Jefferson Davis estate offered as new home for monuments

Jefferson Davis estate offered as new home for monuments

Beauvoir, a beachside estate on the Mississippi Gulf Coast, was Jefferson Davis' retirement home. Now it's a privately run museum in Biloxi. Its director issued a statement Thursday offering to take monuments that "any city or jurisdiction has decided to take down."

Well, if it means they are not destroyed or removed to some warehouse to rot away from neglect, I would prefer this option. At least the history will be preserved, and be used for educational purposes.

He says the monuments could serve an educational purpose for visitors while being displayed in gardens out of general public view.

I can only hope the education at thee monuments also display the story of how they arrived at this location and the events that led up to them being moved there and where they came from. That information is also part of our ongoing history as well and should be preserved for the future citizens to know how we acted this day.

For those ATS members that want these monuments removed or destroyed, what are your thoughts on this idea? If no state or federal funds are spent for the relocation and ongoing care, would that also be acceptable?

That's actually a really good idea.

Now we have to come up with a way to spirit them away without a bunch of protesters destroying them.

I'm not so sure the events of late are so much about monuments and flags and ideals though.

I think something much more sinister and potentially damaging is afoot.

put the statues and monuments on a national battlefield they'll be safe there,when the snowflakes come to protest the federal government will swat them down like flies.enjoy your protesting and being arrested charged with federal crimes before you even come within sight of a statue.

state goverments are pussies they do anything for votes,the federal government is like our land our statues ,don`t like it? get the # out or get arrested and charged with federal crimes.

originally posted by: Krakatoa
Jefferson Davis estate offered as new home for monuments

Beauvoir, a beachside estate on the Mississippi Gulf Coast, was Jefferson Davis' retirement home. Now it's a privately run museum in Biloxi. Its director issued a statement Thursday offering to take monuments that "any city or jurisdiction has decided to take down."

Well, if it means they are not destroyed or removed to some warehouse to rot away from neglect, I would prefer this option. At least the history will be preserved, and be used for educational purposes.

He says the monuments could serve an educational purpose for visitors while being displayed in gardens out of general public view.

I can only hope the education at thee monuments also display the story of how they arrived at this location and the events that led up to them being moved there and where they came from. That information is also part of our ongoing history as well and should be preserved for the future citizens to know how we acted this day.

For those ATS members that want these monuments removed or destroyed, what are your thoughts on this idea? If no state or federal funds are spent for the relocation and ongoing care, would that also be acceptable?

I know Ive been clamoring for them to be all torn down...

That being said I am 100% okay with the statues ending up in Museums, Art Gallery's, and Confederate cemeteries.

Im probably one of the furthest left leaning people here and I assure you, I am ALL for preserving history. I just want to make sure that history is correctly portrayed and portrayed in the right light.

I am against the statues of Confederate Leaders being displayed in public government locations in a glorifying manner, seeing as how they were traitors, fought on the behalf of slavery, and lastly because they lost.

Replace those statues with Union Generals, Civil rights leaders, famous presidents, inventors, so on and so forth, people we should look up to. Not Confederate leaders.

Keep them in the history books, keep them in the museums, keep them in art, keep them in archives... but dont glorify them in the streets.

Once again, do not remove them from our history, or erase their memory, but make sure they are portrayed as the traitors, plantation owners, and slave drivers they were.

originally posted by: Lucidparadox

originally posted by: Krakatoa
Jefferson Davis estate offered as new home for monuments

Beauvoir, a beachside estate on the Mississippi Gulf Coast, was Jefferson Davis' retirement home. Now it's a privately run museum in Biloxi. Its director issued a statement Thursday offering to take monuments that "any city or jurisdiction has decided to take down."

Well, if it means they are not destroyed or removed to some warehouse to rot away from neglect, I would prefer this option. At least the history will be preserved, and be used for educational purposes.

He says the monuments could serve an educational purpose for visitors while being displayed in gardens out of general public view.

I can only hope the education at thee monuments also display the story of how they arrived at this location and the events that led up to them being moved there and where they came from. That information is also part of our ongoing history as well and should be preserved for the future citizens to know how we acted this day.

For those ATS members that want these monuments removed or destroyed, what are your thoughts on this idea? If no state or federal funds are spent for the relocation and ongoing care, would that also be acceptable?

I know Ive been clamoring for them to be all torn down...

That being said I am 100% okay with the statues ending up in Museums, Art Gallery's, and Confederate cemeteries.

Im probably one of the furthest left leaning people here and I assure you, I am ALL for preserving history. I just want to make sure that history is correctly portrayed and portrayed in the right light.

I am against the statues of Confederate Leaders being displayed in public government locations in a glorifying manner, seeing as how they were traitors, fought on the behalf of slavery, and lastly because they lost.

Replace those statues with Union Generals, Civil rights leaders, famous presidents, inventors, so on and so forth, people we should look up to. Not Confederate leaders.

Keep them in the history books, keep them in the museums, keep them in art, keep them in archives... but dont glorify them in the streets.

Once again, do not remove them from our history, or erase their memory, but make sure they are portrayed as the traitors, plantation owners, and slave drivers they were.

I agree with you I`m very conservative but I just don`t see the need for these statues,not because they are traitors because by the legal definition they aren`t traitors,and not because they owned slaves because slavery WAS legal then, just as abortions are legal now but may not always be.
so, if you want to honor confedrates name states after them like we did with the british royalty that that fought a war to stop us from becoming a free country, nobody bitches about that. or name a county after a confederate like we did when we named thousands of counties after british royalty that fought a war to stop us from becoming a country and nobody bitches about that.
if people want to protest and bitch about something let them bitch about the brits that allowed slavery in the American colonies and then started a war to stop the American colonist from exhibiting free speech, and yet we have thousands of states counties, cities,towns and streets named in honor of these brits that fought a war against us to suppress our freedoms? are you people insane? you want to protest something? fine protest all the names and statues honoring the brits that tried to stop us from becoming a country,because without the U.S.A. you wouldn`t have the right today to protest anything.

so if anyone wants to protest and bitch about something that makes a difference bitch about the brits.

I'll take every monument the libo-facists want rid of if they pay the shipping.

Hows about we keep the removal / destruction of statues commemorating those who fought to protect slave rights , to before the time the fight to keep slaves was lost?.

Every summer these types of things come up. I don't know if people just don't have enough to do because they are under or unemployed, or if it's something darker.

I, personally, think it is something darker and more dangerous.

But that's just me...

sorry - but my cynicism predicts that :

1 - the site will become a shrine for every wingnut who wants to worship the clusterfook that was " the confederacy "

2 - the site will become a iconoclastic pilgramage for every wingnut that has this mentality :



you really think red shirt will stop - just because statues are moved to a " safe space " ?

How about instead of taking down monuments and moving them, we arrest and prosecute the turds vandalizing them. Start beating their a** and maybe they will learn. And if they are underage, then hold the parents somewhat liable for allowing them to act like a thug . The whole attitude of " I don't like it so I'm entitled to destroy it " has got to stop...as well as the attitude " they don't like it , so let's change it and let them get their way ". ....why do we have to hide monuments on a private property , so,people have to now pay money to a museum to go see them ?

The "Confederate" statues don't stand for slavery. That's just an excuse by certain groups to get together and find an excuse to act out. They need a purpose and we all know slavery is "bad."

It's time to cut the crap out, arrest these so-called "protesters" and punish them-like maybe cleaning the statues for a year.

They are protesting something that been gone for over 150 years-no one is bringing it back or glorifying it. If anything, they are historical reminders of real history-a very sad time and in hopes that we could eventually forgive each other (the Civil War was about much more than slavery) and continue as one country, undivided.

If anything, these statues represent historical icons who cared enough to put their lives on the line for what they believed. I seriously doubt these partiers with banners and tiki torches would do the same.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
sorry - but my cynicism predicts that :

1 - the site will become a shrine for every wingnut who wants to worship the clusterfook that was " the confederacy "

2 - the site will become a iconoclastic pilgramage for every wingnut that has this mentality :

you really think red shirt will stop - just because statues are moved to a " safe space " ?

I never made the claim it would stop racism or reverence for the Confederacy. That is your assumption here. But, it will proved a single place to provide that type of visit, if one feels the need to do so. That, is the freedom of expression right there. Trying to prevent that expression is like spitting or wiping your backside with the United States Constitution. And, that make anyone thinking that way just as bad as those that pretend to be offended.

I think the statues should be moved to Chicago.

Think about it. Charlottesville had Confederate statues. One weekend, white thugs show up, black thugs show up, and the police are out in force. The result: one homicide and two accidental deaths.

Chicago would love a weekend like that.

originally posted by: Lucidparadox

originally posted by: Krakatoa

I just want to make sure that history is correctly portrayed and portrayed in the right light.

history can/will never be correctly portrayed. especially given the general hostile nature of history, it will always be remembered and retold as we see fit. the truth remains vague and elusive and mostly forgotten. erasing the statues and images obviously isn't going to help educate anyone one damn bit.

originally posted by: Justso
The "Confederate" statues don't stand for slavery. That's just an excuse by certain groups to get together and find an excuse to act out

Is that a gut feeling?

Well, if that's the case, the timing sure seems suspicious..



Nah, can't have anything to do with the majority of them being put up when the NAACP was formed? These statues are warnings.. to black people..

Below is a link to the full size image (the image upload reduced the size to a thumbnail) =/
Full Image

a reply to: clay2 baraka

You realize the last confederate soldier died in the 1950's right?

So everything up till then, and just afterwards could have had a legitimate reason for being put up beyond racism, I have no doubt some were, do you have any evidence beyond opinion on the reason behind every single statue being put up?

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: clay2 baraka

You realize the last confederate soldier died in the 1950's right?

So everything up till then, and just afterwards could have had a legitimate reason for being put up beyond racism, I have no doubt some were, do you have any evidence beyond opinion on the reason behind every single statue being put up?

Look at the chart.

That is a HUGE "coincidence."

originally posted by: clay2 baraka
These statues are warnings.. to black people..

Warnings from the Democratic Party. These are their historical figures...their monuments and memorials. They own the Confederacy.

Why should Democrats get to bury the evidence of their party's history and deflect blame to 'the other party' so easily? Why should they get to exploit black Americans, AGAIN, to carry out their plan to destroy the evidence of their white supremacist legacy?

I think the Democratic party should fully own their legacy before they get to bury it. They are NOT doing that.

No Republican or Conservative should be blamed for the Democratic Party's history or for objecting to their attempt to destroy the evidence, sweep it all under the rug, and then deflect the blame on others.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Like modern day Republicans owning up to the bigotry they inherited when the ideals OF BOTH parties flipped mid-century?

We can play the blame game back and forth all day.. I'm simply stating that the flag's adoption has a historical purpose.. To intimidate.

originally posted by: clay2 baraka
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Like modern day Republicans owning up to the bigotry they inherited when the ideals OF BOTH parties flipped mid-century?

We can play the blame game back and forth all day.. I'm simply stating that the flag's adoption has a historical purpose.. To intimidate.

What are you referring to exactly?

And I am not seeing any Republicans trying to tear down evidence of any of their party's history and then try to act like if Democrats object, then they must support white supremacy.