Written by a friend of my wife fighting cancer in a nursing home. They worked together for many years and she is s great person, I wish her well.

I agree about the statues being more art than a political viewpoint. I lived on Allen Ave. at Monument Ave. for years and the Statue was nice to see everyday. I would think anyone by now would be settled on the north vs south issues. To me it has been a massive destruction of antique art, some so badly that they can never be replaced. I was hoping they could end up as museum, or perhaps protected garden pieces, before they are totally destroyed. When I glance briefly at the news, and see the destruction, I just see rebellion and consuming bitterness....and venting that anger won't heal their issues....they are just feeding it.



Found these pics online, taken the day that Lee's statue was unveiled on May 29, 1890 to a crowd of 150,000. The project was in response to Lee's death, and took 20 years to complete. There was no "Monument Avenue" at the time, but it was rather placed in what was then an open field. The city grew up around it over the past 130 years. Good to know the true details of the event rather than assume that there's truth to the sinister, modern day version of its origin...that is, the accusation that it's there to perpetrate hate. The hate resides within the accusers.



Blacks have assumed that they were the core reason for the civil war...they were not. It was an issue of states rights to govern themselves, and a clash of power with the federal vs local government. Lincoln used freeing the slaves later to gain some political momentum after both sides were weary of all the deaths in the war, and the emancipation proclamation actually only applied to slaves fighting for the confederacy...it was a move to weaken the southern army, not intended to free all blacks residing in the north:



"Lincoln didn’t actually free any of the approximately 4 million men, women and children held in slavery in the United States when he signed the formal Emancipation Proclamation the following January. The document applied only to enslaved people in the Confederacy, and not to those in the border states that remained loyal to the Union."



So, the modern day myth that all of it was to free the slaves is just that, a myth. White men at the time would not have fought that long and died for black field laborers. There were many cases of white brothers fighting against each other, having taken different political views. The war was about money, and financial gain...what any war is usually about....and the reason that the south was consequently left crushed after the war. All the death and destruction was not "for freeing the black people"....that's the modern day twisted version.



Imagine what's happening to the school history books, what kind of garbage they are being told that only feeds the anger. As Lee put it, slavery was an unfortunate evil in our society in the 1800's....but then so was the treatment of the Native American...it didn't get any worse than that. And, the treatment of all women and children of all colors wasn't much better. When one views the big picture, in context, it becomes clear that our society had a long ways to go to be called "civilized"....and to extract only one part of it and rant about its injustice is an incomplete story. We could testify to injustice for women in the workplace in the '80's....we lived it...and sometimes it wasn't much fun, being treated as second class, occasionally as objects, and always as powerless....but we made the best of it.....and each generation contributes its part, so that the next generation has it just a little bit better.









"Lee is a gentleman, a man of honor, and a religious man with no vices and considerable patience. Optimistic and idealistic, he believes his men can do anything. He is soft-spoken and cares about his men, but is willing to use them boldly and lose them for the Cause."



"...While Lee helped assist individual slaves to freedom in Liberia, and provided for their emancipation in his own will, he believed the enslaved should be eventually freed in a general way only at some unspecified future date as a part of God's purpose. Slavery for Lee was a moral and religious issue, and not one that would yield to political solutions. Emancipation would sooner come from Christian impulse among slave masters before "storms and tempests of fiery controversy" such as was occurring in "Bleeding Kansas". Countering Southerners who argued for slavery as a positive good, Lee in his well-known analysis of slavery from an 1856 letter called it a moral and political evil. While both Robert and his wife Mary Lee were disgusted with slavery, they also defended it against abolitionist demands for immediate emancipation for all enslaved."





Richmond burned after the war...it took hard work, and a long time to rebuild:







I thought that Lee's life was worth at least a testimony based on truth, instead of wild accusations. I sure hope all the mess on TV will be resolved soon, and allow the city to settle down again.

That there is the truth and well written.
Olerebjr.

great post

Thanks for sharing that Darrell. I really wonder what version of that might be in a current history book , if at all that is.

+1

One question for the assembled:

Why are you folks afraid to put these statues in a museum?

They would be protected,properly preserved by the curators,and safe from vandalism.Anybody that would care to view them could,,the dangerous traffic patterns on Monument could be resolved,and with no rally point,a huge amount of local angst and violence could be averted.

Once again,why are you afraid to put these statues in a museum?

Dusty trolling his narrative again....
I see 0 opposition to the museum idea here.

Nice work OP

Not trolling at all,an honest question.Please don't try to deflect,most of the people I've talked with regarding this issue have no clear answer,and I would like to find out the reasoning for keeping the statues in situ.

Its a troll. You posed the question in a thread ABOUT PUTTING THEM IN A MUSEUM.

You asked "Why are you folks afraid to put these statues in a museum?" Pure insinuation.

Stay on topic, start THAT topic

Saw a post that says BLM is actually Hamas.

No one here has any issue putting them anywhere so not sure why you would even bring it up? My question to you is why should they be moved at all? Because HAMAS doesn't like them? Or maybe you don't like them? They have been silently standing there for 130 or so years but only in the last 10 or 20 they have been a issue for someone. The Statues all raise property values because they are Historically recognized for what they are remembrances of a War gone by, a War lost by one side and now called racist. Dusty, for you to troll this post is surprising to me. If you have nothing constructive to add please don't comment, thanks.

They have always been a problem for a group of some of us Americans. They represent bondage and terror. While in slavery or Jim Crow that followed. I do understand for some other Americans they are their ancestors and maybe even their heroes. That’s cool, but it’s time to move on. I don’t agree with people destroying them in the streets but if moved to a place that they will be displayed in a historical context let’s do it in a orderly fashion. Not trolling just speaking my 2 cents.

Now that must be a truly amazing chain of logic to arrive at that conclusion.How do they support the claim?

Anyhow,a couple of folks seem sort of afraid of the idea,which seems odd.It would preserve the statues,and the whole area would benefit from the drop in accidents. There could even be an income increase from parking,restaurants,admissions,gift shops,etc. Why not?

edit:

There is one clue that I have noticed about your writing on the subject,dad.The complete name of the war is the American Civil War. Shortening to the War,and the multiple references to it as the War,gives a rather interesting "tell".

If we have equal rights in this country then my southern heritage should be just as important as black heritage. Wanna tear down the confederate statues ? Then tear down Author Ashe, he offends me.

He offends you why? Did take up arms to keep the institution of slavery going?fought against the federal government and lost? Or just because the color of his skin? I wonder who he oppressed... other than the other Gay men who died from Aids as well?

Of the statues the only ones that are not of the losing generals of a failed insurrection are Ashe and Maury. Ashe's record as a philanthropist,children's advocate,educational advocate,and civil rights spokesperson are without question. Maury is conflicted,but a scientist;and is revered in oceanography as well as other disciplines,and sought to de-escalate the American Civil War.

So,what sort of southern heritage are we talking about,the "lost cause" or our future?

I can respect and understand all points of view in this current debate about civil war statues. My personal opinion is that they never should have gone up in the first place. Honoring the leaders of the losing side in a conflict with statues reminds me of handing out participation trophies. Should we have a Viet Cong soldier memorial next to our Vietnam Memorial in D.C.? How about if Germany erected statues of Erwin Rommel or Herman Goering? Or named their roads and middle schools after them? I also don't like the idea of any statue or monument being removed 100 years after it was erected. This conversation should have happened 100 years ago, and now all sides look like jerks.

toughtom, My thoughts are similar. These arguments on each side are worse than the statues.

Odd as it may sound tom,complete agreement,but the mess was left for someone to clean,and hopefully we get it done this time.

Though it is interesting. We live in a state with a name derived from a former queen of England, so let's get started changing that.

Good point. We have a state, cities, towns, etc named after Washington who owned slaves. The left is never satisfied, so I don’t believe there is a stopping point. (Like it or not, the racial lens applied to everything is a tool of the left to divide and conquer. They seem to have forgotten that most of these statues are of Democrats...)

Ah, at last some truth about the so-called Civil War (wasn't really but that is another matter). Thank you

This is an effort to remove the history and provide more impetus for the ongoing cultural revolution. The statue removal reminds me of the recent Taliban actions in Syria etc. to destroy "idols" which do not fit their narrative. We need to be reminded (I guess) that these statues should stay up not, as one member here opined, to honor loosers but their commitment to to honor, duty and self rule. If we erase our history we lose sight of what made this country great.

The Communist Party, Democrats, BLM, ANTIFA and their supporters are trying, and succeeding so far, in dividing this country in an effort to instill as much economic and personal chaos with the aim of increasing the central government authority and reducing the individual (self rule).

[quote=Paratus]Ah, at last some truth about the so-called Civil War (wasn't really but that is another matter). Thank you

This is an effort to remove the history and provide more impetus for the ongoing cultural revolution. The statue removal reminds me of the recent Taliban actions in Syria etc. to destroy "idols" which do not fit their narrative. We need to be reminded (I guess) that these statues should stay up not, as one member here opined, to honor loosers but their commitment to to honor, duty and self rule. If we erase our history we lose sight of what made this country great.

The Communist Party, Democrats, BLM, ANTIFA and their supporters are trying, and succeeding so far, in dividing this country in an effort to instill as much economic and personal chaos with the aim of increasing the central government authority and reducing the individual (self rule).



yeap,proof that the sooner we start cleaning up this mess the better.

With the situation we have today and the mindset of the dems, cowtowing to BLM terrorists it should be a simple matter to change "Virginia" to 'Va gi na".

I am so ashamed of my state. We are now questioning the decision we made to retire here.

I grew up here,busted;and have "voted with my feet" before.If you find it uncomfortable to be here,may I suggest you consider the same?Let us know where the wind takes you.