Is it racist to oppose removing confederate statues/monuments?

X Factor said:

Can reasonable minds differ on this, or is opposing taking those monuments/statues down racist in and of itself? Poll on the way....

Click to expand...

I certainly oppose removal of any public Civil War recognition if the people of a place want the statues there. If they are to be removed for any reason, that should also be the choice of the people in a place and it should be done legally by vote/consensus.

The Civil War was an important part of our American heritage with good and bad motives, good and bad acts on both sides. Those who want all evidence of it erased from public view call those who participated traitors and treasonous. There is no way I can see it that way. I think the huge majority of all those who supported the Confederacy was to be able to live their lives and control their destinies in peace and they felt increasingly oppressed by a government and northern states who they saw as treating them unjustly.

The vast majority of those who fought in and supported the Confederate war effort were not slave owners and had no stake of any kind in slavery. Probably most disapproved of it while many in the Union army were themselves from slave states in which the slaves had not yet been emancipated. Robert E. Lee, for instance, never purchased a slave but inherited those he was in charge of. He emancipated all his slaves years before the Civil War started. But there are those demanding that his statues come down too.

We should not erase our history because there are ugly sides of it. We should be educated in and understand our history and learn from it.

That will not happen when there are those who think the uglier sides of our history should be violently erased as if that might change something.

And I am not the least bit racist.

X Factor said:

Can't speak for anyone else but that never even crossed my mind.

Click to expand...

Is it possible that the reason it didn't cross your mind is because you have a blind spot to the systemic racism that exists in our society since it doesn't affect you?

X Factor said:

Can reasonable minds differ on this, or is opposing taking those monuments/statues down racist in and of itself? Poll on the way....

Click to expand...

There isn't a blanket answer, each monument should stand or fall on its own.

The majority of confederate monuments erected after the war were in memory of the soldiers who had fought and died for the South. However, many more confederate monuments were constructed in times of significant racial strain; first during Jim Crow and second during the Civil Rights movement.

It's difficult to understand how anyone could be either against monuments put up in memory of solders that bravely fought for their home. It's also difficult to understand how a non-racist person could support keeping confederate statues built during the Civil Rights unrest.

AlbqOwl said:

I certainly oppose removal of any public Civil War recognition if the people of a place want the statues there. If they are to be removed for any reason, that should also be the choice of the people in a place and it should be done legally by vote/consensus.

The Civil War was an important part of our American heritage with good and bad motives, good and bad acts on both sides. Those who want all evidence of it erased from public view call those who participated traitors and treasonous. There is no way I can see it that way. I think the huge majority of all those who supported the Confederacy was to be able to live their lives and control their destinies in peace and they felt increasingly oppressed by a government and northern states who they saw as treating them unjustly.

The vast majority of those who fought in and supported the Confederate war effort were not slave owners and had no stake of any kind in slavery. Probably most disapproved of it while many in the Union army were themselves from slave states in which the slaves had not yet been emancipated. Robert E. Lee, for instance, never purchased a slave but inherited those he was in charge of. He emancipated all his slaves years before the Civil War started. But there are those demanding that his statues come down too.

We should not erase our history because there are ugly sides of it. We should be educated in and understand our history and learn from it.

That will not happen when there are those who think the uglier sides of our history should be violently erased as if that might change something.

And I am not the least bit racist.

Click to expand...

Agreed, and well said.

X Factor said:

Can reasonable minds differ on this, or is opposing taking those monuments/statues down racist in and of itself? Poll on the way....

Click to expand...

There isn't a blanket answer, each monument should stand or fall on its own.

The majority of confederate monuments erected immediately after the war were in memory of the soldiers who had fought and died for the South. However in the years since, the vast majority of confederate monuments were constructed in times of significant racial strain; first during Jim Crow and second during the Civil Rights movement.

It's difficult to understand how anyone could be against monuments put up in memory of solders that bravely fought for their home. It's also difficult to understand how a non-racist person could support keeping confederate statues built during the Civil Rights unrest.

OlNate said:

and not caring if they hurt others isn't necessarily racist either - they may just legitimately like the statues and not care what other people think. Not giving a **** about black people doesn't necessarily indicate racism.

Click to expand...

You left three words out of your sentence. I fixed it for you. They're supposed to be there, but you left them out because they radically alter the truth of your sentence don't they?


They're ****ing statues. You can put a pretty statue of something else there if you think your little park needs some art in it. Replace it with a statue of someone that virtually everybody likes. Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson, Cal Ripken Jr.....

Mithros said:

There isn't a blanket answer, each monument should stand or fall on its own.

The majority of confederate monuments erected immediately after the war were in memory of the soldiers who had fought and died for the South. However in the years since, the vast majority of confederate monuments were constructed after in times of significant racial strain; first during Jim Crow and second during the Civil Rights movement.

It's difficult to understand how anyone could be either against monuments put up in memory of solders that bravely fought for their home. It's also difficult to understand how a non-racist person could support keeping confederate statues built during the Civil Rights unrest.

Click to expand...

Agree!

It's also hard for someone like me to understand the heritage argument when some of those same people who claim they are just wanting to preserve their heritage are the first in line to try and tell me to give up mine. That makes it seem like to me it's not the actual heritage but something deeper they are trying to preserve.

Perotista said:

Symbols, be they confederate monuments, statues or the flag or something else, they mean different things to different people. Let me say this, I have a confederate battle flag, the stars and bars encased in glass on my living room wall. The history of that flag was it originally belonged to my great grandfather who fought in the Spanish-American War. He carried it with him and then passed it down to my grandfather who had it in WWI in France. My dad was gifted it and he carried it in the Pacific in WWII. Myself, I had it with me in Laos and in Vietnam and when that war was over, I had it with me being station in Fulda Germany guarding the East German Border. My grandson took it to Afghanistan with him. My son never served.

So what does that confederate flag mean to me? It means being southern born and breed, being 100% American. Although that flag never saw Europe during WWII fighting the NAZI's others did.

View attachment 67221521

View attachment 67221522

I want to puke when I see these neo-Nazi's carrying that flag. Perhaps it's time to take that flag down off the wall and fight them, the neo-Nazi's again.

A short story to show that symbols can mean different things to different people. Back in the 60's the rebel flag mean rebellion against authority, the don't trust anyone over 30 crowd. I do get sick and tired of people calling it treasonous. Especially when that flag and the folks who took it different places probably did far more for this nation, America than those calling it treasonous ever thought of doing. The treasonous south provides more volunteers into today's United States military than any other region of this nation, roughly 40%.

The tradition will survive, My grandson who had it in Afghanistan just had a boy. A great grandson.

Click to expand...

Context is important, especially with regard to how a reasonable person would expect to respond to it. Having it on your mantle encased in a place of honor shows respect. Flying it publicly today when it is widely regarded as an overtly racist symbol means that you're either a racist or you don't mind being seen as a racist.

I believe this is in India, where it is entirely unremarkable as a sign of good fortune. The same building would be incredibly racist if it were in a different location. Context matters.

AlbqOwl said:

I certainly oppose removal of any public Civil War recognition if the people of a place want the statues there. If they are to be removed for any reason, that should also be the choice of the people in a place and it should be done legally by vote/consensus.

Click to expand...

So if the mayor, and or governor of the city or state who was elected by a majority of the people orders them removed(which would have to be the case generally) your fine with it.

AlbqOwl said:

Those who want all evidence of it erased from public view

Click to expand...

We don't want them removed from public view. We want them in a museum where they can be put into historical context not in a park where they are being given a place of honor. We are not trying to forget the civil war, just making sure the country remembers who won it, and who were the good guys.

AlbqOwl said:

call those who participated traitors and treasonous. There is no way I can see it that way.

Click to expand...

We only call the confederate side traitors and treasonous, and that's because that is exactly what they literally where. There is no other way to see it, so if you're struggling with that then you're proving why these statues need to go. They appear to be giving you a false understanding of what the confederacy stood for.

Would you support the erecting of a statue honoring Benedict Arnold as well?

AlbqOwl said:

I think the huge majority of all those who supported the Confederacy was to be able to live their lives and control their destinies in peace and they felt increasingly oppressed by a government and northern states who they saw as treating them unjustly.

Click to expand...

Yeah, we don't really give a **** what talking points they came up with to try and justify their desire to continue owning black people. It's bull****, and there's no reason to let that narrative continue.

Most of the people that supported Hitler just wanted to make Germany great again. They were still ****tards for thinking that murdering Jews would help accomplish that.

AlbqOwl said:

The vast majority of those who fought in and supported the Confederate war effort were not slave owners and had no stake of any kind in slavery.

Click to expand...

The vast majority of Germans who fought in WWII didn't start out wanting to murder the jews either.

AlbqOwl said:

We should not erase our history because there are ugly sides of it. We should be educated in and understand our history and learn from it.

Click to expand...

Again, please stop repeating this bull**** lie. Nobody is erasing history. We're simply not honoring it. Education takes place in school books, and museums. Put your references to these people there. Statues in city parks and in front of government buildings do not educate. They honor. These men are not deserving of honor.

AlbqOwl said:

And I am not the least bit racist.

Click to expand...

pro tip buddy. Telling someone you're not racist is a lot like telling a woman that you're a nice guy. If you feel the need to tell a someone that, then it's probably not true.

americanwoman said:

Agree!

It's also hard for someone like me to understand the heritage argument when some of those same people who claim they are just wanting to preserve their heritage are the first in line to try and tell me to give up mine. That makes it seem like to me it's not the actual heritage but something deeper they are trying to preserve.

Click to expand...

Agreed....Also at the time of the Civil war there were 5.5 Million whites in the South and 3.5 Million slaves. Today there are 38.7 Million Whites, 21 Million Hispanic, and 14.6 Million Blacks, It's pretty obvious that most of non-Blacks that live in the South today have either immigrated to or are descended from people who immigrated to the South since the Civil War. The confederate monuments put up in the 20's and 60's weren't about their grandparents.

MrWonka said:

You left three words out of your sentence. I fixed it for you. They're supposed to be there, but you left them out because they radically alter the truth of your sentence don't they?


They're ****ing statues. You can put a pretty statue of something else there if you think your little park needs some art in it. Replace it with a statue of someone that virtually everybody likes. Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson, Cal Ripken Jr.....

Click to expand...

Hold on there, champ, you're barking up the wrong tree if you feel like you need to lecture me about racism. Check my posts, you'll see what I mean.

Of course adding those words changes the truth of the statement, and of course that's why I left them out - I was talking about something else. That's how this whole language thing works - you pick the words you think will best convey what you are talking about.

I also talked about the fact that there are racist motivations as well, and I personally agree with you on what should be done with the statues. But don't be the dumbass so many on the right generalize us all to be and try to boil the world down to binaries. There are probably lots of people who don't give a **** either way, about black people, about white people, about anyone but themselves and what they like, with no specific ill will toward anyone. Whether that's acceptable or not is another conversation, but that's not the question being asked in this thread.

Nap said:

I think this is the point many outside of the South seem to be overlooking and why so many are in support of the Rebel flag. The meaning of that flag has changed from the original intent into one of southern pride for the majority that display it. Like you it made many of my coworkers and myself sick seeing it displayed next to a Nazi flag. While I understand the reasons some have a distaste for the flag, especially when some racist POS uses it as a symbol of hate, it has a far different meaning for the majority of southerners.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

MrWonka said:

The statues were absolutely put there with the intent of intimidating black people. If you're denying that reality then you're almost certainly a racist.

Click to expand...

Thats just ****ing stupid. Beyond words. I cant imagine you actually believe it.

"I haven't thought about those statues a day in my life!"

The strong write their own storyline. The weak? Well...they will read whatever script they are handed.

Mithros said:

Context is important, especially with regard to how a reasonable person would expect to respond to it. Having it on your mantle encased in a place of honor shows respect. Flying it publicly today when it is widely regarded as an overtly racist symbol means that you're either a racist or you don't mind being seen as a racist.

I believe this is in India, where it is entirely unremarkable as a sign of good fortune. The same building would be incredibly racist if it were in a different location. Context matters.

Click to expand...

The swastika s a holy Buddhist symbol also. It symbolizes the footprints of Buddha. The battle flag of the confederacy featured the St. Andrews Cross.

Perotista said:

The swastika s a holy Buddhist symbol also. It symbolizes the footprints of Buddha. The battle flag of the confederacy featured the St. Andrews Cross.

Click to expand...

Exactly... but even if its a sacred symbol, a Buddhist in the US should not display a swastika publicly because the swastika is a symbol of racism. It's certainly not the Buddhists fault they can't use the symbol. And it would be awesome if we lived in a world where the swastika didn't convey a message of hatred and intolerance. But of course we're not even close.

Faggot used to mean a pack of cigarettes or a bunch of sticks. Not so much anymore. Using that language today, even if you're referring to a pack of cigarettes or a bunch of sticks is usually offensive. The meaning has changed. We don't always get to pick what a word or symbol means.

I guess the moral of the story is that communication always involves two people. If you're going to publicly display a symbol, it's important to take into account what that means to the people viewing it. That said, the people viewing it should also try to understand that certain symbols can mean different things to different people. Basically don't be a jerk.

Depends...

If you're opposed to their removal strictly from the standpoint of historical preservation, then I'd have to say NO for the most part. However, it depends on the legacy behind the history. That can get somewhat tricky. So, let's talk about that...

If that legacy is that of cruelty, death and destruction, then it's a statue I wouldn't necessarily want to see on display open to the public unless viewed in the appropriate location suited for memorializing said individual or paying tribute to the event. Take the status of Ghangus Khan, for example. A brutal, savage dictator. Yet, he has one of the largest statues ever erected sitting atop a monument facility built specifically for him as a tourist attraction.

Everything has its proper place. Many of these Civil War statues were placed in the wrong place on purpose, erected in the 1950 and 60's during the Civil Rights era. As I've said before, put them in Civil War museums, Civil War cemeteries or at Civil War memorial sites (i.e., battlegrounds) and they'd be fine. Put them in the public square where their presence really has no connective relevance and you cause problems.

Sidenote: Relocating these Civil War statues to appropriate sites isn't rewriting or removing history. No one's saying they should be destroyed. (At least no one whom I've talked to about them.) People are just saying put them in a place that's more appropriate to be displayed. After all, when you erect something that's meant to be a slight to a people, how else do you expect them to react?

Mithros said:

Exactly... but even if its a sacred symbol, a Buddhist in the US should not display a swastika publicly because the swastika is a symbol of racism. It's certainly not the Buddhists fault they can't use the symbol. And it would be awesome if we lived in a world where the swastika didn't convey a message of hatred and intolerance. But of course we're not even close.

Faggot used to mean a pack of cigarettes or a bunch of sticks. Not so much anymore. Using that language today, even if you're referring to a pack of cigarettes or a bunch of sticks is usually offensive. The meaning has changed. We don't always get to pick what a word or symbol means.

I guess the moral of the story is that communication always involves two people. If you're going to publicly display a symbol, it's important to take into account what that means to the people viewing it. That said, the people viewing it should also try to understand that certain symbols can mean different things to different people. Basically don't be a jerk.

Click to expand...

The British used the word fag for a cigarette and some here also I suppose. I remember that. I also remember when gay meant happy. It does seem the meaning of words do change over time. How strange that we Americans expect the world to react as we want. I doubt we Americans would be tolerant enough to respect a Buddhist view point. Now I am sure the Buddhist would be tolerant enough to respect ours. In fact I know they would.

It does seem toleration of other peoples views and beliefs is a thing of the past. At least here and in Europe. But where else do the people of those places think the world revolves around them.

MrWonka said:

So if the mayor, and or governor of the city or state who was elected by a majority of the people orders them removed(which would have to be the case generally) your fine with it.


We don't want them removed from public view. We want them in a museum where they can be put into historical context not in a park where they are being given a place of honor. We are not trying to forget the civil war, just making sure the country remembers who won it, and who were the good guys.


We only call the confederate side traitors and treasonous, and that's because that is exactly what they literally where. There is no other way to see it, so if you're struggling with that then you're proving why these statues need to go. They appear to be giving you a false understanding of what the confederacy stood for.

Would you support the erecting of a statue honoring Benedict Arnold as well?


Yeah, we don't really give a **** what talking points they came up with to try and justify their desire to continue owning black people. It's bull****, and there's no reason to let that narrative continue.

Most of the people that supported Hitler just wanted to make Germany great again. They were still ****tards for thinking that murdering Jews would help accomplish that.


The vast majority of Germans who fought in WWII didn't start out wanting to murder the jews either.


Again, please stop repeating this bull**** lie. Nobody is erasing history. We're simply not honoring it. Education takes place in school books, and museums. Put your references to these people there. Statues in city parks and in front of government buildings do not educate. They honor. These men are not deserving of honor.




pro tip buddy. Telling someone you're not racist is a lot like telling a woman that you're a nice guy. If you feel the need to tell a someone that, then it's probably not true.

Click to expand...

Sorry I don't read or respond to chopped up posts. It destroys context, almost always adds a lot of straw men and non sequitur, and is tedious and boring as hell to read. Thanks for understanding.

Hey, new to this site first post so please don't crucify me.

I personally never got the comparison of hypothetical Nazi monuments and Confederate ones, its quite silly to think that
the American Civil war could be made to sound so simply good and evil. YES the South may have been fighting to
preserve slavery on many fronts , but most of the men who died fought to defend their home states more than
anything else. The south was in the wrong no doubt, but they are considered AMERICAN deaths and fighters too. Some would say these monuments were erected to scare African Americans, others would say they were put up to honor the soldiers of the Civil War as more and more of them came to pass 35-50 years after the war ended.

At the end of it all, its just perspective. You have your story that you believe and I have mine. I Personally just hate to see historical monuments destroyed.PERIOD.History is around you to be acknowledged and learned from. I get equally as angry when I see statues of Lenin being destroyed and removed. Remembering our history isn't as simple as taking a history class, it should be preserved as long as it can. It sickens me that theyre used by fanatical right wingers to promote a disgusting agenda, and it sickens me that the only opposition to them wants those statues burned to the ground. What a typical (and predictable)path our country has begun on.

Tl;dr No, a lot of people genuinely just want history preserved for the betterment and learning of our society. Confederates
should not be compared to Nazis its too simple and stupid of a comparison, it is not at all the same situation or ideology.

Put them in the public square where their presence really has no connective relevance and you cause problems

Click to expand...

I definitely don't agree with everything you said, but at the best I can wish for them to be moved to a public display where they can still be seen and accessed for free,
if they are in an irrelevant spot already than id be more than happy to see them moved to a more appropriate one as you stated.