Virginia's history is being erased right before our eyes (Richmond: low crime, neighborhood)

[tgbwc]

Originally Posted by Babe_Ruth

I'd say removing someone's grave facilitates erasing their memory. And what the city of Richmond did with Hill was (ghoulish) grave desecration.

If you're ok with digging up Confederate graves & destroying historical statues.. fair enough.
But it's gaslighting when u pretend like removing memorials and statues isn't erasing history. Removing historical markers and statues fits the literal definition of erasing. (peace)

Featuring them in a permanent exhibit does not fit the literal definition of erasing.

Nowhere did I say I was “ok with digging up graves & destroying historical statues”.

[VA Outdoorsman]

Originally Posted by webster

Well he might not have been a racist horse, but that a horse was chosen shows how far down they were reaching for the Lost Cause.

More than half the people living in Virginia were not born here, add to that the descendants of slaves, those who take a critical look at the Confederacy and the leaders it had, both civilian and military, its surprising they are still up. The chance to put them "in context" has passed as the iconography of the Confederacy has been adopted extremist groups.

This is the wrong way to look at it but I'll appreciate that you are more nuanced than some. Confederate iconography has been co-opted -- even you pointed out the statement by the daughters of the Confederacy -- and it's no different than when someone flies an American flag in an immigrant's face and tells them to go back to their own country. That's not what the American flag represents and nazism is not what the Confederate flag represents either. You can't control how others will use symbols and such.


The Left today is even against the American Flag...and they burn it at their protests. Nothing is sacred anymore.

The statues, burial sites and memorials are history. To say otherwise is foolish. Do you think, say, Cyrus the Great's tomb in Iran is not history too? What about the statues and memorials to the old Persian Empire -- are they no longer worthy of being protected now that the Islamic Republic has taken over?


We need to recognize our past as a country. Tearing stuff down because we don't like it is barbaric.

[16 Acres]

Originally Posted by webster

as the iconography of the Confederacy has been adopted extremist groups.

The last sentence in your post above sure is true. Extremist groups have given the Flag and History a negative image for many years now, but more so lately. That and crazy people like Dylann Roof and others out there carrying out their evilness.

It wasn't that long ago that if you went to historic places like Gettysburg for example, in the gifts shops there were both US and Confederate Flags to buy. And it was no big deal.

[Bungalove]

Originally Posted by Babe_Ruth

I'd say removing someone's grave facilitates erasing their memory. And what the city of Richmond did with Hill was (ghoulish) grave desecration.

If you're ok with digging up Confederate graves & destroying historical statues.. fair enough.
But it's gaslighting when u pretend like removing memorials and statues isn't erasing history. Removing historical markers and statues fits the literal definition of erasing. (peace)

Well, in my town (Fredericksburg, we still have the Confederate Cemetery where the graves are honored. We also have Confederate monuments as well. We even have a Confederate Pyramid! However, Jefferson Davis Hwy. was changed to Emancipation Hwy. a few years ago. Big deal.

[FordBronco1967]

Originally Posted by VA Outdoorsman

We need to recognize our past as a country. Tearing stuff down because we don't like it is barbaric.

It's no different than what ISIS did....

As I heard from some people when Boston, Massachusetts put up that horrific statue that's supposed to honor Martin Luther King Jr., "If you don't like it, don't look at it.".... I guess that doesn't apply to Confederate statues, or any other history those people may not like....

[webster]

The statues were used to promulgate a narrative which ignored the reality of the era. Virginia was not united in its fight. Many chose to stay loyal to the Union, there were even Virginians who were Union generals. They ignore the rampant desertion rate - by 1864 half of the soldiers on the regimental army lists were absent, Lee lamented hundreds a night were deserting in 1864 from the Army of Northern Virginia; where do these statutes teach about the bread riots, the stopping of army trains by civilians for food? Where do they teach that the only way the Davis government could control Virginia was through martial law? Where do they teach about counties leaving VA to form WV. It ignored the horrors of slavery.

Had these things been part of the narrative, then perhaps the statues could have been saved, but what they were displaying was not history. It's too late.

[16 Acres]

Originally Posted by webster

They ignore the rampant desertion rate - by 1864 half of the soldiers on the regimental army lists were absent, Lee lamented hundreds a night were deserting in 1864 from the Army of Northern Virginia

We would sure like to see some proof of that. Do you have any links to provide? In general, there were many absent but for legitimate reasons. Separated from their units, sick, wounded and ended up in infirmaries, etc, only to later to be re-united. I have studied that history and read where most of the absentees were only short periods of time.

Originally Posted by webster

where do these statutes teach about the bread riots, the stopping of army trains by civilians for food?

Need more links.

Not really sure what you are referring to there, but if you want to talk about food shortages, medical supplies and other disruptions, I hope you realize that the Union Army did most of it. They burnt bridges, warehouses, mills, torn up rails, stole what they needed and trampled what they left behind.

The Confederate Army as well as brave Civilians did the best they could to stop it.

Originally Posted by webster

Where do they teach that the only way the Davis government could control Virginia was through martial law?

In the whole state? Need more links.

Originally Posted by webster

Where do they teach about counties leaving VA to form WV.

In History Books. That's one thing that was taught pretty accurate.

[webster]

For a starter on desertion rates: https://encyclopediavirginia.org/ent...2012%20percent. https://cwnc.omeka.chass.ncsu.edu/ex...e-to-desertion

Others can delve further into Lee's correspondence on the issue and other Confederate generals. General Order #8 was issued by Lee on March 27, 1865. Even joking about desertion was punishable by death.

For a starter on bread riots:https://encyclopediavirginia.org/ent...riot-richmond/


Martial law was declared in Richmond, Henrico and other counties by Jefferson Davis on March 2, 1862. This was later extended statewide.

For more read: John Minor Botts' memoirs, The Great Rebellion: Its Secret History, Rise, Progress, and Disastrous Failure . (1866). It is still in print.

[16 Acres]

Originally Posted by webster

For a starter on desertion rates: https://encyclopediavirginia.org/ent...2012%20percent.

Appreciate that link. Will read it as time allows. But one line did get my attention:

both the Union and Confederate armies were plagued by deserters

[16 Acres]

Originally Posted by webster

For a starter on bread riots:https://encyclopediavirginia.org/ent...riot-richmond/

The Bread riots was because of the devastation of the war by the Union. Do you really believe there would be riots like that if there was never a war?

I'm wondering whose point you are starting to make. Yours or mine?