Robert E. Lee statue to be removed- The Taliban strikes again (official, race)

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by Cruz Azul Guy

I’ve always questioned why the confederate cause and monuments are even debated as in my mind there is really no legitimate defense for it in 2020 (and nearly 2021). I’ve previously had to remind myself that perhaps as a “northerner” (born and raised in MN) I couldn’t possibly understand things like “southern heritage” etc. However, the more I dig into history and the actual facts and of how things occurred I become exceedingly convinced that my previous intuition was correct - there is nothing to debate here.

I will chime in. As an African-American who grew up in the South, whose father is from the Midwest, and whose mother is from the South, this is what I see. Whenever I hear someone say "southern heritage", it's really a dog whistle and a cop out. I understand it as someone who has grown up in Georgia. I can legitimately claim southern heritage. My mother is a southerner. My father is a northerner (from the Midwest) but his parents are from the South. Like a majority of African-Americans, my ancestors spent generations in the South. It's a joke to me. I actually have southern roots, like most African-Americans do. Most African-Americans can't identify with the Confederates. A majority of African-Americans (a majority of whom are southerners) do not like the Confederate flag.

I've actually told people "hey, the Confederate flag represents the pro-slavery cause". The response was rather swift and peppered with anger. I get the feeling that even if I showed said persons proof, said persons would not accept it. This is the way I understand it. It does not represent southern heritage for Black people. It's a racially charged issue, but an issue for which few will admit is racially charged. Race is wrapped up in all of this, big time.

[Ellis Bell]

Originally Posted by Ellis Bell

What do you want? You're not going to change your mind --- the government has seen to that. Do you want facts --- there's plenty of them. You're not going to find them in the history books or with a history professor --- you will find them in the newsprint of the 1800s and before --- you'll also find them within the cable contents of the Union and the Confederate Armies

The people in the South didn't abide by the laws any better than the ones up North --- laws were different and so are the people

The case of Mrs. Margaret Douglass


Not history book material She was just one that got caught, btw.

Originally Posted by green_mariner

Mrs. Douglas is one woman. Newspaper articles say otherwise. Go look up William T. Thompson, who founded the Savannah Morning News. Thompson advocated for making sure slavery stayed.

And by the way, the Articles of Secession, those are original documents who actually mentioned over and over how important slavery was to the southern economy and were ready to secede over slavery.

Mrs. Douglas is one woman that got caught --- if it wasn't widely practiced, there would be no need to make an example out of her --- to abide by the laws of the State.

There are those that advocate for abortion rights --- there are those that advocate against abortion rights. Why would you think slavery would be any different? One day the unborn will have rights by law, until then ---

The ideas for Secession began right after the signing of the u.s. Constitution. And when you read about it as the news reports it, you will find not one word about Slavery, is mentioned, except where they refer to not wanting to become Slaves of some one who doesn't know the situation on their home-fronts.

Also, within the Articles of Secession there is one line, that many overlook and that is the discussion about those that fled up North and the Northern States 'offering non-better'. We call that today, jumping from the fire right into the fry pan. Also within those articles the ban on importation is held.

Up North the law was there, but then so were the people not really to keen on abiding by those laws, no different from the Southern people, just different laws, that's all.

[Ellis Bell]

Originally Posted by green_mariner

I will chime in. As an African-American who grew up in the South, whose father is from the Midwest, and whose mother is from the South, this is what I see. Whenever I hear someone say "southern heritage", it's really a dog whistle and a cop out. I understand it as someone who has grown up in Georgia. I can legitimately claim southern heritage. My mother is a southerner. My father is a northerner (from the Midwest) but his parents are from the South. Like a majority of African-Americans, my ancestors spent generations in the South. It's a joke to me. I actually have southern roots, like most African-Americans do. Most African-Americans can't identify with the Confederates. A majority of African-Americans (a majority of whom are southerners) do not like the Confederate flag.

I've actually told people "hey, the Confederate flag represents the pro-slavery cause". The response was rather swift and peppered with anger. I get the feeling that even if I showed said persons proof, said persons would not accept it. This is the way I understand it. It does not represent southern heritage for Black people.

There are those that would disagree with you, but you don't want to listen to them, so you don't.

Then you have people up North displaying confederate monuments, confused as to why that can't do that.

[Dane_in_LA]

Originally Posted by Ellis Bell

And when you read about it as the news reports it, you will find not one word about Slavery, is mentioned...

Simply not true. Slavery was the hot political subject for decades. The Southerners called themselves the Slave States. You can't hand-wave that motivation out of existence with some "both-sides-were-bad" BS, hinging on one case of a Southern woman teaching slaves to read and nebulous references to "how the news reported it".

We have the speeches, the books, the pamphlets, the political campaigns, the diaries and - yes - the newspapers. You think the Cornerstone Speech wasn't printed in the paper?

[DUNNDFRNT]

Originally Posted by Humble and Kind

An intelligent answer.

I'm against taking them down as it doesn't bother me, it's a symbol of our past. Similar to someone sober carrying a beer bottle cap. It doesn't represent "worship", it represents our past and how we have progressed as a country.

We have a statue where the twin towers once were, should we get rid of that also? It could be a viewed as a symbol of immigrants that came to harm people. A radical view could be that it was because we let "others" into our nation and label all legal/illegal immigrants as haters of our country. Yes, that is radical AF...but I wouldn't put it past someone who would view it that way rather than a memorial of the lives lost. Same with Pearl Harbor.

The people who flew the plane werent immigrants, they were tourists and students in the case of the ones who went to flight school in Florida. Not radical, wrong, there are a large segment of those statues that were erected as intimidation, we know the organizations who did this, it wasnt hidden, I dont have an issue with all those being taken down, there are cases were they should not be taken down, Can we have a referendum? take down all confederate statues in any public space that is not a museum with other artifacts of the same time period or a battlefield it can go.

[Dane_in_LA]

Originally Posted by Humble and Kind

We have a statue where the twin towers once were, should we get rid of that also?

It's not a statue of bin Laden though, now is it?

[Ellis Bell]

Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA

Simply not true. Slavery was the hot political subject for decades. The Southerners called themselves the Slave States. You can't hand-wave that motivation out of existence with some "both-sides-were-bad" BS, hinging on one case of a Southern woman teaching slaves to read and nebulous references to "how the news reported it".

We have the speeches, the books, the pamphlets, the political campaigns, the diaries and - yes - the newspapers. You think the Cornerstone Speech wasn't printed in the paper?

Early Disunionist, page 807
Early Secesionist, page 515


Harper's magazine. v.24 Dec. 1861-May 1862.

[Ellis Bell]

Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA

It's not a statue of bin Laden though, now is it?

Splitting hairs I see --- park 51, not a statue but it is there and it was a mosque before it wasn't. I'm glad you brought that up, because I wondered what happened to that, controversy. I remember hearing him being interviewed about his plans --- and I thought they would have run him out of town. Money talks ---

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould

Not sure what the Taliban has to do with statues glorifying traitors on U.S. public property.

Lee was a traitor. He led attacks on his own nation.

The Taliban has nothing to do with this. The OP is comparing those who want Robert E. Lee's statue removed to the Taliban. The OP wants the Robert E. Lee statue to remain up. People like me want it taken down, and never put in places of public honor ever again.

[VA Yankee]

Originally Posted by Ultor

The world would be better served if we could remove "Coonman" Northam from the Virginia capitol!

Don't you just hate it when people vote for someone you don't like I understand the feeling, getting ready to countdown and see Donny moving out of the White House.