Should we see the removal of statues like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. (1 Viewer)

[TheRealTruth]

Recently CNN aired an interview where one of the guests suggested what is in the topic.

CNN's Angela Rye: Washington, Jefferson Statues "Need To Come Down"

CNN's Angela Rye called for statues of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson to come down Thursday on the network. "American history is not all glorious... George Washington was a slave owner. We need to call slave owners out for what they are. Whether we think they were protecting American...

www.realclearpolitics.com

I agree with the removal of confederate statues around the country, but should this also be done for founding fathers?

 

[Dragon]

I realize that it wasn't just slavery, necessarily, that they were fighting over and it's not as clean as this side fought to maintain slavery and the other fought to abolish it, but I believe that absent the issue of slavery, the Civil War most likely is never fought.

I think the point still stands though that a monument honoring a confederate general or soldier wearing battlefield regalia dishonors the memory of slaves whom the Confederacy was hell-bent on continuing to enslave.

From an official open letter that Lincoln wrote to the New York Times in 1862

My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy Slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about Slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save this Union, and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

The issue in Lincolns mind was more the preservation of the union of states than the abolition of slavery according to his own words.

https://www.nytimes.com/1862/08/24/...coln-reply-to-horace-greeley-slavery-and.html

Just to make it completely clear. I actually think that the issue of slavery WAS the most important one, but that was not the way the politicians at the time thought and just shows that nothing is ever just ying or yang.

 

[CoolBrees]

I am embarrassed to say I went to Dachau. I have not been to Auschwitz. Thank you for pointing out my error. I literally have been saying the wrong place for years.

 

[bdb13]

From an official open letter that Lincoln wrote to the New York Times in 1862



The issue in Lincolns mind was more the preservation of the union of states than the abolition of slavery according to his own words.

https://www.nytimes.com/1862/08/24/...coln-reply-to-horace-greeley-slavery-and.html

Just to make it completely clear. I actually think that the issue of slavery WAS the most important one, but that was not the way the politicians at the time thought and just shows that nothing is ever just ying or yang.

Yeah, I'm aware of that Lincoln quote and it's pretty much what I had in mind when I said the Civil War wasn't "as clean as this side fought to maintain slavery and the other fought to abolish it." There may not have been a particularly righteous side to be found but there was certainly a less righteous one.

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

There's a huge number of Lakeview streets that are all named for Confederate "heroes."

yes. yes there are.

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

Did Germany invade Poland again?

geography burn

 

[Tony1Sainstfan]

a local paper just posted a map showing the streets in NO that were still named after confederate generals, et al
streets that i had driven on for decades without realizing the historical context
i would consider myself passably well-informed about things, but i did not know these streets had any connection to the confederacy, thus their import as historical markers is near zero
now with the 'honoring the confederacy' controversy is bloom, the history of these people is re-exposed

I’m going to just bow out of this conversation and admit that you are better educated on this issue than I am.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

We name streets and build statues to honor people and their accomplishments, not for history lessons. Statues and street names make a poor way of teaching people history.

So, what to do about Washington and Jefferson and other major figures in US history who owned slaves or had other notable character defects? It's a bit complex, but for me, I'd look at why we are honoring someone - are we honoring them in spite of those flaws or because of them? I don't think we need to only honor perfect people, humans are complex and filled with flaws, so if we look for perfect heroes, we'll have no one to look up to.

So, for Washington and Jefferson, I think it's clear that the purpose for honoring them is for their contributions to the founding of this nation, and not because of anything related to slavery. So we are honoring them despite their flaws. Contrast that with statues towards Confederate generals and leaders. Why are we honoring them? What were their major contributions to our society today that we still hold dear? What were they known for? For Confederate generals and leaders, they were known for being a major part of a movement that tried to leave this nation of ours and fought and killed American soldiers in order to preserve their states' "right" to own another human. Is that what we want to honor?

The harder question when it comes to Washington and Jefferson is does their contributions that we admire outweigh their flaws? And if they don't should we still honor them? I was all set to say, yes, I believe it's still fitting to honor them for the work they did in the creation of this nation, but someone on this thread (and I'm sorry, I can't remember who) said what can be done that outweighs owning another human, and damn, if that isn't a hard question.

I still lean towards honoring our Founding Fathers, even those who own slaves, but I think pointing out where they fell short of their own ideals is worth doing.

 

[surada]

Recently CNN aired an interview where one of the guests suggested what is in the topic.

CNN's Angela Rye: Washington, Jefferson Statues "Need To Come Down"

CNN's Angela Rye called for statues of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson to come down Thursday on the network. "American history is not all glorious... George Washington was a slave owner. We need to call slave owners out for what they are. Whether we think they were protecting American...

www.realclearpolitics.com

I agree with the removal of confederate statues around the country, but should this also be done for founding fathers?

Should it be done at all? Its our heritage .. good and bad. Would you tear down the Coliseum and the Parthenon? Fill in the Catacombs? Bulldoze the Vatican? How about the Bastille or the Tower of London?

 

[RobF]

Should it be done at all? Its our heritage .. good and bad. Would you tear down the Coliseum and the Parthenon? Fill in the Catacombs? Bulldoze the Vatican? How about the Bastille or the Tower of London?

Seems like we could probably draw a line somewhere between 'statues of slave traders, confederate generals, etc.' and 'the Coliseum'...

 

[Infoman]

I don't see the big issue with statues... Seems like a pointless external target for people get upset about for no reason - when we have real issues to address that are tangible....

Myself - having a heavy Native American (Cherokee Nation) background and bloodline - am not a big "fan" of Andrew Jackson (7th President of the US - founder of the Democratic Party - "Hero" of the Battle of New Orleans). Jackson is essentially "a Hitler-Type" to most Native Americans (responsible for Native American genocide - Trail of Tears - and forced migration of Native Americans) ....

There is an entire square and huge iconic statue dedicated to his greatness right smack in the middle of my home city (and every other street is named after him) - Should there be?

Personally, I see Jackson as a person responsible for murdering an entire generation of my grandmother's people - On the other hand, I recognize his place in American history (even New Orleans history), and understand why others view him differently. And since a statue doesn't define my future, or represent who I am personally - and since we are all allowed our own heritage - I could not care less about the existence of the statue or what people think of it.

I also don't care that my people are mocked as mascots by the Redskins, Chiefs, Braves, etc.

None of it impacts me, because I am looking forward... not backward.

I mean, are we going to take down every symbol in this country that doesn't have a completely controversy free past? Are we going to remove all symbols that offend anyone or reflects poorly on their heritage, or just whoever is screaming the loudest right now?

MLK has been accused by over 40 women of being a notorious womanizer and adulterer... do those faults make his contribution to our history any less notable? If #metoo goes after him, do we remove his name from the streets?

Where is the line?

 

[Incumbent]

Should it be done at all? Its our heritage .. good and bad. Would you tear down the Coliseum and the Parthenon? Fill in the Catacombs? Bulldoze the Vatican? How about the Bastille or the Tower of London?

A lot of relics of the time will remain.

This isn't the reckless attempt to erase history and "heritage" that some are making it, it's a conscious effort by an evolving society to reconsider the people we honor, and in what ways.

If remembering history is the concern, people should be asking why we have done such a poor and incomplete job of teaching the subject. The Tulsa massacre is news to a lot of us in recent years. And Thibodaux, 1887. Inexcusable. There's a lot of history that is being ignored.

Statues of traitors to the U.S. are coming down, meanwhile, it's still too controversial to honor Harriet Tubman on our currency.

History? Heritage? We've only been preserving a facade.

 

[bdb13]

I don't see the big issue with statues... Seems like a pointless external target for people get upset about for no reason - when we have real issues to address that are tangible....

Myself - having a heavy Native American (Cherokee Nation) background and bloodline - am not a big "fan" of Andrew Jackson (7th President of the US - founder of the Democratic Party - "Hero" of the Battle of New Orleans). Jackson is essentially "a Hitler-Type" to most Native Americans (responsible for Native American genocide - Trail of Tears - and forced migration of Native Americans) ....

There is an entire square and huge iconic statue dedicated to his greatness right smack in the middle of my home city (and every other street is named after him) - Should there be?

Personally, I see Jackson as a person responsible for murdering an entire generation of my grandmother's people - On the other hand, I recognize his place in American history (even New Orleans history), and understand why others view him differently. And since a statue doesn't define my future, or represent who I am personally - and since we are all allowed our own heritage - I could not care less about the existence of the statue or what people think of it.

I also don't care that my people are mocked as mascots by the Redskins, Chiefs, Braves, etc.

None of it impacts me, because I am looking forward... not backward.

I mean, are we going to take down every symbol in this country that doesn't have a completely controversy free past? Are we going to remove all symbols that offend anyone or reflects poorly on their heritage, or just whoever is screaming the loudest right now?

MLK has been accused by over 40 women of being a notorious womanizer and adulterer... do those faults make his contribution to our history any less notable? If #metoo goes after him, do we remove his name from the streets?

Where is the line?

I think UTJ's post three above yours hits on the "where is the line?" thing and generally reflects my view:

So, for Washington and Jefferson, I think it's clear that the purpose for honoring them is for their contributions to the founding of this nation, and not because of anything related to slavery. So we are honoring them despite their flaws. Contrast that with statues towards Confederate generals and leaders. Why are we honoring them? What were their major contributions to our society today that we still hold dear? What were they known for? For Confederate generals and leaders, they were known for being a major part of a movement that tried to leave this nation of ours and fought and killed American soldiers in order to preserve their states' "right" to own another human. Is that what we want to honor?

Andrew Jackson is an interesting one though, I'll give you that. MLK example falls into the category of we're not honoring them for that, imo.

 

[Farb]

https://apnews.com/8825a7fce7d07e4d91b4d248fa411a8a

PARIS (AP) — French President Emmanuel Macron has vowed Sunday to stand firm against racism but also praised police and insisted that France wouldn’t take down statues of controversial, colonial-era figures, as he addressed the issues for the first time since George Floyd’s death in the U.S. In a televised address to the nation on Sunday evening, Macron called for the nation’s “unity” at a key moment when the country is trying to put the coronavirus crisis behind while being shaken by a series of protests against racial injustice and police brutality. Echoing American protesters, demonstrators in France have expressed anger at discrimination within French society, particularly toward minorities from the country’s former colonies in Africa.

 

[CoolBrees]

We can all agree there is an actual identifiable difference between a building (colosseum) or an actual battlefield and a statue (Any confederate loser) commemorating said loser right?

I mean, listing out a bunch of historically significant sites and equating them to statues that canonize pro-slavery losers is not exactly apples to apples. More like apples to wingnuts.

The analogy is akin to saying “well we have a memorial at Normandy, Germany shouldn’t have taken down Nazi paraphernalia. where’s the line? It’s a slippery slope”

 

[Dadsdream]

Should it be done at all? Its our heritage .. good and bad. Would you tear down the Coliseum and the Parthenon? Fill in the Catacombs? Bulldoze the Vatican? How about the Bastille or the Tower of London?

Anything related to the British East India Company is tainted with slavery and opium. There's statues to its founders and members all over the world, not to mention the British royal families that profited from it.

How the East India Company became the world’s most powerful business

The trading firm took command of an entire subcontinent and left behind a legacy that still impacts modern life.

www.nationalgeographic.com

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

Should it be done at all? Its our heritage .. good and bad. Would you tear down the Coliseum and the Parthenon? Fill in the Catacombs? Bulldoze the Vatican? How about the Bastille or the Tower of London?

you're conflating monuments with public use structures
statues exist only as a piece of memorabilia - removing them ONLY removes their visual impact
you're are arguing "why not just bulldoze Beauregard school?'
that's nonsensical since it's just cutting off nose to spite your face
obviously schools named after bad people were renamed

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

https://apnews.com/8825a7fce7d07e4d91b4d248fa411a8a

PARIS (AP) — French President Emmanuel Macron has vowed Sunday to stand firm against racism but also praised police and insisted that France wouldn’t take down statues of controversial, colonial-era figures, as he addressed the issues for the first time since George Floyd’s death in the U.S. In a televised address to the nation on Sunday evening, Macron called for the nation’s “unity” at a key moment when the country is trying to put the coronavirus crisis behind while being shaken by a series of protests against racial injustice and police brutality. Echoing American protesters, demonstrators in France have expressed anger at discrimination within French society, particularly toward minorities from the country’s former colonies in Africa.

seemingly he's playing both sides waiting to see if the 'tear it down' movements sputters
i imagine he's giving a different speech in 3 weeks

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

I think UTJ's post three above yours hits on the "where is the line?" thing and generally reflects my view:



Andrew Jackson is an interesting one though, I'll give you that. MLK example falls into the category of we're not honoring them for that, imo.

i'd be interested in us examining whether any person (other than Steve Gleason) deserves a statue - almost all people are way too flawed to deserve lionizing
erect statues/public works to ideals or accomplishments, then have some rider in the commission saying the city (or wherever) will revisit the commission every 20 years to determine if it stands or something else goes in its place