International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Social Issues & Current Events (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=82)
-   -   One less confederate monument to vandalize... (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=321074)

Mike! 28th June 2017 11:00 AM

One less confederate monument to vandalize...
 
The horribly offencive confederate monument in St. Louis' Forest Park (That most people, up until recently, didn't even know was there.) will be removed from Forest Park by Friday. The city decided to let the rightful owners move and store it rather than fight out the city's right to remove and store it in court.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/g...c517b4f9f.html

Resume 28th June 2017 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike! (Post 11900894)
The horribly offencive confederate monument in St. Louis' Forest Park (That most people, up until recently, didn't even know was there.) will be removed from Forest Park by Friday. The city decided to let the rightful owners move and store it rather than fight out the city's right to remove and store it in court.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/g...c517b4f9f.html

“Because what had happened with the vandalism to it, and the city wanted it removed, this way it will be preserved . . . It is a beautiful monument.” says Patsy Limpus, president of the United Daughters of the Confederacy Missouri Division and the St. Louis Confederate Monument Association.

Because nothing says beauty like civil war, treason, and the ownership of human beings.

ponderingturtle 28th June 2017 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resume (Post 11900899)
“Because what had happened with the vandalism to it, and the city wanted it removed, this way it will be preserved . . . It is a beautiful monument.” says Patsy Limpus, president of the United Daughters of the Confederacy Missouri Division and the St. Louis Confederate Monument Association.

Because nothing says beauty like civil war, treason, and the ownership of human beings.

You need to remember the true beauty of the supremacy of the white race. Most of these monuments got put up to fight against integration after all. That is something that still makes the south proud.

mgidm86 28th June 2017 01:07 PM

What did the monument depict? I can't tell from the images.

Resume 28th June 2017 01:24 PM

Confederate Memorial
https://forestparkmap.org/confederate-memorial
Quote:

The Confederate Memorial, dedicated in 1914, features a 32-foot-high granite shaft with a low relief figure of “The Angel of the Spirit of the Confederacy.” Below is a bronze group, sculpted by George Julian Zolnay, depicting the response of the South to this spirit as a family sends a youth off to war.

Tsukasa Buddha 28th June 2017 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resume (Post 11901061)

Also:

Quote:

Beneath that is a quotation by Robert E. Lee: “We had sacred principles to maintain and rights to defend for which we were duty bound to do our best, even if we perished in the endeavor.”
Even as an intentionally sanitized piece it doesn't quite pass the smell test.

bigred 28th June 2017 06:29 PM

Forget the knife, it'd take a chainsaw to cut through the self-righteous stupidity in this thread. :rolleyes:

Tsukasa Buddha 28th June 2017 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigred (Post 11901399)
Forget the knife, it'd take a chainsaw to cut through the self-righteous stupidity in this thread. :rolleyes:

Full of self-awareness too.

Resume 28th June 2017 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigred (Post 11901399)
Forget the knife, it'd take a chainsaw to cut through the self-righteous stupidity in this thread. :rolleyes:

Started right about post 7.

JoeMorgue 28th June 2017 07:25 PM

I'll say the same thing I always say. Don't worry Confederate Flag supporters just because you lost this battle didn't mean you'll lose the wa... oh right.

Skeptic Ginger 28th June 2017 07:43 PM

I was sure this thread was going to be about this vandalized monument: Arkansas Vandal Destroys 10 Commandments Monument One Day After Installation

My eyes glazed over "confederate" in the thread title.

CaptainHowdy 29th June 2017 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigred (Post 11901399)
Forget the knife, it'd take a chainsaw to cut through the self-righteous stupidity in this thread. :rolleyes:

Don't be too upset. It's only the idiots who think the Civil War was fought to free the slaves who come up with these comments.

ponderingturtle 29th June 2017 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy (Post 11902082)
Don't be too upset. It's only the idiots who think the Civil War was fought to free the slaves who come up with these comments.

And it is only historical revisionists who won't read what the founders of the confederacy said who love these monuments.

Spindrift 29th June 2017 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeBentley (Post 11901458)
I'll say the same thing I always say. Don't worry Confederate Flag supporters just because you lost this battle didn't mean you'll lose the wa... oh right.

Give them a break, it's not like they support treaso... oh nevermind.

Checkmite 29th June 2017 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy (Post 11902082)
It's only the idiots who think the Civil War was fought to free the slaves who come up with these comments.

Of course people who think the Civil War was fought to free the slaves are misinformed.

The Civil War was fought to prevent slaves from being freed.

It failed at this aim.

TragicMonkey 29th June 2017 04:26 PM

Wait, 'the Angel of the Spirit of the Confederacy'? Not the Spirit of the Confederacy, but an Angel associated with it? Two supernatural beings, both Confederate? This is a confusing addition to the pantheon.

They should replace it with a monument representing the Ghost of the Angel of the Spirit of the Confederacy. Or the Phantom of the Consciousness of the Intellect of the Ghost of the Angel of the Demon of the Manager of the Spirit of the Confederacy.

Meadmaker 29th June 2017 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Checkmite (Post 11902157)
Of course people who think the Civil War was fought to free the slaves are misinformed.

The Civil War was fought to prevent slaves from being freed.

It failed at this aim.

:D

DevilsAdvocate 29th June 2017 07:36 PM

The Phantom of the Consciousness of the Intellect of the Ghost of the Angel of the Demon of the Manager of the Spirit of the Confederacy...just...passed...byyyyyyyy! [jazz hands] :D

CaptainHowdy 29th June 2017 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle (Post 11902091)
And it is only historical revisionists who won't read what the founders of the confederacy said who love these monuments.

Sure, the Union states, especially Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri. West Virginia, sent their fathers, sons, brothers, and Uncles down into Dixie to save the N-words. Right.

Elagabalus 29th June 2017 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy (Post 11902881)
Sure, the Union states, especially Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri. West Virginia, sent their fathers, sons, brothers, and Uncles down into Dixie to save the N-words. Right.

Incredible, but true!

bruto 29th June 2017 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Checkmite (Post 11902157)
Of course people who think the Civil War was fought to free the slaves are misinformed.

The Civil War was fought to prevent slaves from being freed.

It failed at this aim.

Indeed, I seem to recall reading that the Civil War was, at least technically, begun by the South. It was after all they who seceded, they who took union forts, and they who fired the first shot. And what they were preventing was the prospect that the growing number of free territories would leave the advocates of slavery outnumbered. Apologists can dress it up with states' rights rhetoric and noble pronouncements about God, and no doubt many who fought were valiant, but insofar as the war would not have been fought if slavery did not exist, it's pretty far fetched to say it was not a war about slavery, started by those who feared they could not keep it.

332nd 30th June 2017 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeBentley (Post 11901458)
I'll say the same thing I always say. Don't worry Confederate Flag supporters just because you lost this battle didn't mean you'll lose the wa... oh right.

Im partial to "The ultimate participation trophies."

Craig4 30th June 2017 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resume (Post 11901061)

It would have been more accurate if the angel had been whipping a male slave while raping a female slave.

Craig4 30th June 2017 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigred (Post 11901399)
Forget the knife, it'd take a chainsaw to cut through the self-righteous stupidity in this thread. :rolleyes:

There are only two things a Confederate memorial can memorialize, racism and treason. I suppose you could rationalize that it's a memorial to bravery but that would be bravery in support of racism and treason.

bignickel 30th June 2017 05:08 AM

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Upchurch 30th June 2017 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike! (Post 11900894)
The horribly offencive confederate monument in St. Louis' Forest Park (That most people, up until recently, didn't even know was there.) will be removed from Forest Park by Friday. The city decided to let the rightful owners move and store it rather than fight out the city's right to remove and store it in court.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/g...c517b4f9f.html

I live walking distance from the former monument. We often drive through the park on our daily commute and, depending on where we are going, often drive right past it. It's on a small loop of road named "Confederate Dr." across from a cannon. IIRC, it was constructed decades after the war in the early 20th century as part of an effort by the Daughters of the Confederacy to rewrite history so that the Confederacy wasn't fighting to keep slaves.

Over the last month or two, there have been protests and counter-protests. My wife and I have been following a Facebook pro-removal group who organized the one half of those protests. There were several times, they advised people not bring kids and we would try to avoid the area during those times. We have driven by and seen people with their confederate flags hanging out around it. "Protecting it", I imagine.

I've took a certain amount of joy in watching it disappear piece-by-piece.

badnewsBH 30th June 2017 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle (Post 11900920)
You need to remember the true beauty of the supremacy of the white race. Most of these monuments got put up to fight against integration after all. That is something that still makes the south proud.


From what I could see in the photo, it did look like a very nice memorial. Whether the subject matter was deserving of memorializing is a whole other matter, of course.

CaptainHowdy 30th June 2017 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by badnewsBH (Post 11903149)
From what I could see in the photo, it did look like a very nice memorial. Whether the subject matter was deserving of memorializing is a whole other matter, of course.

Yeah, well, the Jefferson Memorial and the Washington Monument are very nice buildings too but they pay tribute to slave rapists and the ownership of our fellow human beings. The Lincoln Memorial honors a man who believed that Africans were inferior to Caucasians and who failed to abolish slavery when he was in a position to do so.

Dynamite those dishonorable structures and build affordable housing for the descendants of the oppressed, you racist, sexist, antisemitic, homophobic, Trump supporting Neanderthal you!!

Border Reiver 30th June 2017 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy (Post 11903321)
Yeah, well, the Jefferson Memorial and the Washington Monument are very nice buildings too but they pay tribute to slave rapists and the ownership of our fellow human beings. The Lincoln Memorial honors a man who believed that Africans were inferior to Caucasians and who failed to abolish slavery when he was in a position to do so.

Dynamite those dishonorable structures and build affordable housing for the descendants of the oppressed, you racist, sexist, antisemitic, homophobic, Trump supporting Neanderthal you!!

Tell you what, you and those who feel the South's ideals of owning other humans as property win the next civil war and you can do just that after putting your precious Confederate monuments to losers back up.

Spindrift 30th June 2017 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy (Post 11903321)
Yeah, well, the Jefferson Memorial and the Washington Monument are very nice buildings too but they pay tribute to slave rapists and the ownership of our fellow human beings. The Lincoln Memorial honors a man who believed that Africans were inferior to Caucasians and who failed to abolish slavery when he was in a position to do so.

Dynamite those dishonorable structures and build affordable housing for the descendants of the oppressed, you racist, sexist, antisemitic, homophobic, Trump supporting Neanderthal you!!

I think we draw the line at treason. Don't commit treason and you can have a monument. Or if you're going to commit treason, win don't lose.

Ian Osborne 30th June 2017 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spindrift (Post 11903343)
I think we draw the line at treason. Don't commit treason and you can have a monument. Or if you're going to commit treason, win don't lose.

If it was treasonous for the ten states to secede from the union, why was it acceptable for the thirteen colonies to secede from the empire? Destroy all memorials to the American Revolution, and its (slave-owning) founding fathers.

wareyin 30th June 2017 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy (Post 11903321)
Yeah, well, the Jefferson Memorial and the Washington Monument are very nice buildings too but they pay tribute to slave rapists and the ownership of our fellow human beings. The Lincoln Memorial honors a man who believed that Africans were inferior to Caucasians and who failed to abolish slavery when he was in a position to do so.

Dynamite those dishonorable structures and build affordable housing for the descendants of the oppressed, you racist, sexist, antisemitic, homophobic, Trump supporting Neanderthal you!!

Was Jefferson Davis (or any other Confederate honored with a monument) known for anything other than fighting for the right to own slaves? Is the monument to them specifically honoring their struggle to own human beings?

Conversely, did Lincoln (or Washington, or any other founding father) do other deeds worthy of being honored by a monument? Are their monuments specifically a testament to their ownership of slaves, or might they just be honoring other accomplishments?

Spindrift 30th June 2017 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian Osborne (Post 11903349)
If it was treasonous for the ten states to secede from the union, why was it acceptable for the thirteen colonies to secede from the empire? Destroy all memorials to the American Revolution, and its (slave-owning) founding fathers.

The thirteen colonies won. If you win, it's not treason. If you don't win, it is.

William Parcher 30th June 2017 10:25 AM

Time capsule discovered inside Confederate Memorial

Quote:

Originally Posted by ABC News
The Missouri Civil War Museum says crews who dismantled and removed a Confederate monument in a sprawling St. Louis park found a time capsule inside the 103-year-old granite landmark.

Museum director Mark Trout tells KTVI that workers jackhammering around the last pieces of the 38-foot-tall (12-meter-tall) monument popped loose the waterlogged, sealed capsule.

Trout says the find this week was "like Indiana Jones." He says the capsule will be opened privately, with the contents being revealed at a fundraiser...


http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/t...louis-48371809

Emily's Cat 30th June 2017 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig4 (Post 11903058)
There are only two things a Confederate memorial can memorialize, racism and treason. I suppose you could rationalize that it's a memorial to bravery but that would be bravery in support of racism and treason.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bignickel (Post 11903062)
Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Should we destroy any monuments to Napoleon? Or Alexander the Great? Or to any other historical event that is no longer considered acceptable?

There's nothing inherently racist about that statue. The civil war happened. It was a big divide in the country. If the memorials were actually depicting something offensive, or were expressing a racist sentiment, I would understand. But right now, you're pretty much saying that anything and everything that could in any way be associated with the losing side in the civil war should be destroyed because it's somehow innately offensive. And I find that absurd.

Emily's Cat 30th June 2017 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spindrift (Post 11903343)
I think we draw the line at treason. Don't commit treason and you can have a monument. Or if you're going to commit treason, win don't lose.

So we'll be destroying all depictions of George Washington, then?

Or does it only apply if it depicts the losing side... in which case maybe we need to destroy any depictions of King George II?

Emily's Cat 30th June 2017 12:27 PM

Whether you agree with the ideals of the soldiers involved in that war or not, this is the purposeful destruction of history. I don't see this as any better than the burning of the Library of Alexandria. Our descendants should be able to view our history as it was, not with some saccharine shine of political correctness being rewritten to appease some multi-generational guilt.

bignickel 30th June 2017 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903485)
Should we destroy any monuments to Napoleon? Or Alexander the Great? Or to any other historical event that is no longer considered acceptable?

There's nothing inherently racist about that statue. The civil war happened. It was a big divide in the country. If the memorials were actually depicting something offensive, or were expressing a racist sentiment, I would understand. But right now, you're pretty much saying that anything and everything that could in any way be associated with the losing side in the civil war should be destroyed because it's somehow innately offensive. And I find that absurd.

I didn't say there was anything inherently racist in the statue. I could argue of course that all these Confederate flags and statues post war were messages sent to keep 'you know who' in their respective places. I may do that in the future; others have made better arguments about it in other threads.

But I will say that I don't care for statues celebrating traitors in my own country, or celebrating the former enemies of america who attacked us, whether that be the Confederacy, the Kaiser, the Emperor, or the Fuehrer.
Any such statues can be put in museums, and should I think, to show people of a time when certain groups were powerful enough to get statues and roads, dedicated to our former enemies, put on public lands.

I am glad such times are ending, but the future citizens of our nation should be kept aware.

Emily's Cat 30th June 2017 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bignickel (Post 11903497)
I didn't say there was anything inherently racist in the statue. I could argue of course that all these Confederate flags and statues post war were messages sent to keep 'you know who' in their respective places. I may do that in the future; others have made better arguments about it in other threads.

But I will say that I don't care of statues celebrating traitors in my own country, or celebrating the former enemies of america who attacked us, whether that be the Confederacy, the Kaiser, the Emperor, or the Fuehrer.

Do you feel that your dislike of it is sufficient to override anybody else's view who may value that insight to history?

Spindrift 30th June 2017 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903487)
So we'll be destroying all depictions of George Washington, then?

Or does it only apply if it depicts the losing side... in which case maybe we need to destroy any depictions of King George II?

Are there a lot of statues of King George II that were put up after the American Revolution saying what a great guy he was? Or George III for that matter.

It's not a matter of depicting the losers. It's a matter of attempting to re-write history and glorify those who committed treason.

bignickel 30th June 2017 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903503)
Do you feel that your dislike of it is sufficient to override anybody else's view who may value that insight to history?

That insight into history is what museums are for.

Other things visitors can view can be the Confederate Battle Flag (which represents "Southern heritage" somehow...), info on Jim Crow laws, pictures of firehoses and dogs being turned on protesters... etc.

I certainly think that kind of museum can be a tremendous help in educating the future public, certainly to let them know how ridiculous a notion of "sacred principles to maintain and rights to defend" our former enemy thought of.

Checkmite 30th June 2017 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903503)
Do you feel that your dislike of it is sufficient to override anybody else's view who may value that insight to history?

These monuments weren't put up to provide "insight to history"; they were put up to shoehorn and perpetually enforce a revisionist narrative of it.

Indeed the only "insight" these memorials really have to offer us is not to the people they were built to honor, but rather the people who built them. But as I've explained elsewhere, they serve even that function better in a museum.

Emily's Cat 30th June 2017 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spindrift (Post 11903510)
Are there a lot of statues of King George II that were put up after the American Revolution saying what a great guy he was? Or George III for that matter.

It's not a matter of depicting the losers. It's a matter of attempting to re-write history and glorify those who committed treason.

So no monuments to the protesters in Tienanmen square then?

One man's traitor is another man's revolutionary. The only thing that makes the confederate states "traitors" is that they lost. Had they won, they'd have been revolutionaries who seceded from the union.

If it's re-writing history and glorifying treason to commemorate those soldiers, it's similarly re-writing history and glorifying treason to commemorate any failed rebellion. Yet there are plenty of failed rebellions that are still commemorated for any number of reasons.

Either way, it's still history. And it's not being rewritten by leaving those monuments as they stand - it's being rewritten by removing any reference to the confederate side of the civil war.

uke2se 30th June 2017 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903485)
Should we destroy any monuments to Napoleon? Or Alexander the Great?

Think the French and the Greeks would mind if you clomped on in there and started busting up their statues. Worry about your own embarrassing history.

uke2se 30th June 2017 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903562)
So no monuments to the protesters in Tienanmen square then?

Are there any in China?

If not, feel free to set one up in your home town.

wareyin 30th June 2017 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903562)
So no monuments to the protesters in Tienanmen square then?

One man's traitor is another man's revolutionary. The only thing that makes the confederate states "traitors" is that they lost. Had they won, they'd have been revolutionaries who seceded from the union.

If it's re-writing history and glorifying treason to commemorate those soldiers, it's similarly re-writing history and glorifying treason to commemorate any failed rebellion. Yet there are plenty of failed rebellions that are still commemorated for any number of reasons.

Either way, it's still history. And it's not being rewritten by leaving those monuments as they stand - it's being rewritten by removing any reference to the confederate side of the civil war.

You know, I see right wing media continuously saying how this is rewriting history, or erasing the Confederate side, but as someone living in Atlanta, they aren't rewriting anything, or removing references to the Confederates. They are correcting the attempted rewriting of history, known as whitewashing. They removing monuments glorifying the Confederacy or prominent Confederates, and that's a very different thing than Fox news is telling folks.

Go to Kennesaw Battlefield. Go to Gettysburg. No one is removing any monuments there, or erasing any mention of the south.

JoeMorgue 30th June 2017 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian Osborne (Post 11903349)
If it was treasonous for the ten states to secede from the union, why was it acceptable for the thirteen colonies to secede from the empire?

I'd wager there aren't too many monuments to the American Revolution in Great Britain and if there are they are free to tear them down.

autumn1971 30th June 2017 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903485)
Should we destroy any monuments to Napoleon? Or Alexander the Great? Or to any other historical event that is no longer considered acceptable?

There's nothing inherently racist about that statue. The civil war happened. It was a big divide in the country. If the memorials were actually depicting something offensive, or were expressing a racist sentiment, I would understand. But right now, you're pretty much saying that anything and everything that could in any way be associated with the losing side in the civil war should be destroyed because it's somehow innately offensive. And I find that absurd.

Victor Hugo wrote specifically about such monument that we respect and admire the past only because it agrees to remain dead.

When the Southern Pride folks agree to this I will honor their little monuments.

ddt 30th June 2017 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903485)
Should we destroy any monuments to Napoleon? Or Alexander the Great? Or to any other historical event that is no longer considered acceptable?

I didn't know either of them is "no longer considered acceptable". There's a lot you can criticize Napoleon for, but he also exported the fruits of the French Revolution to most of continental Europe. We owe him the meter and the kilogram, the civil code and the penal code, to name a few. Alexander exported Greek culture, science and philosophy to the Middle East. We owe him (specifically, his general Ptolemy I) the Library of Alexandria.

There's absolutely no reason why your country or mine would put up a statue for either of them, but as a human being, I would not feel offended seeing one in France resp. Greece. Actually, my country's first king was Napoleon's brother Louis, and he's sort-a whitewashed out of our history, though he did his best to serve his (assigned) country to the best of his abilities.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903485)
There's nothing inherently racist about that statue. The civil war happened. It was a big divide in the country.

Yes, it is racist. It celebrates a racist cause. The only raison d'ętre of the Confederacy was the right (constitutionally enshrined) to keep slaves and the view that blacks were inferior human beings. And in a sense, the Civil War continues as long as those monuments are there on public land.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903491)
Whether you agree with the ideals of the soldiers involved in that war or not, this is the purposeful destruction of history. I don't see this as any better than the burning of the Library of Alexandria. Our descendants should be able to view our history as it was, not with some saccharine shine of political correctness being rewritten to appease some multi-generational guilt.

The burning of the Library of Alexandria destroyed knowledge. Tearing down a statue does not. There are other and better ways to learn about the evils of the Southern racist bigots than to glorify them with a public monument.

Spindrift 30th June 2017 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903562)
So no monuments to the protesters in Tienanmen square then?

In China? I doubt it.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903562)
One man's traitor is another man's revolutionary. The only thing that makes the confederate states "traitors" is that they lost. Had they won, they'd have been revolutionaries who seceded from the union.

If they won, they would have their own country for their monuments. They lost trying to destroy this country.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903562)
If it's re-writing history and glorifying treason to commemorate those soldiers, it's similarly re-writing history and glorifying treason to commemorate any failed rebellion.

If the glorification for false reason. The war was started by the South to preserve slavery, not the glorious "lost cause" of fiction.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903562)
Yet there are plenty of failed rebellions that are still commemorated for any number of reasons.

A rebellion that cost the lives of hundreds of thousands and was started for the reason of preserving slavery?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 11903562)
Either way, it's still history. And it's not being rewritten by leaving those monuments as they stand - it's being rewritten by removing any reference to the confederate side of the civil war.

Who's removing any reference to the confederate side? Go to any number of museums. Read any number of books.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:23 PM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-19, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.