4 ms·

The Battle to Rewrite Texas History

26 points by benbreen 7y ago

mnm1 7y ago
I don't understand this obsession with the Confederacy in Texas or in the south in general. You don't see Germany having "Nazi Soldiers Day" or Hitler statues. And there's a damn good reason for that. That kind of heritage is damaging and holds our entire society back. It's one of the many things that essentially says "slavery was ok and racism definitely still is." It's frankly, fucking disgusting. What happened should be taught in schools, but it shouldn't be celebrated with holidays and statues like it's something to be proud of. It's shameful, disgusting, and ugly and it makes those who celebrate such things shameful, disgusting, and ugly too.
- shepherdjerred 7y ago
  You're not going to get very far in diplomacy if you don't try to understand their point of view.
  - gameswithgo 7y ago
    I live in the Texas, my mother was born in Texas, my wife is from small town texas, as are her parents and grandparents. Many people in my family have this same obsession with the confederacy. I hear them talk about it, I've lived it, and I do not understand it either. It was a revolution to defend the right to own slaves (as we stated explicitly at the time: https://www.tsl.texas.gov/ref/abouttx/secession/2feb1861.html https://www.tsl.texas.gov/ref/abouttx/secession/2feb1861.htm... ) so that we could do farming. mostly. its not interesting, its disgusting, I do not see what there is to be proud of. Smart people try to explain and sound like idiots. Yes, I'm not a diplomat.
    - non-entity 7y ago
      Ironically there's a lot of intersection with ultra-nationalists
    - defertoreptar 7y ago
      I worked with a guy who was very much the type to have a confederate flag and grew up worshipping the Dukes of Hazzard. I remember when the controversy started lifting off and they began taking down statues, he was confused and upset by it. I've seen this guy around all sorts of people, and he's about the furthest thing from a racist Nazi there is. I believe the "confederate rebel" idea is a source of pride for some groups and is ingrained into their culture. Sometimes that may be mixed with antiquated and racist themes, but they're not always the same thing.
      - krapp 7y ago
        >I believe the "confederate rebel" idea is a source of pride for some groups and is ingrained into their culture. Sometimes that may be mixed with antiquated and racist themes, but they're not always the same thing. Yes. They believe the Civil War was really about states' rights and independence from Federal authority, and that slavery was just an incidental part of that greater struggle, and that their culture represents the last strain of "pure" (politically, not racially, but also kind of yes racially) American culture reflecting the original intent of the founding fathers, before the Federal government started its slide into totalitarianism. It's a lie, but like all effective lies, it's half-baked in truth. Yes, the Civil War was about states' rights... the right of states to own slaves. Yes, Southern forces fought, often valiantly, for their independence... from anti-slavery laws. Yes, there were issues other than slavery, specifically, that caused the South to secede. Every one of those issues inevitably intersects with the institution of slavery at some point. The lie is that it's possible to somehow extract Southern culture from its racist roots, as if slavery and its legacy can just be ignored and set aside as not really pertinent, when slavery was as foundational to the South and its culture as anti-Semitism was to the Nazis. Sure, Hitler designed the VW Beetle and the Nazis built the Autobahn (but not entirely), but that's no reason to fly the swastika in your window.
        defertoreptar 7y ago
        > The lie is that it's possible to somehow extract Southern culture from its racist roots, as if slavery and its legacy can just be ignored and set aside as not really pertinent, when slavery was as foundational to the South and its culture as anti-Semitism was to the Nazis. And yet we do not hold cultures of the world accountable to their roots. Many religions and cultures of today stem from primitive patriarchal beginnings. And just as many have people within who hold these backwards views (anti semitic Palestinians, racist rednecks, Post-Apartheid racism, etc.) As soon as you generalize the people of a culture and make assumptions about them separate from the non-controversial aspects of the culture, then that is when you yourself need to question if you're being the prejudiced one.
  - frequentnapper 7y ago
    oh we understand. we just don't accept nor tolerate celebrating or defending the right to own slaves. not in this century.
  - mnm1 7y ago
    Good. Such people don't deserve diplomacy. You want to be diplomatic with someone who wants to enslave and possibly rape and kill you? Who values such things even after a war was fought so those things world no longer be the norm in our country? That's insane. Confederate supporters, like Nazis, do not deserve diplomacy. It's unfortunate their relics were allowed to exist. There should have and could have been an exception made to the first amendment for this. And don't give me this bullshit about heritage. No one wants to hear about their disgusting heritage. They should be ashamed for even bringing it up. We can learn about their horrible ancestors in school and make sure that shit never sees the light of day again, as heritage or as the reality a lot of these people want to bring back.
- chippy 7y ago
  > I don't understand There you have it
- azernik 7y ago
  It's perfectly understandable. When Germany lost the war, it disavowed the Nazi ideology. When the South lost the war, it kept on believing that white supremacy and slavery were okay.
heyflyguy 7y ago
I'm a 7th generation Texan, still live here and was educated in the system. My dad, my grandfather, uncles all talked alot about Robert E. Lee. "A brilliant battlefield tactician and leader of the confederate army". It's absolutely awful why we seceded, I don't agree with it now. Would I have agreed 150 years ago? I think it's easy to look back and measure him up as a bad man when you use a 2019 yardstick. Little is mentioned about his post-war efforts to encourage pacification of white on black violence, encouraging of all African American kids getting an education, and his denouncement of his own military education. The history books should be accurate, and accurate all the way around. I ask you, what is the value of painting him a bad man if you don't also highlight his own public repentance for so many of those deeds. My city has renamed several confederate parks, always highlighting that "Robert E. Lee fought for slavery" and "didn't want blacks to vote". Both are true statements, but you miss a huge educational opportunity and I believe a chance to teach a powerful lesson: Apologizing, rebuilding, unity, freedom - all of these things require an open and honest conversation about what happened. Lee had extremely complicated views on slavery. His words: '''In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution, is a moral & political evil in any Country. It is useless to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence.''' In summary, I don't condone him. I don't think statues are appropriate. But erasing his full life with his post-war works and efforts is losing an opportunity to heal.
- trowawee 7y ago
  Actually, a lot of people at the time had issues with slavery! At an absolute bare minimum, 3.9 million enslaved people in the United States probably had some strong critiques to level against the existing system of slavery and Lee's decision to commit treason in defense of that system. Of course, Robert Lee didn't consider those people to be humans, with full human rights. And similarly, when you ignore their humanity, and you ignore the historical record of abolitionists from the United States and all over the rest of the world, it becomes a lot easier to pretend that anger at the continued celebration of someone who committed treason in defense of slavery is somehow based on shifting modern mores. The post-war stuff isn't being ignored; it just doesn't matter. The value of "painting him as a bad man" is that he was a bad man, who did horrible things, for horrible reasons, and people like your family still think he was actually a great hero. Even in the language you use, you imply that you don't actually think he was that bad, and you definitely are suggesting that opening a school later in life somehow mitigates leading the military arm of a rebellion in defense of slavery. It really, really doesn't!

26 points by benbreen 7y ago

mnm1 7y ago

I don't understand this obsession with the Confederacy in Texas or in the south in general. You don't see Germany having "Nazi Soldiers Day" or Hitler statues. And there's a damn good reason for that. That kind of heritage is damaging and holds our entire society back. It's one of the many things that essentially says "slavery was ok and racism definitely still is." It's frankly, fucking disgusting. What happened should be taught in schools, but it shouldn't be celebrated with holidays and statues like it's something to be proud of. It's shameful, disgusting, and ugly and it makes those who celebrate such things shameful, disgusting, and ugly too.

shepherdjerred 7y ago
You're not going to get very far in diplomacy if you don't try to understand their point of view.
- gameswithgo 7y ago
  I live in the Texas, my mother was born in Texas, my wife is from small town texas, as are her parents and grandparents. Many people in my family have this same obsession with the confederacy. I hear them talk about it, I've lived it, and I do not understand it either. It was a revolution to defend the right to own slaves (as we stated explicitly at the time: https://www.tsl.texas.gov/ref/abouttx/secession/2feb1861.html https://www.tsl.texas.gov/ref/abouttx/secession/2feb1861.htm... ) so that we could do farming. mostly. its not interesting, its disgusting, I do not see what there is to be proud of. Smart people try to explain and sound like idiots. Yes, I'm not a diplomat.
  - non-entity 7y ago
    Ironically there's a lot of intersection with ultra-nationalists
  - defertoreptar 7y ago
    I worked with a guy who was very much the type to have a confederate flag and grew up worshipping the Dukes of Hazzard. I remember when the controversy started lifting off and they began taking down statues, he was confused and upset by it. I've seen this guy around all sorts of people, and he's about the furthest thing from a racist Nazi there is. I believe the "confederate rebel" idea is a source of pride for some groups and is ingrained into their culture. Sometimes that may be mixed with antiquated and racist themes, but they're not always the same thing.
    - krapp 7y ago
      >I believe the "confederate rebel" idea is a source of pride for some groups and is ingrained into their culture. Sometimes that may be mixed with antiquated and racist themes, but they're not always the same thing. Yes. They believe the Civil War was really about states' rights and independence from Federal authority, and that slavery was just an incidental part of that greater struggle, and that their culture represents the last strain of "pure" (politically, not racially, but also kind of yes racially) American culture reflecting the original intent of the founding fathers, before the Federal government started its slide into totalitarianism. It's a lie, but like all effective lies, it's half-baked in truth. Yes, the Civil War was about states' rights... the right of states to own slaves. Yes, Southern forces fought, often valiantly, for their independence... from anti-slavery laws. Yes, there were issues other than slavery, specifically, that caused the South to secede. Every one of those issues inevitably intersects with the institution of slavery at some point. The lie is that it's possible to somehow extract Southern culture from its racist roots, as if slavery and its legacy can just be ignored and set aside as not really pertinent, when slavery was as foundational to the South and its culture as anti-Semitism was to the Nazis. Sure, Hitler designed the VW Beetle and the Nazis built the Autobahn (but not entirely), but that's no reason to fly the swastika in your window.
      - defertoreptar 7y ago
        > The lie is that it's possible to somehow extract Southern culture from its racist roots, as if slavery and its legacy can just be ignored and set aside as not really pertinent, when slavery was as foundational to the South and its culture as anti-Semitism was to the Nazis. And yet we do not hold cultures of the world accountable to their roots. Many religions and cultures of today stem from primitive patriarchal beginnings. And just as many have people within who hold these backwards views (anti semitic Palestinians, racist rednecks, Post-Apartheid racism, etc.) As soon as you generalize the people of a culture and make assumptions about them separate from the non-controversial aspects of the culture, then that is when you yourself need to question if you're being the prejudiced one.
- frequentnapper 7y ago
  oh we understand. we just don't accept nor tolerate celebrating or defending the right to own slaves. not in this century.
- mnm1 7y ago
  Good. Such people don't deserve diplomacy. You want to be diplomatic with someone who wants to enslave and possibly rape and kill you? Who values such things even after a war was fought so those things world no longer be the norm in our country? That's insane. Confederate supporters, like Nazis, do not deserve diplomacy. It's unfortunate their relics were allowed to exist. There should have and could have been an exception made to the first amendment for this. And don't give me this bullshit about heritage. No one wants to hear about their disgusting heritage. They should be ashamed for even bringing it up. We can learn about their horrible ancestors in school and make sure that shit never sees the light of day again, as heritage or as the reality a lot of these people want to bring back.
chippy 7y ago
> I don't understand There you have it
azernik 7y ago
It's perfectly understandable. When Germany lost the war, it disavowed the Nazi ideology. When the South lost the war, it kept on believing that white supremacy and slavery were okay.

heyflyguy 7y ago

I'm a 7th generation Texan, still live here and was educated in the system. My dad, my grandfather, uncles all talked alot about Robert E. Lee. "A brilliant battlefield tactician and leader of the confederate army". It's absolutely awful why we seceded, I don't agree with it now. Would I have agreed 150 years ago? I think it's easy to look back and measure him up as a bad man when you use a 2019 yardstick. Little is mentioned about his post-war efforts to encourage pacification of white on black violence, encouraging of all African American kids getting an education, and his denouncement of his own military education. The history books should be accurate, and accurate all the way around. I ask you, what is the value of painting him a bad man if you don't also highlight his own public repentance for so many of those deeds. My city has renamed several confederate parks, always highlighting that "Robert E. Lee fought for slavery" and "didn't want blacks to vote". Both are true statements, but you miss a huge educational opportunity and I believe a chance to teach a powerful lesson: Apologizing, rebuilding, unity, freedom - all of these things require an open and honest conversation about what happened. Lee had extremely complicated views on slavery. His words: '''In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution, is a moral & political evil in any Country. It is useless to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence.''' In summary, I don't condone him. I don't think statues are appropriate. But erasing his full life with his post-war works and efforts is losing an opportunity to heal.

trowawee 7y ago
Actually, a lot of people at the time had issues with slavery! At an absolute bare minimum, 3.9 million enslaved people in the United States probably had some strong critiques to level against the existing system of slavery and Lee's decision to commit treason in defense of that system. Of course, Robert Lee didn't consider those people to be humans, with full human rights. And similarly, when you ignore their humanity, and you ignore the historical record of abolitionists from the United States and all over the rest of the world, it becomes a lot easier to pretend that anger at the continued celebration of someone who committed treason in defense of slavery is somehow based on shifting modern mores. The post-war stuff isn't being ignored; it just doesn't matter. The value of "painting him as a bad man" is that he was a bad man, who did horrible things, for horrible reasons, and people like your family still think he was actually a great hero. Even in the language you use, you imply that you don't actually think he was that bad, and you definitely are suggesting that opening a school later in life somehow mitigates leading the military arm of a rebellion in defense of slavery. It really, really doesn't!