The Holocaust was a genocide of one group by an enemy. We don't want to forget the Nazis because they are a symbol of where you get to if you allow prejudice created by self-interest to go unbridled. That story is told by the victors.
Slavery helped facilitate the modern world and as unpalatable as that is, it is an undeniable fact of history and one that directly relates to today.
Slavery is an integral part of history which was legal and accepted as normal at that time in history. To airbrush out that fact would be foolish for reasons previously discussed and to completely vilify those that wanted it to continue would be judging their attitudes by modern standards.
I see no point in the retrospective demonisation of historical figures as it serves no purpose beyond political tokenism and pandering to stupidity.

You have to ask yourself where you draw the line.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (17 Aug 2017 6.43pm)

Yeah but America also has statues of Jefferson Davis and parks and high schools and streets named after him and some states celebrate his birthday as a national holiday. Not really the same as Rommel. More similar to Germany keeping statues of Hitler up.

I don't understand the point that lots of people are making, how on earth is removing a statue 'airbrushing history' if anything it's confronting it and making it more relavent in today's world.

This history has a place in America, that place is not as a sign of celebration and vindication through statues and public memorials, but in education and museums and being viewed in the correct context.

Edited by coulsdoneagle (17 Aug 2017 6.54pm)

Most of these statues were placed several decades after the civil war, at the height of KKK activity more for political than historical reasons. Their very presence was a statement to others rather than a lesson to learn from the past. I'm not one to say that they should be airbrushed out, but many were certainly graffitied in.

If people become overly attached some are possibly as attached to the message as they are the monument, hence the type of person who showed up to defend it. On the other hand if individuals decide to deface or destroy they should be arrested as they are not the voice of the community or elected body. It should ideally be down to local communities to decide their future.

Interestingly General Robert E. Lee was invited to attend a meeting to plan granite statues in 1869. His reply: " “My engagements will not permit me to be present, & I believe if there I could not add anything material to the information existing on the subject. I think it wiser moreover not to keep open the sores of war, but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife & to commit to oblivion the feelings it engendered.”

There's more than one way to learn from history, I'm sure he'd agree.

Edited by wordup (17 Aug 2017 8.21pm)

I think you're completely missing the point of their actions.

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Not just Lee though - few Confederates attended and many from both sides and none shared his view that the war should be allowed to rest.

Really?

Do explain.