Share this article

print logo

Letter: We shouldn’t romanticize Confederate monuments

We shouldn’t romanticize Confederate monuments

A recent letter urging states to leave Confederate monuments alone did make for an amusing contradiction. In the beginning of the Civil War, America was filled with romantic idealism about war. There was even a case of civilians planning a picnic on a nearby hill to watch a battle. (They soon realized it was a bad idea.) Near the end of the war, as husbands, sons and loved ones came back maimed, or never came back, war lost its romance and people were sick of it. But everything looks prettier from a distance and some want the romance back.

The monuments were put up as tributes to soldiers in a worthy cause. But was it worthy? It was for slavery, and any historian of note will tell you the same thing. States’ rights and self determination all lead back to slavery. The romantics may say that the average Confederate didn’t own slaves. But like most people, they hoped to be rich, and what did most rich people have at that time? Slaves.

Besides, New Orleans has chosen to do this within its own borders. Is that not a case of states’ rights?

Is it a plot to erase our history? No; more to present it truthfully. Germany has monuments of the Holocaust, but there’s no Nazi monument.

Larry Schultz


There are no comments - be the first to comment