Alabama acting to make sure cities don't remove confederate monuments

[iu_a_att]

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/335283-alabama-moves-to-protect-confederate-monuments

Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey (R) this week signed legislation that will preempt cities and counties from removing monuments to the Confederacy from public property, over the objections of black lawmakers and civil rights groups.

The legislation comes after the city of New Orleans removed several statues honoring Confederate figures in recent weeks. The measure’s lead sponsor, state Sen. Gerald Allen (R), said he hoped to end the “wave of political correctness” sweeping the nation.

“Where does it end? Are all parts of American history subject to purging, until every Ivy League professor is satisfied and the American story has been re-written as nothing but a complete fraud and a betrayal of our founding values of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?” Allen said.
​

When will Alabama finally come to grips with the profound evil of white supremacy and its history of slavery and oppression?

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Speaking if snowflakes, crying that their participation trophies might be torn down. I do approve of the last confederate battle flag being flown for historical purposes. Note, the last flag flown over any confederate army was solid white.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/335283-alabama-moves-to-protect-confederate-monuments

Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey (R) this week signed legislation that will preempt cities and counties from removing monuments to the Confederacy from public property, over the objections of black lawmakers and civil rights groups.

The legislation comes after the city of New Orleans removed several statues honoring Confederate figures in recent weeks. The measure’s lead sponsor, state Sen. Gerald Allen (R), said he hoped to end the “wave of political correctness” sweeping the nation.

“Where does it end? Are all parts of American history subject to purging, until every Ivy League professor is satisfied and the American story has been re-written as nothing but a complete fraud and a betrayal of our founding values of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?” Allen said.
​

When will Alabama finally come to grips with the profound evil of white supremacy and its history of slavery and oppression?

Do the civil rights leaders, black legislators, and you really believe we can deny history by tearing down monuments depicting that history? Or maybe you think that tearing down Southern Civil War monuments will advance the cause of civil rights and end racism? Nope. Historical cleansing is what fanatics and extremists do. Let the monuments stand.

On a related note. How would you pick and choose which monuments to destroy? Do you have an objective standard? How about shuttering Montecello because it has preserved slave quarters? Should we move Arlington National Cemetery because it occupies the grounds of a Confederate general?

 

[RBB89]

Do the civil rights leaders, black legislators, and you really believe we can deny history be tearing down monuments depicting that history? Or maybe you think that tearing down Southern Civil War monuments will advance the cause of civil rights and end racism? Nope. Historical cleansing is what fanatics and extremists do. Let the monuments stand.

On a related note. How would you pick and choose which monuments to destroy? Do you have an objective standard? How about shuttering Montecello because it has preserved slave quarters? Should we move Arlington National Cemetery because it occupies the grounds of a Confederate general?

How about not literally putting confederate "heroes" on a pedestal? In the middle of town? A trip to the museum or reading a book should suffice.

 

[Rockfish1]

Do the civil rights leaders, black legislators, and you really believe we can deny history be tearing down monuments depicting that history? Or maybe you think that tearing down Southern Civil War monuments will advance the cause of civil rights and end racism? Nope. Historical cleansing is what fanatics and extremists do. Let the monuments stand.

On a related note. How would you pick and choose which monuments to destroy? Do you have an objective standard? How about shuttering Montecello because it has preserved slave quarters? Should we move Arlington National Cemetery because it occupies the grounds of a Confederate general?

No one is denying history except those who deny what Confederate monuments are intended to glorify.

 

[hoot1]

What about the rights of elected local government to express the desires of their community members?

Having said that, monuments are often works of art which are reminders of our history. Reminders which can reflect parts of history best forgotten. These memories which may be best forgotten possibly should be preserved so we don't repeat our past failures. Like the Germans keeping the WWII concentration camps intact or the Lest We Forget Black Slavery Museum.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

How about not literally putting confederate "heroes" on a pedestal? In the middle of town? A trip to the museum or reading a book should suffice.

Okay. Let's make the town square a safe space. Got it. People who think monument cleansing accomplishes anything important are people who really don't think. There can never be enough cleansing to accomplish the intended purpose.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

What about the rights of elected local government to express the desires of their community members?

Having said that, monuments are often works of art which are reminders of our history. Reminders which can reflect parts of history best forgotten. These memories which may be best forgotten possibly should be preserved so we don't repeat our past failures. Like the Germans keeping the WWII concentration camps intact or the Lest We Forget Black Slavery Museum.

Local elected officials obviously have the authority to erect or destroy monuments. That isn't the argument. My point is the wisdom of such action and whether it accomplishes a legitimate public purpose. See my ISIS link above.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

"they are who we thought they were".

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

Do the civil rights leaders, black legislators, and you really believe we can deny history by tearing down monuments depicting that history? Or maybe you think that tearing down Southern Civil War monuments will advance the cause of civil rights and end racism? Nope. Historical cleansing is what fanatics and extremists do. Let the monuments stand.

On a related note. How would you pick and choose which monuments to destroy? Do you have an objective standard? How about shuttering Montecello because it has preserved slave quarters? Should we move Arlington National Cemetery because it occupies the grounds of a Confederate general?

I never knew how good of a shark leaped you were. You will go to no ends to support anything the Heritage Foundation instructs you to.

 

[Rockfish1]

I never knew how good of a shark leaped you were. You will go to no ends to support anything the Heritage Foundation instructs you to.

It's a common neo-Confederate trope that we "deny history" when we decline to glorify the Old Confederacy. It's a way to play footsie with racism without quite actually making racist statements.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I never knew how good of a shark leaped you were. You will go to no ends to support anything the Heritage Foundation instructs you to.

Yep. If we can just get rid of the artifacts about events of 150 years ago we can finally have racial peace. I wondered why the black Harvard grads wanted to have their own ceremony, why universities are allowing racially segregated dorms, and why racial tensions seem to be worsening. It must be all those damn monuments.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

This shouldn't be complicated.

1. Remembering history is good. We've made mistakes, and we should own up to those mistakes to decrease the chances we make them again.

2. Erecting a monument in honor of someone is not remembering history. It is celebrating what that person did and stood for. We should not be celebrating what the Confederacy stood for.

New Orleans removed these monuments, but didn't destroy them. Eventually, they will probably all end up in a museum, which is where they belong.

Like the Germans keeping the WWII concentration camps intact or the Lest We Forget Black Slavery Museum.

Concentration camps have been preserved, for good reason. But you won't find a statue in honor of Hitler in downtown Berlin. Also for good reason.

 

[Rockfish1]

Yep. If we can just get rid of the artifacts about events of 150 years ago we can finally have racial peace. I wondered why the black Harvard grads wanted to have their own ceremony, why universities are allowing racially segregated dorms, and why racial tensions seem to be worsening. It must be all those damn monuments.

Shorter CO. Hoosier: If I'm not offended, it must not be offensive.

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

Yep. If we can just get rid of the artifacts about events of 150 years ago we can finally have racial peace. I wondered why the black Harvard grads wanted to have their own ceremony, why universities are allowing racially segregated dorms, and why racial tensions seem to be worsening. It must be all those damn monuments.

Impressive simple thinking. Kudos.

 

[iu_a_att]

This shouldn't be complicated.

1. Remembering history is good. We've made mistakes, and we should own up to those mistakes to decrease the chances we make them again.

2. Erecting a monument in honor of someone is not remembering history. It is celebrating what that person did and stood for. We should not be celebrating what the Confederacy stood for.

New Orleans removed these monuments, but didn't destroy them. Eventually, they will probably all end up in a museum, which is where they belong.


Concentration camps have been preserved, for good reason. But you won't find a statue in honor of Hitler in downtown Berlin. Also for good reason.

This is on point with no false notes.

 

[iu_a_att]

Yep. If we can just get rid of the artifacts about events of 150 years ago we can finally have racial peace. I wondered why the black Harvard grads wanted to have their own ceremony, why universities are allowing racially segregated dorms, and why racial tensions seem to be worsening. It must be all those damn monuments.

Are racial tensions worsening? I think what is happening is that white supremacy is slowly dying off...that is why the cities and towns across the south are finally deciding to take the heroes of white supremacy off their pedestals and move them into the museum. The GOP opposition in Alabama just reminds us that the advocates of white supremacy are not entirely powerless yet.

 

[RBB89]

Shorter CO. Hoosier: If I'm not offended, it must not be offensive.

He does this constantly and it boggles my mind. I think he truly believes it too. "Oh well I'm not offended so how could anybody else possibly be? Nothingburger..."

 

[CO. Hoosier]

This shouldn't be complicated.

1. Remembering history is good. We've made mistakes, and we should own up to those mistakes to decrease the chances we make them again.

2. Erecting a monument in honor of someone is not remembering history. It is celebrating what that person did and stood for. We should not be celebrating what the Confederacy stood for.

New Orleans removed these monuments, but didn't destroy them. Eventually, they will probably all end up in a museum, which is where they belong.


Concentration camps have been preserved, for good reason. But you won't find a statue in honor of Hitler in downtown Berlin. Also for good reason.

Agree with #1

On #2, this discussion is not about erecting monuments. It's about the value gained by removing them. I don't see the value. Some people allow themselves to be consumed by symbols and artifacts. If they have feelings about symbols, the answer is not to destroy the symbol. We can never ever cleanse the environment of offensive material. There will always be SOMETHING in need of removal. Trying to do that is ISIS-like.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Are racial tensions worsening? I think what is happening is that white supremacy is slowly dying off...that is why the cities and towns across the south are finally deciding to take the heroes of white supremacy off their pedestals and move them into the museum. The GOP opposition in Alabama just reminds us that the advocates of white supremacy are not entirely powerless yet.

Why do you think black students request racially segregated college dorms? I have no clue except to say intolerance is increasing. There are other similar examples.

 

[iu_a_att]

Why do you think black students request racially segregated college dorms? I have no clue except to say intolerance is increasing. There are other similar examples.

https://thinkprogress.org/the-unite...erant-of-everyone-except-racists-cb5120c7820c

 

[CO. Hoosier]

He does this constantly and it boggles my mind. I think he truly believes it too. "Oh well I'm not offended so how could anybody else possibly be? Nothingburger..."

You seem to assume there is value in not being offended. Maybe there is for some people, but is that a value that should be nurtured and encouraged as a society? I think the end game of that notion requires the destruction of many other values.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Agree with #1

On #2, this discussion is not about erecting monuments. It's about the value gained by removing them. I don't see the value. Some people allow themselves to be consumed by symbols and artifacts. If they have feelings about symbols, the answer is not to destroy the symbol. We can never ever cleanse the environment of offensive material. There will always be SOMETHING in need of removal. Trying to do that is ISIS-like.

Utterly ridiculous. ISIS-like? Could you be any more hyperbolic?

You can't separate erection from removal. If you see no value in removing a particular monument, then you must, by necessity, have no problem with its erection. Trying to say something to the effect of, "Well, I wouldn't have put it up, but now that it's there, I don't feel the need to take it down" is the coward's way of defending monuments to racism without having the guts to just come out and say it.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

What about the rights of elected local government to express the desires of their community members?

Having said that, monuments are often works of art which are reminders of our history. Reminders which can reflect parts of history best forgotten. These memories which may be best forgotten possibly should be preserved so we don't repeat our past failures. Like the Germans keeping the WWII concentration camps intact or the Lest We Forget Black Slavery Museum.

I don't think Germany is trying to glorify the holocaust or that a museum is trying to glorify black slavery. These confederate monuments are trying to glorify enemies of the US who wanted to cede over white supremacy/slavery.

Edit: Goat, didn't see your response. You said it prettier

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

Yep. If we can just get rid of the artifacts about events of 150 years ago we can finally have racial peace. I wondered why the black Harvard grads wanted to have their own ceremony, why universities are allowing racially segregated dorms, and why racial tensions seem to be worsening. It must be all those damn monuments.

I don't know how you think these two are related. If black Harvard grads really wanted their own ceremony, I'd tell them all they were idiots.

Racial tensions exist partly because people like you can't fathom that Confederate monuments are extremely insensitive to those around whom the Civil War was centered.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

Never forget ----

Every one of them slave-owning, secesh sonsabitches on them memorials had something in common ....























They weren't Republican.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

Never forget ----

Every one of them slave-owning, secesh sonsabitches on them memorials had something in common ....























They weren't Republican.

But they became the republicans

 

[DrHoops]

Germany should have kept all their statues of Hitler and fly the swastika flag all over Germany because of heritage.

Okay. Let's make the town square a safe space. Got it. People who think monument cleansing accomplishes anything important are people who really don't think. There can never be enough cleansing to accomplish the intended purpose.

 

[mrhighlife]

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/335283-alabama-moves-to-protect-confederate-monuments

Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey (R) this week signed legislation that will preempt cities and counties from removing monuments to the Confederacy from public property, over the objections of black lawmakers and civil rights groups.

The legislation comes after the city of New Orleans removed several statues honoring Confederate figures in recent weeks. The measure’s lead sponsor, state Sen. Gerald Allen (R), said he hoped to end the “wave of political correctness” sweeping the nation.

“Where does it end? Are all parts of American history subject to purging, until every Ivy League professor is satisfied and the American story has been re-written as nothing but a complete fraud and a betrayal of our founding values of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?” Allen said.
​

When will Alabama finally come to grips with the profound evil of white supremacy and its history of slavery and oppression?

Do the civil rights leaders, black legislators, and you really believe we can deny history by tearing down monuments depicting that history? Or maybe you think that tearing down Southern Civil War monuments will advance the cause of civil rights and end racism? Nope. Historical cleansing is what fanatics and extremists do. Let the monuments stand.

On a related note. How would you pick and choose which monuments to destroy? Do you have an objective standard? How about shuttering Montecello because it has preserved slave quarters? Should we move Arlington National Cemetery because it occupies the grounds of a Confederate general?

What a silly argument. You remember history through text books and museums. You honor history with statues and monuments. There is absolutely zero that is honorable about the confederate army. A bunch of poor saps were duped into becoming traitors so rich old white men could keep slaves. What are they honoring?

They should erect a statue of Hitler in Germany by your argument. It's history!

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

But they became the republicans

Y'all need to believe that worse than Carters needs pills

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Utterly ridiculous. ISIS-like? Could you be any more hyperbolic?

You can't separate erection from removal. If you see no value in removing a particular monument, then you must, by necessity, have no problem with its erection. Trying to say something to the effect of, "Well, I wouldn't have put it up, but now that it's there, I don't feel the need to take it down" is the coward's way of defending monuments to racism without having the guts to just come out and say it.

What's changed? What's next? Your's and other's whole argument is all about evolutionary offensiveness. If a town wants to take away a monument I don't care. But don't tell me that it MUST be done because people are offended by a monument. While I generally don't argue slippery slopes, in this case the point about these offensive monuments rest on a slippery slope. It is impossible not to offend people. It is impossible not to make people angry. Similarly, it is not the purpose of public policy to make people happy or content. All this is squarely on the people with the emotional responses, not on the people who allegedly provoke the emotional response.

I can see how the Stars and Bars is offensive. Now we have people who are offended by the American Flag. This is guaranteed to evolve and broaden .

The ISIS comparative is not hyperbolic. The Islamic fundamentalists are offended by non-Islamic icons and monuments, so they destroy them. The only difference that in one case you approve of the removal of the offensive things and in the other case you don't. The human emotions involved in both are identical.

"You can't separate erection from removal. If you see no value in removing a particular monument, then you must, by necessity, have no problem with its erection". This is a particularly silly point. There is a huge difference. As I explained above, the offensiveness about existing monuments is evolutionary. It is based upon changing standards of offensiveness. That is an issue that that has no ending point. Erection? Nope.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I'd tell them all they were idiots.

If you did that you would offend them. Why are you okay with that?

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

What's changed? What's next? Your's and other's whole argument is all about evolutionary offensiveness. If a town wants to take away a monument I don't care. But don't tell me that it MUST be done because people are offended by a monument. While I generally don't argue slippery slopes, in this case the point about these offensive monuments rest on a slippery slope. It is impossible not to offend people. It is impossible not to make people angry. Similarly, it is not the purpose of public policy to make people happy or content. All this is squarely on the people with the emotional responses, not on the people who allegedly provoke the emotional response.

I can see how the Stars and Bars is offensive. Now we have people who are offended by the American Flag. This is guaranteed to evolve and broaden .

The ISIS comparative is not hyperbolic. The Islamic fundamentalists are offended by non-Islamic icons and monuments, so they destroy them. The only difference that in one case you approve of the removal of the offensive things and in the other case you don't. The human emotions involved in both are identical.

"You can't separate erection from removal. If you see no value in removing a particular monument, then you must, by necessity, have no problem with its erection". This is a particularly silly point. There is a huge difference. As I explained above, the offensiveness about existing monuments is evolutionary. It is based upon changing standards of offensiveness. That is an issue that that has no ending point. Erection? Nope.

I didn't say they must be taken down. You did say you see "no value" in doing so.

Your evolutionary offensiveness is particularly silly. You don't think black people found them offensive when they went up? Seriously?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I didn't say they must be taken down. You did say you see "no value" in doing so.

Your evolutionary offensiveness is particularly silly. You don't think black people found them offensive when they went up? Seriously?

I don't know. But if you deny that attitudes about emotions and reactions to events don't change over time, you are being silly. The problem is how much of a public or governmental response should there be to accommodate these changing attitudes and responses? I say damn little--while admitting that in some cases that is necessary--particularly in defining crimes against the person. We can't ever get to the point where people won't have emotional responses to things and events. But we seem to think that there is value in addressing the emotional response of being offended. I don't see that value. In the long run, continuously addressing that value is destructive. (See ISIS)

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I don't know. But if you deny that attitudes about emotions and reactions to events don't change over time, you are being silly. The problem is how much of a public or governmental response should there be to accommodate these changing attitudes and responses? I say damn little--while admitting that in some cases that is necessary--particularly in defining crimes against the person. We can't ever get to the point where people won't have emotional responses to things and events. But we seem to think that there is value in addressing the emotional response of being offended. I don't see that value. In the long run, continuously addressing that value is destructive. (See ISIS)

Of course attitudes change. But that's not the point. I think it was wrong to glorify these confederate "heroes" when the statues first went up. Now there is enough political will to start rectifying that mistake.

 

[Rockfish1]

I didn't say they must be taken down. You did say you see "no value" in doing so.

Your evolutionary offensiveness is particularly silly. You don't think black people found them offensive when they went up? Seriously?

The problem here isn't that black people are too easily offended by these tributes to white supremacy and treason, but that so many white people aren't offended by them.

There is no Confederate "heritage" worthy of honor or nostalgia. The Confederacy should be regarded as a stain on Southern history, and certainly not as a source of pride -- any more than Germans should celebrate the "good" parts of their Nazi "heritage" with swastikas and Hitler statues.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

Y'all need to believe that worse than Carters needs pills

Y'all need to deny history worse than Trump needs to resign.

Keep telling yourselves you're the party of Lincoln. Today's republicans wouldn't elect Lincoln in the reddest of the red states. He wouldn't get through a primary.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

The problem here isn't that black people are too easily offended by these tributes to white supremacy and treason, but that so many white people aren't offended by them.

There is no Confederate "heritage" worthy of honor or nostalgia. The Confederacy should be regarded as a stain on Southern history, and certainly not as a source of pride -- any more than Germans should celebrate the "good" parts of their Nazi "heritage" with swastikas and Hitler statues.

Exactly. To refer back to an earlier post, this is why concentration camps were preserved as memorials, but you won't find any statues of Nazi leaders adorning German city squares. Remember, mourn, reflect, but don't honor.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Parenthesis: It's not only the Lost Cause that has this issue. John Chivington has a statue in Denver that once honored the Sand Creek massacre, until protests forced the state to change the wording on the accompanying plaque.

https://newrepublic.com/article/120441/statue-celebrated-sand-creek-massacre

 

[CO. Hoosier]

What a silly argument. You remember history through text books and museums. You honor history with statues and monuments. There is absolutely zero that is honorable about the confederate army. A bunch of poor saps were duped into becoming traitors so rich old white men could keep slaves. What are they honoring?

They should erect a statue of Hitler in Germany by your argument. It's history!

Then why do we preserve civil war battlefields? Is that a wast of time, money and effort? Should we destroy the famous Robert E. Lee statue there?