Confederate Statues Are Torn Down—Who’s Next?

 

Margaret Thatcher, at Hillsdale College

The latest brouhaha about moving a Confederate statue called Silent Sam took place at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The statue was originally pulled down in August, and now university administrators must keep it on campus; a state law was passed in 2015 prohibiting state agencies from “permanently removing or relocating state-owned memorials or statues.” UNC Chancellor Carol Folt stated, “I have a preference to move it off campus, but, like everyone here, I swore to obey the law.” How noble of her.

The university is considering a proposal to build a history and education center to house the statue and other historical artifacts; the announcement of this proposal on Monday led to the latest campus protest. The administrators will decide next week whether to move forward with the proposal for the new center.

Although “white supremacists” (and not normal American citizens) supposedly are the ones who have demanded the Confederate statues remain in place, many of us are probably ambivalent about these statues; they remind of us a difficult time in American history, a period of racism and violence. Yet we also know that reminders of those times are a way to demonstrate our willingness to face our past and point to the lessons we have learned.

I began thinking, however, about the implications of these removals of Confederate statues, and where it could lead us.

What other criteria could be used to condemn celebrated Americans who are memorialized in statues? We have already seen school curricula altered to support the propaganda of the Left: Christopher Columbus has been turned into a destroyer of Native Americans; George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were racists (slave owners), as were other presidents. As The Federalist points out today, Harry Truman was an anti-Semite. Other admired politicians could be targeted, such as Margaret Thatcher, who broke the unions in England.

So this is not just about removing the statues of Confederate soldiers. It might just be the first step in removing any statues of people who didn’t, or don’t, accept the Progressive agenda.

An interesting sidenote worthy of mentioning is that the University of California, Irvine, rejected a proposal to erect a statue to Raoul Wallenberg, the Swedish diplomat who risked his life to save 100,000 Hungarian Jews from Nazi death camps. They gave no explanation for their refusal.

Why do statues make such powerful statements? I believe they take ideas and embody them in stone, providing a visual, visceral impact. They are also continually displayed for everyone to see, making a statement about our Founders, about freedom, about leadership, and about values. Although many people over time might just walk by them without noticing them, others might stop to view and contemplate them, at least the first time they pass. These people who are carved in stone or bronze tell all who view them that they are worthy of remembering and honoring for generations.

So removing Confederate statues may just be the prelude to a larger, more insidious plan.

And statues may not be the only monuments affected. A Detroit High School has threatened to remove Ben Carson’s name. Don’t worry—if it happens, it won’t be until 2019.

Published in Culture
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 67 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Matt Balzer, Straw Bootlegger (View Comment):
    Well I wouldn’t expect there to be any there, much like I wouldn’t expect statues for Washington in London. That’s why I asked what defines a wrong cause. Should people not have respect for William Wallace? I would expect the answer is no in England and yes in Scotland.

    Speaking of Washington and William Wallace who is the better rapper?

    • #61
  2. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Outside of black Southerners, who are as left-leaning as black Americans in the country as a whole, the South is an overwhelmingly conservative region, far more so than any other area except the predominantly Mormon areas of the United States. Its not that the South doesn’t produce left-leaners, they simply produce them in far fewer quantities than elsewhere, and moreover produce far more conservatives than elsewhere, with characteristic results (moderates are more susceptible to gradual cultural change from a relatively large, and highly motivated, progressive minority). And I’m saying that newcomers will be far more left-wing, as a group, than native Southerners, diluting the total and in some cases turning states purple or blue (as in Virginia). Those who are, and choose to remain, hostile to Southerners honoring our heritage will be overwhelmingly of the Left.

    Texas and Florida are examples of Southern states with lots of northern transplants that are not Left wing in political orientation.

    It’s not as though the only choices we have are neo-Confederate racists and “progressive” socialists.

    The northern transplants in Florida largely are left-wing, and it is a purple state as a consequence.  I don’t know the details of Texan voting demographics.

    Indeed its not.  Clearly, however, you believe that people who disagree with you on this issue are generally ‘neo-Confederate’ racists.  Definitely not disproving my theory that the driving forces behind your position are spite and disdain.

    • #62
  3. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Matt Balzer, Straw Bootlegger (View Comment):
    Well I wouldn’t expect there to be any there, much like I wouldn’t expect statues for Washington in London. That’s why I asked what defines a wrong cause. Should people not have respect for William Wallace? I would expect the answer is no in England and yes in Scotland.

    Speaking of Washington and William Wallace who is the better rapper?

    I’ve heard there is going to be the start of a new season today.

    • #63
  4. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    It’s not as though the only choices we have are neo-Confederate racists and “progressive” socialists.

    Neither Ted Cruz nor John Cornyn of Texas buy into the neo-Confederate mythology. Same for Rick Scott and Marco Rubio.

    There is a 21st century out there and most Southerners have embraced it. It’s time to put away those childish things, including the Confederate flag and all the rest.

    I myself can’t get into the Confederacy. Besides the not unimportant issue of slavery, the executive had way too much power for my libertianish principles and they executed two men writing anti-slavery pro-Confederacy propaganda.

    But is now really the time to do what the Cain-like SJWs want? It won’t be a solemn and respectful change in that occurs after a long and thoughtful deliberation about history. It will be history thrown into the all consuming fire of oikophobia that hates this society more than it loves humanity. David Rubin probably isn’t a big fan of the Confederacy but he has come out against all the tearing down of every statue because he recognizes this is the regressive left’s way of shutting people up rather than continuing the conversation.

    Well said, @Henry Castaigne! 

    • #64
  5. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Perhaps my “We should look at the Confederacy with a mood of regret” line was poorly worded. I should have wrote: “I would try to persuade others that the Southern Confederacy represents a regrettable moment in our history.”

    “Persuade” is a better word choice than “should.” Ooops.

    Thanks, I understand that. 

    I don’t look at it with regret or celebration. It was what it was. Even slavery was a product of its times. I don’t think it makes sense to judge the past with the morals of today. Lord knows, the future may well judge us harshly on eating animals and having abortions.

    I also think post scarcity folks will look back and not understand the morals of “Not enough”.

    • #65
  6. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    Here in Indianapolis there is Monument Circle, at the center of Downtown. It’s where all the Monuments commemorating those who fought and died for the United States of America.

    But, for the most part, it isn’t about those who fought and died against our country.

     

    The people of the CSA were Americans. They were born and died Americans. The whole point of bringing the two halves together again is welcome your brothers and sisters back with malice towards none, and charity towards all.

    • #66
  7. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Matt Balzer, Straw Bootlegger (View Comment):

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):

    Matt Balzer, Straw Bootlegger (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    Either a side who fights for a wrong cause should morally have monuments or is should not. If it is not OK for the South, then it ain’t OK for the Germans.

    Who then gets to determine what was the “wrong” cause? Is it simply a case of “they lost the war?”

    The American Civil War is very different than WW2 any other war we were involved in. These were all American boys fighting and dying. The differences between the southern boys and the northern boys were very hard to define. Their leaders had their ideologies, but the men were just fighting for their homes and freedoms. When it was all over, they were just dead American boys. Erecting statues to memorialize their sacrifice harms no one, but allows their ancestors to show their respect and take a small amount of pride in what they tried to do.

    Agreed. I was asking in a more general sense. For example: is it wrong to have memorials to, say, Napoleon? What about WWI monuments?

    What is repugnant isn’t the desire to learn about the history of Napoleon or World War I or the Civil War.

    What’s repugnant is that some Southerners feel an emotional need to live in the 1860s, as if they are still “fighting for Southern rights” like John Calhoun.

    Get a life! Quit worshipping your ancestors who fought for an immoral cause. No one cares about how your feelings were hurt when that Robert E. Lee statue got torn down.

     

    What is repugnant is the ongoing and steady anti-Southern bias shown by the Northeast, unabated. I grew up with it. The North looks down on the South, still to this day. 

    • #67
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.