Hi Prothero.
By all accounts Robert E. Lee was an honorable man

Take a look at this article — Cavacava

I was familiar with that article in the Atlantic before I wrote the post. I guess the point is, close scrutiny of almost any historical figure will reveal their weaknesses as well as their strengths. Biographies in early decades generally glossed over the faults but modern historians and biographies try to show these individuals in their true complexity.

Roosevelt turned away Jewish Immigrants before and during the war, and interned Asian-Americans during the war. Should we then tear down all the monuments on the mall and rename all the streets, bridges and buildings?

Jefferson's star has been in decline due to his relationship with Sally Hemmings and his treatment of her children and family.

What about the civil war battlefields and the monuments there?
Once one starts this process of revisionist history where does it stop.

The civil war (war between the states) was about much more than slavery. The southerners who fought in the war for the most part were not wealthy or slaveholders. They thought they were fighting for their state and their rights. In fact the issue of federalism and states rights are still with us today but at least the right of secession issue has been settled (except maybe in Texas).

Lincoln clearly stated has purpose in the war was not to free the slaves but to preserve the union.
It is ignorance of history to see these monuments and these individuals as emblematic of nothing but slavery. Tearing down the monuments will not erase the historical stain of slavery nor solve the problems of residual racism and segregation which are still with us today. We should not even try to erase the history of the civil war, rather we should learn the lessons it teaches.

Well then how could you have said "By all accounts..." ?

But don't you see that approximately 15% of our population is black, many descendants of slaves who were treated immorally and were continually mistreated even after the war and many claim are still being mistreated by the majority. The cities/states where these monuments and other symbols are located have every right to remove them from their daily lives. Let these mementos be archived put them in a swamp, the desert or wherever.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

In my "ignorance", I believe that this monument, the Confederate Flag, and the other mementos, materially mock Lincoln's words.

The gettysburg battlefield where Lincoln spoke those words is filled with statues and monuments of both the south and the north. Once you begin this sort of process, where does it end?

OK, then, forget the argument that it is immoral....that these mementos still offend a significant section of our population... that they blatantly blaspheme Lincoln's words.

It "ends" with the people who have to live and work in their presence. If these people don't want these mementos, then they ought to have the right to have them removed. If this is still a country of the people, by the people for the people, and they voted to remove the statue, then it ought to be removed.. In the same manner as the State of Georgia recently stopped flying the Confederate Flag on its statehouse. I don't believe there is logical or moral argument or any other rational argument that over rules their collective of choice of how they wish to live, what they want to see everyday.

That's why these statues are coming down in many Southern States.

Note I have not said that these statues necessary need to be destroyed (although I think it would be preferential) but rather archived, as someone suggested...as in a museum or equivalent. Where maybe they could be understood in their proper context, but I am not even sure of that.

You know if it was put to a vote and the majority voted to remove the statues, then I would not have a problem. That is not what has happened. Instead a minority has protested and some politicians have given in to their version of Political Correctness. Is this really improving race relations? Instead it seems to have inflamed passions? Do you think a vote would pass in all Southern States? I seriously doubt it. I don't think Lincoln would have a problem honoring the fallen of the South or the North.

That's crap, and you have said nothing, the funny thing is that I think you realize this. The United States is a representational form of government. To now use that form of rule as defective is worst than Trump's attempt to portrait his conviction as truth.

I can see you are losing patience. I am sorry you feel that way.
Just so you can see the extent of the problem. I am done now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_monuments_and_memorials_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America

No statue can or should remain in situ forever. Can we not all agree on that, as a starting premise?

Is this still about statuary? I wonder why Lee is so venerated, myself, as he arguably lost the war by invading the North and committing his army to battle at Antietam and Gettysburg. Be that as it may, I have no difficulty with statutes being consigned to museums, where those who are fond of them may gather to gaze upon them in wonder and admiration. I personally find nothing admirable about the Confederacy, though I'm amazed that people were fooled into fighting so hard so that certain families could retain their wealth and property and enjoy a life of leisure, waited on by slaves.

But the statutes are clearly not the problem. I doubt anyone is inspired to violence or hatred by them; I suspect they find that inspiration elsewhere. So remove them by all means, but the question to be considered, I think, is what their removal would accomplish and what the consequences of their removal would be.

Well yes, forever is a long time and change is the one inevitable feature of reality.
There is the Acropolis in Greece and the Forum in Rome, both have been around a long time, statues and all. The Greeks and the Romans both had slaves, BTW.
I just think seeing any/all confederate monuments as just a symbol of slavery is historically incorrect and starting this kind of revisionist history trend is likely to cause more problems than it solves.

There is the Acropolis in Greece and the Forum in Rome, both have been around a long time, statues and all. The Greeks and the Romans both had slaves, BTW — prothero

Indeed, but there was not a racial element to the ancients' slavery.

I just think seeing any/all confederate monuments as just a symbol of slavery is historically incorrect — prothero

I guess so. In terms of a spectrum of acceptability, perhaps Lee is towards the more acceptable end - though "more" acceptable does not necessarily mean "acceptable" of course..

Well we will see what happens, but it is another one of these issues around which there is not great consensus and the views in the South are different than the North.
I do worry about Jefferson, Washington, Jackson, Roosevelt and many others if we begin this sort of project.

To be fair to Lee, from my understanding, by the time he arrived at Gettysburg, a good portion of his forces were engaged in fighting and retreating at that point was not really in the cards. Of course, these points are taken away for deciding to attack the middle of the enemy forces over open ground. With Antietam, again, I don't think you could disengage the enemy that easily and regroup like you could in more modern wars. At best, Lee would have to retreat and give the control over to the Union forces as to where the battle should take place.

You know if it was put to a vote and the majority voted... — prothero

That's crap — Cavacava

Process matters.

As far as I know, very few people in Minneapolis associate Lake Calhoun with John C., slavery, states' rights, or anything else. It is still called Lake Calhoun, but "Bde Maka Ska" -- the Sioux name --has been added to signs. Bde Maka Ska means White Earth Lake, but other tribes (driven out by the later arriving Sioux) called it Loon Lake.

I find the process quite problematic. The request for a name change was made by an on-line petition by about 1000 people. 1000 on-line signatures, 400,000 citizens. The Park Board decided to go ahead and change the name after Yale changed a building name. "The changes are part of a national trend away from place names that honor racist or otherwise fraught figures." according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

"Racist or fraught figures." Now that's a very wide opening for dubious decisions.

"Racist or fraught figures." Now that's a very wide opening for dubious decisions. — Bitter Crank

We have minorities that are offended by Halloween, some offended by Christmas. I've been corrected so many times for saying "Merry Christmas", I switched to "happy holidays" which offended others. The safest thing seems to be say nothing at all. I little off subject but still on the subject of the excesses of Political Correctness, and the "fraught" notion of microagressions.

I don't think you could disengage the enemy that easily and regroup like you could in more modern wars. — Chany

I don't think so either, but they moved remarkable swiftly GIVEN the enormous logistical problems of supply both armies had to cope with. Just think about horses; there were about 4 or 5 soldiers per horse. 40,000 soldiers, 10,000 horses. Feeding and taking care of both two and four legged armies was a planning nightmare, but they did it. The rank and file didn't ride; it just took that many horses to move guns and equipment, supplies, ammunition, feed, horseshoes, etc. and to remove the human wounded. There were long wagon trains between depots and battle fields, moving continuously.

Indeed, but there was not a racial element to the ancients' slavery. — Jake Tarragon

Debatable. Different sorts of people were judged to be more or less fitting for certain work based upon their background. Just as black Africans were thought to be good laborers by American plantation owners, so did many of the ancient societies. I mean, just look at Egypt's history if you want to see some real class stratification based on what we now call racial stratification.

just as examples:

https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/24588/
Some students at the University of Missouri have called on administrators to remove a statue of founding father Thomas Jefferson, suggesting in a petition and during a recent protest that the campus sculpture is offensive, oppressive, and celebrates a “racist rapist.

http://thehayride.com/2017/05/take-em-nola-demands-removal-andrew-jacksons-statue

Yesterday, Take ‘Em Down NOLA held a rally at the site of the old Jefferson Davis monument. They demanded the removal of still more monuments and the names of streets to be changed. Among the monuments they demanded removed is Andrew Jackson’s monument in Jackson Square.

Take ‘Em Down NOLA’ president Malcolm Suber called for streets such as General Ogden and Jefferson Davis Parkway to be renamed and the monument to President Andrew Jackson, though unassociated with the Confederacy, to come down.

Andrew Jackson, who saved New Orleans in 1815 from British rule, is even more complex than the Confederate monuments. While he was a brilliant general and a former U.S. President, Jackson was a slave owner and he conducted what would be called today genocide against Native Americans. It is for those very reasons why Andrew Jackson is going to be replaced by Harriet Tubman on the $20. That is a move I support, by the way.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/19741/leftist-activists-demand-new-york-museum-take-down-michael-qazvini

On Monday, more than 200 SJW zealots held a protest inside the American Museum of Natural History in New York City to take down the supposedly “racist” statue of former President Theodore Roosevelt. The protest’s organizers, NYC Stands with Standing Rock and Decolonize This Place, also called for Columbus Day to be renamed Indigenous People’s Day.

We are daily insulted and injured by racist Europeans, African Americans, and western hemisphere natives who insist that Columbus discovered America, when every village idiot in Alabama knows that Leif Ericsson discovered Canada 500 years before fourteen hundred and ninety two when Columbus sailed west, the natives to screw. AND we didn't pillage and oppress the natives, to boot. (As you well know, the Norsk never oppressed or harmed ANYONE!)

In reparation for your hideous racist behavior, we demand that everyone in the western hemisphere submit to a 500 year regime of Scandinavian Design, Danish Modern, and FinnStyle and everyone learn Norwegian. That'll teach you to lie about history! (And you can jolly well learn to love lutefisk too.)

[reply="Bitter Crank;9717

Italians have better food. I'll take baccala (at least its not treated with lye, my stomach just rolled), you can keep your lutefisk, and the cream herring too. Give me a lasagna, spaghetti with meatballs, pasta, pizza, tomatoes mozzarella, the best wine & women in the world!...just fuhgettaboutit, the Italian got the credit because Italians have the best food in the world and the biggest mouths.

Sure you do. You stole spaghetti from China, meatballs from Sweden, Tomatoes from the Mexicans, and you have such beautiful women because the Romans stole appealing ladies from all over. And Lotzza Motzza. Your wine is bought by American bohemians so they can put candles in the grass-wrapped chianti bottles. Instead of Champagne you have Asti Spumante. The one thing you have that you all invented yourselves is your big mouths, stuffed with bologna.

In the area of race relations, there is very little high ground for ANY American to occupy.

Most Americans are beneficiaries of the Aboriginal American genocide. Every house, factory, farm, bank, apartment building, sidewalk, store, freeway, oil well, mine, or mill is located on expropriated land. The wealth of America was extracted from and produced on the land of the displaced or exterminated American Indian.

Slavery was visited upon Africans, and slaves were worked primarily on plantations, but not exclusively, and not exclusively in future Confederate states. Southern states, southern planters, southern importers or exporters, southern manufacturers, southern slave markets -- just about the entire southern economy -- depended on capital under the control of New York banks (primarily). Northern firms conducted much of the trade in southern goods. Slaves and plantations were insured by northern companies. Much of the slave trade was conducted by companies in Connecticut or Rhode Island.

The wealth northern businesses accumulated from the south benefitted wealthy families, institutions, and northern states. Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, for example, benefitted from the slave trade. Just one among numerous beneficiaries.

The northern business establishment that benefitted from slavery also benefitted from the civil war, and benefitted from reconstruction. When you control so much money, it is difficult to not benefit from just about anything.

Many family histories of Americans include branches of antebellum southerners, slave owners, slaves, army soldiers who fought against the American Indians in the genocidal wars, and so on and so forth. Immigrants who came here in the early 20th century? They were, in many cases, egregiously sexist and racist, to boot -- even if they themselves were oppressed people.

And white people? The bulk of white people shipped over to the colonies were white trash the English wanted to get rid of. For the most part, the early white trash remained below the mean level of accomplishment. They stayed working class. Waves of white riff raff came to the United States to find a better life than they could get in Norway, Italy, Germany, Ireland, Russia, the Balkan and Baltic states, etc. 99% of them did not become part of the rich 1%, or even the better off top 10%. They stayed working class. The American Ruling Class has never respected the white working class much more than it has respected any other part of the American demographic.

I was just thinking about it, and I realized that in the case of Antietam, Lee probably could have ran away and gotten away with it, given that the opposing commander was George McClellan, a man so cautious that Lee probably could have spent three months vacation while McClellan pondered whether Lee's retreat was a feint or not.

OK. But it was all so long ago and part of expired civilizations that those ancient monuments have a different feel to them. Also, Confederate statuary and other officially located symbols sprang up despite the fact the Confederacy lost. History is supposed to be written by the victors and all that...The cause thrived on despite "defeat" and so there is an extra motive to put that particular aberration to rights.