Qashistan wrote:The Black Forrest wrote:
Well the people should think this out more. A statue of Lee really doesn't have a place in the city now. Especially with the issues of today. Now you could argue there is a place for them on the battlefields today.
You don't have to worry about Washington until they remove him from the Dollar and Mount Rushmore.
Why not? He was a great general, politician, and he knew when the game was up. He was never a white supremacist. He served the US well in the Mexican war but his loyalty to his home state was stronger than his loyalty to the federal government.
Yes, he owned slaves. So did Washington, Jefferson, Madison, etc. Why do they have a place anymore? Why is the Washington Monument still standing? It is, after all, 2017. Washington died in 1799. Indeed, in our current society, should we really be glorifying a straight white male who served in the army, married and had children, and served selflessly in high political office?
This kind of logic is silly. Lee will always have a place simply because his place in Southern history is monumental.
It's not about who owned or who did not own slaves, it is about who fought a war to maintain slavery. Even if he didn't believe in slavery he still fought on the side that aimed to maintain it. That should not be commemorated.





