You’ll find no argument from me there.
I just remembered this article from Dolan about Sherman from six years ago:
Sherman tried to tell these idiots, over and over, that they were stupid and deluded. He wasn’t even going to debate the non-existent justice of their cause like Grant, who rightly called the Confederacy “the worst cause for which men ever fought.” Sherman, who was a much more analytical, intellectual man than Grant, focused on the fact that the South—the white, wealthy South, that is; the only one that mattered—was wrong. About everything. Every damn thing in the world. But most of all about its childishly romantic notions about war.
Sherman was trying, in everything he did, to wake these idiots from their delusion. That’s why they hate Sherman so much, 150 years after his campaign ended in total success: Because he interrupted their silly and sadistic dreams, humiliated them in the most vulnerable part of their weird anatomy, their sense of valorous superiority. Sherman didn’t wipe out the white South, though he could easily have done so; he was, in fact, very mild toward a treasonous population that regularly sniped at and ambushed his troops. But what he did was demonstrate the impotence of the South’s Planter males.
The taking and burning of Atlanta were just one more chance to slap the South awake, as Sherman saw it. When he was scolded—by people who were in the habit of whipping slaves half to death for trivial lapses—for his severity toward the (white, landowning) people of Atlanta, he replied, in his “Letter to Atlanta,” in a way that shows how patiently he kept trying to talk grown-up sense to an insane population:
3 Likes
That’s one hell of an entertaining article.
1 Like
I think the actual timing of the erection/dedication of any individual memorial/statue actually matters here.
So if it went up during Jim Crow, that absolutely matters.
2 Likes
As long as them nutjobs don’t go after TV reruns of the Dukes of Hazzard and the the General, I don’t care that much.
Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull were fighting for freedom. The confederacy were fighting against freedom.
Nope. If it were up to me, no Democrat would have a statue.
Honestly the issue isn’t confederate monuments. People have already gone beyond destroying those. Eventually breaking statues will not be enough and they’ll want blood.
the issue you are talking about goes beyond confederate statues. this thread, however, is about confederate statues and symbols of the confederacy.
1 Like
Fair enough.
My personal opinion is I don’t really give a shit. Some of them are pretty amazing (stone mountain, Richmond). But i worry more about a society trying to erase the past more than people being offended by a sculpture. It conjures up memories of the Taliban.
1 Like
I agree. I fear if we erase the past we forget it and can fall back into old (bad) ways. That’s why I think most should be preserved (except that awful awful one posted further up), and have plaques explaining the history. They should NOT be places glorifying the Confederacy or Confederates in any way.
I would prefer Confederate statues and memorials preserved in the same way Auschwitz has been, for example.
3 Likes
Agree. I do not agree with Confederate flag being part of a state flag, although I would not prohibit a private citizen from flying it on their property even if I disagree.
Those who remove unsavory history and ignore it are doomed to repeat it.
This is one of many reasons I like Lee, despite the fact that he fought against the union.
Holy shit, that looks like something a grade schooler would make.
Not sure about that, but I’ve not dives into the origins of all the statues under attack right now.
Although the statue of Forrest I posted above is indeed really ugly, it pales in comparison to how ugly a person he really was. Forrest was one of the founding members of the KKK and their first Grand Wizard. He was also responsible for the Fort Pillow massacre of Union troops who had already surrendered. He was a real piece of shit. I’d be fine with no statues of him anyplace at all.
I’m not sure if there are any, but perhaps a statue or two commemorating Southern Unionist who fought for the Union Army would be appropriate. More than 120k white southerners fought for the North.
I don’t think they should be on government property, except battlefields and cemeteries. I lived for quite a few years in Richmond, and thought the statues on Memorial Avenue were beautiful, but inappropriate, and somewhat disrespectful to many of my fellow citizens.
I’ll put in a vote for Thomas Jonathan Jackson for great american generals, but I’m biased as one of my Great Great Great Grandfathers fought and died in his command.
And there is nothing wrong with a nation paying tribute to an honorable enemy.
Right now in this country we are putting everyone under a microscope and yet don’t see anything. There is nothing wrong with having a memorial to dead Confederate soldiers on some site of a battle if you want to memorialize their bravery. The Spartans owned slaves yet we admire the 300. Humans are not perfect and there is something sad about young, some very young, Southern soldiers dying for a lost (and yes, wrong) cause. This is not that different from our troops who died in Vietnam. Weak people fail to see others as human but have no problem seeing them as the Other. There are lessons to be learned if we focus on the human factor.
5 Likes
ABSOLUTELY. the human factor is ultimately theost important. Also tt takes a strong person to see others as people first.
I could easily picture some of these protesters pissing on the grave of a 14 year old Confederate soldier without having any sense of sadness or sympathy for the fact that a 14 year old was in that position to begin with. It’s tragic and not deserving of hate.
3 Likes
Absolutely. It bothers me that anyone could do this, but especially people who worry about their own 14 year old kids getting killed as victims of gangs or anything else. But then, many of the rioters are spoiled and not from the places in question.
War is shit. And especially earlier centuries when you had middle school kids on the lines
Let’s just get rid of “the grave of” and “Confederate soldier.”
Here’s the thing, George Floyd was a criminal scumbag. It was wrong how he was killed but that doesn’t change the fact he was a violent criminal. But, we can’t say that “out loud” because the narrative is that he was a saint because of how he was killed. His flaws are not relevant when assessing him as a person. It’s the same with Rayshard Brooks; he was a criminal and human trash. But, because of how he died he was a good father and husband. We can’t judge him taking into account he was not a good person. We can only see whatever positive may have been there. And, if we do look at the bad we can always say these two men were victims of their circumstances and not just see them as violent scum; they were products of their environment.
However, when it comes to Thomas Jefferson for example, we can’t look past his flaws but rather, we have to define him by those flaws. He wasn’t a product of his environment. We can’t evaluate him in context. But we have to call a man who went to prison for abusing his kids a good man.
7 Likes