The protesters in Denver pulled down a civil war statue, but it was of a Union soldier. The three streets around the state capitol are Sherman, Grant, and Lincoln. Should those all be renamed? Is it okay for protesters to pull down the street signs if they don’t like Lincoln, Grant or Sherman?
“Civil war symbolism is one thing everyone can rally around. Let’s start there for the good of the country and leave the rest to another day.”
When I posted this I thought my context was clear. So there is no doubt.
Confederate symbolism is the one thing we can rally around as needing to be removed. Quickly. There is no place outside of battlefield and cemetery sites that should preserved. They deserve no places of honor in our country. Period. That is what I think we can agree on as a super majority in our country.
Just want to make sure a quick read didn’t misinterpret the post.
Mount Rushmore is just a tourist trap, not some site of an important American event, and it really is indisputably stolen land. If we were the country we pretend to be, we’d take a meaningful step and return the land. There are plenty of nifty places to take a photo of your family.
Taking down a statue or monument doesn’t erase Robert E Lee or the confederacy from history, or remove their mention from education or society. Although, it’s pretty ironic that privileged people howl about erasure when they, given every power and choice to do something inclusive, have chosen to erase significant parts of our common history.
You ask for using the process, following the rules, asking permission. How has that worked out for decades? How has the system benefitted those with the power as opposed to those without? How long do we ask people to wait? 50 years? 60? 80? 244? If a few Lincoln Streets or Jefferson Avenues have to be renamed, it is not the end of the country. It is the beginning of making amends, and we should lean into that arc and help it bend towards justice.
(from a white suburban mom, btw. Proud to fly the flag. Proud to ask for better)
Are you suggesting that people don’t support removing confederate statues so the only way to get that done is to end-run around the democratic process? I think most people do support replacing those statues, and it is being done, lawfully, in many places, (including in Richmond, the former capital of the confederacy). Governments of laws are a sign of a civilized society. You would not like the alternative.
If you visit the Saratoga area, seek out the Saratoga monument in a nearby little town, its name escapes me (maybe Victory, NY?)
It is a Victorian-era obelisk. The 4-sided base has 4 niches containing statues of the heroes of the battle: Philip Schuyler, Daniel Morgan, Horatio Gates AND…the 4th niche is purposely left empty, to memorialize the treason of the 4th hero of the battle, BENEDICT ARNOLD. Like Valdemort, he is “unnamed”. Even the Boot Monument at the site of the pivotal encounter of the battle, mentions his valor there, as well as his later treachery, without ever mentioning him by name.
@roycroftmom No, I’m not suggesting that we become lawless, that’s not a solution. But neither is pretending that the processes in place reflect equity or access to the process. Telling people to raise their voice when they are effectively on mute, metaphorically, is something we do to make ourselves feel like we are addressing the issue when we are just punting. Richmond has been promising for years to remove the Lee statue…but never…quite…has…the …ability to do it. When other countries have a populace that want change, we cheer them on and say Democracy In Action!!! and Power of People!! but when it happens here, we fall back on There’s A Proper Way. All of which is to say, I think a good process is reflective of stakeholders’ input, is timely, and nets action. By that metric, our processes for putting up and taking down statues is deeply flawed. It’s always a bad idea to stick to a mistake just because a lot of time has been invested. I don’t love the idea of crowds pulling down statues, but I just don’t think it rises to a calamity.
@Iglooo …whenI say stolen, I mean the federal government had a legal agreement they refused to honor, even when their own courts ruled against ignoring it. Yes, I think we should give those sorts of things a look if we want to shout “nation of laws!” and “freedom and liberty” and mean it. No, I don’t think that applies to every situation. And please don’t kill yourself.
Today’s news states that Richmond has already taken down statues of Stone wall Jackson , Davis, and a naval officer named Maury. The Virginia governor has ordered the removal of Lee as well, which is now being challenged in court. Do we want to ignore the court system as well? Obviously change is occuring.
Yes, those statues on Monument Ave have been removed — due to the public pressure, outcry, and protests. I do not believe the gov would have ordered the immediate removal without those; having done so I don’t see any reason to ignore court challenges. This is the sort of chaos that is sown when the original decisions on monuments (who/how many/what kind/where) was left to only one point of view.
Just a guess, but the current unrest might have had something to do with that.
We stole everything from everybody. Shall we give it all back and kill ourselves?
[/quote]
Red herring. We can’t change the past but we can certainly recognize injustices, long unrecognized and make amends the best we can. Better late than never.
Sounds just like the Boston Tea Party.
This is extremely powerful and helps in the understanding.
I think we can all agree that it is good when politician’s reflect the people’s will and remove statues lawfully.
Extrajudicial action, which some apparently condone, was most often used for lynching, rather than tea parties, so it is not something I endorse. It would be wise to recall its history
You just hit on a point my daughter talked about yesterday. All of this will only make white people (we are white BTW), feel like their doing something when in reality the downing of monuments, which is symbolic, does nothing to help people of color. We need to help by building economic centers where they live. Improve the Healthcare where they live. Improve the education, where they live. The whole tax system needs to change. If we get money for education from our local taxes especially if you own a house. Some of that goes to pay for your local school system. In poor areas, how are they supposed to fix that problem?
The statues on Monument Avenue in Richmond were taken down after the state passed a law allowing such removal as of July 1. The Lee statue is in a court battle. The land was donated with a condition that the statue be protected. If the statue is removed the land could go back to the heirs of the original owners at which point the city or state would buy it from the heirs. But it is going through a legal process. The rule of law and the views of the citizens are being followed in both instances.
How ironic that so many of the statues in question are of those who brazenly broke the law to do what they wanted to do (successfully or unsuccessfully).
- Confederates: levied war against the US, defined as treason in the US constitution.
- Andrew Jackson: ignored a Supreme Court decision (*Worcester v. Georgia*) and negotiated a treaty with illegitimate representatives (Treaty of New Echota) to implement a planned ethnic-cleansing program (Trail of Tears).
Of course, the revolutionary heroes (Washington, Jefferson, etc.) were not exactly following British law at the time either.
I attribute it to a lack of understanding, based on study or experience, of societies which lack governments based on law, @ucbalumnus.
Horrifically murdering people and destroying property are not moral equivalencies.
But yes, it is good when politicians reflect the people’s will when the people’s will is ethical and moral.
The eternal questions that premise raises are (1) is the people’s will ethical and moral, and (2) if so, do the politicians’ actions reflect that will? If those two answers don’t align, then you get people going outside the system. That’s what we are seeing right now. Which one of those answers is off is what we seem to be debating. But seems to me that no matter where we sit, we all have issues with how well our political system has been serving us. No shock that people are self-helping when they don’t trust the politicians.
The Supreme Court is an important force for protecting rights of all citizens. Who exactly, other than you, determines if the people’s will is moral and ethical? That is the idea of checks and balances in our system. If we let each person decide and act on their own, we are lawless.