Tag: confederate statues

bookmark_borderFurther thoughts on Madison County monument

Posted on by Marissa

I’ve been reading more about the Confederate monument in Madison County, Alabama and the events that led to it being removed and the Attorney General suing the county. What I’ve read solidifies my opinion that the county was wrong to remove the statue and deserves to be sued. 

A few random thoughts:

On August 5, 2020 the monument was vandalized with red paint. This alone is enough reason not to remove the statue. To vandalize any monument is unacceptable, and the absolute last thing that should be done in such a case is to reward the culprit by giving him/her what he/she wants. Leaving the statue in place and protecting it punishes the vandal; that is reason enough to make this the right course of action. 

Immediately after the vandalism, a bully named Rebecca Boggs was quoted by local news station WHNT as saying, “I’m a very strong supporter of removing a treasonous statue that doesn’t need to be there in the first place.” This statement is completely idiotic. How can a statue be “treasonous”? Confederate soldiers bravely fought to form an independent country. Anyone who calls them “traitors” or describes them as “treasonous” is an authoritarian and a bully who believes in mindless conformity and has no tolerance for diversity. 

City Council candidate John Meredith said of the vandalism, “Regardless of where you stand, you know that the current situation can’t continue. We got to sit down, both sides, and come up with a solution.” He is correct that the situation of all-out war against all things related to the Confederacy, as well as of relentless attacks on statues and monuments of all types, cannot continue. But why do people of both sides need to come up with a solution together? This is a situation in which one side – those who love the Confederacy and its monuments – has done nothing wrong. The other side – those who hate the Confederacy and hate all things and people that do not conform to today’s standards of political correctness – is attacking, insulting, brutalizing, and stomping on the first side for no justifiable reason. The solution to this situation is for the latter group to simply stop attacking, insulting, brutalizing, and stomping on the former. To solve the problem of Confederate statues being vandalized, people must stop vandalizing Confederate statues. It really is that simple.

Particularly disturbing is the fact that during a protest on July 30, someone held a sign that read, “Human Decency $25,000. We have a choice. Pay the fine! Move that racist statue.” This is a reference to the Memorial Preservation Act, the Alabama law that bans cities, towns, and counties from removing historical monuments and sets the penalty for doing so at $25,000. First, of all, the sign states that the statue is racist, which it is not. Additionally, the sign seems to imply that human decency requires removing the Confederate monument. But nothing could be further from the truth. Human decency actually requires protecting and preserving the monument. Removing a monument to the losing side of a war is bullying, it is intolerance, it is bigotry, and it is stomping on the underdog. It is the exact opposite of human decency. 

There is also a significant fairness issue presented by the idea of paying a $25,000 fine to have a Confederate statue removed. Why should taxpayers have to foot the bill for an immoral act of bullying, intolerance, bigotry, and stomping on the underdog? They shouldn’t. The fact that cities, towns, and counties can choose to simply pay the $25,000 to remove statues demonstrates that the penalty is not severe enough. Removing statues is never acceptable, and the penalty should be harsh enough to deter these immoral acts from ever happening. If a statue is removed, which should never be the case, then those who support the removal should pay 100% of the fine. Accurately determining which people support the removal and which do not would of course be tricky, because people will obviously have an incentive to lie to avoid sharing in the burden of the fine. But there should be at least some attempt made to ensure that only those people who advocate for and support the removal of statues are penalized, as opposed to innocent people who might be opposed to the removal. 

bookmark_borderPoliticians express delight at ruining of National Statuary Hall

Posted on by Marissa

The National Statuary Hall in the U.S. Capitol building is now ruined. During the night, the state of Virginia removed its statue of Robert E. Lee. The Statuary Hall contains 100 statues (now 99) representing two noteworthy historical figures from each state, which are chosen by representatives from the respective states. Until recently, Virginia was represented by Lee and George Washington. The state is planning to spend $50,000 in taxpayer money to replace Lee with civil rights activist Barbara Johns.

In my opinion, this is an absolutely disgraceful move. Johns, who led a student walkout to protest conditions at her all-black school in 1951, is not an adequate or deserving replacement for Lee, who led the armed forces of the Confederate States of America in a valiant effort to establish an independent country. Johns was described as “brave, courageous, and fearless” by her sister, Joan Johns Cobbs. A Richmond Times-Dispatch editorial called her “a symbol of youthful courage, conviction and action” who “represents the promise of tomorrow.” And a Washington Post editorial stated that “she and Washington make a fine and fitting pair to represent Virginia.” 

Nothing could be further from the truth. Johns was nowhere near as brave, courageous, fearless, or honorable as Lee was. She is completely unworthy of standing alongside George Washington in the Statuary Hall. With Lee gone, the U.S. Capitol becomes yet another item to be crossed off my list of places that I dreamed of visiting one day. 

“We should all be proud of this important step forward for our Commonwealth and our country,” said Governor Ralph Northam. “The Confederacy is a symbol of Virginia’s racist and divisive history, and it is past time we tell our story with images of perseverance, diversity, and inclusion. I look forward to seeing a trailblazing young woman of color represent Virginia in the U.S. Capitol, where visitors will learn about Barbara Johns’ contributions to America and be empowered to create positive change in their communities just like she did.”

“The Congress will continue our work to rid the Capitol of homages to hate, as we fight to end the scourge of racism in our country,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. “There is no room for celebrating the bigotry of the Confederacy in the Capitol or any other place of honor in our country.” She also called the repugnant act “welcome news.” 

And State Senator Louise Lucas, who led the commission that recommended removing the Lee statue, said: “Confederate images do not represent who we are in Virginia, that’s why we voted unanimously to remove this statue. I am thrilled that this day has finally arrived, and I thank Governor Northam and the Commission for their transformative work.”

Let’s go over these false, mean-spirited, and irrational comments:

To say that the removal of Lee is welcome news and something that people should be proud of is so far from the truth that it defies comprehension. The idea that anyone could be proud, thrilled, or even remotely happy about this development is sickening. With Lee included in its collection, the National Statuary Hall was a place where diverse historical figures and diverse viewpoints were celebrated and honored. Now it has become a shrine to mindless conformity. Lucas is correct in calling this “transformative work,” but it is an understatement to say that this is a negative, not a positive, transformation. If Confederate images do not represent who the people of Virginia are, then that reflects badly on the people of Virginia, not on the Confederate images. And I suppose this is a step forward, as Northam called it, if one’s goal is to create a society in which all individuality, uniqueness, and independent thought are stomped out, but why anyone would have this as their goal is incomprehensible.

Contrary to Northam’s and Pelosi’s claims, the Confederacy and its statues are not symbols of racism or “homages to hate,” nor is there any “bigotry of the Confederacy.” Ironically, the only bigotry here is that demonstrated by Pelosi, Northam, Lucas, and other devotees of the political correctness movement that seeks to eradicate from the earth all traces of those who fail to conform to their ideology. The supreme irony in this situation is that Virginia had been telling its story with images of perseverance, diversity, and inclusion all along… by honoring Lee and other Confederate leaders. If Northam truly cared about diversity and inclusion, he would have left Lee in place in the U.S. Capitol and preserved and protected all of his state’s magnificent Confederate monuments instead of brutally tearing them down and spending millions of taxpayer dollars to replace them with new statues of conformist, politically correct figures. 

A country in which there is no room for celebrating the Confederacy in any place of honor is not a country in which I want to live. Political leaders have made it clear that there is no place for someone like me in this country. I am devastated, I am enraged, and I am shattered. I hate the United States of America with all my heart. The fact that people would deliberately do such a heinous act and then issue statements gloating about how happy it makes them is beyond despicable, beyond reprehensible, and beyond disgusting. Northam, Pelosi, Lucas, and any person who believes that this development is in any way positive deserve to burn in Hell for all eternity. 

bookmark_borderAlabama Attorney General sues county for removing statue

Posted on by Marissa

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall is standing up for Confederate monuments. He is suing Madison County, Alabama for removing a statue from its location in front of the county courthouse on October 23 and moving it to a nearby cemetery. The 24-foot tall monument featured a generic Confederate soldier and was inscribed with the words, “In memory of the heroes who fell in defence of the principles which gave birth to the confederate cause.” According to the lawsuit, the statue was erected in 1905, was destroyed in 1966, and a replica monument was installed to take its place in 1968. A copy of the lawsuit can be found here. 

Alabama has a law called the Memorial Preservation Act, which was passed in 2017. “No architecturally significant building, memorial building, memorial street, or monument which is located on public property and has been so situated for 40 or more years may be relocated, removed, altered, renamed, or otherwise disturbed,” the law states. The law covers any “statue, portrait, or marker intended at the time of dedication to be a permanent memorial to an event, a person, a group, a movement, or military service that is part of the history of the people or geography now comprising the State of Alabama.” The penalty for any person, government, or other entity that removes, relocates, renames, or alters a monument is $25,000, and Attorney General Marshall intends to make the Madison County Commission pay.

Marshall released a YouTube video in which he spoke about the illegal removal of monuments and the general tendency of elected officials to disregard the law when it is politically expedient to do so. Here is an excerpt: 

“In recent months, we have witnessed a number of elected officials take it upon themselves to tear down monuments and statues protected under Alabama law… First, any elected official who removes a historic monument or statue in violation of Alabama law has broken the law. He has not simply decided to ‘pay a fee’ so that he can lawfully have the monument or statue removed. He has committed an illegal act. Second, any elected official sworn into office by taking an oath to uphold the law, who then breaks a duly enacted and constitutional law, has violated that oath. Third, despite what some newspapers might have you believe, any elected official who disregards the duties of his office in this manner has done so not out of courage, but has done so out of fear. This should not be celebrated, for disregarding the law subverts our democratic system… I urge my fellow Alabamians to take note of those casting votes and spending their tax dollars to violate a law of this state. It is now a question of when not if these same leaders will cast aside yet another law—being guided only by the political winds of the moment.”

I love this message, particularly the part where Marshall points out that removing Confederate monuments is cowardly, not courageous. He also makes a great point that it is unfair to taxpayers for $25,000 of their money to be spent on illegally removing a beautiful historic monument. 

In these discouraging times where bullies have been disturbingly successful in their quest to stomp out everything good in the world in the name of political correctness, it is heartening that someone is standing up for what is right. All states need to have laws like Alabama’s Memorial Preservation Act to protect priceless works of public art against racist, intolerant mobs and the craven politicians who bow down to them. It would be even better if the fine were even higher than $25,000. Removing a Confederate statue is one of the most immoral acts a person or government could do; no penalty is too harsh for such a despicable act. Thank you, Attorney General Marshall, for defending magnificent statues that cannot defend themselves. 

bookmark_borderNortham to spend $11 million to ruin Richmond

Posted on by Marissa

After destroying everything that made Richmond, Virginia unique, beautiful, and good, Governor Ralph Northam is proposing to spend millions of dollars to create bland, homogeneous, meaningless new works of art. His proposed budget for 2021 includes $11 million to redesign Monument Avenue, which was until recently the location of five magnificent status of Confederate President Jefferson Davis, Gen. Robert E. Lee, Gen. Stonewall Jackson, Gen. Jeb Stuart, and Commander Matthew Fontaine Maury. (Lee is technically still standing but has been completely covered with graffiti and will be removed next year unless an appellate judge reverses the court decision allowing his removal.) Supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement brutally vandalized the beautiful statues over the summer, and Northam and Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney took the side of the destructive mobs and ordered the statues removed. The budget also includes $9 million to develop a Slavery Heritage Site and $100,000 to build a Virginia Emancipation and Freedom Monument.

This article at Hyperallergic.com describes the plan as “funding public art that tells a more complete and inclusive story of American history.” National Geographic describes Northam’s vision as “inclusive art recognizing a diverse and challenging history… The long-term goal is to repurpose parts of Monument Avenue to better reflect Virginia’s and America’s diverse heritage… to elevate unheard voices and neglected histories.” In Northam’s words, “These investments will help Virginia tell the true story of our past and continue building an inclusive future. At a time when this Commonwealth and country are grappling with how to present a complete and more honest picture of our complex history, we must work to enhance public spaces that have long been neglected and shine light on previously untold stories.” And Alex Nyerges, director of the Virginia Museum of Fine Art, which is leading the effort to design new monuments, said, “It is about looking to the future, looking to a future that’s inclusive, that’s forward thinking, and there’s also an element of healing.”

Unfortunately, this plan is the exact opposite of how it is being described. A collection of public art that leaves out the Confederacy is by definition neither complete, nor inclusive, nor diverse. It is Confederate historical figures whose voices have traditionally been unheard and whose stories have been neglected. Removing their statues and replacing them with monuments to mainstream, moderate, non-controversial, bland, mundane people just makes their voices even more unheard and their stories even more neglected. Northam’s vision is to further marginalize those who are already marginalized and further elevate those who are already in the spotlight. Monument Avenue already did shine light on previously untold stories, and Northam and Stoney decided to wipe those stories out. Brutally inflicting further pain on those who are already hurting, in order to please those who already receive preferential treatment, is the exact opposite of healing. It is beyond sickening and beyond reprehensible that Northam, having destroyed Richmond’s diversity and beauty, is now spending $11 million of taxpayer money to replace these irreplaceable works of art with conformity and nothingness. If he truly cared about inclusion, diversity, healing, unheard voices, neglected histories, or untold stories, he would have ordered all of the beautiful Confederate monuments to be cleaned up, repaired, protected, and preserved for all time. 

bookmark_borderPolitically correct bullies vote to remove Lee statue from Antietam

Posted on by Marissa

In yet another step in their quest to make the world as bad a place as possible, the politically correct bullies are senselessly attempting to get rid of the statue of Robert E. Lee on the Antietam battlefield in Maryland. The House of Representatives recently voted in favor of Resolution 970, which calls for the removal of the magnificent statue.

“It was commissioned with the explicit intent of honoring the Confederacy and glorifies the Confederacy — its leaders, the cause of slavery and open rebellion against the United States,” said Rep. Anthony Brown. “It’s also historically inaccurate. The monument depicts Gen. Lee riding up to the battlefield on horseback while evidence shows that the general actually traveled to a different part of the battlefield in an ambulance due to a broken wrist… Instead of teaching us the dark lessons of our history, this statue sanitizes the actions of men who fought a war to keep black Americans in chains. There is no reason why any of our nation’s public spaces should have monuments celebrating those who betrayed their country.” Brown also called Lee a “brutal slave owner” and called the institution of slavery “savage.” 

“I cannot find a single case of any other country on earth where monuments and memorials are put up to honor the generals of enemy forces in a civil war, or any other war,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin. “There’s something freakishly unusual about this practice.” He also called the Confederacy “neither noble nor heroic.”

Let’s go over these arguments:

First of all, the Confederacy was both noble and heroic. The fact that a statue honors and glorifies the Confederacy is a good thing, because the Confederacy deserves to be honored and glorified. This is because the Confederacy was in open rebellion against the United States. Contrary to what Representatives Brown and Raskin argue, rebelling against a government is a good thing, not a bad thing. The Confederacy was fighting to form an independent country, which is exactly what the colonies were doing during the Revolutionary War. If you believe the Confederacy was in the wrong, then in order to be logically consistent, you must also believe that America was in the wrong during the Revolutionary War and the British Empire in the right. 

To address Brown’s point about slavery, yes it is true that slavery was part of what the Confederacy was fighting for. It was one of the reasons why the southern states chose to secede from the United States. But the Confederacy’s primary cause was not slavery but secession itself. To treat the Confederacy as synonymous with slavery is to ignore the fact that the Confederates were fighting for their independence, while the Union side was fighting to force other people to remain part of the country against their will. Anyone who truly values liberty and opposes authoritarianism would believe, as I do, that the Confederate cause overall was morally better and more honorable than the Union cause.

As for Brown’s claim that slavery was savage, perhaps that is true, but in my opinion not as savage as the despicable acts of destruction and vandalism that have been perpetrated against statues across the country and world by those with similar ideologies to Representatives Brown and Raskin. Additionally, although Lee was a slave owner, he was not brutal as Brown claims. He inherited a farm with numerous slaves and was relatively kind as slave owners go, freeing the slaves once the debts of the estate were settled. 

It also bears mentioning that the argument that Confederate generals were bad because they fought for slavery somewhat contradicts the argument that Confederate generals were bad because they “betrayed their country” and “waged open rebellion against the United States.” Those who make the first argument criticize members of the Confederacy because they (allegedly) trampled on the rights of the underdog by forcing people to endure slavery. Those who make the second argument criticize members of the Confederacy because they were the underdog, fighting back against a federal government that was trampling on them. These arguments are inconsistent: is trampling on the underdog bad, or is it actually good, as is presumed by the second argument? I have noticed numerous instances lately in which people, including Brown and Raskin, make both arguments in the same speech, completely ignoring the fact that they are contradicting themselves. 

As for Raskin’s argument that America is the only country to erect monuments to enemy generals, that might be correct. This practice may indeed be unusual. But that has nothing to do with whether it is good or bad. In my opinion, allowing the losing side of a war to be honored is not only good, but to do anything else would be morally reprehensible. As I explained above, the Union side was wrong and the Confederate side right. Therefore, the leaders and soldiers of the Confederacy absolutely deserve to be honored with monuments and memorials. The Confederacy deserved to win the war; in fact the southern states deserved to be allowed to exist as an independent country without the United States even waging war against them. Given that the United States unjustly won a war that it didn’t even have a moral right to wage, the absolute least that the U.S. could do would be to allow the losing side to erect monuments to their leaders and soldiers. To take away the right to commemorate the Confederate dead, as politically correct bullies are doing across the country, is to compound horrific injustice with even more injustice. It is beyond despicable.

Another counterpoint to Raskin’s argument is that in most wars, both countries continue to exist after the war. It makes sense that each country would honor only its own generals, because generals from other countries would be honored in those countries. But in the Civil War, one of the warring nations was completely obliterated as an independent entity. It’s not possible to put statues of Confederate generals in their own country, because the Union’s victory in the Civil War means that what used to be the Confederacy is now part of the United States. According to Raskin’s logic, the generals of the losing side in any war for independence do not deserve to be memorialized at all. This is stomping on the underdog and is, for the reasons explained above, beyond despicable.

As for Brown’s point about historical accuracy, it is true that Lee traveled in an ambulance for most of his time at Antietam, as opposed to riding on horseback. His horse, Traveller, had gotten scared by something and bolted while Lee was holding his bridle, causing Lee to fall and break his arm. I don’t really get the argument that because of that, Lee should not be allowed to have a statue at Antietam. I suppose technically the statue of him on horseback, without any visible injury to his arm, is not perfectly historically accurate. But the fact that Lee was injured during a random accident with his horse doesn’t make him any less of a brilliant general or honorable man. It doesn’t make him any less deserving of a statue, and it is mean-spirited to use this as a reason to get rid of Lee’s monument.

What is particularly reprehensible about Resolution 970 is the fact that the statue being targeted is located on a battlefield. The whole purpose of a battlefield is to commemorate history, specifically the battle that took place there. And if a battle took place, there were necessarily two sides, each fighting bravely for what they believed was right. To argue that only one side in a battle should be honored is bigoted, intolerant, cruel, and mean-spirited. When the politically correct bullies first began to demand the removal of statues, they focused on those monuments located on city streets. Move the statues to more appropriate places such as museums and battlefields, they demanded. But now statues on battlefields are under attack as well, demonstrating that the bullies’ quest to strip away everything beautiful, good, magnificent, and glorious from the world knows no bounds. Every excuse for a human being who voted in favor of this resolution is a bigoted, mindless coward who deserves to burn in Hell for all eternity. 

bookmark_borderA day that will live in infamy

Posted on by Marissa

Disgusting. Disgraceful. Despicable. Dishonorable. Repugnant. Reprehensible. Heartbreaking. Dismaying. Sickening. Awful. Horrific. There are no words strong enough to fully describe this:

Virginia Military Institute removing Confederate statue (nbc12.com)

Yet another beautiful piece of the world senselessly destroyed. Bit by bit, everything that makes life worth living is being taken away. What makes this instance particularly awful is that when the politically correct bullies began destroying everything good in the world this spring and summer, VMI’s leaders stated that they had thought carefully about the issue and made the decision not to remove the Stonewall Jackson statue. For them to reverse themselves is cowardly and treasonous. 

The Virginia Flaggers got it right when they described this as a day that will live in infamy.

At least someone is fighting back.

bookmark_borderSome good news from the election

Posted on by Marissa

The news from the election is not looking good, but there is at least one positive development arising from Tuesday’s vote. Or to be more specific, six positive developments. In Virginia, six counties held votes on whether or not to remove Confederate monuments. In all of these counties, residents voted not to remove the statues. 

The margins of victory are as follows:

  • Charles City County – 55% to 45%
  • Halifax County – 60% to 30%
  • Franklin County – 70% to 30%
  • Lunenburg County – 71% to 29%
  • Warren County – 76% to 24%
  • Tazwell County – 87% to 13%

According to the Virginia Mercury, the votes are not binding, but county leaders have said that they will respect the will of the voters. Full results can be found here. 

The reason why these votes took place to begin with is that earlier this year, the Virginia state legislature passed a law enabling county and local governments to remove Confederate statues. Prior to that, removing the monuments was not even an option. While I’m relieved that these six monuments – which are all located outside of courthouses – will be staying in place for the foreseeable future, I do not think that voters should have the power to get rid of them. It’s awesome and restores my faith in humanity that sizeable majorities voted to preserve these beautiful pieces of history. But it’s possible that some day in the future, if popular opinion changes, these statues could eventually be removed. That should not be a possibility. Something as important as preserving works of public art and treating rebel soldiers with the respect that they deserve should not be subject to majority rule. The voting results in these six counties are heartening indeed, but all statues across the world deserve a guarantee of protection no matter what the majority opinion happens to be.

bookmark_borderGood news and bad news on General Lee

Posted on by Marissa

Statue Robert E. Lee Richmond.JPG
Robert E. Lee Statue (photo by Martin Falbisoner via WikiMedia)

This past week a judge ruled that the state of Virginia can remove the huge, magnificent statue of General Robert E. Lee on Monument Avenue in Richmond. A group of homeowners sued to stop Governor Ralph Northam’s plan to take down the beautiful statue, but the judge dismissed their lawsuit. Lee is currently the last Confederate statue standing on Monument Ave; the city tragically removed the rest of the sculptures that gave the street its name earlier this year.

The fact that people actually exist who want this statue to be removed remains incomprehensible. This is another step in the disgraceful quest to strip the world of everything beautiful, magnificent, unique, artistic, and distinctive, to create a society of conformity and nothingness, and to trample on anyone who does not share the majority view. Do these individuals think that all food should be required to undergo a process that removes its taste and texture and turns it into gruel? Do they think that Walt Disney World should be razed so that the land can be turned into a giant parking lot? Do they think that all clothing should be banned and people required to spend their entire lives naked? I believe that these things are analogous to removing Confederate statues, and equally senseless and wrong.

Northam called the ruling “one step closer to a more inclusive, equitable, and honest Virginia,” and Attorney General Mark Herring described it as “one step closer to finally bringing down this relic of our racist past and moving forward as a diverse, inclusive, welcoming community.” Nothing could be further from the truth than these statements. First of all, the statue is not racist. Second, condemning and erasing all historical figures not deemed to be perfect according to the prevailing norms of 2020 is the exact opposite of inclusion and diversity. And third, completely disregarding the preferences of those who admire and cherish this statue is the exact opposite of being equitable. 

1890 Lee statue unveiling.jpg
Unveiling of the Robert E. Lee statue, May 29, 1890

The statue of Robert E. Lee that all these bullies find so horrible and offensive was sculpted in France by acclaimed artist Antonin Mercie, who was known as the “unrivaled master of the chisel.” It was commissioned in 1876 by the Lee Monument Association and was based on a painting by German-American artist Adalbert Vlock. Several bronze pieces were cast separately before being assembled. The completed statue was exhibited in Paris and then shipped to Richmond, where 10,000 people helped to pull it to its final location: a traffic circle at the intersection of Monument Avenue and Allen Avenue. The statue was finally unveiled on May 29, 1890. In 2007, the statue was added to the National Register of Historic Places. The figure of Lee stands 14 feet tall, and the entire statue, including the horse and the base, is 60 feet tall. Interestingly, the horse does not represent Lee’s faithful steed, Traveller, but instead is a generic horse with “ideal” proportions. 

How could someone think that the city of Richmond, the state of Virginia, or the world would be improved by removing this statue? The actions of the governor, attorney general, and presiding judge, as well as all those who support the ruling, demonstrate a complete disregard for General Lee, those who honor his memory, the artist and sculptor of the statue, and all those who worked to create it and bring it to Richmond. 

There is a tiny shred of good news, however: the judge stayed the ruling pending appeal. This means that Lee will remain standing until the plaintiffs’ appeal is heard, which will happen at some point next year. With Virginia’s gubernatorial election happening next November, there is a chance that the statue will remain in place until there is a new governor, who might possibly allow it to stay.

bookmark_borderMy letter to Stone Mountain Memorial Association

Posted on by Marissa

I recently wrote a letter to the Chairman of the Stone Mountain Memorial Association asking them to preserve Stone Mountain’s Confederate Memorial Carving. This likeness of Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, and Stonewall Jackson is the largest Confederate monument in the world, and sadly but unsurprisingly has come under fire from the politically-correct bullies. I got this idea from the awesome organization Monuments Across Dixie, which works to protect existing Confederate statues and build new ones. I urge you to write a letter as well, following the instructions in Monuments Across Dixie’s Facebook post, if you also support preserving this amazing piece of art and history. 

bookmark_borderConfederate lives matter

Posted on by Marissa

It is horrible enough that supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement have brutally and mercilessly attacked, both physically and verbally, statues of historical figures in public places. What is even more disturbing is that these acts of vandalism and destruction are not limited to monuments on city streets and in public parks but have extended even to the graves of fallen soldiers.

For example, back in June, someone “tarred and feathered” several Confederate soldiers’ grave stones at Crown Hill Cemetery in Indianapolis, Indiana. The area of the cemetery that the vandal(s) targeted is known as the Confederate Mound and contains the remains of 1,600 prisoners of war who died at Camp Morton. Tarring and feathering was a form of public humiliation popular during the 18th century that was often used by angry mobs against British tax collectors. 

In another incident, someone pulled down Confederate flags that had adorned graves at the Resaca Confederate Cemetery in Georgia. Some of the flags were arranged to spell out “stop racism” and others were scattered on the ground. Over 450 Confederate soldiers who died in the Battle of Resaca are buried in the cemetery. 

Additionally, at the Confederate Cemetery in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, someone defaced an obelisk honoring known Confederate soldiers as well as unknown Confederate soldiers who were discovered in a mass grave nearby. A swastika was spray-painted on the obelisk and the names of the soldiers crossed out. 

In Little Rock, Arkansas, vandals beat, attempted to pull down, and graffitied an obelisk in Oakland Cemetery that honored 900 mostly unknown Confederate soldiers who died in various hospitals in the area. “They destroyed one of our obelisks and wrote all over it with spray paint, and chipped it very badly beyond repair,” said cemetery employee John Raines, according to the Arkansas Democrat Gazette. “They wrote a bunch of racial slurs and f this, f that.” The vandals also desecrated nine nearby wooden grave markers, gouging the word “Confederate” out of them. To their credit, cemetery staff reported the incident to law enforcement as a hate crime, and a man named Mujera Benjamin Lungaho was recently arrested and charged with vandalizing the graves and obelisk.

In Silver Spring, Maryland, someone knocked down a grave marker in the Grace Episcopal Church cemetery that honored 17 Confederate soldiers who died in the Battle of Fort Stevens. A note left on the scene read: “Here lies 17 dead white supremacists who died fighting to keep black people enslaved. The Confederacy was and always will be racist. Let this marker be a more accurate depiction of history because the last one was a disgrace.” The original grave marker, which the vandal(s) characterized as “disgraceful,” simply read, “in memory of seventeen unknown Confederate dead” and provided additional factual details about them. 

The behavior demonstrated in these and similar incidents is beyond despicable. It is wrong to argue that Confederate statues should not be displayed in city squares, but to deny fallen soldiers a dignified and peaceful rest is an entirely new level of wrongness. The fact that people would take it upon themselves to go into a cemetery and desecrate soldiers’ graves, in some cases bringing spray paint or even a strap with which to pull down a memorial, is disgusting. It takes a truly cruel, nasty, and mean-spirited person to demonstrate such hatred towards someone who died over 150 years ago. Yes, the South had slavery, but it is ignorant to view that as the single defining attribute of the Confederacy and of the soldiers who fought for it. Confederate soldiers were people, just like you or me, each with different motivations for joining the Confederacy and each with an individual story. (See this Facebook post for an eloquent example of this.) One does not need to agree with or support the cause that these soldiers fought for in order to acknowledge their personhood and show them basic respect.  

The BLM movement is based on the presumption that most people believe that black lives do not matter. But essentially no one holds this view. Instead, it is rebel soldiers who are treated as if their lives did not matter. In our politically correct society, it is considered “disgraceful” to provide a Confederate soldier with a simple, factual grave marker, while an “accurate depiction of history” requires these soldiers to be reduced to “white supremacists” and their cause reduced to “fighting to keep black people enslaved.” Acknowledging those who fought for the Confederacy as individual people is no longer acceptable; instead they must be posthumously sworn at, insulted, beaten, thrown on the ground, stomped on, tarred and feathered, their very names violently obliterated. This is true bigotry, and this is true intolerance. And it is not limited to a handful of vandals but extends to prominent politicians as well. 

An attempt by Congress to replace Confederate-inspired military base names has received a lot of publicity, but what is even worse about Section 377 of the National Defense Authorization Act is that it would actually require Confederate soldiers’ graves in Arlington National Cemetery to be desecrated. This amendment would require that the government “remove all names, symbols, displays, monuments, and paraphernalia that honor or commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America from all assets of the Department of Defense.” The website Conservative Daily points out that there is a large Confederate monument at Arlington that is surrounded by the graves of 482 soldiers. The amendment would presumably require the removal of the monument, which would be logistically impossible to do without disturbing the graves. And even if somehow the Confederate graves were allowed to remain, the amendment would ban any sort of signage or plaques pertaining to them. “Just think about how small of a person someone would have to be to write an amendment in 2020 that could force the exhumation of 482 Civil War soldiers because they disagree with the cause they fought for,” the Conservative Daily article continues. “The GOP is so spineless, they actually believe that posthumously punishing Civil War dead is a reasonable ‘compromise’… Three years ago, this started as a debate over whether cities should have statues honoring Confederate officers like Stonewall Jackson or Robert E. Lee. Today, it has transformed into a debate over whether Civil War grave sites should be exhumed so that the dead can be posthumously punished.”

I couldn’t have said it better myself.