Stone Mountain, Georgia
- Thread starter treetiger
- Start date
My post wasn't "clearly designed" to do anything but encourage people on both sides to research it on their own.
nah man. Would never compare the extent of the two. But the fundamentals, where there is a dark period in a country's history, and you have to deal with how not to glorify the history while also not forgetting it, are the same. Germany has handled this well. That was my only point
This shit is getting ridiculous. History is just that history learn from it and move on.
I have a family member who is German. According to her, they don't even teach WWII or Hitler in their schools. It's pretty much washed away.
But, their country was split up for nearly 50 years and half grew up with communism. Also, confederates were not trying to take over the world but wanted to split from the US. Big difference.
like I said the extent is different, but would you not agree that the civil war is a dark period in U.S. history?
just don't see why everyone cares so much. A Robert E. Lee statue being taken down in Virginia has no impact on my quality of life. If other people hate it that much and it truly offends them, who cares
I never said it wasn't. I said that, according to my German family member, WWII and Hitler are not taught in German schools. But, Germany wanted to take over the world, not just be left alone and their retribution included a split of their country.
So, I'm not sure you want to use the German model as the bastion on how to teach tough times to the kiddies. Or, just sweep it under the rug which is the way it looks like we're going. Nothing to see here, kiddies, let's move on into what's going on in Hollywood.
Noticed this in your posting history years ago.
As one of the resident experts on the history of Stone Mountain let address the original topic and not the removal of confederate statues. The reason I asked if you have been to Stone Mountain let us know, I wanted to who was speaking from visiting the park or just responding on the topic. I have been side of the park easily over a 100 times. The issue is more than just removal of the figures on the side of the mountain. The entire park is a memorial to the confederacy.
-Symbolic Birthplace of the new kkk
-The memorial was started by the daughters of confederacy. The sculptor who started this memorial would gone on to do another more famous one. Mount Rushmore
-helen plane “I feel it is due to the Klan which saved us from Negro domination and carpetbag rule, that it be immortalized on Stone Mountain. Why not represent a small group of them in their nightly uniform approaching in the distance?”
-1958, the state of Georgia had bought Stone Mountain and pushed ahead with plans for a revised bas-relief design featuring Lee, Jackson, and Davis, sans Klansmen
-They eulogize the leaders of the Confederacy and celebrating their cause as valiant and noble
-The majority of the streets in the park are named after confederate leaders
-Even more where that comes from
-To Larry. You are not alone in not knowing. Ironically, it’s the relative restraint of Stone Mountain’s design that’s made it such an effective vector for this line of thinking. While the klan’s decades of terrorism ultimately relegated it to the proverbial shadows of white America, Stone Mountain never faced such a backlash. One hundred years after the monument was first imagined, most Americans have no idea how closely its history is entangled with the birth of the 20th century kkk and white supremacy. Now the terrorist kkk, alt-right, etc. have felt emboldened to show their face.
XCUDB
-Symbolic Birthplace of the new kkk
-The memorial was started by the daughters of confederacy. The sculptor who started this memorial would gone on to do another more famous one. Mount Rushmore
-helen plane “I feel it is due to the Klan which saved us from Negro domination and carpetbag rule, that it be immortalized on Stone Mountain. Why not represent a small group of them in their nightly uniform approaching in the distance?”
-1958, the state of Georgia had bought Stone Mountain and pushed ahead with plans for a revised bas-relief design featuring Lee, Jackson, and Davis, sans Klansmen
-They eulogize the leaders of the Confederacy and celebrating their cause as valiant and noble
-The majority of the streets in the park are named after confederate leaders
-Even more where that comes from
-To Larry. You are not alone in not knowing. Ironically, it’s the relative restraint of Stone Mountain’s design that’s made it such an effective vector for this line of thinking. While the klan’s decades of terrorism ultimately relegated it to the proverbial shadows of white America, Stone Mountain never faced such a backlash. One hundred years after the monument was first imagined, most Americans have no idea how closely its history is entangled with the birth of the 20th century kkk and white supremacy. Now the terrorist kkk, alt-right, etc. have felt emboldened to show their face.
XCUDB
Lee was torn between fighting for the North and South and was simply a man of a different time (doesn't mean that things were right back then)...he wasn't an evil man by any means.
But that's not even the point - it starts with taking his statue down and then it leads to gradually erasing history because of an agenda.
Well, it all speculative. We will never know many of the people hearts or minds on why they built them. Are we saying any statute built before 1920 or after 1960 is good? I've not seen that argument that wants to tear them down.
The closest thing that I have seen is that Japan has memorials of samurais that revolted against the emperor. But Japanese culture is very big on honoring the past, good or bad.
What are you afraid of? The removal of a statue doesn't change history.
Last edited:
Is it traitorous to secede from the union? I do agree it is traitorous to overthrow the government. But if a state votes to secede, b/c the citizens no longer want to be a part and they don't take up arms and invade any other state. Are they still traitors?
If you wish to leave the United States and don't take up arms nor attempt to undermine the United States then I would not consider you a traitor. If Texas (or California) chose to leave the Union amicably, then, no that is not treason.
I've read way too much about this and I haven't seen anything comparing anyone in the Civil War to the Nazis. It would be tough to do seeing the Civil War occured long before the Nazis existed.
But, if the federal government refused to leave, say, a fort in your state that they claim they own, and even bring in extra soldiers to defend them.....and Texas or Cali bombs them then that IS treason?
Because that is what happened in SC.
No wonder you hate the South.
They did secede and the first shots fired were right here in South Carolina by confederate loyalist or soldiers depending on how you view it. So don't make it seem like the government not using union because they were and still are the ruling law of the land forcefully with violence force them back in.
If you want to remember history, then we should acknowledge the true goals of the Confederacy. Vice President of the Confederacy, Alexander Stephens, made it clear that the Confederate cause was about maintaining slavery and white supremacy.
He said in his now famous ‘Cornerstone Speech’ that the Confederacy’s “cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery — subordination to the superior race — is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.”
You see, these statues only tell one side of the story but the ground which they preside has more than one history.
I am sure many participate in youth sports teams that have kids from many races. Now imagine if you were coaching practice in a park with a statue of a Confederate General and the kids asked you about that statue. Would you explain that it's proud southern heritage? Would that story be inspirational? Would your explanation highlight why part of the population was forced labor? Would it help that child feel accepted? I suspect you would have a hard time convincing kids the worthiness of a one-sided story.
Last edited:
Is this for real? These southern men were just trying to protect their family? Uh...what about killing, raping, beating,splitting black families apart, and treating them worse than dogs? Was that just part of the "time we live in"? You make it sound like these slave owners hired black people to do a job and the black folks were unhappy with their wages.
These guys are exactly like the Nazis. The only reason the Nazis are slightly worse is because the slave owners didn't have a "final solution" for blacks. These slave owners chose to go to war defending their way of life and they lost. These monuments are nothing more than participation trophies as @steele-tiger said. For a board that frowns upon participation trophies, it's hilarious how many want to hang on to these.
BTW, if whites feared anti-white genocide, why didn't they just load up these dangerous black people and send them back to wherever they got them? That would seem to be a more reasonable solution, no?
The question is when the remove every confederate monument because it will happy what are you going to do about?
Bottom line: He chose to fight for the South and lost. No participation trophy.
I am with you and agree that it should be left up to the local governments to decide. Ultimately, it is the people in their jurisdiction that will enjoy them or their absence. Whatever their rationale, it really does not matter as much to me given that the democratic process is prevailing in those communities.
Since you mentioned where do you draw the line I can only say for myself that I dont think we should go to the extremes you cite like removing the founders because they owned slaves or because someone was a KKK member. Likewise, I don't personally have a problem with a Stonewall Jackson or a Robert E Lee or a Strom Thurmond or a Abraham Lincoln statue, building name, etc. I think it makes for a good discussion that these folks had positives and negatives by today's standards. Now if my constituent's (assuming I am a council person in a local community) truly want them down regardless, I would listen and try and yield to their will after discussing my own views. That being said, I do think that someone can be so evil by today's standards that it does make sense to remove them based on moral grounds. Those would include murderers (Tillman), rapists, people who molest children (Joe Pa) and the like. The distinction I would draw is that these people were guilty of capital crimes during their lifetime. In other words, even in their time period it was considered wrong and the offense could have been severely punished if they had been prosecuted.
Thanks for your response.
If this stuff is making you racist, you already were and are a racist. What you just posted makes you a racist. You just didn't know you were.
In your post you described most of the people complaining and then generalized. First of all more white folks enjoy the spoils of a corrupt and abused welfare system. It should be blown up and redone. It's horrible and hurts more than it helps. Also, the people you described aren't the ones complaining. The educated and enlightened ones both black and white are complaining. The ones you're describing could scream at the top of their lungs and no one would hear them. Think about it.
I never knew. Thanks, I just thought it was good work of art. I still don't think the majority of people who go see it today think of it in this fashion.
I hope they don't destroy it and leave it blank.
I don't understand this logic. It's not rewriting history. It's choosing not to honor those who fought to enslave others.
Just because there are no Hitler statues doesn't mean he isn't in the history books.
I asked a question to @kgwillison and he answered it and I agree with his comment. I think your doing something that a lot of people do which is read too much into it.
How about this, since Georgia pays for the statute. How about Georgia vote by referendum. If 50.1% of the population votes to remove it, then so be it.
And if that happens to be, my hope as a non-Georgia resident, is y'all replace it with something beautiful and representative of the warmer feelings of the south.
And if that happens to be, my hope as a non-Georgia resident, is y'all replace it with something beautiful and representative of the warmer feelings of the south.
Says the white guy who has never been discriminated against.
What amazes me is the lack of remorse many in the South show for what it fought for in the Civil War. In Germany, they are so ashamed of the rise of Hitler and the nationalism of that era, that they won't fly German flags above their house. In the South, many are still embracing that battle they fought 150 years ago.
Didn't own slaves but supported slave owners. If the majority didn't own slaves and viewed slavery was wrong, then they should have done something about it. As I see it, no real difference to me. If a Muslim supported ISIS because they wanted America out of Muslim countries but didn't support ISIS using terrorism to accomplish that goal, would that be just a misunderstood Muslim? You can sit there and pick and choose which issues you think people were fighting for all you want, but the bottom line is that slavery was one of those issues.
There's no statue of Hitler. Is history accurate without one?
To me, the "drawing of the line" happens when we discuss what the person is being honored for. No one is building a statue of MLK because he was against gay marriage. Similarly, no one put GW on teh dolla dolla bill yall because he owned slaves. The confederate monuments were erected to honor these men who fought for slavery.
I think you need a history lesson. I'm not going to waste my time it explaining it.
