Fair comment or apologist for Nazis or Nazi himself?

@SW-User I agree. Why remove the statue?!!

@SW-User History should conform to what's politically correct, amirite?

@SW-User No,not in my opinion, too Orwellian for my taste.

@SW-User I was being facetious :P I agree with you entirely.

@SW-User You know, you never know here, but glad you are a free thinker.

@SW-User A statue isn't usually a historic artifact but is a monument celebrating someone's life. In this case it was a Confederate general.

It gets to the tricky question as to whether it's a side of history that should be celebrated. I get why black Americans would see that as a symbol of oppression. Also, think who uses Confederate flags and why.

@Burnley123 A historic artifact is only one after the fact. And why is it less significant than a cultural one? I am not for destroying our history because I don't like it. Celebrating it? They lost, their cause was flawed, nobody with any sense agrees that slavery was a good thing for our country...I am still against taring it down.

Yes, lets go to all the countries in the world and tare down all sautes that supposedly celebrate a cruel leader/ civilization ..like even ancient civilizations, nothing should be spared. Who is for that? Why would it be different? Because more time has elapsed between atrocities?

hi Literaturegirl
History teaches through artefacts. In Germany the government has decided to change names of military buildings from Nazi era military commanders because they found Nazi cells in the army. Removing civil war statues is the same thing. The battle of ideas needs to be won against Nazism or it will repeat. There is no reason to object to the removal of pro slavery icons. Erect some statues showing the hero of the fight against slavery. That is the real history and also reflects the ideas which all but Nazis want.
Best wishes
:)

ps

German army to drop Nazi names from barracks more than 70 years after end of World War Two


Germany’s defence minister has called for the names of Nazi-era figures to be removed from military barracks.

“The armed forces have to make it clear, both internally and to the outside world, that they are not a continuation of the Nazi Wehrmacht,” Ursula von der Leyen said on Sunday.

Historians welcomed the initiative, but called for an exception to be made in the case of Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, the “Desert Fox”, because of his part in an assassination plot against Hitler.

While there are no modern German barracks named after major Nazi war criminals such as Hitler or Hermann Göring, several are still named after military figures from the Third Reich.

The Marseille air force barracks in Appen is named after Capt Hans-Joachim Marseille, the “Star of Africa”, a fighter pilot who took part in the Battle of Britain and North Africa campaign, and shot down 158 Allied aircraft, more than any other Luftwaffe ace.

The Lent army barracks in Rotenburg is named after Col Helmut Lent, a “night-fighter” pilot who shot down 110 Allied aircaft, 102 of them at night.

The Schulz-Lutz army barracks in Munster is named after Maj-Gen Adelbert Schulz, commander of the 7th Panzer Division, who served in the invasion of Belgium and died on the eastern front.

“The Bundeswehr should focus more confidently on its own 60-year history. Why not in barracks names?” Ms von der Leyen told Bild am Sonntag newspaper.

The minister’s initiative comes after a far-Right terror cell was uncovered within the German army. Two soldiers have been arrested on suspicion of planning to carry out a “false flag” terror attack and blame it on refugees, including an officer who led a double life posing as a Syrian asylum-seeker.


The case has reopened debate over the role of the military. The Bundeswehr was founded in West Germany in 1955 as a completely new military force, officially eschews any link to the Nazi Wehrmacht. But Nazi memorabilia was found on display in the officer’s mess at a barracks where the two arrested men were based.

“It’s long overdue to rename the last barracks named after Wehrmacht officers,” Prof Johannes Tuchel, head of the German Resistance Memorial, told Bild am Sonntag.

“Officers like Schulz, Lent and Marseille fought in Hitler’s war and were part of Nazi propaganda.”

The barracks should be renamed after soldiers who resisted the Nazi regime, he said. “Those who fought for human rights and the rule of law cannot be commemorated enough.”

But he called for an exception to be made in the case of two barracks named after Field Marshal Rommel because of his part in the von Stauffenberg plot to assassinate Hitler.

While it has never been fully clear exactly what role Rommel played, he was forced to commit suicide by Hitler loyalists over his support for the failed plot.

@SW-User I respect your point but I am not sure you understand mine. A statue is not a historical artefact. It is a monument made to celebrate something after the fact. The statue itself is more historic than it is cultural. I am not at all in favour of hiding history or destroying historic artefacts.

This is an extreme example to demonstrate the point: Imagine if a university in Berlin had a statue of Hitler. It would not be wanted because it would be seen to celebrate a shameful history. A Confederate statue is a less extreme version of the same thing.

I advocate learning about all history, even (and especially) history which is difficult and uncomfortable. I also think it's fair to learn about the Confederacy and that there were other issues involved apart from slavery.

The debate about this statue though is primarily about race. The people who are defending it are white supremacists and they are doing it because they have neo-confederate and racist beliefs. I am not saying anyone on here agrees with them in any way of course because none of you does but I am saying that I understand why people are against Confederate symbols.

@sogdianrock The removal of the statue predictably incited reaction. Better it stay, not least as a reminder of how things were. You can't erase history by removal and/or changing buildings, nor make Nazi sympathisers change either. Just leave the statue to be shat on by birds, left to rust and decay -but a!so as a reminder of what was once highly valued in the US

hi Burnley123
it is about political ideas and statues just represent them to people as creditable. Sure have history displayed just representing the ideas you live by not dead nazi ideas.Its the ideas not the stones.
Best wishes
:)

@sogdianrock But ideas in culture can have manifestations in physical form; like this one.

In London, the most famous statues are of Winston Churchill and Horatio Nelson; war heroes both. The statues say something about the values of the country and what it wishes to celebrate. Given my own politics, I idolise neither and think that Churchill was a more complex figure than many realise. However, they are not symbols which represent the dominance of one group of people over another.

Symbols have power because of the meaning ascribed to them. Not everything about the Confederacy was bad but the point is that the people who use these symbols and ascribe meaning to them usually do so for the worst reasons. For them, a Confederate symbol is a right-wing protest against the Government and celebration of domination over African Americans.

hi Burnley123
Sure. The Government has to choose which symbols best represent the ideas which they want to represent the ideology of the state. In this case it has wisely been decided to remove statues of confederate generals. See above newspaper report how the Germans are removing Nazi era generals from their army bases because it influences soldiers to admire right win g ideas. It is long overdue in both countries.
As for Churchill he represents a wide range of ideas which is appropriate to a democracy.
Best wishes
:)

@sogdianrock Thank you.

@sogdianrock Ignored my response. Rest my case 2 :)

hi Literaturegirl
Sorry for not responding - it was hidden from sight. Case?
We disagree on the purpose of statues. Adverts for the idea of the person and the ideas they represent. Why leave adverts up for something you no longer want people to buy - especially if it is dangerous?
Best wishes
:)

@sogdianrock Read what I wrote perhaps

@sogdianrock So who is with me taking a trip to Greece and removing anything to do with Alexander the Great who's army was not above raping women an enslaving the populations it conquered how about all those Roman statues let's tare them all down!
And any other ancient civilization that celebrates ruthless leaders who conquered nations and held ideas we find abhorrent today we can't celebrate that shit!

@SW-User Excellent point, IMHO

hi justmerae
A trip to Greece would be nice but I have never seen a statue to Alexander The Great in Greece. Anyway he was famous for conciliation with enemies. He married Roxanne who was the daughter of the Sogdians who he conquered at the battle from which I get my name.
Alexander was called The Great because he was. He did not enslave populations and left their rulers in place.
Anyway this is about recent history and the political ideas which should not be advocated as admirable.
Best wishes
:)

@SW-User True lovers of history who believe we can learn from the bad as well as the good from our history would weep at this discussion. Intolerant in name of tolerance, only the warm and fuzzy must exist, and self-righteous in attitude.

@sogdianrock Would be nice if you'd read what I'd written and responded to it, but no worries

@SW-User I guess a difference is that Alexander the Great is not seen as an offensive symbol to a section of the domestic population. There wouldn't be a statue of him in lands that he conquered.

A Greek example would be statues of generals during the Greek post WW2 dictatorship.

@sogdianrock Bullshit when does ancient history become ancient? When has it been long enough to excuse atrocities?

hi Literaturegirl
sorry again. I thought I had and I had replied fully. On re-reading what you said I notice you said the removal of the statues had generated the reaction. That decision was right imho and that of the state governments concerned. Enough is enough with the romanticisation of The Confederacy. It was cause of The Civil War and that must not be refought!
Best wishes
:)