Preserving Confederate Statues Isn’t Like Preserving Auschwitz

There is a very big difference between the way people see Auschwitz and the way many White Southerners, at least, see Confederate Generals posed triumphantly on horses. Auschwitz serves as a reminder of those who suffered, while the Confederate statues glorify those who fought for continued suffering. You will notice that there are no triumphant looking statues of Hitler in Germany.

There is, however, a far more accurate analogy to be made here. Imagine if, in Germany, 50 years after WWII, groups of Holocaust deniers did put up statues of Adolph Hitler looking triumphant? And then got mad that people wanted to tear them down, because how dare they not remember history?

Well, that is exactly what happened in the United States after the Civil War. The Lost Cause of the Confederacy is revisionist history just like Holocaust Denial is. It is also about as accurate.

Germany, as you may know, bans people from promoting Holocaust Denialism. After the Civil War, America did the exact opposite. It allowed the Lost Cause bull# to proliferate, believing that it would help the nation to heal. Lost Causers were allowed to pretend that not only was the war about more than just slavery (it was not), that it was noble in some way, but also that slavery wasn’t really all that bad anyway.

it seems to bear repeating again, that the reason confederate statues suck, is because they are glorifying bad things.

i'm not sure why this is so hard for some of you to understand. maybe this will help? probably not but what the hell.

Let’s Teach Republicans Why Preserving Confederate Statues Isn’t Like Preserving Auschwitz!

IMPORTANT: New (old) Standards Are Being Enforced (again) For New Threads

I got a better idea.

Lets teach statue phobes the meaning of the first amendment.

I don't have any issues with the statues being collected into museums ... as long as the statues and memorials that were raised in support of Segregation are noted.

"This statue was erected in 1910 (1940, 1960) in order to symbolize opposition to the end of Segregation and to oppose the Civil Rights movements. The Confederacy was primarily founded with human slavery and White supremacy as constitutional concepts. This statue represents a hateful trend in some Americans who believe themselves so superior to others that they justified keeping them as chattel."

I'm sure no one will have an issue with that, will they? Preservation of actual history and all.

So treating this as a tourist attraction is wrong?

Or is it for history?

originally posted by: neo96
I got a better idea.

Lets teach statue phobes the meaning of the first amendment.

Oh, the First Amendment covers trashing the Fourteenth Amendment now?

Do tell.

The LAST person I would go to learn from would be a brainwashed, angry democrat.

This is um....how would you lefties put it......nauseating virtue signaling? I see no virtue here, and I see no logic. Keep babbling about Nazis as if y'all know everything there is to know about it.

The History Channel (which I used to call the "Hitler Channel") concentrated on maybe 10 years out of the thousands they could have made shows about.....Hitler this, Nazi that......Now I know why. Keep shoveling the crap into the masses until they are full with it and start spewing it back out.

a reply to: Gryphon66

But what about statues commemorating the poor sods who never owned slaves, but were conscripted to fight in the confederate army anyway?

a reply to: fiverx313

What does Auschwitz have to do with anything?

What you people don't seem to understand is that nobody is denying what the statues represent. Suck or not, bad or good, history should be preserved the way it was cemented.

Context shouldn't matter at all.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Yeah do tell.

What part of this is confusing ?

Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

mendment XIV Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

www.law.cornell.edu...

IF you want to bring it up at least know what it means.

It means statuephobes have exactly ZERO right to prohibit the free exercise of speech/express and be denied equal protection under the LAW.

DEAL WITH IT.

originally posted by: Flatcoat
a reply to: Gryphon66

But what about statues commemorating the poor sods who never owned slaves, but were conscripted to fight in the confederate army anyway?

Can you point out the poor sods who believed in White Supremacy from the ones who didn't? Can you point out the ones who, although they were poorer and didn't own other people, still fully believed in the "peculiar institution" as Vice President Stephens put it?

I can't myself. It's a good question. Maybe you can find out where those statues of those folks are and get back to us?

We could discover which ones were installed in support of Segregation and in support of the Confederacy's values of Slavery and White Supremacy though, right?

a reply to: fiverx313

A federal law raised the status of Confederate soldiers to the same level as US vets. It allows for gravestones and statues to be erected and they are protected just as any other war memorial is.

All confederate soldiers were pardoned by the President with the exception of political leadership and some generals.

This is not like 2 countries going to war and one country winning. The war was with ourselves and you will not find another moment in time where our civil war is repeated for the same reasons.

It is our history. For better or worse, it is our history and we need to own it.

Not hide it.

a reply to: neo96

None of it's confusing to me.

Are you claiming now that erecting statues is a speech act?

Are you claiming that the statues aren't being taken down by the municipalities that own them? The citizens who own them?

Can you admit that you want to impose your personal desires and sense of right over their in THEIR OWN COMMUNITY?

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: fiverx313

What does Auschwitz have to do with anything?

What you people don't seem to understand is that nobody is denying what the statues represent. Suck or not, bad or good, history should be preserved the way it was cemented.

Context shouldn't matter at all.

Well, it should come as no surprise that the Alt-Left wants to control what people think.

They're anti-freedom if thought, unless you believe as they believe.

The rise of Antifa, and our own media trying to portray them as the good guys, is the scariest thing that has happened to this nation since 911, IMO.

We have a bona-fide communist movement amongst us. FFS!

a reply to: fiverx313

It's all a matter of perspective.

You can't know what people think about statues or concentration camps.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Are you claiming now that erecting statues is a speech act?

Sure was when it comes to throwing cross's in urine and calling it art.

Like that didn't snip off a billion Christians.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: fiverx313

A federal law raised the status of Confederate soldiers to the same level as US vets. It allows for gravestones and statues to be erected and they are protected just as any other war memorial is.

All confederate soldiers were pardoned by the President with the exception of political leadership and some generals.

This is not like 2 countries going to war and one country winning. The war was with ourselves and you will not find another moment in time where our civil war is repeated for the same reasons.

It is our history. For better or worse, it is our history and we need to own it.

Not hide it.

Now that's actually a good argument. Bravo. Do you have a reference to the law you're talking about?

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: fiverx313

What does Auschwitz have to do with anything?

What you people don't seem to understand is that nobody is denying what the statues represent. Suck or not, bad or good, history should be preserved the way it was cemented.

Context shouldn't matter at all.

NOT by US government tax money of the citizens.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Gryphon66

Are you claiming now that erecting statues is a speech act?

Sure was when it comes to throwing cross's in urine and calling it art.

Like that didn't snip off a billion Christians.

Stop trying to to toss in red herring. I know the cross -n-pee bit er, uh, peeves you off. You've been crowing about how none of us have the right not to be offended for days, so you've mooted that argument.

Focus. Is the erection of statues BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS a speech act protected under the First Amendment ... or not?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Flatcoat
a reply to: Gryphon66

But what about statues commemorating the poor sods who never owned slaves, but were conscripted to fight in the confederate army anyway?

Can you point out the poor sods who believed in White Supremacy from the ones who didn't? Can you point out the ones who, although they were poorer and didn't own other people, still fully believed in the "peculiar institution" as Vice President Stephens put it?

I can't myself. It's a good question. Maybe you can find out where those statues of those folks are and get back to us?

We could discover which ones were installed in support of Segregation and in support of the Confederacy's values of Slavery and White Supremacy though, right?

Same question can be asked of your statement..

What statues do you know for a fact were only put up with racist intentions?

I ask since the last veteran of the civil war died in the 1950's, while I have no doubt some were no doubt put up with racist intent, and I am certain that some were put up to honor people that recently passed or were of an advanced age.

Here's another thought.

Why don't all the statuephobes build their own monuments instead of acting like nazi thugs erasing things they don't like.