Unfortunately the most important statue is already under lock and key.
In any event, I have to tip my hat to UT for never having been crazy enough to put up a statue of Louis Wigfall. That's to their credit.
Posted on 12/28/2006 11:31:38 AM PST by peggybac
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- The new president of the University of Texas says he will appoint a panel to decide what to do with four bronze statues on the Austin campus that honor confederate leaders and have drawn complaints for several years. William Powers Jr., who took over as president this month, said the advisory committee would look into concerns about the statues, which include likenesses of Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States, and Gen. Robert E. Lee. "A lot of students, and especially minority students, have raised concerns. And those are understandable and legitimate concerns. On the other hand, the statues have been here for a long time, and that's something we have to take into account as well," Powers said in Wednesday's Austin American-Statesman. The university's previous president, Larry Faulkner, wrote an open letter to the campus more than two years ago saying the statues convey "institutional nostalgia" for the Confederacy and its values. "Most who receive that message are repelled," Faulkner wrote. Statuary on the Austin campus has grown more diverse over the years, partly as a result of student-led efforts. A student fee raised funds to install a statue of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. in 1999. Also in the works are statues of Hispanic labor leader Cesar Chavez and Barbara Jordan, the first black woman from the South elected to Congress.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
It isn't just UT Austin. This post-modernist trend of rejecting all history has completely taken over campuses everywhere.
I guess we are lucky the daughter is attending Texas A & M. She and her classmates UNDERSTAND history and are not worried about what people think. They study things that happened years ago and learn how to influence the future.
"I think that getting rid of the statues will allow students to concentrate on studies instead of a bunch of old guys who died years ago. I know many still love the Confederate on here, but it is time to move on. I have discussed this at length with many FRiends here and I still don't get what the use of praising people who lost a war is about. People born in the South cannot possible be jealous of the North winning still can they????? I don't see us shoving it in your faces ever".
...You! Are! An! Idiot! It's called history you moron! That should be a part of the curriculum. Or are you too busy taking "The Art of Dic$ Sucki$$" and other "progressive" classes?
But yet a mere 85 years earlier, the British North American colonies declared themselves free and that they had the unalienable right to do just this.
I think it is difficult to reconcile the "justness" of the American Revolution without also acknowledging the same of the Civil War. Either political subdivisions are free to leave or they are not. Or else, I suppose, it's simply that might makes right. Probably the latter.
A claim that later was shown to have no evidence to back it up. The fact of the matter is that nobody knows for sure what happened to Cinque once he returned to his homeland.
Hyperbole aside, how can you claim that Lincoln violated the Constitution on one hand with his suspension of habeas corpus and then complain that he didn't violate the Constitution on the other by arbitrarily ending slavery in the states not engaged in rebellion? Maybe you should read up a bit on both?
General Sherman's Union troops were ordered to burn a wide swath across Georgia. They burned everything, including churches, and ransacked houses as common thieves and pillagers. This has been documented, even by southern children of the time, who witnessed and wrote down the criminal acts of Union soldiers.
Then no doubt you can provide the documentation? Sheman's men burned rail lines, transportation facilities, economic targets like cotton gins, municiple buildings, and other legitimate military target. The claims that they burned everything in sight is a southron myth.
Blacks in my rural community near Nashville were FORCED to build a railroad bridge across the Harpeth River (a mile from my house) by the Union Army who was supposedly busy freeing those blacks from slavery.
And the alternative was what? Remain in the fields FORCED to toil away for their master? No hypocrisy in that claim, is there?
By the way, Tennessee was not covered by the Emancipation Proclamation so legally they couldn't be freeing anyone.
If you knew the true history of the Civil War...
One might say the same about you.
And your source of information is ........
I keep expecting someone to demand that Duke chisel the statues of General Lee, Sydney Lanier and Thomas Jefferson off the fascade of the Chapel.
Encyclopedia Britannica, Wikipedia, the Mystic Seaport Website. How about you?
Of course, if each subdivision is free to leave whenever it feels like it, the only way for a large political entity to remain intact will be for it to never do anything with which any of its subdivisions disagrees sufficiently. Sort of a permanent Security Council with each subdivision having a veto.
You know, the Poles tried this and it didn't work out very well for them. It got them partitioned among the neighboring powers for more than a century.
I've done a little research on Conque's history after his return to Africa. It is more accurate to say that there is no incontrovertible evidence of his activities. Stories were recorded at the time of his slaving activities, but they were more in the nature of rumors. Poor quality evidence, but not no evidence.
The university should even entertain these people who come to complain about these statues. Just tell them they are there they are staying. You dont have to dipstick.
Should UT remove them or not?
Unfortunately the most important statue is already under lock and key.
In any event, I have to tip my hat to UT for never having been crazy enough to put up a statue of Louis Wigfall. That's to their credit.
If it were up to me? No.
Unsubstantiated rumor is not evidence.
I originally got the data from a site on Google. It appears that they have 'modernized their site and removed such 'filth'.
I do find it interesting that this 'myth' wasn't investigated until the year 2000. I wonder whose feelings were hurt.
Probably had something to do with the movie.
We still praise King Leonidas don't we? How about Queen Boudica? Or William Wallace? Or the defenders of the Alamo? Or even General Custer?
King George III's entire point was that no "people," defined by him as the people of the British Empire, could remain long self-governing if any subgroup of that people could jump ship whenever they felt like it. As the Colonies would probably have found out had they won. How long before further fissioning began? And how long will any people survive in a jungle world, if they constantly divide and subdivide?
Mexican President Santa Anna's entire point was that no "people," defined by him as the people of Mexico, could remain long self-governing if any subgroup of that people could jump ship whenever they felt like it. As Texas would probably have found out had they won. How long before further fissioning began? And how long will any people survive in a jungle world, if they constantly divide and subdivide?
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.