The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

(This could just as easily been a local topic, but nevertheless deserves a thread of its own)

Quite a few things have happened recently to bring us to this:

Three Tulsa school board members publicly support changing name of Lee Elementary School
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/education/three-tulsa-school-board-members-publicly-support-changing-name-of/article_a2469262-607f-5ea3-9c55-9adccae5550f.html

Mostly knee-jerk reactions to events mentioned in other threads here, including the planned riot in Charlottesville, Virginia where a neo-nazi cop-wannabe plowed into a crowd of people with a car.

(Tulsa School Board members) Jennettie Marshall, Shawna Keller and Amy Shelton are the board members who have declared publicly that they support changing Lee Elementary School’s name. Board members Gary Percefull, Suzanne Schreiber and Cindy Decker declined to comment, and Ruth Ann Fate didn’t voice an opinion.

This does not remotely compare to Mr. Trump's failure to directly condemn the racist hate groups who supported his election. 
Erasing the names of those who shaped our history -- for better or worse -- is cultural and intellectual dishonesty better suited for scenes from Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four" than an educated society.

Yet we are promised that sanitizing our war memorials, street and school names will fix racial inequity.

"There’s not much we can do to fight against White Supremacists in America, but this is something we CAN do,” reads the petition posted by Antigone LoVoi.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/following-charlottesville-protests-online-petition-started-to-change-the-name/article_42930ca9-ef67-5f86-a68e-05a9ab8eef0b.html

Exactly what would that do?  Has historical cleansing ever "fixed" hatred or prejudice?
Is editing the past a verifiable solution to anything, or just an opportunity to take a swipe at another culture?
If there is a logical, rational reason for this "whitewash," the case hasnt yet been made, but the knees of our city educators are still twitching.

"In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil in any country."
-- Robert E. Lee

If anything, tweaking history (or how we remember history) is more the problem than the solution.







(P.S. Ulysses S. Grant was a slave owner.  Everyone turn in your $50 bills to me by midnight.)

The question is, why should he have ever been honored with naming a school after him in the first place? What is Lee famous for? What did he do for this country that we would honor him for?

He’s famous for being a traitor to this country. He was the top general of the CSA, which was founded to preserve slavery and the result was a war with more than a million deaths. Today he is a hero to the KKK, White Pride and Nazi types.

Removing his name from a school is correct, he did nothing of value, added nothing but pain and death to our history and he did it on the side of evil.


Ulysses S Grant was President and a general that preserved the Union and helped end slavery. That he also was a slave owner is part of his history that should be remembered along with the positive reasons he is famous today. here's an interesting article on that very question.
https://pastexplore.wordpress.com/2015/06/29/did-ulysses-s-grant-own-slaves-during-the-civil-war/

His situation is very different from Lee.

Lee, however, was also a prominent general in the Mexican-American War if my memory serves me.  Lincoln implored him to join the Union army.  I'm not advocating for or against.

If he had stayed out of the war, would he be remembered today?

How is removing statues and renaming building's erasing history?

History books still cover the civil war and Robert E Lee

History books can now have a new entry:

2017:   America decides that Robert E Lee should no longer be honored with statues and having Elementary schools named after him.  Many wonder why schools in Oklahoma were named after him in the first place.
2017:   President Trump stubbornly refuses to condemn Nazis...  get's the boot after 8 months in office.

Did the YMCA erase history when they renamed the Thorton Y @ 51st & Darlington to Tandy?

I have to agree mostly with Patric’s post.  Re-naming things doesn’t change racial attitudes or outcomes, folks.  I really don’t care if they call it Lee School or PS 2, the name of a school building has nothing to do with changing attitudes about racism.  If anything, I believe it makes pinhead nazi types believe they are even more be-set and they will become more active the more symbols like this they think are important are extinguished.

At what point do we go back and start wiping out literature and movies with racial stereotypes to keep everyone happy?

You couldn’t get away with making a movie like Blazing Saddles these days, I don’t think.  The movie poked fun at every stereotype you could think of and it was thought of as comic brilliance at the time.

I lost count of how many times the N-bomb was dropped in Pulp Fiction.  Might need to go back and re-edit that. 

Oh and I HATE Illinois Nazis!

(A bit of levity, folks. I think U.S. society is forgetting how to laugh at times even when it comes to certain stereotypes)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdXMagTUEAA-nH2.jpg:large)

  Statues are not history.  They can be an expression of someones version of it.  

As for a school being named for someone.  Usually when a school is named for someone like Wright or Roosevelt you learn about the person and perhaps the school even uses some positive characteristic, motto, success story, etc. to inspire the students.  Students read about the person, do essays on them, etc.

Strikes me as odd that Lee was chosen in the first place and I wonder why when there are so many great, positive role models to learn about?  What were they hoping to teach the children?  Do they regularly admonish them in the classrooms saying "Don't be a terrible loser like Lee and join the wrong side!".  How positive and motivating is that? lol

Wooo Hooo! Go Lee!  Oh wait, I mean...

Lee was opened in 1918, at the height of the KKK and right before the race riot. You tell me why it was named what it is named?

Why so many schools are named after Lee (hint, it's ain't racist):

He accepted an offer to serve as the president of Washington College (now Washington and Lee University) in Lexington, Virginia, and served from October 1865 until his death. The Trustees used his famous name in large-scale fund-raising appeals and Lee transformed Washington College into a leading Southern college expanding its offerings significantly and added programs in commerce, journalism, and integrated the Lexington Law School. Lee was well liked by the students, which enabled him to announce an "honor system" like West Point's, explaining "We have but one rule here, and it is that every student be a gentleman." To speed up national reconciliation Lee recruited students from the North and made certain they were well treated on campus and in town.

It took me ages to find this on Wikipedia.  ::)

In other words, it's because he was hell of a lot more of a man (human) than most people arguing his removal from society.

For many people, one aw sh!t wipes out a thousand attaboys.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/16/us/robert-e-lee-statues-letters-trnd/index.html

Based on his writings, Lee was not a fan of statues honoring Civil War generals, fearing they might "keep open the sores of war."
According to historian Jonathan Horn, Lee was often consulted in his lifetime about proposals to erect monuments to Confederate Gen. Stonewall Jackson and others.

In a 1866 letter to fellow Confederate Gen. Thomas L. Rosser, Lee wrote, "As regards the erection of such a monument as is contemplated, my conviction is, that however grateful it would be to the feelings of the South, the attempt ... would have the effect of ... continuing, if not adding to, the difficulties under which the Southern people labour."

Three years later, Lee was invited to a meeting of Union and Confederate officers to mark the placing of a memorial honoring those who took part in the battle of Gettysburg.
"I think it wiser not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered," he wrote in a letter declining the invitation.

Such conflict over Civil War symbols, some 150 years after the war ended, makes Lee look prescient.
"Lee feared that these reminders of the past would preserve fierce passions for the future," wrote Horn, author of a Lee biography titled "The Man Who Would Not Be Washington"

I'm not saying you are wrong, but Tulsa was basically run by the KKK at the time and the city burned down Greenwood just three years later.

He didn't exactly ding a car in parking lot and not leave a note. His aw sh!t was leading a war to protect slavery that killed over a million Americans.

These guys think it was a bit less killed:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/science/civil-war-toll-up-by-20-percent-in-new-estimate.html

Still a lot of people though.

I think at one time there was a consensus that the toll was around a million Americans lost, once disease and starvation were figured in.

Those same historians scoff at the notion that Lee was fighting "to preserve slavery" as he abhorred the practice, and only became a slaveowner by inheritance.  His foe Grant, however, was much more enthusiastic about the practice. Grant was a wealthy incompetent that was only tapped because of his military popularity (like N.B. Forrest) and let his corrupt cabinet run his administration to the ground.  (sound familiar?)

In the thinking of the day, Virginia was Lee's "country" and he only took up arms against his former West Point classmates when they became the invading army.

I didn't do my Master's Thesis on the number of casualties in the US Civil War.  I just did some quick Google checks.  Most were around 620,000 military casualties but these guys upped it some to about 750,000.  But hey,  anything over "0.5" rounds up to "1" so a million or more it is.

So, the first thing he did was free them?

Wow, you want to walk about white washing history?

The school is named after Robert E. Lee, it isn't named after Washington College (now Washington & Lee).    Nor were statutes raised of Robert E. Lee because of his academic career.  Name a school named after another president of an obscure college...

The school is named after a famous civil war general who fought against the United States of America, it isn't named for Capt. and then Major Robert E. Lee the Spanish American war officer.

While Lee did distinguish himself after his defeat, the monuments were not put up as a testament to his reconstruction efforts or his many statements on reconciling with the north.  The discussions when the statutes were erected, the commencements, and the timing of their placement all make it fairly clear he was being honored as a symbol of the mythology of the Confederacy.  Lee was a gentlemen of his time and place, a great general, a noble aid to reconstruction after the war, I have a lot of respect for him.  But he was also a traitor, a racist slave holder, and a a general who killed over a hundred thousand United States soldiers.

Lets be serious, the school, the statutes, and the monuments were put up to either commemorate the war sacrifices of the south or to glorify the mythology of the "old south."  Many of these monuments, and Lee Elementary school, were put up and named in the teens and early twenties, as the KKK was at its peak.  Some of the monuments have photos of hooded KKK attended the commemoration.   I haven't seen nor heard of any dedications that elicited the strong union building and education credentials of Robert E. Lee.

This isn't an argument for or against the name.  I don't really have a strong opinion.  If people know the facts and still feel we should honor Robert E. Lee, so be it.  But lets not pretend it was named Lee elementary because of his academic credentials or good deeds.

My proposal:  if people want to rename a school, it goes to a vote of alumni, current parents, and staff (like an expanded PTA).  66% required for change.  The decision gets ratified by the school board.  If the vote carries, the side wanting to change the name is responsible for the fund raising to change the name.

If people want to change the name of their school, remove a statute from their town square, or put one up... so long as we aren't infringing someone elsels rights, then let the people have their way.

Wrong on both counts. Lee was a vicious slave master and Grant only an accidental one. It's alternate southern history to say otherwise:
Lee:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-myth-of-the-kindly-general-lee/529038/

Grant:
https://pastexplore.wordpress.com/2015/06/29/did-ulysses-s-grant-own-slaves-during-the-civil-war/

 was going from memory without checking, apologies.

A clear case of what I talk about all the time - a lack of knowledge or sense of history.   Read the quick once over at the link below.  There is a much more complex, nuanced, story than your sound bite version. 

And I know - you normally don't get even close to doing that sound bit thing - this time you need more information.  They have the Lee Barracks at West Point.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E._Lee

If it were to happen, that sounds like a fair proposal.

FWIW I believe the Civil War numbers that venture towards the million mark included the massive civilian losses.

So why did Grant keep his until 1859?  Apparently quite a few years after acquiring him....  Even Lincoln was not enthusiastic about freed slaves running around the country without the second half of the Republican plan - emancipation and colonization - the two pronged approach to the "colored problem".  Free them, even if the government had to buy them, but make sure they went back to Africa or the Caribbean.  This was the Republican plan from about the 1820's on.


Today's world still trying to put blanket judgements on 19th century thought.  Hey, sounds good - let's get ALL of them off the money and tear down all these vile, hypocritical memorials everywhere for what they did to the Native Americans!!   ALL of those old white guys were complicit and active participants in murder, torture, and extermination.

Which is worse - slavery or genocide and extermination??


Edit;
One more quick note - one of the quotes from a Lee slave talked about a beating...

Wesley Norris, one of the slaves who was whipped, recalled that “not satisfied with simply lacerating our naked flesh, Gen. Lee then ordered the overseer to thoroughly wash our backs with brine, which was done.”

I am the last person in the world to excuse someone beating another like that - it is unconscionable. 

As for the brine, well I have had salt used on me as an antiseptic, and the old family that are all gone now used that as a mainstay to clean wounds.  Several times some of the loggers in the family would get ax wounds and have a box of Morton salt with them in the forest.  Poor some over the wound with a little water to make a paste, bind it up, and go on chopping trees.  And yeah, it easily could be considered torture - that's how I felt about it.  But none of them nor I have died from infection treated that way.   Mostly luck I suspect, but that was a common medical treatment, lacking anything better...

Also used a treatment for bronchitis, pneumonia, etc - mixed 1 part whisky, 1 part kerosene, 1 raw egg, 2 or 3 parts water.  Make any sick family member drink it...including kids.   Yum!   Not!   But also, none died from those diseases.  Probably again, mostly luck.

Aldrich Ames, a Russian mole within the CIA, was responsible for the deaths of numerous agents. He is serving a life sentence in the federal prison at Terre Haute.

Jonathan Pollard was a Navy intelligence analyst who sold or tried to sell secrets to several foreign governments. He served 30 years in federal prison before being paroled in 2015.

Robert Hanssen, an FBI agent, spied for Russian intelligence over 22 years. He's serving 15 consecutive life sentences in a federal supermax prison.

Robert E. Lee resigned his commission in the United States Army to become a Confederate general leading the Army of Northern Virginia, an army that killed thousands of Union troops.

All these men were traitors. All these men did irreparable harm to our country. Lee is the only one we find on monuments, however. To understand why some of us view Confederate monuments as an affront to humanity since they glorify rebellion, traitorous actions, hatred, and slavery, you need only consider raising monuments to Ames, Pollard, and Hanssen. If that thought is repugnant, if the idea of glorifying men who harmed our nation is one that elicits a visceral reaction in your gut, you begin to understand your fellow countrymen who clamor for the removal of Confederate monuments.

Wasn't Hanssen the subject of the movie "Breach" with Chris Cooper playing Hanssen?

Unless the Soviet Union has statues of American spies in Red Square, this comparison makes no sense.

Maybe another approach...

Here's two flags white supremacists use.
One represented a nation of slavery for four years.
One represented a nation of slavery for a century prior to that.
Which one should we ban?

(http://wnyt.com/APImages/AP493663a687604e9aa201f3723be92ac2.jpg)

Guess it depends on who "wins".  The Natives lost, so the same actions perpetrated against them are still celebrated.

Still crimes against humanity, no matter how one rationalizes it.

I haven't seen that one. It's on the list now.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/opinion-blog-the-hidden-danger-of-purging-the-nation-of/article_910adc35-2f4b-5ccf-b0b2-e97fdc5ac920.html

One only represented a nation of slavery as well as a nation that rebelled against the United States.

One represents a nation with a complicated history that endeavors to improve itself.

One represents a nation that fought and died to free slaves.

One represents the longest living representative government on the planet.

One represents a nation that fought Nazis and fascists. 

One represents a nation that perfected the light bulb, created vaccines, and took the liberty of inventing the internet.

One is flown by millions in the belief that it serves as a symbol of hope, freedom, and success.

One is flown by thousands who want it to be seen as a symbol of hatred and intimidation.

Ye' ole' stars and stripes isn't perfect.  We have done and continue to do sketchy things.  But the stars and bars isn't complicated either, it existed primary to support the institute of chattel slavery. While the nuance of the American flag is certainly lost on some (we're perfect #1 always etc.), there is little nuance to the stars and bars.

One of those nuances - the south certainly was fighting to keep slavery, as well as the other states rights issues they saw threatened by Lincoln.

But the north fought to keep the Union together and preserve an economic system balance that was greatly threatened if the south left - eliminating slavery was never one of their main goals of the war - didn't become one for several years.  They NEEDED the south to keep sending raw cotton to the mills in the north for their industrial basis...they had little recourse to get it elsewhere.  So, as with other groups, the north industrialists who ran the show saw the need to keep the south effectively in serfdom, while the south needed to keep slaves to be able to maintain their participation in the economy.  There was HUGE resistance to letting the south become industrialized...just another little side effect.

And even taking Andrew Jackson into account, it was the same northern industrialists driving the extermination/genocide of the Native Americans.  So, add that to the balance to the US flag - and it didn't stop at the Civil War.  Bounties paid for Indian scalps didn't end for another 30 years or so.  And the US government continued an official policy of societal genocide of natives and ripping families apart until it was finally outlawed in the mid 1970's!!   Over 100 years later!

So this is how Trump wants to make us "great again"...go back to the "good ole days" when one could just go out with a rifle and a skinning knife - kill some Natives, take their scalps and get paid $5 to boot!!


We are definitely a work in process.  As I have said here before, no nation in the history of the planet has done as much total good as has the US.  AND no nation in the history of the planet had done so much total bad as the US.

Your last point is obviously debatable. One of the quotes I see being tossed around of Lee's recently is how he insists slaves were essentially better off here then Africa or elsewhere (paraphrasing). This quote is used to be critical of Lee, but he was right. African's sold into slavery to the East did have it way worse. And they weren't doing a whole lot better where they were at, obviously they were enslaved in Africa. But those that went east, that was some bad news right there.

Our history often makes it difficult to be proud of our country, however I love this country like I love my family. That means I often choose to see the best in them, and this country. And there is a lot of good to see, no doubt.

Likewise, slavery continued in some northern states years after the end of the CW, and most people dont realize the Emancipation Proclamation was only aimed at "states in rebellion." 
Im also proud our country has stood for freedom and civil rights above others, but have to balance that with the knowledge it, like the White House, was built by slaves.

No it isn't.  It is one of those absolute truths of the world.   Goes to a knowledge and sense of history.  On both extremes, you can find as many examples as you want from other places in the world, and we have one that will Trump it in our history!  (See what I did there...!)

Slaves better off here - yeah, that is also a major theme in Jefferson Davis writing, along with many other apologists/slaveholders at the time.  It was exactly the same method used by the Fake Fox News propaganda cycle today.  The history thing again - Rupert Murdoch and Minions know the history and use it to forward their warped, twisted world view.

I am always proud of this country - BECAUSE....and this is a big one... no matter the evil done, there are always GOOD people working against that evil.!  And sometimes they actually make progress against the enemies of humanity!   Note that word "progress" again... leads to "progressive".  By it's definition making things better.  As opposed to the reactionary extremist right that not just tries to maintain the status quo, but attempts to take us backwards.  Backwards to that time where America can be "great again"...  Tell me all about that one.

Wasn't quite years....House ratified the 13th Amendment in 1864.  Senate in Jan, 1865.  Certified and declared adopted in Dec 1865, so technically about 7 months after end of war.

Didn't stop any of the other abominable things going on, but at least it was an attempt at a start.  Gave us one more ideal to try to live up to.  Took another 100 years to get even close to living up to that ideal.  And now, the Minions are trying to take us back by making America "great again"...

None of the northern states were slave states excepting four border states. Three states; Maryland, which ended slavery on November 1st, 1864, West Virginia, which ended it on February 3rd, 1865 and Missouri, which ended slavery January 11th, 1865 ended slavery during the war. Slavery only continued on after the war in some originally Union controlled areas of Louisiana and Virginia and in Kentucky, all of which ended slavery with the 13th Amendment, which was ratified on December 6th, 1865, seven months after the end of the war on May 9th 1865.  

Ah, missed Delaware. Ended with the 13th as well.

I should point out the slave state of Delaware took its sweet time ratifying the 13th Amendment, and several "states in rebellion" like Missouri and Tennessee voted to abolish slavery before the end of the war.  


Meanwhile, the slope got a lot slipperier:

Maryland State House Removes Statue Of Judge Who Wrote Dred Scott Decision
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/18/544407092/maryland-state-house-removes-statue-of-judge-who-wrote-dred-scott-decision

A very well reasoned Op-Ed.

I also believe the more symbols which are taken down or names which are changed will result in more activism from white supremacist types who will view this as oppression.

Tennessee was always an oddball case.  There really are 3 states rolled up into that one long sucker!  East, Middle, and West.  And the 3 zones were very divided during this time.  It barely seceded, mainly on account of West TN.  East TN was in great part loyalist - not wanting to secede at all.  LOTS of TN's fought in the Union armies.

Many people have somehow interpreted the TN flag as somehow being related to the Confederate flag, but never was and did not derive from any Confederate flag.


Still gotta go to the context of the times - States rights were still a thing that many people actually thought was real and that they believed in it.  The war proved how wrong that was...   This also shows a lot of the state of mind of many people, that considered themselves to be just as much Tennessean or New Yorker as they were US citizens.  Different world than now on many levels.  Now, we seem to mostly identify as "Americans" who also happen to be citizens of some state at any particular time.

There were probably still family members that recalled "the union". There were states, and then there was a country. I'm sure many probably viewed their allegiance in that order as well. I still view Lee as a person worth respecting, but one whose allegiance ultimately ended up putting him on the wrong side of history.

Even aside from his being a traitor and leading an army into a civil war to protect slavery that killed hundreds of thousands, did you read the article I posted about him? How he treated his own slaves? How his men executed all captured black Union soldiers? How any freedmen they caught were sent south into slavery, even if they had never been a slave?

What is there to respect about a man like that?

Bannon is out.   

There are varying accounts when it comes to how he treated his slaves. Historians and biographers have said as much anyway. Since I wasn't there, I have decided to withhold passing judgement, especially considering some of the verifiable things that he has done/said in his life.

He also didn't lead anyone into any war, and for that matter wasn't even the general of the confederate forces at the time the war commenced. And if you want to really parse words, he probably spared the life of many by surrendering, and taking such an active role during reconstruction.

What is there to respect about Grant then, using that logic.  He had slaves.  He worked to kill hundreds of thousands.  He was also President while Indian genocide was going on.

Marias Massacre
Skeleton Cave Massacre
Sappa Creek Massacre
Battle of the Big Hole

Nobody has clean hands.

And we haven't even gotten to Andrew Jackson, who is still on our money!  You gonna start calling for his removal a while, I presume??  Since we are all into "pious mode" right now...!

You found an article that was biased.  Did you ever bother to doublecheck any of their facts?   There were enough inconsistencies and outright errors in the story that you should have been skeptical.  

Put anyone's life under a microscope and you can find things to hold against them.  Not that it matters.

Isn't Jackson getting replaced by Harriet Tubman?

And Grant, for all his (real) faults,  picked the right side in the war and wasn't a traitor to his country.

Let's not forget that Grant is on the $50, that should make him more valuable as a president.  :)

I'm under the impression that secession at the time was viewed as a check on the federal government, which everyone was skeptical of (rightly so it would seem). And it was generally understood that states could in fact secede and leave the union. Is that not accurate?

If it is, then Lee was not a traitor at all. He was conquered. Ya know, like the Indians. But he let his white privileged let him get pardoned. ;-)

From Wikipedia (the sources I believe are all from one or two biographies):
The evidence cited in favor of the claim that Lee opposed slavery included his direct statements and his actions before and during the war, including Lee's support of the work by his wife and her mother to liberate slaves and fund their move to Liberia,[69] the success of his wife and daughter in setting up an illegal school for slaves on the Arlington plantation,[70] the freeing of Custis' slaves in 1862, and, as the Confederacy's position in the war became desperate, his petitioning slaveholders in 1864–65 to allow slaves to volunteer for the Army with manumission offered as a reward for outstanding service.[71][72]

As I noted, Lee saw his country as Virginia, as did many at the time.  He didnt see himself as a traitor by defending his homeland from invaders.

I believe much has changed in the century and a half since, but not everything.  If you think Texans see themselves as their own country, go visit Virginia.
OTOH, im surprised to see so much public school stereotypes of CW history here, today.  Fighting for slavery?  Really?

So what are the errors we should check?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/18/us/robert-e-lee-slaves.html?mcubz=1

Some of you missed the deadline to surrender those all into me by midnight.

There’s not much we can do to fight against White Supremacists in America, but this is something we CAN do. You'll thank me afterwards for getting those out of your wallet conscience.
Then we can go to work on all the supremacist symbolism here:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/35/Vector_Oreo.svg/190px-Vector_Oreo.svg.png)

...and to think they thought they could get away with that.  


 ;)

The southern states did say they could succeed, because they did.

The succession papers from the southern states made very clear why they were doing so. It was slavery. The overreach they cited by the federal government was working to get rid of slavery.

I've posted quotes from a number of the state's succession statements in the past. I can do so again.

Was there a mechanism that could have kept the southern states from seceding at that point in time? Other than war that is. That is what I am trying to discern, not the why.

War is generally considered a failure of politics, that or it's end state. What mechanism can override when people want to go to war?

There is quite a lot written on this.   There were leading politicians on both sides that thought the states did have the right to secede.  Lincoln, and others, did not.  (Obviously)  The war settled that, except for some idiots in TX that still claim they have that right.  (They don't.)

But a traitor to humanity.  As in committing crimes against humanity.

4 of them directly said they were seceding because of slavery.  Couple others alluded to it.  I have talked about that too - the flag is not about history as being lied about today.  It had mostly disappeared by the 1950's but revisited as protest to the civil rights efforts that finally seemed to be getting some traction - in particular, school desegregation.  State flags were changed about that time to have the stars and bars.  And certainly not a St Andrew's cross...    It's a pretty flag - just a shame it became associated with slavery, like the swastika was perverted by Nazi's.

Scorched Earth was certainly evil.

...and slipperier:

Anti-Muslim Oklahoma legislator calls for removal of mosques
http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/anti-muslim-oklahoma-legislator-calls-for-removal-of-mosques/article_96a85a6a-d7af-5369-96cd-084557b203d1.html

We better go ahead and get rid of all the Founding Father's monuments and take them off the money.  After all, THEY are the ones that enabled - nay, demanded - that slavery not be infringed on.

Article 4, Section 2.  US Constitution.

No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.


We would not have had a Constitution nor a United States without the evil perpetrated by the likes of the Founding Fathers.   Is this a case of "ends justifies the means..." ??

The view from across the big pond:



General Robert E. Lee, the Confederate general whose statue sparked confrontation in Charlottesville, wrote to The New York Times before the Civil War to say that he planned to release slaves he had inherited, in accordance with a will.

The letter, republished in the paper on Friday, is seen as further evidence of Lee’s nuanced feelings about slavery.

Although he fought to create a separate, slave-owning south, he was said to have personally mixed feelings about slavery.

“He was not a pro-slavery ideologue,” said Eric Foner, a Civil War historian, author and professor of history at Columbia University.

“But I think equally important is that, unlike some white southerners, he never spoke out against slavery.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/18/robert-e-lee-wrote-new-york-times-say-planned-free-inherited




Earlier this week, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other politicians pressed the U.S. Army to rename two streets named for Confederate generals Gens. Robert E. Lee and Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson on an Army base in Brooklyn. The Army has so far resisted, saying the streets were named for the generals "in the spirit of reconciliation" and to recognise them as individuals, not representatives of "any particular cause or ideology."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/18/new-york-subway-tiles-look-like-confederate-flags-altered

At some point, there must be reconciliation and Christian forgiveness...or any other kind of forgiveness.  Doesn't mean to forget.

The difference here, with the people involved manifests as no remorse.  No regret.  And in point of fact, especially with Trump, doubling down to create more of the vile, pernicious, poisonous bile he has become so famous for.

The meaning of a memorial is never set in stone. The people who commission it might have one message in mind, but those who view the monument in generations that follow may draw entirely different lessons. One generation’s hero becomes another generation’s symbol of inhumanity — one reason Americans eventually turned away from statues of great men on horses, instead choosing stones decorated with lists of those who made the ultimate sacrifice.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/why-those-confederate-soldier-statues-look-a-lot-like-their-union-counterparts/2017/08/18/cefcc1bc-8394-11e7-ab27-1a21a8e006ab_story.html?utm_term=.ee20fdd515eb

Monuments are partially intended to be little "museum" spaces for presentation and education of history.  As well as glorification.   This is the part where I am somewhat ambivalent - we don't do as good a job at museums as we could - we have some great ones, but as with everything, always room for improvement.   I don't think any of these statues should be destroyed, but if gonna take them down  - and I think that is generally a better idea than not - they should go to an educational venue.

Stone Mountain...well that already kinda is.  And needs to have enough information to be an educational event for anyone willing to open their eyes.  Which I know is kind of "utopic" in concept.

One thing is particularly amazing to me - and I have been having a running "gun battle" with some family in the last few days over this.  From people who are known mixed blood involving several Native American tribes, a bit of English, German, and Irish, some Hispanic, and a touch of Jewish and Muslim/Middle Eastern.  The hate we see in Charlottesville and elsewhere is coming from people who feel they are one culture - white. And they really aren't, but that fact doesn't impinge on their reality.  IF all the Klanners and different hate groups were truly all white, well those 24 people in this country would be so horribly inbred as to not be a viable population. And yet, they continue to hate themselves.  Hah!  Eureka - maybe that inbreeding IS the explanation for these people!!  

Yeah, I just had to go there....lol.


And this guy... Chip Barker.  Loser of the month Award!  I guarantee he is not 100% white (because no one is,except for the 24!), but he won't have the balls to do a DNA test to see what he is.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article167939222.html

In eastern Europe, they left the empty pedestals of the communities leaders after they toppled all of the statutes.  At first because it was sudden. Then because they were broke.   Now it is a testament to history.

Also - with the signing of the declaration of independence, many royal statutes were toppled in the new United States.

Somehow, we still remember the communist dictatorships are bad.  Somehow we still remember the revolutionary war.  Crazy that removing statues doesn't actually change history, or knowledge of it...

Yeah, and funny that conservatives seem to be the ones always bleating about progressives being SJWs (social justice warriors).

Trump labels Boston protesters 'anti-police agitators,' then praises them for 'speaking out against bigotry and hate'
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/08/20/trump-labels-boston-protesters-anti-police-agitators-then-pra/23075598/

Remember this amoral turd?

(http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/150622191833-charleston-church-shooting-dylann-roof-radicalization-savidge-dnt-tsr-00002118-exlarge-169.jpg)

Its Dylann Roof, and he gained his 15 minutes of fame shooting up a church.  When someone found selfies of him posing with a flea-market Confederate flag the mandate was clear:  Eliminate all the flags and this problem will go away.

We were promised that.  We were called racists if we questioned the efficacy, or the motives.

So everyone took down Confederate flags.  Did it work?

Patrick, et al,

This is a generational thing.   Removing Confederate flags,  changing names on schools, etc, isn't going to have a major immediate effect.  But generationally things will change.   Take away all those symbols, and the next generation will wonder why they were ever up in the first place.  And by the next, the subject will be removed enough (for the vast majority) that they can begin to look at the Civil War and "Old South" in general from a historical perspective and not an emotional one.

Again,  I'm relatively ambivalent on this issue as a whole, but we should not make decisions like this on where we want to be tomorrow, or next week, or even next year,  but rather were we want to be in the next couple of generations.

Patrick.  I generally agree with your comments....

But, you're being a wee bit obtuse here.

Nobody ever claimed that racism would end the moment a confederate flag is taken down.  How would that even work.    Racism would be immediately eliminated at a some radius proportional to the height of the flag?   

As illogical as it sounds, I believe there were people saying just that, at the top of their lungs.  Politicians didnt wait for the Logic to appear, they just reacted out of fear of not being re-elected.

The only thing that will stop it is to quit teaching it.

Maybe we should just take all the children of the extremist right at birth so they cannot propagate that philosophy...

Oh, wait... what??

Whoa.  I'm not arguing that politicians aren't reactionary, but I don't remember that.  I don't remember being promised that if we take down Confederate Flags we will no longer have hate, anger, crazy people, or violence. I don't think the Germans thought clearing the country of Nazi paraphernalia would stop hate.  But they did think it would hinder their efforts to rally people to the Nazi cause.  Seeing a symbol or monument to your "tribe" has power to it.  That's why monuments exist.

Also, we didn't take down all the Confederate flags.  We just saw it fall in SC last year.  Mississippi still has it as part of the state flag.  Several states issue confederate license places. They are still flying all over the place.  I saw one on the back of a truck this morning.  So even if removing them all would bring about world peace, we didn't remove them all so... gee, we better keep trying.

These are just symbols of a problem.  A Nazi flag never actually killed any Jewish people.  Putting up a Confederate monument at the height of the KKK didn't actually lynch any black people.  But they are meant to be symbols to inspire people with or to a certain belief.  I think it is too far to ban speech/symbols we don't like, but if a community decides they want to remove something they no longer feel represents them - have at it.

I really don't get the push back.  I need you to articulate it.

"Everyone" was a broad brush on my part; there was a concerted effort to remove flags from public places.  Not 100% but definitely a rolling bandwagon.

Maybe I just feel disgust at people like the KKK or Nazis winning. They seize upon symbols that at one time meant something different and weaponize them.
Do society's loosers rally around swastikas or flags of the Army of Northern Virginia?  Yes, they do today, and they dont really care if those symbols once meant peace or that Americans died defending them.  They win by mis-appropriation.

Of course, I may be over-thinking the problem.  The question was, and should be "What will renaming streets or schools really, really accomplish?"

The answer needs to have a lot more substance than "Its just something we can do."

Sure, but take them from the left and the right, be an equal discriminator. Then you can shape them into this.

(https://photos.smugmug.com/MRLS-2016/i-czxgwSX/0/48268dc3/M/Pink-floyd-film-Stills122-M.jpg) (https://kevinallsop.smugmug.com/MRLS-2016/i-czxgwSX/A)

That way you can just grind them out to believe whatever the political winds bring.

(http://pm1.narvii.com/6340/5b542639e5946c0c422790ccc8bf85d98b590a8e_hq.jpg)

Yes, there was a bandwagon to remove perceived symbols of hate after extreme acts of violence in the name of hate.  A far better reaction than retaliatory acts of violence, but no one is going to say Americans aren't prone to jumping on a bandwagon.

And yes, those symbols may have once stood for something else.  In the context of a Hindu temple I understand seeing a swastika, but that symbol has otherwise been well and truly obfuscated.   Some symbols will never be taken back.  Others are more complex.

The reason to rename schools, roads, or remove monuments is to demonstrate that what they are now perceived to stand for is not something the community wants to celebrate.  This isn't about making on group or another happy.  It's about a message from the community about what it values.  Generally, communities don't name a school or put up a statute to "remember history" if that isn't something they hold out as worthy of celebration or intending it to send another message.  Truly, I can't think of a monument or naming right a community has done that is of something they dislike.

So when the community determines it is no longer wants to celebrate it or no longer appreciates the message, then take down the statute or rename the school.  It sends the message that the community has moved on and no long wishes to celebrate whatever meaning the monument has taken on (which may or may not be the same meaning initially intended). 

In the context of civil war monuments, I can't say it as well as the Mayor of New Orleans, so I won't try.   I'd encourage you to read his words on why New Orleans decided to remove its statutes (a move that I admit I was kind of sad to see before reading his explanation, the "old south" atmosphere seemed like part of New Orleans nastaulgia):
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/05/23/read_mitch_landrieu_s_confederate_monuments_speech.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/08/22/the-lie-of-maintaining-confederate-monuments-in-the-name-of-history/?utm_term=.fac2b7ab0786


I think a balloon boy-statue would be cool.

We were promised a Satanic Baphomet monument not too long ago.  Might have been good for tourism...  ;)


But getting back to our city leaders, I havent heard any suggestions for a new school name.
I dont think any kid really wants to brag about going to "Reconciliation Elementary" for fear it sounds like some school-to-prison pipeline.

Sort of like "Repeal and Replace" where they havent quite worked out the second part?

Maybe we could name it after the Taiwanese-American film director?   Very Cosmopolitan, and we'd save money not having to buy new letterhead.
 

I've been stumping for Sara Lee. 
Tasty snack cakes for all.

Bruce
Tommy
Stan
Spike
Brandon

Actually, I kind of like Harper.  Harper Lee Elementary isn't a bad name at all.  I fully realize it is a half-solution, but if it makes everyone happy and saves coin.... it is a fitting name.

Bruce & Brandon- shows respect for Asians
Tommy- can’t do that, imagine the anatomically-correct statue  :o
Spike- should make the BLM faction happy
Harper- a great literary legend that works well with an educational institution

I just remembered my stepfather’s brother’s name was Robert.  I guess they should change the name on his headstone to avoid offending anyone.

Names don't offend, people do.
Also difference between gravesite and statue honoring said individual.
There's also the whole free speech thing.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/55/1a/c9/551ac948155a1a370c74c4c730e305c4--unusual-headstones-famous-tombstones.jpg)

So he was a proctologist?

And then there is this stupidity or over-sensitivity:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41022954

Double face palm

UNLESS his asian-american parents named him after the confederate general?!
/s

New Yorkers are now taking aim at the Christopher Columbus statue in Columbus Circle and the tomb of Ulysses S. Grant.
Some object to the Theodore Roosevelt statue outside the Museum of Natural History, and others suggest the name “New York” itself may have to go because the Duke of York was a slave trader.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2017/08/23/a9e29ea6-8849-11e7-a50f-e0d4e6ec070a_story.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2017/08/22/espn-pulls-announcer-robert-lee-off-virginia-game-charlottesville-protests/592458001/

The decision for the person to call or not call the game wasn't made by the network evidently, nor was he pressured to do one thing or another.

S.E. Hinton Elementary

It's overdue.

Nope. Battle of classes. Upper versus lower class. Too much diversity everyone has to be equal. Same for Titanic, everyone should have been treated equally, and should have had equal opportunity to be rescued.

Need to change it from Lee to something like Compton, Watts, Chicago, Detroit, Selma, Rodney King, OJ Simpson, Michael Brown, Ferguson, Baltimore, Freddie Gray, Marilyn Mosby, Tawana Brawley, Al $harpton, Maxine Waters. Then it will be named right and no one will be offended.

You know what cures racism? More racism. This ESPN mess with Robert Lee is unbelievable. 


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DH6-16rVYAAsxek.jpg)

Yes, the ESPN thing was ridiculous.  But not sure how that was racism - they essentially stuck him in a closet because of his name, not because of his race.  Lets not confuse all stupid things with racism.

I believe one could call it an over-reaction to racism because of his name and it being a Virginia game.  It’s still a product of racist issues, apparently. 

Much like hypersensitivity over statues or school names.

I’m curious how many Robert Lees one would find on the tax rolls in the Commonwealth of Virginia?

It's frustrating to see honest and reasonable discussions go down the rat hole of over-sensitivity and misdirection.

Of course pulling the announcer is a result of the near-term hyper-sensitivity. I personally don't agree with it, but I get it.  Right now, at this moment, maybe some discretion is called for.

Or maybe not.   

But that's a separate (albeit related) argument from the over-arching issue of race hatred and whether our not we should promote (via statues, school naming, etc...) those people that perpetuated institutions and social structures (and actually seceded and fought - and lost - a war to that effect)  that are now seen by the vast majority of our society to be unacceptable.

Again, I'm not arguing for or against changing the name of Lee School, but I do understand and appreciate that our understanding, impression, and support of various issues does change with time.   This is not "white-washing" or "removing history".  No one is advocating for an erasure of Lee's name (or even the Confederate battle flag) from the history books, but rather that these symbols should no longer be promoted in society today.

 

I would google search where you got that image, but I don't feel like finding you on Stormfront yet again. Someone else want to run an image search and see where 'ol Guid has been?

Six Flags Amusement Parks now to be American Flag Amusement Park.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/08/19/six-flags-over-texas-only-fly-american-flags/582935001/ (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/08/19/six-flags-over-texas-only-fly-american-flags/582935001/)

http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/arlington/article167953237.html (http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/arlington/article167953237.html)

Going to take a long time digging up Arlington, 'cause guess whose front yard that was?

More obscure history... I was hoping someone would have picked up on my thinly-veiled reference to director Ang Lee, whose film "Ride With The Devil" was booted out of theatrical release because he had the gaul to include historically-accurate black Confederates.
It made some people uncomfortable, having to pick up a history book.

There were slaves that were forced to be laborers and camp servants for Confederate troops and at times forced to fight as well. The idea of black soldiers proudly and willingly fighting for the south is a fiction and another example of revisionist history. The story of slaves pressed into service to fight to preserve their own bondage is not a positive for the south. Sorry.

https://www.civilwar.org/learn/articles/black-confederates

According to the History channel....
The Confederacy didn't even allow black troops until March of 1965 (One month before the war was over?)
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/confederacy-approves-black-soldiers


Stupid revisionist history.
Though no one knows for sure, the number of slaves who fought and labored for the South was modest, estimated Stauffer. Blacks who shouldered arms for the Confederacy numbered more than 3,000 but fewer than 10,000, he said, among the hundreds of thousands of whites who served. Black laborers for the cause numbered from 20,000 to 50,000.
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2011/09/black-confederates/

I'm disappointed to see that.  Flying the Confederate Flag along side the French, Spanish, Mexico, Republic of Texas, and American flags makes sense.  It wasn't glorifying the Confederacy or trying to "send a message." Unless the argument is that they were also glorifying France and Spain.   There were not statutes of Cornwallis or Hitler next to the statutes of Lee to commemorate people we have defeated - there was one theme.  To me, the 6 flags are more akin to having a statute of Robert E. Lee at some battlefield upon which he fought along with other generals and monuments to the same.

But... their company, their decision.  Rebrand if you want to I guess. 

I wonder how Silver Dollar City would respond. :)

College mascots now signs of white supremacy and racism. Could the Sooner Schooner and Pistol Pete be next?

LSU Tiger

http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/lsu-football-students-cite-racism-in-petition-to-change-tiger-mascot-060217 (http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/lsu-football-students-cite-racism-in-petition-to-change-tiger-mascot-060217)

USC Trojans

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-usc-traveler-20170818-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-usc-traveler-20170818-story.html)

...or segue into the "war on drugs?"

(http://www.digitalmediatree.com/library/image/10/zig-zag-history.jpg)

To an earlier comment, black men were not allowed to fight alongside white men in the Union army.  It wasnt until the creation of a segregated "colored regiment" that blacks could serve.

Thanks Denzel.

I'm sure you can find an ad absurtum example of  someone calling for anything to be removed.  Not sure how the Schooner or Pistol Pete could be seen as racist, but hey, lets all grab torches and march to support statutes to the Confederacy because someone could possibly think they are.

Better yet, make LSU change the name "Tigers" because its lame.  GO TIGERS!  Is that the LSU, Auburn, or Missouri Tigers of the SEC? 

The LSU "mascot changing lynch mob"  sounds pretty formidable

That was my point that the absurdity has begun. As for OU & OSU, I was being tongue and cheek that since they represent white settlers that the Native Americans might ask for a change.

IF OSU changes their mascot, they''ll lose that sweet royalty thing they've got with NMSU
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistol_Pete_(New_Mexico_State_University)

$10/year.     And don't forget Wyoming.  The third Cowboy, with a Pistol Pete mascot.

Ahole at Slate targeted Dixie Stampede in Tennessee?

I'll do the work for you...

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2017/08/visiting_dolly_parton_s_dinner_show_dixie_stampede.html


Have never been there or to the Medieval Times things.  You can just tell by all the hype surrounding these that it is shallow, bad-acting, and poor food.  Harris verified that by saying food was ok, but not quite up to Cracker Barrel.  I have no idea how she really feels about CB, but it really sucks!!  So this place must be truly horrible food.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/letters/letter-to-the-editor-tulsa-s-latest-version-of-the/article_96c544be-50d1-5ec3-bfc2-6b6862d68a17.html

I've been there probably 6 times. Great entertainment (especially the Christmas show), good value, and the food is fine. Kids love it, and very family friendly.

National Geographic report on Charlottesville.

This is what Alt-Right and White Power groups do for a statue. This is what Trump and the right claims have moral equivalency with any other Americans
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDIfPhx-Fm0

Just another fake news source unfairly showing groups devoted to hate saying hateful things and assaulting people. Sure, every Nazi, Klansman, and white nationalist there was there to advocate for oppression of most of American Citizens.  And yes, they showed up with body armor, weapons, firearms, shields, torches, etc. with the intent of instigating conflict.   And yes, the vast majority of counter protesters were nonviolent, had signs about love, included clergy and much prayer. But don't forget there were some counter protesters who advocated hate of Nazis and said they would fight back.

So basically, totally the same thing.

WHITE power!  Jews will not replace us!  I mean, lots of blame on many sides.

[sarcasm label shouldn't be needed]

We go by there enough that it would be easy to drop in and see it...just haven't yet.  Guess we could just go to Branson, too...     Equal time event - go there to eat...after all, I have eaten at Chic-Fil-A on occasion.  Not very often, because it isn't very good either.

Love your comment, "food is fine"...  Just as I suspected - not as good as Cracker Barrel !!  And CB still sucks...


I want to see all the monuments/statues left intact as they are and ADD plaques or whatever it takes to tell the rest of the story - the WHOLE story behind what was happening at the time.  Stories about Lee.  Jefferson Davis.  As is the case with Washington and the boys, there are nuances to the stories.  How would we be taught about them if England had won?  Either war.  And how would that have impacted the southern issue if we were English?   England abolished slavery in 1833.  Would the Civil War have happened then - in 1833?  (C) 2017 Heironymouspasparagus

Hey, I think I just came up with an idea for a dystopian novel !!

And then there is always something there to remind you.... we have progressed not one iota.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/republican-says-black-democrat-missing-150325014.html

The Tulsa School Board decision regarding what to do about Lee Elementary School’s name isn’t going to come quickly.
The board, three members explained to the World, wants to take a deliberate approach to consider not just the name of the school, which honors a Civil War Confederate general, but to evaluate every school name in the district, potentially looking at names such as Columbus, Jackson and Lewis & Clark.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/education/not-wanting-to-rip-the-band-aid-off-too-quickly/article_940744a6-71fc-5096-aa09-e8b8c5d2e101.html

OKC schools are going through the same paroxysms.  They put out a call for comment and apparently got 2.  Total as of this morning.

(rhetorical question:) Does "what the majority wants" really matter here?

http://democracyweb.org/majority-rule-principles

Never has.  Why should it now?


Yass...I like this...
“The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community against his will is to prevent harm to others.”
-- John Stuart Mill

Huge gaping hole in the discussion - slavery and foreign genocide is covered.   What about American genocide, extermination, and mass murder?   I guess that doesn't count any more, since there is such a relatively small voice of the Native Americans left.


How far we have strayed from that... well, we never actually have been there, so I guess we really haven't strayed.

“Tulsans are, of course, 80 percent of northern stock, but they realize that there is no north or south and their hospitality is as fine as the far-famed southern brand,” said Sgt. J.B. Thompson, reported to be the last living soldier who had fought alongside Gen. Robert E. Lee in his last battle. (Tulsa Public Schools dedicated an elementary school to Lee during the reunion.)

http://www.tulsaworld.com/blogs/news/throwbacktulsa/throwback-tulsa-rebel-yells-and-dixie-rang-out-as-confederates/article_2b50a00d-2a54-5a0f-b534-8a818b197a6e.htm

Osage Nation opposes proposed TPS school name change

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/education/update-osage-nation-opposes-proposed-tps-school-name-change/article_df632a55-dd0f-532d-9fc7-66f16f1cdfba.html

10 symbols beyond the Betsy Ross flag that have been co-opted by white supremacists

https://expo.oregonlive.com/life-and-culture/g66l-2019/07/092e2d63314276/10-symbols-beyond-the-betsy-ross-flag-that-have-by-coopted-by-white-supremacists-.html