27 votes

After a year of rising tensions, protesters tear down Confederate statue on UNC campus

This topic is locked. New comments can not be posted.

70 comments

  1. [51]
    demifiend
    Link
    Considering that Confederate soldiers fought for the "right" of their respective states to keep human beings enslaved because their ancestors came from Africa instead of Europe, I'm OK with...

    Those soldiers were still Americans, just because they were on the losing side of the conflict doesn't mean their deaths should be forgotten.

    Considering that Confederate soldiers fought for the "right" of their respective states to keep human beings enslaved because their ancestors came from Africa instead of Europe, I'm OK with removing their monuments from public view. Stick 'em in a Confederacy Museum if you must, but it's long past time they came down. It's time for the south to admit that they were not only on the losing side, but the wrong side.

    27 votes
    1. RapidEyeMovement
      Link Parent
      I think it is more important to note when and why those statues were erected. This gets at the heart of the issue. The context for why they where erected, give much of the reason for their removal...

      I think it is more important to note when and why those statues were erected. This gets at the heart of the issue. The context for why they where erected, give much of the reason for their removal today.1
      2

      See ~dubteedub comment for much better info

      16 votes
    2. [49]
      EscReality
      Link Parent
      This is a very narrow minded view on the situation. It's literally advocating the whitewashing of history. The average confederate soldier fought because of loyalty to their family and locality,...

      This is a very narrow minded view on the situation. It's literally advocating the whitewashing of history.

      The average confederate soldier fought because of loyalty to their family and locality, for them it was about defending their homes not slavery. At the time most people were very loyal to their states, so those men would have fought for their state.

      It was the bloodiest war in our history, taking down monuments to the children that died in it because of childish political drama is just sad.

      This wasn't a monument to a Confederate leader, it did not advocate the Confederacy, it was just a statue of an anonymous soldier representing the youth that died in the war.

      8 votes
      1. [27]
        Gaywallet
        Link Parent
        Removing it from the history books is whitewashing it. A monument in a public space is an entirely different story.

        It's literally advocating the whitewashing of history.

        Removing it from the history books is whitewashing it. A monument in a public space is an entirely different story.

        28 votes
        1. Zekka
          Link Parent
          you know what's whitewashing history? mentioning the Confederacy in any context while downplaying the fact that it literally existed for the sole purpose of continuing slavery like the builders of...

          you know what's whitewashing history? mentioning the Confederacy in any context while downplaying the fact that it literally existed for the sole purpose of continuing slavery

          like the builders of this statue and like EscReality in this thread

          12 votes
        2. [25]
          EscReality
          Link Parent
          No, its really not.

          No, its really not.

          1. [20]
            Gaywallet
            (edited )
            Link Parent
            The purpose of a monument is to commemorate an event. It's in a public area, so the event that's being commemorated can't be one that is likely to incense people. To some people, it doesn't matter...

            The purpose of a monument is to commemorate an event. It's in a public area, so the event that's being commemorated can't be one that is likely to incense people.

            To some people, it doesn't matter why confederates fought for their side. What does matter is that the confederacy was for slavery, and the abolition of slavery was an important step forward.

            A monument for the confederate war that doesn't highlight the sacrifices made by those fighting to end slavery will, by nature, incense someone who's ancestors were enslaved (or could have been). This does not belong in a public space. The people are not there for a history lesson, they are there to enjoy a park. Would you enjoy a park if there was a large statue of a penis there? What if this penis was actually celebrating an old ritual by our African ancestors and was of historical significance?

            It's a public space, not a history museum, and assaulting people with a history they don't want to focus on or is difficult for them to consider is not a public good. It's not something we need to do.

            21 votes
            1. [19]
              EscReality
              Link Parent
              How am I supposed to react to this? You are literally saying that it doesn't matter why 620,000 men died, it only matters what their leaders on each side thought. Do you seriously not get how...

              It doesn't matter why confederates fought for their side. What does matter is that the confederacy was for slavery, and the abolition of slavery was an important step forward.

              How am I supposed to react to this? You are literally saying that it doesn't matter why 620,000 men died, it only matters what their leaders on each side thought. Do you seriously not get how genuinely messed up that view is?

              2 votes
              1. [9]
                Gaywallet
                Link Parent
                Apologies, perhaps I should have worded it better. To these people, it does not matter why the confederates fought. That's not what gut feeling they get when they see the symbology. If you show a...

                Apologies, perhaps I should have worded it better.

                To these people, it does not matter why the confederates fought. That's not what gut feeling they get when they see the symbology.

                If you show a nazi symbol to a holocaust survival their immediate and persistent reaction is one of fear, anger, and remorse. It's a negative reaction that we do not need to be forcing on them. Why do you think Germany banned the nazi symbol for so long? They weren't whitewashing their history when they did this - in fact, they enacted lots of law to ensure that this was taught in public schools.

                This is a public space. Why must there be a statue commemorating something that makes people profoundly uncomfortable?

                18 votes
                1. Zekka
                  Link Parent
                  it's not just that the imagery makes people profoundly uncomfortable. getting this built says "if you had any real power you could get rid of this, but you can't. the mayor hates you and the...

                  it's not just that the imagery makes people profoundly uncomfortable.

                  getting this built says "if you had any real power you could get rid of this, but you can't. the mayor hates you and the alumni hate you and everyone who helped us build this doesn't care about what you think. if you try to get it taken down our friends in high places are going to tell you you didn't file the right paperwork, or that you were the first to complain, so shut the fuck up."

                  and this literally happened for a hundred years, to this specific statue. the students tried multiple times to get it taken down through legal channels. nobody listened -- the school administration blamed the city and the city said nobody ever contacted them.

                  12 votes
                2. [7]
                  EscReality
                  (edited )
                  Link Parent
                  Their ignorance is not a reason to hide history. The statue is memorializing students that died in the war, it should be there on the campus they left to defend. Who cares if it makes people...

                  To these people, it does not matter why the confederates fought.

                  Their ignorance is not a reason to hide history.

                  The statue is memorializing students that died in the war, it should be there on the campus they left to defend.

                  Who cares if it makes people uncomfortable, if anything that is a good thing.

                  You worded it just fine, doesn't make it any less wrong.

                  1 vote
                  1. [6]
                    Gaywallet
                    Link Parent
                    How is it hiding history?

                    How is it hiding history?

                    15 votes
                    1. [5]
                      EscReality
                      Link Parent
                      How is erasing monuments and keeping them out of public view not hiding it?

                      How is erasing monuments and keeping them out of public view not hiding it?

                      1. [4]
                        Gaywallet
                        Link Parent
                        In this case, I highly doubt the monument was transported to a museum, but let's imagine for a second that it was - that it was relocated to a place more appropriate for the statue. Is that hiding...

                        In this case, I highly doubt the monument was transported to a museum, but let's imagine for a second that it was - that it was relocated to a place more appropriate for the statue. Is that hiding it?

                        Why is the display in this specific public venue so important? If it's already present in the public view through the mandatory educational system, why must a statue also exist?

                        14 votes
                        1. [3]
                          EscReality
                          Link Parent
                          Because the statue memorializes students from that campus that died in the war. They are a big part of that schools history and there is nothing wrong with the school memorizing them.

                          Why is the display in this specific public venue so important?

                          Because the statue memorializes students from that campus that died in the war. They are a big part of that schools history and there is nothing wrong with the school memorizing them.

                          1. [2]
                            Gaywallet
                            Link Parent
                            Do you have an answer to my first question? It sounds to me your issue is with the students taking it down, and not the fact that it was taken down. Is this correct? What if the school had decided...

                            Do you have an answer to my first question?

                            They are a big part of that schools history and there is nothing wrong with the school memorizing them.

                            It sounds to me your issue is with the students taking it down, and not the fact that it was taken down. Is this correct? What if the school had decided to take it down because it was inciteful. Would that be whitewashing history?

                            12 votes
                            1. EscReality
                              Link Parent
                              I would have no issue if the school had decided to relocate the memorial and did so in a normal and respectful fashion.

                              I would have no issue if the school had decided to relocate the memorial and did so in a normal and respectful fashion.

                              2 votes
              2. [10]
                Comment removed by site admin
                Link Parent
                1. [9]
                  EscReality
                  (edited )
                  Link Parent
                  I really wish we could block users on Tildes. You are following me around replying to every comment I make, it childish and inappropriate and this isn't the first topic/thread you have done this...

                  I really wish we could block users on Tildes. You are following me around replying to every comment I make, it childish and inappropriate and this isn't the first topic/thread you have done this to me in.

                  I will not be replying to you again. Keep your political agenda to yourself.

                  1 vote
                  1. Deimos
                    Link Parent
                    It's a public comment thread that you've posted 21 comments in (over 1/3 of the thread), arguing with everyone that disagrees with you. Complaining about one other person that's also involved in...

                    It's a public comment thread that you've posted 21 comments in (over 1/3 of the thread), arguing with everyone that disagrees with you. Complaining about one other person that's also involved in the discussion replying to "too many" (3) of your comments doesn't make much sense.

                    If you don't want to argue with people, don't... have a bunch of arguments with people.

                    21 votes
                  2. [7]
                    spit-evil-olive-tips
                    Link Parent
                    Do you realize the irony of saying this in a thread where you're defending monuments of confederate soldiers? Do you believe that's a politically neutral position?

                    Keep your political agenda to yourself.

                    Do you realize the irony of saying this in a thread where you're defending monuments of confederate soldiers? Do you believe that's a politically neutral position?

                    18 votes
                    1. [6]
                      EscReality
                      Link Parent
                      I do in a way. I make a distinction between dead soldiers and the government they fought for. The men should be remembered, the government that lead them should be vilified. I have read enough...

                      Do you believe that's a politically neutral position?

                      I do in a way. I make a distinction between dead soldiers and the government they fought for. The men should be remembered, the government that lead them should be vilified. I have read enough first hand accounts of the war to understand that the men fighting in it did not necessarily share the views of the rich landowners that controlled them. It's important to note that this monument was a memorial to the students from the school that died in the war, it was not a statue of confederate leaders or pusing any sort of agenda.

                      Also, I am an educated, mature adult and wouldn't allow myself to be offended by an inanimate object in the first place, but that is a completely different conversation.

                      1 vote
                      1. [4]
                        spit-evil-olive-tips
                        Link Parent
                        Without getting into the merits of your position - do you believe your position is politically neutral, but that people who disagree with you are pushing a political agenda? If you put yourselves...

                        Do you believe that's a politically neutral position?

                        I do in a way.

                        Without getting into the merits of your position - do you believe your position is politically neutral, but that people who disagree with you are pushing a political agenda?

                        If you put yourselves in the shoes of the people who disagree with you, do you see any way that they might see your stance as also politically motivated?

                        I am an educated, mature adult and wouldn't allow myself to be offended by an inanimate object in the first place

                        Are you implying that people who disagree with you, in addition to pushing a political agenda, are some combination of uneducated, immature, and/or easily offended?

                        16 votes
                        1. [3]
                          EscReality
                          Link Parent
                          My reasoning for wanting history preserved and the memories of dead Americans that died in our bloodiest war memorialized is not motivated by a larger political ideals. I think the majority of...

                          My reasoning for wanting history preserved and the memories of dead Americans that died in our bloodiest war memorialized is not motivated by a larger political ideals.

                          I think the majority of people fighting against (and for) these monuments are doing so because of a bigger political agenda and that it in reality has very little to do with the monument in itself.

                          I am implying that people that get offended by an inanimate object are both immature and uneducated. If those students are really that offended by walking by a bronze statue that doesn't actually depict anything offensive then yes, they are easily offended when its not called for.

                          The conflict that memorial represents was not theirs, they should note it for its historical value and move on, not violently tear it down.

                          1. [2]
                            spit-evil-olive-tips
                            Link Parent
                            "Such-and-such is fine as it currently is and doesn't need to change" is an inherently political position. It's the essence of small-C conservatism. Just because you're defending the status quo...

                            "Such-and-such is fine as it currently is and doesn't need to change" is an inherently political position. It's the essence of small-C conservatism. Just because you're defending the status quo doesn't mean you're magically above the political fray.

                            I would also urge you to take a more nuanced and generous approach towards people you disagree with. There are reasons to desire change besides "being offended", and even if some of them are offended, there are possible reasons other than immaturity or lack of education. Trying to claim that you hold your opinions because of education and maturity is kind of a dick move, and approaches /r/iamverysmart territory.

                            But I get the feeling I'm talking to a brick wall, so this will be my last reply to you in this thread.

                            18 votes
                            1. Zekka
                              Link Parent
                              in this thread: an person claiming to be apolitical has apparently been judo'ed into defending white supremacy, calling people who oppose it "childish," "uneducated," and "immature." the hubris!...

                              in this thread: an person claiming to be apolitical has apparently been judo'ed into defending white supremacy, calling people who oppose it "childish," "uneducated," and "immature."

                              the hubris! would that it were not so common

                              6 votes
                      2. Luna
                        Link Parent
                        This much: is true- But this: is not true at all- This statue was literally a monument to white supremacy. You mentioned in your comment below that "people that get offended by an inanimate object...

                        This much:

                        it was not a statue of confederate leaders

                        is true-

                        First, he credited Confederate soldiers with saving “the very life of the Anglo Saxon race in the South,” adding, “to-day, as a consequence the purest strain of the Anglo Saxon is to be found in the 13 Southern States — Praise God.”

                        But this:

                        or pusing any sort of agenda

                        is not true at all-

                        I trust I may be pardoned for one allusion, howbeit it is rather personal. One hundred yards from where we stand, less than ninety days perhaps after my return from Appomattox, I horse-whipped a negro wench until her skirts hung in shreds, because upon the streets of this quiet village she had publicly insulted and maligned a Southern lady, and then rushed for protection to these University buildings where was stationed a garrison of 100 Federal soldiers. I performed the pleasing duty in the immediate presence of the entire garrison, and for thirty nights afterwards slept with a double-barrel shot gun under my head.

                        This statue was literally a monument to white supremacy. You mentioned in your comment below that "people that get offended by an inanimate object are both immature and uneducated." If there was a statue dedicated to another group of people subjugating your own people based not on merit but on the color of your skin, I bet you'd be pissed off as well, and rightfully so. I'd imagine that if there was a monument celebrating the white genocide that white supremacists claim is occurring in South Africa, you'd be enraged.

                        11 votes
          2. [4]
            clerical_terrors
            Link Parent
            Tearing down statues of USSR leaders in Berlin is not considered whitewashing as far as I'm aware, it was an act of rejection against a tyrannical regime who's sordid history has not disappeared...

            Tearing down statues of USSR leaders in Berlin is not considered whitewashing as far as I'm aware, it was an act of rejection against a tyrannical regime who's sordid history has not disappeared from the public nor the private record. Why is this suddenly different? What magic property do these confederate statues, most of which were not even erected after the war but years later, have that they are sacrosanct?

            14 votes
            1. [3]
              EscReality
              Link Parent
              You are clumping every confederate statue in the south into one category, that is the problem. This statue was not of a Confederate leader (if it had been I would have no issue with its removal)...

              You are clumping every confederate statue in the south into one category, that is the problem.

              This statue was not of a Confederate leader (if it had been I would have no issue with its removal) the statue is a memorial to students that died in the war. It was placed on the campus they left and is a memorial to their deaths. It is not a Confederate leader or symbol of the Confederacy. It is a memorial to dead soldiers.

              That is the distinction. Even in Berlin there are many memorials to the German soldiers that lost their lives in WW2, even though all images of the Nazi regime have been removed.

              1. [2]
                clerical_terrors
                Link Parent
                It is a memorial placed in 1913, which seems like a rather long time to start remembering your dead, by the Daughters of the Confederacy and dedicated with a speech by a former Confederate soldier...

                It is a memorial placed in 1913, which seems like a rather long time to start remembering your dead, by the Daughters of the Confederacy and dedicated with a speech by a former Confederate soldier which such touching passages as:

                And how she lived for him, that patient widowed mother of the South; what a man she made of him; how she has kept true in his breast the best traditions of his race; how she has fed him, clothed him, brought him up through poverty to wealth, from weakness to strength, to the high honor of hard work, through the indomitable example that she set! She has made of the sturdy manhood of the South the highest product which a Christian race has yet attained.

                And

                The present generation, I am persuaded, scarcely takes note of what the Confederate soldier meant to the welfare of the Anglo Saxon race during the four years immediately succeeding the war, when the facts are, that their courage and steadfastness saved the very life of the Anglo Saxon race in the South – When “the bottom rail was on top” all over the Southern states, and to-day, as a consequence the purest strain of the Anglo Saxon is to be found in the 13 Southern States – Praise God.

                And

                I trust I may be pardoned for one allusion, howbeit it is rather personal. One hundred yards from where we stand, less than ninety days perhaps after my return from Appomattox, I horse-whipped a negro wench until her skirts hung in shreds, because upon the streets of this quiet village she had publicly insulted and maligned a Southern lady, and then rushed for protection to these University buildings where was stationed a garrison of 100 Federal soldiers. I performed the pleasing duty in the immediate presence of the entire garrison, and for thirty nights afterwards slept with a double-barrel shot gun under my head.

                All monuments are ultimately just symbols, whether they be for the glorification of leaders or the ideas they represented. This one seems to be not just a symbol of remembrance of youths having been sent of to die undeservedly in an unjust war, but of glorifying the cause of said war and remembering these youths as heroes for having fought for the Confederate cause.

                Memorials to dead soldiers are rarely without afterthought. France is littered with monuments to the dead of WWI and the specific history of many those monuments is been contextualized as being about remembering the useless and unjustifiable massacre that war represented, not as a glorification of those who died valiantly for the fatherland.

                16 votes
                1. gksu
                  Link Parent
                  Whoa, I knew that most of these "monuments" were racist, but I had no idea they would try to immortalize a near lynching.

                  Whoa, I knew that most of these "monuments" were racist, but I had no idea they would try to immortalize a near lynching.

                  7 votes
      2. [9]
        demifiend
        Link Parent
        All of this is true but irrelevant. Memorials are like funerals. They are not for the dead, but for those left behind. The problem is that those left behind after the war are themselves dead. Why...

        The average confederate soldier fought because of loyalty to their family and locality, for them it was about defending their homes not slavery. At the time most people were very loyal to their states, so those men would have fought for their state.

        All of this is true but irrelevant. Memorials are like funerals. They are not for the dead, but for those left behind. The problem is that those left behind after the war are themselves dead. Why should the living be burdened by the public presence of statues erected by KKK leaders to the memory of those fallen for an immoral cause?

        11 votes
        1. [8]
          EscReality
          (edited )
          Link Parent
          First of all, these statues were not all put up by KKK leaders. This one was not, it was put up by the families of the fallen soldiers and the school's alumni asscociation. I have family that...

          First of all, these statues were not all put up by KKK leaders. This one was not, it was put up by the families of the fallen soldiers and the school's alumni asscociation.

          I have family that fought for the Union, I am a direct descendant of "those that were left behind". I would never want statues built in the memory of my dead relatives taken down and I would never advocate taking statues built to remember confederate soldiers down just because they were on the losing side.

          The loss of life should never be forgotten. The fact that it has become common and socially acceptable to advocate the whitewashing of history is just sad. You cannot erase what you do not agree with from history.

          Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

          5 votes
          1. [3]
            spit-evil-olive-tips
            Link Parent
            Christ I'm tired of this strawman narrative. No one is advocating for bulldozing museums about the Civil War. No one is advocating for not teaching about the Civil War in history class. No one is...

            advocate the whitewashing of history

            Christ I'm tired of this strawman narrative.

            No one is advocating for bulldozing museums about the Civil War.

            No one is advocating for not teaching about the Civil War in history class.

            No one is advocating for removing mentions of the Civil War from textbooks, or from the school library.

            What is being advocated for is changing what we glorify. There's much, much more to history than statues in public squares. Tearing down or replacing those statues does not whitewash history as a whole.

            19 votes
            1. [2]
              EscReality
              Link Parent
              Exactly, and this statue was a statue of an anonymous soldier erected to memorialize the soldiers that died from the area. It was not glorifying anything. I am all for taking down statues of...

              Exactly, and this statue was a statue of an anonymous soldier erected to memorialize the soldiers that died from the area. It was not glorifying anything.

              I am all for taking down statues of Robert E. Lee or other Confederate leaders, but taking down a memorial to people that lost their lives fighting for the town where said memorial stands in is wrong.

              This is whitewashing history, it is ignorant to think it is anything else.

              4 votes
              1. Zekka
                Link Parent
                it's crazy how there are so many memorials to the people who died fighting for slavery and practically none to the people who died by being slaves. after all, there were a hell of a lot more...

                it's crazy how there are so many memorials to the people who died fighting for slavery and practically none to the people who died by being slaves. after all, there were a hell of a lot more slaves than soldiers, period, on both sides.

                you'd almost think the people mass producing them for $50 each didn't see slaves as worth memorializing

                weird

                4 votes
          2. [3]
            CALICO
            Link Parent
            Silent Sam was funded by the United Daughters of the Confederacy, an organization which promotes the Lost Cause and is largely seen as a White Supremacist association.

            First of all, these statues were not all put up by KKK leaders. This one was not, it was put up by the families of the fallen soldiers.

            Silent Sam was funded by the United Daughters of the Confederacy, an organization which promotes the Lost Cause and is largely seen as a White Supremacist association.

            16 votes
            1. [2]
              EscReality
              Link Parent
              As far as I can tell the UDC has been associated with some White Supremacist groups over the years but are they themselves not one. They are a group dedicated to preserving the memory of their...

              As far as I can tell the UDC has been associated with some White Supremacist groups over the years but are they themselves not one. They are a group dedicated to preserving the memory of their ancestors modeled after the famous DAR.

              1. CALICO
                Link Parent
                I'm sorry, but that's just not correct. The United Daughters of the Confederacy is dedicated to promoting the Lost Cause, which 'glorified the days of the Confederacy, valorized the men who fought...

                I'm sorry, but that's just not correct.

                The United Daughters of the Confederacy is dedicated to promoting the Lost Cause, which 'glorified the days of the Confederacy, valorized the men who fought in the war, and declared the South’s innocence in relation to the war and Reconstruction.' The UDC "contributed mightily to the legend [of the Lost Cause]", and were active agents to influence collective memory.

                If you'd like to know more I highly suggest this dissertation: [PDF warning]
                Teachers of the Lost Cause: The United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Rhetoric of Their Catechisms

                15 votes
          3. demifiend
            Link Parent
            So do I. How is that relevant? So am I. Again, how is this relevant? That's your business. As far as I'm concerned, the place to memorialize the Confederacy is in museums dedicating to presenting...

            I have family that fought for the Union,

            So do I. How is that relevant?

            I am a direct descendant of "those that were left behind"

            So am I. Again, how is this relevant?

            I would never want statues built in the memory of my dead relatives taken down and I would never advocate taking statues built to remember confederate soldiers down just because they were on the losing side.

            That's your business. As far as I'm concerned, the place to memorialize the Confederacy is in museums dedicating to presenting the whole and unvarnished truth about the Confederate cause, stripped of all romanticism. Better yet, designate every battlefield a national monument as was done with Gettysburg and honor the fallen of both sides there.

            But don't talk to me about whitewashing history. Southerners started doing that while there was still flesh on the bones of their dead.

            14 votes
      3. [13]
        Comment deleted by author
        Link Parent
        1. [12]
          EscReality
          Link Parent
          It saddens me that you can reduce the mass loss of life to this. It was one of the bloodiest and most horrifying wars we have ever participated in, we shouldn't be forgetting those that died in...

          Just because foolish children got tied up and died in war perpetrated by wealthy white landowners doesn't mean we should tolerate statues for them or their cause, despite the sadness of the conflict and death as a whole.

          It saddens me that you can reduce the mass loss of life to this. It was one of the bloodiest and most horrifying wars we have ever participated in, we shouldn't be forgetting those that died in it. This has nothing to do with the politics of either side.

          2 votes
          1. [11]
            demifiend
            Link Parent
            Oh, please. It was a rich man's war, but it didn't have to be a poor man's fight. Every man jack who fought in that misbegotten war could have refused. Even the draftees, though they would have...

            It saddens me that you can reduce the mass loss of life to this.

            Oh, please. It was a rich man's war, but it didn't have to be a poor man's fight. Every man jack who fought in that misbegotten war could have refused. Even the draftees, though they would have suffered for doing so.

            When some rich asshole sounds the call to arms, the only correct answer is, "You first!"

            7 votes
            1. [10]
              EscReality
              Link Parent
              This is true of most wars, you still cannot ignore the loss of life because of that. If anything memorials for those that died should hold even more meaning because they died for a cause that was...

              It was a rich man's war, but it didn't have to be a poor man's fight.

              This is true of most wars, you still cannot ignore the loss of life because of that.

              If anything memorials for those that died should hold even more meaning because they died for a cause that was not necessarily theirs.

              2 votes
              1. [8]
                demifiend
                Link Parent
                You want a meaningful war memorial? One that doesn't reduce the dead to some abstract figure meant to represent them? Head on down to DC and take a look at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Walk the...

                If anything memorials for those that died should hold even more meaning because they died for a cause that was not necessarily theirs.

                You want a meaningful war memorial? One that doesn't reduce the dead to some abstract figure meant to represent them? Head on down to DC and take a look at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Walk the entire length of the wall. Memorize every name of the men and women who fought, killed, and died in that war. There's over 58,000 of them, most of them poor men and women fighting another rich man's war.

                9 votes
                1. CALICO
                  Link Parent
                  As an aside, anyone who finds themselves in DC with some spare time should really check out the Vietnam Memorial if you can. It's really something to behold.

                  As an aside, anyone who finds themselves in DC with some spare time should really check out the Vietnam Memorial if you can. It's really something to behold.

                  7 votes
                2. [6]
                  EscReality
                  Link Parent
                  Yea, and 620,000 Americans died in the Civil War. More men died in The Battle of Gettysburg than the entirely of the Vietnam War.

                  Yea, and 620,000 Americans died in the Civil War. More men died in The Battle of Gettysburg than the entirely of the Vietnam War.

                  1. [5]
                    demifiend
                    Link Parent
                    So what? Are all their names carved in stone somewhere? Or are we supposed to make do with statues of some artist's representation of a "Union soldier" or a "Confederate soldier"? If you want to...

                    So what? Are all their names carved in stone somewhere? Or are we supposed to make do with statues of some artist's representation of a "Union soldier" or a "Confederate soldier"? If you want to memorialize the Civil War's fallen, then stop dicking around with statues and pick a mountain.

                    8 votes
                    1. [4]
                      EscReality
                      Link Parent
                      What?

                      What?

                      1. [3]
                        demifiend
                        Link Parent
                        You heard me. Go and carve the names of your precious fallen -- all those poor ignorant schmucks who died screaming for the right of a few rich traitors to continue owning slaves -- into a goddamn...

                        You heard me. Go and carve the names of your precious fallen -- all those poor ignorant schmucks who died screaming for the right of a few rich traitors to continue owning slaves -- into a goddamn mountain.

                        8 votes
                        1. [2]
                          EscReality
                          Link Parent
                          lmao, chillax. I am a Coloradan and my family is from New England. They are not my fallen, but they are Americans that died in our bloodiest war and they should be remembered.

                          lmao, chillax.

                          I am a Coloradan and my family is from New England. They are not my fallen, but they are Americans that died in our bloodiest war and they should be remembered.

                          2 votes
                          1. demifiend
                            Link Parent
                            They should only be remembered as poor traitors fighting for rich traitors. May their names be both accursed and forgotten.

                            They are not my fallen, but they are Americans that died in our bloodiest war and they should be remembered.

                            They should only be remembered as poor traitors fighting for rich traitors. May their names be both accursed and forgotten.

                            8 votes
              2. Litmus2336
                Link Parent
                Not all wars are rich man's wars, in fact a lot aren't. Such as The Nigerian civil war, where Biafra fought to end the religious persecution it experienced Antonio José de Sucre y Alcalá's war to...

                Not all wars are rich man's wars, in fact a lot aren't. Such as

                1. The Nigerian civil war, where Biafra fought to end the religious persecution it experienced
                2. Antonio José de Sucre y Alcalá's war to free Bolivia from Spanish rule
                3. The Belgians defending their country in WW1

                Sure, these weren't everyones wars. And the generals were probably all rich people. But at the end of the day sometimes a war is something more than a struggle between rich people exercising their follies.

                Now, I don't see the need for memorials for those who make great sacrifices. These people made great sacrifices for a terrible cause. I'd much rather we honor those who made small sacrifices for good things than big sacrifices for bad things.

                1 vote
  2. [2]
    NubWizard
    (edited )
    Link
    More background and history revolving around the statue: https://exhibits.lib.unc.edu/exhibits/show/silent-sam/timeline 1910 June 2, 1913 May 23, 1940 February 23, 1954 March, 1965 April 8, 1968...

    More background and history revolving around the statue:

    https://exhibits.lib.unc.edu/exhibits/show/silent-sam/timeline

    1910

    Sculptor John Wilson begins designing Silent Sam, using sixteen-year-old Bostonian Harold Langlois as a model for the statue. Later that year, President Venable calls for work to be stopped on the monument as funds are raised. He specifies that the UDC will pay one-third of the total cost and alumni donors will pay the remaining two-thirds. Venable says that the University itself will not pay for the memorial, but he is actively involved in raising money, sending letters to prominent alumni asking for their support for the memorial.

    June 2, 1913

    The monument is dedicated on commencement day. The unveiling features speeches by Governor Locke Craig and Julian Shakespeare Carr, a Confederate veteran, local industrialist, and trustee of the University. In his speech, Carr lauds the Confederate army's "sav[ing] the very life of the Anglo Saxon race in the South" and recalls "horse-whipp[ing] a negro wench until her skirts hung in shreds" for insulting a white woman on Franklin Street.

    May 23, 1940

    Students opposed to the United States becoming involved in World War II hold a peace rally in Memorial Hall and plant white crosses around Silent Sam. During the rally, students who support American entry into the war throw eggs and rotten vegetables onto the stage during an anti-war skit. UNC president Frank Porter Graham intervenes, quelling the conflict temporarily. The same evening, students burn the crosses around Silent Sam.

    February 23, 1954

    The Daily Tar Heel refers to the monument as "Silent Sam" for the first time. When first mentioned in the Tar Heel in 1913, the paper referred to it as "the Soldiers monument." From the 1920s through the 1940s, the paper referred to it as the "Confederate memorial."

    March, 1965

    A letter to the editors of the Daily Tar Heel by student Al Ribak, titled "Silent Sam Should Leave," sparks discussion in the newspaper about the monument's meaning and history, whether it is a racist symbol, and whether it should be removed from campus.

    April 8, 1968

    Silent Sam is splashed with paint and tagged with graffiti as demonstrations erupt around the country following the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The next day, student volunteers scrub the statue and decorate it with small Confederate flags. They are asked to remove the flags and do so

    November 19, 1971

    The Black Student Movement and the the Afro-American Society of Chapel Hill High School hold a gathering and protest at Silent Sam in memory of James Cates, a young black man murdered in the Pit by members of a white motorcycle gang on November 20, 1970, and William Murphy, a black man shot and killed by a highway patrolman in Ayden, N.C. on August 6, 1971.

    April, 2003

    A letter to the Daily Tar Heel by Dr. Gerald Horne comparing Silent Sam to statues of Saddam Hussein being toppled in Iraq prompts discussion of the meaning of Silent Sam and whether it should be removed from campus

    September, 2011

    The Real Silent Sam Movement holds a demonstration at Silent Sam, including the unveiling of a mock plaque on the monument’s side explaining its racist history

    March 1, 2015

    Members of the Department of Anthropology formally express support for the Real Silent Sam Coalition's demand for Silent Sam to be labelled with a plaque explaining that it commemorates a legacy of white supremacy

    If there is one thing that is clear to me it is that the feelings of dislike and animosity towards the statue is not something that is new to today's age and to act like it's a symbol of memorializing students only is one that is born out of selective ignorance. From the start, this statue was given life as a symbol of hate and a celebration of the ideals of rascism. The fact that for over 60 years, this statue has been seen as a symbol of rascism and hate tells a better story of history than that of memorializing dead Confederate students.

    As someone who spent a good amount of time in Western North Carolina, I am proud of the students for taking the matter into their own hands, especially after the governor of the state for I'd the removal of these statues without the explicit permission of the state government.

    17 votes
    1. EscReality
      Link Parent
      Thank you for posting a timeline of sorts, Quality post. The only thing I would add is that sculptor John Wilson was a Canadian with strong ties to Harvard (where he taught for 32 years) and the...

      Thank you for posting a timeline of sorts, Quality post.

      The only thing I would add is that sculptor John Wilson was a Canadian with strong ties to Harvard (where he taught for 32 years) and the city of Boston, he did not make the statue because of racist desires. It was 100% intended as a memorial, it is unfortunate Julian Carr was chosen to speak at the commencement because he does tarnish it, but doesn't actually change its meaning.

      Personally I think if the statue was being seen as a racist symbol, then they should have tried to change how people viewed it. Obviously for the first 30-40 years or so it was not seen as racist. The statue in itself is not racist, does not show racist acts and is at its core just meant as a memorial to fallen students (modeled after a 16 year old boy from Boston of all places). Pushing to change the stigma around it would have solved all of their issues with it without resorting to illegal destruction of property.

      2 votes
  3. [2]
    anti
    Link
    The speech given when it was put up should tell anyone who is curious the purpose of these racist symbols. It's no coincidence that these statues were raised when they were. They we're all put up...

    The speech given when it was put up should tell anyone who is curious the purpose of these racist symbols.

    It's no coincidence that these statues were raised when they were. They we're all put up during flare ups of white supremacist sentiment. I have no qualms with taking them down. The never should have been put up.

    If the govrnement won't take them down, then let the people do it for them. Those protestors did a good thing.

    12 votes
    1. spit-evil-olive-tips
      Link Parent
      In case anyone is unaware of just how bad this period of American history was with regards to race relations: The Rise and Fall of the Second Ku Klux Klan

      It's no coincidence that these statues were raised when they were.

      In case anyone is unaware of just how bad this period of American history was with regards to race relations:

      The Rise and Fall of the Second Ku Klux Klan

      On August 8, 1925, more than 50,000 members of the Ku Klux Klan paraded through Washington, D.C.

      By 1925, it had anywhere from 2 million to 5 million members and the sympathy or support of millions more.

      9 votes
  4. [2]
    Luna
    Link
    Here's a video of them pulling it down, for those interested.

    Here's a video of them pulling it down, for those interested.

    11 votes
    1. JayJay
      Link Parent
      When they start looking like the mob of ISIS fighters tearing down religious statues they might want to start rethinking their methods. This is probably going to get used in a GOP ad somewhere.

      When they start looking like the mob of ISIS fighters tearing down religious statues they might want to start rethinking their methods. This is probably going to get used in a GOP ad somewhere.

      1 vote
  5. pleure
    Link
    I love it. If I had to name the best development to come out of America in the past year or two I'd say it's the number of people realizing that direct action works and that you have more options...

    I love it. If I had to name the best development to come out of America in the past year or two I'd say it's the number of people realizing that direct action works and that you have more options than waiting for the next election and trying to vote in a better government.

    11 votes
  6. [10]
    EscReality
    Link
    wiki I find this one interesting because it was a memorial to soldiers from the area that lost their lives, not a memorial to a specific Confederate leader. Those soldiers were still Americans,...

    Demonstrators gathered at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill campus Monday night achieved a decades-long goal for those opposed to public displays of Confederate statues: They toppled "Silent Sam," a monument dedicated to fallen Civil War-era soldiers.

    wiki

    Silent Sam is a statue of a Confederate soldier by sculptor John A. Wilson, erected in 1913 on the campus of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States. It was located on McCorkle Place, the university's upper quad, facing Franklin Street on the northern edge of campus.[1] On August 20, 2018, it was pulled down from its pedestal by protesters.[2]

    I find this one interesting because it was a memorial to soldiers from the area that lost their lives, not a memorial to a specific Confederate leader. Those soldiers were still Americans, just because they were on the losing side of the conflict doesn't mean their deaths should be forgotten. I totally understand not wanting statues of Robert E. Lee everywhere, but destroying monuments for forgotten soldiers just feels like whitewashing the past.

    6 votes
    1. [10]
      Comment removed by site admin
      Link Parent
      1. TenThousandSuns
        Link Parent
        Holy shit, context is everything...

        Holy shit, context is everything...

        20 votes
      2. [8]
        EscReality
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        That is not necessarily true. People often claim that forgetting that the early 1900s was less than 30 years after Reconstruction ended and the nation was just getting stabilized again. While...

        It is because like most of these statues that were erected in the early 1900s as a symbol of white supremacy

        That is not necessarily true. People often claim that forgetting that the early 1900s was less than 30 years after Reconstruction ended and the nation was just getting stabilized again. While obviously some of them were put up by white supremacists, you have to take into account that the majority of the population at the time remembered the war, had loved ones that died in it and would have wanted monuments to remember them. It's no different than us erecting Vietnam or Gulf War monuments. Julian Carr being the speaker at the commencement of the statue is unfortunate but ultimately meaningless, that story provides very little context as to why the statue would be toppled today. The statue was put up by the UDC and is a memorial to people that died in the area, as far as I can tell no white supremacist group funded it, it was not offensive in anyway and did not promote any Confederate leaders. There was no reason as far as I can see to take it down.

        1 vote
        1. [2]
          Comment deleted by author
          Link Parent
          1. EscReality
            Link Parent
            But, it wasn't true for this one. That is the point I am making.

            But, it wasn't true for this one. That is the point I am making.

        2. [7]
          Comment removed by site admin
          Link Parent
          1. [6]
            EscReality
            Link Parent
            That's a dumb reason. His speech happened a 100 years ago and had nothing to do with the monument, he used it has a political platform for his cause, but he didnt erect it and he was not why it...

            That's a dumb reason.

            His speech happened a 100 years ago and had nothing to do with the monument, he used it has a political platform for his cause, but he didnt erect it and he was not why it was erected.

            The UDC shouldn't have invited him to speak, but that doesn't change the meaning of the monument.

            Like I said, the monuments being put up in the early 1900s were being put up by the families that lost their loved ones in the war 30 years prior. It's not that weird.

            1 vote
            1. [6]
              Comment removed by site admin
              Link Parent
              1. Zekka
                Link Parent
                so yeah when the Racist Monument Club built all those other racist monuments it was super racist, but this one's not racist at all. same subject matter, same builders. totally different this time....

                so yeah when the Racist Monument Club built all those other racist monuments it was super racist, but this one's not racist at all. same subject matter, same builders. totally different this time. really.

                8 votes
              2. [4]
                EscReality
                Link Parent
                Bottom line, the statue isn't glorifying the confederacy and it was built to memorialize students that lost their lives in the war. It was paid for by the school's Alumni Association and the UDC....

                Bottom line, the statue isn't glorifying the confederacy and it was built to memorialize students that lost their lives in the war. It was paid for by the school's Alumni Association and the UDC. While the UDC has had questionable ties to white supremacist groups over the years they are not now, nor have they ever been, a white supremacist group. They are nothing more than the Confederate version of the DAR and that's fine. A speech that happened 100 years ago has nothing to do with today. In reality the statue was not harming anyone, it didn't display anything overtly bad and the meaning behind it was nothing more than a memorial.

                1. [3]
                  Gaywallet
                  Link Parent
                  Abraham Lincoln's famous "four score and seven years ago" speech happened well over 100 years ago and is monumentally important both today and to American history. And what are your thoughts of...

                  A speech that happened 100 years ago has nothing to do with today

                  Abraham Lincoln's famous "four score and seven years ago" speech happened well over 100 years ago and is monumentally important both today and to American history.

                  In reality the statue was not harming anyone, it didn't display anything overtly bad and the meaning behind it was nothing more than a memorial.

                  And what are your thoughts of statues of famous dictators? Stalin? Hitler? What about statues including inciteful imagery like the swastika such as a statue displaying the symbol of Hitler's Germany?

                  Are those overtly bad? What makes something "overtly bad"?

                  11 votes
                  1. [2]
                    EscReality
                    Link Parent
                    That's the thing, this wasn't a statue of a famous leader of the Confederacy and it wasn't a statute specifically glorifying the confederacy. It was a statue of an anonymous soldier representing...

                    That's the thing, this wasn't a statue of a famous leader of the Confederacy and it wasn't a statute specifically glorifying the confederacy. It was a statue of an anonymous soldier representing the students (from the campus it stood on) that died in the war.

                    The point you are trying to make is irrelevant because this was not a statue representing a confederate leader or the confederacy.

                    1 vote
                    1. Gaywallet
                      Link Parent
                      How is a man in confederate uniform any less representative of the confederacy than a confederate flag, or a nazi symbol?

                      How is a man in confederate uniform any less representative of the confederacy than a confederate flag, or a nazi symbol?

                      14 votes
  7. starchturrets
    Link
    This thread is going to get locked.

    This thread is going to get locked.

    3 votes
  8. J-Senior
    (edited )
    Link
    This reminds me of the protesting uni students in South Africa. Three years ago there was a big fuss about the statue of Cecil Rhodes outside the University of Cape Town. It was declared a symbol...

    This reminds me of the protesting uni students in South Africa. Three years ago there was a big fuss about the statue of Cecil Rhodes outside the University of Cape Town. It was declared a symbol of racism and the protesters wanted it removed. The aftermath got messy.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodes_Must_Fall

    Locked thread edit test.
    Seems it works.

    2 votes