Now they're after the mountain itself! (Stone Mountain, Dallas: income tax, cost of, moving)

[magnetar]

It's not remotely as ridiculous as the state owning and operating a monument to the losing side of a war against the United States.

[Psykomonkee]

This is a dumb topic, but I do have an opinion so here goes it...

I do think it was dumb to have those generals on the mountain in the first place, but whatever. It's there & it looks nice. F who they are, they were idiots and traitors to the nation in the first place.
Honestly, those generals are really no different than having a large Edward Snowden statue put up in Brooklyn...

Really. The Confederacy were traitors. And as a pro American, anything Confederate equals anti-American.

With that being said, I still don't see why have the sculptures removed. It's still history. Good or bad, it's history. To remove them would be the same dumb tragedy as Christians burning books & demonizing Science during the dark ages, or other conquerors destroying the culture of the people they've conquered. Would be about as bad as someone removing the face off the Sphinx. Just leave the sculpture alone. But the flags? That's a different story. Let's be real... F "Heritage..." That flag isn't heritage. It's not even the real Confederate flag. It's the battle flag, therefore it represents nothing BUT Anti-Union aka UNITED States of America... Anti-American behind a series of hateful beliefs with a foundation in complete selfishness, so selfish that one person could hurt another person simply to make their own life a little easier. No different than an ISIS Flag. No different than a Nazi flag... It's an embarrassment to be Southern and look around and see all these people claim this anti-American flag represents Southern heritage. NO IT DOESN'T! STOP! It's embarrassing...

Get rid of the stupid flags. Leave the stupid sculpture...

[magnetar]

Originally Posted by Psykomonkee

With that being said, I still don't see why have the sculptures removed. It's still history. Good or bad, it's history.

I agree with most of what you said, but that carving on the mountain isn't historic. It didn't really get started until 1964 and wasn't finished until 1972. That's historic in the same way a MARTA station is historic. I agree completely that we shouldn't ignore our history, but there's a gulf of difference between learning about the mistake that was the Confederacy in a museum or a textbook, with the proper context, and memorializing the men who fought that war with a monument that was built as a defiant response to the Civil Rights movement, with the generous support of the KKK.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by Psykomonkee

This is a dumb topic, but I do have an opinion so here goes it...

I do think it was dumb to have those generals on the mountain in the first place, but whatever. It's there & it looks nice. F who they are, they were idiots and traitors to the nation in the first place.
Honestly, those generals are really no different than having a large Edward Snowden statue put up in Brooklyn...

Really. The Confederacy were traitors. And as a pro American, anything Confederate equals anti-American.

With that being said, I still don't see why have the sculptures removed. It's still history. Good or bad, it's history. To remove them would be the same dumb tragedy as Christians burning books & demonizing Science during the dark ages, or other conquerors destroying the culture of the people they've conquered. Would be about as bad as someone removing the face off the Sphinx. Just leave the sculpture alone. But the flags? That's a different story. Let's be real... F "Heritage..." That flag isn't heritage. It's not even the real Confederate flag. It's the battle flag, therefore it represents nothing BUT Anti-Union aka UNITED States of America... Anti-American behind a series of hateful beliefs with a foundation in complete selfishness, so selfish that one person could hurt another person simply to make their own life a little easier. No different than an ISIS Flag. No different than a Nazi flag... It's an embarrassment to be Southern and look around and see all these people claim this anti-American flag represents Southern heritage. NO IT DOESN'T! STOP! It's embarrassing...

Get rid of the stupid flags. Leave the stupid sculpture...

Confederates considered any southern unionists traitors.
Loyalists considered any Colonials traitors and vice versa.
If you were somehow able to measure it, those people currently flying the Confederate flags are probably more "pro-American" than the average American.

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by bu2

That article is from the Washington Post so you should take it with a grain of salt. There are some extremists on the Texas textbook committee, but you can't take a northeast source on Texas seriously. I don't see any sources out there complaining about it but far left publications. If I saw more moderate publications complaining I might take it more seriously. I suspect they are taking wording here and there out of context.

Except DC isn't the northeast.

Even so, a "leftist" source like WaPo isn't the only one talking about this.

How Textbooks Can Teach Different Versions Of History : NPR Ed : NPR
State textbook standards on Civil War concern historians, activists - Houston Chronicle
Texas school board approves controversial textbook changes | Need to Know | PBS

[cwkimbro]

Originally Posted by magnetar

I agree with most of what you said, but that carving on the mountain isn't historic. It didn't really get started until 1964 and wasn't finished until 1972. That's historic in the same way a MARTA station is historic. I agree completely that we shouldn't ignore our history, but there's a gulf of difference between learning about the mistake that was the Confederacy in a museum or a textbook, with the proper context, and memorializing the men who fought that war with a monument that was built as a defiant response to the Civil Rights movement, with the generous support of the KKK.

not exactly.

It was really started in 1915. It was planned to be something far bigger than it is now with more than just those 3 main characters. Lee's head was finished in the early 20s.

The original sculptor left the project to do Mount Rushmore after having creative conflicts.

Another sculptor started work on the project almost from scratch, including General Lee's head.

Money to pay for this dried up from the great depression and that sculptor died in 1935, but there was still a considerable amount of work done too. The state bought in 1958 planning to finish it and turn it into a park. That is what started in 1964. In 1972 they finished the compromised scaled down sculpture with the horse legs missing.


Stone Mountain has a very questionable history to say the least, but this was not some cheap piece of fabric the state hung up to be defiant to the civil rights movement.


....

My thoughts on this article and this stance from the NAACP.

At least when it comes to a simply monument or this relief.

It is a very expensive piece of art, a memorial, and the world's largest bas-relief sculpture. Just let it go and let the laser show do its things where they get to break their swords and everyone cheers. It is just three prominent figures on a horse that were an important part of history with no other symbolism on a specific issue.


Some parts of Southern white history and parts of the civil war aren't all about just about slavery. That is way too overly simplistic. Slavery -was- an important issue leading up to the civil War, but that was one issue inter-twined with other aspects of culture in the South and their desire for independence too. It was inter-twined with divisions that started before the popularity of the abolitionist movement in the North. It shouldn't be forgotten, but it shouldn't be pitched as the only and sole justification either.

There were also heavy export taxes on cotton and most Southerners felt that money went to the North. Back then the government got a greater percentage of its taxes through those types of taxes. Income tax didn't exist yet and tariffs were a big income source for the government. The Tariff of 1824, became a big political conflict between the South and the North and that conflict didn't go away. It was designed to protect Northern manufacturers from cheaper European goods, but it harmed anti-tariff reciprocity for Southern raw materials. Basically in those days the US couldn't compete with the superior industry in Europe and Europe couldn't compete with (and needed) the raw materials from the U.S. These tariffs escalated several times. South Carolina actually threatened secession in 1832. For over 35 years there was a battle over tariffs that were north v. south.

Southerners were trying to be independent and be on their own and keep and control their own potential taxes. Make laws to benefit farmers and not just industry at the cost of farmers. The South has always wanted to have greater local independence, even as a part of the US, well before and after the civil war. That was the heart of the Civil war. Sadly, slavery -is- a part of that, but not the only part.

The basic point is.... even though I will talk about slavery and the civil war and don't like people in complete denial over that connection, we don't have to look at every little thing memorializing the civil war and past Southern culture as just slavery. The civil war had a huge impact on the South and the results ended up being good and bad in different ways. Most of it was fought in the South and in the early years of Reconstruction the Republicans (modern-day irony) really economically decimated the South. It was something that brought Southerners together, even more... even though it would remain part of the U.S. It is worth having a memorial with some understanding that not every part of White Southern culture just about slavery.

Now I will agree that lasting abolition of slavery was probably the greatest and longest lasting outcome of the Civil War, it wasn't the only reason it was fought or the only division that existed between the North and South.

So when I see a monument or a memorial in the South regarding the war, I see mixed emotions and I can't support the blind removal of every one of them.

When it came down to the symbol put on the flag in 1956 in blatant defiance of of the civil rights movement... I get it. I wanted that flag gone for years, but if anyone wants to push this debate to every little memorial or other wide spread aspects of Southern culture from that era, they need to start acknowledging other aspects of culture, cultural divisions, and just what had happened to South before during and immediately after the war. It isn't necessarily to "commemorate slavery."



But I do want to end with this. If Stone Mountain Park is to be a memorial of the Civil War, it would seem proper to think of other ways to memorialize the positive affects after it.

Part of me thinks it would be fitting to memorialize the freedom of blacks throughout the park and do more to teach the history of how that happened and what happened after. It was the greatest and longest lasting effect of the civil war after all.

[JMatl]

^Fabulous post, cwkimbro.

Thank you for being a voice of reason.

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by DawgPark

Political correctness gone horribly wrong.

Next, let's dig through history and find any presidents, military leaders, governors, etc who mistreated or spoke unfavorably about women, jews, latinos, homosexuals, transgenders, atheists, American Indians, short people, fat people, poor people, handicapped people - both mental and physical .... and erase them from all visible and written history, as if their moments of mistreating said people defines their entire life, body of work, and contribution to this earth.

Our great country has become a society of whiny victims, just looking for the next person to hurt their feelings.

Doing this would ultimately backfire, because once we're all done erasing history, what will the offended classes have left to complain about?

[bryantm3]

Originally Posted by netdragon

It's art.

I think they should add union troops to the rock face and call it a day.

ditto. the carving was never really completed, so make it an even bigger carving honoring the END of the civil war.

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by netdragon

it's art.

I think they should add union troops to the rock face and call it a day.

no.