Posted on 10/07/2015 6:19:55 PM PDT by BBell
The latest issue of The Economist magazine, a center-right publication that claims a weekly readership of 1.5 million, calls for New Orleans to remove its Battle of Liberty Place monument, as well as statues of famous Confederates.
The article takes aim at divisive statuary in general, but it names the Liberty Place obelisk as a concrete example of a monument that merits no public support.
"When public land and resources are used in a way that causes widespread offence, as preserving these state-sponsored tributes does, the authorities should have a good reason for doing so. In (the case of Liberty Place), they don't," the article says.
The Liberty Place monument, which now sits at the foot of Iberville Street in the French Quarter, commemorates a bloody 1874 coup against the Reconstruction government of Louisiana by a band of ex-Confederates.
As is The Economist's tradition, the opinion piece is unsigned.
The piece lays out three main arguments for keeping divisive statues in place, none of which The Economist finds persuasive. The arguments, which have been raised by many New Orleans residents who want to keep the statues, include: the need to preserve history, the existence of more pressing concerns and the difficulty in distinguishing between the relative sins of historic figures.
It is important to preserve history, the magazine writes, but official endorsement of such statues suggests the figures they commemorate "should be not just remembered but publicly revered."
The point echoes a similar theme Mayor Mitch Landrieu has used in his advocacy of the removal of the Liberty Place obelisk and statues of Robert E. Lee, P.G.T. Beauregard and Jefferson Davis, all famous Confederates.
The Historic Development Commission's staff has also raised concerns that allowing the statues to stay in
(Excerpt) Read more at nola.com ...
Oh, and it was also a paramilitary organization of the Democratic Party. Imagine that.
To totally destroy America, you must destroy EVERYTHING American. The commie lib ‘RATS are on a scorched earth mission. Destroy! Destroy! Destroy! Anybody fed up yet?
Your average low information voter would not know that....NOLA is a chocolate city after all.
The Economist is a coffee table decoration that liberal hipster douchebags subscribe to so that they may put it on display so they look clever to their liberal hipster douchebag friends.
I agree with you. Conservatives should be 100% behind tearing down monuments to Democrat race riots in Reconstruction Period and Jim Crow South. We should be behind ripping down every monument to a Jim Crow Dixiecrat. And ripping down Woodrow Wilson monuments too. The Democrats erected these things as a political statement of White Supremacy when they used White Supremacy to maintain political control. They are disgusting.
One thing about America, we always put our history, the good, the bad and the ugly up front. This is the camel’s nose. The communists removed another Ten Commandment monument. Why? Because they can. All monuments must go to do away with America.
“Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.” - George Orwell
The economist is a keynesian socialist rag. Why are they calling it center right?
I’m leery right there.
"[Democrats] McEnery and Penny having been elected governor and lieutenant-governor by the white people, were duly installed by this overthrow of carpetbag government, ousting the usurpers, Governor Kellogg (white) and Lieutenant-Governor Antoine (colored).
United States troops took over the state government and reinstated the usurpers but the national election of November 1876 recognized white supremacy in the South and gave us our state."
Like I said, it's a memorial to a bunch of white supremacists.
As with everything in the civil war, historical artifacts have two sides to a story.
IMO, in this case it’s just a obelisk. But it could have just as well been the grave of a southern general or a bust.
If you destroy or remove history without the consent of the public via legal threat or whatever, you have altered history, white washed it, so to speak.
No different then ISIS or the Taliban.
So what therefore is worse....The history or the destruction/removal of it.
See post 10.
This is not a civil war monument.
You, obviously, are not familiar with the term “carpetbagger”.
Look up Hillary.
Conservatives need to learn their history. Any monument to a “Southern” cause from the Reconstruction period or early 1900s most likely is a monument to the Democrats’ efforts to rule the South through race hatred and their brutal oppression and terrorizing of blacks. It is a disgusting period in history and it was brought to us by the Democrats. They are an evil party and monuments to Jim Crow and Dixiecrat Dem heroes should be destroyed. Now that’s not the same as monuments to Southern Civil War generals. That is completely different. But Dem segregationist politicians are a different story. That’s why I was happy when they got rid of the Jefferson Davis statues. He was a disgusting traitor.
It’s about the Post Civil war...What do you think Carpet baggers are!
Ice-cream salesmen...?
Really? I must have been out when we covered this in US History.
I know well what a carpetbagger is.
“The Economist magazine, a center-right publication “
ROTFLMAO!
I know what a carpetbagger is.
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.