My View: Why Confederate Statues Are Not Some Innocuous Historical Icons of the Past

Over the last week, I have had several lengthy conversations with otherwise well-meaning people arguing about the historical value of Confederate statues and icons.  By removing these statues, they argued, we are erasing history.

The great irony of the last week is that the actions of white supremacists in Charlottesville has, if anything, hastened their demise.  There are several reasons for that.  First, the specter of white supremacists marching through other towns with Nazi flags, swastikas and torches unnerved a lot of otherwise would-be opposition.

Second, the specter of future violence likewise changed the decision.

But I think there is a third reason and that is that the debate made a lot of people realize two critical facts – first, these monuments were not put up strictly to celebrate history but as a reminder to people of color, particularly African Americans during the Reconstruction and Jim Crow eras, that they remain second-class citizens.

Second, they remain a reminder to those same people that white supremacy remains in place today.  And so the removal of the statues has become a symbol of tearing down white supremacy.

My friend this week posted this comment from his son who is African American:

“To every black person in America, every monument to the Confederacy – every statute honoring someone who served the Confederacy – is a burning cross reminding us that, even though the Confederacy lost the civil war and slaves were freed, nothing has really changed.”

Some have argued that the removal of Confederate statues will lead to a slippery slope effect.  So we don’t do the right thing now because at some point we may push the movement too far?

To me the whole slippery slope argument is unfounded nonsense anyway.  Maybe the Al Sharptons of the world want to defund the Jefferson Memorial, and others will clamor to remove slaveholders from various monuments.

Al Sharpton on the one hand, and Donald Trump on the other  (he said during his press conference that removing monuments is “changing history” and “I wonder, is it George Washington next week?”) are missing the point.

There is a difference between removing memorials of people who were the product of their time and removing memorials specifically put up as reminders of white supremacy.

Mr. Trump misses the point that there is a key difference between people like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, who were flawed and imperfect men, like all of us, who also happened to do great things, and the generals of the Confederacy who fought for slavery and took up arms against our nation.

The New York Times this week quotes James Grossman, the executive director of the American Historical Association, who told the paper that Mr. Trump is failing to understand the difference “between history and memory.”

Altering monuments, he said is “not changing history,” but rather, “how we remember history.”

Mr. Grossman noted, as many have this week, that “most Confederate monuments were constructed in two periods: the 1890s, as Jim Crow was being established, and in the 1950s, during a period of mass Southern resistance to the civil rights movement.

“We would not want to whitewash our history by pretending that Jim Crow and disenfranchisement or massive resistance to the civil rights movement never happened,” he said. “That is the part of our history that these monuments testify to.”

The most poignant comments on this were made by New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu as he removed his city’s statues.

He pointed out, “There is a difference between remembrance of history and reverence of it.”

He noted that “the Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, and P.G.T. Beauregard statues were not erected just to honor these men, but as part of the movement which became known as The Cult of the Lost Cause.”

He explained, “This ‘cult’ had one goal — through monuments and through other means — to rewrite history to hide the truth, which is that the Confederacy was on the wrong side of humanity. First erected over 166 years after the founding of our city and 19 years after the end of the Civil War, the monuments that we took down were meant to rebrand the history of our city and the ideals of a defeated Confederacy.”

Mayor Landrieu points out that “these men did not fight for the United States of America. They fought against it. They may have been warriors, but in this cause they were not patriots.

“These statues are not just stone and metal. They are not just innocent remembrances of a benign history. These monuments purposefully celebrate a fictional, sanitized Confederacy; ignoring the death, ignoring the enslavement, and the terror that it actually stood for.”

The mayor continued: “After the Civil War, these statues were a part of that terrorism as much as a burning cross on someone’s lawn; they were erected purposefully to send a strong message to all who walked in their shadows about who was still in charge in this city.”

The mayor drove home his point, arguing, “Should you have further doubt about the true goals of the Confederacy, in the very weeks before the war broke out, the 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.”

For those who are arguing we need to preserve these statues, this is what you’re arguing for – a reminder that slavery and the subordination to the superior race “is his natural and normal condition.”

No wonder my friend’s son has such a disdain for these symbols of white supremacy.

So I say to President Trump and all of the mayors and governors out there, Mr. President, tear down these statues.  Tear down these reminders of the horrors of our past and the continued source of strife in this nation.  Tear down these vestiges of white supremacy and help us forge together a new nation conceived in liberty, justice and equality for all.

—David M. Greenwald reporting



Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$
USD
Sign up for

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

100 Comments

  1. Keith O

    Tear down these vestiges of white supremacy and help us forge together a new nation conceived in liberal, justice and equality for all.

    LOL, Freudian slip there?

     

  2. Claire Benoit

    I just hate this. I know I cannot speak for all black Americans but my mother is black with southern roots, I went to a historically black university, and I’ve lived in predominantly black cities with rich histories and these monuments abounding

    NEVER ONCE before now have I ever heard a black person complain of feeling oppressed by these statues. In fact I feel I could probably dig up photos of many of them taking pictures alongside them as they toured historical landmark sites and shared the memories.

    ive tried to talk myself into this and relate to what I’m told I should feel but this just seems destructive and altogether absurd. One thing that makes most of America so much more boring than other countries is that we are newer and lack the old historical relics that older countries have…. I love these pieces and I know many others do too.

    It’s unfortunate that the only people who made noise marching against the removal were aggressive supremacists. But I actually think a lot of people secretly feel as I do but are afraid to express the unpopular and “insensitive” stance.

    it is what it is. I think these pieces of history are special. And as for benefits to blacks; as I’ve said – add not subtract. But I don’t call the shots.

    1. David Greenwald

      These pieces of history were put up as symbols of oppression Claire. That’s why they were constructed in the first place, the history is very clear on this point.

      1. Keith O

        How do you know that?  Show the proof otherwise it’s just opinion.

         Have you ever been to Gettysburg?  I have, took a horseback ride tour with my family through the battlefields with guides and headphones.  It was a fantastic historical excursion rich with facts and stories of the battle.  Yes there were monuments, statues and museums everywhere and it had nothing to do with reminding blacks that they were second class citizens (as David says).  It was an educating historical experience about the great battle that took place there.  It would be a travesty to lose that.

         

        1. Eric Gelber

          It’s still just someone’s opinion.

          Like much of history, it’s opinion–or interpretation–based on reference to historical facts. It’s fine to have a different interpretation, but you need to cite reasons why a given interpretation is flawed or provide the facts on which your alternative interpretation is based. You do neither. You simply reject an interpretation of historical facts out of hand, without explanation. That’s not a reasoned position nor does it contribute to any meaningful discussion.

        2. Keith O

          it’s opinion–or interpretation

          You are correct, and one’s opinion or interpretation can and often will be swayed by one’s political leanings.  For instance, check out the author of the article you supplied, check out her Twitter feed.

    2. David Greenwald

      From the Mayor of New Orleans: “After the Civil War, these statues were a part of that terrorism as much as a burning cross on someone’s lawn; they were erected purposefully to send a strong message to all who walked in their shadows about who was still in charge in this city.”  Those are your pieces of history that you argue are special.  Really?

    3. Keith O

      Claire

       But I actually think a lot of people secretly feel as I do but are afraid to express the unpopular and “insensitive” stance.

      Claire, you are correct.  Go online, there are several stories about this all over the place with ongoing conversations in the comment sections.  Check it out, a majority agrees with you.  The Vanguard and local Davis liberals are not a good baromenter of how people actually view this across the country.

    4. Tia Will

      Claire

      relate to what I’m told I should feel “

      Who do you believe is telling you how you should feel ? What I have seen at least in the comments on the Vanguard is some who share your feelings, and others, such as myself who do not. But at no point have I seen anyone try to tell you how to think or feel. I also think that our conversations have made it clear that race is not a determinate factor in how one feels about these statues. This is in my mind exactly how it should be. We are truly in trouble when the color of our skin is the sole determinate of how we think about an issue.

    5. Dave Hart

      Let’s analyze where these statues fit into the social order of the South.  From George Lakoff’s reasearch:

      The Conservative Moral Hierarchy:
      • God above Man
      • Man above Nature
      • The Disciplined (Strong) above the Undisciplined (Weak)
      • The Rich above the Poor
      • Employers above Employees
      • Adults above Children
      • Western culture above other cultures
      • America above other countries
      • Men above Women
      • Whites above Nonwhites
      • Christians above non-Christians
      • Straights above Gays

      These statues typically rest on the third, fourth, a modification of the fifth (Slaveowners over slaves), the tenth and eleventh bullets.  They are propaganda pure and simple.  If you grew up around these statues and have anything like fond memories, it is no different that me having fond memories of advertising jingles from mid-1950s TV.  Your feelings are guiding your morality and values instead of your morality and values providing the framework for your feelings.  Effective propaganda aims to manipulate your feelings and cares not a whit whether it is moral or ethical.  It can be both, but that is not its true function.

      1. Jerry Waszczuk

        Dave

        George Lakoff is a Marxist . What his philosophy has to do with anything in this discussion . .  He is a member of the scientific committee of the Fundación IDEAS (IDEAS Foundation), Spain’s Socialist Party‘s think tank. Spanish former prime minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero presides over the Foundation as its honorary President. Zapatero’s  grandfather was a communist executed by Spanish general who ruled over Spain as a military dictator for 36 years from 1939 until his death. 

         

      2. Dave Hart

        Jerry, I don’t know if he is a Marxist and I don’t understand how that means anything in this discussion.  He is a cognitive scientist, according to his published work from UC Berkeley.  Is there anything about the hierarchy you disagree with?  It seems to provide a very good taxonomy on how people respond to the society they live in that is irrespective of political party.  I would argue that authoritarian regimes, even if they consider themselves socialist, are conservative according to his taxonomy.  You might give it another look before you prejudge based solely on personal associations.

  3. Claire Benoit

    I have only learned of this recently and the more I learn; the more upsetting it is. I did see a video of a AA woman in Los Angeles who clearly feels as I do but was careful not to overstate it – because truly the black opinion is being manipulated and forced imho.

    I still think this whole thing is staged/planned… I am skeptical of anyone who profits from their beliefs. Its believable (to me) that the controversial leader who executed the white nationalist march was paid off or contracted by politicians. Why? Because clearly a statue being removed for its relevance to racist history isn’t going to get the protection it needs if white nationalists march AND loudly chant hateful phrases. I’m sure there were patriotic history lovers lost in the noise.

    Had he REALLY wanted the statue to stay; he’s have at least organized a peaceful white American heritage protest. I think if the extremist groups weren’t so useful in being used as pawns (if not volunteering as such) in political games – a white heritage society would have been respectfully acknowledged a long time ago. And by now; could have positive relations with a black American heritage society… they are both American.

    Anyway, this is sad. Our history IS slavery and colonialism. It was evil and sad but it’s the only history we have for that time period. Erasing the time markers doesn’t erase time; just loses pages in our uniquely beautiful  – sometimes tragic, but always beautiful story.

    And we need to honor it because while it was pure horror for our ancestors; a LOT of wonderful opportunities came out of it for all of us. #1: the existence of every black American.

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      We , the American people are not each other enemies ,

      The enemies are those people behind the curtain jerking everybody’s chains and trying to divide us up by age , by race , by income .

      Dr.  Ben. Carson

      The  Mayor of Chancellorsville  Michael Signer  with his gang did good job jerking everybody’s chains . Read  the title of this article . This what the Dr. Carson is talking about .

    2. Keith O

      Erasing the time markers doesn’t erase time; just loses pages in our uniquely beautiful  – sometimes tragic, but always beautiful story.

      Beautifully written Claire.

  4. Keith O

    David writes:

    To me the whole slippery slope argument is unfounded nonsense anyway.  Maybe the Al Sharptons of the world want to defund the Jefferson Memorial, and others will clamor to remove slaveholders from various monuments.

    David says the “slippery slope” argument is unfounded nonsense but then immediately contradicts himself with an example of where a prominant black leader is advocating for exactly what people stated would happen.

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      Keith
      Black people who were  never slaves are fighting white people who were never nazis over a confederate statue erected by democrats  because democrats can’t stand their own history anymore and somehow it’s Trumps fault?

      1. Noreen Mazelis

        Yes, Jerry, the Democrats want us to forget their support of segregation, both de jure in the South — remember the “Solid South” that always went Demo? — and de facto in the North.

      2. Matt Williams

        Noreen, the Dixiecrats were Democrats in name only.  They always would have been Republicans were it not for the fact that the Republican Party was “the Party of Lincoln.”

        Whenever a vote came up that was determined by ideology rather than political affiliation, the Dixiecrats almost unanimously voted the conservative line. If you need an example, a crystal clear one was the vote on the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

  5. Dave Hart

    The only slippery slope that was ventured out onto was when the first statues honoring the Confederacy were erected.  They should never have been erected in the first place and it’s a shame it’s taken this long to recognize that.  Statues and monuments should be confined to the victims of institutions only.  Child laborers killed in factories, victims of the German holocaust, American slaves are examples of people from groups who are properly memorialized in bronze or stone.  Otherwise forget it.  The confederacy was dedicated to the enslavement and murder without punishment of people based on their skin color.  If a statue is okay for those people, it’s okay for Adolph Hitler to be memorialized in statues around Germany or even Israel because he is “part of their history”.  Stupid thing to say and a stupid thing to do.  That’s my ruling.

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      Dave

      I  totally disagree with you . Lynching people did not end with the  the end of civil war and formal racial segregation in USA was ended 100 years after  the civil war and 20 years after the Holocaust . I am quite familiar with   the Holocaust history committed by Hitler but I am also quite familiar with Holocaust committed by Stalin.  Stalin Holocaust was the  Holocaust and slavery for the the  80 million victims. Similar to today’s  North Korea.  In USA we  have  official government sponsored US Holocaust Memorial Museum In Washington D.C and in others cities like Houston and Los Angeles , Boston  

      ·        The Holocaust was the systematic, bureaucratic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of six million Jews by the Nazi regime and its collaborators. Holocaust is a word of Greek origin meaning “sacrifice by fire.” The Nazis, who came to power in Germany in January 1933, believed that Germans were “racially superior” and that the Jews, deemed “inferior,” were an alien threat to the so-called German racial community.

      In same Washington DC we have the Victims of Communism Memorial. In contrary to the Holocaust is not the  not a museum like the  Holocaust Memorial Museum . The Memorial of 100, 000,000 killed by communists  is a Statue located at the intersection of Massachusetts and New Jersey Avenues and G Street, NW, two blocks from Union Station and within view of the U.S. Capitol.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victims_of_Communism_Memorial
      The memorial is dedicated “to the more than one hundred million victims of communism”. The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation says the purpose of the memorial is to ensure “that the history of communist tyranny will be taught to future generations. If we would have in Washington D.C Holocaust Memorial Museum of Communist than people would learn history they would never forget . It  was  not a coincident that US Communist Party  was outlawed by the Communist Control Act of 1954 but the  KKK and neo-Nazis are legal and they are still  marching . What is your opinion about?  I think that neo -Nazi with fully automatic rifle is a lot more danger than the Confederate Soldier statue .
       

       I think it would be proper have in USA  a  Slavery Memorials similar to the Holocaust Memorials to teach kids in school and people how this country was found and  why  the  racial segregation was abounded 100 years after Civil  War and how it did happen.  You want destroy Statues and monuments but you don’t care to have legally registered neo-Nazis organisations and KKK . What is  your point ?  I don’t see that 100 years statute and confederate monuments are more inappropriate or dangerous to have than  marching neo -Nazis and KKK members . In USA we have 35,000 museums and only one is which is dedicated to slavery. 
      I found a interesting article in Washington Post  entitled” I am a black South Carolinian. Here’s why I support the Confederate flag”

      ·        We may never completely agree on whether the Confederate flag is a symbol of racism or pride, and whether the Civil War was fought primarily over slavery or state’s rights. But South Carolinians should turn their focus to what we do agree on: that we are citizens of the greatest country in the world and the most patriotic state in the nation. As such, just two banners should fly over our statehouse grounds: the South Carolina flag and the American flag.

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/06/24/i-am-a-black-south-carolinian-heres-why-i-support-the-confederate-flag/?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.4022891e9595

       

      1. Dave Hart

        I would ask you to re-read my post above because for the most part I can agree with you.  You agree that the victims of whichever holocaust is being considered should have a monument and so do I.  Erecting statues is different than trying to police peoples’ thoughts.  No, I don’t want to see organizations outlawed any more than I want to see certain books or ideas outlawed.  I don’t care what crazy crap people come to believe as long as they respect the right of others to believe in their own brand of crazy crap.  That does not extend to acting on those crazy ideas.  That is what social institutions like legislatures, legal codes and elections are designed to moderate.  And when those institutions fail, heaven forbid, common ethics and morality must step in.  Unfortunately, morality on the side of “good” against “bad” or “evil” is usually civil war.  This is why we really do want to keep this discussion in the public domain and within civil institutions.

        I’m totally okay with civil institutions taking down the statues because the Confederacy was a thinly veiled organized crime and murder operation.  Anyone who believes it was something else needs to spend more time reading history by actual historians.  As an American, I care about how we keep our national history alive and what we choose to revere and what we choose to condemn.  This thread is about the Confederacy statues.  Not interested in talking about other countries in this space right now.

        1. Jerry Waszczuk

          Dave

          Are you considering your self  a White American Nationalists.?  This thread is about the Confederacy statues as you stated but you brought the Holocaust into the discussion . Holocaust are the other countries which are Germany , Romania , Italy , Hungary , Austria , Lithuania , Ukraine , France and Slovakia .   Americans have  nothing to do with Holocaust and Americans are not responsible for Holocaust . However , Americans likes  to have Nazis  and KKK around and Holocaust Memorials but Americans like you don’t like to have  statues of  the Confederate soldiers and  don’t Memorials of Slavery. Strange but true . Unbelievable hypocrisy.

  6. Claire Benoit

    Haha, thank you Keith. My life suggests that I am meant to write; my vocabulary & grammar call for a serious editor… But I have just started an English program that I am hoping will at least build my confidence.

    GREAT IDEA that hit me tonight. I hope someone gets this: A team of multi-ethnic americans (several should be black) who appreciate the confederacy monuments for their historical value should plan a road trip photographing each one before its taken down. They need to see all of the monuments and create a book with reflective journal entries on each one. Once all the monuments are taken down – this could (ironically) end up being a required book for college students. (Or at the very least; a popular read!). It would mark this point in our history. I feel like it could be called “Miles From Nowhere” (also a great roadtrip song :-P). This could probably be an awesome thesis for history majors across America. They could coordinate this so that each pair/small group would be responsible for only one state….

    Okay; watching Gone With The Wind now….

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      Claire

      I wish to have your skill . I would a rich guy . I don’t believe your vocabulary and grammar call for serious editor . You are a lot better writer than David Greenwald  regardless what you write about .

       

  7. Tia Will

    The enemies are those people behind the curtain jerking everybody’s chains and trying to divide us up by age , by race , by income .”

    I would believe that Dr. Carson is being honest in this statement if he were to include the racist, sexist, economic and religious divisions that were not created by but certainly magnified, amplified and manipulated  by Donald Trump throughout his campaign. Dr. Carson was and remains mysteriously quiet on this manipulation and “jerking of chains”.

  8. Tia Will

    I would like to step back a moment from the removal of the statues as the proximate cause for the white nationalist hate march. Claire you may reasonably not be aware of the full range of events surrounding the purported Free Speech Rally ostensibly called to protest the removal of the statue. You may not know about how many of the attendees wrote about the “black and Jewish scum” and their plans to kick ass, harm and yes, even kill anyone who got in their way. When confronted, one of the white supremacists whined that they were just “talking trash” on line and that there intent was completely peaceful. This was thoroughly belied by the interviews in which they called Jews and “n…..s” trash and scum. Also their inconceivable reference to Heather as worthless because she was 32 and childless…. white supremacist feeling about what they consider a “breeder”. Namely any woman of reproductive age.  Along with the fact that many of them showed up in superior arms and gear than the local police. In view of all of these primary source statements, and directly filmed actions,I find it hard to believe 1. That the statues were the main driving factor behind the gathering. 2. That their intent was in any way peaceful. 3. That they are not delighted by the divisiveness that their actions and the words of their apologist in the WH have fanned. If you have any doubt about this, check out the statements made by David Duke.

    These men have every right to their desire to have the statues remain just as you have the same right. They do not have the right to provoke, involve, or condone violence to get their way. They had many other options for peaceful action. They chose violence and each individuals actions is on himself alone.

     

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      Tia

      32-year-old Heather Heyer, was killed and 19 others were injured due to  irresponsible. ill minded  provocation which was  crafted by  mayor of Charlottesville Michael Signer and his gang from City Council . They are as same scums as the provoked by their action the neo -nazi who plowed his car into crowd . 

      Is the 100 years old statue is more important for you than  life of Heather Heyer and suffering of others ?

       

       

        1. Jerry Waszczuk

          Dave

          This is your opinion . It was premeditated ill crafted provocation. What you would say if armed neo -nazi would kill 50 people because  mayor of Charlottesville Mr. Signer  and his gang had idea to dislike Gen. Lee. I think he  was hoping for blood outcome of  his ill crafted provocation for political reason. He is left wing democrat.

      1. Matt Williams

        Dave, it is interesting to see how a different city has dealt with the issues.  For the full story see https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/16/us/baltimore-confederate-statues.html?mcubz=3&_r=0

        Baltimore Mayor Had Statues Removed in ‘Best Interest of My City’

        BALTIMORE — It was “in the best interest of my city,” Mayor Catherine Pugh said Wednesday, as she explained why she ordered Confederate monuments removed under the cover of darkness, days after violence broke out during a rally against the removal of a similar monument in neighboring Virginia.

        “I said with the climate of this nation,” Ms. Pugh said later, “that I think it’s very important that we move quickly and quietly.”

        With no immediate public notice, no fund-raising, and no plan for a permanent location for the monuments once they had been excised — all things city officials once believed they would need — the mayor watched in the wee hours on Wednesday as contractors with cranes protected by a contingent of police officers lifted the monuments from their pedestals and rolled them away on flatbed trucks.

        But, in an interview here, Ms. Pugh suggested the tense political climate had turned her city’s statues into a security threat and she said that her emergency powers allowed her to have them removed immediately.

        “The mayor has the right to protect her city,” she said. “For me, the statues represented pain, and not only did I want to protect my city from any more of that pain, I also wanted to protect my city from any of the violence that was occurring around the nation. We don’t need that in Baltimore.”

        Ms. Pugh said she had spoken with the president of the City Council on Monday, the same day the council voted unanimously to remove the four monuments, and said she intended to take them down “quickly and quietly.” Initially, she also wrote a letter to the Maryland Historical Trust, providing notice of her concerns, but was advised by the city’s attorney that she could move forward without its approval, based on her executive powers to protect the city.

        Ms. Pugh said she did not anticipate a legal challenge but that the city would fight any suit.

        “I don’t think it would matter, because I think having consulted with my legal team I acted in the best interest of my city,” she said,

        The mayor said she did not know where the statues were moved or where they will end up. She suggested plaques be installed that describe “what was there and why it was removed.”

        Some of the empty pedestals, including the one in the Mount Vernon neighborhood, drew the attention of passers-by, some who were seen reaching atop the pedestal to feel a sticky black goo left behind.

        For a moment, a middle-aged woman pulled up in a sedan and idled next to the site. “Have they taken the monument down?” she yelled out a window to a man sitting on a nearby bench. “All of them?”

        He answered in the affirmative, and she responded with a slur before driving away.

        Kaylyn Meyers, 29, watched the exchange and said it seemed to sum up the tension gripping the country.
        “People are really emboldened right now,” she said, while pausing to smoke a cigarette and look at the pedestal. Regarding the woman in the car who uttered the slur, she said, “That was just completely wrong.”

        1. Howard P

          [Pugh]  She suggested plaques be installed that describe “what was there and why it was removed.”

          Wow… like adding the third nitro group to di-nitro toluene!

          At least the City will have the bronze available for the plaques… remove, recycle, reuse.

  9. Tia Will

    Claire

    I love your idea about documenting these statues and the use of their presence, and removal as a source of education and conversation for year to come.

    If there is any doubt that this event was not just about the removal of statues, I offer the words of one of the white supremacist leaders :

    “We achieved all of our objectives,” Matthew Heimbach, a founder of the Nationalist Front, a neo-Nazi group that bills itself as an umbrella organization for the white nationalist movement, said in an interview Saturday. “We showed that our movement is not just online, but growing physically. We asserted ourselves as the voice of white America. We had zero vehicles damaged, all our people accounted for, and moved a large amount of men and materials in and out of the area. I think we did an incredibly impressive job.”

    Please note that his objectives in his own words said nothing at all about free speech or the statues. Hmmm…..

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      Tia

      The White Supremacist , Neo -Nazis and KKK achieved their objectives thanks to provocateurs , the  mayor of Charlottesville and his gang. This is not end of the story . Shortly after this provocation  the  a Massachusetts teenager has been charged with vandalizing a Holocaust memorial in Boston, in what the city’s police commissioner called a “senseless and shameful” act, particularly after the neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville, Va..  This ho w it is go . Politicians from Democratic Party have agenda . https://nyti.ms/.2uY07hb

      1. Dave Hart

        The Democrats do not have an agenda (good or bad, unfortunately) that applies in these cases.  The KKK, Neo- and Old School Nazis do have one as they now exhibit.  The only change in the nation is the symbolic mis-leadership of the [president].  These alt-right groups now feel emboldened like they did not just a few months before.  They’ve always been there, under the rocks, afraid of their own shadows and angry and afraid of any and all.  Not complicated.
        [moderator] edited

      2. Tia Will

        The White Supremacist , Neo -Nazis and KKK achieved their objectives thanks to provocateurs”

        So is it your view that the present day Nazis are innocent of their own actions ?  They had no free will ?  No free agency ?  If you believe that, then they are a pretty pathetic lot. If you do not believe that, then why not just disavow their actions as well as the actions of the “provocateurs”.

        I don’t know if you have ever had children. Anyone who has is familiar with the following scenario. Your kids emerge from another room, one having hit the other one hard enough to leave a mark. The hitter says “He made me do it ! He took my toy !” Do you hold one or the other completely guilty or completely innocent in the interaction ? Or do you consider both responsible for their own contribution and discuss alternative suggestions for the future ?

        1. David Greenwald

          Actually I think the white supremacists et al lost the week.  Statues are quietly being removed.  Trump damaged.  Boston a complete failure.  Seems like a complete loss for them.

        2. Howard P

          Tia… let’s followup on your sibling analogy…

          But first, will say that the neo-nazi, white supremicist etc. views are pure poison and odious, and their tactics, more so.

          Back to your analogy… what if a neighbor kid was playing with one son, and told the one who took the toy, “take your brother’s toy, to see if we can get a rise out of him”?  The brother takes the toy and the neighbor kid gets to see the reaction with no personal risk… does that neighbor child bear any responsibility?  What if the other brother had a ‘friend over’, who saw that the brother whose toy had been taken was irked, and egged him on with, “you gonna’ take that from him?  you ought to belt him one!”.  Does that ‘friend’ bear any responsibility?

          Like yours, mine is an oversimplification of what went down… but given the number of ‘protesters’ and ‘counter-protesters’ who did not come from Charlottesville or its environs, I believe my analogy is closer.

          Lots of “dirty hands” involved, some of which are not readily apparent.

          But a truth may emerge… that the statue was only a “toy” that folk used for other purposes… the “toy” didn’t do anything.  Now, instead of dealing with behaviors, mom/dad can just take away all toys and hide/destroy them… problem solved, right?  ‘Sibling rivalry’ disappears? The brothers never fight again?  I think not.  If both kids had all toys confiscated, they might be unified by a common ‘enemy’… mom/dad… t least to the extent they not be likely to listen to mom/dad about attitudes and behavior.

          It is not, nor ever has been ‘about the toy’… symbols/objects have no power, except for what folk ‘give’ them.   The statue of Lee was never going to hurt anyone, if they chose not to be ‘hurt’… the ‘hurt’ comes, perhaps, because some considered it ‘taunting’/bullying… the taunting/bullying is inappropriate and needs to be discussed/addressed. But it is not about the “toy”…

           

      1. Jerry Waszczuk

        Howard

        Do you have any doubt now ?  President Donald  Trump is under siege .  This provocation with monuments removal  was ill but well crafted to suck Donald Trump into. He can  nuke North  Korea but on this subject he is powerless .

         

         

        1. Howard P

          I never had any doubt about the statue just being a raison d’etre for the organization of both the folk who wanted to protest and counter-protest to get into a provocation.

          As to the other part, I think it just as likely Bannon suggested organizing the “alt-right”, fanned the fires, as it is that anti-Trump folk did so.

          I do believe this wouldn’t have happened without outside agitation from both ends of the bell curve… from the initial demands for the CC to take the action, to today.  We’re being played by the extremists, in my opinion.

          The extremists who fear any open/honest dialog, and will attempt to shut down or malign anyone and everyone who would choose the dialog/discussion… ‘for what it’s worth’…

      1. Dave Hart

        David, the slippery slope was when the monuments were initially erected.  Taking them down is a statement of morality and return to equanimity.  Statues should never be erected for an individual because it encourages a cult of the individual and individuals are flawed.  Memorialize in bronze only those ideas and values that transcend the individual.  And, if we must put up a statue or memorial to an individual, minimum waiting period is 100 years.  I agree with the exception for Abraham Lincoln.  It should be a very high bar.

  10. Claire Benoit

    Someone wrote this in a friend’s Facebook; and although his language is dramatic enough for some to dismiss him as a conspiracy theorist – I’m inclined to believe him. It’s what my intuition feels and what this looks like to me:

    “KKK is fake. like the “democracy activists” Vice and Democracy Now were embedded in in Libya and Syria. establishment ideology uber alles. those that don’t believe in neoconservatismand neoliberalism must be racist. lol. Before the establishment propaganda system was pushing Russia Collusion now they’ve switched to White Supremacy. the moral preening of the liberal establishment that’s constantly warmonging, and demonizing, and pushing free trade and immigration to harm workers. They like to pretend how superior they are to whites. who’s more hateful that the liberal establishment. they’ve gone crazy that they lost the election. they can’t accept that because the media said they won. they basically believe and identify with the warmongering s–tmongering media. they follow pseudo elite orders and identify with them. the real issue is all the unaccountable institutional fraud like the elite media. Nytimes a mental illness.”

    TBH it feels like the same genius manipulation that has masses of women believing that forced miscarriages that profit great enterprises are a “women’s right” worth fighting for.

    if we can make you fight for it, it must be for your own good right? Sounds better than imposing a law that demands all women donate the “cells” of their would-be first borns 😝

    Also – (and I am not at all anti-Semitic so please don’t misread this); pregnant women of Cajun/Creole descent are tested for many of the same diseases unique to Ashkenazi Jews. I suspect because there’s truth in the rumors that most slave owners in Louisiana were actually French Jews. ONLY relevance in this (to me) is misguided “blame” if anyone can be blamed for distant ancestors. And the irony that most Jews (I think) are very very “liberal”.

    1. Howard P

      Unlikely that most slave owners in Louisiana were french Jews… the french weren’t all that into ‘slavery’… Louisiana had more free blacks than enslaved blacks well into the 19th century… Jews for many reason, if they were ‘practicing’ would be unlikely to own slaves.  As they celebrate their ’emancipation’ from slavery every year… it’s called “Passover”

      The slavery thing aside (might have been post-slavery) but those of Jewish and Black descent could have had children, particularly knowing the %-age of free blacks… neither were in the upper eschelons of Louisiana society…

      Interesting information, tho’…

  11. Claire Benoit

    *** and by “fight”; I mean given you the false illusion of fighting. What you’re being forced to do by crafty persuasion is not actually taken away nor is there any real chance that what you’re desired to take won’t be given…

    but you’ll march in vagina hats because somewhere in Africa (where you cannot verify what actually takes place) funding might be cut for some places not adhering to guidelines that like everything else are sure to have several loopholes.

    Or

    the most exact manifestation of your phobias and fears will be provoked to solidify the message you’re being fed about what’s racist and oppressive and what respect looks like. The more dramatic, the better. It needs to burn in your mind so that you don’t think too much.

    excuse the theatrics, but it’s what i feel about this and a lot of things happening in our world.

  12. Tia Will

    Claire

    KKK is fake”

    I do not understand that significance of this inaccurate statement and frankly, it led to my inability to truly process and assimilate the remainder of the comments.

    The KKK is not fake. The chants of “Black Lives Do Not Matter Here”, “blood and soil”, “White Sharia now” and “Heil Trump” are real, contemporary and unprovoked by anyone other than the organizers of the march. The goals of the march, as stated by one of the organizers, were not free speech or a protest of the removal of the statues. They are there in his own words in my previous post.

    The KKK was not “fake” when its MO was beating, dragging to death chained to cars, and lynching both blacks and their supporters. The KKK is not fake now when it causes and then glorifies and justifies the death of Heather Hyer. The KKK is not fake when its members continued to harass and threaten those of differing ideas.

    If we are going to blame others for the actions of these white supremacists, why not take a step back and blame Trump for inflaming racist passions thoughout the course of his campaign ? Why not hold him culpable for racial division for his 5 + years of birtherism calling into question the legitimacy of Obama for nothing more than the color of his skin? We could play this game of but X wouldn’t have happened if Y hadn’t happened forever. What I firmly believe is that each individual is entitled to their own feelings about any circumstance. Each individual is 100% responsible for their own actions. No liberal made any conservative take any specific action and the reverse is also true.

    Jerry says that the left has an agenda. Do you believe for one moment that is not equally true of the right ?  Really ?  Even though 45 has repeatedly spoken about advancing his “agenda”. Should both sides not be entitled to advancing their beliefs through a peaceful promotion of their “agenda” ?

    1. John Hobbs

      “The KKK is not fake.”

      Indeed, I was recruited years ago by a cell in rural Yolo county that I imagine is still active.

      This is one of the reasons, that I remind Davis parents that the racist slang your kids use is not just kids being kids……………

    2. Jerry Waszczuk

      Tia
      Left has agenda and the agenda is to overthrow Donald Trump who has no much support from the Congress and the Senate run by Republicans.  War is about 50 million deplorable  on food stamps  to prepare them for revolution by controlling them by the political correctness and media indoctrination .  The krypto -communists which  are operates under the  umbrella of the  Dems Party have their own agenda and provocation with removal of Confederate statuses are being used to achieve the goal. It works quite well.   Communists did not disappeared or vanished after the Communist Control Act which was enacted into law in 1954  and the  US communist party was outlawed.  As I know from history the American Communists opposed war against Hitler after the Ribbentrop -Molotow Pact of  1939 what  resulted to enact into law the  1940  the Alien Registration Act, popularly known as the Smith Act. No so long ago in May 2017 California’s Assembly votes to allow Communists to hold state jobs. The Bill was introduced by ACLU’s   communist from Democratic Party, Assemblyman Rob Bonta. The Lenin statue in Seattle , WA  is smiling .

      California Education Code Sec. 44932 outlines the reasons a school employee can be fired.
      Firing offenses include immoral or unprofessional conduct, “criminal syndicalism,” dishonesty, unsatisfactory performance, evident unfitness for service, a physical or mental condition making the employee unfit to instruct or associate with children, persistent violation of state or local school policies, conviction of a felony or any crime involving moral turpitude, alcoholism or drug abuse – or membership in the Communist Party.
      “It’s a remnant of the Cold War era and should have long been dropped from the Educational Code,” said Juan Lopez, the California chairman for the Communist Party USA.
       
      Communists aren’t a registered political party in California, but they’re still around, and in good numbers, he said.

  13. Ron

    Tia:  “The goals of the march, as stated by one of the organizers, were not free speech or a protest of the removal of the statues.”

    I don’t believe that anyone stated that their “goal” was free speech.  However, much of what the “organizers” are stating consists of free speech.  Some counter-protestors apparently believe that if the message is “offensive enough”, they have a “right” to shut it down (via violence, if necessary). (That’s pretty much what some of them state.)

  14. Claire Benoit

    Tia;

    i was referring to the monuments being presented as having meaning and value exclusively to white national extremists. So obviously anyone of African American descent sounds ridiculous defending their right to stay in place.

    i like history and old architecture; buildings and monuments with souls; even dark ones. I also enjoy the castles of vlad the impaler and want to stand in the sites of the Salem Witch Trials.

    I don’t like what blood drinking Christian crusaders did nor sexist men who abused their powers and killed countless incredible women. But I LOVE the remnants of the past – including the confederacy – And I’m of black American descent.

    I think most people aren’t denying that the loudest voices protesting the removals were creeps (llegally exercising free speech, But creeps nonetheless). But I also agree 100% with Jerry that these creeps were BAITED very deliberately and unnecessarily to lure Trump into an impossible corner, re-fuel the hysteria that USA is actually comparable to Nazi Germany…

    I literally had a conversation with someone screaming at me the “facts” that Pence is a reformed homosexual (and therefore homophobic) Mormon and that Trump is leading the “vast” white nationalist network to deport all non-whites into concentration camps. 😬…

    ^That sounds logical to mmany liberals but I sound insane to be skeptical of how staged/baited a lot of the visible drama is. (At that point in the conversation I just shut up and listened 😝). Pence is not Mormon and never has been – which isn’t necessarily a good/bad thing. The gay thing is equally irrelevant and false.

    “KKK is fake” – I don’t doubt their existence. Of course not. I doubt the accepted beliefs about why they exist. I think whoever leads them is bought and paid by whoever needs them to stir the racial divide that was deliberately created in this country with and for slavery. But y’a; the faces we see (generally with serious learning disabilities/mental illness/dysfunctional backgrounds – THEY believe in what’s they’re doing. But they’ve been recruited by someone who’s much the wiser and profiting. I think it’s naive to think that governemnt doesn’t employ invisible manipulations.

    Anyway; it’s too bad they’re being removed. I still hold adding to them more completed truths and recognition of the people who suffered would have been the richer and more peaceful way to go. But that would give the powers that be the ammo they want… (and not to beat a dead horse but those slaveholders – many of them – ARE the genetic ancestors of a lot of black Americans 😅). It is history.

    I don’t think Trump is the greatest but I dont find him to be so outrageous as most his critics get hyped about… he’s not as smooth, calculated, and rehearsed as the leaders we’ve gotten used too. Maybe that’s a good thing. Let’s stop valuing how great the sheep suit looks on wolves.

    Anyway, maybe Pence will end up being our president. Hopefully the hysteria will calm. I think he’s capable and he feels like an earnestly good person which will be refreshing in the White House. Even some of his positions that others freak out about as extreme based on their values – if you read the fine print – he’s made fair compromises and negotiations on most of them. We will see…

    its unfortunate we’re losing some history. Hopefully at least most will  be placed in museums for rich/lucky kids and curious adults. I kicked myself for not visiting New Orleans before Katrina… now ill be disappointed I didn’t prioritize exploring more of the south before this… lesson : seize the moment.

    1. Don Shor

      i was referring to the monuments being presented as having meaning and value exclusively to white national extremists.

      A significant number of the memorials were funded or coordinated by the United Daughters of the Confederacy.
      The goals of the UDC include (#’s 2 snd 3):

      To protect, preserve and mark the places made historic by Confederate valor.

      To collect and preserve the material for a truthful history of the War Between the States.

      That “truthful history” means the revisionist principles of the Lost Cause:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Cause_of_the_Confederacy
      I’m sorry that modern observers don’t realize that racist and revisionist history motivated those who initiated and installed these monuments. Or that they were installed as Jim Crow laws were being passed and implemented, as separate education systems were being maintained, and then again as civil rights laws were being passed at the federal level. By the way: when those civil rights laws were passed, we saw a lot of resistance and violence and protests by racists and white supremacists. They considered those civil rights laws to be an affront to their way of living and reacted viciously. Nevertheless, we as a nation went ahead and passed and enforced them, even as governors like George Wallace literally stood in the schoolhouse door to block it.
      You may not wish to acknowledge the history of these monuments, and you may wish to blame current political leaders as being provocative for seeking to remove them. But that’s why they’re there.

      1. Jerry Waszczuk

        You may not wish to acknowledge the history of these monuments, and you may wish to blame current political leaders as being provocative for seeking to remove them. But that’s why they’re there.

        Well stated Don.

        The political leader  being  provocative  and using monuments to remove Donald Trump from power . They don’t care about monuments and they don’t care how many people will die to achieve their goal to lead the unemployed american proletariat . Statue of their idol Lenin in Seattle is smiling .

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/08/19/in-seattle-people-are-protesting-monuments-to-the-confederacy-and-communism/?utm_term=.fc74f71a1da8

        Look at these five or six protesters and their signs with Lenin is Hitler . They must be stupid or provocateurs wearing read hats with “Make America Great Again” to ridicule Trump .

         

         

  15. Claire Benoit

    And for the record ; I spent a lot of time up close and personal with refugees from Syria, Libya, and all the related regions….

    they don’t like Obama as much as many of you seem to assume.

  16. Claire Benoit

    Don thank you for the history. When I first heard of this I was dismissive because I thought only ONE monument was being removed… it seemed like much ado about nothing. But now that I know it’s every single trace of that old (largely terrible) world – I feel differently.

    This has motivated me to read more. Still I think the many people who hold your view aren’t understanding mine. I DO understand that these were erected for terrible and shameful reasons. They were tributes to exploitation and dishonesty.

    But i don’t think that negates their place in history. These things were, sadly, part of our history. And they are linked to an era with a wealth of romanticism and charms. Some of which are missed without having been known! And when we enjoy the nostalgia of these old historic towns for their sentimental appeal – the dark side gives that experience depth and authenticity.

    Its the most intimate encounter possible with the unknown or invisible. I assume everyone has felt this, but perhaps not. Luckily there’s plenty more history to America and the world for that matter – but only one confederacy. So much is lost in natural disasters anyway. Why should we lend a hand to destruction? Never seems to be a good enough reason for me.

    (And I do resent that this was done for ulterior motives. There were just so many better options to honor the black american side of this; it seems odd to me that this was the chosen way).

    But I do “get it”. I just disagree. And “you guys” won so the value of another opinion is 0 at this point 😝

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      Claire 
      If it would be done during the 8 years of   the Obama’s administration or   25 years ago  than maybe I would maybe  agree with Don . I am living in USA since 1982 and I lived in Texas , Florida and Washington state . Statues never were a issue . At least not in this form as we see today.   American Black Civil Rights leaders or Dems  did not raise  hell about .  If the American Government and Black Civil Rights  leaders would sponsor to build in Washington DC  and in other US Big Cities   the United States Slavery Memorial Museum and  honor African -Americans in same way as victims of Holocaust are being honored than it would heal the wounds a lot better than removing Conderates statues .  Provocations by using slaves suffering to ridicule and remove President Trump from power who is trying to bring jobs back to America for all Americans is disgusting plot instigating by stalinists and marxists from  of Dems Party.
      https://www.ushmm.org/information/about-the-museum/presidents-commission
      Civil War is integrated part of US History . Holocaust is not the part of the US history  and Holocaust victims are being exploited in this country for political and financial gains . Jewish Professor Norman Finkelstein wrote a book about which is  entitled “The Holocaust Industry”  

      Finkelstein is clear that the Nazi holocaust belongs to the same family of crimes as the U.S. crimes against the Vietnamese and Native Americans. In raising reparations of many kinds within the same frame, he brings together Black suffering, indigenous genocide, Nazi crimes and U.S. war-making abroad. He does not explicitly raises questions of reordering society. The book is forensic scholarship, not a manifesto.

      http://inthesetimes.com/article/19139/norman-finkelstein-holocaust-industry-reparations-ta-nehisi-coates
      Germans paid 60 billions as a  Holocaust reparations . Removing Confederates statues are the  worthless , pointless and provocative gestures which already claimed one person life and injured many others . 60 billion reparation could bring news schools, education  , jobs , new homes to the African -American communities .
       

      1. Claire Benoit

        (haha yes Don youre right. Excuse the digression)

        Jerry I 100% concur with your observations of black sentiment (or lack thereof) toward these monuments until someone decided to use them as tools to feed hysteria over Trump. It’s really quite obnoxious. I am the eldest of 6; I know what bait and bully looks like 😝.

        This really bothers me because the cost is history – and probably a lot of personal sentimental value to the locals (maybe where they had their first kiss or their grandfather talked history with them over ice cream… who knows). And it’s also a huge insult to black americans to have our sensitivities manipulated so easily. But it seems to have worked so it is what it is.

        1. Jerry Waszczuk

          Claire

          Hysteria is already in place . What are you talking about ? Don’t you watch CNN,  or read posts on Twitter .  Example :

          The Los Angeles Times’ editorial board published a scathing column on Sunday that targeted President Donald Trump and the GOP in the wake of last week’s tragedy in Charlottesville.

          “These are not normal times,” the editorial began. “The man in the White House is reckless and unmanageable, a danger to the Constitution, a threat to our democratic institutions.”

          The board specifically singled out Trump’s refusal to clearly condemn neo-Nazis, Ku Klux Klan members, and other “alt-right” supporters who rallied in Charlottesville last weekend to protest the removal of a Confederate statue honoring Gen. Robert E. Lee. The rally quickly devolved into violence and chaos when white supremacists clashed with counter-protesters, ultimately resulting in the death of 32-year-old counter-protester Heather Heyer after apparent white supremacist James Fields drove his car through a crowd of demonstrators.

      2. Howard P

        Removing Confederates are the  worthless, pointless and provocative gestures which already claimed one person life and injured many others.

        No.  Removal or threat of removal of a statue killed no one.  A twisted and/or mentally ill person, wearing a cloak of indignant righteousness to disguise his hatred and/or lack of respect for human life, cowardly used his car in a manner that cost the life of a young woman and injuring 19.

        His acts cannot be laid at the feet of those who voted to remove the statue, and certainly not at the feet of either the statue or the ‘ghost’ of the man memorialized.  They are at his feet, and those who helped to ‘twist’ him with their attitudes and rhetoric.

        90% at his feet, and on his hands. 10% at the feet and on the hands of those who feed on hatred, prejudice and fear.

        His foot on the accelerator… his hands on the steering wheel… no one else’s…

        1. Jerry Waszczuk

          Howard P.

          Howard , you don’t have a clue how much city is going to pay  in lawsuits or settlements to  the victims for this reckless and ill  provocation . Just wait and watch .

          Not so long ago
          Woman who urged boyfriend to commit suicide found guilty of involuntary manslaughter
          Michelle Carter was found guilty Friday of involuntary manslaughter for encouraging Conrad Roy III to commit suicide in 2014. She faces up to 20 years in prison

  17. Claire Benoit

    Jerry they believe he played a major hand in the destabilization of Libya and one referred to Americans as being in a “coma”

    Very interesting conversations I had with some of them.

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      They are right . Not only Libia and Syria . Iraq as well by pulling all  American troop which lead to  power vacuum and atrocities committed  by  ISIS’s . Obama – Clinton team .  Bush never should attack Saddam by force in the first place.  Power and money .

       

  18. Claire Benoit

    Yes I really must read on this. But from what I’ve learned this all rings very true. The Libyans I got to know spoke very highly of Gaddafi as have others from the Arab world…

    so much isn’t what it seems. I really wish I knew more of politics before experiencing some of the encounters of the last 2 years. Very interesting perspectives. None that I would have guessed and most of which go totally against what many liberals THINK other countries want from us…

    i hate categorizing by party but it’s the easiest way to simplify.

    Another oddity is how protective some are of Americas extremely lenient immigration rules even though no European country is as lenient as us. None give citizenship just for being born there… all are so much stricter. (Or at least most).

  19. Jerry Waszczuk

    President of Congress John Hancock sent a broadside to General George Washington instructing him to have it proclaimed “at the Head of the Army in the way you shall think it most proper  Washington had the Declaration read to his troops in New York City  on July 9, with thousands of British troops on ships in the harbor. Washington and Congress hoped that the Declaration would inspire the soldiers, and encourage others to join the army. AFTER HEARING THE DECLARATION, CROWDS IN MANY CITIES TORE DOWN AND DESTROYED SIGNS OR STATUES REPRESENTING ROYAL AUTHORITY. AN EQUESTRIAN STATUE OF KING GEORGE IN NEW YORK CITY WAS PULLED DOWN AND THE LEAD USED TO MAKE MUSKET BALLS.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Adam_Simon_Oertel#/media/File:Johannes_Adam_Simon_Oertel_Pulling_Down_the_Statue_of_King_George_III,_N.Y.C._ca._1859.jpg

  20. John Hobbs

    Jerry Waszczuk-

    “after the Communist Control Act which was enacted into law in 1954  and the  US communist party was outlawed.  ”

    Stop repeating this idiotic lie. The Communist Party was never outlawed, as a literate reading of the act reveals and Communist candidates have frequently been on state and local ballots.

    [moderator] edited

    1. David Greenwald

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Control_Act_of_1954

      Key part: “the Supreme Court of the United States has not ruled on the act’s constitutionality. Despite that, no administration has tried to enforce it. The provisions of the act “outlawing” the party have not been repealed. Nevertheless, the Communist Party of the USA continues to exist in the 21st century.”

      So, like everything in this country, you have to read the fine print – the Communist Party has never been outlawed and the act that you keep citing has never been enforced.

  21. Jerry Waszczuk

    David

    The Supreme Court of the United States has not ruled on the act’s constitutionality one way or another means that the Communist Control Act of 1954  is a  valid act and Communist Party formally does not exist and the members of  the communist party officially  can’t participate in any election to elect public officials and can’t held public offices or teach in public schools regardless that some communism oriented judges issued some  decision contradictory to the Communist Control Act of 1954. Anti-communist oath persist despite communist judges court rulings . And this is a good sign that this country will not fell into the  Communism slavery . It would end of the free world . if don’t understand this and you dreaming about Lenin in charge than something wrong is  with you .

      1. Jerry Waszczuk

        Where . Examples  . Show me a one county or city where somebody who  declared  himself as  US   Communist Party member was placed on ballot Party member than was accepted or elected .

      2. Howard P

        David…Jerry’s comments…

        “The Supreme Court of the United States has not ruled on the act’s [Communist Control Act of 1954 “] constitutionality one way or another …” is true, as written.  His conclusions from that are incorrect…

        Note, in particular,

        However, the Supreme Court of the United States has not ruled on the act’s constitutionality. Despite that, no administration has tried to enforce it. The provisions of the act “outlawing” the party have not been repealed. Nevertheless, the Communist Party of the USA continues to exist in the 21st century.

        See, as my source,

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Control_Act_of_1954.

        So, your statement,

        All your comments are false.  Factually incorrect.

        is partially false and incorrect… the word “all” in particular… the use of that word is 100% factually incorrect.

        1. Howard P

          Am not liking this “dump on Jerry” thing that Mr Hobbs and you are seeming to get into… Jerry, like me and many others here, sometimes word things ineloquently (to say the least), yet some seem to be “protected” from ‘call-outs’ for views or wording, as David knows… Jerry posts with full name.  At least you and John H do the same… but I find the image of the ‘ban button’ disturbing…

  22. John Hobbs

    “David

    The Supreme Court of the United States has not ruled on the act’s constitutionality one way or another means that the Communist Control Act of 1954  is a  valid act and Communist Party formally does not exist and the members of  the communist party officially  can’t participate in any election to elect public officials and can’t held public offices or teach in public schools regardless that some communism oriented judges issued some  decision contradictory to the Communist Control Act of 1954. Anti-communist oath persist despite communist judges court rulings . And this is a good sign that this country will not fell into the  Communism slavery . It would end of the free world . if don’t understand this and you dreaming about Lenin in charge than something wrong is  with you .”

    David, this is a clear indication that this poster lacks the self control and civil manners to be a productive part of discussions on the Vanguard. His past transgressions and the shameless self-promotion of his nefarious labor  lawsuits should also serve as evidence to his real purposes.

  23. John Hobbs

    ” but I find the image of the ‘ban button’ disturbing…”

    But Jerry’s continuous antisemitism, personal attacks and contempt for this country is fine by you.

    1. Howard P

      Well if that is a statement, as I see no question mark, you are a stater of untruths.

      You say I’m OK with antisemitism, and contempt for this country… all untrue…

      And, by the way, I consider those personal attacks.  But that’s OK, because I just called you out as a liar.  We’re even.  And I’m done.

      Oh, John… you have your own personal ‘ban’ button… it’s called ‘ignore commenter’… your choice…

  24. Karl liebhardt

    Please explain – how do you see the pledge?  Is it a pledge to the central gov’t, to the populace or to a set of ideals embodied in the constitution, or all of these things?  My sense is that people like kaepernick note a disconnect between the ideal and the real, which is understandable.  But it is also seems to speak to the idea that the system /and /or the people who are part of it, are almost beyond redemption and “fixing” things via the system is unworkable.

  25. Jerry Waszczuk

    David 
    Beside that you are censoring me and deleting my  comment you  are also manipulator  . My posts were not about whether the Communist Party of USA continuous to exist in the 21 st century but whether the  Communist Party is legal or illegal after the communist were  outlawed by the  Communist Control Act of 1954, Existence versa to be legally registered and to be legally qualified party by Secretary of State office  are two different issues  . However , you are being mean and rude and you deleting my posts not to let other people to read what I wrote about .  
      The Communist Control Act of 1954. The Act was and is  openly prohibitory; its announced purpose is to bar the Party’s name from appearing on any national, state or local ballots. The Communist Control Act, how­ever, is based on legislative, rather than judicial “findings and declarations of fact.”‘” Among these “facts” is the assertion that the Party’s role as “the agency of’ a hostile foreign power renders its existence a clear present and continu­ing danger to the security of the United States and that “the Communist Party should be outlawed
    Prior the Communist Control Act of 1954 was enacted,  the Smith Act of 1940, was  more general anti-subversion statute, was more successful in hampering the Communist Party’s activities. Although originally di­rected against both Communist and fascist-oriented groups, this Act was most commonly and successfully invoked in the 1950s and early 1960s  ( Six years after Communist Control Act of 1954 was enacted ) the  against mem­bers and functionaries of the Communist Party.'” The legislation reaches the acts of individuals, without affecting the legal status of any group. Specifically, the Act punishes “organizing” and “membership” by imposing criminal sanctions against any individual who: knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability or propriety of overthrowing the government of the United States.
    The Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950  embodied another legislative determination — that “Communist action” and “Communist front” organiza­tions, as participants in a worldwide movement controlled by “the Communist dictatorship of a foreign country, presented a “clear and present danger to the security of the United States and to the existence of free American institu­tions.”‘” The Subversive Activities Control Act required such organizations to register with the Subversive Activities Control Board. The Board was empow­ered to order the registration of any organization it found to be a Communist front or Communist action group. A registration order carried grave consequences: the members of the registrant organization could not apply for or use passports, nor hold jobs in a “defense facility;” the organization itself was restricted in its use of public communications media, and was denied certain tax exemptions.
     
    In Dennis v. United States, eleven leaders of the Communist Party had been convicted under the Smith Act of conspiring to organize the Communist Party of the United States, a group advocating the overthrow of the nation by force and violence. The petitioners had also been convicted of so conspiring “knowingly and wilfully.””” The convictions were affirmed by the Supreme Court. Chief justice Vinson, writing for only a four member plurality, focused on the con­stitutionality of prohibiting the advocacy of government overthrow when that advocacy was not accompanied by action. According to the Chief Justice, the goals of the Party were not legally relevant because the means advocated by the Party to achieve these goals lacked constitutional protection:  

    Communist Party trials
    Main article: Smith Act trials of communist party leaders
    After a ten-month trial at the Foley Square Courthouse in Manhattan, eleven leaders of the Communist Party were convicted under the Smith Act in 1949.[53] Ten defendants received sentences of five years and $10,000 fines. An eleventh defendant, Robert G. Thompson, a distinguished hero of the Second World War, was sentenced to three years in consideration of his military record. The five defense attorneys were cited for contempt of court and given prison sentences. Those convicted appealed the verdicts, and the Supreme Court upheld their convictions in 1951 in Dennis v. United States in a 6-2 decision.
    Following that decision, the DOJ prosecuted dozens of cases. In total, by May 1956, another 131 communists were indicted, of whom 98 were convicted, nine acquitted, while juries brought no verdict in the other cases.[54] Other party leaders indicted included Claudia Jones and Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, a founding member of the ACLU who had been expelled in 1940 for being a Communist.
    Appeals from other trials reached the Supreme Court with varying results. On June 17, 1957, Yates v. United States held unconstitutional the convictions of numerous party leaders in a ruling that distinguished between advocacy of an idea for incitement and the teaching of an idea as a concept. The same day, the Court ruled 6-1 in Watkins v. United States that defendants could use the First Amendment as a defense against “abuses of the legislative process.” On June 5, 1961, the Supreme Court upheld by 5-4 the conviction of Junius Scales under the “membership clause” of the Smith Act. Scales began serving a six-year sentence on October 2, 1961. He was released after serving fifteen months when President John F. Kennedy commuted his sentence in 1962.[55]

    (Trials of “second string” communist leaders also occurred in the 1950s, including that of Maurice Braverman.)

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for