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.
When did the ballot box have a vote for removing/relocating those confederate statues? The one in downtown Durham was town down by protesters three years ago. Was there a vote on removing that before protesters took it down? Was there a vote on removing the ones that were torn down in Raleigh?
Lincoln himself was a view that secession didn't actually happen -- whole point of fighting a war.
First Inaugural Address March 4, 1861
I hold that, in contemplation of universal law, and of the Constitution, the union of these States is perpetual....It follows....that no State, upon its own mere motion, can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void; and that acts of violence, within any State or States, against the authority of the United States, are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances. I, therefore, consider that, in view of the Constitution and the laws, the Union is unbroken.
First Inaugural Address March 4, 1861
We find the proposition that, in legal contemplation, the Union is perpetual confirmed by the history of the Union itself. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And, finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was "to form a more perfect Union."
Message to Congress in Special Session July 4, 1861
The States have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal status. If they break from this they can only do so against law and by revolution.
When did the ballot box have a vote for removing/relocating those confederate statues? The one in downtown Durham was town down by protesters three years ago. Was there a vote on removing that before protesters took it down? Was there a vote on removing the ones that were torn down in Raleigh?
The confederate statues are repulsive to many people. I totally understand the desire to topple and destroy.
BUT
my lingering thought is that every generation before for hundreds of years has destroyed art in some form or another, fully believing it was the right thing to do at the time. And of course I am tempted to call these stupid confederate statues "art", but that's a whole different discussion. I can't identify a good reason to keep these things up -- I mean, we don't need old Hitler statutes all over Germany to learn about what happened there.
Personally I'd love to see the crowds force the government to remove these statues rather than do it themselves, as I think it's a greater historical record to show that the "state" was influenced by its citizens to do the right thing. Seems more impactful than just knocking it down during a protest, but i am fully aware that I may be splitting hairs and this is just an artificial distinction in my mind.
Exactly what? When the Durham statue was torn down, I just remember reading that it wasn't so easy for the governor or local officials to have these statues removed, even if the majority of voters wanted it, because of the Cultural History Artifact Management and Patriotism Act of 2015. So the ballot box gave us elected officials that would've wanted to be able to remove it, but they were hamstrung by laws set by a gerrymandered general assembly. What hope should waiting for the ballot box give people in a case like this?
Lincoln himself was a view that secession didn't actually happen -- whole point of fighting a war.
First Inaugural Address March 4, 1861
I hold that, in contemplation of universal law, and of the Constitution, the union of these States is perpetual....It follows....that no State, upon its own mere motion, can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void; and that acts of violence, within any State or States, against the authority of the United States, are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances. I, therefore, consider that, in view of the Constitution and the laws, the Union is unbroken.
First Inaugural Address March 4, 1861
We find the proposition that, in legal contemplation, the Union is perpetual confirmed by the history of the Union itself. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And, finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was "to form a more perfect Union."
Message to Congress in Special Session July 4, 1861
The States have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal status. If they break from this they can only do so against law and by revolution.
Just so I am clear what you are arguing.
1. Your position is the southern states never left the Union and therefore...
2. That the Confederate States of America never existed; including their Constitution, an Army made up of State Volunteers and a currency.
3. As such, ~454K CSA soldiers were killed/wounded for nothing?
Because point 2 and 3 being true, pretty much implies that point 1 actually happened.
Exactly what? When the Durham statue was torn down, I just remember reading that it wasn't so easy for the governor or local officials to have these statues removed, even if the majority of voters wanted it, because of the Cultural History Artifact Management and Patriotism Act of 2015. So the ballot box gave us elected officials that would've wanted to be able to remove it, but they were hamstrung by laws set by a gerrymandered general assembly. What hope should waiting for the ballot box give people in a case like this?
Ya he clearly didn't get the subtlety of your post.
There is some seriously revisionist history in this thread......
Even if you leave out the civil war, there's a huge wall of evidence that we should not be honoring the culture that we are trying to leave behind.
Example: Shortly after the civil war, many freed blacks were able to vote in North Carolina. Within years, the North Carolina legislature passed amendments in 1899 completely eliminating the rights of blacks to vote in North Carolina through a literacy test (that was subjectively administered by county officials) - though people who were able to vote before 1867 were "grandfathered in" (preserving the vote for illiterate white men)
The confederate statues are repulsive to many people. I totally understand the desire to topple and destroy.
BUT
my lingering thought is that every generation before for hundreds of years has destroyed art in some form or another, fully believing it was the right thing to do at the time. And of course I am tempted to call these stupid confederate statues "art", but that's a whole different discussion. I can't identify a good reason to keep these things up -- I mean, we don't need old Hitler statutes all over Germany to learn about what happened there.
Personally I'd love to see the crowds force the government to remove these statues rather than do it themselves, as I think it's a greater historical record to show that the "state" was influenced by its citizens to do the right thing. Seems more impactful than just knocking it down during a protest, but i am fully aware that I may be splitting hairs and this is just an artificial distinction in my mind.
Remember when Saddam's statue fell? Every single American media source was cheering for it. People thought it was so powerful that it fell by the hand of regular Iraqis. So, what has changed? When it's black people, and the statues are "muh great great granddaddy fought there", it's a different story? We should wait for the state to do it? I doubt that people voted to erect those statues, so why should we wait and vote to get rid of them?
The confederate statues are repulsive to many people. I totally understand the desire to topple and destroy.
BUT
my lingering thought is that every generation before for hundreds of years has destroyed art in some form or another, fully believing it was the right thing to do at the time. And of course I am tempted to call these stupid confederate statues "art", but that's a whole different discussion. I can't identify a good reason to keep these things up -- I mean, we don't need old Hitler statutes all over Germany to learn about what happened there.
Personally I'd love to see the crowds force the government to remove these statues rather than do it themselves, as I think it's a greater historical record to show that the "state" was influenced by its citizens to do the right thing. Seems more impactful than just knocking it down during a protest, but i am fully aware that I may be splitting hairs and this is just an artificial distinction in my mind.
After WW2 the US (and the allies) forced re-education on the Germans ("DeNazification") and the Japanese. The goal being that if you removed things in society/culture, the economy, politics and laws relating to Nazism / Imperial Fascism , then you rooted it out from the basis of society and therefore mitigating the chance that you would have to fight it again. In fact I believe the Swaztika is illegal in Germany today as are the SS runes. Imagine the Rebel Flag being illegal.....
That didn't happen here. Hardline Reconstruction people wanted that. They wanted the CSA and it's ideals wiped clean from society and politics and law. But the country stopped short of that....and here we are, 155 years later, still having discussions about "honoring heritage" of a country that lasted five years and existed solely because they wanted the right to own other human beings as property.
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.
