No, Confederate Monuments Don't Preserve History. They Manipulate It | Opinion

Authored by newsweek.com and submitted by viva_la_vinyl
image for No, Confederate Monuments Don't Preserve History. They Manipulate It | Opinion

America said goodbye and good riddance this month to yet another monument glorifying the Confederacy and lying about history on public grounds.

Visitors to Fort Monroe, the historic site where the first Africans arrived on the shores of Virginia in 1619, will no longer see the name of Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederacy, displayed across its famous archway.

Removing Davis' name is an important rejection of the manipulation of history. The individuals behind the archway sought to fulfill their political agenda by honoring a secessionist government, promoting white supremacy and denying the realities of slavery in the United States. Confederate monuments don't preserve "our history," like some falsely argue. They instrumentalize the past to maintain a nostalgia for a white ethnostate in the public space. And as long as they stand on public grounds, this nation will never heal from its painful past with slavery.

The creation of Jefferson Davis Memorial Park and installation of the controversial archway bearing his name did not occur until the 1950s—not coincidentally when African Americans were fighting for equal legal and civil rights. The United Daughters of the Confederacy, a group responsible for the creation of many Confederate monuments unveiled during the Jim Crow era, spearheaded the initiative.

It was a blatant move to conceal Fort Monroe's significance to the history of the slave trade and the fight for emancipation, as well as the truth about Davis.

Here's the real history: Located in Hampton, Virginia, Fort Monroe comprises Old Point Comfort, the spot where the first documented group of enslaved Africans brought from West Central Africa were disembarked in August 1619. The site embodies the birth of slavery in colonial North America, but it is also a symbol of freedom. During the Civil War, it was a station for Union troops, where enslaved men, women and children sought shelter to escape slavery.

As for Davis, he was a slave owner and supporter of slavery. During the Civil War, which was led by Southern states to preserve slavery, he became the president of the Confederacy. One century later, his name became artificially associated with Fort Monroe simply because he was imprisoned there for treason by the Union.

Black activists and their allies have long fought against the erection of Confederate monuments and demanded that the government make the nation's past with slavery visible in the public space. About six decades after the park's dedication to Davis, a plaque memorializing the 20 enslaved Africans was finally placed at the mouth of Chesapeake Bay in the summer of 2015.

Meanwhile, demands to remove the disturbing tribute to Davis grew.

Finally, on April 16 this year, the governor of Virginia ordered the director of heritage assets and historic preservation officer of Fort Monroe Authority to initiate the removal of references to Jefferson Davis Memorial Park from the site.

The detachment of Davis' name from the arch on August 2 is part of a larger movement to fight the glorification of white supremacy and tell the true story of slavery here in Virginia.

After the election of President Barack Obama in 2008, both George Washington's Mount Vernon and Thomas Jefferson's Monticello accelerated the inclusion of slavery in the interpretation of the two plantations. Likewise, the Arlington House, located in the grounds of the Arlington Cemetery, an estate that once belonged to the Confederate General Robert E. Lee, began telling the history of slaves who worked in the property. Plaques now mark slave-trading sites in cities such as Alexandria. Even the house where Lee spent his childhood in Alexandria now offers a tour that includes its urban slave quarters.

And this October, Jefferson Davis Highway will officially become known as Richmond Highway.

Davis is part of one atrocious chapter of the history of the United States. His name and image no longer belong in the public space. As the country commemorates the 400th anniversary of the arrival of the first enslaved Africans in Fort Monroe, it is not too late to start reckoning with the painful past of slavery and its legacies of racism and white supremacy.

Visitors who want to see the removed iron letters of Davis' name will have to visit the Casemate Museum, which was created to showcase the cell where Davis was imprisoned. Although the arch still stands, we now have the opportunity to create new markers memorializing enslaved men and women, as well as those who fought against slavery.

Those are the people who truly deserve honoring.

Ana Lucia Araujo is a historian, a member of the scientific committee of the UNESCO Slave Route Project, and full professor at Howard University. She is the author of Reparations for Slavery and the Slave Trade: A Transnational and Comparative History (2017). Her book Slavery in the Age of Memory: Engaging the Past will be published in 2020. She tweets at @analuciaraujo.

The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.

BrotherChe on August 19th, 2019 at 13:11 UTC »

People defending Confederate monuments: "You can't erase history"

also them: "Slavery was 150+ years ago, get over it"

SotaSkoldier on August 19th, 2019 at 12:56 UTC »

I've posted this before and I will just post it again:

Unreal. Some of you, I see, are students of “The Lost Cause” southern education. Because if you believe what you just said your history teacher really whitewashed the Civil War for you.

The United Daughters of the Confederacy were founded in 1894. Their mission was to “preserve culture.” Social and political clout to rewrite history. They plastered monuments for confederate soldiers all around the south. If you see one anywhere in the south today is is about 95% likely it was due in some part to the United Daughters of the Confederacy. Their entire mission was to have folks believe that:

Confederate fight was heroic. Enslaved people were happy and were even treated well. Slavery was not the root cause of the war.

Before we delve deeper it is crucially important to understand that the vast majority of confederate monuments in the south put up by UDC monuments were created well after the Civil War as most civil war veterans were or had already died. You are welcome to do your own research on this, but you will find that almost all of them were commissioned 30+ years after and the majority of them even longer than that.

“Confederate fight was heroic”. First let's get some irrefutable facts out of the way which alone prove that the confederate fight was not a heroic one but rather about power and controlling the country as a whole:

Prior to the 1850s the federal government was controlled by the south. They, since they controlled the government, were the ones who refused to sign any mutual search treaties with the british which enabled slavers to move freely between Africa and America even though the slave trade had been outlawed. After America formally outlawed slave trading it was only still prevalent in the south. Look up the stories of the Wanderer, Echo (Putnim) and Clotilda ships. The south was so invested in keeping power they even at one point wanted to take over Cuba to gain two states and 4 more senators because they foresaw losing the senate to the Republican north in the near future.

“Enslaved people were happy and were even treated well.”

That entire notion is based around garbage writings like the ones in the Charleston Mercury at the time that folks have treated as though it was written by slaves themselves. It was not--obviously. The Mercury had a single writer and editor who was Henry L. Pinckney. A politician who was a nullifier. Do you know what the nullifier party stood for? Let me tell you.

“The Nullifier Party was a states' rights, pro-slavery party that supported the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, holding that states could nullify federal laws within their borders and that slavery should remain legal.”

It almost seems as though there is a conflict of interest here. A pro-slave trade nullifier writes an article about how well slaves are treated in a paper that he is the owner and soul writer/editor of? Would that fly today? Hell to the no it wouldn’t. Not only that, but when slaves were brought to America they were often dropped off in Cuba then taken to Fort Sumter.

The slave handler there wrote about how weak the slaves were upon arrival from the brutal mistreatment they endured when they were kidnapped and taken to this country. There are documented writings the the Putnim and Clotilda ships literally smelled like death upon arrival to port. They would have 400+folks on board at departure and have 150-200 on arrival. The rest were thrown overboard.

“Slavery was not the root cause of the war.”

This doesn’t even need citations to prove that it is absolutely nonsense. Saying slavery didn’t cause the civil war is like saying that getting shot with a gun doesn’t kill you--bloodloss and trauma kills you. It is comically stupid. America was built on slaves both North and South. But the North eventually tried to put an end to it with the rest of the civilized world at that time. The South were the only part of the nation who tried to nullify federal laws and continued to secretly enable slave trade for decades after the nation had agreed to stop it.

The south wanted to keep control of the federal government so they did not have to change their way of life which was dirt cheap labor at the hands of enslaved people. That is irrefutable fact. So you and others can say that slavery wasn’t the root cause of the civil war all you like. While they succeeded over not wanting a bunch of yankees telling them what to do it absolutely correct. What the yankees were telling them to stop doing was owning god damn slaves.

“The Lost Cause” education that The United Daughters of the Confederacy have tried to peddle to anyone who would listen is bullshit from top to bottom. They can try to say they are the party of Lincoln and freeing slaves all they like, but at the end of the day they are full of shit and so is “The Lost Cause” If you take America and split it between north and south. The south has 100/100 times been part of the country that was infested with racism to a much greater level than the rest of the nation. That is still true to this damn day. So you can remove Democrat and Republican from the equation. The south are and always have been racist. No amount of retro history is going to make that fact go away so you might as well stop trying to spew that trash.

StonedFloridaMan on August 19th, 2019 at 12:54 UTC »

Before I read the article I said two things to myself.

Daughters of the Confederacy

1950s civil rights era

I ask you.... how the fuck did I know?