ERASE HISTORY

AF6872

AF6872

15-Year Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
4,841
It has been "recently" discovered that two buildings on USNA have names associated with Confederate Naval Officers. Franklin Buchanan, first superintendent and founder of the Naval Academy and Admiral CSAN "The Supes House". Also Commander Mathew Fontaine Maury, Captain of the Virginia in another building. As George Santayana stated in "The Life Of Reason" those who forget are condemned to repeat it.

Where they burn books they will also ultimately burn people. "Heinrich Heinie"

"There's more than one way to burn a book, and the world is full of people running about with lit matches." Ray Bradbury
 
I am not a big fan of the statues of the Confederate leaders and even then I wouldnt necessarily take them down beause you are somehow tyring to erase history. I wont cry if they come down, however, the Army bases and in your post about the buildings in the USNA, these places have developed their own history that has nothing to do with the people they were named after. I know almost nothing about the army and yet I have heard of Fort Bragg. I have to assume that their is a lot of history connected to the base. Changing its name because it was named after some Confederate officer seems like an insult to the history of that base and to all those men and women who have served there or had a connection to it. I belonged to a Fraternity that started in the South and most of it founders fought and died for the South. On the other hand, my fraternity chapter was made of all of colors and all religions. We used to laugh that the founders were turning in their graves if they knew that our President was a African American. Now the fraternity wasnt named after a Confederate, but the history of the Fratnerity is very well connected to these men who proably wouldnt have accepted me or my African Amerian president into their fraternity. Who cares.
 
Thanks for bringing this to our attention. You raise a good point about the hazards of forgetting history. In addition to selective amnesia in matters of American history, another attribute of some of our fellow citizens is downright ignorance of history.

Here's a link to a Wikipedia article on the extensive use of slaves on United States military installations between 1799 and 1863.

en.wikipedia.org

Slave labor on United States military installations 1799–1863 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
I completely agree about the idea of not erasing history. But nobody is proposing to stop teaching or writing about a segment of history, or even burn books. These statues and buildings aren't histories, they are shrines and/or structures of honor for people's military efforts in fighting against the US for the South to maintain slavery. There is no plaque under Lee's statue stating that he led a treasonous group who wanted to maintain slavery.
My thought would be to keep these statues but place historical context with them in a plaque. This way they maintain their place as a piece of art but more importantly become a history lesson to people who see them.
As for building and base names, I'm fine with them being eliminated they are insulting to Black military members who are using the facilities. It wasn't very long ago that Blacks fought for their country in segregated units and then returned to a country that still treated them as secondary citizens.
And granted, Washington owned slaves, and slaves were used on some bases. But we don't have statues honoring him as a slave owner or bases built to honor the use of slaves. To me, issues like these aren't the same as statues dedicated specifically to people who fought against the US for a cause.
 
The statues are shrines. Shrines to treason, death, destruction and ultimately slavery. It is not about erasing history but correcting the narrative of the Lost Cause. An example of how hypocritical the original placement of these statues is where are the statues of Gen. James Longstreet? He was at least the third most important Confederate General. What Longstreet did after the War made him erased from the Confederate History. Outside of a roadside sign near his birthplace in Edgefield, South Carolina, one statue in Gainesville, Georgia, where he died, and his name on a few streets in a handful of Southern towns, there are virtually no memorials to Longstreet throughout the South -- or the entire country, for that matter.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/23/opin...-general-longstreet-opinion-holmes/index.html
 
Before hitting on some of the points raised, I want to be clear about where I'm coming from. I am a proud Southerner with a family drenched in East TN/Western NC history since their initial settlement and in VA before that. I had three of four G-Grandfathers who fought for the Confederacy. As I wrote earlier, I am totally against the wholesale erasure of Confederate symbols. I want future generations to know our history, warts and all-from the settlement of the American West to the internment of US citizens of Japanese descent. I want my grandchildren to ask questions. However, I know that neither I nor my grandchildren will never see the the Confederate Battle flag in the same way as my African-American neighbor or his grandchildren will.

AF6872 said:
Where they burn books they will also ultimately burn people. "Heinrich Heinie"
Click to expand...

Do you really want to analogize book burning with changing the name on a building in the US in 2020? Heinrich Heine's (Heinie was pejorative term referring to Germans during WW I) books were among the most famously books burned in public displays in Nazi Germany.

Humey said:
Changing its name because it was named after some Confederate officer seems like an insult to the history of that base and to all those men and women who have served there or had a connection to it.
Click to expand...

I'll let you research Braxton Bragg. Even if he were the most brilliant military tactician in history--which he was not--he was a traitor and in the elite leadership of a rebellion against the United States. And he lost, as did all of his other colleagues. How many soldiers passed through the gates of Ft. Bragg and died on the battlefield during its history, which didn't even begin until 50 years after the Civil War. They were fighting for not against the United States. There is no one more deserving of the honour?

Humey said:
Who cares.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm sure that right about now to my DS, who is there as we speak in the middle of Level C SERE school, doesn't care. But, give him a good night's sleep, 4000 calories and about three minutes to think about it, he'd call it absolutely ludicrous. His first cousin Braxton would agree.

EDelahanty said:
In addition to selective amnesia in matters of American history, another attribute of some of our fellow citizens is downright ignorance of history.
Click to expand...

This x 100
 
Last edited:
They have an ongoing demonstration to take down the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oxford, A reporter walked among the crowd and asked the demonstrators who Cecil Rhodes was. They only know he was a bad guy. If you asked them to point out "Rhodesia" on a map they would probably point out Iceland.
 
Fort Bragg and Benning. Renowned US Military Bases. Do you know what Fort Grant is? Fort Grant is a state prison and a former United States Army fortification in the U.S. state of Arizona. Do you know what Fort Sherman is? Fort Sherman is a former United States Army base in Panama, located on Toro Point at the Caribbean (northern) end of the Panama Canal. Switch names of Benning to Grant and Bragg to Sherman. Generals Grant and Sherman captured entire Confederate Armies.
 
I read Orwell as a teenager in the sixty's. He was prescient and a little before his time but I think he could see the current times.
 
NorwichDad said:
Fort Bragg and Benning. Renowned US Military Bases. Do you know what Fort Grant is? Fort Grant is a state prison and a former United States Army fortification in the U.S. state of Arizona. Do you know what Fort Sherman is? Fort Sherman is a former United States Army base in Panama, located on Toro Point at the Caribbean (northern) end of the Panama Canal. Switch names of Benning to Grant and Bragg to Sherman. Generals Grant and Sherman captured entire Confederate Armies.
Click to expand...

How about changing Ft. Hood to Ft. Rommel. They both lost fighting for a bankrupt cause against the United States Army, but not before causing the deaths of countless US soldiers. Rommel would be a better choice since 1) he never committed treason against the United States, 2) he was a tanker and 3) was involved in a plot to assassinate Hitler.
 
The tone is passionate here and that is okay as it is certainly a topic that elicits strong emotions.

If we keep the debates on the merits of the arguments, we will be fine. However if it devolves into personal attacks, then the mods will have to intercede.

Let's keep it civil, everyone.
 
Last edited:
Or skip the people names, and go with core values. Ft. Courage, Ft. Valor...
(Though my mind already did a warped humor flit to the existing Ft. Bliss).

Humor aside, though, it’s an invigorating time to be alive and shining light on new ways to look at things. I don’t think we should hide history, but tell it more fully and inclusively. I haven’t yet sorted out what that means for statues. Maybe they all belong in a museum somewhere, with “the rest of the story” posted beside them, so future generations know what happened.

I recall taking a Women’s History course in college, as well as a Black History course, during summer school electives, along with some courses I was taking so I could get them done before a semester abroad. The amazing people and significant events that were left out of standard history texts - I felt like an ignoramus.
 
cb7893 said:
Before hitting on some of the points raised, I want to be clear about where I'm coming from. I am a proud Southerner with a family drenched in East TN/Western NC history since their initial settlement and in VA before that. I had three of four G-Grandfathers who fought for the Confederacy. As I wrote earlier, I am totally against the wholesale erasure of Confederate symbols. I want future generations to know our history, warts and all-from the settlement of the American West to the internment of US citizens of Japanese descent. I want my grandchildren to ask questions. However, I know that neither I nor my grandchildren will never see the the Confederate Battle flag in the same way as my African-American neighbor or his grandchildren will.



Do you really want to analogize book burning with changing the name on a building in the US in 2020? Heinrich Heine's (Heinie was pejorative term referring to Germans during WW I) books were among the most famously books burned in public displays in Nazi Germany.



I'll let you research Braxton Bragg. Even if he were the most brilliant military tactician in history--which he was not--he was a traitor and in the elite leadership of a rebellion against the United States. And he lost, as did all of his other colleagues. How many soldiers passed through the gates of Ft. Bragg and died on the battlefield during its history, which didn't even begin until 50 years after the Civil War. They were fighting for not against the United States. There is no one more deserving of the honour?



Well, I'm sure that right about now to my DS, who is there as we speak in the middle of Level C SERE school, doesn't care. But, give him a good night's sleep, 4000 calories and about three minutes to think about it, he'd call it absolutely ludicrous. His first cousin Braxton would agree.



This x 100
Click to expand...
I am just going to respond to the Braxton Bragg comment. I really dont care who or what Braxton Bragg was. Absolutely he was a traitor to this country. I guess my point is that the name Fort Bragg transcends the name and the person it was named for. For all i care, it was named after David Bragg, a NYC fry cook from the 1920s (made that up) The history of Fort Bragg belongs to that name. The fact that it was named after some ass from the 1840s shouldnt even be relevant.
 
We are right to be questioning where we stand as a nation, as organizations and as individuals. We will be best served by applying timeless principles — such as liberty, integrity, fairness — while considering the full context of the given times. Not to mention the greater good that often comes with tolerance of some negatives. In other words, the ends can indeed justify the means.

Take George Washington. Sad will be the day when we no longer venerate him for his vision and courage. Without his peerless leadership, we don’t have all the goodness that has come of and from the United States. He was a slaveholder, and no doubt harbored some level of racism — that was standard for the time. But we would be terribly wrong to now try to erase him (I believe the term du jour is “cancel”) because of those attributes. In the context of his times, he was actually progressive, favoring freeing the slaves in an organized and measured way that would ensure domestic tranquility.

Similarly, we are so far keeping safe Union monuments. But we must acknowledge that while those soldiers and sailors wore blue, most were also racist. Again, par for the time. They may have wanted to preserve the Union and end slavery, but they still thought little of the black race itself. Beware judging actions of the past based on standards of today. It’s unfair, unrealistic and ultimately unfulfilling.

I share these two examples only to say that this is a very complex issue and we must avoid painting with overly broad strokes, or with uncompromising black-and-white lines. Would our history be more elegant if George Washington didn’t own slaves? Of course. But in the end, I’d rather a slaveholder succeeded in creating this nation, than a non-slaveholder failed in the attempt. There’s a lot of gray area here, which should encourage a broader desire to understand. If only the world were so simple to be binary.

Ours is not a perfect country. But it is still the greatest experiment in liberty and self-rule the world has ever known. Or to paraphrase a great historical figure: Our constitutional republic is the worst form of government ever known...except for all the others.
 
Last edited:
I'm not in favor of changing base names or removing statues. You cannot erase history, nor, i believe, erase names. As exhibit A i submit the artist Prince. He changed his name to a glyph and was then known as 'the artist formerly known as Prince'. I believe we would forever be reading about Ft Valor (formerly known as Ft Bragg). Statues that replace a removed statue would always be mentioned as "this is where X's statue used to be". Its pointless.
 
unkown1961 said:
I completely agree about the idea of not erasing history. But nobody is proposing to stop teaching or writing about a segment of history, or even burn books. These statues and buildings aren't histories, they are shrines and/or structures of honor for people's military efforts in fighting against the US for the South to maintain slavery. There is no plaque under Lee's statue stating that he led a treasonous group who wanted to maintain slavery.
My thought would be to keep these statues but place historical context with them in a plaque. This way they maintain their place as a piece of art but more importantly become a history lesson to people who see them.
As for building and base names, I'm fine with them being eliminated they are insulting to Black military members who are using the facilities. It wasn't very long ago that Blacks fought for their country in segregated units and then returned to a country that still treated them as secondary citizens.
And granted, Washington owned slaves, and slaves were used on some bases. But we don't have statues honoring him as a slave owner or bases built to honor the use of slaves. To me, issues like these aren't the same as statues dedicated specifically to people who fought against the US for a cause.
Click to expand...
To me its a slippery slope. We can all agree these werent good men so it easy to say that we should erase them from the public. But what happens in the next generation when someone says (already said today) we shouldnt honor Washington and Jefferson as they were slave owners. I dont like the idea of erasing history because some generation finds it offensive. And yes I know that history is taught in the schools but but we know how well that is taught. Ask the average teenager who Woodrow Wilson was. More importantly its not like people who teach history dont have their own point of view. Again its easy to attack the Confederacy because they were traitors to this country, but not everything is so black and white. There is talk of removing President Wilson name from buildings (or something like that) from Princeton, which he was the president off for some period f time.. Turns out he wasnt he most enlighted men when it came to African Americans. I am not trying to defend his stance on this issue because its wrong, however he was a man from his time and he was the President during WWI and helped create the League of Nations. If we are going to evaluate each president based on todays standards, we arent going to have many people to look up to. I agree its not book burning, but to me its really close.
 
Maybe Prince was onto something. Someday a newly commissioned butterbars will receive the following orders: "The Secretary of the Army hereby authorizes you to report for IBOLC at the Fort Formerly Known as Benning on 6 June 2023 between 0800 and 1000.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top