Ilov80s]

We had lots of problems, no doubt. We served as somewhat of a model for Hitler for fs sake. We want to do anything we can to move away from that.

 

[cockroach]

The hatred and blatant racism against the conservative south is embarrassing in here.  

the bolded are synonyms... which makes your post ironic

 

[timschochet]

We had lots of problems, no doubt. We served as somewhat of a model for Hitler for fs sake. We want to do anything we can to move away from that.

Not sure I've ever read this before. 

 

[Not Sure]

Some dumb arguments here per the usual suspects.  Statues are participation trophies because the south lost?   I would argue we didn't win Vietnam, but I dare you to go to the memorial in DC and call it a "participation trophy."

The hatred and blatant racism against the conservative south is embarrassing in here.  

  On the internet you can be whoever you want to be.  That's why it's strange when some people choose to be stupid, although in your case it's obviously not a choice.

 

[-OZ-]

the bolded are synonyms... which makes your post ironic

I really hope this is just shtick but I'm not sure around here. 

 

[Ilov80s]

Not sure I've ever read this before. 

It's just one take I suppose but it exists. 

 

[OrtonToOlsen]

I hope nobody ever puts up an Obama statue.

 

[MarvinTScamper]

Not sure I've ever read this before. 

That's because it's ####### stupid

 

[General Malaise]

Go ahead then.  Argue it.

I've never even seen a person try to attempt an argument that centered around the US winning the Vietnam War.  So dumb.....

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

yes make them like Tom Landry MIddle School or Nick Saban Avenue.......

Worse than Slavery references, imo

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Is Dixie a banned song per snowflakes?

jesus christ.   stop posting.  

 

[Dedfin]

I've never even seen a person try to attempt an argument that centered around the US winning the Vietnam War.  So dumb.....

That entire post was WTF

 

[Gachi]

I see we are very divided on this topic.

 

[Ilov80s]

That's because it's ####### stupid

Well there certainly are cited comments from NAZI politicians that seem to have validity. The author isn't some jerkoff, he's a really well educated historian.

 

[MarvinTScamper]

Well there certainly are cited comments from NAZI politicians that seem to have validity. The author isn't some jerkoff, he's a really well educated historian.

I'm not questioning your source.  Maybe the nazi historians had never heard of Xerxes, Imhotep, Caesar, Alexander, etc etc etc before the us army treated the Indians poorly. 

The educated historian is looking for blame.  He's a jackass 

 

[Ilov80s]

I'm not questioning your source.  Maybe the nazi historians had never heard of Xerxes, Imhotep, Caesar, Alexander, etc etc etc before the us army treated the Indians poorly. 

The educated historian is looking for blame.  He's a jackass 

Have you read the book? I haven't but the few articles, reviews and critiques didn't seem to be blaming the US for NAZI Germany. 

 

[MarvinTScamper]

Have you read the book? I haven't but the few articles, reviews and critiques didn't seem to be blaming the US for NAZI Germany. 

I'm not sure I want to waste the time, but maybe someday. 

 

[Eephus]

New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu's address before the removal of the Robert E. Lee statue is a mighty fine piece of speechifying

 

[Zow]

Monument - a structure erected to commemorate something

Commemorate - recall and show respect for

It's time for them to come down and be put in a museum

This is said better than I could say it. 

 

[Aerial Assault]

closer to a million deaths, all in including civilians and slaves

3-4 million soldiers, IIRC

No.  For decades upon decades the death toll estimate was 620,000 but that has recently been revised upward to 750,000 with better demographics studies and data.

 

[MarvinTScamper]

No.  For decades upon decades the death toll estimate was 620,000 but that has recently been revised upward to 750,000 with better demographics studies and data.

I've read more...and I'm including civilians and slaves...but I'm fine with your number for argument's sake.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I'm not questioning your source.  Maybe the nazi historians had never heard of Xerxes, Imhotep, Caesar, Alexander, etc etc etc before the us army treated the Indians poorly. 

The educated historian is looking for blame.  He's a jackass 

Imhotep?  I am not sure I would have him on this list.  I thought he was about medicine and architecture, not genocide.  Though building on a grand scale back then did use up labor.  Was he ever a general?  I did not think so.  As for Caesar I guess I would want to know to which one you refer..    

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

No.  For decades upon decades the death toll estimate was 620,000 but that has recently been revised upward to 750,000 with better demographics studies and data.

Must have been during one of those decades I learned my "facts".  I was simply taken off guard in the first post mentioning "Millions".  Now I have opportunity to revisit the matter and maybe learn something new.