[lahamm69]

And he chose to be a traitor

[quietpine]

Originally Posted by nhtexasrn

There are many things about Lee that obviously you don't know. For instance, Lincoln offered him command of the United States Army. He refused because of loyalty to his home state saying he could not raise a sword to the state of his home and birth. Lee was a top graduate of the United States Military Academy and an exceptional officer and military engineer in the United States Army for 32 years. During this time, he served throughout the United States, distinguished himself during the Mexican–American War, and served as Superintendent of the United States Military Academy. Countering Southerners who argued for slavery as a positive good, Lee in his well-known analysis of slavery from an 1856 letter called it a moral and political evil. It was said of Lee, "He was a foe without hate; a friend without treachery; a soldier without cruelty; a victor without oppression, and a victim without murmuring. He was a public officer without vices; a private citizen without wrong; a neighbour without reproach; a Christian without hypocrisy, and a man without guile." Yes, he was born into a certain culture and that's all he knew at the time, but it's so much more complicated than what you have stated. He and his wife were both disgusted by slavery even though they were born in to that culture.

It’s telling that the Army confiscated the grounds of his plantation, Arlington, just across the Potomac River from the Capitol as the burial site for Union soldiers some awarded the Medal of Honor who he was responsible for killing. Taking his property for this purpose was sending a strong message about what the country thought about his treason. And Lee isn’t buried in that hallowed place for a reason.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by COLTempleton

What people may not realize is that the North actually asked Lee to fight for them. Also, Lee did not have slaves and was against slavery.

Lee lived with his family and they DID have slaves. He was not for slavery, he was for Virginia - which wanted to maintain their status quo, which was to continue slavery. He was not an abolitionist. In addition, he felt that blacks were inferior sub-humans, and their lives could only be better now that they were on the North American continent, and that perhaps with enough time and discipline, they might evolve to be civilized humans.

[b0bd0herty]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

There is nothing about Robert E. Lee that warrants his statue being on display in a public park, UNLESS you want to glorify his attempts at maintaining blacks being officially considered inferior and sub-human.

Just like over 50% of our population does...

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by nhtexasrn

There are many things about Lee that obviously you don't know. For instance, Lincoln offered him command of the United States Army. He refused because of loyalty to his home state saying he could not raise a sword to the state of his home and birth. Lee was a top graduate of the United States Military Academy and an exceptional officer and military engineer in the United States Army for 32 years. During this time, he served throughout the United States, distinguished himself during the Mexican–American War, and served as Superintendent of the United States Military Academy. Countering Southerners who argued for slavery as a positive good, Lee in his well-known analysis of slavery from an 1856 letter called it a moral and political evil. It was said of Lee, "He was a foe without hate; a friend without treachery; a soldier without cruelty; a victor without oppression, and a victim without murmuring. He was a public officer without vices; a private citizen without wrong; a neighbour without reproach; a Christian without hypocrisy, and a man without guile." Yes, he was born into a certain culture and that's all he knew at the time, but it's so much more complicated than what you have stated. He and his wife were both disgusted by slavery even though they were born in to that culture.

He committed treason against the United States. The only people who celebrated him were the Confederacy - which existed to overturn the US Government in a massive insurrection that most of us like to call the Civil War.

[dougjb]

Well ... the real reason the statue on Monument Drive was removed was because of Traveller, Lee's horse. It is believed that it is improper to show the bare butt of the horse which by this time would have flooded Monument Drive to several feet had it been defecating all this time! Unfortunately, it was impossible to remove Lee's tuchas from Traveller. Thus, the whole statue had to come down!

[Rosebud1949]

Originally Posted by Bay Kid

Monument Avenue in Richmond, VA. will never be the same. They have removed the statue. They don't even know the history of Gen. Lee.

No matter how many statues you pull down you will NOT change what happened. Part of the object of history is TO LEARN FROM IT AND NOT REPEAT IT... that includes the continual mistakes.

Children cannot learn from history if you try to demolish it, or stop teaching it, and they will continue heading over the cliff along with the other lemmings, because some Q anon said it was the right thing to do OMG. Start thinking for yourselves and make sensible judgements. How about a novelty suggestion .. think of your fellow man, and not just yourself

[nhtexasrn]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

He committed treason against the United States. The only people who celebrated him were the Confederacy - which existed to overturn the US Government in a massive insurrection that most of us like to call the Civil War.

Like I said, it was a complicated time with many issues, not just slavery, but go ahead and write your own version of history.

[Escape Artist]

Originally Posted by nhtexasrn

Like I said, it was a complicated time with many issues, not just slavery, but go ahead and write your own version of history.

On a 9/11 anniversary note, the removal of statues by those who cannot see them in a historical context and as representing a past that pre-dates their ideology reminds me very much of the Taliban, who in 2001, just a few months before Sept. 11th, destroyed the ancient Buddhist statues in Afghanistan despite pleas from the global community not to because they should be seen as artifacts not religious symbols. No matter, they did it anyway.

Closed, intolerant minds filled with ignorance, hate and fear knows no particular ethnicity, race, religion, ideology or culture.

[Chi-Town]

Turns out the statue wasn't the only General Lee casualty.

Hurricane Ida: Duke of Hazzard's 'General Lee' Car Crushed, Actor Says

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by bimmertl

Really, kids won't know the history of our great country since a Robert E Lee statue was taken down?

Grew up in Wisconsin. Don't believe there were any Lee statues there or anywhere in the Midwest and probably most of the rest of the USA other than the South. Somehow millions of Americans learned US history without seeing statues of Lee. Amazing!

Germany accepted losing WW2 and became stronger for it, also Japan. The south were sore losers that never forgot - even today, many of our current problems can be traced back to the Jim Crow era. I find it strange! Even attitudes toward masks and vaccinations have regional differences. Vermont and Connecticut have a HIGH % of vaccination - Arkansas and Mississippi have a LOW %. And Texas is from Mars in logic.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Monuments typically celebrate the winners, and the honored dead who fought for our country. Robert E. Lee was neither. His monument -should- be reconstructed and placed in a museum of some kind, because the monument itself is an official Historic Monument. But the thing this monument represents doesn't need to be on public display in the middle of a park.

The history is: The south LOST. The Confederacy LOST. He wasn't even very good at being a hero - he ultimately surrendered to Grant at the end of the war.

He led 15 battles during the Civil War. He was victorious in only 5 of them. He was defeated in the first battle, the last battle, and two other battles. The rest were inconclusive, and during one of them, Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation.

There is nothing about Robert E. Lee that warrants his statue being on display in a public park, UNLESS you want to glorify his attempts at maintaining blacks being officially considered inferior and sub-human.

Well-spoken and perfectly logical, Kudos !

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

What Should West Point Do About Its Robert E. Lee Problem? - Modern War Institute

How about General Robert E. Lee as seen by cadets at West Point in 2020? The comments after the article are worth a long look.

I agree with putting Jim Crow-era statues in museums or warehouses until museums are paid for and purchased - but as far a military strategy goes (I imagine) Gen. Lee was dealt a losing hand as far as manpower and resources go - and those normally win wars fought conventionally. So, Lee had to improvise a hit-and-run mobile army. So, of course, he lost MOST battles like an underdog in a heavyweight fight usually does! Maybe, just maybe (I can't be sure) Southern US whites and military minds respect Gen. Lee for just representing the UNDERDOG, which is a US pattern. Also, southern whites NEEDED statues to maintain BOTH their self-proclaimed, legendary dignity and to try and STAY at the top of the pecking order. They were probably rightfully defensive about the invasion of "Carpetbaggers" from the North.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by BigSteph

I am from Richmond.

All of the tearing down of the city is one of the reasons I left recently. No, not a big reason, but just another check on the Pro/Con list of reasons to leave.

I get that the monuments are symbols with different meanings to the different types of people that live in the city. If I were black, it would remind me of just how troubled my existence may have been 150 years ago, and continuing to present.

Had we decided as a city to address things and let everyone make a case, it is possible that the monuments could have been respectfully moved to a more appropriate place (such as a national civil war battlefield). Yet, we didn't have those discussions and we had a summer of rage where every manner of illegal activity was allowed to flourish in Richmond. The monuments were defaced. A feel good moment for some, and an insult to others. Civility was on vacation and a line was drawn -- My Tribe or Your Tribe.

Richmond is famous for its past and it cannot escape it. Unlike Charleston and New Orleans and others, Richmond is unable to celebrate the very bad and the good -- hold it up to the truth of the past. The original White House of the Confederacy was in Richmond. The "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death" speech by Patrick Henry from a hundred years earlier is only blocks away. Edgar Allen Poe had a home another block or two away. Mr. Bojangles was a Richmonder. Arthur Ashe was born in Richmond. The QB from the Seahawks, Russel Wilson, is a Richmonder -- my friend coached him in high school -- he said he was a better baseball player than he was at football -- imagine that.


Richmond even had an opportunity to host the national slave museum and somehow it decided against it. Richmond was one of the top locations in America for the importation of human labor (slaves). It would have been fitting to have the National Slave Museum adjacent to the White House of the Confederacy on grand Church Hill. Richmond could have capitalized on its past and gave context to those bronze and granite statues. Context that might be hard to accept by some, and ever-so needed for others.

Instead, like so many urban areas, the city erupted into an unrecognizable orgy of ropes, chains, spray paint, broken windows, and fires. Buses burned in the street, buildings set ablaze, shops looted. The summer was long and hot, covid was raging, and social justice flames fanned hotter. Interesting to note, the vast majority of the faces of the agitators were pale, not brown or black.

I drove downtown weeks later and it looked like something from a picture of a war zone.

I realized that it wasn't a place for me any more. Richmond cannot celebrate its history, it can only tear it down. The thing is, it all still happened.

I don't agree with most of the content, but I am impressed with how well and interestingly written it is!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by NoMo50

Incredible. So, should we tear down the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial since WE lost?

But, in Vietnam, I doubt, that they have a monument to US soldiers.