A Case for Taking Down Confederate Statues

Some people just won't let things die. It's how I feel when I hear the rally cry of "the South will rise again." The Civil War was a war fought over 150 years ago because the Confederates thought that owning people as property was acceptable, and even used the Bible to justify the practice. The South lost the Civil War, yet there are those who feel nostalgia for "that better time." One of the ways in which they feel that nostalgia is by fighting against those who want to take down Confederate statues. Those who are in favor of these statues argue that it's about preserving history and "how dare you take away our heritage." In spite of these emotional claims, there are a few reasons why, after looking at the arguments on both sides, we should ultimately take down these statues:

1. Those arguing for these statues primarily base it on the preservation of history. Looking at when these statues were erected provide some sense of motive. First, most of the statues were erected long after the Civil War, thereby diminishing the "preservation argument." Second, the two major spikes (1900s-1920s and 1950s-1960s) were times of great civil rights tension and also when white supremacy in the United States were at their peak. This is why comparing the statues of Confederate soldiers to those of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are false. Yes, Washington and Jefferson were slave-owners. But let's remember that the good they achieved (e.g., founding this country, establishing our country's ideals, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution) outweighed their slave-owning. Even more importantly, very few (if any) of the statues of Washington and Jefferson commemorate the fact they owned slaves. The Confederate statues, on the other hand, are a different matter. Granted, there are some exceptions, such as General James Longstreet, who led an African-American militia after the Civil War. But for the vast majority of Confederate statues, they commemorate service to the Confederacy and what the Confederacy fought for (see Point #2).

2. The historical argument leads into why we build statues in the first place. Statues are not put up to merely make a values-neutral historical statement. They are erected with the intention of exalting and honoring the individual(s). In this case, Confederate statues are built to honor what the Confederates fought for. There is a difference between remembering and examining the Civil War versus celebrating the cause of enslaving a group of people based on skin color. The Confederates instigated a treasonous war, and it was not fought over "Northern aggression" or the abstract concept of states' rights. It begs the question of the "right to do what?" The answer? Own another human being (see below). The Confederates lost the moral battle and lost on the physical battlefield. Why is that worth honoring? Why is Southern pride being based on its most shameful moment of history? I'm sure that the South has more to offer than a legacy of slavery.     

3. There is a history of toppling statues once a certain individual or side loses, one that predates our modern-day notion of political correctness. After the Declaration of Independence was signed, the statue of King George III was toppled. Germany removed Nazi statues after WWII. The same goes for statues of Stalin, Lenin, and Saddam Hussein. If countries are able to remove statues honoring tyrants to symbolize a better tomorrow, I think the United States can handle removing statues of Confederate generals.  

4. Taking down a statue does not lead to a false slippery slope of removing the Confederates from libraries, museums, or history books. Nor does it mean that we stop individuals from putting up Confederate flags or statues on private property. Conflating the specific removal of Confederate statues on public property with the general removal of the Confederates from historical remembrance is simply inaccurate. We should not forget this history. If anything, we should remember what they fought for, what they believed, and why they were ultimately in the wrong. We should teach that racism and treating people like property are unacceptable in any civilized society. 

5. Building statues does not address any market failure, which means the government has no business building statues of any kind in the first place. As Cato Institute scholar Jeff Miron argues, we should simply take down all statues in public parks. 

6. Confederate General Robert E. Lee was against building Confederate statues. Why? Because they are too divisive. Because it would be more difficult for the nation to heal from the wounds inflicted by the Civil War. Lee believed that by keeping these statues around, they perpetuate the divisions that have been around since the Civil War. Boy, was General Lee right on that one! 

These Confederate statues don't deserve a status of honor. At best, they deserve to be in museums or other historical sites such as battlegrounds to remind us of past mistakes and how to make sure we don't repeat the mistake of subjugating people simply because they are different from us. We should not use taxpayer dollars to fund or preserve divisive symbolism such as Confederate statues. Yes, we should take down the statues, but even if we remove the statues, the divisiveness will remain. Why? The statues are a manifestation of the divide, and merely act as a symptom of the wounds that have not healed since the Civil War, as is illustrated by the debate over the statues. Rather than commemorate a flawed and morally troublesome past, we should build a future that represents the democratic values the Founding Fathers had in mind. We should have a society that believes in and preserves the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness for all Americans. The Confederate statue debate simply reminds us that we as a nation have a ways to go on making that ideal a reality.