I can see arguments on both sides, but I tend toward removing all of the statues and agree with renaming military installations or any other government operated facility that bear the name related to confederacy. I don't agree with other statues being removed and defaced in all of the situations where it has occurred because some of it is illogical, but that is a different discussion. I think there should be places where you go that have related artifacts such as museums and the reconstructed plantation that exists as a historical space in the south where the statues would have a place as markers for history. We should increase the number of such spaces and really work at fully developing the historical perspective from the view of the slaves. I think former President Obama and the Smithsonian made great strides with the museum that was opened on African-American history. It's a national museum, but more needs to go into local places, states, and especially the south where people were actually held as slaves. People really need to know and understand that history fully. I know there are tours you can take of actual places that were part of the underground railroad in the north, and it's all something to see and learn from. There is also a slave ship, the last one, I heard they are in the process of recovering it and that is a VERY INTERESTING story, the Clotilda. It all needs to be brought out.

I believe there are groups of people who have worked on the southern plantation and the Clotilda project and hopefully they receive all of the necessary funding and more to further their efforts and even go way beyond. It is extremely worthwhile part of history we should all be knowledgeable on. I don't think this aspect of history has been as fully discussed and explored as it should be. It is a wise use of resources and time to build up these memorial/educational spaces. Some of these spaces can include these removed statues as long as they are put in proper context and include representation of those that were oppressed and what that actually meant. Even the removal of the statues and the renaming is history itself in the making.

The uncivil war lasted four years. And they call that heritage? Or history? Its just a bunch of traitors and still is.

The Civil War lasted about 20 minutes, history-wise. Heritage my ass!

I believe in respect and veneration for all people.

The making of harsh judgments is a sure path to personal misery.

I have one of those Southern heritages as well and I'm very thankful that some people's attitudes have changed. I think I would have asked him what part of these Southern heritage he is most proud of that they are taking away from him.

..don’t think I’ve ever disagreed with you Keep up the good work

It's one thing to acknowledge that the way of life used to be different, but to celebrate and enshrine those who led the fight to continue enslaving human beings, is a step backward in our humanity.

It's also history (in the making) that people's consciences change, with better understanding and empathy, and therefore make changes for the betterment of society.

So, the very toppling of statues, and decisions to ban waving the confederate flag at events, and other symbols of "southern heritage" disguising outright hatred and inequality of the races, is history in the making.

Exactly well put. You could ask him would he erect statues of slave owners beating slaves to death? That's part of his heritage. And if he said, "well it would be clear that it was as a reminder of how bad things were" ask him how he could be sure that people weren't looking at them thinking they venerated such acts?

Good for you!!