Removal of Confederate statues and flags?

Scaeva

Ad Honorem
Oct 2012
5,379
#91
Washington is not forcing them to abandon it, all the removal of statues and symbols related to the confederacy were made on a State level, not on a federal one.
It was also cases where the residents of areas where statues were removed wanted them gone, because the statues no longer represented the values of their communities. The outrage over the removal was coming from people outside those communities, who wished to tell others what public art they must have among their own homes.

Take the removal of the Robert E. Lee statue in New Orleans as an example. 60% of the people of modern New Orleans are black, most of whom are descendants of people Robert E. Lee was fighting to keep enslaved.
 

Fiver

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
3,632
#92
There are a lot of variables from the (multi-variate) equation, like Lincoln, that could be removed and there would have been no war (as I just posted).
Had the Republicans nominated someone else in 1860, he still would have won the electoral vote and the Confederacy still would have seceded. Lincoln was one of the most moderate politicians seeking the Republican nomination.

Also, slavery was in the equation from 1783 to 1860, but no civil war.
Most causes of World War I were part of the equation for far longer than 77 years, but that does not mean that nationalism, imperialism, and the shifting balance of power in Europe did not cause World War I.

Entire books, numerous academic papers, and countless words have been devoted to the causes of the Civil War. Don't you think any attempt to boil that down to a single sentence or word must fail?
Confederate leaders clearly and repeatedly said their primary reason for secession to to preserve slavery. Do you contend that the Confederate leaders were lying when they said it was primarily about slaver?
 

Code Blue

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
3,533
Caribbean
#93
Had the Republicans nominated someone else in 1860, he still would have won the electoral vote and the Confederacy still would have seceded. Lincoln was one of the most moderate politicians seeking the Republican nomination.
It is possible that another Republican might have won in 1860, but that doesn't refute the point implied by the question in my post 84 that Democrats were "rebelling" against "Republicans," Lincoln's name did appear in the follow-up post because he is the Republican who won.

Confederate leaders clearly and repeatedly said their primary reason for secession to to preserve slavery. Do you contend that the Confederate leaders were lying when they said it was primarily about slaver?
I do believe them. I also believe them when they reference a sectional or regional party (the Republicans) as a threat. I also believe the South Carolina Ordinance was either intentionally based on Madison's Federalist 43 or written by someone who was otherwise well immersed in the theory of the secession from the Articles of Confederation and Federalism. I also believe them when they write about being fed up with crony capitalism and being perpetually stuck as the end consumers of tariffed goods (which is how the crony capitalism was funded).

While generally I am quite skeptical of politicians words, I find these Southern Democrats to be openly arrogant men, impolitic in their rhetoric, who thought themselves impervious, and who had no reluctance to wear it on their sleeves. They would be different than a couple of recent politicians who were suckered by undercover video-journalists in open duplicity. So, I find the secession ordinance that contain elaborations to be reliable documents, and not just the sentences that have a form of the word slave in them.

I also believe that you should not snip quote Madison. He vacillates,.
 
Last edited:
Jun 2018
112
Philadelphia, PA
#94
Everything is historically justified. I do not think that is the issue here.
Many people get wrapped up in how they personally view these things, instead of how a lot of other people view them.
These people think that these are only symbols of racial oppression and the like, when in fact they are very salient to the people of the South. They are apart of their heritage and culture. Robert E. Lee in particular had a difficult time with his allegiances during the war. The fact is the Civil War was about more than just race issues, so these statues and memorials should also be about more than that.
 
Aug 2012
785
Washington State, USA.
#95
I can understand why people don't like the American South before and after the American Civil War, but they are still Americans. One thing that for sure I refuse to take part in is the double think of others. Just because they feel a certain way, doesn't mean I am expected to have the same bias. Forcing someone to tear down a statue because of how you feel about it is not the American way. Maybe it is in a public space, but people in Virginia or wherever are tax paying citizens like anyone else. I would never get on a bus with a mission to coerce the people of Seattle to tear down their famous Lenin statue, even though Lenin in my mind was far for evil than Robert E. Lee.
 
Sep 2012
3,421
Bulgaria
#96
Guys, you should read the story about how Lenin's statue arrived in Seattle, who commissioned it, the sculptor etc. It is currently held hostage in the political debate about removal of CSA statues. One should realise that it is privately owned and is on private property, so the city cant force its removal.
 

Scaeva

Ad Honorem
Oct 2012
5,379
#98
Everything is historically justified. I do not think that is the issue here.
Many people get wrapped up in how they personally view these things, instead of how a lot of other people view them.
These people think that these are only symbols of racial oppression and the like, when in fact they are very salient to the people of the South. They are apart of their heritage and culture. Robert E. Lee in particular had a difficult time with his allegiances during the war. The fact is the Civil War was about more than just race issues, so these statues and memorials should also be about more than that.
I'd flip that around and argue that is some white Southerners who get too wrapped up in how they personally view the flags, instead of putting themselves in black Americans' shoes or considering the history behind those flags.

Secession was near entirely motivated by a desire to preserve and protect the institution of African slavery. The Confederates themselves declared it in the speeches given at their secession conventions and in the ordinances of secession that they drafted. Slavery was so central to the American Civil War that without it being a divisive issue of the day, there would not have been a civil war. Race issues were central to the conflict.

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product, which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin."

Mississippi Declaration of Secession
 
Last edited:

Code Blue

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
3,533
Caribbean
#99
Scaeva
"The Confederates themselves declared it in the speeches given at their secession conventions and in the ordinances of secession that they drafted["

Code Blue reply:
Six States, a majority of the 11 - Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia - did not cite slavery as a cause. One could argue that 8 out of 13 did not, if one includes the occupation governments of Kentucky and Missouri, whose ordinances were written by "Confederates."
 
Last edited:

Similar History Discussions