Robert E. Lee's Ironic Ghost Reveals Contradictions And Concerns About Removing History

History is a bitch.

We all know this.

So let's move from this basic point of reference.

I can understand why blacks are offended by Confederate statues in America. I'd be a tad annoyed as well if I had to look up at dudes who fought to keep me in chains.

It may be a part of history but it doesn't mean someone has to be reminded every time they go out to the grocery store.

Fine lines of respect and all that.

On the other hand, there's something to be said of erasing history too. That the south fought for its rights as they saw it is an integral and intricate part of the American experience. It can't be erased, ignored or forgotten.

Then comes the unfortunate inevitable problem when it comes to sanitizing history. Historical figures tend to be painted with one broad brush when not deserved.

Robert E. Lee is one such figure. For example, he was morally opposed to slavery and dedicated his life to helping blacks integrate during the Reconstruction Era.

Does he really deserve to be targeted? He strikes me as the wrong target. Is he that much worse than Lenin in Seattle? Now there's a movie 'Lenin in Seattle'.


I don't think so. His statue is far more offensive and problematic given his ideology murdered millions.

On any intellectual, moral and political scale Lenin is totes worse than Lee.

Either way, it points to a potentially bigger problem.

It won't stop at Confederate symbols as the incident vandalizing Christopher Columbus's bust/statue showed recently. Or to a more grotesque extreme, the outright destruction of historical artifacts like was the case with Sweden and Viking relics.

It's more about taking out parts of history we don't agree with.

And that's a Pandora's Box best not be opened.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.