We forgot to celebrate the 150 Year Anniversary of Lee's surrender

[Michchamp]

Ulysees S. Grant:

I felt like anything rather than rejoicing at the downfall of a foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much for a cause, though that cause was, I believe, one of the worst for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse.
​

Well, I for one am happy the South lost, and we crushed treason.

I've been reading more and more about Reconstruction; the end of the Civil War was far from the end for slavery (in practice). I remember our history classes growing up usually glossed over this period. The Union actually had to enforce the 13th Amendment at the point of the bayonet in much of the South for the next 20+ years. and if the troops weren't there, slaverowners carried on however they wanted in a lot of places.

I agree with this proposal to scrub the names of those who engaged in treason to defend the practice of slavery from all monuments throughout the United States, rename them, and include historical markers there explaining the name change and the rationale.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I didn't forget. I just celebrated this privately and introspectively as I do every 150 years.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Durham was home to the biggest troop surrender. We have some events next week.

http://www.nchistoricsites.org/bennett/event.htm

 

[Thumb]

Ulysees S. Grant:

I felt like anything rather than rejoicing at the downfall of a foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much for a cause, though that cause was, I believe, one of the worst for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse.
​

Well, I for one am happy the South lost, and we crushed treason.

I've been reading more and more about Reconstruction; the end of the Civil War was far from the end for slavery (in practice). I remember our history classes growing up usually glossed over this period. The Union actually had to enforce the 13th Amendment at the point of the bayonet in much of the South for the next 20+ years. and if the troops weren't there, slaverowners carried on however they wanted in a lot of places.

I agree with this proposal to scrub the names of those who engaged in treason to defend the practice of slavery from all monuments throughout the United States, rename them, and include historical markers there explaining the name change and the rationale.

But where does it stop? Many of the Founding Fathers were slave owners. Do they get a pass just because they weren't around to pick a side in that fight? Hard to tell which side Washington and Jefferson might have landed on.

Seems to me that proposal would violate the 1st Amendment.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Seems to me that proposal would violate the 1st Amendment.

Nah. Corporations might be people, the the government isn't.

...but to the rest of it, yeah, MC's plan involves picking out the ones that did it to protect slavery. How are you supposed to know why people did what they did?

 

[Thumb]

Nah. Corporations might be people, the the government isn't.

...but to the rest of it, yeah, MC's plan involves picking out the ones that did it to protect slavery. How are you supposed to know why people did what they did?

He said "all monuments", not just government ones.

 

[Gulo Blue]

He said "all monuments", not just government ones.

Oh yeah. Good point.

Hey MC, your proposal sucks, you thoughtpolicing, 1st Amendment hating, commie!

 

[Michchamp]

But where does it stop? Many of the Founding Fathers were slave owners. Do they get a pass just because they weren't around to pick a side in that fight? Hard to tell which side Washington and Jefferson might have landed on.

Seems to me that proposal would violate the 1st Amendment.

doesn't matter. there's a clear bright line here: the nation will not honor those who committed treason against it. And I don't mean "treason" as it's casually thrown around on Fox News... I mean armed insurrection against the United States.

The DOD would rename Fort Bragg, Fort Lee, etc.; state and local governments would rename roads, bridges, buildings, et al, although some standard could be established if there were some particulalry burdensome reasons why something shouldn't be renamed. we wouldn't require monuments be demolished, just removed if practical, and if not, a sign placed next to it explaining why it was still there.

And let me clarify: it wouldn't violate the 1st Amendment, insofar as we'd still allow people (racist people) to have their privately owned and maintained monuments to Robert E. Lee, Nathan Bedford Forrest, Jefferson Davis, etc. if they wanted to.

if Selma, AL refuses to rename the Edmund Pettus bridge... fine, but there goes their Federal transportation allotment. Let's see the Daughters of Confederate Veterans foot the bill for it.