Statues come tumbling down. Updated. More monuments. Final updatte

FINAL UPDATE: So many Confederate monuments, place names and other tthings are disappearing or being toppled or otherise gotten rid of ttthat tthere is no way I can keep up with it. I am spending the whole day collecting documentation for my archives on stuff being taken down and will be working into this evening to get everything filed away.

There might have been a Confederate statue  that  wasn't spray painted, perhaps  in some remote area, but it seems that most got a lot of spray paint.

Some statues have come down.

Here the United Daughters of the Confederacy removed this statue which was at a prominent public place.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/02/us/confederate-statue-alexandria-trnd/index.html

They might put it up on private property, but it doesn't have any real power as a private statue as opposed to a statue on public property. When it is on public property it is basically endorsed by the government. On private property it can still do work as a private shrine, so it isn't completely powerless.

On private property the cost of the maintainancce and keeping the statue  falls on private individuals. This isn't just the statue itself and the pedestal. A path to the statue and gates and lawns and bushes have to be maintained. Trash has to be picked up. Governments with Confederate statues expend money on them in doing these functions.

It does happen that private groups raise funds for statues on public property such as restoration, but the fact that the statue  is on public property gives the statue status making it easier to raise funds.

The neo-Confederates are aging and how much  money they will have to maintain statues in the future.

In Birmingham, Alabama another statue wass removed last night or the night before.

https://www.al.com/news/2020/06/watch-live-birmingham-taking-down-confederate-monument.html

The State of Alabama is stating they will sue Birmingham. It will be interesting how this works out.

https://www.wvtm13.com/article/alabama-attorney-general-files-lawsuit-against-city-of-birmingham-after-removal-of-confederate-monument/32746959

The Republican Party will be identified with the Confederacy.

Another story about both statues.

https://apnews.com/810a6cb13ce6cdbde5b534661c5f2da6

I think that if the Democrats get elected, they won't be giving a free pass to Confederate monuments and symbols.

Recently the New York Times had an article about military bases named after Confederates.

They really couldn't care less up until 2015. Now they want the names changed. The centrist Democrats and neoliberals have decided that being anti-Confederate is part of a winning strategy.

Updated 6/3/2020

Athens, Georgia

https://www.redandblack.com/athensnews/mayor-orders-county-to-look-into-removing-confederate-monument-downtown-commissioners-speak-on-sunday-protest/article_1db335a0-a5a9-11ea-845e-bf003e49571c.html

Bentonville, Arkansas

https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/jun/01/confederate-monument-bentonville-square-be-moved/

Birmingham, Alabama

https://www.today.com/video/birmingham-mayor-discusses-decision-to-remove-confederate-monument-84290629554

Robert E. Lee statue taken down at Lee High School in Montgomery Alabama.

https://www.wsfa.com/2020/06/01/robert-e-lee-statue-taken-down-lee-high-school

Richmond, Virginia

https://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/northam-to-order-removal-of-richmonds-robert-e-lee-statue/article_311a23b3-fb8c-5d87-a0cb-ca564241b29a.html

Headquarters of the United Daughters of the Confederacy set on fire.

I don't know how long it will be before YouTube pulls down these two videos.  Commentary at the end. CLICK ON THE VIDEO TO SEE THE WHOLE THING.

PART 1 https://youtu.be/ElRQPTL80xs

PART 2  https://youtu.be/fOY_ep6Suo4

PART 3 https://youtu.be/fOY_ep6Suo4


PART 4 UDC BUILDING IS REALLY ABLAZE  https://youtu.be/Rm4pGR1a_hk

PART 5 FIRE RESPONDERS TRYING TO GET THROUGH THE FRONT DOOR https://youtu.be/mEroeEtI1GA
 

Confederate monuments were intensively spray painted in Richmond. In future disturbances over the issue of race Confederate monuments and other places will likely be considered targets.

Previously in civil disturbances prior to 2015 I didn't hear of cases where targeting Confederate memory was part of it. It might have happened, but it certainly wasn't frequent.

Jefferson Davis highway is falling apart./ Breitbart is as stupid as ever.

I have realized that if I published a book on the Jefferson Davis highway at this point, it would not work to bring down the Jefferson Davis highway, but keep it alive. So it will never be published. I am not sure what I am going to do with the five or six file boxes of notes I have, but I will have to do something to make sure it isn't used to reincarnate the Jefferson Davis highway metaphysically.

This article is somewhat assuring in that Breitbart hasn't come up with a better idea to keep Confederate monuments than the erasing history idea. I am not going suggest alternatives since I literally don't want to give them any ideas.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/09/05/virginia-erases-american-history-from-streets-jefferson-davis-highway-now-richmond-highway/

This is important since it makes the rest of the Jefferson Davis highway system less tenable. No chamber of commerce will want their city to be the first city where the highway starts. With the ends of the highway untied, the higway will unravel.

The futility of efforts to keep the built landscape named after some Confederate figure becomes more and more apparent.

I think that psychologically the change of the name of this highway works to undermind the Confederate mouments in Richmond.

Also, everytime anything Confederate gets removed successfully from the environment, it will occur to others that the Confederate named item of the built environment in their city can go.

Finally, as there are fewer and fewer Confederate items, the remaining ones seem more and more anomalous.

Dallas moves to remove another Confederate statue. Richmond however still stuck in the Confederacy

The Smithsonian article about the vote to remove the Confederate War Memorial in Pioneer Park. It is online here.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews-history-archaeology/dallas-city-council-votes-remove-massive-confederate-war-memorial-180971503/

This is the 2nd statue it is going to remove.

This Smithsonian has changed a lot since it was publishing stuff criticizing suggesting that Richmond, Virginia, which still hasn't gotten rid of any Confederate monuments, was somehow wiser than New Orleans which got rid of them all.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-richmond-has-gotten-right-about-interpreting-its-confederate-history-180963354/

When you are behind Dallas that must really hurt.

This is the town of M.E. Bradford and William Murchison. All their little dreams of neo-Confederacy Gone With the Wind!

As I have stated before, each time a statue is removed, the ones that remain seem more anomalous. With Austin, San Antonio having gotten rid of Confederate stuff, and Dallas moving forward, it won't be long until someone in Houston will decided it is time to move forward. 

No major metropolis wants to feel their are more retrograde than Dallas. Houston will start moving to re-examine its memorials.

As time goes on smaller metropolises will want to look at getting rid of their Confederate statues also, since Confederate statues will stand as a mark of backwardness. 

Neo-Confederacy is crumbling a statue at a time.

Three Critical Cities and the neo-Confederacy's ultimate redoubt. UPDATE:

There are three cities that are critical as ultimate hold outs for Confederacy monuments and the Lost Cause mentality in general. These are: Richmond, Lexington, and Dallas.

Dallas is on the list since not only does it have a in-depth neo-Confederate and Lost Cause past, it is known as a reactionary city. People say that it is the city that the civil rights movement passed by. It is the city which Martin Luther King said the African American community slammed the door in his face. It has the replica Arlington plantation house. Dallas is notorious for far right groups.

Richmond is on the list since it is the former capital of the Confederacy. It has Monument Avenue full of Confederate monuments. It has the Museum of the Confederacy now part of the American Civil War Museum. It has an elite which identifies with the Confederacy.

Lexington, Virginia is like the holy city of the Confederacy. I visited in July 2017 and did extensive photo documentation and bought a lot, a lot of artifacts. There is Washington & Lee University, named after George Washington and Robert E. Lee. There is the Virginia Military Institute which is self-identified with the Confederacy. It has a church with a picture of Confederate soldiers fighting behind the stage. There is the Robert E. Lee Episcopal Church. VMI manages the Virginia Civil War Museum by Market Place.

I would like to say that when I visited the Lee Chapel and the Washington & Lee Campus, I thought of Kevin Levin's condescending comments to some African American law students who were trying to get the university to lose the Lost Cause. I was disgusted.

The whole town is living in a time warp in the Confederacy. There shouldn't be a university like Washington & Lee or a military institute like the Virginia Military Institute in America.

Lexington, Virginia will be the last redoubt of the Lost Cause, a little white Valhalla of the Confederacy.

It seems to be a small upscale town with the two universities and some tourism as the local industry. It is fairly white as far as I can tell.

I think the pressure points are that a Confederate university or institute may not seem very desirable for an academic career and the university and institute might not be well thought of.

When I was there I visited Stonewall House and they told me that the numbers visiting having been declining each year. I think the tourism component of this Lost Cause city of the Confederacy will be declining. I don't think that Confederate identified institutions of higher education make a local climate for start ups.

I think that students will come to see the university as some antique hold over in a back water and not the place to get an education for the future. The students the university and institute get will be those who don't care or aren't put off by going to a Confederate university or institute, in a such a city. The student body will thus acquire a reputation which will further put off many students and intensify the process of self-selection of students who would want to live in such a Confederate bubble like Lexington.  The process will feed upon itself.


UPDATE:

Stone Mountain is an important point also in the Lost Cause built environment. This article is very interesting both for what it says about the topic, and also that it comes from the Smithsonian, the publisher of Kevin Levin

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-will-happen-stone-mountain-americas-largest-confederate-memorial-180964588/

Richmond, Virginia, oh what will the neoliberals favorite mayor do?

Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney originally came out with a plan for contextualization. But that was several weeks ago. That was before Charlottesville. Confederate monuments are coming down all over the place.

So now he sees both sides of the debate.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-richmond-confederate-monuments-08182017-story.html

Well that was two days ago in the Los Angeles Times.

The Los Angeles Times reports:

"As memorials toppled across the country, the African American mayor of the former capital of the Confederacy defended his city’s own. 

Removal doesn't do “anything for telling the actual truth,” Levar Stoney said.
That was Monday. 

Two days later, the Richmond mayor said Confederate monuments had become a “rallying point for division and intolerance” and should be removed.

This is a Richmond Times-Dispatch article on Mayor Stoney, August 14, 2017 about his being committed to Confederate monument contextualization.

http://www.richmond.com/news/local/city-of-richmond/mayor-stoney-richmond-s-confederate-monuments-should-stay-with-context/article_b8cbb743-410f-520f-9197-2a58450d128a.html

So in the end the monuments will go, but Mayor Stoney will not get credit for any vision or being like Mitch Landrieu.

Instead he will be remembered as a mayor who didn't think that the winds can shift and the weather van can suddenly turn around. That is a mayor who didn't have any convictions and guessed wrong on where this issue is headed. The wages of a centrist Democrat who triangulated wrongly.

Perhaps Mayor Stoney can be known as the great waffler.

Some more articles about Richmond and the struggle there.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/richmond-mayor-confederate-monument-debate-trump-doesnt-live/story?id=49313827

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/richmond-could-be-next-confederate-monument-battleground-n793741

At this point even the ACLU is calling for the monuments removal. Wonders never cease.
http://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/government-politics/aclu-calls-for-removal-of-confederate-memorials-in-virginia/article_0f80a646-52d3-5e64-aba2-5d077b3d92d5.html

Crazed racist speech made at the Museum of the Confederay

https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/blog/is-the-confederacy-obsolete/

The above is a link to an article published in the Southern Partisan in 1994. It is a crazed racist speech made by Ludwell H. Johnson at the Museum of the Confederacy (MOC) in November 1993 upon being named a Museum Scholar of the MOC.

It was published in Southern Partisan, 3rd Quarter 1994, pages 21-26.

It is now published online by the Abbeville Institute accessible in the above link.

For copyright reasons I could not quote it at length in this article about the MOC, link below.

http://www.blackcommentator.com/441/441_museum_confederacy_sebesta_guest_share.html

As I explain in the Black Commentator article Ludwell Johnson's neo-Confederate views were no secret.

Unfortunately the MOC as part of the American Civil War Museum will be part of the decision how to contextualize the Confederate monuments on Richmond's Monument Ave. Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney announced that there will be a commission because the monuments have a "false narrative."

http://www.richmond.com/news/local/city-of-richmond/mayor-stoney-richmond-s-confederate-monuments-can-stay-but-whole/article_80e564f7-69f3-5897-a579-5799a9293b68.html

I see Stoney  is employing all the buzz words, like diversity.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/richmond-mayor-keep-confederate-statues-but-add-context/2017/06/22/cc30bb72-577b-11e7-840b-512026319da7_story.html?utm_term=.8ed32cf5dcad

The above post article states:

"He said he's personally insulted by the monuments and wishes they had never been built."

So insulted he doesn't want them removed evidently.

The Virginia Flagger's protests against Stoney are artfully being used to make Stoney look like he is some champion against neo-Confederates which he obviously isn't.

I think we see the tactics that will be used to retain Confederate monuments.

Garrett Epps points out in "The Atlantic" that the fight over monuments is not a fight over the past but a fight over the future.

Garrett Epps, Richmond native, has an article in The Atlantic titled, "The True History of the South Is Not Being Erases: Taking down Confederate monuments helps confront the past, no obscure it." 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-true-history-of-the-south-is-not-being-erased/529818/

The article concludes

This is not a fight over history; it is a fight over the future. The neo-Confederate faith is not a heritage; it is a political program. And the proper lesson of Southern history is that this radical message—unapologetic, uncompromising, violent white supremacy—lurks in the American bloodstream like a virus, re-emerging at times when the national immune system is weak.

We may be living through an outbreak.

To survive and prosper, the South, and the nation, must renounce this pernicious creed and disarm its symbols. The bronze and marble men do no honor to the region’s true parents; they do, however, dishonor its children.

One way or another, they must yield their unearned pride of place.

For those who know my views I have always said it was a fight over the future. I have always said that it is a political program of white supremacy, and that it poisons our future.

Maybe Richmond won't follow the Richmond example

This was published in the Richmond Times-Dispatch today or yesterday.

http://www.richmond.com/opinion/your-opinion/letters-to-the-editor/cod-june-monuments-whitewash-history/article_c5249b40-45f3-5be8-982d-433395236b29.html

The title is "Monuments whitewash history," by John Winn III.

The letter to the editor is given the award "Correspondent of the Day," with a fountain pen drawing. He is listed as a resident of Richmond by the Times-Dispatch. So Levin can't ask Winn his question, "Have you ever been to Richmond?" which he asked Sarah Jones when she proposed taking down the Confederate statues. https://twitter.com/KevinLevin/status/864241228333940737

A single letter, even given the Correspondent of the Day designation, won't by itself bring down the monuments. It will be a voice to bring the Confederate monuments down and that is important.

However, the letter being given the designation Correspondent of the Day may signify that the Richmond Times-Dispatch is shifting on the monuments. They could have just published the letter, but instead decided to give it a special designation. Perhaps they want to be able to position themselves as neutrals going into what they see as an upcoming intensified struggle over the Confederate monuments.

I am sure that those involved in Richmond politics, civic affairs, cultural institutions will note that this letter was given a special designation by the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

I  doubt that the elites of Richmond wanted Richmond singled out as Confederate monument city before the nation. To be set up as the opposite of New Orleans.  To be seen as a new capitol of Confederate monuments as they tumble elsewhere across the nation.Yet, Levin made Richmond the capitol of Confederate monument retention in this article.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-richmond-has-gotten-right-about-interpreting-its-confederate-history-180963354/

I doubt African American Mayor Dwight C. Jones wanted to be set up as the opposite of New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu.

The Virginia Defenders are quite aware of Levin's Smithsonian article. They took pains to explain to me that they wanted the monuments down. I am sure that Jones political opponents in the African American community have taken note of this article.

I have always said that pressing on the issue of Confederate symbols, place names, and monuments would be a lens to see who people really are.

The Smithsonian magazine article really pulled away the curtain and exposed Richmond's soul.

This maybe the first visible fracture in the defenses of the capitol of the Confederate monuments.


For those in Richmond who want to get their Confederate monuments taken down I recommend this article.

http://thegrio.com/2017/05/26/hundreds-of-confederate-statues-still-standing/#oQWeYWxF2IXyGtRl.01

"Why are hundreds of Confederate statues still standing?" Quoted twice in this article. I describe the emerging set of arguments set forth by academics as rationalizations for these monuments.

http://thegrio.com/2017/05/26/hundreds-of-confederate-statues-still-standing/#oQWeYWxF2IXyGtRl.01

The link to the article is above.

I will have to elaborate for this posting later. I am currently tied up with a project.

I did supply many links to the writings of different scholars, blog postings, news articles.

Kevin M. Levin attempts to talk down to Sarah Jones of the "New Republic" magazine

Kevin M. Levin attempts to patronize Sarah Jones of the "New Republic." You can read the exchange here on Twitter if you are a member. I printed it out for my records.

https://twitter.com/KevinLevin/status/864241228333940737

In this conversation he is the expert talking down to Sarah Jones. He also uses his usual tactic avoiding debate on the issues by either questioning the competency of the individual or their right to debate the issue.

You really have to read the entire series this is one example. Not the capitalization of "WHY" and the expression "you would do well to consider."

Levin pulls out what he thinks will flatten Jones by asking whether she has been to Richmond. If Jones hasn't then she is some type of outside agitator. This is the theme of "Sweet Home Alabama" that Jones is an outsider.

Turns out that Sarah Jones is from Virginia and has been to Richmond many times.

Then it is more patronizing stuff.

Levin's patronizing of Sarah Jones is this article by Jones in New Republic.
https://newrepublic.com/minutes/142710/yes-tear-confederate-monuments

Sarah Jones in the article is basically calling Gary Shapiro of the University of Richmond a fool. She doesn't use the term, just calls his arguments "deeply confused."

Though Shapiro does not deny the horrors of slavery or hold up the Confederacy as an entity worthy of praise, his argument is deeply confused. If these monuments are “memorials,” whom do they memorialize? Certainly not the victims of slavery.

Levin blogs on this encounter.
http://cwmemory.com/2017/05/15/is-richmond-next/

From his blog:

I do not mean to suggest that all parties in Richmond are satisfied or that mistakes have not been made. What I do think is important to acknowledge is that the city has made a concerted effort to think carefully about how history is interpreted and how it is commemorated in public spaces. None of this is acknowledged in the New Republic piece.

Turns out that Sarah Jones doesn't think much of what the little cliques in Richmond have done.

And Levin is bent out of shape that Sarah Jones doesn't think much of the efforts of the local historical societies and what cliques they make up and of which he is in good standing.

He can't comprehend that some figures in the larger national establishment are just coming out  and saying these statues need to go and really don't care what rationalizations or excuses or clever strategems the local historical cliques have come up with.

I wonder how long it is going to be before The Atlantic decides that Levin is retrograde.

Convoluted stuff and nonsense arguments aren't going to convince people other than those who love the Confederacy or fear loss of white control over the landscape. That is white nationalists and banal white nationalists. http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/breaking-the-white-nation.html

"The Atlantic" magazine has lengthy article explaining why Confederate monuments need to go

I am posting so often since significant developments seem to be occurring by the hour.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/the-motionless-ghosts-that-haunt-the-south/526668/

What is interesting about this article is that the liberal establishment and neo-liberal establishment is deciding that the Confederate monuments need to go and are providing the space for voices against Confederate monuments to be heard. This is an important change from the past where these type of publications mostly didn't discuss Confederate monuments.

The old story was the Confederate flag hurt feelings of African Americans, but if the flag was gone, then everything was okay. You had to be a radical to be against Confederate monuments.

As one major journal of public opinion follows the next it will develop that they all will adopt a position that they are for the removal of Confederate monuments. Support for Confederate monuments will be confined to reactionary magazines and websites and support for Confederate monuments identified with reactionary opinion.

Arguments for contextualization will be seen for what they are, an excuse to retain monuments or just plan oddball.

Here is a quote from the article.

Those monuments, that reverence for the Lost Cause and its leaders, do lasting damage to all who live in their shadows. It’s no coincidence that Richmond was the ideological powerhouse of “massive resistance”—defiance of the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education—during the 1950s. That constitutional monstrosity flowed directly from neo-Confederate ideology.

A picture from my visit to Richmond.

No churches in Richmond hosted the United Daughters of the Confederacy's Memorial Service in 2016

The 2016 Memorial Service for the 123rd National Convention of the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) in 2016 in Richmond, Virginia was held at the UDC Memorial Building.

No church was willing to host them and the Historic Richmond Foundation didn't rent the UDC the Monumental Church. It seems that writing every last officer of the Historic Richmond Foundation and every sponsor of the Historic Richmond Foundation got them to think a little, probably about their reputations rather than anything involving a moral reflection on what they did.

Also, having corresponded with the Roman Catholic Church, United Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church USA, and Episcopalian Church about the issue and with follow up letters answering all their evasions, it seems that for a little while anyways they won't be hosting any Confederate events in Richmond, Virginia. I do want to point out that St. Paul's Episcopal Church was different than the others and extraordinary in their engagement with the moral issues.

As for the Presbyterian Church USA, I am planning to re-read the Gospels to see if Christ passed the bar exam. I have been meaning to, but I have so many things to do.

I have had other projects to do and there is so much work in tracking the neo-Confederate movement. However, I will start writing churches again about hosting. I hope to have more help this year on the issue.

www.templeofdemocracy.com has a section on the Churches of the Confederacy. It needs to be made current which I hope to do in February.

The National Park Service no longer refers to Richmond, Virgin

The National Park Service has dropped the reference to Richmond as the capitol of the Confederacy. It is now the capitol of Virginia.

However, for many residents of Richmond they are still living in the Capitol of the Confederacy aided in this metaphysical task by the Museum of the Confederacy, now the American Civil War Museum.

This is the link to the article:

http://www.dailyprogress.com/starexponent/news/virginia-no-longer-capitol-of-the-confederacy/article_aa6e352e-d8e5-11e6-8e16-ff32500d4a49.html

Bit by bit the neo-Confederacy is being brought down.

National Cathedral decides to get rid of Confederate flag stain glass, maybe the United Methodist Church will learn from this example and give up the Confederacy.

The National Cathedral in Washington, D.C. has decided to get rid of their stain glass Confederate battle flags.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/06/08/washington-national-cathedral-to-remove-confederate-battle-flags-from-its-windows/?tid=sm_tw

These stain glasses were donated by the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) in the 20th century, I think in the 1940s or 50s. They considered it one of their prize accomplishments.

This follows after St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Richmond, Virginia, first dis-invited the UDC and then decided to get rid of Confederate memorialization.

This is the story about St. Paul dis-inviting the UDC.
http://richmondfreepress.com/news/2014/nov/07/confederates-hold-service-downtown-church/

This blog posting has a whole host of articles about St. Paul's giving up the Confederacy.

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2015/10/st-paul-episcopal-church-moves-to-rid.html#.V1oXN_krKiM

Perhaps this will get the United Methodist Church to give up enabling neo-Confederate groups.

The campaign against churches enabling the Confederacy is documented at:

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/churches-of-the-confederacy.html

The Episcopal Church was the leading enabler of neo-Confederate groups, but that seems to be coming to an end.

I am tied up with an important project, but I plan to get back on the topic of churches. The action of removing the Confederate battle flag from the National Cathedral will send a message to all the churches.

There are other churches with Confederate stain glass battle flags such as at the Old Blandford Church in Petersburg, Virginia. Now that stain glass now can be questioned. If one church has gotten rid of a Confederate battle flag, why not another.

Religious Scholar gives his assessment of the meaning of Confederate iconography at St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Richmond

http://openfriendshipinaclosedsociety.blogspot.com/2015/08/signs-of-crimes-and-forgiving-victim.html


The above is the link. The reassessment of church's connections to the Confederacy is happening.

St. Paul's Episcopal Church is the church I wrote back in 2014. They first decided to disinvite the United Daughters of the Confederacy, then they decided to assess their Confederate imagery in the Church.


The correspondence and news articles can be read at this link.

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/richmond-2014-2015.html

Shouting in New Orleans, Kevin Levin horrified.

The City Council in New Orleans has voted 6 to 1 to get rid of three Confederate monuments and one monument that celebrated the restoration of white supremacy in New Orleans through violence.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/17/us/new-orleans-confederate-monuments-vote/

Evidently there was rancor in debating this issue.

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/12/confederate_monument_debate_de.html#incart_river_index

This has horrified Kevin Levin who referred to this article in his recent posting that Richmond could show New Orleans the way on Confederate monuments and is critical of the efforts in New Orleans to get rid of the monuments.

http://cwmemory.com/2015/12/14/new-orleans-should-look-to-richmond/

I track Kevin Levin as representative of a certain type of mentality that tends to find one reason or another to criticize any effort to remove the Confederacy and end a racialized landscape. The concept of a "racialized landscape" won't appear in Levin's blogging.

Some things are immediately obvious. Richmond isn't getting rid of any of its Confederate monuments. New Orleans is getting rid of its Confederate monuments. It seems Richmond might look to New Orleans rather than the other way around.

Levin's link is to the New Orleans major daily paper and it might occur to him that the newspaper might not be very sympathetic to the monument removal, but for the purpose of argument, let's accept that the reporting is accurate. This leads to an observation about Levin's rational that controversy is to be avoided at all cost.

During the Civil Rights movement in the 1950s and 60s a lot of people didn't oppose civil rights directly, argued instead that it needed to be gradual so that violence and outrage could be avoided. As if African Americans should have their rights denied so some racist white people wouldn't be upset.

Levin's argument is an exact parallel to this.

Levin's example, which he puts forth as counter example to what happened in New Orleans, is the discussion in Richmond about memorializing the slave trade in Shockoe Bottom. This isn't about eliminating a white racialized landscape or doing something about it. It isn't about removing Confederate monuments. However, they evidently don't have heated conversations which is Levin's criteria for judging the process of addressing the landscape. But it is nothing about the Confederacy. It is inane to use it as a counter example.

It doesn't occur to Levin that perhaps this memorial is a ploy to keep the Confederate monuments on monument avenue.

Or more likely it is a ploy to get some of the African American groups to go along with the gentrification of Shockoe Bottom which is going to displace poor African Americans. As explained in this article. http://imagine2050.newcomm.org/2013/11/21/richmond-mayor-seeks-to-gentrify-along-slave-burial-ground/

I don't necessarily know all the issues about what is happening in Schockoe Bottom but I am not holding out Schokoe Bottoms development as a reason to slap New Orleans. It also shows how superficial and uncritical Levin's thinking is.

The real obstacle to getting rid of the Confederacy and white racialized landscapes is not just groups like the United Daughters of the Confederacy or the Sons of Confederate Veterans and crank white extremists. It is people like Levin who find all sorts of complications and needs for interpretations and their professional input which seem to keep these racialized landscapes in place.

In the following link you can read about how people like Kevin Levin in various historical societies in New Orleans tried to keep the Confederate monuments with their various rationalizations and how they were rejected by the African American community.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/confederates-preservationists-new-orleans

What it is, is that the loss of these monuments means the loss of white privilege and various professionals and individuals and historians start instinctively to come up with rationalizations to keep the monuments.

That The Atlantic has him write on Civil War related matters and controversies over Confederate monuments is revealing of the The Atlantic magazine.

Kevin Levin should realize that historical memory isn't the exclusive province of elites nor is it going to be decided by the League of Self-Important Civil War historians.

P.S. My article on white banal nationalism.

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/breaking-the-white-nation.html

St. Paul Episcopal Church moves to rid itself of Confederate symbols, Ashley Luskey chatters to try to save the white geographic space

In 2014 as a result of my letters to them, St. Paul's Episcopal Church dis-invited the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC).

http://richmondfreepress.com/news/2014/nov/07/confederates-hold-service-downtown-church/

This is part of my general campaign to get churches to not host neo-Confederate groups.

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/churches-of-the-confederacy.html

To my surprise St. Paul's Episcopal Church has further decided to get ride of Confederate memorials that are part of the church itself.

http://www.richmond.com/news/local/city-of-richmond/article_fda4f734-e732-5c7f-bbe3-5f66f1f09cb3.html

This effort is not unique to St. Paul's Cathedral. Another Episcopal Church, the National Cathedral in Washington D.C. is getting rid of its Confederate stain glass.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/29/living/national-cathedral-confederate-images/

The effort by St. Paul's has led to discussions by historians, including one by Ashley Luskey who published a rational for St. Paul's to keep the Confederate memorials.

Kevin Levin did an interesting blog posting with links to two articles on the topic.

Kevin Levin's blog posting is:

http://cwmemory.com/2015/10/01/st-pauls-episcopal-and-the-limits-of-public-history/

Christopher Graham blog posting is:

https://whighill.wordpress.com/2015/10/01/historians-doing-historian-things-on-confederate-monuments-is-not-enough/

Then there is Ashley Luskey's writing on the topic:

http://publichistorycommons.org/ashley-luskey-civil-war-memory-post/
She voices the usual justifications, "history is being white washed" etc. She doesn't seem to get it that the Confederate symbols glorify the Confederacy and have power as long as they are in their place.

I have written this before, "Every Confederate monument whispers, 'Civil Rights might be the slogan of the day, but white supremacy is for the ages.'"

Kevin Levin's blog posting and Christopher Graham's posting make good points and refute Luskey.

I think that all three however miss the big picture about race and Christianity and these historic churches.

These historic churches are usually downtown in metropolises of substantial size. In many cases people whose parents or grandparents attended those churches have moved (fled) to the suburbs. In a lot of cases the church is finally closed down and sold to another denomination with an urban demographic. ( I mean minorities.)

There is a church in my neighborhood a few blocks away which was sold since the members were getting tired of driving from the suburbs into Oak Cliff, a part of Dallas. I was told that they held on for a while, but as the older members died off and the younger members were growing up in the suburbs it finally came to an end.

In other cases, for churches that think they are universal and that have a history of African American and Hispanic members will, they will consider recruiting members from those people that live downtown.

I can tell you that Ashley Luskey's chattering rationalizations aren't going to be generally accepted by minority members.  I am sure that the Walter Williams of the world will be glad to go to a church with Confederate symbols, but most African Americans don't want Confederate symbols around when they are dealing with life issues.

Another issue is that Christianity's center of gravity is leaving the West. Christianity started as a religion in Asia and its center of gravity is leaving or has left the West. Interest in religion is declining in the West. Christianity is thriving outside the West.

The Anglican Communion has a great many members in Africa. It is a global faith.

The Confederacy is baggage that American Episcopal church doesn't need if it wishes to be connected to a global Christianity. The same goes for other American churches.

Besides planning on writing Richardson and Dallas churches in the coming year, I am planning on writing religious leaders concerned with race overseas and in Africa. Let the United Methodist Church explain to their members there why they are fooling around with the Confederacy.

"Richmond Free Press" publishes interview with me.

The article is online at the Richmond Free Press. The link to the web based issue is at:

http://richmondfreepress.com/news/2015/jul/24/dallas-researcher-driven-protest-educate-public-ab/

This is the print version.

http://issuu.com/richmondfreepress/docs/july_23-25__2015_issue?e=13821893/14381766

I am hoping that this lets people know that there is someone out three that has the information about the neo-Confederates.

Racial Politics at a Virginia Flagger event in Richmond and what the "Richmond Times-Dispatch" didn't tell you.

Recently I visited Richmond, Virginia to carry out activities including counter activities against the neo-Confederates there, in particular the Sons of Confederate Veterans 2015 National Reunion from July 15th to July 19th.

We did a lot of video recording while we were there. We plan to be putting up some videos online on Youtube which will show the thinking of neo-Confederates.

The following video is a speech of Richard T. Hines at the Virginia flagger rally on the afternoon of Saturday July 18th at the Capitol Square in Richmond, Virginia. Richard T. Hines was the former managing editor of the notorious neo-Confederate magazine Southern Partisan for 20 years. He was also a lobbyist for dictators.

An article on who he is is online here: http://www.thenation.com/article/lobbyist-lost-cause/

The link to the following video is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLQNSKfQwIE.

Click on the video to make it larger so you can see the entire video.



Watching the timing.

At 3:08 Hines makes brief reference to Gay pride flags to characterize those who are at the lowering of the Confederate flag in South Carolina and who wanted to see the flag lowered. He wants to characterize the anti-Confederate flag forces as pro-Gay.

At 3:16 Hines starts talking about what Conservative commentator Ann Coulter says about the Confederate flag.

At 3:26 Hines quotes Ann Coulter to say this about Nikki Haley:

"At least Nikki Haley should have waited for three or four generations before telling Southern Americans what symbols were allowable or not."

Nikki Haley was born in South Carolina and grew up there, but since her parents are immigrants Richard Hines and Ann Coulter don't think she really is Southern or American enough to make decisions about the place where she lives and despite the fact that she was elected by the residents of South Carolina to be the governor.

At 3:43 the politics of race comes up and Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are denounce as shysters and Nikki Haley is denounced for merely being on the stage with them.  The fact that Nikki Haley is a potential Vice-Presidential candidate with Jeb Bush is bemoaned.

The crowd of flaggers is cheering Hines' speech.

So we have homophobia, the politics of race, an attach on Nikki Haley and Jeb Bush a leading presidential candidate, a clearly expressed Xenophobic and anti-immigrant sentiments, and an attack on Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Did any of this get into the Richmond Times-Dispatch coverage of the event. Not at all, not even hinted at.

This was the coverage of the rally. http://www.richmond.com/news/local/article_0624e257-8be0-5d14-8f59-86e9476b1e3f.html

Even though the opening speech was by a former editor of the Southern Partisan, the reporter puts the word "neo-Confederacy" in quotes:

"We’re here to see what motivates the Virginia Flaggers, what makes them tick,” said Sebesta, who has written studies of the “neo-Confederacy” movement.

Otherwise the entire report was the uncritical repeating of the assertions of the Virginia flaggers.

I was in communication with the reporters at the Richmond Times-Dispatch and sent them considerable documentation about the Sons of Confederate Veterans none of it made it into their paper.

Generally the Richmond media is sympathetic to the Confederacy. We hope to have more videos online from the visit as time goes on.