Historical cleansing

[Yazichestvo]

[kalynraye]

Re: Historical cleansing

Mississippi is a current battle ground over the confederate flag, especially since the state flag contains a smaller confederate one. NCAA has announced they will allow absolutely no games in Mississippi until it changes. It doesn't hurt my feelings one bit to have the confederate flag or statues of those statues removed. The ones who are angry of course are white, white and conservative. The confederate flag doesn't bother them. It doesn't make life hard for them so leave it! It's pretty disheartening to see.


The statue I would love to come down is Andrew Jackson's. That man was bad, that's all there is to that. In fact I do believe they were trying to pull that down however the police intervened on that one.

[MaskedOne]

Re: Historical cleansing

I'm past my thirties and had to google it. And still, as a product of the south, and with little more than faulkner to guide me, I understand the nuance of that history.

I don't personally believe that there is any excuse to this specific ignorance. Any excuse only matters in that it allows people to whitewash their views, previous or present, and to whitewash history. They knew better. We all...always... knew better....and yet...

I could quote Robert E Lee saying much the same.

While I love to accuse humans of willful blindness, and am inclined to think that a number of people fond of the Lost Cause mythos will never willingly abandon it (holocaust deniers exist, if people really want to believe stupid shit then they will), I also think fixing history courses would help. Memorable nuance from my US history course basically amounted to, "Yes, the South epically fucked up on multiple levels but the Union was not exactly made up of angels." I don't thing that's actually enough to reliably keep a position firm against family members parroting a popular mythos with great vigor. Actually using period writings (it doesn't have to be Cornerstone, I just find that particular example compelling) to demonstrate the ideology of the Confederacy won't kill the Lost Cause inside a generation but I think it'll weaken it.

[Rhythm]

Re: Historical cleansing

Probably, just hard for me to understand because it is taught and I did hear it.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Historical cleansing

Have we considered that history -is- taught with such nuance...but that we the people reject that in favor of the lost cause?

No...

It's a developmental issue.

Average students in high school are juuuust managing to navigate "nuance."

Many never will. Others are already there. But on average, nuance without life experience & mental readiness is planting corn on concrete.

[Rhythm]

Re: Historical cleansing

I'm past my thirties and had to google it. And still, as a product of the south, and with little more than faulkner to guide me, I understand the nuance of that history.

I don't personally believe that there is any excuse to this specific ignorance. Any excuse only matters in that it allows people to whitewash their views, previous or present, and to whitewash history. They knew better. We all...always... knew better....and yet...

I could quote Robert E Lee saying much the same.

[MaskedOne]

Re: Historical cleansing

Have we considered that history -is- taught with such nuance...but that we the people reject that in favor of the lost cause?

I'm pretty sure there's an argument to be made that history is never taught with sufficient nuance before college. Skipping that (a similar argument can be made for a number of things, there's always room for more nuance), I think the larger issue question is how consistently history is taught well across the country. My high school didn't directly buy into Lost Cause mythology but it failed to directly refute it with any vigor. Personally, I tend to think some of the Confederate writings and speeches should be required study in US history. The Cornerstone Speech is epically damning of the Confederacy and I didn't know about it till my I was in my 30s.

[thalassa]

Re: Historical cleansing

Have we considered that history -is- taught with such nuance...but that we the people reject that in favor of the lost cause?

Not really...* Even with common core, what is taught where is still too variable in the US.

I had great history classes in college. High school was decent because I had good teachers, the textbooks sucked, they used lots of augmenting material. (this was 20 years ago in a suburban school district in the midwest)

My kids go to a DoD school overseas, their history teacher in middle schools is awesome. Their recommended summer reading includes A Young People's History of the United States (based on the Peoples History of the United States by Howard Zinn)...

But before that, they lived in rural GA, in what was supposedly a good school district...their history class was a joke.



*ETA, not saying this isn't part of it, but as it applies to older folks...no, if you take a look at the curriculum and text books that were used, they are a joke in many cases.

[Rhythm]

Re: Historical cleansing

Have we considered that history -is- taught with such nuance...but that we the people reject that in favor of the lost cause?

[thalassa]

Re: Historical cleansing

More importantly, I think our history needs to be taught a lot more with nuance and context, and with a realistic look at the flaws within. Less American mythology, more critical history.

I think that statues of men like Jefferson, Washington, etc, should be left alone for right now...I'm not opposed to their removal, per se (depends on where they are and why they are there). I think, in this case, the context of such monuments would be better off if they were examined and added to more fully explore those time periods of history, good and bad. At Monticello, for example, a very real discussion of Sally Hemmings and Jefferson's children and an examination of slavery could be more indepth (they do at least discuss both now). ...at the Gateway Arch or other Louisiana Purchase oriented monuments, an examination of the problems and consequences of expansionism.

People are flawed. They are products of their time and place and culture and upbringing. They should be acknowledged for both their failures and successes honestly. And the stories of those they wronged, purposely or not, should also be told. What they shouldn't be, is venerated as if they are perfect...

[Rhythm]

Re: Historical cleansing

It's extremely neat in this case, imo. The phenomena of confederate monuments was not a product of our history, or any ambiguities within it, but a product of what some of us wished for our future to be. Erected in two pushes, one between 1900 and 1920, with the literal daughters of the confederacy carrying water for lost cause mythology, and then in the civil rights era nearly a century later.

They were erected in california, dc, indiana, iowa, kansas, mass, new york, ohio, and pa. All union non slave holding states. They were erected in arizona, idaho, montana, new mexico, nevada, oklahoma, and washingston. All states added after the civil war.

Just three of those union states which hold a confederate monument; new york, ohio, and pa....account for a third of union deaths in the civil war. A similar relationship exists between these states and ww2 dead....but you won't find any monuments to the wehrmacht in them.

Monument culture is a form of propaganda.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Historical cleansing

I agree with both of you.

I often feel as if we are being forced to take an either-or stance. Reality is so much less neat.

[Rhythm]

Re: Historical cleansing

There can be no parity between jefferson, and jefferson davis. The former was a deeply flawed man, and flawed in a manner quite unlike most of us. The latter renounced his citizenship, rejected this country, and fought a losing war to preserve the institution of slavery.

[MaskedOne]

Re: Historical cleansing

Off the top of my head, I'm opposed to going after Jefferson related stuff without seeing an epic argument for it. Completely independent of all other considerations, when you start broadening your target list beyond the Confederates then the "Where does it stop?" and slippery slope arguments being used to try and defend Confederate participation prizes monuments stops being a pointless tangent and starts looking like an argument worth at least hearing. I'm not willing to put up with that lightly. I'm not absolutely opposed at this moment but I'd need to see a pretty strong case.

[B. de Corbin]

To begin:

I absolutely understand and agree why removing Confederate monuments from government locations is totally 100% correct.

It's like goobermint sanctioned building of Nazi glorifying monuments 'cause "Yeah, these guys were shitty, but some of them were cool."

But now we're looking at T. Jefferson... A great man who imagine better than he could actually perform.

Should statues of Jefferson come down?

I can't say yes or no. I do not have the family history that allows me to have experiential knowledge of the emotions on one side of the issue.

However, I do hope that at some time in the future of human history we, as a species, accept the obvious, yet strangely occult, fact; No human is perfect, and Sometimes Even Assholes Do Great Things. "

I would hate to have my Good and Bad displayed in the public balance of history.

Not really sure how I'd come out.

I don't know what any of this means. You decide.