South Carolina Confederate Monuments and Jim Crow

[PatYoung]

An interesting article on the Confederate monuments of South Carolina as a product of Jim Crow:

https://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/charleston/sc-confederate-monuments-remain-as-a-symbol-of-black-subjugation/Content?oid=28290077
[hr]
From the article:

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]White racist resentment against the modest progress African Americans made during Reconstruction fueled the relentless campaign of terror that followed. At the ballot box and elsewhere, through Jim Crow laws and lethal violence, black folks were prevented from exercising their civil rights. That suppressive effort was visibly manifest in monuments to the Confederacy, erected in numbers across this state that made evident the white supremacist zeal with which they were put up.[/font]


[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Black South Carolinians, of course, were allowed no input about having these markers populate public spaces through which both African Americans and whites moved. Their voices in opposition to the erection of tributes to the Confederacy — a nation whose own founders explicitly cited black slavery as its founding principle; whose Constitution prohibited all laws blocking "the right of property in negro slaves" — were silenced by the ever-present threat of racial terror violence. Like African Americans throughout the South, they were forced to live amongst Confederate idols, which often stood on towering pedestals, strategically placed near courthouses and statehouses, where they functioned as reminders of the racial order and tacit warnings not to step outside of it. Black Charlestonian teacher and civil rights activist Mamie Garvin Fields wrote about how black Charleston in the 1890s regarded the statue of John C. Calhoun, who infamously proclaimed slavery a "positive good." "As you passed by," Fields noted in her memoir, "here was Calhoun looking you in the face and telling you, 'N*gger, you may not be a slave, but I am back to see you stay in your place.'"[/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Well into the 20th century, Confederate monuments remained a keystone of white South Carolina's retaliatory response to black folks' meager Reconstruction-era civil rights gains. Just over 10 years after Northern troops left the state, the Calhoun statue was dedicated, one of dozens of symbols of white defiance against black equality. The same principle was at work more than 160 years later when South Carolina's neo-Confederate legislators governed from a place of anger about the movement of the Confederate flag from one part of the Statehouse to another. Despite having already achieved a victory for the status quo, the illusory threat of black racial progress provoked a legislative whitelash in the form of the Heritage Act. That law, held up against the backdrop of history, reveals itself as a modern update to a very old American idea. The Newtonian law of white supremacy is that for every black civil rights step forward, there must be a retaliatory push back.[/font]

 

[48th Miss.]

An interesting article on the Confederate monuments of South Carolina as a product of Jim Crow:

https://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/charleston/sc-confederate-monuments-remain-as-a-symbol-of-black-subjugation/Content?oid=28290077
[hr]
From the article:

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]White racist resentment against the modest progress African Americans made during Reconstruction fueled the relentless campaign of terror that followed. At the ballot box and elsewhere, through Jim Crow laws and lethal violence, black folks were prevented from exercising their civil rights. That suppressive effort was visibly manifest in monuments to the Confederacy, erected in numbers across this state that made evident the white supremacist zeal with which they were put up.[/font]


[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Black South Carolinians, of course, were allowed no input about having these markers populate public spaces through which both African Americans and whites moved. Their voices in opposition to the erection of tributes to the Confederacy — a nation whose own founders explicitly cited black slavery as its founding principle; whose Constitution prohibited all laws blocking "the right of property in negro slaves" — were silenced by the ever-present threat of racial terror violence. Like African Americans throughout the South, they were forced to live amongst Confederate idols, which often stood on towering pedestals, strategically placed near courthouses and statehouses, where they functioned as reminders of the racial order and tacit warnings not to step outside of it. Black Charlestonian teacher and civil rights activist Mamie Garvin Fields wrote about how black Charleston in the 1890s regarded the statue of John C. Calhoun, who infamously proclaimed slavery a "positive good." "As you passed by," Fields noted in her memoir, "here was Calhoun looking you in the face and telling you, 'N*gger, you may not be a slave, but I am back to see you stay in your place.'"[/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Well into the 20th century, Confederate monuments remained a keystone of white South Carolina's retaliatory response to black folks' meager Reconstruction-era civil rights gains. Just over 10 years after Northern troops left the state, the Calhoun statue was dedicated, one of dozens of symbols of white defiance against black equality. The same principle was at work more than 160 years later when South Carolina's neo-Confederate legislators governed from a place of anger about the movement of the Confederate flag from one part of the Statehouse to another. Despite having already achieved a victory for the status quo, the illusory threat of black racial progress provoked a legislative whitelash in the form of the Heritage Act. That law, held up against the backdrop of history, reveals itself as a modern update to a very old American idea. The Newtonian law of white supremacy is that for every black civil rights step forward, there must be a retaliatory push back.[/font]

Not having read the Heritage Act but having read the article I think people need to look deeper than the slavery of 155 or so years ago. I would assume the Act covers more than these CSA statues and I doubt it was a bunch of white supremacist that wrote and voted the law into being. It seems there is a movement that is more centered on destruction than education. There is a place for these soldiers who fought and served for many reasons apart from the articles of Secession and destroying that will not educate anybody but will instead create mob rule as it did in Charlottesville and the print lies or distortions that came out of it. There is a movement alive to day to undo the past 234 years. It is a slippery slope to say the least and I for one do not want to go down that road any further to placate anybodies perceived sensibilities. It was what it was, just like the progress of all civilized nations on the planet we have moved on. I don't see anybody trying to tear down the pyramids or Inca sacrificial alters. Educate, learn and move on. All the people directly affected are dead and all the rest to me seems to be just activism for the purpose of destroying our foundation in the name of so called sensitivity.

 

[Andersonh1]

An interesting article on the Confederate monuments of South Carolina as a product of Jim Crow:

https://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/charleston/sc-confederate-monuments-remain-as-a-symbol-of-black-subjugation/Content?oid=28290077
[hr]
From the article:

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]White racist resentment against the modest progress African Americans made during Reconstruction fueled the relentless campaign of terror that followed. At the ballot box and elsewhere, through Jim Crow laws and lethal violence, black folks were prevented from exercising their civil rights. That suppressive effort was visibly manifest in monuments to the Confederacy, erected in numbers across this state that made evident the white supremacist zeal with which they were put up.[/font]


[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Black South Carolinians, of course, were allowed no input about having these markers populate public spaces through which both African Americans and whites moved. Their voices in opposition to the erection of tributes to the Confederacy — a nation whose own founders explicitly cited black slavery as its founding principle; whose Constitution prohibited all laws blocking "the right of property in negro slaves" — were silenced by the ever-present threat of racial terror violence. Like African Americans throughout the South, they were forced to live amongst Confederate idols, which often stood on towering pedestals, strategically placed near courthouses and statehouses, where they functioned as reminders of the racial order and tacit warnings not to step outside of it. Black Charlestonian teacher and civil rights activist Mamie Garvin Fields wrote about how black Charleston in the 1890s regarded the statue of John C. Calhoun, who infamously proclaimed slavery a "positive good." "As you passed by," Fields noted in her memoir, "here was Calhoun looking you in the face and telling you, 'N*gger, you may not be a slave, but I am back to see you stay in your place.'"[/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Well into the 20th century, Confederate monuments remained a keystone of white South Carolina's retaliatory response to black folks' meager Reconstruction-era civil rights gains. Just over 10 years after Northern troops left the state, the Calhoun statue was dedicated, one of dozens of symbols of white defiance against black equality. The same principle was at work more than 160 years later when South Carolina's neo-Confederate legislators governed from a place of anger about the movement of the Confederate flag from one part of the Statehouse to another. Despite having already achieved a victory for the status quo, the illusory threat of black racial progress provoked a legislative whitelash in the form of the Heritage Act. That law, held up against the backdrop of history, reveals itself as a modern update to a very old American idea. The Newtonian law of white supremacy is that for every black civil rights step forward, there must be a retaliatory push back.[/font]

How someone feels about a monument does not prove why that monument was erected in the first place. A look at the documents and speeches of those who put it up would be far more useful. The author of this hit piece is clearly unhappy about the Heritage Act and feels the need to insult both the people who put up the monuments that the act is designed to protect, and the legislators who are trying to keep mobs and activists from tearing them down today. He has no real facts, so insults will have to do.

A little research yields some facts that go against what the author of the article claims. The South Carolina Monument Association, who commissioned the Confederate Soldiers' memorial on the SC state house grounds, left a record of why that monument was created. From the Constitution of the SC Monument Association, and nowhere in the purpose of the monument is there any mention of race:

1. This Association shall have for its object the building of a monument, in the City of Columbia, by the women of the State, to the memory of the South Carolinians who fell in the service of the Confederate States.

----------

With the wish that all who have shared in a common sorrow may share also in the privilege of raising this testimonial to our lost heroes, the annual subscription for membership is put at the lowest point practicable, that thus it may be within the means of those who, having little to give, have still the right, through tears and suffering, to join us in the fulfillment of this most sacred duty.


The Heritage Act covers all historical monuments in the state, not just Confederate. And the author of the article is clearly just angry and throwing insults, because the SC legislature is hardly a hotbed of white supremacy. The author simply does not like what they've done, so he resorts to name-calling.

And 48th Miss is right, the goal here is to tear down all of American history.

 

[Andersonh1]

How far do we take this "things done during Jim Crow must have had a racist motivation" mindset? What else does that apply to? Were schools built during Jim Crow built to assert white racial dominance? How about businesses?

It seems obvious that monuments put up to honor the soldiers who fought in the CS army can be just that, with no racial meaning intended. The problem here is twofold: modern observers who are more obsessed with race than the Confederates ever were, who find racial bias in everything, and modern historians who see nothing but slavery when they look at the Confederate States. In both cases, we have people who are determined to focus on one aspect, and either ignore everything else, or find some way to interpret it so that it can be connected to race. Either way, we're not getting an honest assessment of the full context. If we were, we'd have to admit that sometimes a memorial to the dead is nothing more than a memorial to the dead.

I don't think people like the author of the article in the OP today have any conception of the trauma and loss that the survivors of the war went through. The sheer number of monuments and memorials alone ought to say something to us about the level of devastation they felt. They had to have closure somehow, particularly for the men who just never came home and had no gravestone.

 

[Viper21]

How far do we take this "things done during Jim Crow must have had a racist motivation" mindset? What else does that apply to? Were schools built during Jim Crow built to assert white racial dominance? How about businesses?

It seems obvious that monuments put up to honor the soldiers who fought in the CS army can be just that, with no racial meaning intended. The problem here is twofold: modern observers who are more obsessed with race than the Confederates ever were, who find racial bias in everything, and modern historians who see nothing but slavery when they look at the Confederate States. In both cases, we have people who are determined to focus on one aspect, and either ignore everything else, or find some way to interpret it so that it can be connected to race. Either way, we're not getting an honest assessment of the full context. If we were, we'd have to admit that sometimes a memorial to the dead is nothing more than a memorial to the dead.

I don't think people like the author of the article in the OP today have any conception of the trauma and loss that the survivors of the war went through. The sheer number of monuments and memorials alone ought to say something to us about the level of devastation they felt. They had to have closure somehow, particularly for the men who just never came home and had no gravestone.

Great points. Points lost on many folks. That some folks would rather believe all of these monuments were about white supremacy, doesn't make it the truth. Many monuments that I've personally visited, & or seen, are simply memorials to "Confederate Dead". Those who were lost in the war. I've seen that inscription, or something similar many times. Research the history of particular monuments themselves, lots of them reveal thoughts similar to your post above. A simple desire to honor folks from their community that were lost.

Many widows, & fatherless children donated nickels, & dimes to help erect some of these monuments. So many of their sons, husbands, & fathers never returned, & neither did their remains. Plenty of these monuments helped those emotional wounds...

Most of the "white supremacy claims", & nefarious reasons for erecting said memorials, are modern ideology talking.

 

[Andersonh1]

I get a bit amused every time a thread appears here that originated on CWT and I think "I don't remember posting that... wait, yes I do."

Most of the "white supremacy claims", & nefarious reasons for erecting said memorials, are modern ideology talking.

Very much so. We're chipping away and burying our shared national history, both the visible reminders on the landscape and in national memory.

 

[Jim Klag]

How far do we take this "things done during Jim Crow must have had a racist motivation" mindset? W

Since absolutely everything in the Jim Crow era was racially motivated, it is endless. You cannot tell me that Jim Crow laws were anything else than whites trying to keep blacks "in their place." If you don't believe that is so, you are either delusional or deliberately obtuse.

 

[Andersonh1]

Since absolutely everything in the Jim Crow era was racially motivated, it is endless. You cannot tell me that Jim Crow laws were anything else than whites trying to keep blacks "in their place." If you don't believe that is so, you are either delusional or deliberately obtuse.

I assume that even in the racist Jim Crow era, people had other motivations for doing things. I don't even see how that's a controversial opinion. No one is always motivated, at all times, by a single issue.

 

[rittmeister]

I assume that even in the racist Jim Crow era, people had other motivations for doing things. I don't even see how that's a controversial opinion. No one is always motivated, at all times, by a single issue.

of course not - but don't you think if it's kinda the default in the background it's even worse?

 

[Jim Klag]

I assume that even in the racist Jim Crow era, people had other motivations for doing things. I don't even see how that's a controversial opinion. No one is always motivated, at all times, by a single issue.

Jim Crow, as a concept, was 100% racist. I'm sure there were some people in the south who did not believe in Jim Crow. But, as applied, it was white supremacy writ large and codified into laws by the majority - north and south. "Separate but equal" as stated by SCOTUS in Brown v. Board Of Education, was inherently "unequal" and racially motivated. When we first moved to Atlanta, I was a grade schooler. One day walking in downtown with my mom, we encountered an elderly black man coming in the opposite direction. As we came near, he stepped off the sidewalk and let us pass. "Mom," I asked. "Why did that man do that?" My mother was nearly in tears and told me she'd tell me later. I saw my first "Colored Washroom" signs and "We Cater To Whites Only" signs. And this was in "the city too busy to hate."

 

[Al Mackey]

Not having read the Heritage Act but having read the article I think people need to look deeper than the slavery of 155 or so years ago. I would assume the Act covers more than these CSA statues and I doubt it was a bunch of white supremacist that wrote and voted the law into being.

It specifically and only covers confederate displays and civil rights movement displays, which itself is an admission the two things, the confederacy and civil rights for all Americans, are diametrically opposed.

[begin quote]
A BILL

TO AMEND TITLE 1, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF GOVERNMENT, BY ADDING CHAPTER 10 SO AS TO ENACT THE "SOUTH CAROLINA HERITAGE ACT OF 2000" WHICH PROVIDES THAT AS OF A SPECIFIED DATE, ONLY THE UNITED STATES FLAG AND THE SOUTH CAROLINA STATE FLAG MAY FLY ATOP THE DOME OF THE STATE HOUSE AND BE DISPLAYED WITHIN THE STATE HOUSE, WHICH STIPULATES ON THIS DATE WHERE CERTAIN FLAGS OF THE CONFEDERACY SHALL BE FLOWN OR BE DISPLAYED ON THE GROUNDS OF THE STATE CAPITOL COMPLEX, AND WHICH PROHIBITS THE REMOVAL OF THESE CONFEDERATE FLAGS ON THE STATE HOUSE GROUNDS AND THE REMOVAL, CHANGING, OR RENAMING OF ANY LOCAL OR STATE MONUMENT, MARKER, MEMORIAL, SCHOOL, OR STREET ERECTED OR NAMED IN HONOR OF THE CONFEDERACY OR THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT WITHOUT THE ENACTMENT OF A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY APPROVING SAME ADOPTED BY A TWO-THIRDS VOTE OF THE MEMBERSHIP OF EACH HOUSE; AND TO AMEND SECTION 10-1-160, RELATING TO THE DISPLAY OF THE STATE FLAG ON THE STATE HOUSE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE UNITED STATES FLAG SHALL ALSO BE SO DISPLAYED, THAT THESE TWO FLAGS ONLY SHALL BE DISPLAYED IN THE CHAMBERS OF EACH HOUSE AND IN CERTAIN OTHER LOCATIONS WITHIN THE STATE HOUSE, AND THAT NO OTHER FLAG MAY BE DISPLAYED IN THESE LOCATIONS OR WITHIN ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL BUILDING EXCEPT UNDER SPECIFIED CONDITIONS, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION MAY NOT BE AMENDED OR REPEALED BY A SUBSEQUENT ACT WITHOUT A TWO-THIRDS VOTE OF EACH HOUSE OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:

SECTION 1. Title 1 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"CHAPTER 10

South Carolina Heritage Act of 2000
Section 1-10-10. This chapter may be cited as the 'South Carolina Heritage Act of 2000'.

Section 1-10-20. (A) To honor and recognize the history and heritage of this State and the many contributions of its diverse citizenry, it is necessary and appropriate to codify the placement of certain symbols on the Capitol Complex and within the State House which salute the contributions and sacrifices of our constitutional history. On July 1, 2000, or thirty days after the effective date of this section, whichever occurs last, the only flags that shall fly atop the dome of the State House are the United States Flag and the South Carolina State Flag.

(B) The Infantry Battle Flag of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia (Confederate Battle Flag) must be displayed on the State House side of the Confederate Soldiers' Monument on the State House grounds. This flag is square with a St. Andrews Cross of blue, edged with white, with thirteen equal five-pointed stars, upon a red field, with the whole banner bordered in white. The total outside measurement of the flag shall be fifty-two inches square, inclusive of the white border. The blue arms of the cross are seven and one-half inches wide and the white border around the flag proper is one and one-half inches wide. The stars are five-pointed, inscribed in a circle six inches in diameter and are uniform in size. The Confederate Battle Flag shall be flown on a flagpole approximately equal in height to and immediately adjacent to the Confederate Soldiers' Monument.

Section 1-10-30. The Infantry Battle Flag of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia (Confederate Battle Flag) displayed on the Confederate Soldiers' Monument on the State House grounds, and any monument, marker, memorial, school, or street erected or named in honor of the Confederacy or the civil rights movement located on any municipal, county, or state property shall not be removed, changed, or renamed without the enactment of a joint resolution by a two-thirds vote of the membership of each house of the General Assembly approving same. This provision shall not apply to the maintenance and repair of the monument, marker, memorial, school, or street.

Section 1-10-40. (A) On July 1, 2000, or thirty days after the effective date of this section, whichever occurs last, the Confederate Flag (Naval Jack) must be removed from atop the State House, from the front ground floor foyer of the State House, and from the chambers of the Senate and the House of Representatives and simultaneously therewith the Confederate Battle Flag must be placed at its place at the Confederate Soldiers' Monument.

(B) The Confederate flags displayed in the respective chambers of each house of the General Assembly shall be transferred to the custody of the Department of Archives and History for presentation and display as the department shall deem appropriate.

(C) There must be erected around the Confederate Soldiers' Monument appropriate decorative iron fences to keep secure the Confederate Battle Flag.

(D) The Division of General Services of the Budget and Control Board shall replace the flag displayed at the Confederate Soldiers' Monument as necessary to avoid its being displayed in a ragged or faded condition."

SECTION 2. Section 10-1-160 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:

"Section 10-1-160. (A) The United States flag and the State flag shall must be displayed daily, except in rainy weather, from a staff upon the State House, and must be displayed above the rostrum in the chambers of the House of Representatives and the Senate of this State and in the front ground floor foyer of the State House. No other flag may be displayed in these locations nor atop or within any other building owned by the State or any political subdivision thereof except in museums and parks for historical exhibits and as may be directed in each chamber of the General Assembly by the respective body that sits in that chamber; provided, that the display of a Confederate flag within the chamber of either house as prohibited by Chapter 10 of Title 1 is not permitted. The State Budget and Control Board shall purchase a suitable flag flags for display at the State House locations and cause it them to be displayed, the expense to be borne out of the funds provided for maintenance.

(B) The provisions of subsection (A) of this section may only be amended or repealed upon enactment of an act which has received a two-thirds vote on one of its readings in each house of the General Assembly."

SECTION 3. Except as otherwise stated, this act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.[end quote]

https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess113_1999-2000/bills/4895.htm

It seems there is a movement that is more centered on destruction than education. There is a place for these soldiers who fought and served for many reasons apart from the articles of Secession and destroying that will not educate anybody but will instead create mob rule as it did in Charlottesville and the print lies or distortions that came out of it.

Like the lie that there were "very fine people on both sides?" The mob rule of "Jews will not replace us?"

That mob rule?

There is a movement alive to day to undo the past 234 years.

Rubbish.

It is a slippery slope to say the least and I for one do not want to go down that road any further to placate anybodies perceived sensibilities. It was what it was, just like the progress of all civilized nations on the planet we have moved on. I don't see anybody trying to tear down the pyramids or Inca sacrificial alters.

Placating perceived sensibilities and not just moving on:

"Destroying history" in New York City during the Revolution:

Educate, learn and move on. All the people directly affected are dead

Let's say the legislature of South Carolina decides to remove all confederate monuments from public places. Would you be able to "move on" from that? After all, all those confederates are dead.

Are you able to "move on" from complaining about what Union forces did during the Civil War? All directly affected are dead.

and all the rest to me seems to be just activism for the purpose of destroying our foundation in the name of so called sensitivity.

Rubbish.

 

[Andersonh1]

It specifically and only covers confederate displays and civil rights movement displays, .

That is not true, and no amount of inflammatory pictures will make it true. The actual law can be found in Title 10 of the South Carolina code covering public buildings.

https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t10c001.php

SECTION 10-1-165. Protection of certain monuments and memorials.

(A) No Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Mexican War, War Between the States, Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, Persian Gulf War, Native American, or African-American History monuments or memorials erected on public property of the State or any of its political subdivisions may be relocated, removed, disturbed, or altered. No street, bridge, structure, park, preserve, reserve, or other public area of the State or any of its political subdivisions dedicated in memory of or named for any historic figure or historic event may be renamed or rededicated. No person may prevent the public body responsible for the monument or memorial from taking proper measures and exercising proper means for the protection, preservation, and care of these monuments, memorials, or nameplates.

(B) The provisions of this section may only be amended or repealed upon passage of an act which has received a two-thirds vote on the third reading of the bill in each branch of the General Assembly.
​

Section 1-10-10 covers the Confederate Flag, and is the law that was amended to remove it from the State House.

https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t01c010.php

2015 Act No. 90, Section 2, provides as follows:

"SECTION 2. The South Carolina Infantry Battle Flag of the Confederate States of America [the Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia (General Robert E. Lee's Army) the South Carolina, Georgia, Florida Department version] shall be permanently removed from its location on the south side of the Confederate Soldier Monument. The South Carolina Infantry Battle Flag of the Confederate States of America shall be permanently removed from its location on the Capitol Complex Grounds within twenty-four hours of the effective date of this act. Upon its removal, the flag shall be transported to the Confederate Relic Room for appropriate display. The flagpole on which the flag is flown and the area adjacent to the monument and flagpole must be returned to its previous condition by the Division of General Services."

Effect of Amendment

2015 Act No. 90, Section 1, amended the section, providing for removal of the South Carolina Infantry Battle Flag of the Confederate States of America from the grounds of the Capitol Complex.

SECTION 1-10-20. Confederate Flags from above rostrums of Senate and House of Representatives chambers to be placed and displayed in State Museum.

The actual Confederate Flags (Naval Jack) removed from above the rostrum in the chambers of the House of Representatives and the Senate must be placed and permanently displayed in a suitable location in the State Museum.

HISTORY: 2000 Act No. 292, Section 1.

SECTION 1-10-30. Confederate Flag from dome to be placed and displayed in State Museum.

The actual Confederate Flag (Naval Jack) which is flying on the effective date of this act and which is removed from the dome of the State House must be placed and permanently displayed in a suitable location in the State Museum.

HISTORY: 2000 Act No. 292, Section 6.​

 

[Jim Klag]

All the people directly affected are dead and all the rest to me seems to be just activism for the purpose of destroying our foundation in the name of so called sensitivity.

So you're saying no one is genuinely offended by Confederate battle flags and monuments. Is that right? It's all just PC bullshit? You should walk in their shoes before you state generalities like that.

 

[Al Mackey]

How someone feels about a monument does not prove why that monument was erected in the first place. A look at the documents and speeches of those who put it up would be far more useful.

As well as a look at what the monument says.

The author of this hit piece

It looks like an Op-Ed to me, and it has accurate information in it, such as this: "There are 175 Confederacy monuments around South Carolina, most of which were erected in the 50 years after Reconstruction — the 12 years after the Civil War when Union troops ensured formerly enslaved folks were briefly granted the most basic claims of citizenship, such as voting rights and political access. In 1877, when the federal government abandoned both the South and the protection of its African-American inhabitants, white South Carolinians vigorously dedicated themselves to the reestablishment of absolute white power and black subjugation. White racist resentment against the modest progress African Americans made during Reconstruction fueled the relentless campaign of terror that followed. At the ballot box and elsewhere, through Jim Crow laws and lethal violence, black folks were prevented from exercising their civil rights."

And this: "Black South Carolinians, of course, were allowed no input about having these markers populate public spaces through which both African Americans and whites moved. Their voices in opposition to the erection of tributes to the Confederacy — a nation whose own founders explicitly cited black slavery as its founding principle; whose Constitution prohibited all laws blocking 'the right of property in negro slaves' — were silenced by the ever-present threat of racial terror violence. Like African Americans throughout the South, they were forced to live amongst Confederate idols, which often stood on towering pedestals, strategically placed near courthouses and statehouses, where they functioned as reminders of the racial order and tacit warnings not to step outside of it. Black Charlestonian teacher and civil rights activist Mamie Garvin Fields wrote about how black Charleston in the 1890s regarded the statue of John C. Calhoun, who infamously proclaimed slavery a 'positive good.' 'As you passed by,' Fields noted in her memoir, 'here was Calhoun looking you in the face and telling you, 'N*gger, you may not be a slave, but I am back to see you stay in your place.' ' "

And this: "The Heritage law today keeps standing Confederate statues that black South Carolinians have overwhelmingly wanted removed since they were first erected. Even under the chokehold of Jim Crow, Fields wrote that African Americans in the late 19th century would 'carry something' to protest the Calhoun statue through defacement — 'scratch up the coat, break the watch chain, try to knock off the nose.' Given neither political nor social recourse, this was the only way to resist. Opposing the presence of figures who fought for and vocally defended the evils of black enslavement should not have been an act that could get you killed then."

Let's take a look at what might be considered controversial.

"just like the Jim Crow laws those markers celebrate." Granted, many confederate monuments don't celebrate Jim Crow laws specifically.

"That suppressive effort was visibly manifest in monuments to the Confederacy, erected in numbers across this state that made evident the white supremacist zeal with which they were put up." A sweeping generalization if one is including monuments solely to confederate dead in cemeteries. However, if they are monuments to the confederacy itself, which is the wording the author uses, then probably not a sweeping generalization.

"Well into the 20th century, Confederate monuments remained a keystone of white South Carolina's retaliatory response to black folks' meager Reconstruction-era civil rights gains. Just over 10 years after Northern troops left the state, the Calhoun statue was dedicated, one of dozens of symbols of white defiance against black equality. The same principle was at work more than 160 years later when South Carolina's neo-Confederate legislators governed from a place of anger about the movement of the Confederate flag from one part of the Statehouse to another. Despite having already achieved a victory for the status quo, the illusory threat of black racial progress provoked a legislative whitelash in the form of the Heritage Act. That law, held up against the backdrop of history, reveals itself as a modern update to a very old American idea. The Newtonian law of white supremacy is that for every black civil rights step forward, there must be a retaliatory push back." There's a lot to unpack there. While the timing of monument erections by itself is not conclusive of intent, it can't be dismissed. While there can be alternate explanations for the timing, those alternate explanations aren't conclusive either. Additionally, the whole story of the so-called "compromise" of moving the flag from the dome to the statehouse grounds wreaks of a backlash. The only ones who thought this was a "compromise" were the white legislators who enacted it. It failed to address the complaint of having the flag in a sovereignty context. The fact that it says a monument cannot be removed without the consent of the legislature shows they were aware of changing demographics and changing attitudes and wanted to prevent local communities from exercising local sovereignty.

is clearly unhappy about the Heritage Act

For good reason. "With the passage of that law, neo-Confederate state legislators successfully disenfranchised South Carolinians who oppose Confederate statuary, stripping entire communities of the political power to demand its removal. How fitting, in a kind of perfectly grim symmetry, that the same legislation that protects South Carolina's Confederate monuments also disempowers the majority of its black citizens — just like the Jim Crow laws those markers celebrate."

and feels the need to insult both the people who put up the monuments that the act is designed to protect, and the legislators who are trying to keep mobs and activists from tearing them down today.

That's a falsehood.
The legislators are keeping local communities from having a voice in who they believe is worthy of honor. If someone wants to tear down a statue, the Heritage Act isn't going to stop them.
See?

He has no real facts, so insults will have to do.

She. And she does have real facts, as shown above.

 

[Al Mackey]

A little research yields some facts that go against what the author of the article claims. The South Carolina Monument Association, who commissioned the Confederate Soldiers' memorial on the SC state house grounds, left a record of why that monument was created. From the Constitution of the SC Monument Association, and nowhere in the purpose of the monument is there any mention of race:
1. This Association shall have for its object the building of a monument, in the City of Columbia, by the women of the State, to the memory of the South Carolinians who fell in the service of the Confederate States.
----------

With the wish that all who have shared in a common sorrow may share also in the privilege of raising this testimonial to our lost heroes, the annual subscription for membership is put at the lowest point practicable, that thus it may be within the means of those who, having little to give, have still the right, through tears and suffering, to join us in the fulfillment of this most sacred duty.

You left out the words about the cause, which was perpetuation of slavery and white supremacy. Why? The inscription on the North Side reads: "This monument perpetuates the memory of those who, true to the instincts of their birth, faithful to the teachings of their fathers, constant in their love for the state, died in the performance of their duty . . . who have glorified a fallen cause by the simple manhood of their lives, the patient endurance of suffering, and the heroism of death . . . and who in the dark hours of imprisonment, in the hopelessness of the hospital, in the short sharp agony of the field, found support and consolation in the belief that at home they would not be forgotten." That fallen cause was the preservation of slavery and white supremacy.

The inscription on the South Side reads: "Let the stranger, who in future times reads this inscription, recognize that these were men whom power could not corrupt, whom death could not terrify, whom defeat could not dishonor, and let their virtues plead for just judgement of the cause in which they perished… Let the South Carolinian of another generation remember that the state taught them how to live and how to die, and that from her broken fortunes she has preserved for her children the priceless treasures of her memories, teaching all who may claim the same birthright that truth, courage and patriotism endure forever." The just judgment of the cause in which they perished is that it was the worst possible cause for which men could fight. A celebration of that cause lends credibility to the author's case.

The Heritage Act covers all historical monuments in the state, not just Confederate.

That's a falsehood. It does not. It covers confederate and civil rights monuments, not all historical monuments.

https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess113_1999-2000/bills/4895.htm

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:

SECTION 1. Title 1 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"CHAPTER 10

South Carolina Heritage Act of 2000
Section 1-10-10. This chapter may be cited as the 'South Carolina Heritage Act of 2000'.

Section 1-10-20. (A) To honor and recognize the history and heritage of this State and the many contributions of its diverse citizenry, it is necessary and appropriate to codify the placement of certain symbols on the Capitol Complex and within the State House which salute the contributions and sacrifices of our constitutional history. On July 1, 2000, or thirty days after the effective date of this section, whichever occurs last, the only flags that shall fly atop the dome of the State House are the United States Flag and the South Carolina State Flag.

(B) The Infantry Battle Flag of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia (Confederate Battle Flag) must be displayed on the State House side of the Confederate Soldiers' Monument on the State House grounds. This flag is square with a St. Andrews Cross of blue, edged with white, with thirteen equal five-pointed stars, upon a red field, with the whole banner bordered in white. The total outside measurement of the flag shall be fifty-two inches square, inclusive of the white border. The blue arms of the cross are seven and one-half inches wide and the white border around the flag proper is one and one-half inches wide. The stars are five-pointed, inscribed in a circle six inches in diameter and are uniform in size. The Confederate Battle Flag shall be flown on a flagpole approximately equal in height to and immediately adjacent to the Confederate Soldiers' Monument.

Section 1-10-30. The Infantry Battle Flag of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia (Confederate Battle Flag) displayed on the Confederate Soldiers' Monument on the State House grounds, and any monument, marker, memorial, school, or street erected or named in honor of the Confederacy or the civil rights movement located on any municipal, county, or state property shall not be removed, changed, or renamed without the enactment of a joint resolution by a two-thirds vote of the membership of each house of the General Assembly approving same. This provision shall not apply to the maintenance and repair of the monument, marker, memorial, school, or street.

And the author of the article is clearly just angry and throwing insults,

As shown, this is a falsehood.

What's your excuse for making clearly false claims about the story and the author?

because the SC legislature is hardly a hotbed of white supremacy.

It is enough of a hotbed of white supremacy to disenfranchise local communities.

The author simply does not like what they've done, so he resorts to name-calling.

She. And we have yet another false claim.

And 48th Miss is right, the goal here is to tear down all of American history.

That's rubbish, and a bald-faced lie.

 

[Al Mackey]

That is not true, and no amount of inflammatory pictures will make it true. The actual law can be found in Title 10 of the South Carolina code covering public buildings.

https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t10c001.php

SECTION 10-1-165. Protection of certain monuments and memorials.

(A) No Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Mexican War, War Between the States, Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, Persian Gulf War, Native American, or African-American History monuments or memorials erected on public property of the State or any of its political subdivisions may be relocated, removed, disturbed, or altered. No street, bridge, structure, park, preserve, reserve, or other public area of the State or any of its political subdivisions dedicated in memory of or named for any historic figure or historic event may be renamed or rededicated. No person may prevent the public body responsible for the monument or memorial from taking proper measures and exercising proper means for the protection, preservation, and care of these monuments, memorials, or nameplates.

(B) The provisions of this section may only be amended or repealed upon passage of an act which has received a two-thirds vote on the third reading of the bill in each branch of the General Assembly.
​

Section 1-10-10 covers the Confederate Flag, and is the law that was amended to remove it from the State House.

https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t01c010.php

2015 Act No. 90, Section 2, provides as follows:

"SECTION 2. The South Carolina Infantry Battle Flag of the Confederate States of America [the Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia (General Robert E. Lee's Army) the South Carolina, Georgia, Florida Department version] shall be permanently removed from its location on the south side of the Confederate Soldier Monument. The South Carolina Infantry Battle Flag of the Confederate States of America shall be permanently removed from its location on the Capitol Complex Grounds within twenty-four hours of the effective date of this act. Upon its removal, the flag shall be transported to the Confederate Relic Room for appropriate display. The flagpole on which the flag is flown and the area adjacent to the monument and flagpole must be returned to its previous condition by the Division of General Services."

Effect of Amendment

2015 Act No. 90, Section 1, amended the section, providing for removal of the South Carolina Infantry Battle Flag of the Confederate States of America from the grounds of the Capitol Complex.

SECTION 1-10-20. Confederate Flags from above rostrums of Senate and House of Representatives chambers to be placed and displayed in State Museum.

The actual Confederate Flags (Naval Jack) removed from above the rostrum in the chambers of the House of Representatives and the Senate must be placed and permanently displayed in a suitable location in the State Museum.

HISTORY: 2000 Act No. 292, Section 1.

SECTION 1-10-30. Confederate Flag from dome to be placed and displayed in State Museum.

The actual Confederate Flag (Naval Jack) which is flying on the effective date of this act and which is removed from the dome of the State House must be placed and permanently displayed in a suitable location in the State Museum.

HISTORY: 2000 Act No. 292, Section 6.​

Wrong. The reference was specifically to the Heritage Act of 2000, which I provided in full. It specifies only confederate and civil rights movement monuments.

 

[Andersonh1]

No point in discussing any of this with you if you can't be honest about the law. I provided the link to the law that protects monuments across the state. The act of 2000 deals primarily with the flag on the dome and removes it, I have to repeat.

But even there, it does not only deal with items related to the Confederacy. (and I'm copying from the link, which is all caps, so I'm not shouting at anyone here.)
- ONLY THE UNITED STATES FLAG AND THE SOUTH CAROLINA STATE FLAG MAY FLY ATOP THE DOME OF THE STATE HOUSE AND BE DISPLAYED WITHIN THE STATE HOUSE
- PROHIBITS THE REMOVAL OF THESE CONFEDERATE FLAGS ON THE STATE HOUSE GROUNDS AND THE REMOVAL, CHANGING, OR RENAMING OF ANY LOCAL OR STATE MONUMENT, MARKER, MEMORIAL, SCHOOL, OR STREET ERECTED OR NAMED IN HONOR OF THE CONFEDERACY OR THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT WITHOUT THE ENACTMENT OF A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
- NO OTHER FLAG (US flag, SC flag) MAY BE DISPLAYED IN THESE LOCATIONS OR WITHIN ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL BUILDING EXCEPT UNDER SPECIFIED CONDITIONS

 

[Al Mackey]

In his prayer to open the monument's ceremonial unveiling, General Ellis Capers said, "May this monument bear to the stranger a constant testimony to the costly sacrifices which true men must ever be ready to make in asserting and defending their principles." Of course, the principles of continued slavery and domination of the black race by the white race.

In his oration, General John S. Preston said, "they dare to dedicate it to the memory of men who devoted themselves to a cause which they lost, and are thereby branded by the world as traitors to Truth and to Liberty." The cause, of course, was perpetual slavery and white supremacy.

https://archive.org/details/southcarolinamon00sout

 

[Al Mackey]

No point in discussing any of this with you if you can't be honest about the law. I provided the link to the law that protects monuments across the state. The act of 2000 deals primarily with the flag on the dome and removes it, I have to repeat.

But even there, it does not only deal with items related to the Confederacy. (and I'm copying from the link, which is all caps, so I'm not shouting at anyone here.)
- ONLY THE UNITED STATES FLAG AND THE SOUTH CAROLINA STATE FLAG MAY FLY ATOP THE DOME OF THE STATE HOUSE AND BE DISPLAYED WITHIN THE STATE HOUSE
- PROHIBITS THE REMOVAL OF THESE CONFEDERATE FLAGS ON THE STATE HOUSE GROUNDS AND THE REMOVAL, CHANGING, OR RENAMING OF ANY LOCAL OR STATE MONUMENT, MARKER, MEMORIAL, SCHOOL, OR STREET ERECTED OR NAMED IN HONOR OF THE CONFEDERACY OR THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT WITHOUT THE ENACTMENT OF A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
- NO OTHER FLAG (US flag, SC flag) MAY BE DISPLAYED IN THESE LOCATIONS OR WITHIN ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL BUILDING EXCEPT UNDER SPECIFIED CONDITIONS

I posted the Heritage Act of 2000 in its entirety. You're the one being dishonest. I specifically said it expressly talks about confederate monuments and civil rights movement monuments, yet you try to make it seem as though I didn't include civil rights movement monuments. Why are you lying about my posts?

It doesn't just remove the flag. It also protects any confederate or civil rights movement monument from being removed.

 

[O' Be Joyful]

FWIW, I believe the truth behind the erection of these monuments, through out the South and elsewhere such as Arizona, lies somewhere in-between honoring the dead and being an expression of white supremacy, tending towards the latter. Sometimes they were co-joined, sometimes not, and an honest expression of a community's loss and grief.

Many of these monuments are beautiful examples of the sculpture and carving arts and should be preserved. But, I shall always maintain that these decisions as to whether such works should remain in their current locations should be a matter for the locals to decide.

Local rights or State's rights? What a perplexing question. Sounds familiar

.