United States Confederate Statues, symbols, and memorials debate thread

[Edgeplay_cgo]

You don't remember Gone with the wind, birth of a Nation and the thousand and one pieces of Jim Crow propaganda.



Nathan Bedford Forest is a complex figure. There was a large number of Blacks in his cavalry brigade. At his going away speech, he was effusive in his praise of them; describing them as "the finest of Confederates." Yes, he was a founder of the KKK, but he reportedly tried to disband it when it started to go crazy. It obviously didn't stay disbanded, eh? He was one of our earliest civil rights activists; launching a number of civil rights suits at his own expense. When he died, over 5,000 Blacks attended his funeral. OTOH, before the War, he was a slave trader. The peri bellum period is very complex.

The house negros vs slave negro dynamic is a real thing, slaves fighting on behalf of their masters isn't a new phenomenon.
[/QUOTE]

Correct. And there was a population of freedmen who mourned the passage of slavery. Life was tough, but secure. You ate. We see the same thing with Osties, former East Germans. There was a controversial high school essay assignment done in a Chicago Black neighborhood. The question was "Would you rather live in freedom or slavery, and why?" A large number of students, perhaps the majority, voted for slavery. The overwhelming reason was, "You eat."

 

[Battlegrinder]

You don't remember Gone with the wind,

For the most part, no I don't. But I do remember the scene where Clark Gable tells a bunch of Confederates that they're idiots and the north will kick their asses, a bunch of them go "nuh uh, we're gentlemen, they could never beat a bunch of gentlemen" in the most entitled, arrogant manner possible, and then in the next scene Scarlett gets a letter about how her husband and "gentlemen" caught disintery and shat himself to death.

Suffice to say I wasn't exactly enamored with the noble lost cause of the south.

birth of a Nation and the thousand and one pieces of Jim Crow propaganda.

No, I haven't seen a movie and propaganda campaign from a hundredish years ago, and given the us population, neither has anyone else aside from like a dozen or so people.

 

[S'task]

No, I haven't seen a movie and propaganda campaign from a hundredish years ago, and given the us population, neither has anyone else aside from like a dozen or so people.

Birth of a Nation is mostly watched by college students studying film history because it's mainly remembered for the technical advances in filmography that were developed for it, not for any other reasons.

Not exactly a bunch of Neo-Confederates that bunch of aspiring Hollywood types...

 

[HistoryMinor]

Bringing the argument to the correct thread.

I find it interesting that you equate the South in the American civil war with Nazis. Aside from the POW camp at Andersonville, I am unaware of an possible justification for this comparison.

As for your remark about 'poor southerners,' yes, the soldiers, especially later in the war were the poor because the way the laws were structured, a rich man could pay to avoid being drafted or send a slave to fight in his place.

Look, you seem to be insinuating that I support slavery or that I'm secretly a neonazi or something just because I don't think destroying our history is acceptable. What's your real problem here?

Someone needs to invent a bot that links to all the white supremacists rationales for the war that riled up poor whites to fight for rich plantation owners

Correct. And there was a population of freedmen who mourned the passage of slavery. Life was tough, but secure. You ate. We see the same thing with Osties, former East Germans. There was a controversial high school essay assignment done in a Chicago Black neighborhood. The question was "Would you rather live in freedom or slavery, and why?" A large number of students, perhaps the majority, voted for slavery. The overwhelming reason was, "You eat."

First off I want a citation for that. Second off, what's your point? Collaborators and ignorant people always turn up. Thirdly, I don't know why you can't eat while free, slavers got rich off of black labor. Fourthly it makes sense that some freedmen wouldn't like the end of slavery, they would no longer be above other blacks in highly segregated areas.

For the most part, no I don't. But I do remember the scene where Clark Gable tells a bunch of Confederates that they're idiots and the north will kick their asses, a bunch of them go "nuh uh, we're gentlemen, they could never beat a bunch of gentlemen" in the most entitled, arrogant manner possible, and then in the next scene Scarlett gets a letter about how her husband and "gentlemen" caught disintery and shat himself to death.

Suffice to say I wasn't exactly enamored with the noble lost cause of the south.



No, I haven't seen a movie and propaganda campaign from a hundredish years ago, and given the us population, neither has anyone else aside from like a dozen or so people.

Grandpa did, and he raised his kids to mirror the values in those films.

 

[Battlegrinder]

did, and he raised his kids to mirror the values in those films.

You do realize that when I requested no inflammatory language, that bare-veiled accusations about someone's entire family being racists is in fact quite inflammatory and insulting, right?

 

[HistoryMinor]

You do realize that when I requested no inflammatory language, that bare-veiled accusations about someone's entire family being racists is in fact quite inflammatory and insulting, right?

Bro, casual racism in the mid 20th century south isn't debatable. That's like saying mid 20th century machismo wasn't homophobic, of course it was. Nobody denies that their abuelo talked shit.

 

[S'task]

Bro, casual racism in the mid 20th century south isn't debatable. That's like saying mid 20th century machismo wasn't homophobic, of course it was. Nobody denies that their abuelo talked shit.

Err... while I in general agree with you on mid 20th century racism, I'm not so sure that the mid 20th century machismo was inherently homophobic. That implies that it was worried or cared much about being seen as homosexual, but since homosexuality wasn't a major concern in the mid 20th century (1930s to 1960s) and the LGBT rights movement really started until 1969... I'm not sure the timeline fits right, since most of that generation wasn't even really concerned with or thought of it much. Not like how racism and white supremacy was a core part of the identity of the Jim Crow south.

Now 1970s and 1980s machismo that developed in the aftermath of the start of the LGBT civil rights movement and in the aftermath of the Sexual Revolution I think you could make a much stronger case was much more inherently homophobic, as many of the adopted things from that... the focus on sexual conquests, the refusal to have emotional intimacy with other men, and other such aspects were very much developed as ways of signalling "not gay" to society and each other.

 

[Battlegrinder]

Bro, casual racism in the mid 20th century south isn't debatable. That's like saying mid 20th century machismo wasn't homophobic, of course it was. Nobody denies that their abuelo talked shit.

I'm aware people were racist in the past. I'm also aware my family is not, and that are hilarously off base with your guesses as to what movies they watched and and how they raised thier children. For example, my grandfather was not even born when Birth of a nation came out, so you'd be talking about my great grandfather, not grandfather. Who was living in fucking Poland at the time that film came out, and I'm reasonably certain that the intentional film industry was too busy not existing to get that movie screened overseas. And when he moved to the states, he did not move to the south, nor did my grandfather live there until after he retired.

This line of conversion is over.

 

[HistoryMinor]

I'm aware people were racist in the past. I'm also aware my family is not, and that are hilarously off base with your guesses as to what movies they watched and and how they raised thier children. For example, my grandfather was not even born when Birth of a nation came out, so you'd be talking about my great grandfather, not grandfather. Who was living in fucking Poland at the time that film came out, and I'm reasonably certain that the intentional film industry was too busy not existing to get that movie screened overseas. And when he moved to the states, he did not move to the south, nor did my grandfather live there until after he retired.

This line of conversion is over.

I have stories about the poles in Chicago and racist northern organizations but okay lol, for some reason you're taking this personally.

 

[Lightershoulders]

I can not in good faith agree to ever raising the flag my brothers of yesteryear fought the traitors who left us. The Marine Corps was split, a true and sad version of brothers killing brothers who would have gladly fought alongside eachother if given a common enemy.

One side won. The other didn't. And that is enough.

As a military man, I can respect certain individuals for their tactics and learn from them. And I do, and have. But I can not respect what they fought for.

The Confederacy should be in museums and at historical sites to remind us of what must never happen again. Not removed and tarnished.

 

[HistoryMinor]

I can not in good faith agree to ever raising the flag my brothers of yesteryear fought the traitors who left us. The Marine Corps was split, a true and sad version of brothers killing brothers who would have gladly fought alongside eachother if given a common enemy.

One side won. The other didn't. And that is enough.

As a military man, I can respect certain individuals for their tactics and learn from them. And I do, and have. But I can not respect what they fought for.

The Confederacy should be in museums and at historical sites to remind us of what must never happen again. Not removed and tarnished.

Does it belong downtown or flapping over highways far away from actual fighting? IDK, I remember them coming out when Obama won then disappearing in 2016, we know what's going on and why it pops up in the west and even fucking canada

 

[Lightershoulders]

Does it belong downtown or flapping over highways far away from actual fighting? IDK, I remember them coming out when Obama won then disappearing in 2016, we know what's going on and why it pops up in the west and even fucking canada

A small part of it can attributed to Kanye West. He has a small following who agreed with him when he wore the Confederate Battle Flag, to remove power from the symbol itself.

The rest I have no idea.

 

[HistoryMinor]

A small part of it can attributed to Kanye West. He has a small following who agreed with him when he wore the Confederate Battle Flag, to remove power from the symbol itself.

The rest I have no idea.

"Kanye West is at fault, not the deep South."

 

[Lightershoulders]

"Kanye West is at fault, not the deep South."

A small part. Very small part.

It was bizarre when I first heard about, and even weirder to see a lanky tall black dude wearing it in chicago after Kanye did it.

 

[Big Steve]

What's this about sending a slave to fight in his place? The Confederacy didn't approve slaves actively joining the Army until the beginning of 1865, after tumultuous debate in their Congress, and only a year after Patrick Cleburne was nearly censured for proposing the idea in the army.

Hell, in 1861 free blacks in New Orleans raised a regiment to fight for their state and the Louisiana legislature literally passed a law to make them disband. (Not surprisingly, the unit was re-organized after New Orleans fell to Union forces and wound up fighting for the Union).

There are stories and reports of slaves shooting, but those are, IIRC, mostly personal assistant slaves who picked up their owners' guns to open fire for one reason or another.

 

[Quickdraw101]

I won't fly a flag of traitors. The confederate constitution literally labeled blacks as inferior and deemed the reason for leaving was because the government tried outlawing slavery. I can understand tombstones, but I see no reason to name public places after their generals or leaders. I don't care if you fly it or not, but I really don't want to see more roads and public places named after them.

 

[Comrade Clod]

The defeat of the confederate states of America was one of the few truly just wars conducted in the 19th century.

 

[ReeeFallin]

There were some dickheads a couple months back who wanted to tear down the stevie ray vaughan statue in houston because they didn't realize he was a rock star and thought it was a confederate monument.

I can't take seriously anyone who doesn't even know what they claim to hate.

 

[Cherico]

That's a complicated question.

Whats the historical value of the memorial? Stuff built right after the civil war dedicated to the dead is in a different catagory then the kitchy crap created by the daughters of the confederacy.

Who does it honor? A memorial made to honor the dead in that 10 year time span after the civil war is different then one made to honor Forrest during the civil rights era.

What about artistic value? There are some asetecically pleasing statue that qualify as works of art and some very noted eyesores that are just ugly (cortasy of the daughters of the confederacy.)

Its probally some thing that should be decided on a case by case basis.

 

[Cyan Saiyajin]

Whatever the reasoning for their construction is I consider this stuff to be art and helps distinguish and decorate the south, its removal will accomplish nothing of value. Getting rid of them will not change minds in any sort of positive way, outside of making people who have lived around these works of art feel like we're intrusive busy bodies that need to find something actually productive to do.

Even if we replaced the art with something else, considering that this is all socially-politically motivated the replacements are going to be someone else's idea of "approved" topics anyway for now, until what, the next group decides that set of statues are offensive or stupid and need to go down? Are you just given a future mandate to random groups of people to replace all art they find offensive forever?

Also as far as only keeping them in designated historical sites I would point out most of the sites they are at could be considered historical. Most southern cities and parks could be considered historical sites and benefit economically from being such. That's why they spend so much money trying to upkeep their old architecture and art around their cities.

What is the sense in hurting a cities ability to operate economically when they rely on being historical sites?