The monument we have at the Galveston County courthouse is a symbol of Confederate war service.

Many like it are being removed in the South.

The reason many people find them offensive is that they represent outdated values and honor a group of people who defended slavery. Of course, historians will argue that it was much more complicated than that.

The problem with the words on the monument is that they refer to those who fought as having the highest “purity of motives.” There was nothing pure about those motives.

When some people of European descent think of those monuments, perhaps they don’t think of what an endorsement like that means.

The Confederacy was a cause that stood for slavery. Honoring it means that you think it’s OK to buy a human and to keep him or her in bondage — to use that person relentlessly to satisfy the economic and sexual needs of a dominant group of people.

Look at the bald truth of it. Those Confederate symbols represent an acceptance of access to the bodies of black men and women.

So when people celebrate a system of subjugation, they are celebrating a system in which people of color are at a severe disadvantage — economically, sexually and socially; supporting those monuments that honor the Confederate cause is like saying you think it was acceptable to exploit people in this way. Perhaps it even implies that you think it’s OK to continue exploiting others.

We still have wage and social problems, but we don’t build monuments to celebrate the vast disparity between the rich and the poor.

We know this is a problem and, as voters, we try to address it.

Instead of celebrating rape, lynching and economic objectification as a right, why not celebrate an effort to make things right, not only for the vast numbers of African-Americans upon whose backs the nation was built, but also the millions of other people who are struggling from paycheck to paycheck?

Instead of investing angst and energy into preserving outdated and irrelevant values, let’s turn our attention to those who we elect to represent all of the people.

Let’s get rid of the symbols of oppression, but also look carefully at those who do not realize what is important. If there are those who can’t do without the monument, take it down and put it in a museum. But don’t use my tax dollars to maintain it.

Let’s begin to think ahead to the next election, to those who seek to represent us, to whether, partisanship aside, they can make responsible, fair changes that move us forward, not backward.

Let’s get rid of the reminders of economic and social subjugation and move forward. By the way, are there any monuments to the many people, especially African-Americans, who made sacrifices to build this country?

Let’s get registered to vote, and let’s vote. Let’s pay attention to what candidates have to say and work for the ideals that are inclusive and considerate, not exclusive and vicious.

Dale Taylor, a retired journalist and educator, lives in Galveston.

Locations

(131) comments

Claudia Burnam

After the Confederate monuments are gone what is the next thing on your agenda? E G Wiley

Mark Aaron

"After the Confederate monuments are gone what is the next thing on your agenda?"

This is a common response I hear from Confederate apologists. It is the logical fallacy known as "the slippery slope argument" where in if you take action against an injustice you risk taking action against a long list of other things.

There are a couple of problems with this argument. In this case the apologists claim the next target will be George Washington or Thomas Jefferson. But Washington and Jefferson aren't celebrated for their ownership of slaves. They are cited for their leadership, bravery, and intellect. Civil War monuments celebrate treason against the United States and the perpetuation of slavery. They are not analogous.

Further, if the action of taking down monuments celebrating slavery and treason cause some other things to be removed then perhaps they deserve to be removed or condemned.

Carlos Ponce

Dale writes, "There was nothing pure about those motives."
Many people have a problem with the phrase "purity of motives" going under the FALSE assumption it referred to the dense of slavery. What was meant by "purity of motives"? Let me re-post this excerpt from the GDN written as the monument was dedicated in 1912:
From the Galveston Daily News June 4, 1912 Page 12
"Imposing Ceremony Marks Unveiling"
Address by Charles B. Macgill, nephew of Gen. J. E. B. Stuart: "Because it
was their duty to themselves, their country and their God to defend their homes
against the invasion of those who would usurp that most sacred safeguard of personal liberty, the inherent and cherished constitutional right of a free people to govern themselves, the confederates sacrificed all save honor. For four long years, with an army numbering at the most not 900,000 men poorly armed and equipped, without resources and without reserve forces, they held in check, and in most battles defeated the best armed, equipped and organized army on earth, numbering: three million men or more, with resources and reserve forces unlimited. From first Mananas to Appomattox were fought the bravest and bloodiest battles the world has known."
"Purity of motives" meant the defense of their homes, their farms, their towns, their families, NOT slavery. Slavery was and still is bad, evil but that's not what this monument is about.
And remember, Black men fought for the south.
Watch on Youtube:
"Proud Black Confederates on the Confederate Flag - 'Dont take Our History Away' "
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAuUiwCNS6w
and "Black Confederate"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8hPo6mYnks

Carlos Ponce

Make that "Many people have a problem with the phrase 'purity of motives' going under the FALSE assumption it referred to the defense of slavery."

Mark Aaron

"Make that "Many people have a problem with the phrase 'purity of motives' going under the FALSE assumption it referred to the defense of slavery.""

Yes, sadly there are more than a few Confederate apologists around who will grasp at any straw, no matter how absurd to defend treason and bigotry.

Carlos Ponce

My family is from the South - South of the border. None fought in America's Civil War. I am not a Confederate apologist. I am interested in TRUTH and History. And I back my assertions with documentation.

Mark Aaron

More of your Confederacy apologia, Carlos? The partial phrase you cherry pick is from a longer declaration that leaves no doubt that it was meant to glorify traitors aligned against the United States and its Constitution. Traitors who ignored law and judicial precedence and called for the violent overthrow of the legitimate government of the United States.

Had the traitors you laud so enthusiastically obeyed the law they wouldn't have had to worry about the legitimate authorities coming to their states. They were criminals, not heroes. Their motives were foul and inhumane. They deserve no glory.

Just because other known Confederate apologists made a claim in 1912 doesn't make it any truer today that it was back then.

Furthermore, your claim that Blacks served the Confederacy is a myth. Towards the end of the war, 1865, the Confederacy, losing the war, authorized Black enlistment, but only a small contingent was trained in Richmond, Va., but there is no evidence they ever served. You have been played for a fool yet again Carlos.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/the-myth-of-the-black-confederate-soldier

Emile Pope

Free people???? Personal liberty???? Tell that to the slaves they owned. What a hypocritical bunch of garbage. And a whole lot more Black people fought for the Union...

Carlos Ponce

There were free Blacks in the South at the time, Emile, and some owned plantations and Black slaves. Some owned slaves to protect family members who were still slaves. Others owned slaves to make money.
"The free colored population [native] of Louisiana … own slaves, and they are dearly attached to their native land … and they are ready to shed their blood for her defense. They have no sympathy for abolitionism; no love for the North, but they have plenty for Louisiana … They will fight for her in 1861 as they fought [to defend New Orleans from the British] in 1814-1815."
" In 1830, the year most carefully studied by Carter G. Woodson, about 13.7 percent (319,599) of the black population was free. Of these, 3,776 free Negroes owned 12,907 slaves..."
http://www.africanamerica.org/topic/did-black-people-own-slaves
"A few months before the Confederacy was born, there were 35,766 more free black people living in the slave-owning South than in the North, and removing D.C. from the equation wouldn’t have shifted the result. And they stayed there during the Civil War."
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/african-americans-many-rivers-to-cross/history/free-blacks-lived-in-the-north-right/
While its true that more Blacks fought for the North than the South there were 65,000 Black Confederate soldiers. While a few fought on the promise of freedom, many were free to begin with.
New Orleans had a Black Confederate regiment consisting of 1400 free men.
Ebony magazine, June 1962 page 132

Mark Aaron

" 65,000 Black Confederate soldiers."

That is a complete and utter lie, Carlos. Nothing of the sort ever happened. There is no credible evidence whatsoever to support that absurd claim. Yet again you have been duped and played for a fool. You seriously need to learn how to qualify a source so you don't keep being played for a patsy.

Walter Manuel

If we start to remove all historical facts that brought us to where we are today, then that must also include any and all oppressive parts of African American history whether fact or fiction including Kunta Kinte, Rosa Parks, Harriett Tubman, Uncle Tom and many other individuals whose role accomplished so many great things as a part of our "history". Period!

The suffrage of the above mentioned individuals only serves today to promote racial division and hate for some, just like these confederate statues that many claim is offensive to them.

I'm personally offended myself to read that someone's civil rights were violated by the color of their skin and would never promote idolizing something that happened so long ago, but unfortunately it's still a part of history for which none of us alive today were a part of.

How many years have these statues been on display and only now after "Black Lives Matter" has been organized, have these statues become such an offensive piece of history??? I just don't get it.

Think about it, should the Egyptians now tear down all of their pyramids just because they were all built by slaves and only serves to remind visitors today of the suffrage of others??

So, where does all of the cherry picking of suffrage begin and end? We can't erase history, but one thing that we ALL can do is stop using the past to further promote one's own personal agenda.

We can't have it both ways, history is just that.... history![wink]

Mark Aaron

"If we start to remove all historical facts that brought us to where we are today, then that must also include any and all oppressive parts of African American history whether fact or fiction including Kunta Kinte, Rosa Parks, Harriett Tubman, Uncle Tom and many other individuals whose role accomplished so many great things as a part of our "history". Period!"

That is ridiculous. Just because you remove something clearly offensive doesn't mean you logically have to remove everything else that mentions the offense.

You started with a false premise, everything you claimed afterwards is based on that false premise.

Emile Pope

People have been offended for years. It's just now that something can be done about it. Your offended? What you are is someone who is offended but won't do or say anything about it. But always ready to say and do something when someone tries to remedy the situation. Please stay on your sidelines and enjoy your pizza slice...

Carlos Ponce

Where was the Confederate Army Headquarters in Galveston during the Civil War?
That was the home of Colonel James Moreau Brown at the corner of 24th Street and Broadway. The building still exists. Want to take that down?

Mark Aaron

"the home of Colonel James Moreau Brown at the corner of 24th Street and Broadway. The building still exists. Want to take that down?"

A home doesn't glorify treason or bigotry like a monument does. Surely you know better than that Carlos. Your ability to type and construct sentences suggests you are capable enough to know better.

Carlos Ponce

"Surely you know better than that Carlos." From your posts I wouldn't doubt if you tried to take Ashton Villa out because it was used as Confederate Army Headquarters. Haters know no end to their hatred.

Mark Aaron

"From your posts I wouldn't doubt if you tried to take Ashton Villa out because it was used as Confederate Army Headquarters."

Unlike you, Carlos, I know the difference between a public monument and a house.

"Haters know no end to their hatred."

If you mean to infer that I hate bigots and traitors, you would be correct. I have no use for them or for their apologists.

Randy Chapman

I suppose the thought of honoring loved ones lost in a war is a concept that troublemakers like the author above cannot fathom. People fought in a war that was based largely on geographic location, less on ideology. Just as many that fought in the Vietnam war had a different ideology than the official U.S. policy, they were drafted. Honoring their lives is not a bad thing, nor does it make anyone that believes these monuments should remain, a racist. On the other hand, many of those calling for removal of the monuments are race-baiting troublemakers.

Mark Aaron

There is nothing honorable about treason or the perpetuation of slavery. It is something to be deeply ashamed of, not something to celebrate.

"On the other hand, many of those calling for removal of the monuments are race-baiting troublemakers."

So you are a fan of treason and bigotry then? You think it should be honored? Maybe we should add a statue honoring brave Nazis next?

Gehrig Boone

I say if we remove all the monuments referring to the Confederacy, then we should remove all the Martin Luther King statues, monuments, rename the thousands of streets named Martin Luther King Blvd. etc. These remind me of the the violent riots of the 60's and I find that offensive. Makes about as much sense as removing monuments: like that is going to make history go away. Funny these monuments have stood for decades and now all of a sudden they are a problem. The people wanting to remove them are the problem.

Mark Aaron

"I say if we remove all the monuments referring to the Confederacy, then we should remove all the Martin Luther King statues, monuments, rename the thousands of streets named Martin Luther King Blvd. etc. These remind me of the the violent riots of the 60's and I find that offensive."

Statues and streets honoring Dr. King celebrate his non-violent struggle for equality and justice. He was neither a racist or a traitor who set out to overthrow his legitimate government like the Confederates did.

If you are so concerned about history then you should be seeking vehicles that tell the ugly truth about slavery, not ones that defend and honor it.

Josh Butler

Anyone who thinks this stops at statues and monuments is very naive.

Mark Aaron

"Anyone who thinks this stops at statues and monuments is very naive."

Anyone who is duped by the logical fallacy of "the slippery slope" is the naive one here. Just because you address an injury or grievance does not mean anything tangentially associated with a subject is equally offensive.

Kelly Naschke

If history repeats itself it would seem that removing all reminders of history would be counterproductive in ensuring something as evil as slavery isn't reignited. And if all of these protestors are truly so inflamed by this unsavory chapter in history, why are they not protesting modern day slavery that is alive and well in some parts of the world? The protesters are nothing more than hypocrites. As Mizzz Taylor writes her attempt to erase history, a young black girl is being raped by her master in North Africa. The fact that she chooses to pontificate about American history and does nothing in regard to the poor black girl getting raped on a daily basis either proves Mizzz Taylor as highly hypocritical or highly uneducated and ignorant....or a combination of both.

Mark Aaron

"If history repeats itself it would seem that removing all reminders of history would be counterproductive in ensuring something as evil as slavery isn't reignited."

If you are so concerned about history you should want that history to be accurate. There is nothing accurate about a monument that glorifies treason and slavery. You should be incensed that your tax money is misused to perpetuate such an odious lie. Better to use public spaces and money to tell the truth. Spend the money on accurate education and accurate depictions of the horrors of slavery in a museum.

Kelly Naschke

Why doesn't George Soros send his bought and paid for protestors to the corners of the world that still actively engage in slavery instead of creating social problems on our streets?

Mark Aaron

"Why doesn't George Soros send his bought and paid for protestors to the corners of the world "

Seriously, George Soros the great and all powerful boogieman? LOL How can people be so easily duped into believing such ridiculous nonsense?

Carlos Ponce

Not nonsense, Mark You are the one being duped.

Mark Aaron

"Not nonsense, Mark You are the one being duped."

And you base that conjecture on what, your biases and bigotries? You certainly don't have any facts you can accurately cite.Try to do so.

Jim Forsythe

An anonymous multimedia producer posted a Craigslist ad on January 1 soliciting “talented, creative, rational, intelligent, non-fear-mongering and educated media industry professionals or qualified entbusiasts (sic)” to help create a “stunt” aimed at presidential front-runner Donald Trump.
The producer wants to perpetuate an unspecified “Onion-class stunt” that “can easily be repeated (at least 5 times by my estimate) with increasing veracity and afford (sic) mentioned joy.” Compensation is listed as “Millions of dollars worth of glee and, eventually, the admiration of a thankful nation.” The Onion is a current events satire newspaper and website. Fictional articles featured mimic the tenor of actual news articles and include mention of real people and events. The Onion launched a satirical Youtube channel in 2012.

These ads were reproduced on multiple web sites as proof that organizations were trying to fabricate dissent at Trump rallies, all such claims hinging on nothing more than rank speculation that the ads themselves demonstrated the existence of an organized, professional, large-scale movement against Trump:

Carlos Ponce

"And you base that conjecture on what, your biases and bigotries? You certainly don't have any facts you can accurately cite.Try to do so."
Mark, I guess you haven't seen the links attached to my posts and references to previous editions of the Galveston Daily News some dating to 1912.
"don't have any facts" - you must be joking. No bias nor bigotry on my part, just historical research. Try THAT some time.
Why you hate is beyond me. [unsure]

Mark Aaron

"Not nonsense, Mark You are the one being duped."

Feel free to prove that with either facts or reasoned debate anytime. So far you are batting zero for zero. Your arguments are childish logical fallacies and your sources are either junk, cherry picked, or misrepresented.

Kelly Naschke

"are there any monuments to the many people, especially African Americans". Can someone please give Mizz Taylor the location of the Jack Johnson statue so as she may go and eat her words?

Mark Aaron

"Can someone please give Mizz Taylor the location of the Jack Johnson statue so as she may go and eat her words?"

If I recall correctly that metal sculpture has been gone for many, many years. Care to cite another one?

Mark Aaron

I agree with you wholeheartedly, Dale. That odious monument glorifies treason and bigotry and does nothing to further the historical lessons we should all learn from the Civil War. Slavery is evil. It should never be celebrated, only condemned.

Kelly Naschke

Why are the Africans (Blacks) that perpetuated, contributed to, were duplicitous in, and still continue slavery , not held accountable? Why so much hostility to the country that stood up, said no more, and ended slavery?

Mark Aaron

"Why are the Africans (Blacks) that perpetuated, contributed to, were duplicitous in, and still continue slavery , not held accountable?"

You know Galveston is not in Africa, right? You also know we are discussing a Confederate monument, right?

George Croix

I'm offended by all this offense.
Now what....

We could get rid of everything that has Roman numerals on it.
We could ban Volkswagons mand german Chocolate Cake.
We could refuse to allow japanese cars to be sold in this country.
Wo could stop buying diamonds.
We could suspend diplomatic relations with egypt and ban tourism there.
Etc etc ad nauseum for the myriad cases where somebody somewhere in time has used slavery to advance their personal selves or national ambitions.

History simply doesn't support all this angst over slavery.
Therefore, the reason cannot be any concern for enslaved humans, but only for some who were. That's why it's so important to remove only some symbols, but turn a blind eye to others.

I get it.....

Mark Aaron

"We could get rid of everything that has Roman numerals on it."

Yet another Confederate apologist with an embarrassingly ridiculous false premise where you pretend anything even remotely associated with an outrage is equally offensive as the original. Oh please.

George Croix

No, that's a lie that I'm an apologist for the Confederacy.
But, you can continue to do so if you want. I don't care...
Show the strength of your convictions,...either you're against ALL reminders of slavery, or you're cherrypicking.....


Mark Aaron

"either you're against ALL reminders of slavery, or you're cherrypicking....."

Yet another sad example on your part of an immature logical fallacy. This one is known as a false dichotomy, where you pretend there are only two choices. There are, in fact more choices. The intelligent one being that "reminders" that glorify or excuse treason and bigotry should be condemned. I am sorry to inform you George, but you are the epitome of a Confederate apologist. Hopefully, with enough education, you'll be able to move beyond that one day. I'm rooting for you. I believe you are a good person who has simply been misled.

Carlos Ponce

So, are you against ALL reminders of slavery?[unsure]

George Croix

Hey, GDN, is it OK to change your name and still post????
[beam]
I thought I recognized that single-purposed salesmanship from somewhere.... [whistling]

Mark Aaron

"Hey, GDN, is it OK to change your name and still post????"

Is that you Carlos? I don't think you are supposed to do that.[innocent]

Carlos Ponce

No, its not me, Mark.

Mark Aaron

"No, its not me, Mark. "

Well that's good to know. You both parrot the same lame rightwing talking points so it is easy to mistake you for each other. My apologies.

Carlos Ponce

No, I was doing volunteer work at a local historical museum, greeting visitors and doing research from 9 to 1 today. Perhaps you should do some historical research before you post things concerning history. Otherwise you sound like a ....

Mark Aaron

"No bias nor bigotry on my part, just historical research. Try THAT some time."

Given how easily your silly claims are refuted it is clear that you are not especially adept at research. Your use of cherry picking and other logical fallacies also suggests you are easily duped. Perhaps you should try another hobby more appropriate for your skills, like quilting or macrame.

Carlos Ponce

Refuted? Au Contraire, the fallacies lie in your bigoted hatred. My research is fine. What are your credentials? I am a certified teacher of History in the State of Texas. And you sir?

horace norris

But if you take them down the pigeons will be offended

George Croix

[beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam]
That's what I thought.

Kelly Naschke

Kind of funny watching Mark Aaron talk in circles without the ability to address any logic or reason, which is pretty typical for his canned rhetoric. And when and why was the Jack Johnson statue and placard from the state of Texas removed? Seemed like it's unveiling and ceremony was all not so long ago??

Mark Aaron

"when and why was the Jack Johnson statue and placard from the state of Texas removed? Seemed like it's unveiling and ceremony was all not so long ago??"

Where is this statue you claim to have seen? There was one years ago at Menard Park, but it has been gone for many, many years.

Samuel Collins III

The Jack Johnson park and statue is located at the Southwest corner of 26th and Ave M.

Carlos Ponce

Thanks Sam, you beat me to it!

Mark Aaron

Thanks for the clarification, Samuel. I stand corrected.

Carlos Ponce

The Jack Johnson statue is in the Jack Johnson Park at the old Central Cultural Center 2601 Avenue M, Galveston, Texas.
http://galvestonoldcentral.com/Jack_Johnson_Park.asp
According to the brochure, the statue is still there.
http://galvestonoldcentral.com/pdf/juneteenth-brochure-2017.pdf

Carlos Ponce

In 2015 there was a petition on Change.org to remove the monument. It had 69 signatures.
Then there was a petition to keep the monument also on change.org. It had 1095 signatures.
http://www.galvnews.com/news/article_7e87930a-2852-11e5-aaf4-07452f59a99c.html

Mark Aaron

"In 2015 there was a petition on Change.org to remove the monument. It had 69 signatures."

Some random poll on a relatively obscure website is instructive of nothing, Carlos. They are meaningless unscientific polls. Rightwing ideologues often "brigade" polls from their websites asking their followers to go and distort such polls. Change.org, like many progressive sites, is a common target of such brigading.

Carlos Ponce

What do you gather from the readers of the GCDN in 2017, for or against taking down the monument?
How about taking a new poll from Galveston County residents. I dare say most would say "leave the monument where it is".
Like you said, change .org is a PROGRESSIVE website.

Mark Aaron

"What do you gather from the readers of the GCDN in 2017, for or against taking down the monument?"

I give next to no credence to newspaper discussion boards as a source of facts. In my experience most newspaper forums in the US have an overpopulation of rightwing zealots. They generally run off most thoughtful commenters by ganging up on them and harassing them.

I rely on sound credible facts from objective sources. A concept I don't expect you to fathom. You are clearly in the thrall of rightwing propaganda mills like Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, The Drudge Report, Newsmax, World Net Daily, The Washington Times and the host of other imitators out there.

When I seek sources I look for objective sources. If a site has either a liberal bent or a conservative bent they are not what I would call objective. Unlike most conservatives I meet online I don't think anything that is not conservative is automatically liberal, just as the reverse applies. The goal of any professional source or reporter should be to report without bias. That is what objective means. If you claim to tell the liberal or conservative side of things you are not objective and probably not credible.

Carlos Ponce

"I rely on sound credible facts from objective sources." Thanks for the laugh![beam]

Mark Aaron

Jim Forsythe said: "These ads were reproduced on multiple web sites as proof that organizations were trying to fabricate dissent at Trump rallies, all such claims hinging on nothing more than rank speculation that the ads themselves demonstrated the existence of an organized, professional, large-scale movement against Trump:"

This claim, without documentation, is meaningless. More often than not this kind of incident is a "false flag" ploy meant to garner sympathy for the alleged target. When, in fact, the victim was the one who posted it. Nor does some random ad on Craigslist mean that this is some widespread phenomena.

Emile Pope

Who cares about "purity of motives"?
Most of the confederate statues were put up after the Plessy v ferguson decision make racial segregation legal and Jim Crow laws were being enacted to strip away all of the rights of Black citizens in the South. It wasn't meant to commemorate the soldiers but a statement to the Black citizens that they were now second-class by erecting statues of people who fought to keep them that way. Did removing Hitler statues erase his history? People still seem to remember him. And having a statue of someone who fought to protect inequality in front of a building trusted with promoting equality and justice is an abomination.

Carlos Ponce

They didn't fight to protect inequality. I see you haven't paid attention to my posts, their links, nor proof. Typical Emile.[sad]

Carlos Ponce

Yes, Emile, many Confederate monuments, statues and memorials were erected after Plessy v Ferguson (1896) but many were erected between the Civil War and Plessy. Do the math. The Civil War was between 1861 and 1865. Plessy happened 31 to 35 years later. Soldiers were between 18 and 39 years old. Those who survived the Civil War were dying. That's why more memorials were made at that time.

Mark Aaron

Thank you for the insight Emile. You bring forward thoughtful points I hadn't considered. You make an especially telling point about removing Hitler statues.

George Croix

I thought you didn't approve of comparisons, Aaron, declaring them 'marginally associated'...looks like you are not a one trick pony after all, and really quite diverse in thought...good for you.... [beam]
Of course, the telling point difference is the people who tore down statues/pictures/memories of Adolf Hitler were the people personally living under his vile rule....they were not making a political statement, but reacting to personal harm.
Not many around these days personally harmed by the Civil War.
It's strictly symbolism, as Mr. Semar mentioned.....
A lot around who use that symbolism as an excuse, though, on BOTH sides, to divert and deny and deflect from real causes for problems or attitudes, rather than a we-should-never-do-this-again exercise in reality.....well, there's nothing illegal about that,
and it's good to know what people really think.
The country is more polarized and prone to abjectly nutty action and reaction that at any time since the mid-19th century, imo....which, of course, makes it more likely to have another internal war...bigger than the small ones going on right now...

It would help if people sat down across from each other more often, and made their cases personally, face to face, which would eliminate the tendency to not walk a talk, and promote better understanding, even if not more agreement.

That offer is still open.
How about a neutral location, and go Dutch on the drinks and eats?
I don't drink alcohol, so, please, no bars, unless they serve Diet Coke.
You cut-and-paste your comments and responses on this subject from these pages, and I'll do mine, and we'll read 'em to each other across a table and see if the meaning and understanding work better without any filtering...the object being discourse, not snark.
It's a start.....

George Croix

"That offer is still open.
How about a neutral location, and go Dutch on the drinks and eats?
I don't drink alcohol, so, please, no bars, unless they serve Diet Coke.
You cut-and-paste your comments and responses on this subject from these pages, and I'll do mine, and we'll read 'em to each other across a table and see if the meaning and understanding work better without any filtering...the object being discourse, not snark.
It's a start....."

Well, never mind......
I missed a few more of your responses before I tried some civility for the 3rd time.
I'm pretty sure a face to face would be good for either one of us....

George Croix

would be???

would not be.....

Not close enough......

George Croix

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Galveston,_Texas

If the Wikis are correct:

Pay particular attention to paragraph 5 under Exploration and Settlement.
Maybe instead of just taking down a statue, the history deniers should support abandoning the whole town make it into a museum....
Fior that matter, the GDN claims to have been in business since, what, 1842.
So their position on slavery was unlikley to be opposed at the time that Galveston was a major hub of it.
Maybe the GDN should be closed...or torn down and relocated to a museum....

Maybe at least change the name of it to hide it's past collusion...name changing is all the rage these days.....

Mark Aaron

" the history deniers should support abandoning the whole town make it into a museum...."

Yet another sad example of a false dichotomy wherein if you point out an injustice your only choice is to condemn anything even marginally associated with the injustice. Sad, George, sad. Surely you can do a little better job than a middle schooler trying out for the debate team.

George Croix

Except, of course, I didn't say it's an only choice.
But, you can pretend I did. I don''t care.
So, you consider the second largets hub for slavery west of the Mississippi to be 'marginally associated' with it.
Interesting....



George Croix

Hey, Aaron, welcome mat is out....personal invitation...
Drop by the house for a cold Diet Coke and lets talk in person where nuances and inflections are not lost.
I'm in the book....
Bring Fritos......

Mark Aaron

I don't drink diet sodas and my cardiologist won't let me have Fritos anymore. Oh well.

George Croix

oh, well......
I'd get another cardiologist.....

Samuel Collins III

A reasonable compromise would be to move it to a place like the Bryan Museum. The statue would be saved for those that want it saved and the museum could use it as a tool to teach. My personal opinion has been to take resources we have and tell a more complete story of our shared history. What will the cost be to remove 700 plus monuments? Could those funds be better used to erect new monuments to honor the memory of the enslaved people? Who will get the contracts to remove the monuments? We changed laws and removed signs, but the fact we are still dealing with these issues in 2017 tells me the hearts of men and women have not changed enough. Some have changed, but not enough. The attitudes towards Mrs. Taylor in this thread is evidence of that. Just because you have a different opinion than someone else does not mean the other person has to be an idiot . For people to totally ignore why these monuments were erected is dishonest and unfortunate. If New Orleans can take the Confederate statues down and some how the sun still shines I think the people of Galveston will find a way to survive if this monument is moved.

Carlos Ponce

Thanks for your input. The monument was originally paid for by the Daughters of the Confederacy through donations and placed in what was called "Central Park" where it stands today. Little cost to maintain, just an occasional hose down but nature has taken care of that the past year. You're right that the cost of moving statues can be better spent.
By the way, you have a wonderful radio program on KGBC Saturday mornings. I recommend all interested in local affairs to tune in.

Samuel Collins III

Thanks for listening. Norman and I are thinking about discussing this topic on air.

Mark Aaron

Well said Samuel.

Charlotte O'rourke

One would think that our ancestors would have seen that slavery was just plain evil, but they did not; and I personally cannot understand how slavery was allowed to legally exist. Almost all of our leaders in this era did not see slavery as unjust and an abomination. As a general rule they also thought women weren't wired to vote and participate in endeavors outside the home. Sounds like a google employee that was recently fired.😮

Even General Grant - who was the union general - and his wife had slaves.

Galveston had a slave market and slave auctions and our leaders allowed this.

A very dark period in our history.

Leaders that meet standards of promoting equality and fairness, in my opinion, were abolitionists and women suffrage activists so maybe memorials should be erected to these heroic individuals.

With that said, I'm against destroying historical monuments or art or books of any kind, and prefer historical statues to remain in place with context added. Second choice would be to move it to a museum.

Soldiers that fought for the confederacy received presidential pardons to help the nation heal and memorials for both sides were created for leaders and all soldiers serving in this conflict to help in the healing process.

It seems our nation is still not healed .... over 150 years later ... and racism and sexism have not been eliminated.

I want to thank the writer of this commentary for sharing her views of the memorials as the way she perceives them is different than how I was taught, and only through dialogue and understanding other's perspective can peaceful resolution be achieved.

I hope Texas takes its time deciding what to do with these confederate memorials as the removal of four statues in New Orleans cost $2.1 million and the statues are stored in a hidden location.

The Robert E Lee statue was dedicated in 1884 and was on the national register of historic places and listed as one of the most important statues in New Orleans.

It would be helpful to publish what criteria will be used for statue removal. For example, will it be people that owned slaves, fought on confederate side in any capacity or fought on confederate side and didn't accomplish anything else before or after the war, any confederate memorial anywhere, etc.

I ask this question because the removal of Sam Houston statue has been discussed as well as Christopher Columbus was sprayed with paint in Houston, and the criteria for removal is not clear.

As a historic reminder, many individuals fought on the confederate side and then went on to become civic leaders in other areas and places. Some even helped to build Galveston.

In summary, sure we will survive the removal of confederate statues, but will it really help heal us as a nation? That is the pertinent question.

Keep love in your heart and my prayers and thoughts are with the families of the injured and killed in Charlottesville.

Cary Semar

I guess we all have our pet peeves. I don't like the phrase "under god" in the pledge of allegiance. I remember when they put it in. I was in the 3rd grade and I thought it was a bad idea even then.

I guess the thing about the statues is that when social progress occurs and injustices are reduced, the remaining injustices seem even more intolerable. The statues are a symbol of racial subordination just as the figure of Christ on the cross is a symbol of our hope for immortality. Symbols are important because people are ready to fight and die for them. That's why we have them.

George Croix

The 'indivisible' part of the pledge could certainly stand some updating...

"The phrase "under God" was incorporated into the Pledge of Allegiance on June 14, 1954, by a Joint Resolution of Congress..."
I was also in the 3rd......year of my life.....[beam][beam]

Walter Manuel

So I guess we'll all never know the educational qualifications of Mark Aaron to support his credibility as Mr. Ponce requested?

And Emile Pope, is that the weakest thing that you could come up with regards to someone eating a "slice of pizza"? Obviously you have exhausted any meaningful dialogue regarding this biased guest column opinion.

Why am I not surprised that some people want to their posts to be taken seriously when they themselves make themselves look so inept and unprepared? [yawn]

Walter Manuel


Emile Pope posted on Aug 19, 2017 5:21pm

"People have been offended for years. It's just now that something can be done about it. Your offended? What you are is someone who is offended but won't do or say anything about it. But always ready to say and do something when someone tries to remedy the situation. Please stay on your sidelines and enjoy your pizza slice"...

Emile, I suppose your post further proves your not prepared and are biased with your own opinion of any subject matter that does not align with your own?

I suppose all of "my actions" regarding the former LMISD BOT being removed by TEA from their seats was simply done so by sitting behind a computer and ranting about the incompetence that ran amuck amongst the former LMISD board?

It easy for you obviously to sell BS to others rather than to provide facts in order to support your own personally driven cause.

Sorry Emile that your out of league at this point, but you just keep sitting behind your computer screen pecking at your keys and watch as others do exactly what you choose only blab about.

Perhaps you and Mark Aaron would make great friends since neither of you are committed to trying to see both sides of any issue. It's obviously that both of your ways of thinking is right and everyone else is totally wrong. Go figure.... [whistling]

Mark Aaron

Do you know what an ad hominem argument is Walter? For many it is a last resort, for others an only resort.

Mark Aaron

"Perhaps you and Mark Aaron would make great friends since neither of you are committed to trying to see both sides of any issue. "

So if people don't agree with you the only viable reason is because they refuse to look at all sides of the issue? Do you consider yourself infallible, Walter? That is what you appear to be saying.

Walter Manuel

"Could those funds be better used to erect new monuments to honor the memory of the enslaved people"?

Seriously Mr. Collins??? You can't have it both ways, take one statue that does not support your own agenda and replace them with one that does?

Isn't that after all what this whole "monument" issue has been driven by, people being offended by history?

Why don't we take down the statutes and replace them with statues related to whatever that town is associated with such as Galveston- "seagulls", Louisiana "crawfish" ETC, ETC.

Why can't we ALL just be politically neutral when it comes to taking down these statues while trying to replace them with yet another controversial image to further divide our country?

So when do we start replacing our currency with presidents who did not own slaves themselves?

6th President Of Pennsylvania - Benjamin Franklin (1785-1788) - $100.
Owned around 7 slaves in his lifetime. After his return from England in 1762, he became an abolitionist. However, like most other founding fathers, refused to debate it in public.

1st US President - George Washington (1789-1797) - $1.
Owned and inherited hundreds of slaves during his lifetime. Freed all of his slaves in his final will. His views on slavery evolved dramatically during his lifetime.

3rd US President - Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809) - $2.
Owned hundreds and freed only a few. His views on slavery were complex and conflicting.

7th US President - Andrew Jackson (1829-1837) - $20.
Owned as many as 300 in his lifetime. Staunchly opposed ban to slavery. Hostile to abolitionists. Did not free any slave.

16th US President - Abraham Lincoln (1861-1865) - $5.
Abolished and outlawed slavery in US. Didn't own any.

18th US President - Ulysses Grant (1869-1877) - $50.
The last vestiges of slavery was quashed by him. Even though he badly required money, freed his only slave instead of selling him.

Mark Aaron

"Why can't we ALL just be politically neutral when it comes to taking down these statues while trying to replace them with yet another controversial image to further divide our country?"

Because people of conscience believe in righting wrongs. And who, other than you, believes any statue will automatically be controversial?

"So when do we start replacing our currency with presidents who did not own slaves themselves?"

Again with the "slippery slope" fallacy. You would have people believe that things only tangentially associated with a subject are equally as offensive. That is nonsense.

Carlos Ponce

Move the statues. Will Mark Aaron pay for it?

Mark Aaron

"Move the statues. Will Mark Aaron pay for it?"

I am more than happy to pay my fair share.

Samuel Collins III

Yes seriously. The resources could be used to tell a more complete story of our shared history. That story includes many different ethnic groups. I mention the enslaved people because the current conversation is mainly around the Confederate monuments and how the monuments were used to only tell the story from one perspective. Often whenever I talk about the enslaved people or African American history you take a position as if I want only to celebrate or talk about African American history which is not the case. So yes I am serious. As I said originally my opinion is not to move them, but a compromise would be to move them to a museum.

George Croix

How about put 'em side by side, Mr. Collins?
Can't get a better comparison than that...
And forces people prone to do so to Consider and Compare, rather than simply Condemn or Conflate.
You have proven yourself an honest and reasonable man...imo.....
How about a 5th 'C-word' - compromise...?

Samuel Collins III

I agree we must find a way to compromise.

Mark Aaron

Some things should not compromised. Treason and bigotry, for example. That hateful statue does no one any good save the Confederate apologists and the white nationalists. Neither deserve compromise. Melt that piece of hate down, or chunk it in the Gulf.

Samuel Collins III

https://savingplaces.org/press-center/media-resources/national-trust-statement-on-confederate-memorials#.WZnVTfdOnqA

Mark Aaron

A worthless link, at best. Its claim that the statues are of significant historical value is nonsense. Take a picture of them for a book or museum, then melt them down or turn them into gravel. We don't need monuments to treason and bigotry in the public square.

Carlos Ponce

I don't agree with everything on that web site but find it worthy of discussion, not worthless. Sam is trying to form a consensus, a compromise and is offering ideas, a scholarly approach. You wish to destroy. How many of these monuments do you actually see even on an occasional basis? There are things I don't want to see. The wise thing is to take a different route or tolerate the views of others. But some are intolerant. No law against that but it does show your character.[sad]

Mark Aaron

" trying to form a consensus, a compromise"

Core values should never be compromised.

Charlotte O'rourke

Great website. Balanced and informational. Thanks or posting.

Carlos Ponce

Romans destroyed the Jewish Temple. This was an atrocity.
The Spanish destroyed Aztec, Mayan and Incan artifacts, structures. We look back at this as an atrocity.
ISIS is demolishing historic churches, synagogues, mosques, Sufi and Shi'i shrines, and major archaeological sites. This is an atrocity.
Egyptian jihadist call for the removal of the Sphinx and Pyramids. This would destroy historical artifacts.
Get the picture?

Mark Aaron

"Get the picture?"

None of the things you cite are specifically monuments to bigotry and treason. The Civil War monument in Galveston serves no other purpose other than to glorify bigotry and treason. Move it to a museum for criminals, or destroy it.

Carlos Ponce

"None of the things you cite are specifically monuments to bigotry and treason."
Ditto.None of the monuments and memorials you want removed represent bigotry and treason.
"The Civil War monument in Galveston serves no other purpose other than to glorify bigotry and treason." Apparently you have NO IDEA why the monument was erected. Clueless and biased response.

Mark Aaron

"Apparently you have NO IDEA why the monument was erected. Clueless and biased response."

Just because I don't buy into your naive pollyannish take on the matter doesn't mean I don't understand why it was erected, Carlos. The words of a Jim Crow Confederate apologist from 90 years ago is far from conclusive as you would pretend. This is 2017. Time for the Confederate apologists to get over it and move on. Monuments to treason, hate, and bigotry have no place in the public square. Take them to the dump and display them there.

Carlos Ponce

Again, I am a teacher certified to teach history in the State of Texas. I am a Board member of a Local Historical Foundation that operates two museums. I volunteer at those museums doing research and greeting visitors.
And YOUR credentials, sir?

Mark Aaron

"And YOUR credentials, sir?"

GHF was one of my top clients for better than two decades. I also did work for all of the museums in town and a significant number of historic buildings and homes. Much of that work required historical research. Unlike you, however, I don't think that my research or an undergraduate degree bestows omniscience or expertise beyond the scope of my work.

I reserve the right to judge you by your words, Carlos. Sadly I find your scholarship, such as it is, lacking. You clearly do not know how to qualify sources and your undiscerning bias makes you far to easy to deceive. Nor am I impressed with ad citation responses. Just because you find something on the internet does not make if true. Junk in, junk out.

Carlos Ponce

" I find your scholarship lacking..." I find yours non-existant. GHF might have been your client but you have no earthly idea what real historical research is all about. And I DO qualify my sources. Internet sources are but one source. Books and papers resources are hard to convey given the restraints of these forums but constitute a great deal of my research. I find your posts biased with absolutely no scholarly effort. Just hatred.

Mark Aaron

"And I DO qualify my sources."

LOL. Thanks for the laugh Carlos.

Carlos Ponce

Lad to make your day bu I do qualify my sources. Have you seen me cite any resource you disdain or find lacking credibility?

Carlos Ponce

"Glad to make your day but I do qualify my sources.

Mark Aaron

"Have you seen me cite any resource you disdain or find lacking credibility?"

I'm talking about the nutty accusations and conclusions you keep throwing around and I keep refuting with facts, Carlos. You only get that kind of nonsense from click bait propaganda mills like Drudge or Fox News. You clearly get most of your "news" from such manipulative sites.

Carlos Ponce

Never read Drudge, occasionally watch FOX when it's on at restaurants and waiting rooms. Don't agree with everything on it. Not nutty but well thought out and backed with evidence!

Charlotte O'rourke

Mark: "Its claim that the statues are of significant historical value is nonsense. Take a picture of them for a book or museum, then melt them down or turn them into gravel."

"Take them to the dump .."

LOL ..... Philistine .... an apt description of anyone making this type of generic statement.

Are you going to advocate melting down Arlington house next .... the home and memorial of Robert E Lee as well? Jefferson Memorial?

You've said in past posts .... not Jefferson ... because he is a founding father even though he owned slaves it is not what he is known for, but Reverend Sharpton said the memorial offends him. Should it also be taken to the dump because it is offensive and represents bigotry? What if the KKK shows up to try and save it?

As a FYI, the statement below is from the National Park Service:

"Arlington House is the nation’s memorial to Robert E. Lee. It honors him for specific reasons, including his role in promoting peace and reunion after the Civil War. In a larger sense it exists as a place of study and contemplation of the meaning of some of the most difficult aspects of American History: military service; sacrifice; citizenship; duty; loyalty; slavery and freedom."

Obviously I'm not going to change your mind and you will not change mine on the importance of historical preservation and learning to put that history in context.

It is impractical to hold past leaders and politicians to our current standards of civil rights. Most would fail the test in a BIG way and we would have huge DUMP of irreplaceable art and history and destruction of architecture.

In my opinion, even Lincoln would fail by current standards.


Mark Aaron

"It is impractical to hold past leaders and politicians to our current standards of civil rights. Most would fail the test in a BIG way and we would have huge DUMP of irreplaceable art and history and destruction of architecture. "

I agree with much of what you say Charlotte. I don't think of houses as monuments to hate and bigotry like a Confederate statue is. I don't think all former slave owners should be completely damned and removed from history, but they should be condemned for that ugly practice. Though it should forever remain a stain on their reputation. But monuments to the continuance of slavery, and the treason in service of that vile practice, are a blight and a disgrace. History needs them no more than it needs statues of Hitler or Pol Pot.

Jim Forsythe

A Houston man has been charged with trying to plant explosives at the statue of Confederate officer Richard Dowling in Hermann Park, federal officials said Monday.

Carlos Ponce

The man in question is 25 year old Andrew Schneck who was on probation for explosives possession . A former classmate called him a loner who never had a girlfriend and struggled with social interactions, according to the Houston Chronicle.

Jarvis Buckley

Sad to see our country torn apart like this. So much liberal hatred for our President & America.

Mark Aaron

"So much liberal hatred for our President & America."

It isn't just Liberals who find Trump unacceptable Jarvis. Most of the world finds him unacceptable too, as do a growing number of Republicans. Regarding Liberals hating American, it isn't Liberals who want to "drown our government in a bathtub" or "destroy the administrative state." Those are the words of Republicans, who like the Tea Party and other right wing elements who hate our government and want to harm it. You can thank Ronald Reagan and Trump, among others, for teaching Republicans to hate government.

Carlos Ponce

"Most of the world finds him unacceptable too, as do a growing number of Republicans."
I bet you got from fake news media.

Steve Fouga

Jarvis, it isn't just liberal hatred, it's mainstream hatred. Not for America, of course, but for the president. He's a hard man to like.

George Croix

Mr. Fouga, I couldn't agree more that Pres. Trump is a hard man to like. I don't like him as a person at all.
But if popularity was all that mattered, we'd have elected a 3rd term rather than a neophyte.
Buyers remorse?
No doubt for some. It's interesting that in the three states he was supposed to lose that ended up giving him the win he remains popular...they see something they liked and still do better than what they had and were offered.
It's certainly deja vu all over again in that way......
And the Top man now isn't helping himself with the idiotic tweets....
People paying attention already know the media and 'resistance' has gone bonkers...and if they don't care, then fueling the fire only increases the burn....

Steve Fouga

George, I just read that his popularity in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania had dropped to an average of 35%. I found that incredible, but it's being reported by several outlets. Fake news? Bad polls?

George Croix

I dunno, as I saw them at 78 to 83% a couple days ago.
I think that any polls reflecting Pres. Trump are about as accurate as the ones that were about candidate Trump.
Ya pays your money and takes your pick....
It's a good thing that the Presidency is not a popularity contest, or anybody could get elected just on their smile or their line of bull or their color or promises of free stuff or back room deals with supporters or......
Hmmmmm.....
Uh oh.....looks like deaj vu all over again....

Carlos Ponce

"He's a hard man to like."
I like him!

George Croix

"If convicted, Schneck faces a minimum of five and up to 40 years in federal prison and a possible $250,000 maximum fine."

Not enough....

"KHOU 11 Investigates found that this isn't the first time Schneck has been criminally connected to dangerous chemicals. He was let off probation just last fall, two years into a five year sentence, after the then-college student plead guilty to storing explosives in his family's home."

Hopefully that won't be supressed at trial time....

Steve Fouga

I see few calls for a popular vote, at any level, on the removal of Confederate statues. Why?

George Croix

Maybe the call for that is not as widespread as we would be led by media and the loudest voices to believe....?
Maybe.....

Carlos Ponce

"I see few calls for a popular vote, at any level, on the removal of Confederate statues. Why?"
Most Americans say Leave the Confederate Memorials alone. A recent poll found 62% believe they should not be taken down or moved. I don't believe that or any poll. I believe it is HIGHER.

Robert Braeking

The Marxists who want to remove historical symbols would have us all believe that they are 'offended'. The Civil War Memorials are just the latest symbols of choice. Those who are offended at the Civil War do not understand its motivations.

George Croix

It's fun to watch the reaction of the 'offended' internet bad A's when you tell them you are offended by their offense.
Deer in the headlights.....[beam][beam][beam]
You used to have to pay to go see a good comedt act...now it's avilable on a smart phone.....life is good....[wink]

Gabriel Horn

History like it or not can't be erased with the removal of reminders. Applying today's moral compass to events that took place over 100 years ago is adolescent.
It's time to be realistic and be glad things are no longer this way.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.