Black Lives Matter Activists Rally for Removal of Confederate Monument

1. These monuments commemorate a treasonous support of slavery and racial inequality. They are a testament to the white supremacy that exists in our country and should be removed as part of righting the long history of racial inequality and injustice that plagues our United States.

   1. I will continue to honor the fighting men of both sides of that war. I will protect their monuments and counter the hateful and ignorant bigots that deface them and demand their removal. I am decended from Union sioldiers that owned slaves and Confederate soldiers that owned none. No shame. I am proud of them all. It makes my American fabric a rich tapestry. The people protesting these things are simply struggling for relevance and meaning. They are ignorant, bigoted, sad and pathetic creatures.

      1. From your statement “The people protesting these things are simply struggling for relevance and meaning. They are ignorant, bigoted, sad and pathetic creatures”, Bud that is an ad hominen attack and straw-man argument. I am southerner, and I think these monuments do represent the past for the USA, but this is the past were one group of Americans decided that their state rights, specifically to own slaves, and treat them as less than men, was more important than rest of the USA. They are traitors to the USA and founded their own confederate nation, and then they lost. Now is it as simple as this explination, no, but no history is, however at the end of the day the former americans who fought for the confederacy (for whatever reason) chose to willingly leave the USA for a new nation. They are traitors by definition. The fact that black Americans (many of which who have been here longer on these shores than even some of my southern friends and family) have to walk through a public space that glorifies there sacrifice, is in a word, repugnant. There is nobody stopping a building for civil war veterans on both sides of the divide, nor is there anyone stopping a private museum for the Confederate cause, but there absolutely should be public outrage to public dollars being spent to perpetuate a myth that somehow those that fought for the south were doing anything other than seceding/treasonous acts. You are free to honor them all you want, I think re-enactments are great, I think history is great, and I think the fact that we were once so divided but came back together is also great. But ignoring the history, ignoring your fellow americans who rightfully would be offended with such public monuments is neither ok, nor appropriate.

2. It baffles me that supporters of the Confederacy keeping using the old trope that “Confederate soldiers were fighting for states’ rights, not slavery.” It’s illogical. What right of the states were they defending? The right to determine for themselves they would continue subjugating slaves.

   When someone like The marshal of The SCOV explain that “The men honored with these memorials fought nobly and bravely for their country,” the only response that seems appropriate is to ask which country. Glorifying the actions of generations past that tried to tear apart the United States seems to be the definition of anti-American.

   The only humane response is to take down the statue from it’s place of prominence in Travis Park and move it to a museum setting where it can be contextualized in terms of the history of San Antonio, Texas, the South, the US, and race relations.

   1. You lack of historical knowlege is appalling. Understanding the time and context not modern values learned placed of context or relevance into historical events is disingenuous and dishonest. Your outrage is your own.

   2. And yet we just remembered declaring our independence from another tyrannical govt in 1776. Please check your documents again referencing slavery.

   3. My great grand father was a vs soldier wounded at Gettysburg. He owned no slave. When he stepped on the field there were 80,000 muskets & 110 cannons pointed at him. Get over yourselves, you weren’t that important. Protecting his rights were!

   4. It still baffles me Andy that people like you hate recognized American Veterans and support people who do not think we should even celebrate the 4th of July

3. A few thoughts and observations first.
   1) The statue IS NOT of Wm. B. Travis but of a simple Confederate soldier as the article proclaims.
   2) In my opinion the Rivard Report article was more of an advertisement for BLM and it’s motivations and actions than the event itself. The reporter politically trained rather journalistically trained. Definitely not Robert Rivard edited, at least I hope not.
   3) The statue only asks rememberence of the Confederate dead. That’ s it. No mention of causes or politics or justifications implied or otherwise.
   4) The statue was erected by the Gen. Albert Bee Chapter of the United Confederate. Veterans or the UDC I believe. It still is a work of art. It still is historical. It’s message is simple and inoffensive then and now and in the future in a city that has always strived to embraced multicultures and diverse history, the good and the bad and learned from it. After all the Alamo does the same in its way. It is not a comparision but it is still remberance. And both are worthy. The history is uniquely American and deserving of perpetuation for the myriad of lessons that they show, teach, inspire and even inflame even when disingenuous, dishonesty and imagined hysteria are present. It’s what history is all about.
   5) Finally In my opinion for what little it is worth, BLM and its politics are flatulence with no wind.

   1. I agree with Mr. Westbrook. BLM needs to leave history alone.

   2. Thanks for your informative comment. We’ve corrected the article to show that a Confederate soldier is depicted on the monument, not Travis.
      The essence of the event was the group’s demand that the city remove the statute from public space. This article reports on that demand. Its purpose is not to endorse the demand.

4. ‘Any people, anywhere, being inclined and having the power have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is,a most valuable, a most sacred right – a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. ‘ – Abraham Lincoln, January 12, 1848 speech to the US House of Representatives.
   ‘I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South. So fully am I satisfied of this, as regards Virginia especially, that I would cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war, and have suffered all I have suffered, to have this object attained.’ – Robert E. Lee, 1870.
   These monuments stand as headstones for those in unmarked graves upon now silent battlefields and in mass graves who have none. They were placed there by a people, the least intelligent among which, was infinitely more sensible that the modern tools crying for removal, and were placed on county property instead of a cemetery by said people to honor those fathers, sons and brothers of that county.
   Remove first the memorials to your own family members before removing those to someone else’s.

5. Let’s remove all statues of anyone involved in the Civil War on both sides and delete any mention of it in our school history books. Furthermore let’s brainwash everyone to forget the past. Maybe lobotomies and adding Thorazine to the water system will speed up the process.

6. These (tolerant) people need to educated about the Civil War and that these monuments are to honor the dead, not white supremacy. The Confederate soldiers included African-American, Native Americans, Mexicans, Jewish, French, Irish, etc., all fighting against an illegal invasion because Lincoln wanted his taxes. I wish I could post pictures here of blacks proudly attending UCV reunions. “End the Hate, Support Our Confederate Brothers and Sisters”!

   1. From your comment” . . . all fighting against an illegal invasion because Lincoln wanted his taxes.”

      Ok that ridiculous, even before Lincoln was president the South was already engaged in active seditious activities. Whether the confederate soldiers were smart or not, does not change the fact that they volunteered to leave the USA to form a new country called the confederate states of America. By the way we don’t live in that country, we live in the USA. Slavery was certainly a huge part of the what led to the war, as were taxes, workers rights, and our constitution. To say it was about states rights, ignores the fact that it is treasonous, it is sedition to leave the USA, to foment sedition which is exactly what the south and it’s leaders did. Whether all of the confederate were slave owners or not does not really have anything to do with it. In war, whether it is a civil war or just a regular one, I am sure there are good and bad people on both sides. It’s the leaders and the institutions that support the government and the policies it represents are what matters. The south wanted slavery to continue, the north didn’t. There were economic reasons for the north to support this position as there were economic reasons for the south to support it’s position. But only the south could not live with the policy, only the south walked away from the government and only the south chose to take its ball and go home. The south was wrong for economic reasons that have made this country what it is today (by turning away from slavery), that has made it the shining city on the hill. Whether you honor a specific southerner or just a general soldier, the effect is still the same for the Americans that fought against the south, and for the Slaves who literally were tortured, treated like animals, and killed with impunity (as possessions not people) a reminder that many americans are willing to honor the treasonous former americans who fought for slavery and the southern confederate states (country) at the expense of those other americans. Honor your veterans at a private space, not a public one.

7. Here’s a thought – Travis did NOT fight in the Civil War. The Park is named after a martyr of the Battle of the Alamo (1836) – who died 24 years BEFORE the Civil War. Why not call it a “Civil War Memorial” honoring ALL who died needlessly on ALL sides? We can’t (nor should we) erase history. But “history” is constantly being re-examined and clarified. The story of the Alamo as we know it today is clearly not what was taught to me in school during the “White Ages” of the 1960’s. We grow, we evolve, we make amends. Yes, there’s a Confederate soldier atop the plinth. Texas was a Confederate state – you can’t whitewash that. Let’s add Black soldiers and Union soldiers to the base. (Bulldozing Auschwitz because it’s a disgusting memory does not “erase” Auschwitz and what occurred there.) Where does it end? Robert E. Lee was one of the founders of St. Marks Episcopal Church across the street – do we tear it down because Lee was a Confederate General who helped build the church? And then there’s the Cenotaph in front of the Alamo …!

8. Google information is rewritten from an original written piece of written history of this it is the interpretations of the writer

9. Move the man unmentioned to a place where it can be watched and protected because BLM will have its way it always gets its way so my beloved monuments must be moved to a safe place where it can be loved

10. “In a public conversation in Ringo’s banking house, a sterling union man put this question to him: “What do you honestly think was the real object of the war on the part of the federal government?” “Sir”, said Grant, “I have no doubt in the world that the sole object is the restoration of the Union. I will say further though-that I am a Democrat-every man in my regiment is a Democrat-and whenever I shall be convinced that this war has for its object anything else than what I have mentioned, or that the government designs using its soldiers to execute the purposes of the abolitionists, I pledge to you my honor as a man and a soldier that I will not only resign my commission, but will carry my sword to the other side and cast my lot with that people.”
    DEMOCRATIC SPEAKER’S HANDBOOK
    Matthew Carey Jr.
    1868

11. It WAS about State’s Rights. The issue had been up in the air constantly and each side saw the interpretation in different ways. It firmly settled the issue of federalism. I really cant believe how the regressive moment continues to scream the opposite. This washing away of history is really disgusting. Politically correct zombies wish to recreate history to today’s stupidity is something every academic should be against. The Rivard Report is constantly slipping even more to the regressive side alienating moderates.

    1. For the last time, the American Civil War was not about states’ rights.
       https://qz.com/378533/for-the-last-time-the-american-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights/

       1. The last time? Oh thank God. So tired of you fools regurgitating the same old tired, repeatedly debunked lie about it being over negro servitude.

12. The lack of knowledge of the true history is appalling. But furthering their agenda by pandering to the left wingers is more important to them than the truth.

13. The monument honors soldiers who fought in the war. Texas soldiers did not leave their families alone on the world’s most dangerous frontier, walk most of 2000 miles and fight and die for 4 years for the 4% (in the South – 1% in the nation) who owned slaves. They fought because the north invaded.

    1. http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/5-myths-about-slavery

       Myth #2: The South seceded from the Union over the issue of states’ rights, not slavery.
       This myth, that the Civil War wasn’t fundamentally a conflict over slavery, would have been a surprise to the original founders of the Confederacy. In the official declaration of the causes of their secession in December 1860, South Carolina’s delegates cited “an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery.” According to them, the Northern interference with the return of fugitive slaves was violating their constitutional obligations; they also complained that some states in New England tolerated abolitionist societies and allowed black men to vote.
       As James W. Loewen, author of “Lies My Teacher Told Me” and “The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader,” wrote in the Washington Post: “In fact, Confederates opposed states’ rights — that is, the right of Northern states not to support slavery.” The idea that the war was somehow not about slavery but about the issue of states’ rights was perpetuated by later generations anxious to redefine their ancestors’ sacrifices as a noble protection of the Southern way of life. At the time, however, Southerners had no problem claiming the protection of slavery as the cause of their break with the Union—and the Civil War that followed.

       1. What is never spoken is the hhistorical fact that the idea of racial equality as is known today was a hard lesson learned. It still is. The idea of racial equality for all was a radical idea even among abolitionists of that time. Slavery was ancient, legal and protected at many levels relevant to geography and law and changed more to gradual enlightenment and education in most of the world except America. Force did not change these olden values. History examined and debated are are our hard lessons learned. Ancient symbols allow this. Flavor of the month opinions and outrage leading to the elimination of history do nothing positive but stop the debate. “Agitate, agitate, agitate” is good but proscribed history is a dangerous hard lesson too often forgotten. The monuments of the past remind us as they should. It’s as simple as that.

       2. You confuse secession with the war. Secession was legal and slavery and economics certainly played a part in it. The war however was not started until the north invaded. That is why the soldiers fought and that is who the monument honors. The worst thing that happened to slaves was that it was not allowed to end peacefully as it did in most countries and was certainly on the way to ending in the US (too expensive, Irish workers much cheaper, etc). Because the war ended it abruptly the inept and naive federal government could not take care of the 4 million freed slaves who had their medical care blanket pulled out from under them (state laws had required it) and as a result 1 million died due to malnutrition and disease (read “Sick from Freedom”).

    2. Exactly: If centralism is ultimately to prevail; if our entire system of free Institutions as established by our common ancestors is to be subverted, and an Empire is to be established in their stead; if that is to be the last scene of the great tragic drama now being enacted: then, be assured, that we of the South will be acquitted, not only in our own consciences, but in the judgment of mankind, of all responsibility for so terrible a catastrophe, and from all guilt of so great a crime against humanity.

14. Get an education that is not revised or politically corrected….if you dare!
    http://www.southernheritage411.com

15. “Mike Lowe is co-founder of the San Antonio organization SATX4. Originally named SATX4 Ferguson, the group formed to expose and protest systemic racial injustice following the 2014 shooting of Michael Brown, an 18-year-old unarmed man who was shot by a police officer in Ferguson, Mo.”
    That’s the takeaway paragraph that sums up the entire article. The ignorance of this reporter is appalling. If he doesn’t know what actually happened in the Michael Brown incident, if he can’t quit repeating the false narrative of BLM, if he’s too lazy to tell his readers that local, state and federal investigations All exonerated the officer who shot Michael Brown – if he can’t accurately report on what happened Three Years Ago – Why Should We Expect Him To Tell The Truth About What Happened Over 150 Years Ago?

    1. Hi Tim, thanks for your interest in the story. It’s a fact that former officer Darren Wilson was not indicted in the 2014 shooting of Michael Brown. SATX4 was still founded following those events. Background on their organization was provided in the story as they are the organization demanding that the statue be removed.

       1. When you say that BLM was started following the police shooting of Michael Brown, “an unarmed black man,” you tilt the narrative in such a way that gives credibility and sympathy to BLM. Without telling the Whole Story of the Michael Brown incident, or at least mentioning that the officer who shot him did so in self defense and that the “Hands Up Don’t Shoot” mantra of BLM is an absolute fabrication, you’ve taken their side.

16. If we are going to allow BLM to remove our history than make them take there’s down to
    Take down any and all things with MLK on it and we can all forget about that history to
    We can’t forget our history cause if we do it could repeat itself and neither side wants that or do they ask BLM that cause They are the most racist group I have ever seen

17. Were Confederate Generals Traitors? Distinguished Scholar Walter E. Williams answers that question:
    https://www.creators.com/read/walter-williams/06/17/were-confederate-generals-traitors

18. Comments made by President Gerald R Ford at the signing of Senate Joint Resolution 23, which restored posthumously Robert E Lee’s Citizenship. The petition drive that lead to this legislation was initiated by students at Robert E Lee High School in San Antonio, TX.
    https://fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/speeches/750473.htm

19. Why do people who fought as secessionists against the United States deserve a thirty foot tall monument in a US city park?

    Removing monuments from public property is not the same as “erasing history”. Quit using fallacious arguments to try to support your beliefs.

    Regardless of the reasons for secession (slavery), the Confederacy represents white supremacy for a whole lot of people (just a coincidence, I guess). In the years since the Civil War, its symbols have been used by white supremacists to promote white supremacy and oppress minorities. Lots of people have a serious problem with this, considering that this country allegedly embraces equality, not to mention all the institutionalized oppression being endured. It is objectively reasonable to remove monuments from public property that directly or symbolically promote inequality among people.

    1. Those men fought and died for their beliefs. I don’t care about their color, politics or religion. I respect that. The families of the fallen deserve to remember.

       1. You think the word “falacious” is “name calling, subjective, arbitrary political correctness”? Are you not familiar with logical fallacies? You should study them, they would help your arguments, assuming your arguments are based on logic instead of emotion. I have no patience for ambiguous right-wing dismissive terms like “political correctness”, but I do believe our society should progress, and traditionalist beliefs impede that progress. Move the Confederate monument from a city park and put it somewhere else, maybe the Confederate Cemetery. San Antonio has a Confederate cemetery with nearly 1000 graves. It would look nice there. Put an actual monument to Travis in Travis Park.

       2. Lots of people have fought and died for lots of beliefs, more recently for civil rights and racial equality. My question is why do these people, who seceded from and then fought against the United States, deserve a forty foot tall monument in a US city park?

20. It’s amazing that many people can ignore the history of the United States and lump all of American history’s evil on the South from 1861-1865.
    The flag of the United States flew much longer over slave ships during the slave trade.
    The flag of the United States flew during the Native American massacres at Wichita And Sand Creek, courtesy of the US Cavalry, and many statues today are of the men who authorized or led in such massacres.
    The New York City Riots of 1863 was because Northeners didn’t want to join the US Army against the South and hung free African Americans.
    Oh and during the Texas Revolution the flag of Mexico flew over the executions at Goliad and against the Texans at the Alamo. Let’s ban the flags of Mexico in San Antonio right?
    The flag of the United States flew over the Manzanillo Japanese Camps during World War Two.
    Let’s dig up the graves and relocate the monuments of men such as Phil Sheridan who said “the only good Indian is a dead Indian, and the best Indian is a good and dead Indian .”
    Let’s ban the US flag for
    The Mi Lai (sp) massacre during the Vietnam War and the deaths of students at Kent State in 1970. The national guardsman had US Flag shoulder patches.
    Also let’s ban the US Flag because the photographs of the KKK in the 1920’s and 1930’s marched with the US Flag down Pennsylvania Acenue in Washington D.C.
    I find all these to be offensive and demand that the monuments and flags be hauled down because the US flag was flown and tear down the all the monuments before 1950
    Because if you look hard enough all
    These people did something that is offensive in one way or another.

    1. Hey Joe, if your entire argument is “Everybody does terrible things all the time so the Confederate monument should stay” then you need to do better.

       1. At least he presented a factual argument over your faux outrage. Refute it but your argument that he has to better is nonsense. You are entitled to your opinions and beliefs as you so state Ludite but saying that the other is falacious or any other name is just name calling, subjective, arbitrary political correctness. Yes, two can play that as well. People who fought and lived through those those “historical times” and terribly difficult times feltt the need and acted with their own funds to commemorate their dead. No where are your observations and modern opinions even suggested on the monument. The people of that time deserved it and earned it. It will be worthy of discussion one hundred years from now. Your political correctness will not in my opinion. At least these 125 year old monuments provided it.

          1. First off this has to public lands, not a simple statue on private land, or a flag on private land. If the confederates need to have statues then by all means commemorate those on private land. By the history good and bad should both be taught and certainly be subjective will play into any position one might take as life experience has a way of shaping you. So what does it feel like to stand in front of a public monument as a citizen and see one of the enemies of my nation being honored? It’s silly. There are no monuments to the german from WWI or WWII on public land, nor are there Japanese monuments on public land, with the exception of cemeteries. This is an argument about public statues and public displays, not private ones.

             Seriously how much time did any of you spend in this park last year? I was there once, I saw the statue, as I had seen it before, and in 2017 it is ridiculous the amount of latitude that is shown to people who hold onto the pride of the seditious acts committed by former americans who joined the Souther States of the Confederacy.

Comments are closed.