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.
Could it be that those who cherish Southern history see their oaths in the same light as Lee, hence their attachment to this historical figure?
In all of this, I am not making a judgment about any person or event. There is, however, a knee jerk reaction taking place in society, and most of it's based on ignorance and misunderstandings.
The consequence of these misunderstandings is hostility and division between people...not good.
I do, at heart, have a utopian view of society, in which all people get along and share mutual respect. Much of the infighting in society today is unnecessary, unproductive, and insidious.
not sure what you are asking but to GEN Lee there was a higher allegiance. That was to the people who took his mother in after his father fled the country leaving him and his mother destitute on the streets when Lee was about 9 years old. These people fed him, clothed him, educated him, and took care of his mother.
There is no way GEN Lee could turn his back on those people even if it meant losing everything he had, including his reputation and legacy.
"The issues of emancipation and military service were intertwined from the onset of the Civil War. News from Fort Sumter set off a rush by free black men to enlist in U.S. military units..."
Free Black men enlisted in ever increasing numbers, to volitionally participate in the Confederate Army, that they might gain full (recognized) personhood, by bolstering the cause of the Confederacy (slavery).
Wow.
Or...could it be that free Blacks saw themselves standing with the Confederacy for reasons outside of slavery? The later makes a lot of sense; the former, not so much.
People will go to great lengths for their freedom.
Though no one knows for sure, the number of slaves who fought and labored for the South was modest, estimated Stauffer. Blacks who shouldered arms for the Confederacy numbered more than 3,000 but fewer than 10,000, he said, among the hundreds of thousands of whites who served. Black laborers for the cause numbered from 20,000 to 50,000.
Those are not big numbers, said Stauffer. Black Confederate soldiers likely represented less than 1 percent of Southern black men of military age during that period, and less than 1 percent of Confederate soldiers. And their motivation for serving isn’t taken into account by the numbers, since some may have been forced into service, and others may have seen fighting as a way out of privation. But even those small numbers of black soldiers carry immense symbolic meaning for neo-Confederates, who are pressing their case for the central idea that the South was a bastion of states’ rights and not a viper pit of slavery, even though slavery was central to its economy.
I need to take a step back, and digest what you have both written.
Again, I thank you both for your time.
***
Separate from the above sentiments:
I am not expecting you to answer for anyone but for yourself.
But this I cannot help but ponder: since we both agree that Southern preservationists claim superiority on the basis of intellectual, nor racial, superiority, why is the reaction to persons that revere certain traditions extreme in nature?
Could such a reaction not be wearisome, at best, and slanderous, at worst?
I say that, to acknowledge the fact that the cycle of hostility is self nurturing; it will never be broken, and we will never be a united people, for as long as misconceptions exist, and we view our neighbors with suspicion and preconceived notions.
How I wish for a solution to make us a whole and united people.
What's tragic about all of this, is that if we all sat down at the same table, we would likely find ourselves with much more in common, than what we have in differences.
My opinion is that an overwhelming majority of southerners have pride for their country/region/state without holding on to feelings of racial superiority. They aren't the problem.
There are "Southern preservationists" who don't fit this category. I expect all decent people to not cut them slack, no matter their color. It's too difficult today for many to condemn them. It shouldn't be that hard to condemn racists, instead of jumping to "both sides" or deflecting arguments. I pray it will improve in time.
If they were dedicated to the Confederacy during the Lost Cause with the usual fanfare and ceremony I can guarantee they could not only be "construed" but be literally interpreted as "supporting white supremacy." It was an explicit priority and value of the organization.
An open letter from the great-great-grandsons of Stonewall Jackson.
Dear Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney and members of the Monument Avenue Commission,
We are native Richmonders and also the great-great-grandsons of Stonewall Jackson. As two of the closest living relatives to Stonewall, we are writing today to ask for the removal of his statue, as well as the removal of all Confederate statues from Monument Avenue. They are overt symbols of racism and white supremacy, and the time is long overdue for them to depart from public display. Overnight, Baltimore has seen fit to take this action. Richmond should, too.
In making this request, we wish to express our respect and admiration for Mayor Stoney’s leadership while also strongly disagreeing with his claim that “removal of symbols does [nothing] for telling the actual truth [nor] changes the state and culture of racism in this country today.” In our view, the removal of the Jackson statue and others will necessarily further difficult conversations about racial justice. It will begin to tell the truth of us all coming to our senses.
Last weekend, Charlottesville showed us unequivocally that Confederate statues offer pre-existing iconography for racists. The people who descended on Charlottesville last weekend were there to make a naked show of force for white supremacy. To them, the Robert E. Lee statue is a clear symbol of their hateful ideology. The Confederate statues on Monument Avenue are, too—especially Jackson, who faces north, supposedly as if to continue the fight.
These statues are not historical artifacts. Pottery found in a well is an artifact. Statues put up in a later time period is not an artifact. As to the rest of your post, this is not the political board.
If you're going to be a word-choice-nazi, at least be a literate one.
ar·ti·fact
ˈärdəfakt/Submit
noun
plural noun: artifacts
1.
an object made by a human being, typically an item of cultural or historical interest.
"gold and silver artifacts"
synonyms: relic, article; handiwork
"hundreds of unidentified artifacts are stored in numerous rooms beneath the museum"
Pretty amazing that the descendants of both Lee and Jackson agree that taking the monuments down is the right thing to do and many still miss the memo.
not sure what you are asking but to GEN Lee there was a higher allegiance. That was to the people who took his mother in after his father fled the country leaving him and his mother destitute on the streets when Lee was about 9 years old. These people fed him, clothed him, educated him, and took care of his mother.
There is no way GEN Lee could turn his back on those people even if it meant losing everything he had, including his reputation and legacy.
Mama comes first.
I got that, for sure, but I thank you for your thoughtful explanation
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.
