The Future of Confederate Monuments

I think the debate at this point lacks authenticity and sophistication. We should be realizing that oppression doesn't foster feelings of love or affection much less for justice. The Reconstruction period in the South shows us that the liberated Slaves were far from demonstrating that their 200 years in bondage helped them understand the complexity of human emotion.  What galls me most is the insinuations of the breeding of Slaves and illicit sexua.l practices that this preoccupation may infer.  What of our sexual revolution and the pretext that SEX IS LOVE.  Shouldn't Southerens be countering this is proof positive they LOVED their Slaves????

Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. The statues represent our failures and as a reminder of the evil of Slavery. However, we tend to judge people of the past using today's virtue's which should be done but keep in mind things were differently back then in terms of beliefs and culture. We slowly evolve as a nation trying to correct our mistake of the past & become better as much as we can. Quit trying to destroy our history and historical monuments with your supposed moral superiority your hurting our future in the long run. None of our founders were perfect & to reject them based on their flaws is foolish. Lincoln was an abolishinist and did his best to free the slaves & you want to remove his statues because he wasn't perfect enough for your over inflated virtues? Quit destroying our history & monuments dispite the ugliness of our past this is how we learn & strive to be better.

Removing any monument from the National Parks would be a serious mistake in terms of awakening public interest in history. Showing such disregard for those who placed those monuments there to honor the dead would likely result in a marked drop in visitors to these historical sites, as well as donations towards the preservation of these places from the forces of urban encroachment. This loss of history in the long run would be almost as much a tragedy as the loss of life that led to the existence of these hallowed sites. I fear that the removal of the monuments and subsequent denigration of the Confederate soldier's identity and memory will ultimately lead to the eradication of many of these historical sites in less than 20 years.

In battle it is common practice for civilized soldiers and leaders to respect the fallen and honor the valarant. Fighting for what you believe in whether it be freedom from oppression or whatever reason. Men and woman suffered on both sides a monument is a token of remembrance for both sides.

Leave the statues and monuments alone. Its history . Also no one living today was ever a slave or slaveowner. Also many people who lived in the south during civil war and since have moved north and vice versa so people who support villifying confederates or union ideas are fighting their shadow. Enough of this silly idea of redoing history. Live in the real world and reality that no one is perfect.

As a historic preservationist this is very troublesome.  The monuments were placed on battlefields by both sides, in the case of Chickamagua it was a mutual project by Union and Confederate veterans.  In  courthouse lawns, squares, public medians and other places the reason both North and South were the same -- memorializing community loss.  Here is an article in the peer reviewed Nineteenth Century Magazine.  https://www.academia.edu/41329543/Forever_in_Mourning_Union_and_Confeder...

What's next renaming of the southern states that fought against the Union in the Civil War are we then going to start renaming ships and everything else and will just tear down everything it doesn't matter what it was it needs to stop

ALL of these civil war monuments need to be protected and preserved! Period! Those that want these historical monuments removed aren't going to visit places like Gettysburg and Bull Run anyway! Leave them alone for our future generations. 

What a bunch of pack of lies is trash of article is you realize without these monuments the battlefield Parks will go out of business first you idiots from the left always say they belong in the battlefield museum in cemetery battlefield parks are all those in one and yet you cannot leave anything alone all of these propaganda lies have already been debunked a lot of Yankee monuments were put up during the Jim Crow era so why the one-sided lie.

Those that remove history are doomed to repeat it you communist are never going to be satisfied you'll go after George Washington and other presidents next mark my words.

Leave the monuments alone!! 330 million would agree.. Its part of our history. Men of all colors died in battle 1861-1865. Trying to erase history is only for the ignorant and those that actually believe if you dont see a statue you'll forget about something as crucial as our country's historic battle od the south merely trying to secede from a dictatorial govt!!

History is not there for you to like or dislike.  It is there for you to learn from it.  And if it offends you, even better.  Because then you are less likely to repeat it.  It's not your to erase.  It belongs to all of us.

Many of the articles i read about the JIm Crow laws and the like there is never any mention who was passing the laws.  I don't ever recall the Democrftic Party ever apooigizing for their role in the mess.

We also have to discuss Africas role in slavery.  They were capturing their fellow human beings and selling them into slavery.  It still happening to this day.

Lincoln led Republicans controlled both houses of the 37th Congress. One of their select committees was the “Committee on Emancipation and Colonization.” The following resolution from that committee explains exactly what motivated Northern “anti-slavery.” Anti-slavery meant nothing more than “anti-black;” and to rid the country of an “inferior race” to prevent amalgamation. It was this kind of immoral racism that led to Southern secession in the first place. Is it any wonder that the MISSISSIPPI Declaration of Secession laments that the North “seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.” If this is why the South was “pro-slavery,” in order to protect their black neighbors from Northern racism, what else are we not being told about the cause of secession and war?

37th Congess. 

No. 148. REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON EMANCIPATION AND COLONIZATION,In the House of Resentatives, July 16, 1862:

“It is useless, now, to enter upon any philosophical inquiry whether nature has or has not made the negro inferior to the Caucasian. The belief is indelibly fixed upon the public mind that such inequality does exist. There are irreconcilable differences between the two races which separate them, 

as with a wall of fire. The home for the African must not be within the limits of the present territory of the Union. The Anglo- American looks upon every acre of our present domain as intended for him, and not for the negro. A home, therefore, must be sought for the African beyond our own limits and in those warmer regions to which his constitution is better adapted than to our own climate,and which doubtless the Almighty intended the colored races should inhabit and cultivate.

Much of the objection to emancipation arises from the opposition of a large portion of our people to the intermixture of the races, and from the association of white and black labor. The committee would do nothing to favor such a policy; apart from the antipathy which nature has ordained, the presence of a race among us who cannot, and ought not to be admitted to our social and political privileges, will be a perpetual source of injury and inquietude to both. This is a question of color, and is unaffected by the relation of master and slave.

The introduction of the negro, whether bond or free, into the same field of labor with the white man, is the opprobrium of the latter... We wish to disabuse our laboring countrymen, and the whole Caucasian race who may seek a home here, of this error... The committee conclude that the highest interests of the white race, whether Anglo-Saxon, Celt, or Scandinavian, require that the whole country should be held and occupied by those races.”

General Lee exclaimed:"The best men in the South have long desired to do away with the institution of slavery, and are quite willing to see it abolished. UNLESS SOME HUMANE COURSE, BASED ON WISDOM AND CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES IS ADOPTED, you do them great injustice in setting them free.” 

CSA Governor Henry W Allen Jan 1865

"To the English philanthropist who professes to feel so much for the slave, I would say, come and see the sad and cruel workings the scheme.--Come and see the negro in the hands of his Yankee liberators. See the utter degradation--the ragged want--the squalid poverty. These false, pretended friends treat him with criminal neglect. William H. Wilder, He says the negroes have died like sheep with the rot. In the Parish of Iberville, out of six hundred and ten slaves, three hundred and ten have perished. Tiger Island, at Berwicks Bay, is one solid grave yard. At New Orleans, Thibodaux, Donaldsonville, Plaquemine, Baton Rouge, Port Hudson, Morganza, Vidalia, Young's Point and Goodrich's Landing, the acres of the silent dead will ever be the monuments of Yankee cruelty to these unhappy wretches. Under published orders from General Banks, The men on plantations were to be paid from six to eight dollars per month, In these orders the poor creatures after being promised this miserable pittance, were bound by every catch and saving clause that a lawyer could invent. For every disobedience their wages were docked. For every absence from labor they were again docked. In the hands of the grasping Yankee overseer, the oppressed slave has been forced to toil free of cost to his new master. I saw a half-starved slave who had escaped from one of the Yankee plantations, he said "that he had worked hard for the Yankees for six long months--that they had 'dockered' him all the time, and had never paid him one cent!" The negro has only changed masters, and very much for the worse! And now, without present reward or hope for the future, he is dying in misery and want. Look at this picture ye negro worshippers, and weep, if you have tears to shed over the poor down-trodden murdered children of Africa."

General Robert E. Lee was offered the command of the US Army at the beginning of the Civil War but turn down the offer . He could not fight against his State: Virginia. At that time Loyalty was to your State not to the USA. Leave the monuments stay so that all future generations can learn from our past history. Like it or not, many races and ethnic groups fought for both sides. 

I just wish we would allow each locality to vote on whether to keep or remove their monument and let the majority of votes make that decision. I don't think people realize that in most cases these men had their United States citizenship restored and all rights that go's with it. Some were elected to local,State and Federal Offices.

They a art that was paid for with blood and if they go everything will go black memorial  union memorial  and all others if we don't have all history we need none and no in not racist I have black people in my family too so it's not black or white its history 

Lee wasn't a slaveowner. Lee ended the war and saved thousands of lives. He was one of the greatest generals of our country's history, along side George Washington and Patton. This talk about the south being the epitome of racism at that time is misconstrued. The north was just as racist and only cared for their own power, using that desired power to put tariffs on the South. Read into the Corwin Amendment, it is possibly the most heinous and racist legislation ever brought to Congress and was perpetrated by Northern politicians and was given inaugural approval by Lincoln. The reason people want to deface history and reshape it all as racist, which doesn't end with the civil war and the confederacy, is because it gets rid of the idea of state rights to decide their future and introduces the concept of tyrannical governments dictating our lives as a justified end, despite the means. 

Dear Sir or Madam

It is difficult to know which inaccuracy in this story to address first.

First, let me begin with the slander against Robert E. Lee. There is simply no evidence that General Lee was a "brutal slaveowner." There is a story unearthed within the last several years that Lee instructed a sheriff to whip one of the Arlington House slaves. As you know, corporal punishment in the mid-19th century was common in both civil law and, especially, within the military. As an Army officer, there is no doubt that General Lee ordered soldiers to be punished with corporal punishment. Punishment by flogging was not as common in the United States Army as in the United States Navy, but it was used by both branches of service.

I believe that placing General Lee's actions concerning the punishment of this slave within a mid-19th century perspective is vitally important. How can we judge men and women of the 19th century by the standards of the 21st Century? This slander against General Lee can be clarified by reading any of the many standard biographies. 

Second, if Robert E. Lee was a traitor, then so was George Washington and every leader of the American Revolution. All of the men and women whom we revere as leaders of the Revolution were considered to be traitors to Great Britian and the King. The British Colonial administration considered everyone who took up arms against the King to be a traitor. Indeed, the Sons of Liberty and other groups were considered to be terrorists by British administrators and the British military.

Third, had the Civil War never taken place, Robert E. Lee would still be remembered one of the finest officers who ever served in the United States Army. His military record prior to the War was nothing short of brilliant. His feats of engineering were remarkable, including changing the direction of the Mississippi River at St. Louis. He made valuable contributions to the American victory in the War with Mexico and was recognized for his bravery. He served a superindent of the United States Military Academy. By the way, Lee graduated second in his class and the only student without a demerit. General Winfield Scott called Lee the finest soldier he had ever known.

Again, any standard biography will reveal that General Lee was not, by 19th Century standards, a traitor. He opposed secession and only resigned from the United States Army after his native state of Virginia had seceeded. He could not take up arms against his own state and his own people. 

Therefore, if Robert E. Lee was a traitor against his national government, so was George Washington. 

Fourth, let us set aside General Lee's brilliant leadership during the War. He is widely acknowledged as one of the great military leaders of all time. Instead of debating his military prowness, let us consider his years after the War. As president of Washington College, General Lee sought to rebuild the South by educating the young men of the South. He developed a highly creative and remarkably practical curriculum. He led the college with distinction and quelled student protests against Federal authority. 

Fifth, General Lee could have chosen not to surrender at Appomattox Court House. He could have disbanded the Army of Northern Virginia and fought a guerrilla war. This may have caused the horrors of the War to last for several more years. That he chose to surrender is an important turning point in American history.

Finally, concerning the placement of most Confederate monuments in the last decade of the 19th Century and the first two decades of the 10th Century. Certainly, these were decades of racial segregation not just in the South, but across the nation. White Supremacy was a reality across the nation and it was reflected not only in the treatment of African Americans, but also in the genocide of Native Americans, and the bitter prejudice against Chinese immigrants and other ethnic groups. 

After four years of brutal combat fought largely within the Southern States, much of the South was in ruins. The task of rebuilding the South into a viable part of the nation took decades. Many Northern monuments were erected as early as the late 1860s and the 1870s. More were erected in the next three decades. Not only was the South impoverished, but the primary focus of remembrance in the first twenty years after the War was the discovery and the reinterrment of Confederate dead. While the activity to honor Union dead was led by Clara Barton and funded with Federal money, in the South this effort was led by the Confederate Memorial societies formed by the ladies of the South. Thousands of Confederate dead were discovered and properly buried. This was a vitally important effort. 

The erection of Confederate monuments and memorials served the same purpose of monuments and memorials decaded to Union heroes and regiments. That purpose was to remember the tragedy of the War and the courage of the men who fought. Confederate monuments were erected in the early decades of the 20th Century because it took that long for the various memorial associations and local governments to raise the money necessary to erect said monuments.

Develop ways to place both Union and Confederate monuments within their historical context. Removing Confederate monuments from the National Parks System will be a costly process that will take years. Years of litigation will follow the attempt to remove such monuments because most were erected by Confederate memorial societies. The descendant organizations of the memorial societies, such as the UDC, will use every legal means to prevent their removal. The answer is not removal, but placing Confederate monuments within their historial context.

Jeffrey C. Lowe

What completely incorrect and false description of REL. This article is so full of lies I can not even begin to start on where it is false. Lee freed the slaves that his wife inherited. Lee never owned any property besides his horses and saddles.  And Lee has never been described as brutal. A man of honor.

The Confederacy represented millions of Americans, including the descendants of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, George Mason along with US Senators, +40 year US war veterans, former Presidents and Vice Presidents, etc.   It doesn't matter if they won or lost, but should be preserved as reminders of the Americans who fought in the most significant and largest war in our history that occured on American soil.  They fought and died doing something that was very American; seeking Independence from a distant powerful Federal Government and protecting home and family from a deadly, destructive military invasion.

Leftists particularly wants to remove the Confederate monuments because its government was too American in nature and represents the greatest threat to their globalist agenda.  They know the Confederacy were the true heirs of US colonial ideals that carried on the legacy of the Thomas Jeffersonian view of the Constitution.  They malign the Confederacy because it remains the most successful limited-government/ conservative movement ever to stand up to a powerful, controlling, invasive federal government that was intent on conquest and subjugation of civilians. Even the British at the time recognized that the war between the states was an honorable attempt for Independence and freedom: “the Southerner is fighting, not only for his life, but for that which is dearer than life, for liberty; he is fighting against one of the most grinding, one of the most galling, one of the most irritating attempts to establish tyrannical government that ever disgraced the history of the World.” – Mr G. W. Bentinck, then representing British house of Parliament.  It's no surprise the American Communist party has prominently displayed Lincoln between Lenin and Stalin after Lincoln permenantly "destroyed the old republic of the founding fathers and laid the foundation for a new order seen today." (Fleming Foundation)

Here's why Confederate Monuments & Memorials are being removed, so people don't know what they really fought for.  Here's a cursory review of what is engraved on Confederate Monumnents:

I think the following Confederate Monuments accurately capture the goals and objectives of Southern American/Confederates:

Austin, Texas: “Died for states rights guaranteed under the Constitution. The people of the south, animated by the spirit of 1776 to preserve their rights withdrew from the Federal compact in 1861. The north resorted to coercion. The south against overwhelming numbers and resources fought until exhausted.

Columbus, Georgia: “To honor the Confederate Soldiers who died to repel unconstitutional invasion, To protect the right reserved to the people, and to perpetuate forever the sovereignty of the states.”

Richmond County, Georgia: “These men died in defense of the principles of the Declaration of Independence.”

Augusta, Georgia: “For the Honor of Georgia. For the Rights of the States. For the Liberties of the South. For the Principles of the Union. As these were handed down to them from the Fathers of our common country.

St Louis, Missouri: “To the memory of the soldiers and sailors of the southern Confederacy who fought to uphold the right declared by the pen of Jefferson and achieved by the sword of Washington. With sublime self-sacrifice they battled to preserve the Independence of the States which was won from Great Britain and to perpetuate the Constitutional government which was established by the Founding Fathers.”

It is alarming and immoral that there are individuals who  wish to  remove and distroy   vistidges  of our nations history for it is that history both good and bad that has forged our strength among nations. I fault our Congressional leaders and many in the media for their lack of educational background and context of our history. Are we going to enact changes to cover up our history and follow in the footsteps of the former Soviets, Chinese and North Koreans? It's bad enough that our teachers slant and inject their opinions/persuasions in the  classroom. Early in the building of our great country people came to our shores wanting to start anew...they "Americanized " their name, learned English and didn't expect anything but hard work to fulfill their dreams. They had no expectation of an entitlement to prosperity and success!  Nor did folks go around calling themselves African Americans....Mexican Americans...Asian Americans,  rather they were proud to be labeled as an American! 

Bottomline, if we are so ashamed and don't learn from our past mistakes then we are aptly going to fail in this "great experiment " of a Republic...for the people and by the people, one nation under God with liberty and justice for all!

IS there any documentation proof R Lee BEAT ANY slave? Keeping in mind during his extensive military career PRIOR to the ACW, He was stationed abroad. He IN FACT inherited the slaves AFTER the death of his father in law.....

It's very concerning that the National Parks Traveler would publish such a deceptive and malignant article.  I would expect a more evn-handed approach that grasps why the monuments are where they are, instead of a "woke" diatribe condemning noble men of another era.  How does the author feel about slave-owning, tobacco-growing George Washington?

Wish we had a Robert E. Lee today. He was truly a great man.

The requirement for the Parks will probably be based on 1619 project on the past history requirements. Which we all know has been proven not true. I hope we get true and honest history lessons if this is a requirement for anywhere that we have to set our statues of old.

I have visited Civil War sites (Gettysburg, Manassas, for instance), and have driven through most of the South (Virginia, the Carolinas, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama, Arkansas, Missouri).  I have also traveled through (in vehicle) from western Germany through to Austria (and into Slovakia).

Perhaps one might try to fight for their notion that Nazis are worse than slave-holders.  How much worse, though?  Especially when one considers that modern day versions of both are nearly inseparable in the public consciousness and consistently work together as a common cause?  So enjoy what you claim is a difference, but it isn't enough of one that there is some moral high ground for the slave-holding racist traitors that sought to leave the country for the sole purpose of continuing to keep other humans as chattel.

I will not be attending, visiting, giving a nickel to the national parks that allow such heinous misrepresentations of actual, factual history.  When I visited Gettysburg, I was shocked and appalled at how pro-traitor the monuments and even worse the store owners are/were.  My wife and I were dismayed and saddened at how much 'honor' was given to racists and slavers.

As the just-former president (ironically, it turned out) stated, we should execute traitors.  To that end, every single combatant that fought against the United States during the Civil War (or the War of Southern Treason) should have been executed.

The U.S. has a LOT to make up for in its past, but the losers of the worst era of our country's history need to get over themselves.  For a group of people (the losers) who constantly whine that the descendants of the actual slaves need to move on, it is immensely ironic that they are unable to do so themselves, especially considering how heinous their 'side' of the facts really were and still are.

Leave the monuments to Confederate and Union troops alone.  There was immense courage and valor on both sides!  

Long live the Union and Hurrah for Dixie.

Of course the democrats are try remove confederate monuments, they don't want to admit how racist they were and still are!!!! YOU CAN NOT EREASE HISTORY!!!! leave things alone and stop believing the democratic b****shit lies!!!!! It's apart of the nation's history whether you like it or not!!! Let's go and remove all the statues of the civil rights movement then!!! Fair is fair!!!!

Monuments of both sides are very appropriate for battlefields. Both monuments depic the struggle of the battle. A monument in the front of a courthouse, on the side of a mountain, in the middle if a town square. Is not an appropriate place. The monuments placed in those places was put there for intimidation purposes.  To remind certain people of just where they are. What the rules are and who was going to win. A big part of being scared of your enemy is a psychological warfare. Keep them poor, down, uneducated,  in poverty, physically beaten. While showing them how superior you are. So the ones being held back will not rise up and demand equal treatment because they don't know any better. When the oppressed rise up the oppressors are now scared to be treated like they have trested the oppressed ones.

It is my right as much as anyone elses to appreciate the physical monuments to my ancestors. To deny anyone that right runs counter to what is right by American standards and it would be discriminatory to remove them. You tell only half a story if only half is represented on the field. It is completely shameful to even consider this action. Why do you think people frequent these fields? They do so to fully understand about battles and the war itself. As far as removing history, it is s matter if history that these monuments were erected in the first place. See how many visitors come and get a "both sides" story if they are taken away. It's damnable to do so.

Let's pretend slavery didn't happened. It did and you can erase history. 

Humphrey, you need mental health counseling bud. You are SERIOUSLY using the example of fascists to defend Censorship??? I'm from the north, my ancestors fought for the union. Most little towns, in Pennsylvania at least, have a union soldier monument at their courthouse or what have you. I wasn't shocked to see confederate monuments when I moved to the south. I actually enjoy seeing all the monuments here, they're interesting. I don't flip them off and say "that guy shot at my great great great great grandpappy!!! Tear it DOWN!!!!" because I am in fact NOT a basket weaving, chronically offended nutcase with no life who is so emotionally fragile that I feel victimized by a hundred year old statue. Have you ever actually been to Gettysburg or Antietam??? There are far more union monuments than confederate monuments, like 5 to 1 easily. Im not victimized by the pyramids even though brown skinned people enslaved my mother's people to build them. That's in a really famous book you may have heard of yet I've never heard of anybody calling to tear those racist oppressive things down and pay me reparations. What DOES offend me however, the grandson of a WWII vet who liberated Dachau is when people try to cheapen the Holocaust. Dachau is STILL there btw, and there ARE German military monuments in Europe as there SHOULD be to remind people of what happened there. As a decendant of Union veterans, I think I can speak for my ancestors when I say Leave the damn monuments ALONE or you WILL start something. And the sons and daughters of UNION veterans WILL stand up alongside the sons and daughters of confederate veterans to ensure you find yourself on the losing side of that. But I'll chip in five bucks to put up a monument to all you idiots after it's done. Get a life dude. 

Ridiculous waste of time and resources.....we are not living in the past; we learn from the past to make the future better for all people.  Historical fact cannot be erased from the timeline of this country.....

If they remove all monument from battlefield what's next. taking down George Washington and Jefferson and every president that owned slaves too?

Removal of Confederate Monuments will destroy towns like Gettysburg. The monuments are beautiful and paid for by State Legislatures. It is not the General Lee Monument, it is the Virginia State Monument. These marxists need to read about General Lee. There was no brutal nature within him, a true Christian Gentleman.

if ALL STATUES ARE REMOVED INCLUDING ANY BLACKS, WHITE  AND ALL OTHERS THEN WHAT WOULD ANYONE COMPLAIN ABOUT? SHOULD THE RED TAILS BLACK PILOTS IN WORLD WAR TWO BE FORGOTTEN AND ALL OTHER RACES. THERE ARE RACIST IN EVERY RACE INCLUDING BLACKS. WHY ARE THEY DECIDING WHAT SHOULD BE DONE WITH THE PAST. 

All nations , organizations , groups of people and people themselves have something in their past that's not so great. We can destroy everything in sight that might remind us of our history and our education system can continue to teach falsehoods , but it won't change one thing that happened. Slavery was not the only reason for the Civil War . States rights had alot to do with it. It's always about money and power. I say  dont name any road , building , monument etc. after anyone , I dont care what color they are or what they did. There's always going to be someone to come along 25 yrs. later and object. The Egyptians  and the  Roman's held the Jews in captivity, should we go tear down their statues and rewrite their history. There have been slaves of all races throughout the history of the world in every part of the world. All we can do is move forward and treat each other with respect on a daily basis. All we here in the media and from the politicians is about how bad race relations are in this country. Again it's all about money or power.

The marxist in this country are doing everything they can to divide and conquer the USA.  They love to find things they can use to offend and divide people.  This is yet another example of the left wing politically correct cancel culture mentality.

Wow - what a flood of comments within barely 12 hours - and what a flood of poorly-written, stream-of-consciousness, only-loosely-aligned-with-the-truth comments by modern-day sympathizers with the Lost Cause!  Look: statues and monuments to Confederate military men, on the battlefields on which they were engaged, supplemented with suitable signage and interpretive material, are entirely appropriate for our national battlefield parks.  Because that's instrumental to how these parks can teach about their history; and communicating and appreciating that history is what these parks should be all about.  But that doesn't mean that the men represented in these statues and monuments were in any way, shape, or form, "heros".  They were traitors to the nation fighting for one of the worst causes in American history, Southern chattel slavery.  How did this comment thread become twisted into some sort of Confederate revivalist stream?

 Just like the nazis did to the Jews democrats want to destroy not only confederate statues but any reminder of what made our country free. It's nothing but revisionist history. And some sick twisted fantasy of communist to divide our nation.

This article promotes the Democratic Party Agenda of its Maoist Cultural Revolution sweeping the nation like the black plague.  This agenda is the national policy of the NAACP Headquarters, in Baltimore, in its "Take em Down Movement" which was first promulgated formally by its past President Mfumo in 1987.  It is built on historical inaccuracy, lies, and promotes an agenda of black power and black racism for political and monetary purposes.  All across America weak-kneed liberals and misguided academic Marxists have spewed this drivel and persuaded spineless government officials of its false agenda of guilt and shame upon the South and the Confederacy.  The War between the States was not fought over slavery, and that is a historical and proven fact!   The Maoist Cultural Revolution that is being promoted is blatant historical revisionism, is unpatriotic, and is dividing the United States and is promoting racial division and may bring about another Civil War. It is being promoted to bolster the Democratic Party and fill the coffers of the national headquarters of the NAACP in Baltimore. Its motivation is about power and greed and racial domination.  

The real "Lost Cause" is continuing to hide the New England transatlantic slave trade origins that funded the New England economy. That history and the only southern port sectional taxes keep getting swept under the rug as the key trigger of the war. The Morrill Tariff was it and there was no Andrew Jackson as President to stop it. They’re not interested in truth but only in continuing the northern "Holier than Thou" propaganda to hide their key role in initiating and profiteering off of the slave trade and also their unconstitutional southern only port taxes. It's also technically correct to say the "Jim Crow North." Jim Crow laws started in Boston in 1838 by separating people by race in railcars more than 20 years before the start of the war. Just a small sample about the propaganda taught about the war. The finger pointers are mainly interested in covering their own greed and guilt ridden history. The southern agricultural system was set up in the north to profit the northern power structure. They turned their heads while the technically illegal slave trade continued. One of the Brown brothers of NE prominence was the last one to illegally dump slaves on Jekyll Island Georgia in 1858. The southern only port tariffs funded the Federal purse up to 75-90 percent and the northern controlled congress would not allow compromise on stopping yet another southern tax. So the north made money and profits on the slave trade, cheap cotton for nothern manufacturers, and the southern port taxes. Look up the Devil's Punch Bowl in Natchez and then tell me how much the north fought to free slaves and cared for slaves. Thousands of women and children were left to die while the "free" men "were pressed into duty" to pick cotton to send to northern mills. And why did slaves run to Canada and not just stop in the northern US? That's another interesting answer if you can make the correct associations. This simpleton, biased non academic study of the confict embarassingly exposes you as ignorant or underhanded. And yet there is still more... Start with your own Generals. 

I'm stuck wondering how many of the rightwing commenters on this article are actually supporters of our national parks and protected lands, how many are actually usual readers of NPT, and how many are just rightwing fringers who got the word to show up and spout.

There are always someone that that any memorial offenses. I won't name the ones that offend me. I believe as many southerners do that "Civil War" was a misnomer put in place by the winners. A civil war is where two sides fight to control an entire nation. No one called Geo. Washington and his revolution a civil war. The war of 1861-1865 was a war for Southern Independence. Mr. Lincoln was willing for Southern states to continue slavery until the abolitionist forced him politically to move toward emancipation. Make no mistake Lincoln was a knowledgeable politician. It is a great shame on him that between early November 1860 and March 20, 1861 he hardly lifted a finger to head off war. If J.F. Kennedy had been president-elect then he would broken his hump to prevent war; he knew what war was all about.

The whole idea of removing veterans’ memorials from the lands where they (veterans of this land we call home) fought and died, the very blood from their veins seeping through the earth, is repugnant and sacrilegious. Don’t even get me started on the Generals lied about in some of these comments or the full reasons for that war. All of that is immaterial. It is simple. Those are sacred lands. Our ancestors who loved this country shed their blood, sweat, tears, limbs, and gave up their lives in war.  Many were conscripted and had no choice.  Only immoral, sacrilegious persons would want to remove memorials from battlefields. This whole subject is vile. 

The purpose of remembering history is to not repeat the unsavoryor hurtful past. To remove the monuments is an attempt to hide or erase history, wrong path, we should educate not only the good but all history. It's there to see how far we have came but yet how far we still have to go.