The idea that there are still parks and places named after Civil War Generals from the South

[Quixote1818]

seems odd to me. Why do we still glorify these people? Glorifying people who fought to keep people enslaved? WTF?

[rrneck]

1. Wars leave quite a cultural impression, for good or ill. nt

[demhottie]

2. Making heroes of people that fought to keep you enslaved

My mother worked at a school for troubled teens in the south. She said that people always underestimated them but that they were some of the most insightful students she has ever had. She had some sort of a class trip with them and they came across a civil war statue. She described how hard it was answering their questions about why that person was a hero.

I wish people would take a moment to think about how dehumanizing it is to be confronted with statues honoring people who fought with all their power strength and will for the right to enslave you- to buy and sell and rape and abuse your ancestors.

It's bullshit and those statues need to come down. They are acts of psychological violence against African Americans and they take a serious toll over time.

I see them as no different than having Nazi statues in town squares- utterly fucked up and wrong.

Thanks for addressing this topic.

[EarthGurl2012]

3. Why glorify them from any war?

I imagine there are many who would not like the fact that there are places named after Sherman.

Just sayin

[DemocratSinceBirth]

123. Sherman Won And He Was Fighting Among Other Things To Free Black Folks

Not enslave them...

[Art_from_Ark]

159. Sherman also destroyed countless lives and property in the process

and helped to kindle a deep-seated hatred in the South that lasted for decades. He also had no problem killing countless Native-Americans, including women and children.

[Scootaloo]

181. On the latter point, neither did Washington or Jackson

And we put their mugs on our two most-used bills of currency.

[demhottie]

183. Washington raped his slaves

He has black descendants

[Ken Burch]

205. Sherman is a mixed bag, though.

After the war, he did just as much to persecute Native Americans(his attitude was illustrated by his famous quote "Kill 'em all...nits make lice&quot as he ever did to free African Americans.

And he could have freed the slaves without burning Atlanta. His campaign in Georgia was on the same moral plane as Lt. Calley at My Lai.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

226. "I will make this march and

I will make Georgia howl." Gen. Wm. Tecumseh Sherman

Sherman's march to the sea was nothing like My Lai which was a bunch of stressed out young men seeking revenge. Certainly immoral but not on the same plane as the concept of Total War embraced by Grant and carried out by Sherman.

Total War: "is a war limitless in its scope in which a belligerent engages in the mobilization of all their available resources, in order to render beyond use their rival's capacity for resistance."

[Democracyinkind]

227. In history, there are seldom real heroes. Only in mythology.

Which is fine, since heroism is a mythical/literary concept, not per se a historic one.
I used to glorify Sheridan, until that day that my boss said that I should look at his time as an observer in the Franco-Prussian War.

There's no heroes in history. Just humans - as complicated and as fucked up as anyone alive today.

Then again, there are those random people, that pop up and completely transcend the moral, scientific, cultural and religious limitations that bind the rest of their contemporaries.

[madinmaryland]

177. I think every "Main Street" in every southern city and town should be renamed "Sherman Street"

[Ken Burch]

206. No..."Liberation Street"...and be adjacent to Tubman/Douglass Square.

n/t.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

4. Let the Old South have its memories.

What else do they have?

[theHandpuppet]

218. That old argument really burns me

As if the history and memories of the "old South" belong solely to white people who fought for the Confederacy. Some 180,000 Southern Unionists, mostly from the southern Appalachians, fought to preserve the union, as well as an additional 100,000 southern ex-slaves who fought with the United States Colored Troops. Where are their statues, memorials, parks, the bridges, schools and roads named after these patriots?

By implying that the history of the "Old South" is proprietary to the Confederacy is an insult to the millions of enslaved people -- and white Unionists -- who are also part of Southern history... not that most folks in the South have been taught that some quarter million of their brethren fought and died against the secessionist cause of the stars and bars.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

241. I'm not a fan of the Old South by any stretch.

My family were comprised of Northerners during the Civil War and they fought for the Union so I have no sympathy for the Confederates.

My opinion is if they want to name a college or park after a Southerner then they will do it, but they can't discriminate against anybody regardless of sex, color, religion or other.

The US names some of its military hardware after fallen Native Americans, and I find that more offensive.

I believe that both instances are covered under the first amendment. Try taking that away from the south and see what happens.

I'm all for parks being named after those who have not been recognized, but you can't force that on another group of people no matter how backward they are.

[luv_mykatz]

5. Many people in the South seem to be unwilling to acknowledge that they lost the Civil War.

They are still fighting it, which is why they keep and honor the statues.

It also explains how they vote.

[EarthGurl2012]

17. It really is not about loosing the war at all . . .

I believe it is about pride and family for the most part. It is more of a cultural thing than having to do with the Civil War. Believe me, they know they lost.

An example:

Imagine a large cemetery in a small southern town which has been around since the Revolutionary War, or even born out of the Civil War. You have like nine or more generations of your family buried there, including several who were killed or served during the Revolutionary War, The Civil War, WWI, WWII, Korea, Gulf War, Iraq and Afghanistan. How do you deal with that??? Do you move Mom and everyone out of there? Do you remove the information from the gravestones indicating that they were in the war?

Some look at a pentagram and see a symbol of beauty, others see evil. It really is based on your own personal life experience.

[Egalitarian Thug]

32. So the fact that my family has died at sea fighting wars for the entire history of this nation,

and for hundreds of years before that in service to the British would justify my refusal to move on and accept that the world is now what it is?

[EarthGurl2012]

40. I would have to have move on defined to answer that one.

Celebrating is one thing I do not agree with, however remembering historical events is. A fine line I know.

[Egalitarian Thug]

46. Well, just extend the analogy. I would be justified in hating all you fucking traitors

for committing treason against the Crown.

Or to take a more contemporary example, believing that that those traitorous bastards down south should all be executed for their crimes against both the United States and humanity in general.

And a special note for the tragically impaired among us; I used the above epithets for demonstration purposes only. I neither believe that they are true, nor do I advocate the execution of anyone.

[EarthGurl2012]

49. Sorry, you lost me at hating and fucking . . .

Not really necessary.

[Egalitarian Thug]

51. Too bad for you. If your sensibilities are so easily offended you don't stand a chance. n/t

a chance

[WinkyDink]

110. Nothing about the Confederacy should still engender pride in people.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

126. Give Me a Break

I saw all too well how the vestiges of the Old South used their icons of defeated, rebellious, treasonous leaders to glorify and romanticize the 'southern' way.

Tell me, do you see the beauty of the lash or the whip? Of course not! Remember that next time you visit the grave of someone who used one.

[Ken Burch]

212. That history was used to help create the KKK...an organization founded by those "rebels"

(they weren't ever really rebels at all...they were loyalists to the cause of oppression).

The political leaders of the South STARTED the war, and they did so with no justification whatsoever...when they launched a totally unprovoked attack on Fort Sumter, they forced Lincoln to fight back...if he'd just let them leave, he'd have been impeached and removed from office as a traitor to the Union.

And the stupid thing is, Lincoln at that time wasn't even trying to abolish slavery in the South...he just didn't want it spread to new states. The South should have been happy to leave it at that...they already knew that slavery couldn't go on forever anyway.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

220. ironically

probably all true.

[customerserviceguy]

136. By your logic

we lost the Vietnam War, should we tear down memorials, statues and gravestones of Vietnam vets?

Lincoln wisely called us all to bind up the nation's wounds. The memorials of Southern military figures, while not agreeing or certifying all of what the Confederacy fought for, is part of that.

[Tunkamerica]

257. +1

[Nye Bevan]

6. There's a huge memorial in DC named for a dude who owned hundreds of slaves.

It's called "The Washington Monument".

[David__77]

9. But Washington did not commit treason.

I think that is more pertinent that the slave-owning issue in itself.

[Nye Bevan]

12. Actually, he did. Against the King.

There are always different perspectives to look at stuff like this. Washington and Jefferson were enthusiastic slaveholders, as much so as many Southerners. Is it fair to glorify them and vilify Southern military heroes based upon who happened to be on the winning side?

[David__77]

27. If one is a partisan of the American Republic, then he did NOT commit treason.

On the other hand, if one is a partisan of the confederacy, then those secessionists did not commit treason. Of course there are different views - people disagree. But that does not mean there is not a correct, moral position.

[Kaleva]

30. But even that correct, moral position depends on the view of the individual

The Taliban think they are quite correct and have a moral obligation to execute people for what we'd consider very minor infractions such as a man not wearing a beard or a woman who attends school.

[NYC Liberal]

58. But nobody is proposing to put a Washington Monument in the middle of London.

How many British government buildings fly the American flag?

The United States won its independence and was then recognized by the King and England as a sovereign nation. The US erects monuments to Americans on US soil. The US naming sites in the US after Confederate Civil War heroes is the equivalent of the UK doing the same for American revolutionary war heroes in the UK.

[Uncle Joe]

73. That may be true but the English Civil War has produced its' own set of controversial monuments

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_cromwell#Monuments_and_posthumous_honours



1899 statue of Cromwell by Hamo Thornycroft outside the Palace of Westminster, London

I would wager that if the American Revolution had failed and we were still part of the British Empire, there would still be statues of Washington and the patriots erected on what essentially was English soil.

I would also be willing to bet that other nations; having experienced civil wars or failed rebellions have statues dedicated to both sides of their conflicts, winners, losers and those in the middle such as Oliver Cromwell.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

101. In some circles, there are some who mind digging up Cromwell again.

[Recovered Repug]

13. King George would disagree. nt.

[Tunkamerica]

37. Well, everyone is grateful for your input.

Treason against a state is worse than owning another human. Got it.

We'll make the changes immediately.

[David__77]

68. No, I think slavery is worse, though perhaps less pertinent to the discussion.

Slavery itself was not the issue that divided the Founders from the confederate secessionists. Their treason against republican principles goes much deeper.

For that matter, I'd rather a Frederick Douglass monument to a George Washington one; I'd rather a Harriet Tubman monument to one for Jefferson.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

127. And who called for an end to slavery and freed his slaves.

[Nye Bevan]

138. Washington did not free a single slave during his lifetime.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington_and_slavery

[hughee99]

169. I thought you were talking about another one

the Jefferson Memorial.

[Nye Bevan]

174. That too. And he also raped his female slaves. (nt)

[ChoppinBroccoli]

7. Oh, I'll Go You One Better

My wife works for the Ohio Attorney General, and often has to deal with entities in other States. Once this summer, she had to get something filed in South Carolina. The protocol is that she contacts attorneys who are actually in South Carolina and contracts with them to actually do the filing. But this one particular day, she couldn't find any attorneys in their offices around the State of South Carolina. Why? Because they were all off work observing Confederate Memorial Day.

When she told me this, I was like, "They take a day off work for Confederate Memorial Day? STILL???" And then I got to wondering exactly how one "celebrates" Confederate Memorial Day. The mind boggles. But, as I told my wife that day when she called to tell me about it, what else should you expect from the State that still continues to fly the Confederate flag over its State Capital Building?

[Tunkamerica]

39. That must just be SC. I've never even heard of it. But just looked it up

and SC does indeed celebrate it. May 10th.

[Tom Ripley]

57. The absolutely funniest thing about SC Confederate Memorial Day is its date...

May 10...The death of Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson in 1863 (accidentally shot by Confederate troops) and the capture of Confederate president Jefferson Davis in 1865.
There's a lesson in there...

[Kaleva]

8. By law, they are considered US veterans.

[bluestate10]

10. Irrelevant. Most people of the South don't care about the names, just don't care.

We need to focus on more substantive issues that are worth fighting for. There are some blue areas in the deep South, we should focus on expanding those areas.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

150. Most People of The South Don't Care About their Southern Historical Treasonous Leaders?

Good...let's rename all those schools and streets and tear down those monuments. 'They don't care' and racism doesn't exist in the South. Reminds me of the 'history' books I grew up in Virginia that actually said the slaves were well treated..they didn't mind being slaves....sounds like you have something in common.....ignoring the past.

[aardvark401]

11. Unless you live

in one of those states it is none of your business.

[defacto7]

44. Uh, no.

[intheflow]

14. I was shocked to learn Mississippi celebrates Confederate Memorial Day.

I was living down there for a couple years, went to the library one random Monday only to find it was closed in "celebration".

Made. Me. Retch.

[Nye Bevan]

18. Most Confederate soldiers were not evil slaveholders.

They just happened to be born in the South.

Why is it OK to have a huge memorial for Thomas Jefferson, who owned hundreds of slaves and raped several of his female ones, but not to commemorate ordinary working-class Southern veterans who were maimed or killed on combat?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

141. Oh Good Grief

What next....slaves didn't mind being slaves?

That's literally what Virginia's 'history' books said when I was growing up.

What a load of historical revisionism or in my words...cr*p.

[Nye Bevan]

148. Most 18-year old Confederate conscripts did not own slaves.

They just happened to be born in the South and conscripted into the army. I'm not sure why so many DUers hate these folks.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

151. Right

They were fighting for nothing. Good grief.

[Nye Bevan]

152. Do you understand what "conscripted" means? (nt)

[fightthegoodfightnow]

154. right

It was no one's fault. They were conscripted.

[onenote]

202. In case you hadn't realized, you're losing this argument

[fightthegoodfightnow]

219. LOL

No doubt from someone who thinks the South won.

[onenote]

223. Nah, just another person who understands history.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

224. Oh...ok

Good to know .....LOL.

[intheflow]

258. Why can't they just use regular Memorial Day to commemorate their lost brethren?

Northern states don't have Union Memorial Day.

Also, by bringing Jefferson into the fray you are confusing time periods, making a false equation between the two. Jefferson was a founder - flawed, yes, but someone who advocated for a strong union, living a hundred years earlier than the Civil War. Confederates were, by definition, not slaveholders but people who sought to secede from the Union. They were no more patriots than are the teabaggers calling for the same today. Why they are still "celebrating" their defeat is ridiculous no matter how you slice it.

[Sadiedog]

15. Why do people celebrate Columbus Day?

Why glorify a man who committed the atrocious acts that he did?

[Nye Bevan]

20. Why do we glorify Washington and Jefferson? They each owned hundreds of slaves (nt)

[Sadiedog]

21. I agree. Why? nt

[fightthegoodfightnow]

132. And Both Acknowledged the Pure Evil of Slavery

...and freed their slaves.

[Nye Bevan]

137. No they didn't, not during their lifetimes. General Lee *did* free his slaves, however. (nt)

[fightthegoodfightnow]

139. Actually

They did.

[Nye Bevan]

140. See

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington_and_slavery

Washington did not free any slaves during his lifetime, but relied on his will.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

142. And what part was not true?

The part where he acknowledged the evils of slavery?

[Nye Bevan]

146. Claiming that you find slavery repugnant, but keeping your slaves enslaved until after you die,

seems somewhat hypocritical.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

153. It was

so is defending and celebrating the treasonous actions of a 'culture' that embraced racism, defended slavery, and declared war on America.

[Nye Bevan]

155. Memorializing fallen soldiers is not the same as celebrating slavery or racism (nt)

[fightthegoodfightnow]

158. You Remember Traitors

I won't.

[Nye Bevan]

161. 18-year old farmhands who happened to be born in the South and conscripted into the army

were "traitors"? Really?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

171. Yea Really

Is that seriously your first and primary frame of reference for the civil war?

Give me a break.

[Hoyt]

231. I remember a really funny comment Randi Rhodes made doing a show on racism.

Some fool made the comment that poor farmers didn't fight to preserve slavery.

Rhodes said something like: "Yea, I can see two dirt poor farmers sitting around wondering if they should join the confederate army. One said, I think we better because old Mr. Beauregard ain't gonna pick his own cotton."

[Bake]

77. Excellent point!

Bake
Proud Son of the South

[WinkyDink]

111. We don't; it's a generic "Presidents Day" now. Otherwise, Italian-Americans* celebrate their paisan.

*A group to which I belong.

[billh58]

245. Uh, I believe that you

meant to say "Discoverers' Day"...

[Fumesucker]

16. There are Confederate cemeteries all over the South

They didn't love their families any less because they were on the wrong side of history.

The more I study the era it wasn't the war that screwed up the South so much as the fact that Reconstruction got thoroughly botched, kind of like Dubya did in Iraq after the invasion.

If Reconstruction had gone more like Europe or Japan after WWII, competently run, I think we probably would be in a different and far better country today.

[Kaleva]

19. Many of our military bases are named after Confederate generals

Fort Rucker
Fort Bragg
Fort Lee
Fort Gordon
Fort Benning
Fort Polk
Camp Beauregard
Fort Pickett
Fort A.P. Hill
Fort Hood
Camp Maxey

And the tradition isn't restricted to the Army as the Navy has and has had a number of ships named after Civil War generals.

[JustAnotherGen]

66. That was one of my dad's

Irritants the last few years of his life. He felt it was a slap in the face -

First as a US Army Captain
Second as a Green Beret
Third as a black man of the Jim Crow Era that never turned his back or a tank on his own country.

Really - His quote: we can't have 100% American Fort Names? Yeah - he was born in Alabama!

He got his commission as an officer so he could drive tanks! Guess who he thought was the standard bearer for theater of war using that method? But he never would have petitioned the military to Romnel's name on Fort Hood!

[pinboy3niner]

67. Fort Rommel! :)

I'm sorry you lost your dad. It sounds like he was quite a guy. R.I.P.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

191. As Someone Born on One of Those Bases

It's criminal.

Only reason they are named that is because Southern (and often racist) lawmakers wanted to reclaim their 'culture' and rewrite history.

[gejohnston]

247. all the more reason I'm glad I joined the Air Force.

Other than FE Warren, who was Wyoming's first Gov, they are all named after flyers.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

254. No Civil War Heroes

One of the benefits of Air Force!

[apocalypsehow]

22. It surprises me little to see so many "RKBA" Gungeon regulars taking the slave-holder's, i.e.,

the Confederate, side on this issue in your OP. In fact, it surprises me not at all.

Edit: typo.

[Kaleva]

24. Well, work to change the law if you don't like it.

Confederate veterans have the same status as Union veterans.

[apocalypsehow]

28. As noted: it surprises me little to see so many "RKBA'ers" rush to the aid of anything Confederate.

There is an empathy there, as one can see by browsing about on just about any right-wing, pro-NRA website where the posters don't have to pretend to be something they are not, unlike in our own Gungeon where pretenses to being "pro-gun progressives" have to be maintained in order to keep from being PPR'd.

Thanks for proving my point.


Edit: grammar.

[Kaleva]

34. My guess is that President Obama and many Dems in Congress would support..

the law that gives Confederate veterans equal status to Union veterans.

[apocalypsehow]

42. Your "guess," of course, would be wrong: the Democratic Party has been in the forefront

of stripping trademark status from any number of pro-Confederate organizations as recognized by Congress.

And again: it surprise me not at all to see so many "RKBA" Gungeon regulars rushing in to put on sympathetic airs for the late Confederate States of America. Not one little bit.

[Kaleva]

45. Your'e trying to muddy the waters.

The OP was about Confederate generals and not the CSA. And there's been no effort at all in Congress to revoke the equal status Confederate vets have with Union vets and there probably will never be. Can you name just one member of Congress who is attempting to do such a thing? You speak of pro-confederate organizations, the CSA, NRA and RKBA while most here are speaking of Confederate veterans.

[apocalypsehow]

47. Nonsense: that is called "projection." You're trying to defend the Confederacy, and are now

attempting to change the subject.

But keep defending the status of those Confederate "veterans" you so obviously cherish: it only makes my point for me. Continuously.

[Kaleva]

70. Unable to answer my question?

Who in Congress is working to amend or repeal the law that give Confederate veterans equal status to Union veterans? How many times have you written or called your reps in Congress asking them to amend or repeal that law? Zero?

U.S. Public Law 85-425:Â Sec. 410 Approved 23 May 1958

[apocalypsehow]

84. Unable to refrain from defending the late Confederate States of America?

You've been afforded several opportunities to stop defending that Slavocracy, yet you persist in equating Union veterans with Confederate veterans. Routine stuff from one of our "pro-gun Democrats"....

[Kaleva]

87. Have you ever read my posts in GC/RKBA?

I have no issue with reguiring all semi-automatics have a barrel length of at least 20".

I have no issue with requiring anyone wishing to buy guns and/or ammo to first succesfully complete a safety course and a background check.

I have no issue with restricting detachable magazine capacity for long guns to 5 rounds and for semi-auto handguns, the magazine cannot extend past the butt of the handgun.

The only two guns I own are military surplus bolt action Mosin-Nagents which I have never fired.

[apocalypsehow]

99. 1. The OP is about parks and places named after traitors, not Confederate "veterans," so this

entire sub-thread is a deflection from the OP's complaint in the first place - one I have allowed to proceed because the more our "pro-gun Democrats" ( ) are given the opportunity to rush to the defense of such vile institutions as the Confederate States of America, the better - a record is being built, and it's good that the vast majority of DU'ers who don't venture into the murky abyss that is the Gungeon see this kind of stuff up on the big forums.

2. Confederate "veterans" were not and should be considered "veterans" on a par with Union soldiers: they were traitors. I don't care what some silly law passed when racists had control of Congress says. Neither should any genuine progressive or liberal.

3. Your posts in "GC/RKBA" are as irrelevant as the status of Confederate "veterans" to this OP, and this discussion. But, yes, I've seen your post in that sub-forum, and they are of a piece with the standard NRA talking points that regularly get posted down there, albeit somewhat milder than the usual spittle & froth of the Gungeon regulars. What I've seen more of when it comes to your posts has been in Meta, and that's a curiosity all it's own....

[Kaleva]

162. The OP was about Confederate generals who, by law, are considered US veterans.

Your comment:

" I don't care what some silly law passed when racists had control of Congress says."

In 1958, LBJ was Senate majority leader. JFK was a senator from Massachusetts and Hubert Humphrey was a senator from Minnesota at the time. I'll do some research on how the three voted on the bill and if they voted yea, maybe this can be discussed further in meta about how you implied the three were "racists".

[apocalypsehow]

166. No, it was not: it had absolutely NOTHING to do with their status as "veterans."

Here is the text of the OP, since you apparently could not be bothered to read it:

"The idea that there are still parks and places named after Civil War Generals from the South

Last edited Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:59 PM USA/ET - Edit history (4)
seems odd to me. Why do we still glorify these people? Glorifying people who fought to keep people enslaved? WTF?"

For reasons of your own, that most of us can guess, you rushed in with the "but they're veterans!" defense. That was (1) irrelevant, and (2) an attempt to change the subject.

The OP was talking about parks and other public spaces named after these racist traitors, not some act of Congress that bestowed "veteran" status on people who treasonously took up arms against the United States.

Now, you take to "meta" whatever you wish: the fact remains that those public parks and public spaces should not be named after traitors to the United States who fought a war to preserve slavery, and I don't care WHO was in Congress when that racist, insensitive bill that designated such traitors as "veterans" was passed, it's still a bad law that should be repealed.

Now, are you still finding it difficult to stop defending Confederate "veterans" long enough to denounce, as it should be denounced, the naming of public parks and public spaces after a group of men who attempted to engineer treason against the United States in the name of slavery? Or is that just asking a little too much of you?




Edit: typo.

[Kaleva]

170. It's one's personal opinion that they are traitors. By law, they are not.

If you find the law offensive, work to have to repealed or amended. From reading your posts, I gather you've done nothing towards that so by default, it isn't that important to you. Posting here accomplishes nothing of substance as the status qou will then remain the same.

I don't really care what their status is as they are all dead and have been for a very long time.

[apocalypsehow]

175. Still dodging, and falsely at that. They are traitors "by law," since they had to seek pardons after

the Civil War for the acts they committed while in service of the CSA in order to be restored to their civil rights. Lee and other prominent traitors did so after the war. You do not seek a "pardon" unless you have committed a criminal act - and that's exactly what those who fought for the Confederacy did, to wit, the act of Treason and Sedition. Therefore, the "traitor" definition fits perfectly, and by law.

Now, still waiting on you to express your "personal opinion" whether public parks and other public spaces should be named after Confederate traitors who fought to enslave African Americans?

Answer "yes" or "no," please. Enough dodging.

[Kaleva]

192. You are refering to events well over a 100 years ago. I'm refering to the current status.

OP is also complaining about the situation, the naming of parks after Confederate generals, as it is today.

I'll answer your question if you answer the question I asked of you earlier. What efforts have you made to change the current law giving Confederate veterans equal status to Union vets?? Any? None? It's a simple question which, for some reaon, you refuse to answer. One can only conclude that your refusal to answer is because you really haven't done anything about it and thus really don't actually care. If you did, you'd have readily answered with a long list of the efforts you've made.

[apocalypsehow]

194. Nope, that is not how it works: answer the question put to you.

Should public parks and other public spaces be named after Confederate traitors who fought to enslave African Americans?

What I'm doing about some obscure law is not the issue, either in the OP or in the sub-thread. What is very much an issue is whether a poster who curiously seems to be very worried about the status of Confederate "veterans" is going to give us his "personal opinion" on whether it is acceptable to name public parks and other taxpayer-funded venues after those who wished to keep African Americans in chains. This is really not a hard question to answer for those with progressive values and liberal beliefs - why won't you?

Answer the question put to you: yes, or no, please.

Edit: typo & extension of remarks.

[Kaleva]

196. I'll ask you again.

What efforts, if any, have you made to change the law giving equal status to Confederate veterans? Your answer will give me an idea if you actually do care about the topic brought up by the OP.

You say the law is obscure but I think it's important because if the law were amended or repealed, which would strip Confederate vets of their equal status with Union vets, it'd be alot easier to force the changeing the names of parks and so on named after Confederate veterans.

[apocalypsehow]

197. I'll ask you again for the fifth time in this thread:

Should public parks and other public spaces be named after Confederate traitors who fought to enslave African Americans?

It should be an easy question for someone with progressive values and liberal beliefs posting on Democratic Underground to answer. Why won't you?

[Kaleva]

211. Your comment

"It should be an easy question for someone with progressive values and liberal beliefs posting on Democratic Underground to answer. Why won't you? "

You'll not find a single post here of mine where I claim to be a progressive or liberal. You will find posts where I identify myself as a moderate.

I've already answered you question by responding that I didn't care one way or another if parks or such are named after Confederate generals. If people want to change that, they can go ahead and do so. If not, that's fine with me too. A rather moderate view on the issue wouldn't you agree?

If you'd like to ask me next how I voted in the last election, that info I posted in the Michigan group.

Now what I find interesting in this and other similiar threads is people who profess to be outraged but provide no evidence they do anything about it other then say they are outraged.

[apocalypsehow]

213. So, your answer is "I don't care." That's very curious, "moderate" or no.

Really? You don't care one way or another if public parks and other public spaces are named after Confederate traitors who fought to enslave African Americans?

Really?

Oh, well, you finally dropped the evasion and obfuscation and answered the question: bookmarking for future reference.

"You'll not find a single post here of mine where I claim to be a progressive or liberal"

Of this, I have no doubt.

"...I identify myself as a moderate."

Uh-huh.

"Now what I find interesting in this and other similiar threads is people who profess to be outraged but provide no evidence they do anything about it other then say they are outraged."

It's called a Discussion Board, where folks, like, discuss things. What really irritates you is that you were not allowed to get away with diversion and obfuscation in this sub-thread.

[Kaleva]

214. This is a place where people can discuss what they are doing about what outrages them.

So, what have you done to rectify the parks and public places named after Confederate generals? This is a discussion board and you are free to discuss your efforts. If you haven't done anything, which I assume to be the case by your refusal to answer, that's fine with me. Not everyone is capable of action other then posting in a discussion board.

[apocalypsehow]

215. As already noted: what really irritates you is that you were not allowed to get away with diversion

and obfuscation in this sub-thread. That is why you continue this ridiculous chase down this absurd rabbit hole of a notion that because someone has an opinion about something and expresses it on a Discussion Board, they must, perforce, run right out and jump on some activist bandwagon regarding it.

Now, you have answered the question - you don't care whether parks and other public places are named after traitors who fought to keep African Americans in chains - and continuing to pursue this silly line of reasoning, one unrelated to either the OP or the issue at hand or the question put to you, is simply an exercise in trying to deflect from the truly appalling answer to that very question put to you.

Enjoy your stay at DU. One day, that exit door is going to be shown.

[Kaleva]

225. It's human nature for someone to take action on what outrages them.

If you say you are outraged by an issue but do nothing about it and I say I'm not outraged and I do nothing, the end result is the same is it not?

[apocalypsehow]

243. Again: what really irritates you is that you were not allowed to get away with diversion and

obfuscation in this sub-thread. That is why you continue this ridiculous chase down this absurd rabbit hole of a notion that because someone has an opinion about something and expresses it on a Discussion Board, they must, perforce, run right out and jump on some activist bandwagon regarding it.

Now, you have answered the question - you don't care whether parks and other public places are named after traitors who fought to keep African Americans in chains - and continuing to pursue this silly line of reasoning, one unrelated to either the OP or the issue at hand or the question put to you, is simply an exercise in trying to deflect from the truly appalling answer to that very question put to you.

But you go right on pursuing such lines of reasoning as "I don't care" regarding the matter of parks and other public places that are named after the treasonous men who plunged the United States into the bloodiest war in its history in order to keep African Americans in chains. Such posting behavior almost always catches up to folks on DU after a time, and a PPR follows.

All the rest of this diversionary jazz about "taking action" on an obscure law that only came to my attention during the course of this sub-thread is simply that: diversionary jazz, meant to deflect attention away from the very real ugliness of the expressed view - your expressed view - that it is a matter of moral indifference whether parks and other public places are named after the traitors who brought us four bloody years of Civil War in order to perpetuate the hideous institution of slavery.

Edit: typo.

[Kaleva]

248. But you do nothing about what you say outrages you.

Not everyone is capable of action though. Some may have very valid reasons for not doing anything. Mayb you do to. I don't know.

[apocalypsehow]

249. Sure I do. What really irritates you is that you were not allowed to get away with diversion

and obfuscation in this sub-thread. That is why you continue this ridiculous chase down this absurd rabbit hole of a notion that because someone has an opinion about something and expresses it on a Discussion Board, they must, perforce, run right out and jump on some activist bandwagon regarding it.

Now, you have answered the question - you don't care whether parks and other public places are named after traitors who fought to keep African Americans in chains - and continuing to pursue this silly line of reasoning, one unrelated to either the OP or the issue at hand or the question put to you, is simply an exercise in trying to deflect from the truly appalling answer to that very question put to you.

But you go right on pursuing such lines of reasoning as "I don't care" regarding the matter of parks and other public places that are named after the treasonous men who plunged the United States into the bloodiest war in its history in order to keep African Americans in chains. Such posting behavior almost always catches up to folks on DU after a time, and a PPR follows.

All the rest of this diversionary jazz about "taking action" on an obscure law that only came to my attention during the course of this sub-thread is simply that: diversionary jazz, meant to deflect attention away from the very real ugliness of the expressed view - your expressed view - that it is a matter of moral indifference whether parks and other public places are named after the traitors who brought us four bloody years of Civil War in order to perpetuate the hideous institution of slavery.

But thanks again, BTW, for permitting me to further highlight your callous, ugly indifference to the feelings of African Americans whose ancestors were enslaved by the very Confederate traitors who fought to keep them in chains - the same Confederate traitors who you have repeatedly stated that you "don't care" whether their statues remain, their names memorialized in parks, streets named after them.

It's very instructive for other DU'ers regarding the typical "RKBA" Gungeoneer attitude.

[PavePusher]

72. No-one has "defended the Confederacy". (Projection, indeed...)

What they've done is cite the laws, some possible reasons for them, and propose courses of action for you.

[apocalypsehow]

85. Oh yes they have. Simply denying a plain, indisputable fact does not diminish the fact. Pro-tip. n/t

[PavePusher]

86. What "plain indisputable fact"?

Please cite to a comment where anyone "defended" the Confederacy.

I'll wait.

[apocalypsehow]

97. If you have trouble manipulating your mouse to scroll up and down the screen, visit your

local retailer for a replacement. I'll wait.

[PavePusher]

103. I've already read the comments.

Cite the exact post you are claiming defends the Confederacy, please. I can't seem to find it.

[apocalypsehow]

105. "I can't seem to find it" - Perhaps the problem is visual, then. Lenscrafters? A new monitor?

These are solutions to consider moving forward.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

124. Right

Let's just honor those who declared war on the United States.

[apocalypsehow]

125. And that poster has spent a good deal of this sub-thread pretending that he can't "see" it...

...as if that's really believable.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

129. defend?

How about you take a moment to condemn the Old South and their treasonous leaders?

[LanternWaste]

94. If and only recognizing Zhukhov's strategies in '43 and '44 are a like defense of Soviet-style commu

If and only recognizing Zhukhov's strategies in '43 and '44 are a like defense of Soviet-style communism and the gulag system...




As for me, I can point to the commanders of many armies of many nation from the Napoleonic era to the here and now, and appreciate their application of tactics on the battlefield without glorifying the regime for which they fought...

Or does my admiration of Lord Wellington mean that I secretly want the US to be a colony of the crown again?


Post script caveat-- I do not own a gun, never have, and by the grace of God, never will.

[apocalypsehow]

100. Benedict Arnold was a brilliant tactician, too: why not name an Army post after him?

To ask the question is to answer it: he was a traitor to his country, just as the Southern generals were.

This "Zhukov" and "Wellington" silliness is simply a distraction, an attempt to change the subject: neither of those gentlemen were Americans, and neither of them betrayed the United States of America.

Please try again.

[LanternWaste]

106. Boadicea should not have a statue in Britain? Vlasov not in Russia? Broaden your historical perspec

Not distractions- many people perceive military conflicts and the leaders within them as part of history. A statue of Napoleon in Belgium-- the horror!!!

So it's not a question of me trying again, but merely a question of you allowing your opinions to evolve beyond dogma.

Boadicea should not have a statue in Britain? Vlasov not in Russia? Broaden your historical perspectives, then you may lecture-- til then, you're simply ineffectual and dogmatic.

Washington owned slaves, right? Bad man or good man? Plato condoned slavery? Smart man or idiot? (Rhetorical questions-- answer them by yourselves, to yourself, and honestly this time...)

[apocalypsehow]

107. More deflection. Answer the question: should Benedict Arnold have a statue at West Point?

Yes, or no?



If your answer is "no," then your answer about naming Army Posts and military bases after Southern generals who betrayed their country every bit as much as he did has to be "no," also, "historical perspec" (whatever that is) or no.

[glacierbay]

79. Wow

[fightthegoodfightnow]

143. LOL

So f&cking true. About says it all. Agree completely!

[billh58]

238. What else would you

expect from the neoconservative Libertarians who dwell in a dark gungeon?

[BlueMan Votes]

23. because that's their culture and heritage...

like a lot of things are.

[EarthGurl2012]

33. You know, this is a stereotype.

[apocalypsehow]

35. Nope: it's a reality. Especially when it comes to the entire "RKBA" movement, which is a right-wing

phenomenon, and cause.

[Kingofalldems]

113. Amen brother!

Got off to a bad start with you a couple years ago. My mind is changed. Good job.

[apocalypsehow]

133. Thanks for saying so; I don't remember what we got cross-threaded about, but I apologize

for my part in it (I honestly don't remember, so it might have been all me, being an a**hole for some reason; it happens sometimes, and I'm the first to admit it), and am glad that you have changed your mind about me.

[BlueMan Votes]

38. actually- it's part of the culture and heritage scene from 'oh brother..."

[Egalitarian Thug]

52. You know that a lot of us have actually lived there and seen the reality that still pervades

the culture there, right?

Racists and bigots exist everywhere, it's just that most places don't put them in charge. The "New South" is a PR campaign, reality is what still rules there.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

135. Right

It's a ...what did you call it in your first post on this board.....a 'cultural' thing.

A culture that romanticizes treasonous rebellious leaders now embodied in statues that show no signs they ever used the whip or lash in human bondage.

[Tunkamerica]

41. You know this is from a movie, right?

[EarthGurl2012]

48. Nope, sorry.

I was referencing the culture and heritage being related to the idiots in sheets.

[SmileyRose]

25. you don't get it

You aren't going to get it.
That's OK.

[apocalypsehow]

31. Exactly what, pray-tell, doesn't the OP "get"? Please spell it out for us, specifically....

[OldDem2012]

26. Weee! Another thread offering the opportunity to bash the South! Trashing now....nt.

[sigmasix]

29. Lots of Teabaggers still want to fight that war

This stuff is alive and well because a large number of cowardly racists know that if they display their true feelings about their fellow Americans, most good people will shame them- so they hide behind manufactured heritage arguments.

The question before America in the time leading up to the civil war was: does the federal government have the right to enforce the primacy of the federal bill of rights over states' restrictions about who was an American citizen and what those basic liberties were.

The civil war was fought so that elitist racists didn't get to decide that civil rights could be restricted by the states.
And now Teabaggers want to re-fight that war because they aren't convinced yet.
It's been more than 100 years since these radicals lost and were proven wrong- why do so many Americans think that Teabaggers should be treated as legitimate political agents with a right to a voice in our political system?
Shouldn't they have to give this whole "State's Rights are a constitutional primacy" propaganda up, since they lost the argument in the legislature and on the battlefield?
In fact- I'm sure they had to sign some papers to that effect to become citizens again after the war.

[EarthGurl2012]

36. Teabaggers are everywhere.

They worship Limbaugh, they are fighting his war, not the Civil War.

[Tunkamerica]

43. Apparently lots of people on this board do as well, since there isn't a week that doesn't

go by where there isn't some thread that turns into an excuse to bash everyone south of a make-believe line.



for those that continue to miss it.

[coalition_unwilling]

60. Your heart is in the right place (I think) but you have a very poor understanding of the

root causes, and nature, of the U.S. Civil War.

To wit, the question before America in the time leading up to the civil war was NOT "does the federal government have the right to enforce the primacy of the federal bill of rights over states' restrictions about who was an American citizen and what those basic liberties were." That question had been decided by the Taney Supreme Court in the Dred Scott decision, a decision with which many Northern and Western Americans of the Abolitionist stripe were unhappy, but a decision nonetheless.

The question before America in the time leading up to the civil war was this: do the people through their representative government have the power to restrict the spread of insidious forms of commerce (like human bondage)? A secondary but intricately related question to that was this: does a subsection of the people have the right to leave (or 'secede') from that Union when they are unhappy with that Union's perogatives?

Now your typical Alabama or Wisconsin farm boy may have had other motives for enlisting than the abstract questions laid out above. Having grown up on a farm myself, I can attest to the stultifying boredom of farm life and can guess that the opportunity to travel and get some excitement played a huge role in the average farm boy's decision to enlist. Add to that the question of slavery's morality or lack thereof as a motivator among a minority of the population on either side.

[graham4anything]

184. YUP! and don't forget their hero Ron Paul and David Duke were intertwined.

sheets to the wind (including 2 scissor holes)

and an aside-looking over the names of who has replied to this long thread...(but not naming them specifically)-

it's interesting to see on this thread two of the largest posters here who are on the gun threads too- Pro-NRA, pro-Gun, pro-bring guns into bars and malls and theatres defending the confederate army here.

it should not have been a surprise to me, but it was.

and why do those repub/tea/libertarians think if there was another civil war, the result were any different? it wouldn't be. They would still get their ass kicked.Much like Mitt did.

[SpartanDem]

50. Because Lincoln in a move heal the country gave Confederate and Union vet equal status

so that allowed things to be named after them. I sometimes wish he didn't that when someone tries to whitewash the south's history.

[WCLinolVir]

53. Well I live in Richmond, Va., and it is changing, and most say it's a good thing.

I see all of these statues of the confederacy and they were the ones who burnt this city, and left the citizens to starve. I walk around the Shockhoe area and note the slave trail markers, as selling slaves was big business here, and am looking forward to the day when the south has to put up a rebuttal to all this visual rhetoric. If you have read about the function of slavery, the laws enacted to support it, the day to day aspects of life with slavery, the monetary function of slavery, then you understand just how pervasive and insidious was the pathology that allowed people to do that to another person. Granted there were some slaves that had status as individuals. But not many. And it did little to counter the culture of violence that was inherent with slavery.
I went to an auction in Roanoke of KKK memorabilia. I had to see who would show up and what would this be like. And for the most part it was a mix of people who seemed defensive and somewhat uneasy to be in the spotlight as they bid on items. But unapologetic.The most notable item to me was a photo taken in the thirties in Roanoke, of a large group of Klansmen, women and children, all in whites, minus the hoods. There had to be about 150 people in that photo. And it was a known photo. No effort to hide identities. Just an annual lodge get together. I imagine the war helped break up the lock that organized racism had on the southwest part of Va.
They had a big controversy when they tried to put up a statue of Arthur Ashe here in Richmond. Racism. Anti-gay.
It is funny, that kids here were taught that the Union army burned down Richmond, which isn't true. There are a number of historical inaccuracies that were given as fact. It is apparent that there has been an effort to correct them. But you still hear and read comments about outsiders and libs trying to tell lies about the south. Even the museums are lying. Yeah right.
I say feel free to make any comments you may feel are valid, even if you don't live here. As you can see, the south has been fooling itself long enough. And lying about the damage done.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

144. I grew up in Richmond

...and always thought Monument Avenue should be called Treason Boulevard.

[WCLinolVir]

195. I know what you mean.

I look at them on horseback as if they are going somewhere, or have been somewhere legendary, and just see the downtrodden. as if they needed to be above the mire, or be sucked down. Maybe someday instead of throwing Aunt Jemimah syrup, someone will lay some bodies underneath the horse hooves to signify the reality unspoken. Tempting. Maybe a blindfold on all of them. I keep thinking that this city is over 50% African American. We should be able to do something. What I'm not sure. I'm pretty sure people must get mixed messages when they visit here. Come to Virginia!! See the road to revolution! Tour Poe's house. Look at all the statues of men who fought for slavery and subjugation, cause cheap labor made the south rich!! Tour our great presidents' home who just couldn't live without slaves!! Don't forget to buy some wine.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

221. All True

It's crazy. I have to admit, in the decades since I grew up, thank goodness Richmond is changing. Heck, both Richmond and Henrico County elected Obama.

[gort]

54. Don't forget the Jefferson Davis Memorial Highways

We actually had one in Washington State. It was pushed by the United Daughters of the Confederacists in the 1920's probably in response to the Lincoln Highway.

[godai]

82. In NOVA! n/t

[Neoma]

55. I've had ancestors on both sides of the war, from the volunteer state.

I didn't name any signs, and I'd hope people will realize that broad brushes are truly wrong in any regard. I don't glorify anyone, and I know a lot of southern people who don't give a shit about the civil war, or what names streets are named after.

History is a little more complex than, "Well, their southern, thus they're evangelical, racist, and want slaves, incest, and all of them have confederate tattoos on their ass." At least, that's what it feels like people on DU talks about every time southern bigots are mentioned. It gets old.

[Hippo_Tron]

56. The reason is simple, we never forced the traitors to repent for their sins

In fact, we let them come right back into power after the war ended.

The Civil War solved two things. It ended slavery and it put to rest the question of whether or not states can secede if they don't like what the federal government is doing.

What we should've done is keep the south under military occupation for another decade or two, and killed a few hundred more members of the Ku Klux Klan until they gave up. Anybody who was a political leader in the Confederacy should never have been allowed to return to a position of power again. Instead we just allowed the south to go back to their ass-backward society that they had before the war.

The result was 90 years of Jim Crow and likely an eternity of celebrating Confederate leaders.

Germans don't name parks after Nazi generals because when we occupied Germany we forced them to tour concentration camps and in some instances dig up mass graves. We shoved it down their throats that the Nazis were evil and that they were responsible for allowing this evil to happen. It took a few years, but they finally accepted it. And today Germany is an extremely progressive society.

[coalition_unwilling]

63. Not to get all theological on you, but I don't think you can force anyone to repent

for his or her sins. In order for there to be repentance, there must first be a recognition that one has sinned. I somehow don't ever get the feeling that the Southern traitors ever felt as though they had sinned. Indeed, the advent of the "Lost Cause" mythos in the years following 1865 suggests that many Southerners viewed their cause not as a sin but as a noble, albeit doomed, undertaking.

[Hippo_Tron]

109. I think years of occupation and re-education would've made them get the message

Again, I'm sure the Germans felt they were right in World War II. We fixed that.

[LeftInTX]

59. We have Robert E Lee High School here in San Antonio

I was a little shocked when I first moved here. Up in Wisconsin, we had Grant this, Grant that....We don't have anything named after Ulysses Grant around here. Oh well, it was a long time ago.

We have Kennedy High School which opened while he was alive. And we have a lot of things in South Central Texas named after LBJ.

Now, a real slap in the face would be if they start naming schools after Rush Limbaugh.

[Sherman A1]

61. The Irony here

is pretty entertaining....

[coalition_unwilling]

62. What do you mean by 'we,' white man? JK. On a serious note, I don't think having parks and

places named after them exactly 'glorifies' them so much as it fixes them in the 'mystic chords of memory' (to quote Lincoln's First Inaugural Address):

"The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battle-field, and patriot grave, to every living heart and hearthstone, all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature."

http://www.ushistory.org/documents/lincoln1.htm

Man could that guy pen a line or what?

[davidn3600]

64. They still fly the Confederate flag

Tampa, Florida

[img][/img]

[graham4anything]

65. YES I agree. Same with those who still fly the Dixie Flag. Spits in the face of America & Blacks.

And the odd thing is w/ regard to generals & Jeff. Davis- in any other country they would have been hung for treason after the war.

not to mention-THEY ARE LOSERS, utter complete failures.
Why have a statue for a failure, loser anyhow.

[brokechris]

69. nothing wrong with remembering

I am biracial and have toured several civil war battlefields. It is very moving. Would you prefer this history to be scrubbed?

[JustAnotherGen]

71. I'm bi-racial too

A battelground? That's fine. Naming your bases after KNOWN enemies (they were their own separate country) that fired on your country? Not cool?

Separate a battlefield from a US Military Base.


And I know folks like to pretend it was really sweet and cute that those folks stood up for their rights - but they were NOT Americans when they did that. Jefferson Davis? Confederate flag? Confederate Government? Confederate money? Those tell me we were at war with another country - at least that's what we were told in my Western NY grade school as a kid.

[brokechris]

78. And I was taught that we were all Americans--that we didn't let our brothers

leave the Union, we wanted it to be held together because we did not consider them to be able to separate themselves out.

When I see the names, it makes me remember that we are all brothers (even with people who we disagree with and might not want to be part of) so to remember them softens me toward my fellow man. Brave men fought on both sides, good generals. Let the dead be remembered. It is harder to demonize them (as we might a Hitler) because they were OUR OWN even though we disagreed. I have siblings who I disagree with on everything--but they are still my blood. It was brother against brother and I don't forget that those people were Americans.

When people see their brothers as aliens--worthy of being killed--then they keep the hate alive, they can't heal. Only by loving our fellow man--flawed though he ALWAYS is, can we have healing and peace. (and yes--I am thinking of the ME as well)

I am against all war--so I find the entire thing tragic. And everyone is lucky that I was not president--because I likely would have just let them go. I don't have the stomach for war--and that was a particularly brutal one. To me--they all should be remembered simply in recognition of the horror that they endured.

[PavePusher]

88. Very well said. Kudos to you. n/t

[brokechris]

117. thank you

we need to honor the humanity in our brothers in order to heal.

[JustAnotherGen]

91. That IS very well said

But I come from the Military class in this country . . . I was raised in the culture - and I see zero difference between Jefferson Davis and Adolf Hitler.

None at all. There is no difference between the men that shot at Johan Von Bargerstock (Great Great grandfather that fought for the USA out a western PA unit) and the men that shot at Dieter Von Bargerstock (Grandfather) in Germany and North Africa during world war II.

Now - being born at Rammstein AFB/Weisbaden (then) West Germany and spending my formative years in the 1970s in Germany . . . I can tell you - our harsh approach at the close of World War II created a people who were kind and didn't hold on to the glory of the cause that lead them to be the 'losers'.

You've got to admit - brother to brother and all of that stuff aside - You gotta admit . . . It's kind of funny to see people who are so wed to their heritage of being the loser in an epic war. And it was epic - the loss of human life. Yet they hold onto that.

It's funny - because it makes you think . . . Why was their 'cause' so Noble and worthy of holding up as a shining example of the greatness of America? Because that's how they portray it.

I hate war. I saw what it did to my dad. I saw how my country deliberately and maliciously poisoned my dad with chemicals then tried to play innocent and carefree. I remember him screaming bloody murder in the front hall closet in the middle of the night when I was a little girl. But - I won't ever give one ounce of respect or 'nobility' to the foreign enemy that was the Confederate States of America. I will not give them anymore sympathy than I give the Germans who rained down Blitzkreigs on London.

[brokechris]

119. I see nothing whatsoever funny

about the loss of lives. Sorry. I just can't/don't/won't see it your way.

The thing is--it is easy to hate people like the Southerners and Nazis because they put and denigrated down a whole class of people.

We can feel superior because we would never do such a thing.

And yet--even the "enlightened and self-proclaimed super-intelligent" people right here on DU sometimes exhibit hatred and intolerance toward their fellow brethren over a simple, small difference of opinion.

I don't want to go down that path.

I am a Quaker. I practice peace and tolerance to the best of my ability.

Hatred is hatred. I don't practice it. I look at a monument--and what fills my heart is the remembrance of a great tragedy--and that we need to love our brothers so that it doesn't happen again.

[Nye Bevan]

160. Anyone who sees "zero difference" between Jefferson Davis and Adolf Hitler

needs to take some history lessons.

[graham4anything]

188. I am Jewish and the connection between Ron/Rand Paul & Jorg Haider is very easy to see.

leave it up to you whether that is or is not the same as Davis/Hitler.

There is ZERO difference between Haider and the Paul frauds.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

122. Anyone who declared war on America

....is no longer an American and never will be despite the historical revisionism of some.

[Xithras]

74. Because most honestly didn't look at it that way.

You've got to remember that there was no U.S. Army in 1861. Each state had its own military units, and those units answered to their governor. In the case of national war, the individual states would place their armies under a central command (our current national Army wasn't created until 1917).

That's why you get guys like Robert E Lee, who freed the slaves he inherited, opposed the dissolution of the Union, and was married to a woman who advocated emancipation for all slaves (she was also George Washington's great-granddaughter), fighting for the South. Not because they were evil or defending slavery, but because they were military officers within the existing military command structure who were simply following the command structure they'd always followed.

Lincoln and Johnson both recognized this, which is why full amnesties were extended to the soldiers and officers who fought for the South, and why those soldiers were granted Veterans statuses equal to those of the soldiers who fought for the Union.


Or, look at it this way: Why do we glorify and respect soldiers who fight for America today, when they're largely just fighting for control of oil, to keep brown people under control, and to preserve the economic interests of the powers that be? They are, after all, just occupiers who are killing people in their own homelands, right? Shouldn't we look at them with disdain too?

NO. We don't hold it against the soldiers because we understand that they are simply doing the duty for the country they swore to protect, and following the orders handed down from the politicians above. I think that GWB is an evil man for what he did to Iraq. I don't think that the American soldiers who served in Iraq share any of that blame. I think that the Vietnam war was despicable and evil, and yet I don't hold it against the men who were drafted and sent over there to shoot people who were simply trying to drive foreign powers out of their homeland.

The Confederate soldiers are no different. The blame for the war lays with the politicians who started it an the Confederate leaders who chose war over peace. It belongs to the major slaveholders who demanded it, and the greedy capitalists who believed that the value of some humans was limited to what they could fetch at auction. The rank and file soldiers and officers who fought and died 150 years ago were no different than the rank and file soldiers and officers who fight and die today. Their government drafted them, it ordered them to do something, and they did it.

[MadrasT]

93. Mostly agree but

Not entirely true.

There absolutely was a United States Army in 1861 (though it was very small, around 16,000 men if I recall correctly). It was rapidly augmented with volunteers who fought in the name of their states.

Robert E. Lee resigned from the US Army in April 1861, after being offered its command, in order to defend his home state - Virginia.

It was all about your state back than.

(I mostly agree with everything you wrote, but had to nitpick about the statement that there "was no U.S. Army in 1861".)

[Travelman]

75. Ever been to Russia?

Those people will put up a statue just because it's Tuesday. They have memorials all over the place to some considerably less than savory people. There are still the occasional monuments to Stalin around. They still have a huge reverence to the the Romanovs. Lenin was not exactly a super-nice guy, but they have his tomb right there on Red Square.

People have their historical characters. Many are flawed. We honor Patton, who certainly was no angel in any sense. We honor, as noted, Washington, Jefferson, and many other plantation-owners of the period. Everyone at Arlington is buried within sight of Robert E. Lee's house, but the house still stands. We honor Ike, who engaged in some rather nasty behavior himself, cheating on his wife while he was in England.


Let people have their monuments. When history decides that they're no longer worth having, people will tear them down.

[MADem]

83. There's a confederate soldier statue in York, ME....

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1915&dat=19941013&id=HgxHAAAAIBAJ&sjid=GPgMAAAAIBAJ&pg=5663,2764829

[cordelia]

80. Wow, there hasn't been a South bashing thread here in

what - 13, 14 minutes?

Very tedious and small-minded.

[Odin2005]

81. IMO those "memorials" are equivalent to Germans memorializing Nazis.

The Confederacy was evil, based on an evil ideology that glorified slavery, and everyone who fought for it was a fucking traitor.

[Nye Bevan]

90. So should any memorial for anyone who was a slaveholder be taken down?

How about a memorial to someone who has been proved to have raped his female slaves?

[LanternWaste]

95. Napoleonic statues too...

Napoleonic statues in Belgium, too...

[slackmaster]

108. All you have to do is wish for something, and the Internet can instantly make it come true, Odin2005

But that's just in Germany. There is an exhibit commemorating Erwin Rommel at the British National Army Museum.

http://www.nam.ac.uk/exhibitions/online-exhibitions/enemy-commanders-britains-greatest-foes/erwin-rommel

Oh, and the Smithsonian has a famous portrait of Rommel in one of its collections.

http://collections.si.edu/search/results.htm?q=record_ID:npg_NPG.96.TC23

[lumberjack_jeff]

89. Define "we".

The place names in my state are named by the people here.

If you're concerned about the names your community gives to places and buildings, then by all means speak up.

[raccoon]

92. Why glorify Washington and Jefferson? Why have them on bills? they were both slaveowners. nt

[Nye Bevan]

116. And Robert Lee, unlike Washington and Jefferson, freed his slaves (nt)

[spanone]

96. i live in the south and they harbor a lot of pride in that fucked up war....people are strange

[Hoyt]

230. It's really stange/disgusting and a common characteristic of the bigots there.

[MadHound]

98. The Civil War was a major national trauma,

One that we never have truly recovered from.

In light of such death and destruction, memorials on both sides are to be expected. Hell, there is even a memorial to African American soldiers who served in the Confederate Army. Should we tear that one down?

If we're going to tear down all the memorials to people who advocated, fought for, or perpetuated slavery, hell, half the monuments in DC alone would be gone.

[arcane1]

102. James Loewen's excellent book "Lies Across America" deals with this very topic

I've read it twice, and will surely learn even more the 3rd time

[Tree-Hugger]

104. I own and display a piece of Robert E. Lee memorabilia

...because that is my heritage. We come from the Lees on my maternal Grandmother's side. I honor my heritage, which also includes soldiers on both sides of the Revolutionary War, the Civil War and many other wars (my dad is the last one of my immediate family to serve - Vietnam). I'm not glorifying slavery by doing so.

Grant wasn't exactly an angel. He was also a slave owner at one point. Both Grant and Lee freed their slaves.

"There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil." - Robert E. Lee

[WinkyDink]

112. Maybe neither man was angelic, but only one of them led troops to dissolve the theretofore Union.

[nadinbrzezinski]

114. And another led the army of the South against

The British. And descendants of the Lee's served as both enlisted and officers. I get what the person you answered to said, perfectly well.

All family trees have...family Jewell's and family secrets.

I would not display it, but I am not a member of the Lee family either

[Tree-Hugger]

156. Exactly

And it's not displayed public. It's in my dining room. The black members of my family have no problem with it whatsoever....

[nadinbrzezinski]

165. Hey, I have no problem with it either

but I am a sucker for history. So I would not hide it, because that is an important part of history.

For the record, I also understand the reasons Robert E. Lee resigned his commission and took up arms. It is something that people at times do not get. It is actually something that at times has died. And that does not mean I glorify what he did. I just understand it. It is the same reason why he surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia in the end... honor, the genteel sense of it that existed in the South at the time.

[Tree-Hugger]

168. Lots of shades of gray in the Civil War

It's always viewed as a good guy vs. bad guy and salve vs. free issue when it was so much more complex than that. Lee, though he was the "enemy" was a very noble person and a great general. I like the way you worded it.

[Redford]

157. Jackie Kennedy was a Lee thru her mother's side

Why do you think JFK is buried beneath Robert E Lee's house which is now Arlington National Cemetery? Interesting trivia.

[thucythucy]

115. Last time I was in Richmond I saw

a sign for a "Stonewall Jackson Shrine."

Not a memorial, monument, or museum, but a "shrine." Like he was some blessed saint or martyr or something.

Imagine driving through Berlin and seeing a "Erwin Rommel Shrine."

Creepy.

[PavePusher]

118. Your definition of "shrine" is incomplete.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrine

[thucythucy]

200. How so?

According to the link you provided:

"A shrine (Latin: scrinium "case or chest for books or papers"; Old French: escrin "box or case&quot [1] is a holy or sacred place, which is dedicated to a specific deity, ancestor, hero, martyr, saint, daemon or similar figure of awe and respect, at which they are venerated or worshipped. Shrines often contain idols, relics, or other such objects associated with the figure being venerated.[2] A shrine at which votive offerings are made is called an altar. Shrines are found in many of the world's religions, including Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Wicca, Chinese folk religion and Shinto, as well as in secular and non-religious settings such as a war memorial.[3] Shrines can be found in various settings, such as churches, temples, cemeteries, or in the home, although portable shrines are also found in some cultures.[4]

A shrine may become a focus of a cult image."

In almost all instances the contemporary implication is one of religious veneration.

Like I said, creepy.

[PavePusher]

250. The portion you are ignoring...

as well as in secular and non-religious settings such as a war memorial.

[thucythucy]

255. I suppose.

Interesting though, we don't talk about the "Lincoln Shrine" the "Jefferson Shrine" or the "Washington Shrine." It's the Lincoln Memorial, the Jefferson Memorial, the Washington Monument.

Next time I'm in Virginia I'll stop by the "shrine" and see just how "secular" and "non-religious" it really is.

[PavePusher]

256. Yes, interesting, our vocabulary. Many synonyms, Useful at times. n/t

[apocalypsehow]

121. Or imagine visiting West Point and seeing a "Benedict Arnold Shrine." It's the exact same thing.

Stonewall Jackson and his Confederate ilk were the moral equivalents of Arnold, and certainly shed much more American blood than his betrayal ever did. Plus, Arnold wasn't pimping for slavery, one of the most horrid and loathsome institutions on the face of the earth at the time. So, in some ways Benedict Arnold is morally superior, if ever so slightly, to the Lost Cause Generals and their enablers.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

120. Agree

When was the last time someone who committed treason and declared war on the United States had a school or road named after them?

What next..Bin Laden High School? It's shameful.

[aaaaaa5a]

128. By definition the Confederacy is the most anti-American force in the history of this country.

The Confederacy is more anti-American than the Nazi's, Japan, The USSR, Al-Quedia etc. or any other enemy our country has ever had.


We would never celebrate Hitler or Stalin. So why do we celebrate Jefferson Davis?

[Blue_Tires]

130. What would you do? Change the names of EVERYTHING?

Cities?
Counties?
Streets?
Neighborhoods?
Hundreds of schools from K-12 and higher? (good luck with that shit)
Buildings?
Statues/Monuments?
and the list goes on...

[apocalypsehow]

134. Yep: I'd change everything on that list. Just like the schools with mascots offensive to Native

Americans were compelled to give up their racist images and names, so should all of those places remove/rename their offensive memorials, racist idols, and traitorous heroes from the premises and off the street signage. Time to move on from the "Lost Cause," and it's racist underpinnings.

[Nye Bevan]

149. Jefferson owned hundreds of slaves and raped many of them.

What should we repurpose the Jefferson Memorial as?

[apocalypsehow]

167. Jefferson did not lead a war of treason against the United States. Please try to sort your

apples and oranges better next time. Pro tip.

[Nye Bevan]

173. How do you think African Americans feel about attending a school named for a white slaveholder

who raped his female slaves?

[apocalypsehow]

180. But that's not the subject of this OP - the traitors who attempted to keep African Americans

in chains by killing hundreds of thousands of other Americans is. If you want to talk about Jefferson and his role as a slaveholder, post an OP about it. This is about the traitors who made war on the United States of America in order to keep slavery in place from 1861-65.

Your attempts to change the subject are not gonna work.

[Nye Bevan]

182. Not a big leap from "glorifying people who fought to keep people enslaved" to

"glorifying people who kept people enslaved, and raped their slaves".

Jefferson and the other Framers were very careful to allow for slavery when drafting the original Constitution.

[apocalypsehow]

185. It is a big leap IN THIS OP, which is very specifically about the Confederate traitors who

waged war on the United States in order to uphold slavery.

Again, if you want to talk about Jefferson and the other Framers and the Constitution's role at the start of the country regarding slavery, post an OP about it.

This OP is about the Confederate traitors who made war on the United States to keep slavery up and running as an institution.

[Nye Bevan]

187. Thanks for the suggestion, but I think I will just continue to post in this thread.

I believe that the issues are closely related enough to be covered in the same thread.

[apocalypsehow]

189. The real deal is you simply want to change the subject. Let's have you on the record:

do you or do you not support naming/leaving named public parks and other public spaces for traitors who led a Civil War that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans in the name of preserving slavery?

Yes or no, please.

[glacierbay]

193. What about the professional sports teams with NA names?

Names like the Alanta Braves, Washington Redskins, Kansas City Chiefs, Cleveland Indians, Golden State Warriors, Chicago Blackhawks, would you make them change their names?

[Blue_Tires]

246. I'd agree, but

1. It's impossible to define how wide the "scope" of this should be, i.e., what about things named after say, children of confederates?

2. Who should be in charge of changing all the names?

3. Do you not see how steep and slippery a slope this could potentially be for abuse?

[whistler162]

131. We need to fix this....

rename Maryland, Virginia, Carolina's, Georgia, New York, New England etc. etc. etc.

[Nevernose]

145. Do we dig the corpses out of Arlington, too?

Just the Southern ones, mind you.

[cherokeeprogressive]

147. I can think of about 187,213 things more important than the name of a fucking park. n/t

[cordelia]

199. No kidding. Just another divisive thread to rouse the South haters.

[VOX]

163. Read any online bio of Confederate Gen. Patrick Ronayne Cleburne

His saga embodies just how difficult, complex and tragic this entire issue is -- then and now.

I cannot recommend his story enough -- it encompasses what it means to be an American, an immigrant, a Southerner, a man of principle, and an historical figure of great courage. His story illustrates that there are no easy answers to what author Shelby Foote called the "crossroads of our being."

[Nye Bevan]

164. A few DUers would automatically equate him to Adolf Hitler.

A little too much black-and-white thinking here, sometimes.

[shrdlu]

172. Amazing...

...the amount of willful ignorance on display in this thread.

[Nye Bevan]

176. I fully agree with you (nt)

[turbo_satan]

178. Amazingly, there's a Nathan Bedford Forrest High School...

... in Jacksonville, FL. There was even a movement to change its name in 2008, but when put to a vote, the name-change lost 5-2.

[Nye Bevan]

186. There's a Robert Byrd Bridge from WV to OH. Byrd was an Exalted Cyclops in the KKK (nt)

[patrice]

179. Those names aren't about glorifying. They're about remembering WHAT HAPPENED, but

then maybe that's just the way that I see it, because I am constitutionally incapable of glorifying anything.

Perhaps there should be some balance in these things, but I am not for revisionist history, those names remind not only "Southerners" but every other American besides.

[still_one]

190. The question is does naming a park after a general mean one approves of slavery? Or does it mean

That they honor someone fighting for their state or the south in this case?

To honor those that fought in Vietnam Nam does not mean one agrees with that conflict, does it?

[Ken Burch]

210. Depends. A monument to the soldiers is one thing.

A statue of General Westmorland ordering a bombing raid is another.

[MFrohike]

198. You know what I find odd?

The only people determined to refight the war these days are Yankees and idiots. The rest of us realize it died when LBJ rammed the Civil Rights Act through Congress, but some people are bound and determined to keep their heads in the sand about that little fact.

The real war being fought these days is the same one Southern aristocrats and Northern robber barons fought in the late 19th and early 20th centuries: the war against everyone else.

[Ken Burch]

208. That war needs to be fought, agreed.

The problem is, the perpetuation of the "Lost Cause" mythology, and the narrative that says the "War of Northern Aggression" is a thing that must never be forgotten or forgiven, that is the worst injustice suffered by anyone in this country's history, that matters more than anything else(and the transference of this narrative to the defeat of legal Jim Crow in 1964), is about keeping working-class Southern whites from joining the economic majority in the fight AGAINST the Bourbons and the barons.

In order to get Southern whites to join with their true allies, this mythology has to be confronted...it's an addiction Southern whites need to be cured of. The question is...how to do that?

[apocalypsehow]

209. Another reason I wish we could "Rec" replies: spot-on analysis. I wish I knew the answer.

[Ken Burch]

201. Indeed. Imagine what we'd think of it if Germany had monuments to Mengele, the Gestapo, and the SS.

There's no difference between the generals in the Army of Slavery and the generals in the Wehrmacht. The Southern cause was totally and absolutely evil.

[apocalypsehow]

203. I've been asking our friends from the Gungeon above a very straightforward question

for the very reasons you state in your reply:

Should public parks and other public spaces be named after Confederate traitors who fought to enslave African Americans?

So far I've gotten NO answer to what should be a very easy question to field for those with progressive values and liberal beliefs posting on Democratic Underground.

Nothing but obfuscation, evasion, and attempts to change the subject, trailing off to silence. It's a curious matter....

[Ken Burch]

204. They're probably listening to "Sweet Home, Alabama" on repeat as they post.

And I say that and all I said in the post above as a person whose paternal ancestors lived in eastern Tennessee until 1910.

[apocalypsehow]

207. I just figured they were whistlin' Dixie, but your conjecture is probably closer to the mark...

And some of my paternal ancestors were from Southern Missouri, around Joplin: lots of pro-Confederate sentiment in that region. Still.

[Spider Jerusalem]

216. You mean like this?

A memorial to the fallen of the SS Panzer Division 'Viking'. (The Waffen SS were not the Allgemeine SS; they fought on the Eastern Front, and died in their thousands at Stalingrad; they weren't camp guards.)

[Third Doctor]

217. Jefferson Davis' birthday is a state holiday here.

It's also a paid vacation day for state employees.

[Canuckistanian]

222. The Civil War was deemed a 'noble' war

With heroics on both sides.

But you're right. Glorifying the Confederate generals are honoring those who ultimately lost in a losing cause.

Considering what they were really fighting for.

[Nye Bevan]

232. Should we honor the Vietnam veterans? The Iraq War veterans? (nt)

[apocalypsehow]

244. More false equivalency: the Generals who commanded troops in both the Vietnam and Iraq Wars

did not lead troops into combat against their own country, and kill hundreds of thousands of fellow Americans in the course of said combat, all in the name of perpetuating the hideous institution of slavery.

There. Is. No. Equivalence.

Curious, though, how you keep trying to force an analogy that is simply not there...very curious.

[Tsiyu]

228. I guess american Indians would have to laugh at the outrage

considering that...oh....the sacred Black Hills are named for Custer, and a park in the old Cherokee Land is named for Winfield Scott, who marched the Cherokee off to misery when gold was discovered in Dahlonega.

The history of mankind is one of killing and enslaving others to get your shit.


Lots of statues of people who slaughtered Indians, but they were in the Union so.... IOK

Just have to laugh at the selective outrage here....

[Hoyt]

229. There's a popular park -- confederate carving and former KKK meeting place -- outside Atlanta.

It's a big attraction called Stone Mountain.

I just don't like going there and refuse when I can. Not only is there a gigantic carving of confederate generals on side of mountain, but it was a site used for big KKK meeting in the 40s and 50s. I just don't like the vibe of the place because of all that.

[Tsiyu]

233. My friend Devon called it "Confederama"

especially the laser show - it's a chunk of Southern Pride.

When Europeans first found the mountain, it had a wall around it

People have lived there for 8,000 years according to artifacts found:

http://www.trails.com/tcatalog_trail.aspx?trailid=XMR011-051

Formed 7 miles beneath the Earth’s surface more than 350 million years ago, Stone Mountain is what geologists call a pluton. Molten lava, created by massive collision of tectonic plates during the formation of the Blue Ridge Mountains forced its way into an underlying fold over many millions of years. The east side of the mountain was the first side to be formed.

Stone Mountain granite is significantly different than the underlying Lithonia granite belt that runs east and south of the mountain. Archaic Indian sites dating back 8,000 years have been found near the mountain, as well as woodland Indian sites, moundbuilder sites, and Creek Indian villages.

When Spanish explorers first visited the mountain (about 1560), they called the monadnock Crystal Mountain because of the quartz found around the base and embedded in the mountain. The Creek climbed the trail to the mountaintop, frequently using the site as a meeting place with nearby Cherokees. In 1790, Colonel Marinus Willet met Creek chiefs at the top of the mountain and escorted them to New York to meet with President George Washington. Settlers moving west along Hightower Trail called the peak Rock Fort Mountain because earlier woodland Indians had built a wall around the top. Over time this was shortened to Rock Mountain. The name Stone Mountain was given the peak by Baptist minister Adiel Sherwood, one of the founders of Mercer College (Macon). Largescale granite quarrying began about 1847, the same year the nearby town changed its name from New Gibraltar to Stone Mountain.

Civil War battles briefly raged near the mountain in July 1864, and the Left Wing of Sherman’s army passed just to the north of the mountain in November 1864 on the March to the Sea. In 1958 the state purchased the mountain and surrounding land and turned it into a state park.

Read more at Trails.com: Stone Mountain Mountaintop Trail | Redan Georgia Hikes | Trails.com http://www.trails.com/tcatalog_trail.aspx?trailId=XMR011-051#ixzz2Cm1TF1ph

but during the late 70s the hippies and the more laid back bikers hung out there.

Took it back over, as it were.

I recall hanging out at Stone Mountain with long haired boys and hippie chicks, flowers in our hair, playing guitar on the grass.
People were there from all over the world when I was there.

Don't know how it is now.

[Hoyt]

235. "Confederama" -- That's perfect.

When I was in high school, we used to go out there at night an skinny dip in the lake. That was before I really understood the history of the place.

It is a nice family park now. Just wish they'd do something like carve a big tribute to MLK, John Lewis, Hosea Williams, or somebody in the side of the mountain to go along with the confederate crud. But the crowd that runs Georgia's government now would probably opt for Lester Maddox chasing people out of his restaurant with a gun and axe handle.

[Tsiyu]

239. I bet you remember the nightmare

called J.B. Stoner....I think he lived out that way.

We kids just laughed at the idiots and had fun at their expense.

Last I heard, Stone Mountain and Dekalb County were more left-leaning, but I have not "heard" from that area in a while...

[Hoyt]

242. Hell No, I ain't forgetting . . . . . . . racist JB Stoner.

I remember him running for office, standing in front of a confederate flag spouting all kinds of awful racist crud. Then, he'd claim he was not a bigot.

It reminds me of right wingers today, do some awful crap and claim -- with a straight face -- that racism has nothing to do with it.

We seem to have some of the same experiences.

[Autumn]

234. It's history.

And history should never be erased.

[oneshooter]

236. So if a history is "bad" then it should be erased from all memory?

[Nye Bevan]

237. Yes. Let's demolish the Vietnam Veterans' Wall (nt)

[JNelson6563]

240. There are many tributes

to people who did horrible things throughout the world.

I can't bring myself to get worked up about it, humans have been glorifying monsters for millenia, it's never going to change.

I'd rather channel my energies to stuff that can actually make a difference in people's lives like financial stability and fair laws.

Julie

[grahamhgreen]

251. You gotta understand, the South is still stuck in the '60's,

The 1860's!

[aquart]

252. You know what? They were Americans, too.

Part of us. We can't pretend they weren't there. Or that some of us honored them.

It's even worth it to bring back the argument, to try and understand what it was they thought they were willing to die for.

I wouldn't want a high school named for Bloody Bill Anderson, but I don't want to forget him, either.

We were all Americans before the fight and all Americans after.

[LibDemAlways]

253. George "Macaca" Allen named his son

Forrest, after Confederate General and first Grand Wizard of the KKK Nathan Bedford Forrest. His daughters Brooke and Tyler are also named for prominent Confederates. He's not only glorifying the Confederacy, he's passing on the legacy to the next generation- albeit in a very sly, under the radar sort of way.