A friend shared an article about the history of the statue of Robert E Lee recently removed from Monument Avenue in Richmond VA – the article was well written and shares wonderful insight to the statue’s construction and path to Richmond – the author also painted the well-worn view of why we should honor General Lee – I wanted to address why maybe we should not…
I’ll post a link to the article here for you (“The journey of Mercie’s Robert E. Lee from Paris, France to Richmond, Virginia to Lee’s removal” https://www.facebook.com/Historyofthesouth.pd814/ ), but I quoted the parts of the article that troubled me.
As a military man, I understand honoring great military leaders for expertise and skill with components of the act of war – which is not at all the same as honoring a military leader for defending acts of evil.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
History is important – but was this article really a true reflection of history?
Is this really a history lesson? There’s seems to be significant relevant facts missing from the author’s view of history – one side of a story, is not the story at all.
Perhaps, this is a historically flawed image was buffed up by neglecting the obvious grossness of anyone fighting for, or defending a people group who built a life, economy, and prosperity by dehumanizing, enslaving, and abusing another people group for generations.
For thousands of years, military leaders from all sides of wars and conflicts have been recognized for their military expertise, care for soldiers, and honorable execution of the act of war – I do not find fault in these points honoring Lee – I do find fault with the omission of horrific evil it is to fight and defend a people whose self-professed reason for fighting against the United States forces was to uphold the institution of slavery in the Southern states – there is not honor in that cause.
To fail to acknowledge or reflect on the evil of slavery says more about an attempt to alter history, than the article illustrates about history – it feels disingenuous to show the good side of a skilled leader of soldiers and fail to mention the level of evil that leader fought in support of.
For example:
“It all seemed like a path of destiny, a divine right of a people who had suffered so much loss during the tragic struggle and defense of their homeland, to now have a monument of their most respected general, sitting on his horse in a hallowed place within his native state of Virginia, an embodiment of valor, to remember all those who had sacrificed so much death and hardship from an invading army from the North.” And….
“These soldiers and generals of the Confederacy fought to defend themselves against Lincoln’s invading army, and General Lee gave up all to defend his home state of Virginia, which had rightfully seceded from the Union.”
The author references the sacrifice made by Southerners and “an embodiment of valor” in the face of an invading army without any mention of the crimes against humanity that produced exponentially more suffering, and death on the slaves Lee fought to keep enslaved – not at all a complete picture of the state of the nation, the motives of either army, or the loss of Northerners (also Americans) at that time.
The author mentioned: “Slavery or the defense of it, which Lee felt was a moral and political evil itself, can never take away from the honor and respect due to the thousands of southern soldiers who gave all to protect their homeland.”
This insane oxymoronic backhanded homage to Lee screams of message manipulation – so, what is the take away from this bullet, that Lee, a person who saw slavery as evil, honorably and respectfully lead his countrymen to their deaths and ultimate defeat to defend slavery – first, don’t lose sight of the horrifying human corruption slavery is – second, is there really any honor in fighting against one’s beliefs to perpetuate the human corruption of slavery?
The author referenced, “Lee was placed on that hill for us to remember, to honor, to preserve a part of our southern heritage that we could look back on with pride in view of a great general who never forgot his fellow soldiers, their families, or his own countrymen.”
The Author goes to great lengths to reference and re-reference Lee’s greatness, who fought to defend pride in southern heritage – for me (the reader), it begs for this heritage to be defined – how does one define a heritage that was structured on, and strengthen from the compromise of hundreds of thousands of other human beings – human beings that are continually dehumanized at every attempt to glorify this heritage without any mention of the crimes embedded in this heritage – not exactly transparency.
Finally, the author closes with, “…the landscape around Richmond had changed, now surrounded by the enemies of historical truth, prejudiced toward our southern history and heritage, leaving no respect for its people or its past.”
Again, the author only offers one tone deaf note to his historic tune – I believe the Richmond landscape has NOT changed – the landscape now has a voice that was always there – perhaps, that voice is no longer being suppressed – the author refused to embrace the completeness of historical truth – like a shrewd lawyer painting his criminal client in a favorable light by not brining light to the crime itself.
I do understand heritage – I even understand southern heritage – I was born in Georgia – my mother’s family is from Montgomery – I have siblings born in southern states: Alabama, North Carolina, and Texas – I went to southern schools and churches through the 60’s, and 70’s – my wife is from north Florida – my daughter was born in Florida – my son was born in Alabama – believe me, I totally lived the life – I grew up being fed this same compromised history the author leverages – I have a unique view of southerners who’ve learned from OUR past and embraced a better path forward – I have that same unique view of southerners who deny OUR past and continue to beat the drum of pride in, what is really the horrific evil of slavery.
Kevin's Thoughts 