socko
Bluelighter
Lee is a symbol, and there is more than one interpretation of any symbol. Historical figures such as Lee deserve to be presented with all aspects of history, not just the latest PC-sanitized version of history.
Scrofula: "since you're a supporter of history education, find me an example anywhere in history of a nation allowing monuments to defeated insurgents to go up on public land."
Lee and the Confederacy were not insurgents but were secessionists. Union troops invaded their territory.
In the news, there are plenty of examples of statues of defeated/disgraced regimes, historical figures, and slavers:
Halifax - Edward Cornwallis - politician who isued bounties for Canadian colonists who scalped Indians.
Cecil Rhodes, a white supremicist who was responsbile for subjegating much of southern Africa n the late 19th century, statues exist at Oxford and in South Africa.
Lenin statues still stand in the Ukraine - Kharkiv, Odessa
Arthur "Bomber" Harris, head to the RAF's Bomber Command in WWII, who masterminded the firebombing and massacre of German civilian populations. Statues also exist of Americans who headed firebombing massacre and nuclear bombing of civilian targets in Japan.
Oliver Cromwell who lead massacres in ireland.
Ubiquitous Abe Lincoln statues. Why they are problematic: From Lincoln's Speech, Sept. 18, 1858.
"While I was at the hotel to-day, an elderly gentleman called upon me to know whether I was really in favor of producing a perfect equality between the negroes and white people. While I had not proposed to myself on this occasion to say much on that subject, yet as the question was asked me I thought I would occupy perhaps five minutes in saying something in regard to it. I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the black and white races -- that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making VOTERS or jurors of negroes, NOR OF QUALIFYING THEM HOLD OFFICE, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any of her man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858
(The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume III, pp. 145-146.)
Barcelona - Franco statue
_____
Escher: "Why not add a nice explanation of the Lee statues then - that this was a traitor who fought for a rebellion that believed whites were the superior race and that slavery was desirable.
How well do you think that would go over? Seriously?"
abssoluty, that should be on the plaque, except for the part calling him a traitor. He was not a traitor. Secession was not illegal at the time. The legality of secession was not settled until the end of the Civil War. Lee was a patriot to his home state, and he was defending it against an invading army that practiced scorched earth warfare.
The whole story needs to be told, and it needs to be presented in a way that unites peopel and in a way that is clearly against racism. The majority of the public is ignorant of history. The white supremacists seem to know more about one aspect of the history of the Founding Fathers, that they were white supremicists as well. For its first 200 years, America was a white supremacist nation.
How well it goes over is irrelevant. It is the truth so who cares what people think? Too many people are sorely ignorant of history. Recent current events show that they need to be educated.
Whenever neofascists and Trump sopprot a cause (preservation of monuments and art in this case), they ruin it. Then SJWs knee jerk reaction is to scream to tear it down. To counterbalance the neofacist cause with a more sane and rational view, other statues representing other figures of the civil war and civil rights should be added at the site of the Confederate statues. These statues need to be turned into an opportunity to educate.
scrofula: "Do you agree that most of these statues were put up as intimidation?
Or do you believe they were put up during the civil rights struggles in the 50's as a coincidence, a desire to teach history to the area's youth. By putting up heroic monuments of soldiers who fought to enslave black people. They merely reflect heritage."
Yes, erectign the statues mainly wqasm done to intimidate blacks. The timing itself reflects this. But, there is more to the story of why they were erected. Lee himself was more complicqated than the stereotypes presented about him.
First, Lee supported Reconstruction and reconcilliation without bitterness, both things that helped the newly freed slaves. Partly for this reason, his popularity grew after the war. he was regarded as an honorble leader and a hero by both the Norht and the south. Those were also reasons for the statues.
Second, he was not a "traitor fighing for slavery." That is a simplistic view of history. Seccesion was not illegal at the time southern states seceded. Only the outcome of the civil war itself established it to be illegal.
Lee was from the south, and finding that his hoem state had seceded, taht was the side he joined. Accordign to historians, it was a difficult personal decision.
Third, in 1856, sevearl years before the war, Lee wrote a letter to the New York Times saying that slavery was evil and that it should end. Some historians argue this is evidence that Lee opposed slavery or at least did not actively support it.
fourth, years before the war, Lee's wife and daughter worked to educate slaves. They established an illegal school for blacks. They, like Lincoln, supported an American colonisation movement to set up a colony in Liberia taht would be ruled by former slaves.
Fifth, historians argue about whether Lee himself fought for slavery or for States rights. Lee freed his slaves, slaves he had inherited thorugh his wife's family, at the beginning of the Civil War, a yaer before Lincoln"s Emancipation Proclamation. Also around that time, Lee called for all of the South to free the slaves. No longer supporitn the cause to uphold slavery, Lee could only be fighting for somethign other than slavery. Taht was to defend the Confederacy from a cruel invader.
THe USA was founded as a White Supremacist nation. All of the founding fathers were racist elites. Washington and Jefferson were slave owning white supremacists. Congress enacted the first racial naturalization laws in the 1790s limiting citizenship to free white people. Until the 1960s, the USA continued to have racial quotas for immigration.
The racism of the era needs to be put into perspective. Like Lee virutally all whtie Americans at the time was racist.. They were genociding the Indians at the time, and very few spoke against it.
Lee called for freeing the slaves a year before Lincoln. Lincoln was extremely racist/white supremacist and supported slavery until his advisors warned taht he would lose the elecgtion (and therefore the war) if he didt change his stance.
Public education might not have been the motivation for erecting them, but it can become a motivation for keeping them. If handled properly, they can serve as a contextual history lesson. That would include providing more complete informtaion about their past as well as erecting statues of people who fought for true equality. Reactionaires, in this case SJWs, are too quick to destroy history.
Society is too quick to destroy its monuments, art, and artifacts. Out of the 1000s that were created, how many Roman bronzes of the Caesars still exist today?
Scrofula: "since you're a supporter of history education, find me an example anywhere in history of a nation allowing monuments to defeated insurgents to go up on public land."
Lee and the Confederacy were not insurgents but were secessionists. Union troops invaded their territory.
In the news, there are plenty of examples of statues of defeated/disgraced regimes, historical figures, and slavers:
Halifax - Edward Cornwallis - politician who isued bounties for Canadian colonists who scalped Indians.
Cecil Rhodes, a white supremicist who was responsbile for subjegating much of southern Africa n the late 19th century, statues exist at Oxford and in South Africa.
Lenin statues still stand in the Ukraine - Kharkiv, Odessa
Arthur "Bomber" Harris, head to the RAF's Bomber Command in WWII, who masterminded the firebombing and massacre of German civilian populations. Statues also exist of Americans who headed firebombing massacre and nuclear bombing of civilian targets in Japan.
Oliver Cromwell who lead massacres in ireland.
Ubiquitous Abe Lincoln statues. Why they are problematic: From Lincoln's Speech, Sept. 18, 1858.
"While I was at the hotel to-day, an elderly gentleman called upon me to know whether I was really in favor of producing a perfect equality between the negroes and white people. While I had not proposed to myself on this occasion to say much on that subject, yet as the question was asked me I thought I would occupy perhaps five minutes in saying something in regard to it. I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the black and white races -- that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making VOTERS or jurors of negroes, NOR OF QUALIFYING THEM HOLD OFFICE, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any of her man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858
(The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume III, pp. 145-146.)
Barcelona - Franco statue
_____
Escher: "Why not add a nice explanation of the Lee statues then - that this was a traitor who fought for a rebellion that believed whites were the superior race and that slavery was desirable.
How well do you think that would go over? Seriously?"
abssoluty, that should be on the plaque, except for the part calling him a traitor. He was not a traitor. Secession was not illegal at the time. The legality of secession was not settled until the end of the Civil War. Lee was a patriot to his home state, and he was defending it against an invading army that practiced scorched earth warfare.
The whole story needs to be told, and it needs to be presented in a way that unites peopel and in a way that is clearly against racism. The majority of the public is ignorant of history. The white supremacists seem to know more about one aspect of the history of the Founding Fathers, that they were white supremicists as well. For its first 200 years, America was a white supremacist nation.
How well it goes over is irrelevant. It is the truth so who cares what people think? Too many people are sorely ignorant of history. Recent current events show that they need to be educated.
Whenever neofascists and Trump sopprot a cause (preservation of monuments and art in this case), they ruin it. Then SJWs knee jerk reaction is to scream to tear it down. To counterbalance the neofacist cause with a more sane and rational view, other statues representing other figures of the civil war and civil rights should be added at the site of the Confederate statues. These statues need to be turned into an opportunity to educate.
scrofula: "Do you agree that most of these statues were put up as intimidation?
Or do you believe they were put up during the civil rights struggles in the 50's as a coincidence, a desire to teach history to the area's youth. By putting up heroic monuments of soldiers who fought to enslave black people. They merely reflect heritage."
Yes, erectign the statues mainly wqasm done to intimidate blacks. The timing itself reflects this. But, there is more to the story of why they were erected. Lee himself was more complicqated than the stereotypes presented about him.
First, Lee supported Reconstruction and reconcilliation without bitterness, both things that helped the newly freed slaves. Partly for this reason, his popularity grew after the war. he was regarded as an honorble leader and a hero by both the Norht and the south. Those were also reasons for the statues.
Second, he was not a "traitor fighing for slavery." That is a simplistic view of history. Seccesion was not illegal at the time southern states seceded. Only the outcome of the civil war itself established it to be illegal.
Lee was from the south, and finding that his hoem state had seceded, taht was the side he joined. Accordign to historians, it was a difficult personal decision.
Third, in 1856, sevearl years before the war, Lee wrote a letter to the New York Times saying that slavery was evil and that it should end. Some historians argue this is evidence that Lee opposed slavery or at least did not actively support it.
fourth, years before the war, Lee's wife and daughter worked to educate slaves. They established an illegal school for blacks. They, like Lincoln, supported an American colonisation movement to set up a colony in Liberia taht would be ruled by former slaves.
Fifth, historians argue about whether Lee himself fought for slavery or for States rights. Lee freed his slaves, slaves he had inherited thorugh his wife's family, at the beginning of the Civil War, a yaer before Lincoln"s Emancipation Proclamation. Also around that time, Lee called for all of the South to free the slaves. No longer supporitn the cause to uphold slavery, Lee could only be fighting for somethign other than slavery. Taht was to defend the Confederacy from a cruel invader.
THe USA was founded as a White Supremacist nation. All of the founding fathers were racist elites. Washington and Jefferson were slave owning white supremacists. Congress enacted the first racial naturalization laws in the 1790s limiting citizenship to free white people. Until the 1960s, the USA continued to have racial quotas for immigration.
The racism of the era needs to be put into perspective. Like Lee virutally all whtie Americans at the time was racist.. They were genociding the Indians at the time, and very few spoke against it.
Lee called for freeing the slaves a year before Lincoln. Lincoln was extremely racist/white supremacist and supported slavery until his advisors warned taht he would lose the elecgtion (and therefore the war) if he didt change his stance.
Public education might not have been the motivation for erecting them, but it can become a motivation for keeping them. If handled properly, they can serve as a contextual history lesson. That would include providing more complete informtaion about their past as well as erecting statues of people who fought for true equality. Reactionaires, in this case SJWs, are too quick to destroy history.
Society is too quick to destroy its monuments, art, and artifacts. Out of the 1000s that were created, how many Roman bronzes of the Caesars still exist today?
Last edited:
