• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

OFFICIAL Tear The Fascists Down Thread

I suppose this is a case where having different opinions is acceptable as it's not black and white facts to be argued.
 
I've open my mind. Y'all should try too. There is another voice, or many others. It's not so black and white.

BEND A LITTLE. IT DOESNT HURT.

we can learn plenty about the civil war without statues of generals who were traitors to the united states
 
The UNITED STATES was at war. There were no traitors at the time

wow, talk about wiping out wrong history. the Confederate States of America, a nation that declared itself separate with its own President/government, own treaties with other nations, own currency, etc. declared war on the united states of america.

are you kidding right now?
 
The Durham County sheriff announced Tuesday his office will seek charges against the protesters who pulled down a Confederate statue outside a North Carolina courthouse Monday evening, WTVD reports.

In a statement, Sheriff Mike Andrews said he was grateful that no one was hurt and that county leaders decided to act with restraint towards the demonstrators.

“Collectively, we decided that restraint and public safety would be our priority. As the Sheriff, I am not blind to the offensive conduct of some demonstrators nor will I ignore their criminal conduct. With the help of video captured at the scene, my investigators are working to identify those responsible for the removal and vandalism of the statue,” he said.

The monument of a Confederate soldier holding a rifle was erected in 1924 and inscribed on it are the words “in memory of the boys who wore the gray.”

Later Monday, Gov. Roy Cooper tweeted reaction, saying, “the racism and deadly violence in Charlottesville is unacceptable but there is a better way to remove these monuments.”

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPPPPPSSSSSSSS
 
I think WRT the removal of statues and the "but it's history" argument, the mayor of New Orleans' speech about its removal of its statues deserves to be revisited. I think it's on point:

The soul of our beloved City is deeply rooted in a history that has evolved over thousands of years; rooted in a diverse people who have been here together every step of the way – for both good and for ill.

It is a history that holds in its heart the stories of Native Americans: the Choctaw, Houma Nation, the Chitimacha. Of Hernando de Soto, Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle, the Acadians, the Islenos, the enslaved people from Senegambia, Free People of Color, the Haitians, the Germans, both the empires of Francexii and Spain. The Italians, the Irish, the Cubans, the south and central Americans, the Vietnamese and so many more.

You see: New Orleans is truly a city of many nations, a melting pot, a bubbling cauldron of many cultures.

There is no other place quite like it in the world that so eloquently exemplifies the uniquely American motto: e pluribus unum — out of many we are one.



But there are also other truths about our city that we must confront. New Orleans was America’s largest slave market: a port where hundreds of thousands of souls were brought, sold and shipped up the Mississippi River to lives of forced labor of misery of rape, of torture.

America was the place where nearly 4,000 of our fellow citizens were lynched, 540 alone in Louisiana; where the courts enshrined ‘separate but equal’; where Freedom riders coming to New Orleans were beaten to a bloody pulp.

So when people say to me that the monuments in question are history, well what I just described is real history as well, and it is the searing truth.

And it immediately begs the questions: why there are no slave ship monuments, no prominent markers on public land to remember the lynchings or the slave blocks; nothing to remember this long chapter of our lives; the pain, the sacrifice, the shame … all of it happening on the soil of New Orleans.

So for those self-appointed defenders of history and the monuments, they are eerily silent on what amounts to this historical malfeasance, a lie by omission.

There is a difference between remembrance of history and reverence of it. For America and New Orleans, it has been a long, winding road, marked by great tragedy and great triumph. But we cannot be afraid of our truth.

As President George W. Bush said at the dedication ceremony for the National Museum of African American History & Culture, “A great nation does not hide its history. It faces its flaws and corrects them.”

So today I want to speak about why we chose to remove these four monuments to the Lost Cause of the Confederacy, but also how and why this process can move us towards healing and understanding of each other.

So, let’s start with the facts.

The historic record is clear: the Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, and P.G.T. Beauregard statues were not erected just to honor these men, but as part of the movement which became known as The Cult of the Lost Cause. This ‘cult’ had one goal — through monuments and through other means — to rewrite history to hide the truth, which is that the Confederacy was on the wrong side of humanity.

First erected over 166 years after the founding of our city and 19 years after the end of the Civil War, the monuments that we took down were meant to rebrand the history of our city and the ideals of a defeated Confederacy.

It is self-evident that these men did not fight for the United States of America, They fought against it. They may have been warriors, but in this cause they were not patriots.

These statues are not just stone and metal. They are not just innocent remembrances of a benign history. These monuments purposefully celebrate a fictional, sanitized Confederacy; ignoring the death, ignoring the enslavement, and the terror that it actually stood for.

After the Civil War, these statues were a part of that terrorism as much as a burning cross on someone’s lawn; they were erected purposefully to send a strong message to all who walked in their shadows about who was still in charge in this city.

Should you have further doubt about the true goals of the Confederacy, in the very weeks before the war broke out, the Vice President of the Confederacy, Alexander Stephens, made it clear that the Confederate cause was about maintaining slavery and white supremacy.

He said in his now famous ‘Cornerstone speech’ that the Confederacy’s “cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery — subordination to the superior race — is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.”

Now, with these shocking words still ringing in your ears, I want to try to gently peel from your hands the grip on a false narrative of our history that I think weakens us and make straight a wrong turn we made many years ago so we can more closely connect with integrity to the founding principles of our nation and forge a clearer and straighter path toward a better city and more perfect union.

Last year, President Barack Obama echoed these sentiments about the need to contextualize and remember all of our history. He recalled a piece of stone, a slave auction block engraved with a marker commemorating a single moment in 1830 when Andrew Jackson and Henry Clay stood and spoke from it.

President Obama said, “Consider what this artifact tells us about history … on a stone where day after day for years, men and women … bound and bought and sold and bid like cattle on a stone worn down by the tragedy of over a thousand bare feet. For a long time the only thing we considered important, the singular thing we once chose to commemorate as history with a plaque were the unmemorable speeches of two powerful men.”

A piece of stone – one stone. Both stories were history. One story told. One story forgotten or maybe even purposefully ignored.

As clear as it is for me today … for a long time, even though I grew up in one of New Orleans’ most diverse neighborhoods, even with my family’s long proud history of fighting for civil rights … I must have passed by those monuments a million times without giving them a second thought.

So I am not judging anybody, I am not judging people. We all take our own journey on race. I just hope people listen like I did when my dear friend Wynton Marsalis helped me see the truth. He asked me to think about all the people who have left New Orleans because of our exclusionary attitudes.

Another friend asked me to consider these four monuments from the perspective of an African American mother or father trying to explain to their fifth grade daughter who Robert E. Lee is and why he stands atop of our beautiful city. Can you do it?

Can you look into that young girl’s eyes and convince her that Robert E. Lee is there to encourage her? Do you think she will feel inspired and hopeful by that story? Do these monuments help her see a future with limitless potential? Have you ever thought that if her potential is limited, yours and mine are too?

We all know the answer to these very simple questions.

When you look into this child’s eyes is the moment when the searing truth comes into focus for us. This is the moment when we know what is right and what we must do. We can’t walk away from this truth.

And I knew that taking down the monuments was going to be tough, but you elected me to do the right thing, not the easy thing and this is what that looks like. So relocating these Confederate monuments is not about taking something away from someone else. This is not about politics, this is not about blame or retaliation. This is not a naïve quest to solve all our problems at once.

This is, however, about showing the whole world that we as a city and as a people are able to acknowledge, understand, reconcile and, most importantly, choose a better future for ourselves, making straight what has been crooked and making right what was wrong.

Otherwise, we will continue to pay a price with discord, with division, and yes, with violence.

To literally put the confederacy on a pedestal in our most prominent places of honor is an inaccurate recitation of our full past, it is an affront to our present, and it is a bad prescription for our future.

History cannot be changed. It cannot be moved like a statue. What is done is done. The Civil War is over, and the Confederacy lost and we are better for it. Surely we are far enough removed from this dark time to acknowledge that the cause of the Confederacy was wrong.

And in the second decade of the 21st century, asking African Americans — or anyone else — to drive by property that they own; occupied by reverential statues of men who fought to destroy the country and deny that person’s humanity seems perverse and absurd.

Centuries-old wounds are still raw because they never healed right in the first place.

Here is the essential truth: we are better together than we are apart. Indivisibility is our essence. Isn’t this the gift that the people of New Orleans have given to the world?

We radiate beauty and grace in our food, in our music, in our architecture, in our joy of life, in our celebration of death; in everything that we do. We gave the world this funky thing called jazz; the most uniquely American art form that is developed across the ages from different cultures.

Think about second lines, think about Mardi Gras, think about muffaletta, think about the Saints, gumbo, red beans and rice. By God, just think. All we hold dear is created by throwing everything in the pot; creating, producing something better; everything a product of our historic diversity.

We are proof that out of many we are one — and better for it! Out of many we are one — and we really do love it!

And yet, we still seem to find so many excuses for not doing the right thing. Again, remember President Bush’s words, “A great nation does not hide its history. It faces its flaws and corrects them.”

We forget, we deny how much we really depend on each other, how much we need each other. We justify our silence and inaction by manufacturing noble causes that marinate in historical denial. We still find a way to say “wait, not so fast.”

But like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “wait has almost always meant never.”

We can’t wait any longer. We need to change. And we need to change now. No more waiting. This is not just about statues, this is about our attitudes and behavior as well. If we take these statues down and don’t change to become a more open and inclusive society this would have all been in vain.

While some have driven by these monuments every day and either revered their beauty or failed to see them at all, many of our neighbors and fellow Americans see them very clearly. Many are painfully aware of the long shadows their presence casts, not only literally but figuratively. And they clearly receive the message that the Confederacy and the cult of the lost cause intended to deliver.

Earlier this week, as the cult of the lost cause statue of P.G.T Beauregard came down, world renowned musician Terence Blanchard stood watch, his wife Robin and their two beautiful daughters at their side.

Terence went to a high school on the edge of City Park named after one of America’s greatest heroes and patriots, John F. Kennedy. But to get there he had to pass by this monument to a man who fought to deny him his humanity.

He said, “I’ve never looked at them as a source of pride … it’s always made me feel as if they were put there by people who don’t respect us. This is something I never thought I’d see in my lifetime. It’s a sign that the world is changing.”

Yes, Terence, it is, and it is long overdue.

Now is the time to send a new message to the next generation of New Orleanians who can follow in Terence and Robin’s remarkable footsteps.

A message about the future, about the next 300 years and beyond; let us not miss this opportunity New Orleans and let us help the rest of the country do the same. Because now is the time for choosing. Now is the time to actually make this the City we always should have been, had we gotten it right in the first place.

We should stop for a moment and ask ourselves — at this point in our history, after Katrina, after Rita, after Ike, after Gustav, after the national recession, after the BP oil catastrophe and after the tornado — if presented with the opportunity to build monuments that told our story or to curate these particular spaces … would these monuments be what we want the world to see? Is this really our story?

We have not erased history; we are becoming part of the city’s history by righting the wrong image these monuments represent and crafting a better, more complete future for all our children and for future generations.

And unlike when these Confederate monuments were first erected as symbols of white supremacy, we now have a chance to create not only new symbols, but to do it together, as one people.

In our blessed land we all come to the table of democracy as equals.

We have to reaffirm our commitment to a future where each citizen is guaranteed the uniquely American gifts of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

That is what really makes America great and today it is more important than ever to hold fast to these values and together say a self-evident truth that out of many we are one. That is why today we reclaim these spaces for the United States of America.

Because we are one nation, not two; indivisible with liberty and justice for all, not some. We all are part of one nation, all pledging allegiance to one flag, the flag of the United States of America. And New Orleanians are in, all of the way.

It is in this union and in this truth that real patriotism is rooted and flourishes.

Instead of revering a 4-year brief historical aberration that was called the Confederacy we can celebrate all 300 years of our rich, diverse history as a place named New Orleans and set the tone for the next 300 years.

After decades of public debate, of anger, of anxiety, of anticipation, of humiliation and of frustration. After public hearings and approvals from three separate community led commissions. After two robust public hearings and a 6-1 vote by the duly elected New Orleans City Council. After review by 13 different federal and state judges. The full weight of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government has been brought to bear and the monuments in accordance with the law have been removed.

So now is the time to come together and heal and focus on our larger task. Not only building new symbols, but making this city a beautiful manifestation of what is possible and what we as a people can become.

Let us remember what the once exiled, imprisoned and now universally loved Nelson Mandela and what he said after the fall of apartheid. “If the pain has often been unbearable and the revelations shocking to all of us, it is because they indeed bring us the beginnings of a common understanding of what happened and a steady restoration of the nation’s humanity.”

So before we part let us again state the truth clearly.

The Confederacy was on the wrong side of history and humanity. It sought to tear apart our nation and subjugate our fellow Americans to slavery. This is the history we should never forget and one that we should never again put on a pedestal to be revered.

As a community, we must recognize the significance of removing New Orleans’ Confederate monuments. It is our acknowledgment that now is the time to take stock of, and then move past, a painful part of our history. Anything less would render generations of courageous struggle and soul-searching a truly lost cause.

Anything less would fall short of the immortal words of our greatest President Abraham Lincoln, who with an open heart and clarity of purpose calls on us today to unite as one people when he said:

“With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to do all which may achieve and cherish: a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”
 
I have no confidence the present NC legislature will do anything honorable. In this regard or any other.
 
How do they impact lives? They don't. They're fucking statues. Statues to honor those who last fought and died 152 years ago, or survived, came home, and died as decrepit old men 80 years ago. This is about "feelings." Somebody "feels" angry when they see that. Why do they "feel" angry? Because somebody told them they should feel marginalized and they see all their friends whining on social media and have a heightened sense of self-importance. Fuck their feelings, and frankly, fuck the feelings of anybody who feels so outraged that they have to either march in support of a statue or in opposition to it. Get over yourselves. Have an appreciation for history and how it impacted this country for better and for worse. THINK when you see those monuments, don't FEEL. Think of where we were as a nation before then and since. Think about how the same people who fought for the south had parents who fought in the Revolutionary War, The War Of 1812, The Mexican War (lots of Civil War vets in this one, actually), and sons who have fought in the numerous conflicts since. Think of how their lives were impacted, all their lives. Think of how somebody in Maine had their life impacted the same way somebody in Texas did after a battle in Gettysburg, PA. Think of how tragic the Civil War was for everybody and how the victors chose to deal with the victory and how the defeated dealt with defeat. This shit is over and done and dealt with and was 150 years ago. There is no net positive to be gained from tearing down old confederate statues. None. It is vandalism and lawlessness, plain and simple. It happened in Durham, so I doubt the offenders will even be prosecuted (and it looks like the penalty is on par with a code of conduct offense at Wake), but they should be charged the maximum allowable under law.

And make no mistake, this isn't about the Civil War. This is about passing judgment upon people who lived in a different time and place for things we find truly incomprehensible today. Civil war monuments today, slaveholder founders tomorrow.

The statue in Charlottesville was put up in the 1920s during a period of the expansion of the KKK. Many others and the flying of Confederate flags were put up during the 50s and 60s as attacks on the civil rights movement. They weren't put up in the 1800s.

No matter how you want to rationalize it, these statues are celebrating traitors to the United States of America who fought to prolong slavery.
 
but first we should erect statues of Custer and Hitler...so we can learn about history

Where is this crowd with respect to the desecrated battlefield at Nashville, where General Thomas smashed an entire army of the so-called confederacy? Shouldn't this glorious episode of southern history have more monuments and memorialization?
 
Where is this crowd with respect to the desecrated battlefield at Nashville, where General Thomas smashed an entire army of the so-called confederacy? Shouldn't this glorious episode of southern history have more monuments and memorialization?

something like this:

807f8371dc.jpg
 
I like the historical markers in the south that try so hard to build up the confederates glorious hard fought side, and then end with "the battle was lost and southern forces retreated."
 
If you do even a cursory examination of history-- and it doesn't have to even be US history but could be your own family histories-- you will see that who fought on the north and who fought on the south was often a result of whether somebody went left or right out of the Cumberland Gap. If that land on the Kentucky side looked better, then Kentucky it was. Tennessee side? Then Tennessee. Or folks may have ended up further north or further south. The land was opened up for settlement and for land grants, and nobody was thinking in 1790-1800 about which side their kids or grandkids may have to fight in a war in 60 years. They really weren't thinking about that before then if they happened to settle in the Carolinas or Georgia or Virginia, which was the first English settlement in the new world. They were pushing west for opportunity and for a new start. Kentucky was an especially interesting state in the Civil War.

The politicians fought for one thing, the rank and file largely for another or simply because they had no other choice other than conscription or heading west to the wilderness to avoid service. Go back and look at census records from 1840, 1850, and 1860. Most people didn't own slaves. A few owned a lot. Some had one or two. Most of the northerners didn't care about slavery either. They were in the same boat or cared more about preservation of the union. To portray it as racists vs. non-racists is not accurate. Both sides were quite racist, certainly by today's standards or even the standards of 50 years ago. Even to portray it as slave states vs non slave states is not accurate. What side you came down upon depended largely upon geography and the states caught in between made choices in their own self-interest, not any moral principle.

All this crap having been said, I note the following--

1 - There is a difference between a statue honoring the confederate soldier and, say, one honoring Nathan Bedford Forrest. There is also a difference between Robert E. Lee and Forrest. To not attempt to make any distinction is ignorant.
2 - If a city wants to remove it from public property, they should be the ones making that decision. If state law dictates otherwise, they should work with the state. I won't comment on the wisdom or lack thereof of the NC state legislators except to say that they seem to have a recent history of taking choices away from municipalities and putting them in the hands of the state, which is not a philosophy I generally agree with.
3 - The city should make overtures to the UDC or similar organizations for relocation of the statues. Absent interest there, they should decide whether it is in their interest to destroy something historic or sell it to the highest bidder and make some money off it, which they will need in order to replace it with something else (Coach K statue?) or just put green space there instead.
4 - Lawlessness and vandalism among stupid activists cannot prevail.
5 - These statues aren't Nazi Germany honoring Hitler, nor are the activist denizens of Durham Iraqis overcoming the persecution of Saddam Hussein. Quit making false equivalencies.
 
Sherman lived in Louisiana at the outset of the war and George Thomas, the Rock of Chickamauga, the Sledge of Nashville, was from Southampton County VA, where Nat Turner was from.
 
If you do even a cursory examination of history-- and it doesn't have to even be US history but could be your own family histories-- you will see that who fought on the north and who fought on the south was often a result of whether somebody went left or right out of the Cumberland Gap. If that land on the Kentucky side looked better, then Kentucky it was. Tennessee side? Then Tennessee. Or folks may have ended up further north or further south. The land was opened up for settlement and for land grants, and nobody was thinking in 1790-1800 about which side their kids or grandkids may have to fight in a war in 60 years. They really weren't thinking about that before then if they happened to settle in the Carolinas or Georgia or Virginia, which was the first English settlement in the new world. They were pushing west for opportunity and for a new start. Kentucky was an especially interesting state in the Civil War.

The politicians fought for one thing, the rank and file largely for another or simply because they had no other choice other than conscription or heading west to the wilderness to avoid service. Go back and look at census records from 1840, 1850, and 1860. Most people didn't own slaves. A few owned a lot. Some had one or two. Most of the northerners didn't care about slavery either. They were in the same boat or cared more about preservation of the union. To portray it as racists vs. non-racists is not accurate. Both sides were quite racist, certainly by today's standards or even the standards of 50 years ago. Even to portray it as slave states vs non slave states is not accurate. What side you came down upon depended largely upon geography and the states caught in between made choices in their own self-interest, not any moral principle.

All this crap having been said, I note the following--

1 - There is a difference between a statue honoring the confederate soldier and, say, one honoring Nathan Bedford Forrest. There is also a difference between Robert E. Lee and Forrest. To not attempt to make any distinction is ignorant.
2 - If a city wants to remove it from public property, they should be the ones making that decision. If state law dictates otherwise, they should work with the state. I won't comment on the wisdom or lack thereof of the NC state legislators except to say that they seem to have a recent history of taking choices away from municipalities and putting them in the hands of the state, which is not a philosophy I generally agree with.
3 - The city should make overtures to the UDC or similar organizations for relocation of the statues. Absent interest there, they should decide whether it is in their interest to destroy something historic or sell it to the highest bidder and make some money off it, which they will need in order to replace it with something else (Coach K statue?) or just put green space there instead.
4 - Lawlessness and vandalism among stupid activists cannot prevail.
5 - These statues aren't Nazi Germany honoring Hitler, nor are the activist denizens of Durham Iraqis overcoming the persecution of Saddam Hussein. Quit making false equivalencies.

The are EXACTLY the same as Hitler statues. They are about being traitors to the United States and making slavery live in perpetuity. You can candycoat it all you want, but it was about keeping an entire race enslaved.
 
Thomas should have more monuments. He commanded the most successful frontal assaults of the war and destroyed an enemy army entirely.
 
a statue of hitler might not be a good analogy, perhaps statues of Rommel or Doenitz. Would that make sense?

"it's not that we're honoring Nazism, but the sacrifices of the Wehrmacht and Kreigsmarine" #heritagenothate
 
I'd support a Rommel statue as long as the plaque included the phrase "magnificent bastard".
 
If you do even a cursory examination of history-- and it doesn't have to even be US history but could be your own family histories-- you will see that who fought on the north and who fought on the south was often a result of whether somebody went left or right out of the Cumberland Gap. If that land on the Kentucky side looked better, then Kentucky it was. Tennessee side? Then Tennessee. Or folks may have ended up further north or further south. The land was opened up for settlement and for land grants, and nobody was thinking in 1790-1800 about which side their kids or grandkids may have to fight in a war in 60 years. They really weren't thinking about that before then if they happened to settle in the Carolinas or Georgia or Virginia, which was the first English settlement in the new world. They were pushing west for opportunity and for a new start. Kentucky was an especially interesting state in the Civil War.

The politicians fought for one thing, the rank and file largely for another or simply because they had no other choice other than conscription or heading west to the wilderness to avoid service. Go back and look at census records from 1840, 1850, and 1860. Most people didn't own slaves. A few owned a lot. Some had one or two. Most of the northerners didn't care about slavery either. They were in the same boat or cared more about preservation of the union. To portray it as racists vs. non-racists is not accurate. Both sides were quite racist, certainly by today's standards or even the standards of 50 years ago. Even to portray it as slave states vs non slave states is not accurate. What side you came down upon depended largely upon geography and the states caught in between made choices in their own self-interest, not any moral principle.

All this crap having been said, I note the following--

1 - There is a difference between a statue honoring the confederate soldier and, say, one honoring Nathan Bedford Forrest. There is also a difference between Robert E. Lee and Forrest. To not attempt to make any distinction is ignorant.
2 - If a city wants to remove it from public property, they should be the ones making that decision. If state law dictates otherwise, they should work with the state. I won't comment on the wisdom or lack thereof of the NC state legislators except to say that they seem to have a recent history of taking choices away from municipalities and putting them in the hands of the state, which is not a philosophy I generally agree with.
3 - The city should make overtures to the UDC or similar organizations for relocation of the statues. Absent interest there, they should decide whether it is in their interest to destroy something historic or sell it to the highest bidder and make some money off it, which they will need in order to replace it with something else (Coach K statue?) or just put green space there instead.
4 - Lawlessness and vandalism among stupid activists cannot prevail.
5 - These statues aren't Nazi Germany honoring Hitler, nor are the activist denizens of Durham Iraqis overcoming the persecution of Saddam Hussein. Quit making false equivalencies.

Imagine if the US government had gone into Iraq and removed Saddam but allows his followers to keep the statues up.

As far as the rest of the post, I marvel at the number of strawmen you included here. Brilliant work.
 
a statue of hitler might not be a good analogy, perhaps statues of Rommel or Doenitz. Would that make sense?

"it's not that we're honoring Nazism, but the sacrifices of the Wehrmacht and Kreigsmarine" #heritagenothate

The entire Nazi analogy is incorrect. You're trying to say slavery is abhorrent and Nazis are abhorrent and therefore the two things are the same. Fucking a fat girl is pretty abhorrent too, but that doesn't make a chubby chaser Hitler or Hitler a chubby chaser, though he may well have been for all I know. This ignores all the things that Nazis did that really put them in a class of their own and the fact that they did it some 80 years after the US Civil War. There is a reason guys like Hitler and Pol Pot and Stalin occupy their own rung on the ladder of evil.

It also ignores that the evils of slavery cannot be blamed on the south or the confederacy. Where I take issue with that otherwise eloquent speech from the New Orleans mayor is how he terms it 4 years out of 300. That is far too simplistic a viewpoint. Slavery was a practice for 250 years in America (America as we think of it...not talking about Columbus here). It wasn't a 4 year fight. It culminated in a 4 year fight after years of political fighting. But its evils cannot be pinned on the confederacy. Its evils can be traced back throughout ancient times, and for our purposes to the colonists. It was such a part of life that we articulated ways in which slaves were to be counted in the Constitution (oddly enough, the northern states did not want them counted at all, as it gave them a political disadvantage), and even remarked about the slave trade in the same document. It's a lamentable part of our history that several of the founders thought would eventually have to be dealt with. They kicked the can down the road just as our current politicians do because it was a hot potato issue. Blame the people who lived in 1860-65 if you want, but those who brought it here are just as much to blame, as are the founders, as is the generation the died out prior to the Civil War. And if there is collective guilt as a nation on the issue of slavery, then statues of any Presidents prior to Lincoln must surely be as offensive. As offensive as statues of Hitler, apparently.
 
Back
Top