Booray said:
Redbrickbear said:
Booray said:
Thee University said:
Booray said:
Thee University said:
bubbadog said:
We put up historical markers on the site of where some early school or pioneer trading post once was but won't officially mark the site of the old slave market. Every county square in my state has a monument to its Confederate veterans or war dead -- and I have no problem with that -- but there's no public monument anywhere to the 20,000 Black men from the state who joined the Union Army and fought and died for their own freedom. If taking down Confederate statues today is cancelling, you might say that much of our history got pre-cancelled generations earlier.
A very large number of Confederate monuments around this great, free country were bought and paid for by the widows, kids and grandkids of Confederate Veterans. They raised the $$$$ by collecting pennies, nickels, dimes and other donations. They were proud of their ancestors and 95%+ did not own or have any slaves. They did not march hundreds and thousands of mile on foot and horseback to allow slave owners to keep their labor pool. They did not risk their lives voluntarily so that Boss Hog could wallow around on his plantation and they come home maimed to a mud hut or at best a log cabin.
Nothing prevented blacks, browns and yellows from erecting monuments and roadside historical markers of ancestors they were/are proud of or sites they deem historical.
Today I'm certain Black Lives Matter would part with $100 million or so so get those monuments erected. Don't you think? All it takes is a little work and sacrifice!!!
Those confederate monuments are largely at courthouses and on public land throughout the South, erected in the early 20th century. You are seriously suggesting that African-Americans could have just put up Fredrick Douglas, George Washington Carver and Harriet Tubman statues at the same time?
Damn right I am!
Did they even try? They could out up monuments anywhere in the hoods nationwide so it gets maximum exposure where black folks work, play and do business.
What were they doing? Waiting for someone else to do it for them?
Today there are thousands of black millionaires across this nation fully capable of erecting these monuments. The BLM group is flush with WHITE cash. What is holding them back? Are they waiting for white guilt to kick in and let whitey pay for it.
In the 1920's, when the Confederate statues went up, African Americans were busy trying not to get lynched by the KKK. Suggesting they could have just erected statues of black heroes in public spaces is beyond stupid. The franchise was largely denied to them until the 1960's and even once they got the vote, the idea that they could get approval for what you are suggesting is also beyond stupid.
Every time I think that the some of the conservative posters on Sic'em make valid points about too much reliance on the race card, I can count on you to demonstrate how much work needs to be done.
For the record these statues were built at the exact same time Union statues were.
Starting in the 1880s and continuing all the way until the civil war's centennial in 1960.
The big building spree was in the 1920s because that was right around the time union and confederate veterans were passing away. Same reason that around the 1990s-2010s there was a huge increase in WWII memorials being built around the country as the veterans of that war started to pass on.
This attempt to link war memorials to disrespect towards african americans is spurious.
Unless you want to try and link Grand Army of the Union building statues to african americans in the North somehow.
This lie started when the Southern Poverty (scam) Law Center tried to make a connection and thus further their cause in deconstructing history and vilifying southerners. Started around 2015 when they started putting these claims on their website....vice, huffpost, and then the mainstream media picked up on the trend and used it as a excuse to tear them down.
First, you misread what I said. I said the fact that the KKK was allowed to run rampant when the statutes were being erected was a pretty good indication that African Americans would not be allowed to put up statutes of their heroes. Is that something you disagree with? Are you going to join Thee's stupidity train and assert "gee..I don't understand why Southern courthouses don't have statutes of black heroes...must be the black people's fault?"
Second, your belief that the statues had nothing to do with reminding African Americans of their proper place in the world ignores a pretty obvious rise in overt intimidation that happened simultaneously. While correlation is not causation, smoke often indicates fire.
Third, I don't have mind reading ability that stretches a century back like you so I will say that regardless of the intent of the people erecting the statues, honoring people who fought for the right to enslave other people is going to be hurtful to those who were enslaved and their descendants.
The fact that you and others cannot admit that last point proves the Baylor commission on racial justice was and is absolutely necessary.
I agree with you on all points. I can say that honoring the dead is one thing and has a place but regarding the civil war, it is a careful place that must be exercised with caution. I'msure there are many, escpecially in Texas who fought for Texas and not really the south...having said that...I do think that we need to explore what messages are sent by statues or names.
I have a very good friend who has lived in Tyler, TX all of his life. Recently, Tyler went through an issue with one of it's high schools being named Robert E Lee. Although Tyler Lee has changed its mascot from Rebels to Red Rainders and was predominately Hispanic now, there was still strong feelings on both sides.
My friend was a graduate of Lee HS and was very resistant to the change. However, he did some research and learned that Lee was erected in 1958 and was named Robert E Lee to discourage blacks from ever wanting to attend school there. He stated that having learned that, how could he not be for changing the name.
Sometime the changing of history is necessary once we find out why things were done the way they were...sometimes it means we don't have to change history.
I also understand the fear of today's cancel culture that because Judge Baylor owned slaves, his name must be erased from existance and all references cease...it scares me too.