I really hate people who ignore the fact that democrats used to be the right-wing conservative party then claim that modern dems are somehow hypocrites. Substance is what matters not the label their using. Plus, how is criticizing the democrats for not confronting their history any different then the activists criticizing the confederate statue sympathizers for not confronting theirs?
Sick, beautiful burn to wagecucks aside (cringiest name I have seen lately, by the way), this is something I think about often.
When you really think about it, most political discussions today eventually end up being about things that never happened in the lifespan of the people arguing, in some place that does not care about it anymore either because they got over it already or because they see no problem with it, that may or may not have had meaningful lasting consequences to date, and that does not actually affect their own lives beyond the knowledge of said historical facts on itself, only to wrap up the importance of bringing all of that up by somehow blaming all of it to people, places and events relevant in the last 6 months or so.
One thing is to not forget history so that it does not repeat itself, and another is to bring it up to try and replace the lack of an actual, coherent argument.
![Lee died in 1870, just five years after the Civil War ended, contributing to his rise as a romantic symbol of the "lost cause" for some white southerners. But while he was alive, Lee stressed his belief that the country should move past the war. He swore allegiance to the Union and publicly decried southern separatism, whether militant or symbolic "It's often forgotten that Lee himself, after the Civil War, opposed monuments, specifically Confederate war monuments," said Jonathan Horn, the author of the Lee biography,"The Man Who Would Not Be Washington." "It's often forgotten that Lee himself, after the Civil War, opposed monuments, specifically Confederate war monuments." In his writings, Lee cited multiple reasons for opposing such monuments, questioning the cost of a potential Stonewall Jackson monument, for example. But underlying it all was one rationale: That the war had ended, and the South needed to move on and avoid more upheaval. "As regards the erection of such a monument as is contemplated," Lee wrote of an 1866 proposal, "my conviction is, that however grateful it would be to the feelings of the South, the attempt in the present condition of the Country, would have the effect of retarding, instead of accelerating its accomplishment; [and] of continuing, if not adding to, the difficulties under which the Southern people labour The retired Confederate leader, a West Point graduate, was influenced by his knowledge of history. Lee believed countries that erased visible signs of civil war recovered from conflicts quicker," Horn said. "He was worried that by keeping these symbols alive, it would keep the divisions alive."](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/list/001/286/493/7f7.jpg "Even Robert E. Lee himself didn't want statues to the Confederacy!")
Top Comments
YNG, The Sabbo-Tabby
Sep 24, 2017 at 02:43PM EDT
Nedhitis
Sep 24, 2017 at 06:52AM EDT