When were confederate monuments erected and why?

[randomuser]

1. Let’s be quite clear: the Confederates were traitors. The Constitution itself defines treason in Article III Section 3:

There is no doubt at all that the Confederates met the Constitutional definition. As a matter of prosecutorial and political discretion they were not tried, and so did not incur the legal penalties associated with treason. But, they were undoubtedly traitors.

I know of no country that honors traitors with monuments.

1. It is also undoubtedly clear that conservatives - then Democrats in the South - sought to, and DID, deprive African Americans of their civil and constitutional rights.
2. It’s also clear that these monuments to the Confederates were erected, at least in part, to be a constant reminder to African Americans of the past and current deprivation of rights - they honor the power of white southerners and “put it in the face” of black people.
3. The Republican 'Southern Strategy" of Nixon, GHW Bush, Reagan the Goldwater has undoubtedly transformed the current GOP into the party that now houses the racially intolerant modern day descendants of those who, ante-bellum and until the 60’s at least, once were Conservative racist Democrats. That is, the GOP today is the modern party of racists. Just read the posts on this forum.
4. No one wants to erase history; one can’t really do that.
5. Honoring traitors and pro-slavery leaders who waged war against the United States to preserve slavery is despicable and immoral.

Traitors, and losers.

 

[dvdjs]

Many years ago when I lived in Europe, I saw BBC footage of some Orangemen march. Heroic forbearance all around them. But it seemed to me that the need for such forbearance could be alleviated by even a bit of empathy on the Orangemen’s part. (And a system that relies on it seems overly susceptible to failure.)

I think that that is what is sought here. Let’s avoid things that rub it into others’ faces.

 

[Ridgerunner]

1. Let’s be quite clear: the Confederates were traitors. The Constitution itself defines treason in Article III Section 3:

There is no doubt at all that the Confederates met the Constitutional definition. As a matter of prosecutorial and political discretion they were not tried, and so did not incur the legal penalties associated with treason. But, they were undoubtedly traitors.

I know of no country that honors traitors with monuments.

1. It is also undoubtedly clear that conservatives - then Democrats in the South - sought to, and DID, deprive African Americans of their civil and constitutional rights.
2. It’s also clear that these monuments to the Confederates were erected, at least in part, to be a constant reminder to African Americans of the past and current deprivation of rights - they honor the power of white southerners and “put it in the face” of black people.
3. The Republican 'Southern Strategy" of Nixon, GHW Bush, Reagan the Goldwater has undoubtedly transformed the current GOP into the party that now houses the racially intolerant modern day descendants of those who, ante-bellum and until the 60’s at least, once were Conservative racist Democrats. That is, the GOP today is the modern party of racists. Just read the posts on this forum.
4. No one wants to erase history; one can’t really do that.
5. Honoring traitors and pro-slavery leaders who waged war against the United States to preserve slavery is despicable and immoral.

As an indictment of the dead this fails. The combatants are all dead, and beyond the reach of those who hate them.

As an insult to the millions of people descended from Confederate combatants and civilian casualties, it succeeds in part and fails in part. It succeeds in being nasty. It fails in changing any southerner’s mind about the combatants. And it fails with the majority of the American people, who don’t condone the desecration.

As an indicator of the mean-spiritedness of some on the left, it succeeds entirely. It also succeeds in wrongly painting all liberals as desecrators and haters.

 

[DeniseNY]

As an indictment of the dead this fails. The combatants are all dead, and beyond the reach of those who hate them.

As an insult to the millions of people descended from Confederate combatants and civilian casualties, it succeeds in part and fails in part. It succeeds in being nasty. It fails in changing any southerner’s mind about the combatants. And it fails with the majority of the American people, who don’t condone the desecration.

As an indicator of the mean-spiritedness of some on the left, it succeeds entirely. It also succeeds in wrongly painting all liberals as desecrators and haters.

Exactly

 

[mikekle]

I guess all these people do not recognize this law that was passed in 1958?

So where are all the veterans groups, why are they not standing up and saying something about all this?

 

[dvdjs]

As an indictment of the dead this fails. The combatants are all dead, and beyond the reach of those who hate them.

Hate™
Put me on a pedestal or it’s hate? Can we have even the merest nuance?

And it fails with the majority of the American people, who don’t condone the desecration.

I would say the vast, vast majority, likely including randomuser. There is no indication in his post of support for desecration.

As an indicator of the mean-spiritedness of some on the left, it succeeds entirely. It also succeeds in wrongly painting all liberals as desecrators and haters.

I think it is wrong for this post to be taken as advocacy of hate or desecration.

 

[exnihilo]

1. It’s also clear that these monuments to the Confederates were erected, at least in part, to be a constant reminder to African Americans of the past and current deprivation of rights - they honor the power of white southerners and “put it in the face” of black people.

…

1. Honoring traitors and pro-slavery leaders who waged war against the United States to preserve slavery is despicable and immoral.

Really? What is your ‘clear’ evidence? So far all I’ve encountered is speculation.

To be clear, when I have my coffee each morning from a mug that features an image of Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson I’m being ‘despicable and immoral’?

 

[dvdjs]

Really? What is your ‘clear’ evidence? So far all I’ve encountered is speculation.

To be clear, when I have my coffee each morning from a mug that features an image of Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson I’m being ‘despicable and immoral’?

Why do you do that?

 

[tomarin]

Really? What is your ‘clear’ evidence? So far all I’ve encountered is speculation.

To be clear, when I have my coffee each morning from a mug that features an image of Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson I’m being ‘despicable and immoral’?

Or when I tuck into bed every night in my Robert E. Lee-themed matching sheets and pillowcase? (Just kidding.)

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

I’m boring, I’m drinking my coffee in a Minnie Mouse mug.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Hate™
Put me on a pedestal or it’s hate? Can we have even the merest nuance?

I would say the vast, vast majority, likely including randomuser. There is no indication in his post of support for desecration.

I think it is wrong for this post to be taken as advocacy of hate or desecration.

“Traitors” , 'treason" , “despicable”, “immoral”. Hard to miss the ring of hate in those words, particularly when all said in one short post, some repeatedly.

Nobody is advocating putting anyone on a pedestal except that some poster in some post suggested erecting memorial statues to former slaves, and I think that’s fine, just like the one of George Washington Carver just a few miles from where I live. Very dignified and the site gives a lot of information about his life and accomplishments. He was born here, and lived in slavery here during his young life.

What’s being advocated is tearing down memorials, many or most of them put up while the children of those men or those who served under them were still living. Millions of those descendants live today. I think if some organization undertook to tear down the statue to G.W. Carver and did it, (and certainly those to M.L. King) people would consider that a “desecration”; that is, an attempt to visibly and dramatically demean him, his memory, and his descendants. And I have no doubt whatever, that locals would oppose it, some forcefully.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I’m boring, I’m drinking my coffee in a Minnie Mouse mug.

Well, what you need is something my wife “treated” me to. She brought home a coffee mug that has a porcelain frog in the bottom of it, looking up at the observer. She didn’t tell me about it, just poured coffee in it and let me discover the frog for myself. Nearly jumped out of my skin when I first saw it.

So if you feel your mug is boring, maybe you need a cup with a porcelain frog in it.

 

[exnihilo]

"
Nobody is advocating putting anyone on a pedestal except that some poster in some post suggested erecting memorial statues to former slaves, and I think that’s fine, just like the one of George Washington Carver just a few miles from where I live. Very dignified and the site gives a lot of information about his life and accomplishments. He was born here, and lived in slavery here during his young life.

I believe George was kidnapped and his master had to rescue him. After slavery ended his master raised him and his brother as his own children, had them taught to read, and sent at least George to school.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Well, what you need is something my wife “treated” me to. She brought home a coffee mug that has a porcelain frog in the bottom of it, looking up at the observer. She didn’t tell me about it, just poured coffee in it and let me discover the frog for myself. Nearly jumped out of my skin when I first saw it.

So if you feel your mug is boring, maybe you need a cup with a porcelain frog in it.

Oh no! I recently read about a novelty gift that was a mug that said “Best Husband” but the inside had a hidden message, “Your going to be a dad”. Some wives purchased the mug not knowing what the inside said. Some husbands ended up being a bit shocked.

 

[GKC]

1. Let’s be quite clear: the Confederates were traitors. The Constitution itself defines treason in Article III Section 3:

There is no doubt at all that the Confederates met the Constitutional definition. As a matter of prosecutorial and political discretion they were not tried, and so did not incur the legal penalties associated with treason. But, they were undoubtedly traitors.

I know of no country that honors traitors with monuments.

1. It is also undoubtedly clear that conservatives - then Democrats in the South - sought to, and DID, deprive African Americans of their civil and constitutional rights.
2. It’s also clear that these monuments to the Confederates were erected, at least in part, to be a constant reminder to African Americans of the past and current deprivation of rights - they honor the power of white southerners and “put it in the face” of black people.
3. The Republican 'Southern Strategy" of Nixon, GHW Bush, Reagan the Goldwater has undoubtedly transformed the current GOP into the party that now houses the racially intolerant modern day descendants of those who, ante-bellum and until the 60’s at least, once were Conservative racist Democrats. That is, the GOP today is the modern party of racists. Just read the posts on this forum.
4. No one wants to erase history; one can’t really do that.
5. Honoring traitors and pro-slavery leaders who waged war against the United States to preserve slavery is despicable and immoral.

Can a charge of treason be brought against a non-citizen of the United States? That is to say, not owing allegiance to the United States?

 

[GKC]

I guess all these people do not recognize this law that was passed in 1958?

So where are all the veterans groups, why are they not standing up and saying something about all this?

I don’t think that’s historically accurate, as presented there.

 

[GKC]

Why do you do that?

You ever tried drinking coffee out of your hand?

 

[FirstFiveEighth]

Or when I tuck into bed every night in my Robert E. Lee-themed matching sheets and pillowcase? (Just kidding.)

Lol. That just reminded me of some poetry by Don Williams:

When I was a kid Uncle Remus would put me to bed,
With a picture of Stonewall Jackson above my head
…I guess we’re all gonna be what we’re gonna be,
So what do you do with good 'ole boys like me…

 

[FirstFiveEighth]

1. It is also undoubtedly clear that conservatives - then Democrats in the South - sought to, and DID, deprive African Americans of their civil and constitutional rights.
2. The Republican 'Southern Strategy" of Nixon, GHW Bush, Reagan the Goldwater has undoubtedly transformed the current GOP into the party that now houses the racially intolerant modern day descendants of those who, ante-bellum and until the 60’s at least, once were Conservative racist Democrats. That is, the GOP today is the modern party of racists. Just read the posts on this forum.

Ah, and here it is. The classic “Nixon Southern Strategy”, where it is implied (or straight up boldly stated) that southerners only started voting Republican because Nixon catered to their racism and drew them away from the Democrats. And implicitly all southerners today, or at least the majority who vote Republican, are racists at heart and can therefore be ignored or despised. I’m sure it had nothing to do with an emphasis by the Republican party on “Christian” social values.

I’ve read a lot about the “last acceptable prejudice” on CAF being anti-catholicism, but I propose that there is another “last acceptable prejudice” in this country, in which southerners are by default backwards, religiously fundamentalist, closet racists. In fact I remember once being asked, seriously, by a girl from Michigan if we had paved roads in the south.

I would ask, sir, that you do not paint entire regions of the country based on your prejudices, and I would have you know that the KKK and neo-nazi groups are as despised here as they are everywhere else in the country. Sure, they exist, just as they do in New York, Michigan, Kansas, and California. Living in their trailers where everyone ignores their nonsense. Hint: It wasn’t the residents of Charlottesville, VA waving tiki torches and chanting racist tripe. They wanted nothing to do with those clowns. Perhaps if you visited the south instead of believing in worn out caricatures of it, you would realize this.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Can a charge of treason be brought against a non-citizen of the United States? That is to say, not owing allegiance to the United States?

Just guessing here, but I think there is going to be considerable difficulty in arresting the defendants.