St. Louis to remove Confederate monument (Republic, Union: dangerous, metropolitan, building)

[MUTGR]

Originally Posted by green_mariner

Why should we even been honoring Confederates in the first place?

Because they were Americans welcomed back into the fold after the Civil War. And because their descents have contributed greatly to this country and have fought in our many wars since and have otherwise made this country what it is. The war ended. The US welcomed them back, their descendants raised monuments to their fallen dead. They stood for 100 plus years. Now it's a controversy. Why? A lot of us are sick and tired of the PC crap. And aren't listening to it any more. And the slippery slope problem is real: if you take their monuments you take the founding fathers and many heros since.

We aren't interested in that.

[mjtinmemphis]

Originally Posted by MUTGR

the City of St. Louis:

Feared removal of Texas hero's statue prompts armed protest | Fox News

We might have one of these shooting matches again. The lines will be different I'm sure.

This says a lot about the times we are living in.

[1grin_g0]

One has to wonder what is the goal of the people that want to remove these monuments. If the goal is to stir up racial tension and strife, then they are doing a great job no doubt.

I think one of the benefits to having these Civil War monuments is that they are a reminder of how far we have come as a country. Unfortunately, politicians will stop at nothing to score a few points.

[FrankMiller]

Everything was fine when the oppressed underclass quietly wasted away in obscurity, but now they're stirring things up with talk of rights and respect!

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by MUTGR

Because they were Americans welcomed back into the fold after the Civil War. And because their descents have contributed greatly to this country and have fought in our many wars since and have otherwise made this country what it is. The war ended. The US welcomed them back, their descendants raised monuments to their fallen dead. They stood for 100 plus years. Now it's a controversy. Why? A lot of us are sick and tired of the PC crap. And aren't listening to it any more. And the slippery slope problem is real: if you take their monuments you take the founding fathers and many heros since.

We aren't interested in that.

Correction. They were traitors who got off easy. The truth is under normal circumstances, they would have been tried and possibly executed for treason. They might have been good American soldiers at one point, but once the likes of Lee, Jackson, and Davis chose the Confederacy over the USA, they became traitors. They are lucky.

Yes, those statues stood for 100 years. 100 years too long. They should have never gone up in the first place. They were erected as a assertion of "we do Jim Crow here, we hate the U.S. government, and we honor the Confederate cause, even if we can't have as much of it anymore". The Confederate cause is an inherently dishonorable cause. The evidence shows that the main goal was to keep and expand slavery. That cannot be refuted. Honoring Confederate soldiers means honoring the Confederate cause. The Confederate cause is inherently a threat to me. Call taking those statues PC all you want. I'm glad they're coming down. They have no place in 2017. Taking those statues down is saying "look, the South lost, get over it or leave".

And comparing the Confederates to the founding fathers of this country is inherently false. Their causes were far different from the Confederates. That is why the Founding Fathers won't come down. Most people understand the difference.

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by FrankMiller

Everything was fine when the oppressed underclass quietly wasted away in obscurity, but now they're stirring things up with talk of rights and respect!

And those statues represent the idea of "Blacks should know their place". That is why said statues were erected throughout the South. It was done as an affront to equal rights. It was done as an affront to the DC government. It was done as a way of saying "we do things differently in the South".

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by 1grin_g0

One has to wonder what is the goal of the people that want to remove these monuments. If the goal is to stir up racial tension and strife, then they are doing a great job no doubt.

I think one of the benefits to having these Civil War monuments is that they are a reminder of how far we have come as a country. Unfortunately, politicians will stop at nothing to score a few points.

The truth is, anything related to the Confederacy is a sore spot with Blacks. The racial tensions were already there. Stirring up racial tensions was not the goal. Taking the statues down only showed how divided of a society we have ALWAYS been. This society has always been divided with racial tensions.

There is a difference between a Civil War monument and honoring Confederates. Confederates should never be honored. The Confederate cause was and is a dishonorable one. Period. Confederate tributes needed to stop, period. If there are those who haven't gotten over the South losing, now is past the time to get over it.

[MUTGR]

Originally Posted by green_mariner

Correction. They were traitors who got off easy. The truth is under normal circumstances, they would have been tried and possibly executed for treason. They might have been good American soldiers at one point, but once the likes of Lee, Jackson, and Davis chose the Confederacy over the USA, they became traitors. They are lucky.

Yes, those statues stood for 100 years. 100 years too long. They should have never gone up in the first place. They were erected as a assertion of "we do Jim Crow here, we hate the U.S. government, and we honor the Confederate cause, even if we can't have as much of it anymore". The Confederate cause is an inherently dishonorable cause. The evidence shows that the main goal was to keep and expand slavery. That cannot be refuted. Honoring Confederate soldiers means honoring the Confederate cause. The Confederate cause is inherently a threat to me. Call taking those statues PC all you want. I'm glad they're coming down. They have no place in 2017. Taking those statues down is saying "look, the South lost, get over it or leave".

And comparing the Confederates to the founding fathers of this country is inherently false. Their causes were far different from the Confederates. That is why the Founding Fathers won't come down. Most people understand the difference.

They were talking about it on KMOX radio this morning on Charlie Brennan's show. Several callers made the same point I have: the focus of the new mayor should be on fighting crime, not 100 year old statutes. Apparently I'm not alone in that regard.

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by MUTGR

They were talking about it on KMOX radio this morning on Charlie Brennan's show. Several callers made the same point I have: the focus of the new mayor should be on fighting crime, not 100 year old statutes. Apparently I'm not alone in that regard.

And if you want to talk about that, a separate thread would be a better idea. If you know anything about me, you know I've discussed crime issues. This thread is not the time or the place to do this. Different thread for a different time. Instead of deflecting from the topic, perhaps it would better to admit that maybe many people have a very good reason for wanting those statues down, despite you calling it "PC".

[1grin_g0]

Originally Posted by green_mariner

And if you want to talk about that, a separate thread would be a better idea. If you know anything about me, you know I've discussed crime issues. This thread is not the time or the place to do this. Different thread for a different time. Instead of deflecting from the topic, perhaps it would better to admit that maybe many people have a very good reason for wanting those statues down, despite you calling it "PC".

This may not be the thread to have an in depth discussion about crime, but it is certainly appropriate to point out the priorities of the STL city government. The money that would be spent on removing the monument could instead go to fighting crime, so in that way the issues are connected. The money could undoubtedly be spent on something more effective, something that could actually improve the lives of St. Louisans.

Case in point:

St. Louis police warn of 'mass exodus,' but numbers are anecdotal | Law and order | stltoday.com