Predominantly black group opposes removing Confederate monuments in Texas

Seems the issue is not strictly decided along racial lines. Found this on Drudge today. As reported at the DFW CBS station in Dallas a group comprising mostly black individuals has formed to protect confederate monuments in the city of Dallas.

Excerpt:


Seems entirely sensible to me.

utbagpiper said:

Seems the issue is not strictly decided along racial lines. Found this on Drudge today. As reported at the DFW CBS station in Dallas a group comprising mostly black individuals has formed to protect confederate monuments in the city of Dallas.

Excerpt:

Former city council member Sandra Crenshaw thinks removing the statues won’t help.

“I’m not intimidated by Robert E. Lee’s statue. I’m not intimidated by it. It doesn’t scare me,” said Crenshaw. “We don’t want America to think that all African Americans are supportive of this.”

Crenshaw, along with some Buffalo Solider historians and Sons of Confederate Veterans are coming together to help protect the Confederate markers from toppling over in Dallas.

They feel the monuments, like the Freedman’s Cemetery, tell an important story and help heal racial wounds.


​

Seems entirely sensible to me.

Click to expand...

That's reassuring. It shows that there is not a consensus of opinion on the destruction of monuments that reflect history. Those that are proposing the moving or the actual destruction of monuments that honor those who participated in the Civil War on the "wrong" side typically hang their hat on the issue of slavery. In doing so they betray their ignorance of the myriad issues that led Southerners to seek secession from the Union.

Certainly the abhorrence of slavery was an important issue, but certainly not the only issue. See http://www.encyclopedia.com/history...ipts-and-maps/civil-war-economic-causes-issue.

One cogent counter-point to the trend of erasing all vestiges of Southern participation in the Civil War is the thinking that by leaving the statues in place, people would have reminders of that war and the terrible price that was paid -- by both sides -- in their respective efforts to guarantee State's Rights or Federalism. Without the reminders, the travails of the Civil War might be a forgotten historical episode.

As Edmund Burke (1729-1797) stated, "Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it." We should understand what caused that awful schism and dedicate ourselves to preventing it in the future. To destroy the monuments is akin to ISIS destroying the religious structures that conflict with Islam. The end result will be outrage that solidifies the proponents rather than consigning them to the dustbin of history.

JamesCanby said:

Certainly the abhorrence of slavery was an important issue, but certainly not the only issue. See http://www.encyclopedia.com/history...ipts-and-maps/civil-war-economic-causes-issue.

Click to expand...

Exactly. One cannot deny the role that slavery played in the Southern effort to secede, nor in Lincoln's ability to keep England from assisting the South and to keep the North engaged as they started to question whether they were really so opposed to secession. Slavery is a major theme. But it is not the only and perhaps not even the most important, and certainly not the most important to most who fought. As Lee turned down offers to lead the Union army and instead returned home to lead Confederate forces I read nothing of him doing so to continue the Peculiar Institution. Rather, it was a matter of loyalty to his home State, his nation and family.

JamesCanby said:

One cogent counter-point to the trend of erasing all vestiges of Southern participation in the Civil War is the thinking that by leaving the statues in place, people would have reminders of that war and the terrible price that was paid -- by both sides -- in their respective efforts to guarantee State's Rights or Federalism. Without the reminders, the travails of the Civil War might be a forgotten historical episode.

As Edmund Burke (1729-1797) stated, "Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it." We should understand what caused that awful schism and dedicate ourselves to preventing it in the future.

Click to expand...

It is very easy to forget the horrible price of war. Even here we too often see those who agitate for armed revolution in lieu of peaceful political efforts. Other than imparting truly evil motives to such persons, I can only charitably assume they are wholly ignorant of the cost of war. In addition the dead, there was the horrible suffering. Tens and hundreds of thousands survived, but were left wounded, often physically, almost always emotionally. The South remained largely in abject poverty for fully 80 years following the war, recovering only following WWII. Not to mention the opportunity costs. Every dollar and life spent waging the war or recovering from it was not available to do something good. In the words of Eisenhower, it was a dollar not available to provide education, medical advances, clean water or better sewers.

JamesCanby said:

To destroy the monuments is akin to ISIS destroying the religious structures that conflict with Islam. The end result will be outrage that solidifies the proponents rather than consigning them to the dustbin of history.

Click to expand...

Liberals have used "blowback" as an excuse for the terrorism of radical Islam since at least the 9/11 attacks on the WTC and Pentagon. Yet they seem completely oblivious to the obvious implications when the constantly, and needlessly attack Southern culture and history, or religion, or anything else they find personally disagreeable. Blowback is a very apt description of what the 1994 federal ban on scary looking guns brought as Democrats lost control of the US House for the first time in 40 years.

I think "small minded" most naturally goes with "bigot." And yet, there is no shortage of small intellects among humanity. The masses are too easily manipulated. Some number of men who have never been much racist may be easily recruited into senseless racial animosity if they believe that their sacred history (those statutes are somebody's grand fathers and great grandfathers) is being destroyed at the behest of a particular racial group. Of course, division and violence is exactly what radical lefties want. It is to their advantage as chaos and anarchy create a chance for the communist/progressive forces to take over either directly, or via the demand for something, anything to be done about the chaos.

Nightmare said:

"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.[my emphasis]" (George Santayana, The Life of Reason (1905-1906) Vol. I, Reason in Common Sense)

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/15000/15000-h/15000-h.htm

Click to expand...

According to my research, you are wrong. Burke lived and died long before Santayana was born. The contraction may or may not have been appropriate or added in or out of context.

"Santayana's quotation, in turn, was a slight modification of an Edmund Burke (1729-1797) statement, "Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it." Burke was a British Statesman and Philosopher who is generally viewed as the philosophical founder of modern political conservatism." http://www.answers.com/Q/Who_said_Those_who_ignore_history_are_bound_to_repeat_it

Besides ... how about sticking to the content rather than trying to pick nits about who might have said it when?

JamesCanby said:

--snipped--

Besides ... how about sticking to the content rather than trying to pick nits about who might have said it when?

Click to expand...

Good advice.

The OP limits this thread to:
Predominantly black group opposes removing Confederate monuments in Texas

Nightmare said:

Your research is stupid and pointless if you cannot cite author, title, chapter and verse of your results.

Click to expand...

See previous Post 6. Since your comment is totally irrelevant to the topic, I will not comment further other than to say that your input here is typical of why so many people are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with OCDO, especially in the Social thread.

Please take heed

The only on topic post is the first - all others are off topic.

Grapeshot said:

The only on topic post is the first - all others are off topic.

Click to expand...

As the OP, I'd argue that posts 3 and 4 are also well within the topic. Both discuss specific points made in the article linked in the OP: specifically the claimed benefit of having confederate statues as a reminder of history and the need to remember history. Both are respectful and civil and conform to all other posted rules regarding the social lounge.

But mods will do as they see fit.

Do we need to very carefully select our thread titles to allow just the right amount of natural flow in the discussion, without inviting insults and grossly off topic disruptions?

Civil war History can still be preserved, simply remove all the statues of the losers, E.G. Lee, Jackson and erect statues to William lloyd Garrison.

Garrison was a hero who believed in equality for all man..

Lee flogged woman in public.... Nothing heroic about beating a woman. Yes there were hero's in the civil war, but clearly Lee was not one of them..

America is about winners-- Last I checked the confederates LOST!.. Lee and Jackson lost.. Take them down..

GARRISON WAS A TRUE AMERICAN HERO!

My.02
CCJ

Quite sensible. After all of the statues are remove/destroyed, how will the daily lives of the detractors change. Crenshaw places her career in grave peril. BLM will not take such traitorous behavior lightly. Sensible is not a foundational principle of liberalism.

Nightmare said:

Korean Police Action and the Viet Nam War, during which I served, are about America and America did not win.

Click to expand...

" We failed, but in the good providence of God apparent failure often proves a Blessing".

CCJ

The sensible and best economic solution for removing said monuments, plaques and statues. Have the locals vote whether to remove or let stay.

If removed, hold a public auction and sell off the contents.. The proceeds of said auction be applied to the removal cost thereof.

Have the people decide, that is the best and most fair means to rectify this non-sense.

My .02

CCJ

Nightmare said:

Korean Police Action and the Viet Nam War, during which I served, are about America and America did not win.

Click to expand...

Because the bloody politicians wouldn't LET us win!
IIRC, Gen. William Westmorland wanted to go in, "guns blazing" (so to speak), and lay waste to the NVA as it was being supported by both the Russians and ChiComs. The problem was too many of the supplies were coming in on the Ho Chi Minh trail through Laos and Burma, where the U.S. military was not "allowed" to go.

Nightmare said:

Korean Police Action and the Viet Nam War, during which I served, are about America and America did not win.

Click to expand...

I must confess, being a single man, I have a preference for Asian woman.. :banana:

CCJ

Nightmare said:

Korean Police Action and the Viet Nam War, during which I served, are about America and America did not win.

Click to expand...

which conflict(s) and war(s) have we won and what American rights were restored, made better, or secured because of them and the tremendous loss of life on all sides?

quote:
In the twentieth century, approximately 53,000 Americans were killed in combat in World War I, 291,000 in World War II, 33,000 in the Korean War, 47,000 in Vietnam, and 148 in the Gulf War. Including deaths from disease, accidents, and other factors, each war's total was much higher: approximately 116,000 died in World War I, 400,000 in World War II, 53,000 in the Korean War, 90,000 in Vietnam, and almost 400 in the Gulf War. unquote

final thought..
Of the past 3,400 years, humans have been entirely at peace for 268 of them, or just 8 percent of recorded history. unquote
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/06/books/chapters/what-every-person-should-know-about-war.html

solus said:

which conflict(s) and war(s) have we won and what American rights were restored, made better, or secured because of them and the tremendous loss of life on all sides?

quote:
In the twentieth century, approximately 53,000 Americans were killed in combat in World War I, 291,000 in World War II, 33,000 in the Korean War, 47,000 in Vietnam, and 148 in the Gulf War. Including deaths from disease, accidents, and other factors, each war's total was much higher: approximately 116,000 died in World War I, 400,000 in World War II, 53,000 in the Korean War, 90,000 in Vietnam, and almost 400 in the Gulf War. unquote

final thought..
Of the past 3,400 years, humans have been entirely at peace for 268 of them, or just 8 percent of recorded history. unquote
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/06/books/chapters/what-every-person-should-know-about-war.html

Click to expand...

Plus a billion!.. The numbers tell the truth.
Regards
CCJ