Statue of Confederate General R.E.Lee Removed.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: The3murph

TBH, as long as you are using terms like "fat cuck", you are diminishing your argument. Come on.

Half the people reading might agree in principle but the rhetoric is so insipid and juvenile - they don't want to associate with either the coarseness or the forum bro mentality.

There really is no other way to describe Mitch Landrieu. He is fat. He is bald. He is a cuck. Accuracy, friend, is essential to liberty...

The "coarseness" you say.....Have YOUR ancestors been vilified, spit upon, and their memory "cleansed' from the city of YOUR birth? You are dammed right I feel COARSE. Perhaps even a bit obtuse over the whole thing...

THIS scares the hell out of yankees and others. How DARE these people display pride in their heritage...

a reply to: kosmicjack

while I basically agree with you, let me reiterate that it´s not established fact that slaves built the pyramids
www.google.com...
another member pointed that out earlier, too.

It's like removing Christianity by banning the cross.

a reply to: introvert

You won't find me arguing if the people vote that way...I won't necessarily like it. But, that's how it should work in this country.

No, I wouldn't like it, at all.

I'm moving to the south in the next month or two...I'd kinda like to be able to see these things, y'know? Just because I look at 'em, doesn't mean I agree with it.

Americans need to learn their history. The good, and the not-so good, and that means statues of men that we might not necessarily "admire"...they're part of it.

Frankly, I'm tired of people telling me what I should know, or worse, what I shouldn't know. ...and this is precisely what these removals are.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: introvert

You won't find me arguing if the people vote that way...I won't necessarily like it. But, that's how it should work in this country.

No, I wouldn't like it, at all.

I'm moving to the south in the next month or two...I'd kinda like to be able to see these things, y'know? Just because I look at 'em, doesn't mean I agree with it.

Americans need to learn their history. The good, and the not-so good, and that means statues of men that we might not necessarily "admire"...they're part of it.

Frankly, I'm tired of people telling me what I should know, or worse, what I shouldn't know. ...and this is precisely what these removals are.

Here is how the former Governor of Maine and Union General Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, who led the brave charge of the 20th Maine the Second Day at Gettysburg, described the formal surrender of the Army of Northern Virginia.


The momentous meaning of this occasion impressed me deeply. I resolved to mark it by some token of recognition, which could be no other than a salute of arms. Well aware of the responsibility assumed, and of the criticisms that would follow, as the sequel proved, nothing of that kind could move me in the least. The act could be defended, if needful, by the suggestion that such a salute was not to the cause for which the flag of the Confederacy stood, but to its going down before the flag of the Union. My main reason, however, was one for which I sought no authority nor asked forgiveness. Before us in proud humiliation stood the embodiment of manhood: men whom neither toils and sufferings, nor the fact of death, nor disaster, nor hopelessness could bend from their resolve; standing before us now, thin, worn, and famished, but erect, and with eyes looking level into ours, waking memories that bound us together as no other bond;--was not such manhood to be welcomed back into a Union so tested and assured?
Instructions had been given; and when the head of each division column comes opposite our group, our bugle sounds the signal and instantly our whole line from right to left, regiment by regiment in succession, gives the soldiers salutation, from the "order arms" to the old "carry"--the marching salute. Gordon at the head of the column, riding with heavy spirit and. downcast face, catches the sound of shifting arms, looks up, and, taking the meaning, wheels superbly, making with himself and his horse one uplifted figure, with profound salutation as he drops the point of his sword to the boot toe; then facing to his own command, gives word for his successive brigades to pass us with the same position of the manual,--honor answering honor. On our part not a sound of trumpet more, nor roll of drum; not a cheer, nor word nor whisper of vain-glorying, nor motion of man standing again at the order, but an awed stillness rather, and breath-holding, as if it were the passing of the dead!
As each successive division masks our own, it halts, the men face inward towards us across the road, twelve feet away; then carefully "dress" their line, each captain taking pains for the good appearance of his company, worn and half starved as they were. The field and staff take their positions in the intervals of regiments; generals in rear of their commands. They fix bayonets, stack arms; then, hesitatingly, remove cartridge-boxes and lay them down. Lastly,-- reluctantly, with agony of expression,--they tenderly fold their flags, battle-worn and torn, blood-stained, heart-holding colors, and lay them down; some frenziedly rushing from the ranks, kneeling over them, clinging to them, pressing them to their lips with burning tears.

From The Passing of the Armies By Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain

That's fine, and fine sounding.

However, too many are not shown, or taught, the dark side of those men. Are they?

Very few were saints. Nor should they be held out as such. They're men. Just that. They fought for a doomed cause, some gallantly, with courage...others not so much.

All of it needs to be remembered.

Odd as it may sound, no one is exactly wrong in their opinion on this...

Most aren't seeing both sides of it...black and white, I suppose is how they're seeing it. Ain't none of it black and white, it's all, pardon the pun, gray. That's what we're forgetting here in many cases.

originally posted by: seagull
That's fine, and fine sounding.

However, too many are not shown, or taught, the dark side of those men. Are they?

Very few were saints. Nor should they be held out as such. They're men. Just that. They fought for a doomed cause, some gallantly, with courage...others not so much.

All of it needs to be remembered.

Odd as it may sound, no one is exactly wrong in their opinion on this...

Most aren't seeing both sides of it...black and white, I suppose is how they're seeing it. Ain't none of it black and white, it's all, pardon the pun, gray. That's what we're forgetting here in many cases.

"The dark side of them"? I am not sure I follow your meaning. If you mean the things done to one another on the battlefield well "those who have never smelt the fray" will NEVER understand that anyway...

a reply to: The3murph

Not just battlefield. Of that, there's always a gray area, at least to a point.

Andersonville? The Union prisons which I can't recall at the moment, which were not exactly 5-star accommodations?

Quantrell's raiders? Lawrence, Kansas?

These all occurred during the Civil War, as well. All for a cause, remember. That's the dark side of it, that too should be remembered.

My only point here is that, and I've long ago left the main topic--and I apologize for that--it's far, far too easy to remember the good, or conversely, the bad. Which both sides of the argument seem wont to do. That's the biggest mistake I see here. Removing the monuments because of "bad" things, is disregarding the "good".

a reply to: seagull

I'll see your Andersonville and raise you an Elmira and a Camp Douglas. A higher percentage of Confederate prisoners died in the northern camps than the ones that we held. Our men died in a land of plenty where medicine was there to be obtained and was not subject to an illegal blockade where medicine was declared "Contraband of War".

The sacking of Lawrence, Kansas was a direct result of the Kansas redleg scum depredations against the people of Missouri both before and after the opening of hostilities.

a reply to: strongfp


In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution, is a moral & political evil in any Country. It is useless to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence.

What a lovely letter. People don't seem to write that eloquently much anymore since higher education is on the 'outs' , and there is only one way to go from here. amiright? ur understand?

a reply to: The3murph

Those were the ones I was trying to remember... The brain had a long day.

I know this, not as well as you seem to, and that's my point. How many know this? I certainly don't recall more than a passing glance at this, either the raids--on both sides, or the prison conditions--on both sides.

I had to learn it on my own, and it shouldn't, in any shape, fashion, or form, be that way.

We are, in essence, agreed on this I'm guessing. To remove these is to endanger the history of our country.

originally posted by: olaru12
It's Southern heritage and tearing down the statues won't erase it.

But it might be a first step in their evolution from such corrupt and degrading ignorance (Southern Heritage)!

originally posted by: namelesss

originally posted by: olaru12
It's Southern heritage and tearing down the statues won't erase it.

But it might be a first step in their evolution from such corrupt and degrading ignorance (Southern Heritage)!

What is your heritage? We are proud of our people and don't care what you think.

a reply to: Spider879

I think we're talking parallel universes here. Unacknowledged because unexamined because irrelevant to one culture that lives in a universe parallel to the other.

Not that it matters at this point, the statues are gone and the divide is deepened. Nothing changes except the geographic boundaries. White "Southern" culture in NOLA left decades ago, Katrina washed out the remnant and its been replaced by US "whites" who are the antithesis to any cultural reference at all except that of the so-called white liberal elites.

a reply to: TonyS

Tony the culture, especially, southern culture is a shared experience by both Blks & Whts with different POVs ...take away the divide , like long standing racist sht and pi ing away for a lost cause, and you have the same ppl..

Again I bid you to go to the base of the statue, for all that blatantly racist sht and tell me that sht, should be celebrated... This is simply not just about a dead ancestor that fought on the wrong side.

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
... Not only that, the ideology of thee confederacy, and still the ideology of many southern states today is the the individual is more important than the whole... which is a thought process that destroys the idea of a unified country.

The confederate flag is a disgrace, as are the men who fought on behalf of the confederacy and their wicked heartless ideals.

Spoken in true Marxist fashion.

a reply to: Spider879

Well, I honestly dont care a rip about the statues. I will doubtless never be in NOLA again, its not an issue with me.

And yes, the war was a "shared" experience, but the POVs are so entirely different as to be nearly mutually exclusive and they weren't shared as the same experience. The racism is certainly real and its from both sides as well and that can't be denied and its one reason the divide has only worsened and will never be fixed, IMHO. People like to pick on white Southern culture as racist......I'd suggest black people try going to Connetticut.

If you have studied NOLA's history, you would discover that the last vestiges of its white Southern culture departed NOLA in the late '50's and through the 1960's. They migrated to the Carolinas. They were replaced largely by Oil company personnel from all over the US and after the oil bust of the 1980's, the Majors closed their offices and dispersed their personnel to Texas and Oklahoma. The last of the old timers were washed out by Katrina and ended up living with relatives or retiring elsewhere. The old NOLA French Quarter families have long since sold out and the Quarter itself is owned by newcomers from all over the world.

We can argue about the removal of the statues, but for the greater part, the people who would be descendts of those who erected the statues have long since left NOLA. An example perhaps would help. Years ago, Senegal was a French colony. The French put up statues. The French abandonned their colonial empire after WWII. The statues are long gone. Big deal. Same is the case in Algeria. Mussolinis statue is gone from Tripoli, Libya.

So really, its up to those who now reside in NOLA today to decide what statues the want to put up. Cultures come and cultures go.

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: TonyS

This is simply not just about a dead ancestor that fought on the wrong side.

Says the fella who doesn't have one.

originally posted by: olaru12
Ultimately it's still a States Rights issue. If the people of the State of LA don't want the statues on state land, it's their call isn't it?

See your disconnect....?

I'm pretty sure it was the city council who voted to remove those statues, not the people of Louisiana.