Remembering History or Idolizing Violence?
Across the US, there are countless monuments dedicated to war heroes and figures who fought for America’s freedom. But what happens when a monument represents a figure with values contradictory to those widely held today? While many oppose the countless monuments littering the southern US, most of them by products of the civil war, citing the glorification of racist figures and the perpetuation of racist ideology, there are still an overwhelming number of people who are willing to advocate for the monuments staying where they are. Despite these polarizing views, this issue is a testament to the ever present effects of historical events that continue to influence our society still today.
When arguing in favor of historical monuments, many supporters cite the importance of preserving history and heritage. Across the US, there are countless monuments dedicated to war heroes and figures who fought for America’s freedom. These monuments were designed to honour a particular movement, person or event. But what happens when a monument represents a figure with values contradictory to those widely held today? This is the case with the countless monuments littering the southern United States, most of them byproducts of the Civil War. During this time, many states in the South seceded from the Union and formed the Confederacy after the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860. The newly formed Confederacy fought for individual states’ rights, but primarily for the maintenance of slavery – a haunting legacy that continues to plague the United States. This begs the question: Does the display of Confederate monuments perpetuate an outdated, racist viewpoint or is it important to keep them up for the sake of education?
Many proponents of keeping the monuments argue that they serve as educational reminders, rather than being representative of the ideas and views of the people that they depict. The South has seen a resurgence of pride connected to what they would call “Southern heritage,” reminiscent of the old confederacy. Whether it can be connected to the racist ideology that warranted the enslavement of African Americans or not, this movement places heavy emphasis on the maintenance of these monuments. For example, the monument dubbed “Silent Sam” that was formerly featured in University of North Carolina’s campus has been donated to a group with the purpose of preserving Confederate history (Asmelash 2019). In addition to that, $2.5 million dollars has been allotted for the statue to be permanently erected in a different location.
There are several reasons why it is particularly hard to have a monument removed, especially in certain states. Of the 1,880 total monuments commemorating the Confederacy, only 139 have been removed since the 19th century. This is partly due to a law passed by several states –eight and counting– that prohibits the removal of “objects of remembrance” (Tipler et al.). Local legislature is heavily reliant on citizen input, and recent polls that inquired about the relevance of these types of monuments and whether or not they add value to the community found that 65% say they should remain (Taylor 2019). Despite major push back in recent years from groups that claim that the monuments add to racism in the Southern social climate, it is not hard to see how their efforts are often fruitless.
This isn’t to say that the efforts to combat the rise of Confederate sympathies are completely fruitless. In fact, there have been significant strides made through the utilization of new and creative tactics. A new statue has been unveiled in Richmond Virginia that is reminiscent of Confederate monuments, but with a twist. The man featured riding a horse is actually Black, representing the paradigm shift that has occured in the years following the age of slavery (Schneider 2019). The artist Kehinde Wiley, who is widely known for painting the revolutionary presidential portrait of Barack Obama, used this statue as a statement for the changing of narratives and allowing the voices of those who were oppressed to be forefront in the conversation.
Regardless of one’s views on the Civil War and the true driving force behind the conflict, it is important to acknowledge those who were undisputedly affected by the systems set in place at the time. While many oppose the monuments, citing reasons such as the glorification of racist figures and the perpetuation of racist ideology, there are still an overwhelming number of people who are willing to advocate for the monuments staying where they are. Despite these polarizing views, this issue is a testament to the ever present effects of historical events that continue to influence our society still today.
When arguing in favor of historical monuments, many supporters cite the importance of preserving history and heritage. Across the US, there are countless monuments dedicated to war heroes and figures who fought for America’s freedom. These monuments were designed to honour a particular movement, person or event. But what happens when a monument represents a figure with values contradictory to those widely held today? This is the case with the countless monuments littering the southern United States, most of them byproducts of the Civil War. During this time, many states in the South seceded from the Union and formed the Confederacy after the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860. The newly formed Confederacy fought for individual states’ rights, but primarily for the maintenance of slavery – a haunting legacy that continues to plague the United States. This begs the question: Does the display of Confederate monuments perpetuate an outdated, racist viewpoint or is it important to keep them up for the sake of education?
Many proponents of keeping the monuments argue that they serve as educational reminders, rather than being representative of the ideas and views of the people that they depict. The South has seen a resurgence of pride connected to what they would call “Southern heritage,” reminiscent of the old confederacy. Whether it can be connected to the racist ideology that warranted the enslavement of African Americans or not, this movement places heavy emphasis on the maintenance of these monuments. For example, the monument dubbed “Silent Sam” that was formerly featured in University of North Carolina’s campus has been donated to a group with the purpose of preserving Confederate history (Asmelash 2019). In addition to that, $2.5 million dollars has been allotted for the statue to be permanently erected in a different location.
There are several reasons why it is particularly hard to have a monument removed, especially in certain states. Of the 1,880 total monuments commemorating the Confederacy, only 139 have been removed since the 19th century. This is partly due to a law passed by several states –eight and counting– that prohibits the removal of “objects of remembrance” (Tipler et al.). Local legislature is heavily reliant on citizen input, and recent polls that inquired about the relevance of these types of monuments and whether or not they add value to the community found that 65% say they should remain (Taylor 2019). Despite major push back in recent years from groups that claim that the monuments add to racism in the Southern social climate, it is not hard to see how their efforts are often fruitless.
This isn’t to say that the efforts to combat the rise of Confederate sympathies are completely fruitless. In fact, there have been significant strides made through the utilization of new and creative tactics. A new statue has been unveiled in Richmond Virginia that is reminiscent of Confederate monuments, but with a twist. The man featured riding a horse is actually Black, representing the paradigm shift that has occured in the years following the age of slavery (Schneider 2019). The artist Kehinde Wiley, who is widely known for painting the revolutionary presidential portrait of Barack Obama, used this statue as a statement for the changing of narratives and allowing the voices of those who were oppressed to be forefront in the conversation.
Regardless of one’s views on the Civil War and the true driving force behind the conflict, it is important to acknowledge those who were undisputedly affected by the systems set in place at the time. While many oppose the monuments, citing reasons such as the glorification of racist figures and the perpetuation of racist ideology, there are still an overwhelming number of people who are willing to advocate for the monuments staying where they are. Despite these polarizing views, this issue is a testament to the ever present effects of historical events that continue to influence our society still today.
Catalysts for Change
The act of putting up a statue glorifies the person who the statue is of, believing that they have made a significant contribution to history. Many people contributed to history for the good, and many for the bad and in turn for their actions, have had a monument dedicated to honour them and their legacies. Statues are a constant reminder of the way that these people have altered the societies that we live in and the changes that they have made. For the most part, many statues are justified and are of honorable figures that changed the fate of their countries for centuries to come. However, others may not be as such.
The Black Lives Matter movement served as a catalyst and sparked anger amongst many as they questioned why statues and monuments of racist leaders and slave traders adorned their cities. Immediate removal demanded by those who could not stand the idea of these figures remaining in their cities, whilst others argued that these figures had to remain to serve education purposes and remind us of our past. In the UK, amidst the 2020 protests, the statue of Winston Churchill was vandalized, with people claiming him to be a racist, referring to the comments he made about the Indian people when he was in power. Although Prime Minister Boris Johnson condemned the vandalism and labelled the action to be ‘thuggery’, this did not change the mind of people, young and old alike in their beliefs that the statue dedicated to the former Prime Minister should be removed.
In early June, another controversial statue was targeted when the statue of slave trader Sir Edward Colson was toppled and dumped in Bristol Harbour. Whilst the toppling was not stopped, the statue was received and is currently in safe storage by Bristol City Council, with plans to place it in a museum in the future. There is no need to have statues of controversial figures in important, or busy areas of a city, with the justification that they provide an insight to our past, they should be placed in museums, where they will actually be useful for educational purposes.
It is agreed that we cannot change our history, but we can say that we do not agree with the actions of our ancestors. Beliefs and ideas are constantly evolving and former beliefs are not compatible with contemporary ones. The display of confederate monuments reflects the idea that racists figures with outdated viewpoints are looked up to however, although this may be the case in the South of the US with many of these statues being a source of people's pride, this is not the case elsewhere in the country. The driving argument to keep these statues is that they are a preservation of history and heritage, but the only thing they are doing is reflecting outdated beliefs. These statues should be removed and placed in museums, by doing this, society may just be one step closer in reducing inequality and racism.
Although it can be hard to remove statues, and in some cases, there may be some laws present prohibiting the removal of them, the public should not settle for this. They should actively campaign for the removal of them through petitions and protests, so we can remove racist ideas from our societies and eliminate these figures who did more harm than good. It is important to learn about history, and be aware of the pasts of our countries, however, we do not need the statues of racist and controversial figures around our cities in order to help us to learn and understand.
The Black Lives Matter movement served as a catalyst and sparked anger amongst many as they questioned why statues and monuments of racist leaders and slave traders adorned their cities. Immediate removal demanded by those who could not stand the idea of these figures remaining in their cities, whilst others argued that these figures had to remain to serve education purposes and remind us of our past. In the UK, amidst the 2020 protests, the statue of Winston Churchill was vandalized, with people claiming him to be a racist, referring to the comments he made about the Indian people when he was in power. Although Prime Minister Boris Johnson condemned the vandalism and labelled the action to be ‘thuggery’, this did not change the mind of people, young and old alike in their beliefs that the statue dedicated to the former Prime Minister should be removed.
In early June, another controversial statue was targeted when the statue of slave trader Sir Edward Colson was toppled and dumped in Bristol Harbour. Whilst the toppling was not stopped, the statue was received and is currently in safe storage by Bristol City Council, with plans to place it in a museum in the future. There is no need to have statues of controversial figures in important, or busy areas of a city, with the justification that they provide an insight to our past, they should be placed in museums, where they will actually be useful for educational purposes.
It is agreed that we cannot change our history, but we can say that we do not agree with the actions of our ancestors. Beliefs and ideas are constantly evolving and former beliefs are not compatible with contemporary ones. The display of confederate monuments reflects the idea that racists figures with outdated viewpoints are looked up to however, although this may be the case in the South of the US with many of these statues being a source of people's pride, this is not the case elsewhere in the country. The driving argument to keep these statues is that they are a preservation of history and heritage, but the only thing they are doing is reflecting outdated beliefs. These statues should be removed and placed in museums, by doing this, society may just be one step closer in reducing inequality and racism.
Although it can be hard to remove statues, and in some cases, there may be some laws present prohibiting the removal of them, the public should not settle for this. They should actively campaign for the removal of them through petitions and protests, so we can remove racist ideas from our societies and eliminate these figures who did more harm than good. It is important to learn about history, and be aware of the pasts of our countries, however, we do not need the statues of racist and controversial figures around our cities in order to help us to learn and understand.
