Modern sensitivities and Historical Remembrance

-Says he doesn't care
-Says noone gives a fuck about Civil War in the world except "buttblasted Americans"

I don't know man, that sounds like a troll to me, than "IDC about this part of history"

I support relocating the statues because they're literally traitors, not because they were racists.

It's a historical memorial, leave it up. If it's moved to a museum, the fuckers will just try to shut down the museum because they "support racism" or some shut and then that's even more history gone so it is what it is. Obviously America doesn't uphold the standards of that flag anyone with a peabrain could realise that.

We have a nationalist here bois

Look up Cultural Revolution in China

It's the same concept. A bunch of antifa commies who want to erase history and replace it with their cultural Marxist degenerate nonsense

>Complains about traitors
>His country was founded by traitors.

Doesn't the sheer amount of white nationalists that turned up to support it prove that it is still a symbol that perpetuates racism and not just an innocent piece of history?

It's a dumb statue that no one cared about until someone wanted to remove it.
t. lived in Charlottesville for years

it's just a statue, it has no real value

You're only a traitor if you lose. They lost.

they also turned out to support the statues of Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson. It's a little silly to paint the an entire side by a small minority of it.

There was another rally in support of a confederate monument in Texas yesterday as well and the organizers explicitly banned all klansmen, neonazis, and skinheads from participating.

>I create my own definitions

hmm... really makes you think. Jeff Davis wasn't even convicted of Treason because the union could barely make a case.

they were terrorists

>If it's moved to a museum
Why would it move to a museum anyway? It has neither artistic nor historical value. It's not an actual Civil War-era artifact, just a lawn ornament made many decades later by a forgettable craftsman.

A state judge ruled it was a historical site and it was illegal to tear down the statue.

Go figure.

I wouldn't support it being destroyed but I would be okay with it if they moved to a less public space.

>A state judge ruled it was a historical site and it was illegal to tear down the statue.
No such thing happened. A court granted a temporary freeze on removing the statue while there's an on-going legal battle over the status of the statue.

Let's try to keep topic and away from personal value judgments as possible. For example, what about the recent calls to remove the statue of Cecil Rhodes from the Oxford university last year? In the end it was put to a vote and finally decided to leave it as such.
theguardian.com/education/2016/jan/28/cecil-rhodes-statue-will-not-be-removed--oxford-university

I think they made the right call, I'm not normally one to fall for the slippery slope argument but the "editing" of history out of public sight makes me feel uneasy. It doesn't change the past, it simply makes it easier to forget.

It's not being removed. It's being moved from public property to a fucking a museum.

No shit.

The most unpleasant aspects of history are the most important to remember.

That whole conversation only really takes about thirty seconds to finish, which is why the peanut gallery moves on to the next topic.

this monument removal is very cultural revolution esque

i wonder how many works of classical antiquity representing people or gods who fell into disfavour disappeared or crumbled away because of the same impulse in christian rome?

damnatio memoriae is not a new concept.

>this monument removal is very cultural revolution esque
So is erecting monuments all over the fucking place.

I don't understand going after Lee. He was a stand up guy and didn't have much of a choice but to defend his home state. He ended the war amicably.

Remember this was in a time when people felt much more closeness to their state and community rather than the overarching federal banner.

>I have to defend my home state from the legally elected leadership

Overrated? Boring? You don't give a fuck about it?
Between 700K-1,000,000 people were killed in that war. I don't think such a bloody war should characterized as "boring".

>head emerging from a brick wall

no class

>no class
was that a proletarian pun?

>they also turned out to support the statues of Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson
That doesn't hold much water when Jackson is still seen as a divisive figure (both white nationalists and ultra-lefties, they're both wrong but still) and you're conveniently forgetting the Jefferson statue was in the middle of a liberal college campus they were trying to intimidate at night

I don't agree with them but it's undeniable that racists have coopted this fight

I honestly don't understand why people think taking down statues would make people forget history, people didn't forget the Nazis when they took down Nazi memorials and people aren't going to forget the U.S.S.R because they're taking down statues of Lenin in the Baltics and Ukraine, the point is to not glorify these figures. That being said it'd be preferable that these statues moved to museums, and that there is varying levels of "right" for these statues (Lee & the memorial of the retreating confederates are much more deserving of statuary in the modern U.S than Nathan Bedford Forrest and the Crescent City White League.)

i like the museum idea, it would give context to the statue and hopefully calm down autists on both sides

Why not just make a big plaque in front of the statue explaining the who and why, and maybe a poster on the side with a quick rundown of the civil war and slavery?

This so much, but actions speak louder than words

It wouldn't be race-baity enough to get votes for anyone.

Why not just put it in a museum where it belongs

Why are race relations getting worse in america? It looks scarily like the first flagstones of a path to a new civil war have been lain ...

Don't forget the removal of Cecil Rhodes' statue at the University of Cape Town, even though he contributed massively to the founding of the university, and his statue put the greatest aesthetic on it.

I don't understand why you can't just have monuments side by side: confederate monuments right next to monuments to people like MLK.

Here in Finland, we have monuments to both the reds and the whites who died in the Civil War. At first, we only celebrated whites and did the same to Reds what sjw's are doing to confederate monuments now. But before the winter war, we realized that we must unite and that meant embracing both sides. Demonizing the other side and destroying their heritage is only going to increase polarization and division. Embracing history, learning from it and respecting both sides on the other hand creates unity. In Helsinki we have a street named after both a red and a white commander just a few hundred meters from each other. Why can't America do the same?

Picture related, a monument to people who died to make Finland a socialist state, just meters away from an another monument dedicated to people who fought against them.

A combination of four factors, I'd wager

Declining per capita income for the lower class. Income for people without a college degree is down like 20% from where it was in 1970, and economic hardship makes people more tribal. Lynchings used to go up in the old south whenever grain prices rose.

The decline of intermediate institutions between the state and individuals. It used to be much more common for people to organize their political action through a community, such as through churches, clubs, and unions. These would act to constrain political opportunists and mob mentality.

The decline of traditional media. When there were three TV channels, and local newspapers, there was a lot less incentive to be a clickbait whore and a lot more incentive to be a trustworthy source of information. Now you've got FOX on one side, and CNN on the other, all stirring up shit to sell their own product, to say nothing of Huffington Post and Breitbart.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, America is a much more multiracial society. The percentage of Hispanics has gone up from like 1% to 16% of the US population, the percentage of Asians has gone from under 1% to 5%.

It's much easier to tolerate people when they don't have any political power to threaten you. Now, with the political elite pushing an immigration amnesty and affirmative action everywhere, whites are demonstrably threatened by other races.

TL;DR niggers

It's not that they got worse, it's that they haven't got better.

You forgot the dismissal of the fairness doctrine that required news media to actually be fair, informative, and credible. Yellow journalism was considered trash and not treated the same as respected news.

At least half of those were due to disease though

>white nationalists
>racism

I'm one of those guys who thinks historical artifacts, in general, should be preserved.

But, when it comes to the civil war statues of officers/politicians, I see them as the first instance of Participation trophies in the US. The Confederacy was a traitorous movement that was beaten after much blood was shed. I always felt like the Union should have come down hard on the south after the war, and nipped the confederate idolization in the bud. If a local government wants to take the statues down for whatever reason, let them. If someone wants to research the history of the confederates or the civil war, libraries are a fairly common entity with many books, from both southern and northern authors, on the subject. The internet can also be a valuable resource for researching the conflict, the sides, and the many faces of the war.

Now, if it is a war memorial for the foot soldiers, and not just a statue of a confederate general riding a horse, I'm a little more lenient. They may be traitors, but they were still soldiers who fought for what they believed in and had little control over the shape of the war or it's politics. I think the best compromise is to take the statues down and put them in museums. They would be in a much better condition inside a museum as apposed to being outside, exposed to the elements and potential vandalism. You will still be able to learn about then and see them, and if you are a southerner that gets off to that kind of thing, you could admire them too. Civil rights groups and the black populations, that are the majority in many of these cities, will be happy to see these idols of a rogue state, that in their eyes tried to oppress them, taken down from their home town. It's an effective compromise that preserves the historical significance of the statues, but makes the cities they were in a more welcoming environment.

Also, I'm pretty sure the internet has turned generation Y into autists with no empathy, social awareness, or capacity for shame.

thats the case in almost every prolonged war

If the Statue is on Public Land, and the Public Land, the Statue's position should be voted on. If they vote to remove it, they must be able to provide proper storage for it, or put it in a museum.

History should always be 100% objective, and facts should be presented thusly. I cannot condone any iconoclasms, and I won't.

I put art above Moderns, whose sensibilities I detest, but I won't deny them their public Rights, as they would freely do if unfettered by Antique enlightenment.

It's like the situation in Europe, import as many savages as you like, but the second one of them blows up the Louvre, I say America should intervene and slaughter them, them being both the Euros and the Nuros.

/pol/ shills occupied with this atm.

It was voted on by the city council
It will be moved to a museum or to suitable privAte property.

The removal of the statue from its current location is perfectly legitimate and it was only symbolic of the purpose of the protest. The protest's stated goals was white supremacy, not just about the statue.

I don't give a shit about any of this retarded bullshit. As long as the Statue's fine, I don't care.
Anyone who condones destruction of craft deserves Death. That's simply my morality

The city is 20% black and the paid agitators were from elsewhere which is similar to how zionist funded terrorist groups operate. You can be certain that there was less support among town residents for the rally than opposition to it.

I don't care. As long as the Statue won't be destroyed. The politics surrounding it mean nothing to me. Moderns can kill one another all they like, as long as they don't hurt any art.

Identity politics have been getting progressively worse. It started with minorities and women and now whites are starting to try to get back into it.

I wish everyone would see that the back and forth only increases the defensiveness and hate on either side.

The problem is that even the mainstream anti-identity politics groups still particularly demonize White Identity politics, and refuse to acknowledge that a rise in White Identity is a direct result of a rise in anti-white sentiment.

That means even the mainstream people in the argument against IdPol are still operating under the White/NonWhite paradigm. They're failing to see the point.

Not that user, but at this point, who started it isn't the problem. pointing fingers and complaining about how "this group is trying to suppress my identity" or "they are oppressing me" only intensifies the division, like that user pointed out. It's easy to cast blame and bitch about the other side, it's hard to swallow your pride, go to the other side and try to work things out.

both sides need to stand up and come together to at least reduce the size of this petty fight. concessions on both sides need to be made to find some semblance of common ground. Identity politics isn't an issue that can truly be solved or completely fixed in the end, there's always going to be rumblings from multiple sides or perspectives. But having a discourse with one another can hopefully begin the process of a compromise. Until then, we will just keep getting more antifa and alt-right protesters autistically shit flinging one another over and destroying property over a social construct.

It is going to be very difficult for the political mainstream in America to combat white nationalism if they don't acknowledge legitimate grievances on the part of white Americans.

Ultimately this. We'll have to have a legitimate airing of grievances, and promise to work together. None of this, we're both at fault, but you're the ones who have to follow our demands.

I don't think it's revisionist to decide not to glorify the greatest traitors to our Union in history. Replace it with a statue of a soldier or a veteran from the town from (maybe from a war in which we fought Nazis). Also, statues and memorials to the victims of slavery should be erected, as there seem to be none.

You can propose that. I don't necessarily think monuments should be raised, but if people want to pay for them, that's fine.

Also, don't demonize Lee, he was loyal to Virginia, even though he disagreed with the confederacy. He's a noble figure, despite the cause he fought for.
t. Northerner

The lesson that a Lee statue teaches is pretty useful, even though normies aren't smart enough to get it

>people can do something that they consider to be honorable and noble, and it can have results that are totally repulsive to your sense of morality

A statue of a general in his own state is hardly glorification. I would understand your point if the statue was being commissioned right now but it's been in its place since 1924. All the unfolding drama has only started in the past 2 years. I find it hard to describe the outrage as genuine.

*home state

Lee has always been a respected figure even in the north. Demonizing him today is totally counterproductive. The left is lucky some retard decided to make the Right look even worse.

Hippies were, are, and always will be, a plague on society.

Spot on

It's needs to happen if we're to root out Lost Cause revisionism once and for all.

Getting rid of a monument celebrating an evil thing is not "Erasing History" or "Hiding the Truth". The past still exists in history books, the classes you take at school, documentaries, etc. All these Soviet and Confederate statues are merely celebrations of the oppressors over the oppressed or other repulsive beliefs. Getting rid of all the Hitler statues did not "erase history" in Germany. On the contrary they teach more about Hitler than ever. Getting rid of Confederate statues will simply end a celebration of treason and oppression. We will in fact talk about the Civil War long after its last statue celebrating either side crumbles to dust, so we do not need to celebrate its villains as heroes.

Oh please. When I was young, dumb and full of cum, my friends and I would have snuck into the park at 3am on a Sunday morning, duct taped about 20 M-80 s to good old Robert E. Lee's ass, lit the fuse and run like hell.

Bye bye, Bob.

Today's kids don't give a shit about the statue. They just want an excuse to paint up faggy shields and go curb stomping.

All of the statues will be fine. They're not being destroyed. They're just being moved from public property.

Speaking of memorials being moved, do you think the Father Duffy Memorial in Times Square will ever be moved? I wonder if people who walk around there every day know the story of Father Duffy

I doubt it, why would anyone want it to be removed, aside from anti-catholocism.

Guess the sensible middle-road isn't an American thing

> Museum hosts civil war statues
> Museum gets molotovd by angry hippies for supporting racism
> Or gets defunded in favour of The Karl Marx museum

A statue standing in free air is basically free of maintnance expect for some scrubbing every 10-20 years

>Comparing the Confederacy to the Soviet Union, a totalitarian communist regime.
Wut?

If I defected from the Army and joined a rebel group who defended a society that supported human bondage, I'd be hung as a traitor, not have a statute built for me.

So why should one traitor be treated differently than another?

There were 11 states in the Confederacy. Why are there Confederate memorials in 31 states?

I say if you don't like to remember your history because it was different from how you live today then by all means you should shit all over it. Just as long as you're comfortable with future generations thinking that your generation is a pathetic group that should be forgotten for holding different views than them.

>People who think remembering history requires revering it

Museum exhibits remember

Statues revere.

Worship of the Confederacy is hilariously overstretched. There are monuments to Confederate soldiers in states that weren't even part of the Union. When they tried to put a Union memorial in Bentonville NC around twenty or so years ago, the locals went ape shit.

Nice try Satan but how do you explain this? Even the Samurai (whom the Judayka fear) support the Secessionist cause

Sanders was a horrible choice for Commissary-General. His greasy, shitty chicken took out more soldiers than bullets did. I bet he was a Yankee spy.

>I don't think it's revisionist to decide not to glorify the greatest traitors to our Union in history
It has nothing to do with that though, the logic is "some retard shot 9 darkies in a church, obviously these statues are to blame and not his upbringing, life experiences mental health or his own personal decision making". I don't think someone seeing a statue is going to suddenly agree with every single thing hey did

>Billy Yank wants to put this fat, stubby fingers on the monument of a better man so he can go on a powertrip.
Neck yourself

Fucking yanks don't know our own history. The Confederacy wasn't evil. The civil war was very complex, so much more than "durr the north wanted to free slaves but the south were too racist to comply".
Why would you even fucking hold people from generations ago to modern standards? George Washington had slaves, so should we take his face off our money, off Mt. Rushmore, change the name of Washington and Washington, D.C? It was the norm back then.
The Confederacy didn't secede because they wanted to be racist, they did it because they saw the slaves as their property, and saw the Union as trying to take away their property or prevent future states from enjoying the same property rights they do. Seeing people as property is archaic and wrong, but they didn't know any better. Hell, the average Confederate soldier wasn't dying on the battlefield to keep some slaves, he was dying on the battlefield to protect his home, and to protect his beliefs. Only rich plantation owners had slaves anyway.
Learn your history and stop holding people from a different time to your modern-day principles.

Sure

But why must I revere a traitorous slave owner with statues?

George Washington (A traitorous slave owner by British standards) gets a pass for his role in founding the nation.

Why should American states have statues to a man who fought AGAINST America?

History is dictated by the victors
Your chimp out has been succesfully quelled and now you dont have any power to change the status quo
Vae Victis my hick friend

Because he fought for his state, maybe you shouldn't have made your federation so fucking autistic about muh states

Guess what, Civil War decided Federation trumps States.

STATUES GOTTA GO

I think historical monuments should stay.

Well they are, and so far this autistic crusade about an autistic war that happened in the 19th century has killed at least one person, 10/10 nation you have there

Define "historical monuments"