Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Virginia Military Institute Removes Statue of Confederate Gen. 'Stonewall' Jackson
NPR ^ | 12/07/20 | DUSTIN JONES

Posted on 12/07/2020 4:19:22 PM PST by Enlightened1

The Virginia Military Institute removed a statue of Confederate Gen. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson on Monday morning. A small group watched as the bronze figure was hoisted off its pedestal in front of the VMI barracks.

The historic figure is being relocated from the campus in Lexington, Va., to its future home at the Virginia Museum of the Civil War and New Market Battlefield State Historical Park.

The statue was sculpted by Moses Ezekiel, a member of the class of 1866, and donated to VMI in 1912. And after standing for more than a century, VMI's board voted in favor of its removal in October.

Confederate statues across the U.S. came under attack over the summer as the nation wrestled with issues of racial injustice. VMI, the oldest state-supported military university in the country, was thrust into the spotlight after a Washington Post article alleged Black cadets and alumni endured "relentless racism."

The university was reluctant to remove the statue. Jackson was a professor at VMI before joining the Confederacy in 1861. Many of the institute's cadets served as drill instructors at Camp Lee when the Civil War started and others served and died in the name of the Confederacy.

The school's former superintendent, retired Army Gen. J.H. Binford Peay III, resigned shortly after an investigation into the allegations was announced. The interim superintendent, retired Army Maj. Gen. Cedric T. Wins, is the first African American to assume the position, The Associated Press reported last month.

"VMI does not define itself by this statue and that is why this move is appropriate. We are defined by our unique system of education and the quality and character of the graduates the Institute produces," Wins, a 1985 VMI graduate, said in a news release. "Our graduates embody the values of honor, respect, civility...

(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: grovel; removes; statue; stonewalljackson; vmi
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last
To: Enlightened1

Knock yourselves out you Schwanzlutschers.


41 posted on 12/07/2020 5:18:56 PM PST by Bonemaker (invictus maneo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

VMI Alumni records are a rich resource for historians and genealogists. This page highlights the Patton family’s connection with VMI—Gen. George S. Patton of World War II fame and his ancestors who attended VMI, including his father, grandfather, and great uncles. Four of seven Patton brothers attended VMI during the mid-19th century, including George S. Patton (VMI Class of 1852), General Patton’s grandfather.

The First Generation

John Mercer Patton
graduate, VMI Class of 1846, standing 8th out of 14; lawyer and judge; Colonel, 21st Virginia Infantry Regiment, CSA; died at Ashland, Virginia, October 9, 1898.

George Smith Patton
graduate, VMI Class of 1852, standing 2nd in a class of 24; after graduation studied law and practiced in Charleston; during the Civil War, was commander of the 22nd Virginia Infantry Regiment CSA; killed at the Battle of Winchester in September 1864. Grandfather of Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.

Waller Tazewell Patton
graduate, VMI Class of 1855, standing 2nd in a Class of 16; after graduation practiced law in Culpeper, VA; Colonel, 7th Virginia Infantry Regiment, CSA; mortally wounded at Gettysburg and died in the College Hospital at Gettysburg on July 21, 1863.

William McFarland Patton
graduate VMI Class of 1865; while a cadet took part in the Battle of New Market as a cadet sergeant in Company B of the Corps of Cadets; after war was a Civil Engineer and Professor of Engineering at VMI and Virginia Tech (VPI); he died on May 26, 1905.

The Second Generation

George S. Patton
Born Charleston (now West Virginia), September 30, 1856, the son of George S. Patton and Susan Thornton Glassell; graduate, VMI Class of 1877; after graduation taught at VMI for one year; studied law and became a prominent attorney in Los Angeles, where he was also active in politics; married Ruth Wilson, 1884; children: George S. and Anne; died June 1927, Los Angeles, CA.

The Third Generation

General George S. Patton, Jr. (1885-1945)
The third Patton to bear the name George Smith; attended VMI for one year (1903-1904) as a member of the Class of 1907; appointed to the United States Military Academy in the spring of 1904 and entered West Point in June. While at VMI he studied Algebra, English, History, Drawing and Latin; he was left tackle on the “scrub” football team, a group which scrimmaged several times a week against the varsity team; a classmate described him as “quiet, straight as a string, courteous, well-mannered, more serious minded than lightsome in conversation.”

https://www.vmi.edu/archives/genealogy-biography-alumni/featured-historical-biographies/patton-family-at-vmi/


42 posted on 12/07/2020 5:19:15 PM PST by Pelham (Liberate the Democrats from their Communist occupation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Stupidity is contagious and is seems to raise its ignorance in the Democrat party


43 posted on 12/07/2020 5:20:04 PM PST by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

This blows me away.

He IS VMI.

Every one of the top military colleges have their heroes. We had ID White and Truman Ransom. They had Jackson.

The old timers must be furious about this.


44 posted on 12/07/2020 5:20:25 PM PST by Vermont Lt (We have entered "Insanity Week." Act accordingly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeffersondem

The New Market food fight against a girls school.


45 posted on 12/07/2020 5:21:51 PM PST by Vermont Lt (We have entered "Insanity Week." Act accordingly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Oh....PLEASE


46 posted on 12/07/2020 5:22:49 PM PST by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
Northern states were exercising their states' rights by refusing to track down and return escaped slaves.

The southern states wanted the national government in D.C. to step in and prevent the northern states from exercising their states' rights in that manner.

That effort failed, so the southern states seceded and formed their own central government, under whose constitution no state was permitted to make its own laws regarding slavery.

So the war -was- about states' rights. The north was the states' rights side.

47 posted on 12/07/2020 5:23:12 PM PST by Eric Pode of Croydon (Am I the last living deficit hawk?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

No slavery had NOTHING to do with the civil war...except..
S Carolina article of secession...bitchin about the right to own slaves being threatned:

These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.


48 posted on 12/07/2020 5:28:53 PM PST by FreshPrince
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Eric Pode of Croydon
Northern states were exercising their states' rights by refusing to track down and return escaped slaves.

You may be shocked to learn that article 4, section 2 of the US constitution required them to return escaped slaves.

By refusing to do this they were defying the United States Constitution.

The southern states wanted the national government in D.C. to step in and prevent the northern states from exercising their states' rights in that manner.

They had no such right. They signed it away when they ratified the Constitution.

Article IV, Section 2 of the United States Constitution.

" No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

The Northern states were in rebellion.

49 posted on 12/07/2020 5:29:09 PM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Yeah, the civil war was fought over states rights..

A particular “right” or so they tought,as a matter of fact....


50 posted on 12/07/2020 5:31:15 PM PST by FreshPrince
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreshPrince
No slavery had NOTHING to do with the civil war...except.. S Carolina article of secession...bitchin about the right to own slaves being threatned:

You've been taught crap history, and like many people, you believe it. What you don't grasp here is that slavery wasn't threatened, wasn't being threatened, and both President Lincoln and the representatives of the Northern states were offering a constitutional amendment to guarantee that slavery never would be threatened, and i'm quite certain you have never heard of it.

Yes, Lincoln and the Mostly Northern congress offered the South a constitutional amendment to guarantee slavery forever. The Congress passed the Amendment, and Four Northern states voted to ratify it.

The Ghost Amendment that haunts Lincoln's legacy.

51 posted on 12/07/2020 5:34:40 PM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Eric Pode of Croydon; wardaddy; Pelham; rustbucket; 4CJ; stainlessbanner; PeaRidge

Is that you Walt?

Walt tried that same eaxct weak argument some years ago but was smacked down handily for it by Nolan Chan and 4JC.


52 posted on 12/07/2020 5:35:28 PM PST by StoneWall Brigade (Live Free or Die)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Stupid Stupid Stupid


53 posted on 12/07/2020 5:37:45 PM PST by Texas Fossil ((Texas is not where you were born, but a Free State of Heart, Mind & Attitude!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreshPrince
Yeah, the civil war was fought over states rights.. A particular “right” or so they tought,as a matter of fact....

They already had that right, and they would keep having that right so long as they remained a member of the United States.

You must have forgotten that the United States was a slave owning nation up until December of 1865 when the last Northern slave state finally gave up slavery.

Slavery lasted eight months longer in the Northern states than it did in the Southern states.

54 posted on 12/07/2020 5:37:55 PM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

And I hope VMI alumni remove their pledges and donations from this once fine institution. Get woke, go broke.


55 posted on 12/07/2020 5:38:36 PM PST by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pelham

Patton’s grandfather should have been given co-command of the Army of Southwest Virginia


56 posted on 12/07/2020 5:40:39 PM PST by StoneWall Brigade (Live Free or Die)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan

He fought for States rights.The Civil War should have been fought politically.
Nevertheless, I don’t think our leaders are preparing to win the next war.


57 posted on 12/07/2020 5:40:44 PM PST by KDF48 (Redeemed by Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

They didn’t want to move it. They were told by the thug Northam administration if they didn’t do it. That he would remove the alumni BOV and replace it with all non alums.


58 posted on 12/07/2020 5:41:35 PM PST by Carry me back (Cut the feds by 90%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan

“Yes but Not Stonewall Jackson. He fought for the exact opposite.”

You need to read some history. Jackson did NOT fight for slavery, he fought because his home state seceded and was deemed an enemy of the U.S., and was thus threatened by the latter. Back in those days loyalty to one’s state was generally superior to loyalty to a Union. Like it or not, as seen from a 21st century mindset, that was the norm back in the 19th century.

Jackson established a school for black children, the offspring of slaves and freemen, which at the time was considered in some instances a criminal act. But Jackson said he did it because it was the right thing to do. He was DEEPLY religious, and personally thought slavery was a social evil, but that since it had existed from time immemorial it was because God allowed it.

Jackson was also a brilliant military tactician, and a fierce warrior who placed duty and honor above any personal ambition (of which he had next to none). It is my opinion that Lee lost at Gettysburg because he fought the battle as he’d have fought it had he still had Jackson. That is where Lee erred, and fatally. Ewell replaced Jackson after Chancellorsville, but Jackson almost certainly would have taken Cemetery Hill and Culp’s Hill on the first day at Gettysburg — where Ewell hesitated and made only a half-assed attempt — which would have made all the difference. In my humble opinion. This is one of the reasons I love history so much: It is full of “what-if’s” that make for fun discussions.


59 posted on 12/07/2020 5:42:48 PM PST by ought-six (Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Insane....The children will never be taught that the south was granted total amnesty.


60 posted on 12/07/2020 5:43:48 PM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson