Now they're after the mountain itself! (Atlanta, Stone Mountain: fit in, land, racist)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's a picture on my desk of granddaddy dragging his cotton sack across the field in the hot Georgia sun. I probably would have fallen out after the first hour but dang if that son-of-a-gun wasn't smiling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintmarks
Anecdotal, but I submit this bit of my own family history to show that those of us with family lineages in the south are not that far removed from this war.
My great great grandfather died at Bull Run (I think that is the right battle... my brother knows the history better than I). He left behind an only child, my great grandmother as an infant. That Great grandmother was raised an only child with no father, she married my great grandfather who died shortly after 3 boys were born. My grandfather became the "man of the house" at a very young age, my great grandmother lived with my grandparents as they reared my mother and uncle. She was a bitter woman from all of the loss in her life. This affected family dynamics that I believe have imprinted themselves unto this day. When I went through my own divorce, I went through a lot of soul searching and family study to understand why I react to certain situations the way I do. I am not placing blame on any one thing or person or history, but talking to my uncle and understanding the home dynamics he and my mother grew up under, there is no doubt that part of our family "dysfunction" can be attributed to "Granny" and much of "Granny's" dysfunction can easily be traced to her childhood of which the Civil War was the biggest imprint.
My story is probably replicated many times over. There was a great loss of life during the war and the great poverty and economic loss put on southerners after the war during Reconstruction has left an indelible mark on the populace. No, we whites were not slaves, we do not have that baggage passing on through the generations nor the scourge of Jim Crow laws and the disadvantages associated by segregation. But all southerners were affected by this war. Debating the place of slavery within that war is not going to change any of the pain and suffering that all endured. To come 150 years down the pike and rewrite it all or remove vestiges of it will not erase the pain or loss.
To me, confederate memorials are not a source of shame. Neither are they celebratory idols to a better time and place or a symbol of the betterment of one race. They are remnants of a history not far removed from us today to study and understand why we as a people, southern people in particular, are why we are who we are.
That a great modern city like Atlanta has arisen out of these ashes and that its citizens, both black and white can live and work together to make the great city we have is something to continue to not only celebrate, but in fact be awestruck with amazement that we have what we have considering such a history.
We should never forget it. But we don't have to be defined by it.
Anecdotal, but I submit this bit of my own family history to show that those of us with family lineages in the south are not that far removed from this war.
My great great grandfather died at Bull Run (I think that is the right battle... my brother knows the history better than I). He left behind an only child, my great grandmother as an infant. That Great grandmother was raised an only child with no father, she married my great grandfather who died shortly after 3 boys were born. My grandfather became the "man of the house" at a very young age, my great grandmother lived with my grandparents as they reared my mother and uncle. She was a bitter woman from all of the loss in her life. This affected family dynamics that I believe have imprinted themselves unto this day. When I went through my own divorce, I went through a lot of soul searching and family study to understand why I react to certain situations the way I do. I am not placing blame on any one thing or person or history, but talking to my uncle and understanding the home dynamics he and my mother grew up under, there is no doubt that part of our family "dysfunction" can be attributed to "Granny" and much of "Granny's" dysfunction can easily be traced to her childhood of which the Civil War was the biggest imprint.
My story is probably replicated many times over. There was a great loss of life during the war and the great poverty and economic loss put on southerners after the war during Reconstruction has left an indelible mark on the populace. No, we whites were not slaves, we do not have that baggage passing on through the generations nor the scourge of Jim Crow laws and the disadvantages associated by segregation. But all southerners were affected by this war. Debating the place of slavery within that war is not going to change any of the pain and suffering that all endured. To come 150 years down the pike and rewrite it all or remove vestiges of it will not erase the pain or loss.
To me, confederate memorials are not a source of shame. Neither are they celebratory idols to a better time and place or a symbol of the betterment of one race. They are remnants of a history not far removed from us today to study and understand why we as a people, southern people in particular, are why we are who we are.
That a great modern city like Atlanta has arisen out of these ashes and that its citizens, both black and white can live and work together to make the great city we have is something to continue to not only celebrate, but in fact be awestruck with amazement that we have what we have considering such a history.
We should never forget it. But we don't have to be defined by it.
I agree with you in that all suffered, but in regards to the red bold, I don't understand why you or others would think someone is trying to "rewrite" history.
That word and phrasing has been used a lot in recent weeks and it strikes me as odd.
No one is rewriting history. And as I stated and what others have stated is that we don't see value in removing these vestiges of history. But as a black person and as an American and descendant of southern blacks, I personally do wonder, and many share this sentiment with me, why were the white confederates and their trials and tribulations so much more important than the black and formerly enslaved? The only reason they were is due to the idea that blacks were inferior and didn't matter in history so they were literally erased from southern history.
To me, that is the question and the answer. It is VERY telling that I mentioned having a monument to people who suffered hundreds of years, and especially those valiant people who worked to curtail lynching, and someone suggested that Tyler Perry fund a memorial.....
So to me, it is you all who have succeeded in re-writing history. No one in GA will remove Stone Mountain. No one will alter it to be more inclusive of the true history and legacy of the south. And that is a fact. Black contributions and struggles prior to Civil Rights in the south does not matter to the general populace and those people will never be revered by the south for their bravery and courage in the face of extreme oppression and terrorism, and destitution by such a public monument.
Due to me being way to involved in research, these things are just to near my heart and mind to ignore like most people, which is one of the main reasons I never went to Stone Mountain until a very good friend of mine begged me to go with her and I did because they had recently had a death in the family and I wanted to offer some support. I would never have gone if they hadn't wanted me to because to me, the monument is about white supremacy and I don't want to go and be around that type of negative energy.
But I would never advocate removing it. In TN they are removing a lot of monuments dealing with confederates, including renaming parks and even digging up and moving Nathan Bedford Forest's grave. I don't think they should do that either. It would be better IMO to just be more inclusive and share more about that time period than just gallant confederates and a pride about the hard work and poverty of white southerners who had to deal with those times. White southerners weren't the only ones affected and IMO all these places could incorporate future updates to include the Civil War and Reconstruction experiences of more Americans.
Lincoln began the Reconstruction era in 1863 and alternately crafted a policy of Amnesty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2
But yes, he would never have done that. He was far wiser than the people who actually oversaw Reconstruction.
Matter of opinion.
I'd say that the Radical Republicans didn't go far enough and lost steam way too soon.
The troops should've stayed in the south at least long enough to prevent the conservative jerk-offs from re-establishing the celebration of this stupidity...that we modern folks are unfortunately now contending with.
How tha freak...do people create a culture...off of celebrating a 4 year-old nation that not only lost a war...but lost it big?
Lincoln began the Reconstruction era in 1863 and alternately crafted a policy of Amnesty.
Matter of opinion.
I'd say that the Radical Republicans didn't go far enough and lost steam way too soon.
The troops should've stayed in the south at least long enough to prevent the conservative jerk-offs from re-establishing the celebration of this stupidity...that we modern folks are unfortunately now contending with.
How tha freak...do people create a culture...off of celebrating a 4 year-old nation that not only lost a war...but lost it big?
Only in 'murica, I suppose.
Well Reconstruction is universally viewed by historians as a failure. And almost always because it was too harsh. IMO, the freedmen would have been treated a lot better following reconstruction if Lincoln's path had been followed. Instead, they became easy targets for revenge against the Radical Republicans.
In a recent example, the anti-Baathist campaign in Iraq is viewed as leading to the Sunni rebellions.
After WWII we helped the Germans and Japanese and they became our allies. After WWI the Europeans sought retribution against Germany and that led to the rise of the Nazis and WWII.
Lincoln proposed reconciliation, not retribution. The Radical Republicans chose retribution and that led to the rise of the KKK and Jim Crow. I think we still feel the impacts today from the policy of retribution.
Well Reconstruction is universally viewed by historians as a failure. And almost always because it was too harsh. IMO, the freedmen would have been treated a lot better following reconstruction if Lincoln's path had been followed. Instead, they became easy targets for revenge against the Radical Republicans.
In a recent example, the anti-Baathist campaign in Iraq is viewed as leading to the Sunni rebellions.
After WWII we helped the Germans and Japanese and they became our allies. After WWI the Europeans sought retribution against Germany and that led to the rise of the Nazis and WWII.
Lincoln proposed reconciliation, not retribution. The Radical Republicans chose retribution and that led to the rise of the KKK and Jim Crow. I think we still feel the impacts today from the policy of retribution.
This. Punitive measures are not always the best course of action.
I agree with you in that all suffered, but in regards to the red bold, I don't understand why you or others would think someone is trying to "rewrite" history.
That word and phrasing has been used a lot in recent weeks and it strikes me as odd.
No one is rewriting history. And as I stated and what others have stated is that we don't see value in removing these vestiges of history. But as a black person and as an American and descendant of southern blacks, I personally do wonder, and many share this sentiment with me, why were the white confederates and their trials and tribulations so much more important than the black and formerly enslaved? The only reason they were is due to the idea that blacks were inferior and didn't matter in history so they were literally erased from southern history.
To me, that is the question and the answer. It is VERY telling that I mentioned having a monument to people who suffered hundreds of years, and especially those valiant people who worked to curtail lynching, and someone suggested that Tyler Perry fund a memorial.....
So to me, it is you all who have succeeded in re-writing history. No one in GA will remove Stone Mountain. No one will alter it to be more inclusive of the true history and legacy of the south. And that is a fact. Black contributions and struggles prior to Civil Rights in the south does not matter to the general populace and those people will never be revered by the south for their bravery and courage in the face of extreme oppression and terrorism, and destitution by such a public monument.
Due to me being way to involved in research, these things are just to near my heart and mind to ignore like most people, which is one of the main reasons I never went to Stone Mountain until a very good friend of mine begged me to go with her and I did because they had recently had a death in the family and I wanted to offer some support. I would never have gone if they hadn't wanted me to because to me, the monument is about white supremacy and I don't want to go and be around that type of negative energy.
But I would never advocate removing it. In TN they are removing a lot of monuments dealing with confederates, including renaming parks and even digging up and moving Nathan Bedford Forest's grave. I don't think they should do that either. It would be better IMO to just be more inclusive and share more about that time period than just gallant confederates and a pride about the hard work and poverty of white southerners who had to deal with those times. White southerners weren't the only ones affected and IMO all these places could incorporate future updates to include the Civil War and Reconstruction experiences of more Americans.
If you aren't for blasting the images off the mountain, then the part you bolded in red doesn't apply to you, just those that think that doing so will change anything.
Interesting that you see Stone Mountain park as a memorial to the confederacy. I see it as a geological wonder first and foremost, then as an aside, there is a confederate memorial/museum as part of it. It's always been the way I have viewed it as a white southern male. I don't go there to celebrate, in fact it seems rather odd that so much attention to the confederacy was ever established there in the first place. But it was and is and no need to go and re-do it at this point. What would it accomplish? Nothing except divide people even worse than before.
I hate that this racial ripping apart has consumed the psyche of our country so much in the last few years. In my 54 years I have seen so much change for the good in racial mindsets. Not saying at all that we have completely "overcome" as a country... of course there is still much work to do. But things have gone backwards as of late and I'm scratching my head over it all. I don't buy into some of the conspiracy theories out there, but I do wonder why national media outlets seem to be so intent on inflaming this cultural war.
Well Reconstruction is universally viewed by historians as a failure. And almost always because it was too harsh. IMO, the freedmen would have been treated a lot better following reconstruction if Lincoln's path had been followed. Instead, they became easy targets for revenge against the Radical Republicans..
The historians I subscribe to say different. Like I said, it's all a matter of opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2
In a recent example, the anti-Baathist campaign in Iraq is viewed as leading to the Sunni rebellions..
You're using this situation as an example? America had no business being in Iraq in the first place!
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2
After WWII we helped the Germans and Japanese and they became our allies. After WWI the Europeans sought retribution against Germany and that led to the rise of the Nazis and WWII.
Nice conjecture, but it influences nothing on a point that's essentially about opinion, anyways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2
Lincoln proposed reconciliation, not retribution. The Radical Republicans chose retribution and that led to the rise of the KKK and Jim Crow. I think we still feel the impacts today from the policy of retribution.
See above.
I sincerely hope you are not insistent on engaging further in this exercise of futilty. I don't subscribe to your point-of-view on this issue. Flat-out. Point-blank. End of story.
The historians I subscribe to say different. Like I said, it's all a matter of opinion.
You're using this situation as an example? America had no business being in Iraq in the first place!
Nice conjecture, but it influences nothing on a point that's essentially about opinion, anyways.
See above.
I sincerely hope you are not insistent on engaging further in this exercise of futilty. I don't subscribe to your point-of-view on this issue. Flat-out. Point-blank. End of story.
Let's just leave it at that.
If you can simply deal with that, of course.
I knew I wasn't going to convince you. But a lot more people read any particular thread than post on it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
