And there they go. Lee and Jackson sailing through air onto flatbed truck in Baltimore at 3:40 AM. An amazing sight. pic.twitter.com/4SzRYRiVOB
— Alec MacGillis (@AlecMacGillis) August 16, 2017
Have you ever woken up in the morning to find your city had changed during the night? There's a dystopian edge that called to mind "Dark City"...
And that old Pretenders song with the overly familiar intro, "My City Was Gone":
IN THE COMMENTS: iowan2 said:
I have seen a tag line of late, something about darkness, just can't put my finger on it,Matthew Sablan said:
Oh here it is. Washington Post."Democracy dies in darkness"
Prescient I guess
There's a way to go about removing the monuments. Doing it with force of arms and threatening the city with violence is not the way.And doing it under cover of darkness suggests that it's something shameful that needs to be hidden. If you can't do it proudly, by daylight, you're not ready to do it.
Posts
215 comments:
1 – 200 of 215 Newer› Newest»Saw some activists want to remove a memorial to coal miners this morning. Someone defaced the Lincoln memorial. Looks like violence can get you what you want. Now that we know that, expect it to get worse not better.
Well, Baltimore was where they had planned to assassinate Lincoln pre-inauguration. He was hustled out of town by Pinkerton.
They should put up a statue of Pinkerton!
Nothing could be more ironic than a bunch of Commies cheering a statue of Pinkerton.
Reposting a comment from last night:
“The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.”
― George Orwell
“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”
― George Orwell, 1984
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”
― George Orwell, 1984
In a way, I sort of agree with Adams that these things should go, but they are often beautiful works of art. I hope they are not being destroyed. But I am waiting for the time that Sullivan's Monument is taken down. Sullivan was a Revolutionary general who lead a campaign of genocide against the Indian tribes of upstate New York. When will it be his turn? When does the Jefferson Memorial go?
I see that Google now will tell you, if you ask, or did last time I checked, that Lincoln was not a Republican. Maybe they can dig a giant memory hole that holds not just facts, but physical works of art and historical artifacts.
Desecrating the memory of our Mexican War heroes seems harsh.
Good! Get rid of them all
put 'em in a museum if you like...
Once they have gotten rid of the statues, everything will be fine, right?
Let's tear down the Arkansas state flag for it commemorates the Confederacy. Down with the racist oppressor FDR. Jefferson, woman abuser and slave owner deserves no honor. Down with his monuments. Cast the declaration into the fire. We need not remember him.
If we're going to have a purge, I prefer it done quickly and completely so we need not suffer much.
We are living in the time of the New Soviets.
Finally a New Man and a New Woman will emerge, unburdened by history.
And condemned to relearn everything that brought us to this pass.
Thank You!
Thank you George Soros for this perfect day!
I have seen a tag line of late, something about darkness, just cant put my finger on it,
Oh here it is. Washington Post."Democracy dies in darkness"
Prescient I guess
No one to blame but the fascists. Now, every politician, man, woman and dog will be determined to show that they will not be beaten down by the murderous fascists or their apologist in the White House.
I disagree with the removal of the statues but I agree that the middle class now has to assert itself against the oligarch Trump. This is a law and order issue. We are not going to put up with armed murderous thugs walking in mass through our neighborhoods at night carrying torches. Not going to happen. If our state and local politicians can't or won't stop it then we will.
We should just pass the Great Renaming Act for streets and buildings so the Byrds, Kennedies and other racists or misogynist names are stripped from their buildings.
Washington and Lee will naturally also be renamed.
A generation ago, when the ACLU fought in court to allow Nazi groups to display their swastikas and March through Chicago, we were told, "They have rights, just like everyone else." And maybe the best way to fight them was to make fun of them like "The Blues Brothers" did. Now Antifa violence is proving that point. Once they are through with the Nazis and Civil War statues, who thinks they will stop?
These are Heinlein's crazy years, we just live in them.
At least those statues can be stored away somewhere and at some future date, after sanity has returned...ah, what was I thinking.
The message is that PC is in charge of the government.
The main problem with these kinds of symbols from the Civil War, the semiotics that drives liberals crazy, is that of rebellion against central authority, and the government that liberals want to commandeer in order to rule over every facet of our lives. The personal is political, and politics is who gets to control the monopoly of violence. We can't have a handy symbol of rebellion against central authority available to every free-thinker who owns a pickup truck!
Just change the name to Bruce Lee.
ARM masked armed mobs have been attacking people for over a year.
So, even after all the discussion on this blog, there appears to be no understanding of, or sympathy with, the views that these monuments, glorifying a horrific racist, inhuman past, are maybe past their prime? That they provoke and offend and that it is perfectly sensible for a society to reassess and to say, "Enough."?
Would you feel the same way in Germany, where Nazi monuments were removed? Do you wish the Nazi monuments glorifying Aryan culture should have remained?
Is your point that if someone once put it up, it must remain there forever? Do you dismiss entirely the idea that many right-thinking people - ordinary American citizens - are very disturbed by these statues? Do you just think - "Oh, they're all awful lefties!"?
Though now that antifa has gotten what they want, will they stop violently disrupting protests they don't agree with?
"AReasonableMan said...
No one to blame but the fascists. Now, every politician, man, woman and dog will be determined to show that they will not be beaten down by the murderous fascists or their apologist in the White House.
I disagree with the removal of the statues but I agree that the middle class now has to assert itself against the oligarch Trump. This is a law and order issue. We are not going to put up with armed murderous thugs walking in mass through our neighborhoods at night carrying torches. Not going to happen. If our state and local politicians can't or won't stop it then we will."
Are you going to take the same stance with BLM and all the Democrats, which is pretty much all the Democrats, that support them?
I remember the Mayflower trucks Moving the Baltimore Colts to Indiana in the middle of the night. Maybe its a tradition.
Baltimore City Council introduces resolution to destroy Confederate monuments
The 15-member Baltimore City Council unanimously voted on Aug. 14 for a resolution to not only remove, but destroy statues recognizing Confederate leaders.
. Now, every politician, man, woman and dog will be determined to show that they will not be beaten down by the murderous fascists
Lefties have wished these people into being, and now that they have done so, no way they are going to give up this opportunity for a bloody fight that they have created. Nobody on the left gave a shit when an MSNBC watching, Maddow fan-obi came specifically, and with malice aforethought, gunning for Republicans.
No, let'w wait until the right crazy comes along!
There's a way to go about removing the monuments. Doing it with force of arms and threatening the city with violence is not the way.
First they came for the Confederate heroes...
So, even after all the discussion on this blog, there appears to be no understanding of, or sympathy with, the views that these monuments, glorifying a horrific racist, inhuman past, are maybe past their prime?
Do you even read this blog or the comments? I guess not, so why am I wasting my time?
Congrats to the antifa though on their political victory won through violence and mayhem. I'm sure they will now stop attacking college speakers and parades.
"We should just pass the Great Renaming Act for streets and buildings so the Byrds, Kennedies and other racists or misogynist names are stripped from their buildings."
Hey, I love The Byrds!
"A time to build up, a time to break down/A time to dance, a time to mourn/A time to cast away stones, a time to gather stones together..."
I disagree with the removal of the statues but I agree that the middle class now has to assert itself against the oligarch Trump.
LOL, it's a cult now. Evidence of the eyes shall be ignored, lest I be the one cast out! The Democrats are a coalition oil the hyper-wealthy and urban elites, and their wannabees and the urban poor of color against the middle class. It is now "white supremacy" to point out that the Democrats' identity politics and anti-white rhetoric has reached, what I can only hope is a crescendo.
tim in vermont said...
Lefties have wished these people into being
If wishing worked we would currently be neck deep in unicorns.
Play Dixie before football games instead of the national anthem.
The singing would be a lot better, too.
ARM, which fascists are you talking about?
The ones who claim that they are actually anti-fascists, dressing up in masks and black clothing and "protecting" us with bike locks from scary, scary free speech?
Or the white supremacist dorks with the tiki torches?
Or the black supremacist dorks who shut down campuses and destroy city centers and murder cops?
Or the various other supremacist dorks who have their nose out of joint because the rest of the world does not recognize the unique superiority of their special little group?
Or the ones who call themselves journalists and "protect" us from disturbing news stories?
I don't recall anyone in the white house sticking up for any of those groups...Well, not since January 19th, 2017.
Our country is going pretty fast too. Thanks a lot you crooked liberals.
Stephen Foster songs will be taken off youtube.
Old folks at home has got to go.
@Bob R, that was excellent. Maybe they're taking the statues to Indy.
Archie Bunker: "The coons are coming"?
Trump has miscalculated here, badly, unlike the professional politicians on the right who know their history. Middle class people still run this country, despite efforts on all sides to give control to the oligarchs. Charlottesville is a classic middle class town, a town where middle class people could imagine moving, a town that was one of several similar towns that people here suggested Althouse move to in her retirement.
Middle class people are not going to put up with heavily armed out-of-towners marching through their streets intimidating the local population and inciting violence. This is a law and order issue. Middle class people want to live in 'nice' places where they feel 'safe'. Middle class people saw what happened when the armed agitators arrived and they are not going to put up with that. They can see themselves in Charlottesville and they can see their son or daughter being killed by the fascists.
ARM the middle class has been putting up with that for a year. History doesn't restart whenever it is convenient for you.
At last all the negroes can be happy! I expect that Baltimore will now experience a renaissance. Neighborhoods will be rebuilt, crime will vanish, a hundred flowers will blossom.
The problem is a year or so ago when masked armed outsiders were given space to destroy.
Just for the record, here is a list of things I do not need protection from:
--Free speech
--Lawful assembly
--Statues
--People who look different from me
--Disturbing news stories
--Responsible use of firearms
Here is a list of things I do, actually, need protection from:
--Criminals
--Rioters
--Do-gooders determined to do me their particular type of good, whether I want it or not.
--Do-gooders determined to do someone else good and who feel that I should foot the bill.
Kitty M: "So, even after all the discussion on this blog, there appears to be no understanding of, or sympathy with, the views that these monuments, glorifying a horrific racist, inhuman past, are maybe past their prime? That they provoke and offend and that it is perfectly sensible for a society to reassess and to say, "Enough."?
"inhuman past?"
I'd say it was a very human past. Or are you now so purified that you don't live with any of your own generational faults?
I love the movie "Dark City"
Baltimore isn't removing it's just tuning.
Trump isn't yet wearing a pussy hat, unlike his staff.
I'm surprised they survived the copper thieves this long.
ARM masked armed mobs have been attacking people for over a year.
And don't forget that the mobs attacking and disrupting Republican events (not Nazi or white supremacists) were controlled by the Obama White House.
Robert Creamer's name should be on the lips of every Republican. But they are too afraid of the media to say anything.
Would that be the end of it. I think not. Not until leftist totilatarianism is solidly in place.
I have Dark City but don't remember it. That usually means I bailed out early.
But I'm not a fan of noir. Long stretches of bad acting asking you to empathize. With what. No motivation.
It's what life is like without rules and conventions. The interesting thing is rules and conventions, particularly ones you don't notice.
Heaven forfend
Those things that provoke and offend!
So sez Kitty M.
It would have been better if she was named Kitty N. :-(
Dr. Schreber: I call them the Strangers. They abducted us and brought us here. This city, everyone in it... is their experiment. They mix and match our memories as they see fit, trying to divine what makes us unique. One day, a man might be an inspector. The next, someone entirely different. When they want to study a murderer, for instance, they simply imprint one of their citizens with a new personality. Arrange a family for him, friends, an entire history... even a lost wallet. Then they observe the results. Will a man, given the history of a killer, continue in that vein? Or are we, in fact, more than the sum of our memories?
Next to go, the statue of the Beast of Manzanar, in Washington DC. Sing it, brother!
Sidenote: I loved Dark City, even with how cheesy some of it looked.
"
And don't forget that the mobs attacking and disrupting Republican events (not Nazi or white supremacists) were controlled by the Obama White House."
Lol wut? Obama is no longer in the White House.
I would love to see your definitive proof linking these two.
Someone saying he voted for Obama once (without proof of that) does not count.
I find it surprising that Ann does not call put this pathetic reasoning. She would never have let it stand in her class.
Luckily we have a brave President who is not afraid to speak the truth.
Who was it, Kitty M, who said "you say, 'If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.' Thus you testify against yourselves that you are descendants of those who murdered the prophets."
Our generation doesn't judge and oppress by race or hold ownership to slaves.
But our generation does oppress, by wealth and class and education and public debt. Your generation is more than happy to leave their children slaves to a public debt that can never be repaid and can only be ignored at a terrible risk to the entire world economy. Our generation is more than happy to hold repayment rights to non-dischargable student debt, most of the money from which went not to teachers but to administrators. The left seems more than happy to publically hound people out of their jobs because they won't bow to your narrative and world view. But they claim they are pure and white regarding race, so you think.
Look at Gore and Clinton and Pelosi and Obama and all your prophets and leaders. They've all gotten, or in the case of Obama are on their way to becoming rich beyond imagination. Yet the poor in Detroit are still poor. I know. I was down in east Detroit last Sunday and for the past 3 years every Sunday, and I see it. Oh, and I also noticed that most of the people I encountered are African American. So we say the right words about race, but let's not kid ourselves that the oppression of races continues unabated to this day by even the left.
But in your mind, thank goodness nobody honors the sins of the past in your circles. You can all be so righteous on that account.
They really do think "1984" is a how-to manual.
"Trump has miscalculated here, badly, unlike the professional politicians on the right..."
I believe I've heard that false claim a few dozen times before.
KittyM said...
So, even after all the discussion on this blog, there appears to be no understanding of, or sympathy with, the views that these monuments, glorifying a horrific racist, inhuman past, are maybe past their prime? That they provoke and offend and that it is perfectly sensible for a society to reassess and to say, "Enough."?...
I believe society has every right to reassess. Part of that reassessment is people freely exchanging their views on the subject. That is part of their civil rights. I strongly oppose groups of people using violence and threats of violence to deprive their fellow citizens of those civil rights.
Is your point that if someone once put it up, it must remain there forever? Do you dismiss entirely the idea that many right-thinking people - ordinary American citizens - are very disturbed by these statues?
I don't dismiss the idea, I have just not heard any right-thinking people express such views. The people I've heard express such views have all been raving. ( I've heard plenty of right-thinking people express the view that we should take the statues down. But no rational explanation as to what is very disturbing about them. )
AReasonableMan said...
No one to blame but the fascists.
That's ironic.
They draw near to the concept of a merciful and just society with thier lips, but their hearts are far from it.
We're all these "disgraceful" confederate memorials erected since Trump was elected? In other words, why weren't these "offensive" relics removed during the Obama era?
/s
Dark city is one of my favo movies in that genre. + Rufus Sewell.
Year Zero. The next revolution is gonna be lit.
They can melt down the statues and remold them into a giant statue of Freddie Gray...or Michael Brown with his hands up.
They're preserving them for the worst statue museum.
"There never was a Civil War. The United States was never divided. Now shut up about it."
Whisk away history. Therefore, no history.
I'm reminded of 1984,
"Oceania was at war with Eastasia: Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia. A large part of the political literature of five years was now
completely obsolete. Reports and records of all kinds, newspapers, books, pamphlets, films, sound-tracks, photographs--all had to be rectified at lightning speed. Although no directive was ever issued, it was known that the chiefs of the Department intended that within one week no reference to the war with Eurasia, or the alliance with astasia, should remain in existence anywhere."
Don't forget a statue for honor scholar and would-be aeronautical engineer Travon Martin!
There never was a Civil War. The United States was never divided. Now shut up about it.
No one is trying to destroy the fact of the Civil War. Removing these statues is recognizing that these men were not heroes, but rather traitors defending and indefensible system. Not only that but most of these monuments were not erected immediately after the Civil War, but after World War I, when the Negroes were starting to get uppity and demanding they be recognized as equal citizens.
This is especially true of Baltimore. Maryland was neutral in the Civil War. Why on earth are there Confederate monuments in Baltimore. It makes as much sense as a statue of Hitler in Switzerland.
I strongly oppose groups of people using violence and threats of violence to deprive their fellow citizens of those civil rights.
Then why are you even commenting on this thread? This is about a perfectly legal removal of statues by a duly elected city council.
Agree on the middle class comment!
Unfortunately both sides are fascists, no matter what they are named.
"...[Mayor] Pugh said the decision to remove them overnight was specifically designed to avoid the type of violent conflicts that erupted in Charlottesville ahead of the planned removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee, the Confederate General."
U.S. News
Trump equates Nazis with those who oppose them!
Now that there are some empty pedestals, time for a question:
Is there any moment of American History that the majority of the Left and Right can both agree should be commemorated?
Is there nothing positive left of a shared history?
Perhaps we now can only be symbolized by the likes of a reflecting jelly bean that makes us giddy at the warped reflections of ourselves.
I am Laslo.
One of the staues taken down was of Chief Justice Roger Taney, author of the Dred Scott decision. I predict he won't bring as much on the auction block as the double statue of Lee and Jackson.
Why didn't these statues come down during the Obama era, Freder?
FredFred, Maryland was full of slaveowners and Confederate sympathizers.
As was DC and Kentucky.
I live in Baltimore. You can't get a the city to replace a f-ing lightbulb without 6 months of red tape. I want to know how this got done so damn quickly.
"America seems peculiarly prone to these spasms of self-righteous political emotion in which all sense of perspective and the national interest is lost."
-- Paul Johnson, "Modern Times"
Freder Frederson said...
Then why are you even commenting on this thread? This is about a perfectly legal removal of statues by a duly elected city council.
Because there was a recent incident that is relevant. Nowhere did I say that the city council did not have the right to take the action that they took. The residents of Baltimore deserve the city council that they elect.
Note- It wouldn't surprise me if an action taken is such haste violated some local or state good-governance statute. Something along the lines of requiring public comment, or historical preservation, or something like that. I'm not saying that it did, just that I would not be surprised.
The obese androgynous American of African descent who climbed the ladder to help a mob pull down a statue it didn't like has been arrested.
I don't remember Obama ever speaking out about all these confederate monuments and statues -- clearly a tacit endorsement.
Laslo Spatula said...
Is there any moment of American History that the majority of the Left and Right can both agree should be commemorated?
My town was the site of a small but key battle in the Revolutionary War. Never been any fuss about the various plaques scattered around the place. Everyone hates the English.
Good. Violence works, you see? The mob tore down a statue in Durham and other places got the message: take them down now or the mob will take them down for you.
Good for all of you who side with the mob.
If you want to get things done in this country, violence is the way to do it. That's the lesson I've learned.
"I live in Baltimore. You can't get a the city to replace a f-ing lightbulb without 6 months of red tape. I want to know how this got done so damn quickly."
-- Not replacing a light bulb doesn't invite armed, masked rioters to your city.
Don't worry that your violence will cause problems, either. As long as you're a good person then it'll be termed "civil disobedience" when you break the law and use the threat of violence to get your way.
Mitt Romney and Marco Rubio will justify your violence against bad people, too! So that's a bonus.
Old folks at home has got to go.
Democracy dies in darkies.
AReasonableMan said...This is a law and order issue
My irony meter broke.
If you need me I will be in Princeton NJ removing all trace of the arch-racist Woodrow Wilson. Then on to the racist FDR.
How many starving children could they have fed with the money spent?
It must be quite a blow for the left to finally understand that Obama was a confederate sympathizer.
Mark said...
"And don't forget that the mobs attacking and disrupting Republican events (not Nazi or white supremacists) were controlled by the Obama White House."
Lol wut? Obama is no longer in the White House.
I would love to see your definitive proof linking these two.
Someone saying he voted for Obama once (without proof of that) does not count.
Gee Mark is ignorance really bliss?
Does a guy who visited Obama in the White House several hundred times, is a convicted felon, was caught on tape bragging about sending thugs into Trump events, and was on Hillary's campaign payroll count? Couldn't even Goolag his name to find out, huh?
Note- It wouldn't surprise me if an action taken is such haste violated some local or state good-governance statute. Something along the lines of requiring public comment, or historical preservation, or something like that. I'm not saying that it did, just that I would not be surprised.
Was there ever a comment that better reflected the concern and anxiety of the snowflakes? "Ohhh, someone might have violated an ordinance."
Brookenze...Was there ever a comment that better reflected the concern and anxiety of the snowflakes? "Ohhh, someone might have violated an ordinance."
AReasonableMan said...This is a law and order issue
You guys are great.
Fascinating. Another indication that the Democrats are despairing of ever regaining political power. Making the divisions of the Obama years even deeper is not going to work in their favor. I guess mobs and goose-stepping is all they have left.
And in the morning it was found that every person claiming to be of the Negro persuasion found themselves in possession of a thousand dollars and every white liberal found stains on the sheets/underwear...the statute fairy had done a good night's work...
Considering Baltimore's past efforts at dealing with rioting, this may be for the best assuming they were going to remove them anyway. If this was a spur of the moment thing to get rid of them in violation of law then it looks worse than doing it during the day.
And in the morning it was found that every person claiming to be of the Negro persuasion found themselves in possession of a thousand dollars and every white liberal found stains on the sheets/underwear...the statute fairy had done a good night's work...
No, you guys are great.
Considering Baltimore's past efforts at dealing with rioting, this may be for the best assuming they were going to remove them anyway.
Baltimore's been talking about removing the statuary since the church shooting in 2015 according to U.S. News and World Reports. Events in Charlottesville sealed the deal.
Matthew Sablan said...
Saw some activists want to remove a memorial to coal miners this morning.
Well, to be fair, a lot of those guys work in black face. Clearly we cannot tolerate that!
After a few minutes reflection, I really must step back from my jostling of the left. I now recognize with the democrat party at an historic nadir, agitprop and virtue signaling is all they have left. I shouldn't pile on -- that was tacky.
Now get out there and make those monuments your bitch!
"Hey, hey, hi, ho!
Inanimate objects got to go!"
(Just trying to be helpful)
The removal marks a change in population. The old city moved out and were replaced by others. The new population cares nothing for the old one, or their city, other than the fact that much of it is beautiful.
The old people, who built it, understood beauty. The new ones only vaguely feel it, and cannot make it. Baltimore is much like San Francisco that way.
"What do we want? Empty plinths!
When do we want them? Now!"
(That one may need some work)
In San Francisco, a Union city, they have no confederate memorials. But they do have several monuments to the old people of this city, or rather those rednecks who conquered it's hinterlands. These must go of course, in the interest of modern barbarism.
But not yet, the implications haven't yet seeped into the slow minds here.
With the greater political division between the cities and the surrounding areas, I think there is a real issue here with the cities deciding to dictate the culture. It used to be that the cities were reflective of the area as a whole and their monuments and the like represented the shared pride. With cities acting out of step with the rest of the region in deciding what is and is not acceptable to display, it is going to alienate the two further. Of course, a rural town can put up their own monuments, but there is a big difference between a monument in the big city and a monument off a rural highway.
I'm not sure that is an issue for Baltimore.
I prefer the night for removing statutes and symbols that memorialize folks who fought on the wrong side re keeping Americans in slavery. The costs associated w/ policing and cleaning up after Althouse's proposed statue removal festivals could be better spent taking down more statues, or on schools, or on roads.
Speaking of which, road paving projects are best at night, too. https://seattle.curbed.com/2017/6/1/15727284/seattle-weekend-traffic-i5-i90.
No muss, at least minimized mussing.
Among other interesting ironies in the case of Baltimore is that the powers that be there live in beautiful houses that embody the taste and culture of their old owners, the very people who erected those confederate statues.
Which is no surprise. The moderns have no curiosity. Their place is an object, it just is, independent of social or cultural context.
I expect Lefty people to excuse political violence that promotes their side. They've been doing it for a long time, and certainly did it, with the enthusiastic help of the Media, for the year leading up to Trump's election.
I honestly didn't expect mainstream Republicans like Romney and Rubio to endorse Antifa violence. I voted for Romney and I thought about voting for Rubio.
I was surprised. I probably shouldn't have been.
I know most of those statues well, having been a student at Johns Hopkins for too many years.
The Taney statue was always an abomination, because of the subject.
The 2 in Wyman Park were very nice statues, representing relatively respectable subjects. The Jackson and Lee statue was a focal point in the park's dell. I'm not at all broken up about those being removed, I hope they find good homes.
I'm sure the university is happy that they're gone. They don't really like riots in the backyard.
My family came from the North - Irish from Boston and Swedes from Wisconsin - but we lived in the South when I was growing up, near DC which was segregated till 1953 and in Maryland which was segregated till 1956. We do not want segregation back. And - the Confederacy was a Confederation of slave-holding states according to the original founding documents.
Most of the people enslaved in the US lived in the South and were emancipated by the Civil War yet not able to vote until after 1964.
During and after the Civil War most Southerners were impoverished in the same way and for the same reasons as was Europe, especially Germany, after World War II. The South is the only part of the US whose history includes the experience of being enslaved and of being conquered. Memories of this period are one of the reasons why George C Marshall worked to restore Europe, including Germany, after World War II.
There was no Marshall Plan for the South and this created lasting bitterness which swirls in with the lasting bitterness created by slavery and segregation. That is the Southern reality.
In the years after the Civil War some Confederate statues were put directly on the walkway leading up to the courthouse door and the symbolism - a Confederate guarded the door to justice - was explicit, intended and recognized on all sides. Everyone of these should be moved.
But should we go on and on and play games with terrifying levels of hidden bitterness and rage? I'm not talking about insane people from Ohio or Soros-funded provocateurs like Jason Kessler (the supposed alt right guy who was an Occupy alt lefty before he was an alt righty) or the fuckwit Governor of Virginia who let the sides fight till someone was killed, hoping to ride the whirlwind to the Presidency. I'm talking about sane people including many in the South who elected a President to get the economy going so that they could have jobs, who see him working to that end and who see the Democrats and their allies working to end this hope. I'm talking about sane people who see themselves accused of racism as a means of justifying impoverishing them.
When you want to catch crabs you put rotten meat on a hook and lower it in the water. The crabs love rotten meat; they grab it and won't let go so you pull them up and have them for dinner. The media behaves like crabs; they grab any rotten thing you lower down to them and won't let go. So, these accusations of racism. Let the media grab them and let the rest of us support the effort to get jobs for all.
I'd imagine the incredibly rushed removal was to avoid lawsuits.
I understand that the reason the Lee statue hasn't been moved yet is that there's a court case moving forward to determine whether or not they are protected under Virginia's 1997 monument law. A judge issued an injunction back in March and Charlottesville can't remove the statue while the case makes its way through the courts.
Presumably, if Baltimore had waited to remove the statues, someone would have sued them and gotten an injunction. And then the city would have all the expense of the lawsuit as well as the inevitable protests and counter protests.
I understand the City of Rome, for one, has a great number of statues and other monuments (some in a deplorable state of disrepair) dedicated to an entire society of slaveowners. Or rather, all the ancient parts of the city, now carefully preserved, is such a monument, the greatest one on earth.
We really can't have that.
Wow. The left has lost its collective mind. First, they project their sins on everyone and their grandma. Now, they are practicing historical sterilization in order to completely hide their ideological roots. This comes on the heels of progressive liberalism reopening abortion chambers, resuming abortion rites, and catering to Planned Parenthood clinical cannibalism. Then there are the elective wars, elective regime changes (progressive liberals really like elective procedures), delegated responsibility creating trails of tears, and other social justice adventures to secure democratic leverage and natural resources (e.g. Libyan oil).
I suggest replacing the statues with tokens of liberalism to honor its progress. Perhaps Planned Parenthood can contribute historical artifacts to secure the leftist legacy.
Is there a difference between this and what is happening here?
Well said, wildswan.
No, there isn't really.
Any difference in feeling is a mere fad.
Btw, those ancient Buddhists also had slaves. Serves them right.
And doing it under cover of darkness suggests that it's something shameful that needs to be hidden.
Or needs to be saved from destruction by mindless leftist (but I repeat myself) mobs.
What would be great if someone with a lot of money were to buy up these removed statues and create a PRIVATE museum or memorial park and allow guests to enter into his/her private land to view the statues and other memorabilia.
The media aren't so much crabs--as in soft shell crabs. They are more like public lice.
Airbrushing history. Stalin had nothing on these folks.
They mean nothing outside their context.
Public art is meant to be in public.
A statue of a hero is meant to remind the passerby of the virtues of his ancestors. But if the modern people are unrelated to those people, even in culture or allegiance?
Or, for that matter, any conception of virtue.
In which KittyM exposes herself as an intolerant bigoted person with fascist tendencies.
Do you dismiss entirely the idea that many right-thinking people - ordinary American citizens - are very disturbed by these statues?
Right thinking. As defined by you? What shall we do with the wrong thinking people. Who are these "wrong thinkers"? How dare they not agree with you and your definition of what is the right thinking. If you are not a "right thinking person" are you not an ordinary citizen? Should the non ordinary be purged from society? Perhaps put into some big fenced in areas to keep their "wrongness" from infecting you and the rest of society?
Can KittyM even see where this thought process is leading? I doubt it.
Shall we tape their eyelids open and force them to watch the right thinking propaganda videos until they admit their wrong think status. How about we put big dunce caps on their heads and force them to run a gauntlet of taunts and beatings with sticks until they are "right thinking people".
Right or wrong, people like KittyM make me very afraid for our future.
The Ghost of Bull Conner wrote: Everyone hates the English.
As I suspected, it's all about hate, isn't?
Hate Trump.
Hate Trump voters.
Hate Republicans generally. (Ask Steve Scalise, if he can talk, that is.)
Hate white people generally (http://newbostonpost.com/2017/08/11/stanford-course-abolish-whiteness/)
Hate white people from the South really bad.
Hate dead white people on horseback really, really bad.
You've got it all wrong, DBQ! KittyM is on the side of the Angels -- just ask her!
What shall we do with the wrong thinking people?
Wrong thinking people have a right to think wrongly. That's why we have a First Amendment.
KittyM, along with millions of others, hates the Bill of Rights. I must remember to add that to the List of Hates.
Providence's Burnside statue is probably safe. We don't mind bad generals, just evil ones.
Kitty M said: "That they (the statues) provoke and offend and that it is perfectly sensible for a society to reassess and to say, "Enough."?
The statues have been there for over a century in some cases. Few pay any attention to public statues. There is a statue of Robert Burns in Milwaukee, erected by some Scots in the 20's. I would wager that very few of the people who walk past it could tell you who Robert Burns was.
So why is it that one day, leftists suddenly woke up and found those Confederate statues provocative and offensive? Bill Clinton had no trouble formally authorizing the incorporation of the Confederate flag into the state flag of Arkansas when he was governor. Why wasn't he called a Nazi?
That's because this has nothing to do with actual history. It is a stick with which to beat white Southerners who voted for Trump. If the South still voted Dem, we wouldn't be hearing one damn thing about these statues.
Matthew already said it all. But i might add:
Our society is getting uglier by the minute because ox gorers have lost their perspective when things go their way. I wont refer to anyone in particular, (see comment rules) but some of you, who evidently think themselves on the side of angels, would do well to know how much animosity is built by showing glee in achieving ends through will to power and intimidation.
Of course statues will come down. Others will go up. Sometimes, I'm sure, if you wait long enough, the first ones re-appear in some fashion. That is the way of history. Those who want to be in the vanguard and challenge - doesnt matter if this was 1660 or 1840 or 1930 - there's always something to challenge. For better or ill. Its not bad or good, mind, it just is. Ox gorers gotta ox gore. Change is constant and yet at the same time, nothing about authority changes. The village needs (or maybe prefers is the right word) someone to keep the traffic lights working. Usually ox gorers are too busy to worry about that.
The thing about being an ox gorer, is that you rely on the temperate nature of the villagers. You gotta know how to ox gore right. If everyone starts getting riled up, and thinks - f*k it, might as well get in on this action - then all o a sudden there is splutterin and gnashing of teeth cause, well, questions are raised about why not this ox too? Hmm, maybe supply demand principles kick in - lots of gorers, they got to gore lots of oxen. Why be a villified suburban chump managing the street light, when you can be a Hero of the Age...
There are those in every age who wish to be master. They promise to be good. But they mean to be master. High minded over confident authoritarians should realize that eventually, villagers wise up.
I found this link at Donald Sensing's blog and posted part of this article last night. It is written by a former SJW who, unlike brookzene, KittyM, ARM, Inga and Ritmo, has enough intelligence and self-awareness to have become horrified at what has become of the Left:
"I see increasing numbers of so-called liberals cheering censorship and defending violence as a response to speech. I see seemingly reasonable people wishing death on others and laughing at escalating suicide and addiction rates of the white working class. I see liberal think pieces written in opposition to expressing empathy or civility in interactions with those with whom we disagree. I see 63 million Trump voters written off as “nazis” who are okay to target with physical violence. I see concepts like equality and justice being used as a mask for resentful, murderous rage.
The most pernicious aspect of this evolution of the left, is how it seems to be changing people, and how rapidly since the election. I have been dwelling on this Nietzsche quote for almost six months now, “He who fights with monsters, should be careful lest he thereby become a monster. And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee.” How easy is it for ordinary humans to commit atrocious acts? History teaches us it’s pretty damn easy when you are blinded to your own hypocrisy. When you believe you are morally superior, when you have dehumanized those you disagree with, you can justify almost anything. In a particularly vocal part of the left, justification for dehumanizing and committing violence against those on the right has already begun."
https://medium.com/indian-thoughts/on-leaving-the-sjw-cult-and-finding-myself-1a6769b2f1ff
Quaestor said...Wrong thinking people have a right to think wrongly. That's why we have a First Amendment.
Naaah. Didn't you hear?
Marco Rubio, tweet from last night:
When entire movement built on anger & hatred towards people different than you,it justifies & ultimately leads to violence against them 3/6
That's my bold, but his point. Violence is justified against certain people if their movement is built on anger and hatred. Those people don't have rights, Quaestor. According to mainstream Republican Senator Marco Rubio if you belong to the wrong group then violence against you is justified.
The First Amendment applies to good people. Laws only protect good people. If you're a bad person we're justified in cracking your skull. The people have spoken.
Is it weird that it took milquetoast Mitt Romney and Marco Rubio to actually radicalize me?
Some enterprising Hungarian has figured out a use for all those unfashionable statues:
Memento Park Budapest
The official Republican line is now "Antifa did nothing wrong."
They're scrambling to top each other's denunciation of any deviation from that assertion, I guess to get some head pats from the same Media that's been calling them all Nazis for as long as I can remember.
I'm angry that I'm surprised by any of this!
KittyM said. "That they (the statues) provoke and offend and that it is perfectly sensible for a society to reassess and to say, "Enough."?
There are all sorts of things in society that provoke and offend someone at sometime everywhere.
What else besides some old statues shall we dispense with?
Books provoke and prod you to think. Some books offend on purpose. Some just because someone finds something offensive. Movies. Television shows. Internet sites. Advertising. Speech. Blog posts
Where will it end?
She would most likely agree to removing all these offensive books and ideas so that her delicate sensibilities are not harmed.
Not only are the leftist fascists they also seem to be the new Puritans who will purge us of any SINS or Wrong Thinking?
After all...it is for our OWN good. Right? We will thank them someday.........or not.
I literally cannot imagine what'll happen if the driver isn't convicted of murder--if his team introduces evidence that his car was surrounded and being beaten on by the crowd and he had a reasonable fear for his life, panicked, slipped and hit the gas or whatever...try to imagine if he pleads to a manslaughter charge or is acquitted of murder.
Won't happen, of course, we all know he's already guilty, but man!
So why is it that one day, leftists suddenly woke up and found those Confederate statues provocative and offensive?
Actually, it was Dylan Roof that got the ball rolling. That is when the push came to start removing these statues. It takes a while for the wheels of democracy to turn, especially since there are lawsuits to prevent the removal of these monuments.
When someone kills nine people at a bible study in cold blood hoping to start a race war, people sit up and take notice and think "maybe we shouldn't be glorifying these traitors".
"That's my bold, but his point. Violence is justified against certain people if their movement is built on anger and hatred. Those people don't have rights, Quaestor. According to mainstream Republican Senator Marco Rubio if you belong to the wrong group then violence against you is justified."
The Establishment Right is so damned terrified of being called "racist" that it will deny and justify the actions of the violent Left - even after one of them tried to murder GOP legislators on a baseball field.
Their craven, foolish cowardice is astounding, even though I have come to expect spinelessness from the GOPe. Rubio, McCain and the staffs of intellectually moribund relics like NRO and the Weekly Standard don't grasp that nothing they say or do will prevent the Left from smearing them with the same racist brush as soon as it suits the Left to do so.
The antifas apparently are cooking up some huge protest for November 4. If it occurs and violence takes place (and that's a given), what will such publications and politicians do? Pretend it didn't happen? Oh, I know. They'll blame Trump.
That was over two years ago, Freder -- does it really take the left that long to mobilize the hate?
D has it exactly right. Great comment.
"Actually, it was Dylan Roof that got the ball rolling."
So Dylan Roof was set off by seeing a Confederate flag and a statue of Stonewall Jackson?
What about the leftists who see a statue of Lenin in Seattle? He killed a lot more people than Stonewall Jackson did. Does that make them run out and shoot cops or hit people over the head with bike locks or loot Starbucks?
Did the baseball field would-be mass murderer go bonkers when he saw a hammer and sickle flag at an Occupy rally?
How fucking absurd can you be?
Freder Frederson said... It takes a while for the wheels of democracy to turn, especially since there are lawsuits to prevent the removal of these monuments.
Bullshit. It didn't take any time at all in Durham. The mob got together, all democratic-like, and tore that offending war memorial down. It took about 5 minutes. Those wheels are turnin' baby!
Freder Frederson said...
Maryland was neutral in the Civil War. Why on earth are there Confederate monuments in Baltimore. It makes as much sense as a statue of Hitler in Switzerland.
Maryland was sidelined, compelled into neutrality during the war. Baltimore was strongly pro-Confederacy. Heavily German western Maryland was strongly pro-Union. Confederate statues in Baltimore is (was) consistent with the prevailing temperament of its populace.
Here you go.
The Right Thinking Person showing the Wrong Thinking Person the correct way
The future envisioned by those who agree that the wrong thinkers should be punished and it is justified to do so.
Be afraid.
It's really too bad that Baltimore can't send a crew out in the wee hours of the morning that can fix the schools so that they actually teach kids to read.
Freder Frederson says, "When someone kills nine people at a bible study in cold blood hoping to start a race war, people sit up and take notice and think "maybe we shouldn't be glorifying these traitors"."
When by "these traitors" you mean persons who shoot up a bible study in cold blood, I fully agree.
Problem is that I suspect by "these traitors" you mean people who shoot up a bible study in cold blood, and anyone who may have looked at the same websites as anyone who did so, and anyone who have 2 or 3 points of tangential common political views with anyone who did so, and anyone who even has some shred of human sympathy for the tragedy that is the person who shot up a bible class in cold blood.
If we allow you to construct an exception to the rule that we don't hit or physically hurt people - if we allow you to establish and win on the point that certain people don't deserve the protections of the constitution and the law - then we already know that the next step is for you to expand or shift the definition of who are those undeserving people of the constitution's and law's protections.
When by "these traitors" you mean persons who shoot up a bible study in cold blood, I fully agree.
I am referring to the leaders of the confederacy. Dylan Roof was not treasonous, Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis were.
Bullshit. It didn't take any time at all in Durham. The mob got together, all democratic-like, and tore that offending war memorial down. It took about 5 minutes. Those wheels are turnin' baby!
We are discussing the statues in Baltimore, not Durham.
Focus.
In the future,we should only erect monuments to Nelson Mandela and Madame Curie. I know they aren't 100% sound on the gay marriage issue, but they should pass muster for the next one or two generations. Or maybe just erect some abstract piece of shit and claim that it represents tolerance or freedom or whatever.
Growing up, I had a strawberry farm across the street and orange groves down the block. Then, one day, developers came and took out the strawberry farm, then later they took out one orange grove, then another, then all of them. My dad had worked in those orange groves when he was a young man. I miss them, but very few people who live in that Southern California town remember them. Fewer people every day.
That town didn't want to be defined by agriculture anymore, I guess.
I understand that most of the citizens in Baltimore are now black. They're entitled to commemorate or not commemorate whoever they want in the public square. I have no problem with them taking these statues down, but they're crazy if they think that this act will in any way liberate or improve their lives.
@Freder,
Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis were
That's just not clear, Freder. The nature of the federal union then was not understood as it is now. It was the Civil War that forced that changed in the nature of the Union, & the post effects should not be read into antebellum times.
I will repeat again: other than the Bible, there is no subject in the English language that has more words written on it than the Civil War. No historian writes through the lens of "Lee the traitor". None.
Davis was not liked by pretty much anybody, but Lee was considered by friend & foe alike to be a man of exemplary moral character who saw his loyalty first to his state rather than the nation, a view quite common at the time. After the war, no one, even the most ardent abolitionists, thought that Lee should be tried for treason. No one. Get it, no one.
This is the problem with the Left, Freder. You act like your some sort of ultimate moral arbiters, that you guys have the moral philosopher stone. History & the post war American people spoke, Freder, & Lee was not tried for treason. That's it. That's all. So don't throw around morally weighted words like "traitor" when it's really dubious you have the right to do so.
"they're crazy if they think that this act will in any way liberate or improve their lives."
Imagine if someone in Atlanta had to walk by a statue celebrating General Sherman every day. It might not make their lives better to take it down, but it would at least not irritate them every day and remind them of a bitter past.
About a 1/3rd to a 1/2 of the population of the South (including slaves) were also on the side of the North.
"It's really too bad that Baltimore can't send a crew out in the wee hours of the morning that can fix the schools so that they actually teach kids to read."
Hilarious and trenchant. As has been observed, you can pull down statues until the crack of doom, but the Democrat Party needs you to be a dependent underclass and a dependent underclass you shall stay.
Now that tearing down those statues in Baltimore were of the highest priority -- more important than everything else to be done on such an immediate emergency basis -- what effect can we expect on Baltimore's murder rate?
If these statues present such a danger to our society, will people stop killing people there now?
Now that we have patted ourselves on the back for striking back against "hate," will peace reign in Charm City?
@Paddy,
Imagine if someone in Atlanta had to walk by a statue celebrating General Sherman every day. It might not make their lives better to take it down, but it would at least not irritate them every day and remind them of a bitter past.
I grew up in a town in northern Alabama that had strong Union sympathies during the war. There was a Lee Street, a Jackson Street, BUT....there was also Grant Street & Sherman Street. I always thought that "Sherman Street" in an Alabama town was like "Satan Boulevard" in Vatican City, but there it was.
Strangely enough, while there were certainly crazy people, no one ever claimed the presence of Grant & Sherman Street to be the cause of their maladies.
Hey Freder: Should we be tearing down the statues of Lenin? He's worse than anything Confederate. Yet leftists worship him.
He offends the rest of the country though. So the statues of Lenin in Seattle, New York and LA should be torn down right?
Or is this another case of leftists get to make the rules and no one else does?
--Vance
"Maryland was sidelined, compelled into neutrality during the war. Baltimore was strongly pro-Confederacy. Heavily German western Maryland was strongly pro-Union. Confederate statues in Baltimore is (was) consistent with the prevailing temperament of its populace."
My understanding is that the compelled neutrality was literal - the Army of the Potomac was there for just that reason. Imagine the alternative - Wash, D.C., capital of the Union, completely surrounded by Confederate states.
"I honestly didn't expect mainstream Republicans like Romney and Rubio to endorse Antifa violence. I voted for Romney and I thought about voting for Rubio.
I was surprised. I probably shouldn't have been."
Shortest history of the 2016 Republican primary in print.
We're undergoing a ritual of religious purification, which no reason or logic can stop.
The nation must be purified. The sinners must atone for their sins. We must find and root out all sinners. We must cleans the stain of sin. We must all stand unified in purity.
Well, of the sin de jour, anyway.
The winds of sin-fad and sin-fashion are fickle. Especially in the hands of those who just want to fight while appearing righteous.
@BruceH,
The first & sixth verses of the state anthem of Maryland:
The despot's heel is on thy shore,
Maryland!*
His torch is at thy temple door,
Maryland!
Avenge the patriotic gore
That flecked the streets of Baltimore,
And be the battle queen of yore,
Maryland! My Maryland!
Dear Mother! burst the tyrant's chain,
Maryland!
Virginia should not call in vain,
Maryland!
She meets her sisters on the plain-
"Sic semper!" 'tis the proud refrain
That baffles minions back amain,
Maryland! My Maryland!
Guess who's the tyrant & despot they're talking about? None but Honest Abe himself.
You can see why it isn't sung much anymore......
220 people murdered in Baltimore so far this year. More injured from violence.
Number attributable to neo-Confederates, neo-Nazis, white nationalists, or even history buffs? Zero.
Do the moralists and virtue-signalists here care about any of those people killed or wounded?
Get some perspective.
YH, Lee wasn't tried for treason, though that was part of the goal of reconstruction not to have that ugly process. However, he also didn't get his citizenship back. And likely wouldn't have had he lived into the 1870s, as the amnesty act excluded leaders like him. But maybe Grant would have made an exception. Who knows? All to say, the people of that time did in fact make a distinction between the leaders of the Confederacy and the soldiers, though people on both sides now seem to think it's all or nothing.
Of course, had the South not tried to reassert a neo-Confederacy after 1872, and allowed former slaves to continue as valued citizens, we wouldn't be having this problem in our era. And it's the post-reconstruction era, and how the heritage of the Confederacy was intentionally used as a symbol of racism, that is the continuing issue. Healing happens, but part of that healing and reconciliation comes from realizing how symbols have been used over the decades. It's not easy to say, "Just get over it" to people, but that's what has been said to black men and women for a while.
I will repeat again: other than the Bible, there is no subject in the English language that has more words written on it than the Civil War. No historian writes through the lens of "Lee the traitor". None.
Only if you consider the U.S. the only legitimate publisher of books in English. Lee was strippedof his U.S. citizenship and died stateless. Not everyone was covered by the general pardon at the end of the war.
Back in the 1780s, people in the new United States were very concerned about whether a republic, democratic by the standards of the day, could long survive. The examples of ancient Athens and the late Roman Republic were not hopeful.
the solution they came up with was to confirm the primacy of the sovereign states, and give the larger, national government only those powers that they thought essential to its role. The national government would have very little direct influence on the day-to-day lives of most people, beyond delivering mail.
It worked pretty well for a long time. The Civil War was fought over slavery in the territories; until 1862 there was almost no sentiment outside New England to do anything about it where it already existed, and even there, most abolitionist sentiment favored compensated emancipation, not on moral grounds, but as a matter of practicality. But the war created new facts and imperatives, as long wars do.
Other than that one partial exception, the idea of keeping most issues at the state and local level worked well to preserve an increasingly democratic republic, until the Progressives and the New Deal threw that in the bin, in favor of national dominance. And the idea of a nationally dominant government has now been accepted across most of the spectrum.
Which brings me to this: Why are we all so worked up over a statue in a park in Charlottesville, VA? Why did two bunches of people feel a need and justification to descend on that town and hold parades and shout and make veiled threats at each other?
If there is anything in all creation that ought to be a local issue, it is the statuary in a municipal park. And as far as I can see, the demonstration that Spencer was behind had no lasting effect except that the related violence has led towns all over the South to decide to get their confederate statues and monuments out of public view.
Everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY, needs to go home, pop a beer and put some brats on the grill. We have our disagreements, but we are not each others' enemies, despite what people like Barack Obama and Richard Spencer tell us.
"Alabama that had strong Union sympathies during the war."
Interesting. Reminds me a bit of Northern Ireland.
"no one ever claimed the presence of Grant & Sherman Street to be the cause of their maladies."
Probably because over the last century, they had the chance to distance themselves from the symbols and the history. If there was no history of racism in the 20th century, I imagine there would be no problem with Confederate memorials. But the symbols continued, and became symbols for something other than state's rights.
I don't think, at least I'm not saying, statues are the cause of maladies, but they are representative of a civil statement and can be barriers to reconciliation. But, of course, the barriers aren't just on one side.
I'm kinda surprised no one has pointed out that the Taliban and ISIS removed statues and cultural artifacts that they found disturbing.
And they had perfectly logical justifications for doing it. The continued existence of these statues and cultural artifacts were contradictory to their core beliefs, and they had the power to remove them.
So they did.
Now, I strongly suspect that the logical justifications were not the reason why they removed the statues and cultural artifacts. Or at least not the whole reason.
I suspect at least part of the reason was that destroying stuff is fun. At least for some people.
I also suspect that another part of the reason was that displaying your power is exhilarating. At least for some people.
Democrats rewriting history just as their pet mediaswine rewrite the present and the past.
"He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past." - 1984.
@FF,
Only if you consider the U.S. the only legitimate publisher of books in English.
What sort of a lame-ass answer is that? If you know of a book on the Civil War by any reputable historian who takes that view, produce it.
@paddy,
Probably because over the last century, they had the chance to distance themselves from the symbols and the history.
No. The white people who named those streets Grant & Sherman were the children of those who had suffered in the war. Every generation since the war until very recently suffered in poverty or a lower standard of living caused in no small part by these two men, especially Sherman.
The Civil War destroyed the economy of the South. It destroyed its ruling class. The North botched Reconstruction so badly that, at its end, both southern whites & blacks were left worse off, the whites left with no industry & the blacks now surrounded by an even more hostile white population with no federal protection.
Trust me, in my Alabama youth, the wounds of the Civil War still had scabs.
"Civil War by any reputable historian"
This might turn into a circular argument. To be a reputable historian one would have to have this view.
But, of course, the label traitor has both formal and informal meanings. Formally, Lee wasn't a traitor. He did not take up arms against the US while remaining an officer of the United States. He resigned his commission first. So, there were traitors in both armies who wore the uniform of one army while fighting for another. Lee was very straightforward and indeed honorable in this formal respect.
The question about whether Lee was informally a traitor isn't really settled by academic debate, especially since reputable historians shouldn't be making value judgments about moral duties or commitments. That Lee became more of a Lancelot type figure, a celebrated betrayer-hero, in post-Civil War literature is certainly the case, which is why history writing never is settled by one particular era.
Paddy O said...Imagine if someone in Atlanta had to walk by a statue celebrating General Sherman every day. It might not make their lives better to take it down, but it would at least not irritate them every day and remind them of a bitter past.
Why imagine? Put one up, motherfucker! That was the point of Douthat tweeting pictures of Sherman earlier, right? Times have changed and we ought to make sure we have appropriate monuments to real heroes everywhere.
There's a marker for the beginning of the March to the Sea already--it's either on or just off the Carter Center property near Freedom Park if I remember correctly. After the battle of Atlanta Sherman began the march in the direction of what's now Ponce De Leon Ave (I think) and the marker is approximately there.
By the way, I love the talk of nuance and context from people insisting anyone who doesn't agree with them 100% is a Nazi. I love it from smart good people like you, Paddy O, and I love it from smart good Republicans like Romney and Rubio, and I love it from the smart good people of the Media.
I'm too stupid to understand the distinction between Confederate leaders and common soldiers (like the ones the statue in Durham was commemorating--was, since it was torn down by a mob of good, moral, tolerant people) but I'm not too stupid to know that since I'm not on the side of Antifa I must be on the side of the ugly people...no nuance there, thank goodness!
Freder Frederson said...
When someone kills nine people at a bible study in cold blood hoping to start a race war, people sit up and take notice and think "yeah, lets".
FIFY
At least those statues can be stored away somewhere and at some future date, after sanity has returned...ah, what was I thinking.
The librarian at Yale was wise enough to protect the protect the Puritan statue that was defaced by SJWs.
I saw something similar in Istanbul when I was there. The craftsmen who covered the mosaics in Hagia Sophia with calligraphy panels with Quran phrases carefully protected the mosaics as if they expected the Christian world to rescue Constantinople. It didn't happen but, as the old cathedral was being converted to a museum, the panels were taken down and the mosaics are being rediscovered. They were in perfect condition.
I wonder if that has been stopped by Erdogan?
Not all civilizations are able to save their artifacts from the barbarians, as we see in Durham.
Matthew Sablan said...
"I live in Baltimore. You can't get a the city to replace a f-ing lightbulb without 6 months of red tape. I want to know how this got done so damn quickly."
-- Not replacing a light bulb doesn't invite armed, masked rioters to your city.
How would you know? The light bulb is out! It's dark!
buwaya puti said...
I understand the City of Rome, for one, has a great number of statues and other monuments (some in a deplorable state of disrepair) dedicated to an entire society of slaveowners. Or rather, all the ancient parts of the city, now carefully preserved, is such a monument, the greatest one on earth.
We really can't have that.
Don't worry. Much like here, due the feelings of people of African descent, that is also going to be "fixed". The rest of Europe, too.
"Not only that but most of these monuments were not erected immediately after the Civil War, but after World War I, when the Negroes were starting to get uppity and demanding they be recognized as equal citizens."
*********************
Snort! You mean when the racist Democrat President Woodrow Wilson re-segregated the military and tossed blacks out of their civil service jobs?
Is THAT what you mean, Frederson??
p.s. ARM obviously doesn't know what "oligarch" means. Oligarchs don't run for election. Trump's problem is that the real oligarchs AKA the Deep State hate him for usurping *their* power.
@Paddy,
That Lee became more of a Lancelot type figure, a celebrated betrayer-hero
Once again no. Lee was, to his generation, an example of a man of sterling character who was called by what he saw as his duty & it ended up badly. For him & for the nations.
A generation who knew their classics, such as the educated back then did, knew that the essence of Greek tragedy is the clash of competing moral duties that crush the protagonist between them (e.g. Antigone's sacred & family duty to her brothers corpses, vs her duty to the polis). Doing one's duty as one sees it is no guarantee of anything in this vale of tears. That's what they knew then & we've forgotten now.
YH, I'm from the far West, so I appreciate hearing perspectives by those on both sides who are from the South.
"The North botched Reconstruction so badly that, at its end, both southern whites & blacks were left worse off, the whites left with no industry & the blacks now surrounded by an even more hostile white population with no federal protection."
That's certainly the case, the post-Lincoln government wanting revenge and profit.
If the blacks needed federal protection from the hostile white population, then that's all the more reason to acknowledge the responsibility for current crises. The Southern Whites were treated bad but they should have just gotten over it. Why take their rage out against blacks when they were really angry at the North? Because that's human nature, and the way of rage when feeling empowered after feeling shamed for so long.
"If you can't do it proudly, by daylight, you're not ready to do it."
Who is hiding what? The Baltimore city council voted for the statues to be destroyed, they've been subject to repeated vandalism, so the mayor removing the statues in the dead of night was actually saved them from destruction. Of course, the mayor might have chosen to do it at night to avoid traffic disruption, but let's not let that get in the way of a good story.
Takiyah Thompson lassoed that statue in Durham, NC in broad daylight. She's now been arrested. What do you think the odds are of conviction?
By the way, when Lakim Faust shot 4 white men looking to start a race war, Freder.... oh, wait, that doesn't matter, does it? Racist blacks killing white people because they are white are a-ok by you. Not a problem at all, is it?
Race wars are great as long as the whites are losing the war, is Freder's motto. And the rest of the left.
--Vance
The question about whether Lee was informally a traitor isn't really settled by academic debate, especially since reputable historians shouldn't be making value judgments about moral duties or commitments.
History, of course, is written by the winners. The winners of the Civil War were magnanimous and allowed the South to memorialize the heroes of the losers. That, apparently, is no longer allowed.
Joe Johnston was a pallbearer at Sherman's funeral. Sherman had defeated him at every battle. His aide admonished Johnston that hsi health was none too good and maybe he was risking it by attending the funeral , which was held in bad weather.
Johnston replied, "Sherman would do it for me." Johnston died a month later.
We cannot have that relationship with former enemies any longer because "Shut Up!"
Napoleon sent an army to reinstate slavery on Haiti. The considerable wealth of his wife Josephine came from her family's sugar plantation in the West Indies. Napoleon was by any reasonable metric a far nastier man than Robert E. Lee. Why is there no movement to disavow the monuments to this flawed man? There aren't that many in America, but France is infested with them. Why protest only against Confederate slave owners? Are the supreme white supremacists supremely and solely Confederate leaders? The antifa should be more expansive and less nationalistic in their thinking.
"The antifa should be more expansive and less nationalistic in their thinking."
They will develop a Muslim division and go after French civilization but I doubt they know who Napoleon was.
Their first real target will probably be St Denis Basilica.
That's where Charles Martel was buried but the revolutionaries, like those in Durham and Baltimore, destroyed most of the remains of the kings and left only the tombs. Still, as ISIS has shown, tombs can be blown up.
We're not quite there, yet but it's coming.
YH, I think you're idealizing Lee and flattening opinion about him, but I don't have time to dig into commentary from that era. Though, it would be an interesting project. And maybe Lee was universally beloved at the time. He certainly wasn't hated. More of a Rommel than a Hitler?
My comment about Lancelot is more related to how Mark Twain (a son of the South, and particularly poor Confederate at one time) understood that era. Lee, as a symbol, very much fits into the model of Twain's critique. Lancelot is a complicated figure, a beloved hero of the round table, committed to Arthur, while dallying with Guinevere. He was a good man who sowed chaos.
Maybe Columbus is another useful analogy. He was a hero to many for many generations, but in a changing conception of values and identity, he's now viewed as a significantly more complicated person, which is honestly more true to who he really was.
I do want to add I appreciate the comments sections here as the rest of the world makes it impossible to sketch out thoughts and hear thoughtful perspectives and responses.
Paddy O said...If the blacks needed federal protection from the hostile white population, then that's all the more reason to acknowledge the responsibility for current crises. The Southern Whites were treated bad but they should have just gotten over it. Why take their rage out against blacks when they were really angry at the North? Because that's human nature, and the way of rage when feeling empowered after feeling shamed for so long.
"Root causes" are so great. Well, selectively. Sometimes they're very important and sometimes they don't matter at all.
Collective guilt is like that, too.
Oh, and blood guilt--sometimes people are responsible for the sins of their fathers, and their father's fathers, etc, but sometimes they're not.
The important thing is knowing who's a good person and who's an ugly person. Luckily, as of today, that's easier than ever.
Paddy O said...Maybe Columbus is another useful analogy. He was a hero to many for many generations, but in a changing conception of values and identity, he's now viewed as a significantly more complicated person, which is honestly more true to who he really was
Statues to Columbus offend a great many people, Paddy O. I'm certain a good person like you supports taking them down, yes?
He's not even an American, after all! Let's get to work already.
I had direct line ancestors on both sides of the Civil War. And in my extended family almost every example possible of family members on different side- brother vs brother, father vs son, cousin vs cousin, uncle vs nephew. Those of us living today, including me, can't begin to understand the emotions that led to such an armed conflict that it divided families in such a manner.
In the early 1970's I visited some of my shirttail relatives in SC near the Georgia border whose family had been in one place since the revolution. (My direct line ancestors, all of them, kept moving around.) The older ladies all talked about Sherman's March to the Sea as if it had happened to them. None of them were that old. I found out on that visit that Yankee by itself wasn't a word there, and that Damnyankee was one word. Also found out that people there referred to the United States Military Academy at West Point as The Citadel of the North...
That was a century after the Civil War ended. I imagine it will be another century before all such memories are scattered like the wind. This is the United States, and those memories will scatter as people move and intermarry. We're a fluid society. But tearing down the statues seems almost designed to keep those memories alive.
From stories I read, In much of Europe, groups of people remember slights and mistreatment from a millennia ago. Democrats seem determined to go down that road where past injustices are a constant excuse for new injustices against the others, whoever the others may currently be defined by those in charge of the definitions.
"The winners of the Civil War were magnanimous and allowed the South to memorialize the heroes of the losers. That, apparently, is no longer allowed."
Because none of this is really about the Civil War. It's about the 20th century and Jim Crow. The people of the Civil War have long died and as people they are forgotten. The symbols are left, and the symbols are different than the real people. People can respect Lee the person (and I do), but have great difficulty with the way Lee has been used as a symbol.
Truth be told, I like Longstreet much more than Lee, which is probably why I'm not inclined to defend Lee.
Paddy O said...in a changing conception of values and identity
I like that phrase. I'm going to use that, Paddy O, if you don't mind. I like it as a summary of the utter failure of conservatives to conserve anything of value.
The "move to the Left," or "the Progressive slide," don't have that same ring. But "in a changing conception of values and identity" is really quite good.
"I'm certain a good person like you supports taking them down, yes?"
I don't know any statues of Columbus (yet I still remember who he is!), but if a community wanted to take those down, I'd understand. I'm not a fan of statues to Cabrillo here in California, and if asked I'd say those aren't helpful.
@Paddy,
I think you're idealizing Lee and flattening opinion about him,
Maybe, but I'm bolstered in my view that the post-war generation didn't think that it was all about the romance of "The Lost Cause". No, there were men of honor & there weren't.
A man who no one seemed to care much for was Jefferson Davis. Reviled by southern politicians during the war as an incompetent asshole (I withhold judgement because I honestly don't know that history that well), disliked by the northerners as big-time slave owner, he never got much other than disdain in the post-war world.
The South had good generals & awful politicians. Ol' Jeff seemed to be one of the latter.
I wonder how long it'll take Virginia to do something about historic & main traffic artery Route 1 AKA Jefferson Davis Highway.
The tragedy of the black community is not that there are statues to Lee in the square but that no one wants to live within twenty blocks of MLK Boulevard.
Thomas Sowell's "Black Rednecks and White Liberals" includes a long chapter on the history of slavery.
His main points:
* it was a worldwide phenomena running back thousands of years
* virtually all races practiced it
* Indians, Aztecs, and other New World aboriginals in both hemispheres were already practicing slavery when the first Europeans arrived.
* Europeans bringing African slaves to the New World delivered most to Brazil and the Caribbean, not to North America. The slaves they brought were delivered to them by other Africans who had rounded them up.
* slavery was considered just another aspect of life until the mid-18th century, when Europeans and Americans began thinking of it immoral, in part because they regarded it as running counter to Christian thinking AND because Enlightenment values supported individual rights.
* Slave owners such as Washington and Jefferson hated the institution, but they neither could see a way to suddenly release their slaves---people without land, wealth, education or skills---into the generally agrarian population . How would those people survive? Would they turn on their former masters?Many abolitionists were despised, not because of their opposition to slavery but because their views were regarded as utterly idealistic and impractical, for those reasons.
* The British led the cause of abolition, and Americans soon followed. IOW whites were first to end the practice.
* Brazil didn't end slavery until 1888.
* Slavery is thus not some uniquely American or White horror, visited upon innocents blacks who had no knowledge or history of it. Judging the people who practiced it by today's standards is thus ahistorical, foolish and short-sighted.
Of all the WWII leaders, I respect and admire Churchill the most. Churchill said that half of what he knew was wrong, but the problem was he didn't know which half. He got that right. Churchill was an enthusiastic advocate of bombing the civilian population of Germany. As it turns out, such a strategy did not shorten the war and may, in fact, have lengthened it. Should we consider Churchill a war criminal and tear down his statues? His anti-German animus certainly caused the unnecessary deaths of thousands of civilians.......My own feeling is that if you're half right, you're batting .500 in the major league. Churchill's contemporaries Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin got just about everything wrong.......Robert E. Lee was certainly wrong about slavery and states right but does that invalidate all his other good qualities.
I wonder when the flap about the Confederate Cemetery in Madison will start up again.
A Native American is entitled to tear down a statue of Sherman but not a white southerner.
William, I fully expect the Brits to follow suit and start removing statues of 18th and 19th colonial governors, executives, explorers and so on, because imperialism. (Churchill would certainly be included.)
There has already been a case where Oxford University considered taking down the statue of Cecil Rhodes because of the complaints of a foreign student who was offended by it.
She's studying at Oxford - under a Rhodes Scholarship.
Post a Comment