Memphis Sells Two Public Parks to Get Rid of Confederate Statues

[Yonny Costopoulis]

How are people supposed to know what happened in the past unless they have statues lionizing the leaders of the past? It's not like they could compile this stuff in a book or something.

This made me laugh. Very good (and obvious!) reasoning. Thank you.

 

[SummerMadness]

Let's put up a statue of Mohammed Atta amd see how well that goes over with the "pro-history" crowd.

He is a significant figure in history, why not have a statue to him right in the Financial District?

 

[Landon Caeli]

Tennessee has a law requiring that the removal of any statues from public land be first approved by the state historical commission. In 2016, they passed a law toughening the requirements from the original requirement of a simple majority of the commission to the new standard of a two-thirds majority.

Why removing Confederate monuments in Tennessee is not an easy process

Memphis applied to have its statues of Jefferson Davis and Nathan Bedford Forrest removed, but was denied (because why shouldn't the city have statues to the president of the confederacy and one of the early leaders of the Klan?) So, when they couldn't remove the statues from public parks, they did the next best thing:

They privatized the parks.

And the contract required the purchaser to continue to operate the property as a park.

Memphis removes Confederate statues from Downtown parks

...Well, at least we can still buy their t-shirts. Perfect for birthdays and stocking stuffers.

"Civil War Hero" Men’s Premium T-Shirt by bigtimmystyle | Redbubble

"Jefferson Davis" Men’s Premium T-Shirt by keytesvillemerc | Redbubble

 

[Ana the Ist]

Let's put up a statue of Mohammed Atta amd see how well that goes over with the "pro-history" crowd.

It's a fair point to say the whole "history" angle is nonsense in the case of some statues and monuments. Davis, for example, is really just a historical footnote. Statues of random confederate soldiers aren't meaningful in any way...but to be honest, I never opposed the removal of these kinds of statues.

When we're talking about Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln...and even General Lee...there's an almost absurd reductionism going on by the people who want to remove these statues. All of those men made massive positive contributions to the building and history of our great nation.

Yet to those pushing for their removal, it's all about the worst aspect of their legacy. It becomes some ridiculous argument that "he owned slaves" or "he was racist" or "he fought for the confederacy"...while remaining blind to all they did for this nation.

People who see things only in terms of "race" will always be outraged and at odds with the world.

 

[Landon Caeli]

You can even get Scut Farkus t-shirts online! I want one for next Christmas.

...

 

[Landon Caeli]

Let's put up a statue of Mohammed Atta amd see how well that goes over with the "pro-history" crowd.

How about a t-shirt..?

 

[rambot]

Is there a stayue to tim mcveigh in Oklahoma....like, anywhere?

 

[Babe Ruth]

Has it been mentioned in this thread that the properties were reportedly assessed at over 2 million dollars.. and they were basically given away (for a thousand bucks, right?) to circumvent legal procedure that was created to protect state historical monuments.. Isn't this a gross mismanagement & dereliction of public trust. 2 million dollar park & monuments belonging to the people, given away & subsequently desecrated (?)
Poll after poll (albeit unscientific, ie- local news websites, etc) show popular support for keeping Confederate monuments up, but a motivated, lawless Inquisition keeps demonizing, defacing, & removing them. Sometimes it's individual, criminal acts of vandalism, or grave desecration. But this time it's institutional chicanery & dereliction, my opinion.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Is there a stayue to tim mcveigh in Oklahoma....like, anywhere?

Why would there be? Has he made some contribution to the history of the United States outside of bombing a building and murdering hundreds of innocent people?

 

[Liza B.]

Tennessee has a law requiring that the removal of any statues from public land be first approved by the state historical commission. In 2016, they passed a law toughening the requirements from the original requirement of a simple majority of the commission to the new standard of a two-thirds majority.

Why removing Confederate monuments in Tennessee is not an easy process

Memphis applied to have its statues of Jefferson Davis and Nathan Bedford Forrest removed, but was denied (because why shouldn't the city have statues to the president of the confederacy and one of the early leaders of the Klan?) So, when they couldn't remove the statues from public parks, they did the next best thing:

They privatized the parks.

And the contract required the purchaser to continue to operate the property as a park.

Memphis removes Confederate statues from Downtown parks

What really concerns me is the panicked, bandwagon, mob-like, run-after-this, no-after-that behavior that almost everyone has become susceptible to in these last few years. That's a much bigger danger than some statues in a park.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Has it been mentioned in this thread that the properties were reportedly assessed at over 2 million dollars.. and they were basically given away (for a thousand bucks, right?) to circumvent legal procedure that was created to protect state historical monuments.. Isn't this a gross mismanagement & dereliction of public trust.

In many cases, I would agree, but it's my understanding that it was sold to a non-profit with a contractual mandate to continue using the property as a park. In that case, no, I wouldn't consider it gross mismanagement.

2 million dollar park & monuments belonging to the people, given away & subsequently desecrated (?)

Were the statues included in the sale or just the land?

Poll after poll (albeit unscientific, ie- local news websites, etc) show popular support for keeping Confederate monuments up, but a motivated, lawless Inquisition keeps demonizing, defacing, & removing them. Sometimes it's individual, criminal acts of vandalism, or grave desecration. But this time it's institutional chicanery & dereliction, my opinion.

"demonizing"? lol

 

[TLK Valentine]

Why would there be? Has he made some contribution to the history of the United States outside of bombing a building and murdering hundreds of innocent people?

That's not a contribution to our history?

He declared war against the government... and lost. That seems to be the criteria for getting a statue -- at least if he was further south...

 

[Ana the Ist]

That's not a contribution to our history?

It's rather minor...I wouldn't even put him up there with the guy who invented bubble wrap. I know our educational system tends to focus on war in history class...but war itself is far less important than the circumstances leading up to it and the circumstances after.

He declared war against the government... and lost. That seems to be the criteria for getting a statue -- at least if he was further south...

Who's statue are you comparing him to there?

 

[TLK Valentine]

It's rather minor...I wouldn't even put him up there with the guy who invented bubble wrap.

perhaps not -- but I doubt it's considered "minor" in Oklahoma City...

Who's statue are you comparing him to there?

Those who did likewise and got statues for it -- those who went to war against the US government and lost.

 

[Ana the Ist]

perhaps not -- but I doubt it's considered "minor" in Oklahoma City...

Sure...but we're talking about a historical perspective, not a local one.

Those who did likewise and got statues for it -- those who went to war against the US government and lost.

Example?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Sure...but we're talking about a historical perspective, not a local one.

Local history is still history.

Example?

You really don't know anyone who went to war against the United States government and was beaten?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Local history is still history.

Not so much on a historical perspective though...

I don't recall ever seeing a class for "local history of Oklahoma city" in college...nor a professional historian of something similar.

You really don't know anyone who went to war against the United States government and was beaten?

Not in the manner you're speaking of...no. I mean, the Japanese empire went to war against the United States and got beaten...but to conflate the Japanese empire with little Timmy McVeigh is either a ridiculous overstating of his historical significance or a vast understating of theirs.

Just for the sake of argument though...let's consider Jefferson Davis, most commonly known for his "term" as president of the confederacy. He served in various conflicts such as the Mexican-American War before his election to Congress. The served as head of the Smithsonian institution. The was Secretary of War under Franklin Pierce (I think). He, of course, served in Congress as a Senator ( I think). If I recall correctly, he's quoted as saying that the day his state seceded from the United States was "the saddest day of my life" (odd words for a bloodthirsty black-hating war monger, don't you think?).

Again, he's most commonly remembered as the guy who was in charge of the confederacy.

Now, it should be pretty obvious that to compare him to Timothy McVeigh, Muhammad Atta, or anyone else who's name we only know from the one horrific deed they were a part of requires some childish reduction of history to the worst actions of individuals without any regard for the circumstances and times they lived in.

It's a rather absurd argument.

 

[rambot]

Local history is still history.

I'd wager they have a memorial plaque to the victims and to the event.

But yeah, nothing for the dude.