When were confederate monuments erected and why?

[phil19034]

It looks like some modification of my statement is in order. The transformation I thought took place in the wake of the Civil Rights movement actually did not take place until the Reagan era.

What I can still say though is that the Democrats who fought for slavery were mostly in the South. The whole party did not adopt that view. And that wing of the party has passed on, leaving no ideological descendants today.

There are still racist Democrats in the rural south.

 

[randomuser]

The Civil War monuments erected in the 1960’s were not meant to be an affront to the civil rights movement. In the cases of Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville they were meant to commemorate the centennial of that particular battle. It’s almost unfortunate that the civil rights movement had to happen exactly 100 years after the Civil War.
People need to learn and appreciate history.

That’s what books and museums are for. How, exactly, do you learn by looking at a statue? And not just any statue, but the loser’s 2nd place consolation prize.

Do we ask Jewish Americans to honor the Gestapo losers of WWII? I’m sure they have statues, too.

Books, people, books-! History’s not going anywhere.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

My Irish ancestors got the short end of the stick vs the English. Consistently, I may add. They were long gone by the time the Irish finally obtained their independence. But I would be dang insulted if they were called “losers” in the pejorative sense that term is used now.

Regarding the Civil Rights Act of 1964, sure it was President Johnson’s initiative, but it took the Republicans to provide the majority of the Congressional votes in both houses to pass that into law. Previous iterations were consistently voted down by Democrats across the board. Believe JFK voted against the 1957 version, for instance. What about Richard Byrd, just because he was a Democrat, he gets a pass?

But the split was starting to happen in the 1960’s. In 1968, the Democrat Party nominated a pro-Great Society liberal from Minnesota (Hubert Humphrey) and the southern Democrat reaction to that was to get behind George Wallace’s run as an independent. The swing of the southern Democrats into the Republican column didn’t really take hold until the 1980 election. By then, we had over a decade of experience with the Great Society laws passed under Johnson and that experience was what caused this change of sides to occur the way it did.

 

[RyanBlack]

Far too many of us have forgotten the Constitution which enumerates those powers given to the federal government. All others are to be left to the states. These days far too many, IMO, do not want to operate this way.

The Civil War was fought for reasons other than slavery. There were economic reasons in that the North wanted to raise taxes on goods produced in the South, such as cotton. The South wanted to secede from the Union. Just how many people in the South do you think had slaves? Certainly not the majority. Some of the revisionist history is really sad since history and geography are not taught in schools anymore, all of which leaves too much for those who wish to denigrate a time they do not know because of some ideological theme in this time.

Please read the various articles of secession and Alexander Stephens’s Cornerstone Address. The CSA formed for the express purpose of preserving slavery, and they fought the war with the goal of maintaining the right to keep slaves.

 

[Ridgerunner]

There are still racist Democrats in the rural south.

Nor in the urban North, either.

 

[FirstFiveEighth]

Some quotes for people such as randomuser here, who see nothing but black and white, racists vs non-racists, good vs evil in the Civil War rather than a complicated event that has reverberated through US history since:

Firstly, did you know that President Lincoln asked the band to play “Dixie” after Lee’s surrender at Appomattox?

President Johnson in 1866:

The idea of muzzling the press and tying the tongue of the people of the South, after the manner of the suspicious tyrants, he denounces as absurd. A people should be allowed to grumble who have suffered so much, and they would be unworthy the name of men if they did not respect the brave officers who have suffered with them, and honor the memory of their gallant dead who sleep on a hundred battle fields around their homes.

President Johnson … does not anticipate anything like a Democratic majority in the next Union of Representatives, though the number of Representatives of that party will doubtless be considerably increased. But he does count confidentially on the return of a majority of moderate men, who will be prepared to deal with the people of the South as all honorable and high-minded nations deal with their antagonists after having beaten and disarmed them. And in districts and states where the Republican party fail to nominate such men he thinks Democratic candidates will be likely in a majority of case to be elected over Radicals. The President is unhesitatingly of the opinion that the only safety of the nation lies in a generous and expansive plan of conciliation, and the longer this is delayed the more difficult will it be to bring the North and the South into harmony. If the suspicious, tyrannical policy is too long pursued, the population of the South will become as hostile in time to the North as the people of Ireland are toward England, adding to this evil of hereditary and growing animosity an ability for revenge a hundred fold greater than Ireland possesses.

Robert E. Lee’s resignation letter:

Arlington, Washington City, P.O
20 Apr 1861

Lt. Genl Winfield Scott
Commd U.S. Army

Genl,
Since my interview with you on the 18th Inst: I have felt that I ought not longer to retain any Commission in the Army. I therefore tender my resignation which I request you will recommend for acceptance. It would have been presented at once but for the struggle it has Cost me to separate myself from a Service to which I have divoted all the best years of my life, & all the ability I possessed. During the whole of that time, more than a quarter of a century, I have experienced nothing but kindness from my superiors & the most Cordial friendships from any Comrades. To no one Genl have I been as much indebted as to yourself for kindness & Consideration & it has always been my ardent desire to merit your approbation. I shall carry with me, to the grave the most grateful recollections
of your kind Consideration, & your name & fame will always be dear to me. Save in the defense of my native state shall I ever again draw my sword. Be pleased to accept any more [illegible] wishes for “the Continuance of your happiness & prosperity & believe me

Most truly yours
R E Lee

Lee’s father was an American hero of the Revolutionary War, having served as Washington’s right hand man. The man (Robert) was even married into Washington’s family.

cont…

 

[RyanBlack]

There are still racist Democrats in the rural south.

Yes there are. At the same time, a lot of those racists in the South are now Republicans.

 

[FirstFiveEighth]

The state of Virginia voted 2 to 1 against succession after South Carolina left the Union. When Lincoln decided to raise an army to put South Carolina in its place and asked the states to provide men, Virginia then voted 2 to 1 to succeed. Many other southern states were in the same boat. It was the decision of President Lincoln to start a war that drove the mass succession of Southern States. And they fought an almost entirely defensive war, although they probably could have ended it day 1 after Bull Run by marching directly to Washington instead of doing the gentlemanly thing and letting the enemy retire.

Virginia’s governor:

HON. SIMON CAMERON, Secretary of War:

SIR: I received your telegram of the 15th, the genuineness of which I doubted. Since that time (have received your communication, mailed the same day, in which I am requested to detach from the militia of the State of Virginia “the quota designated in a table,” which you append, “to serve as infantry or riflemen for the period of three months, unless sooner discharged.”

In reply to this communication, I have only to say that the militia of Virginia will not be furnished to the powers at Washington for any such use or purpose as they have in view. Your object is to subjugate the Southern States, and a requisition made upon me for such an object – an object, in my judgment, not within the purview of the Constitution or the act of 1795 [the Militia Act] – will not be complied with. You have chosen to inaugurate civil war, and having done so, we will meet it in a spirit as determined as the Administration has exhibited towards the South. Respectfully,

JOHN LETCHER.

The primary reason you see so many statues of Robert E. Lee in the southeast and mid-atlantic states is that he was one of the major contributors to peaceful reconciliation between the North and South after the end of the war. Lee led by example to “bury the sword” and become good citizens of the Republic again. Without him, guerrilla warfare probably would have continued for years afterwards. He died only 5yrs later after the end of the war. The statues of him were done in this spirit of reconciliation, as an olive branch to heal the sectarian divisions.

Dwight D. Eisenhower on Lee:

General Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation. He believed unswervingly in the Constitutional validity of his cause which until 1865 was still an arguable question in America; he was a poised and inspiring leader, true to the high trust reposed in him by millions of his fellow citizens; he was thoughtful yet demanding of his officers and men, forbearing with captured enemies but ingenious, unrelenting and personally courageous in battle, and never disheartened by a reverse or obstacle. Through all his many trials, he remained selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his faith in God. Taken altogether, he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history. From deep conviction, I simply say this: a nation of men of Lee’s calibre would be unconquerable in spirit and soul. Indeed, to the degree that present-day American youth will strive to emulate his rare qualities, including his devotion to this land as revealed in his painstaking efforts to help heal the Nation’s wounds once the bitter struggle was over, we, in our own time of danger in a divided world, will be strengthened and our love of freedom sustained.

Let us not devolve to some cartoon, comic book version of civil war history in which the losing side were black hearted villains and the winning courageous heroes. To hold people of the past accountable to current, 21st century, 2017 values is unfair and unrealistic. And to compare the confederate states or those who served in the confederacy to Nazi Germany, Hitler and Hess is dishonest and does nothing more than shut down any conversation.

You are of course free to disagree with whether or not civil war memorials should stand in public places. But I think you owe it to those memorialized and those who did the memorializing to actually understand their motivations and their mindset before you go on a righteous crusade.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

Please read the various articles of secession and Alexander Stephens’s Cornerstone Address. The CSA formed for the express purpose of preserving slavery, and they fought the war with the goal of maintaining the right to keep slaves.

I realize that this is easy to say in retrospect, but it was too bad the war had to be fought. Slavery would have pretty much disappeared on its own by the 1880’s due to advances in agricultural machinery making it uneconomical for plantation owners to keep slaves year round. Agriculture for the little guy then evolved into sharecropping which may very well have been tougher than slavery. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that when the industrial North built and expanded factories in the late 19th and early 20th centuries that they drew large numbers of black migrants from the South into their work forces. Which is where the large black populations of Detroit, Fort Wayne, Toledo, Chicago, etc. come from.

 

[ucfengr]

This graph shows the timeline of the erection of confederate monuments from the time of the Civil War to the present. It is interesting to note that relatively few monuments were erected in the 30 years following the Civil War, which one might expect if their purpose was to “preserve history.” The biggest push for confederate statues happens to coincide nicely with the peak of the Jim Crow era. Another peak occurred right during the Civil Rights movement.

Coincidence? I think not.

A more reasonable explanation for the timing of these monuments is that they were erected at times of racial tension by those in power who wanted to maintain that power by glorifying the men who fought for that cause.

They also happened at a time when Civil War veterans were starting to die off. The time coincides with the creation of a lot of Union memorials as well. A similar thing happened about a decade ago when the World War 2 generation started dying off. You had the creation of the National WW2 Memorial in Washington, the hugely successful TV miniseries “Band of Brothers” about soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division, and Ken Burns documentary in WW2. Racism may have had a role, but I suspect nostalgia was the main culprit.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Please read the various articles of secession and Alexander Stephens’s Cornerstone Address. The CSA formed for the express purpose of preserving slavery, and they fought the war with the goal of maintaining the right to keep slaves.

Probably was true from his perspective and no few others.

In lots of places, it wasn’t. In my state there were very, very few slaves. Very few people had any stake in it. The whole economy was different, and favored small holders and immigrant-labor-industry over deep south monoculture “agribusiness”. Slavery wasn’t the issue. The issue was whether the state could remain neutral. The state didn’t want a federal draft in Missouri or armies fighting amidst, and living off, the population either. As we know, there was draft resistance in some of the northern states as well and a great deal of carnage in quelling it.

Whether the Confederacy would have allowed Missouri to remain neutral or not, I don’t know. But the Union wouldn’t allow it and the ensuing war was terrible here. I recall reading that at a point in Jasper County (where Joplin and Carthage are, and were then) there were only 64 residents left in the whole county, it was that bad.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Yes there are. At the same time, a lot of those racists in the South are now Republicans.

And a lot of racists in the North are Democrats. What does any of that mean?

 

[venite_adoremus]

(1) Let those among you who do not have any “racist” ancestors whatsoever, on the fourth generation back, be the first to cast a stone. And be prepared to prove it. You’d be surprised where your roots go.

(2) Agree with previous poster. The Civil War Centennial was the occasion for raising many a statue and enshrining many a memorial across the nation. Would it surprise you to learn that many were funded by the Sons of the American Revolution??? There were two sides in the war. One lost on the battlefield. The rest of us lose now if we allow the hatreds, real and imagined, surrounding this war to resurface.

(3) The only ones who had a right to those hatreds were the actual survivors of combat–those who had lost arms, or legs, or cognizance thanks to their opponents. But you know what? THEY FORGAVE EACH OTHER. They sought camaraderie in each other, Federal and Confederate alike. In Washington State they had common campfires. For example, Miller Post #31 (Seattle) of the GAR and its commander James Langley was responsible for hosting a gathering of all-city veterans at the instigation of one of its members. Langley is buried within sight of the contentious “Confederate” memorial at at local cemetery, which is in reality a grave stone. The last surviving Union veteran in Washington, Hiram Gale, was a pallbearer for the last surviving Confederate veteran in Washington, Pleasant Crump. Confederate veterans are entitled to US Government grave stones. And the vets held joint reunions at the battlefields, most famously in 1938 at Gettysburg, when a National Peace Memorial was dedicated.

(4) Refuse to hate. Today. That’s what Jesus would do.

 

[Robert_Bay]

FINAL WARNING

Charitably discuss the issues, not each other or this thread will be closed

 

[7_Sorrows]

Funny. People appear to hate statues. Some churches think we actually worship statues.
We all know this is totally false.
I have been here in the Deep South for over 30 years. Never once have I had a “hankering” to loll about and think about these statues. I consider it part of the history of this place, nothing more.
I doubt if the millions of people who saunter past them give them another thought.
It’s STUFF.
STUFF doesn’t make people behave one way or another.
It would be a shame to simply erase the history we don’t like.
They don’t harm me, they don’t influence me, and I don’t study them.

It seems like people could spend their time in more PRODUCTIVE endeavors, like trying to get along. Maybe even learn from history.

I agree 100%!

 

[LeafByNiggle]

There are still racist Democrats in the rural south.

Remember, the issue of the role of Southern Democrats in the erection of confederate monuments was first raised by josie in post #5, apparently for the purpose of using this controversy to tar Democrats in general. The discussion was originally about the reason for the monuments based on their timing, irrespective of the party affiliation of the ones putting them up. The observations that many Southern Republicans are racist or that there are racist Democrats in the South are irrelevant and should not be pursued any further in this thread, OK? It isn’t about casting blame. It is about the question of whether the monuments were erected for educational and historical reasons or for asserting racial dominance. These questions may inform the decision to remove the statues or leave them standing, which is a current issue in the news these days. No one is talking about which party erected them, and such considerations cannot possibly carry any weight in the decision of what should be done with them now.

 

[FirstFiveEighth]

When I was in college I was buying textbooks one semester and as I was perusing the shelves for my books I came across one on how different cultures memorialize and remember their dead. Being the history buff that I am, I skimmed through it for a while. I wish I could remember the title, as it would be an interesting read now. It talked about how the British and American custom was to bury officers with their men, while the Germans tend to either memorialize a few individuals, or just have a single memorial simply dedicated to all those who “died for Germany”. It also went into civil war memorials.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Funny. People appear to hate statues. Some churches think we actually worship statues.
We all know this is totally false.

The issue at hand is not about statues in general. It is about monuments to confederate leaders.

I have been here in the Deep South for over 30 years. Never once have I had a “hankering” to loll about and think about these statues. I consider it part of the history of this place, nothing more.
I doubt if the millions of people who saunter past them give them another thought.

Perhaps that is because the message of these memorials does not threaten you. But imagine how someone who is already feeling despised might feel threatened by these displays.

It’s STUFF.
STUFF doesn’t make people behave one way or another.

Symbolic stuff certainly can do that. The sight of the American flag in the center of town can inspire a love of country. That translates into behavior.

It would be a shame to simply erase the history we don’t like.
They don’t harm me, they don’t influence me, and I don’t study them.

There are much more effective ways to preserve history in greater detail than a bronze statue. Things like books. Or a neutral plaque minus the bigger than life image on a pedestal.

It seems like people could spend their time in more PRODUCTIVE endeavors, like trying to get along. Maybe even learn from history.

They have learned from history. That is why they want the monuments removed.

 

[FirstFiveEighth]

That’s what books and museums are for. How, exactly, do you learn by looking at a statue? And not just any statue, but the loser’s 2nd place consolation prize.

Do we ask Jewish Americans to honor the Gestapo losers of WWII? I’m sure they have statues, too.

Books, people, books-! History’s not going anywhere.

That is such a non-argument though. You can say “books” and “museums” for anything.

“Why erect a memorial to the Space program? Haven’t you heard of books?”

“What do you need a holocaust memorial for, haven’t you seen a museum?”

“Why should we have a statue of Jesus in public? Don’t you have a Bible?”

 

[DarkLight]

That is such a non-argument though. You can say “books” and “museums” for anything.

“Why erect a memorial to the Space program? Haven’t you heard of books?”

“What do you need a holocaust memorial for, haven’t you seen a museum?”

“Why should we have a statue of Jesus in public? Don’t you have a Bible?”

I think the argument is that there’s a difference between “remembering” and “commemorating” or “celebrating.” Public monuments are generally meant to do more than simply help us remember, but to express certain values and goals.