On Nazis and Statues

On Nazis and Statues

I feel it necessary to address comments I've been reading about the events in Charlottesville.  In particular, there are two areas that need addressing:  1) the support for Neo-Nazis and white supremacists in this country, and 2) the purpose of statues and monuments.  This may get long, so I apologize in advance:

In the aftermath of the Alt-Right/Nazi march, many on all sides of the political spectrum have criticize President Trump for his lack of response, followed by his "on many sides" response, followed by his more measured condemnation of the white supremacists, followed by his "Alt-Left" comments.

But many others have rushed to the defense of Mr. Trump and the white supremacists.  Their main lines of argument, as far as I've read, is that Antifa and and Black Lives Matter are just as bad as the Nazis (essentially echoing the president), and that attempts to remove the statues are simply attempts to erase history.  

The president asked where it would end - with the removal of statues of Washington and Jefferson (who also owned slaves).  One meme took it a step further with something to the effect of, "Next thing you know, they'll want to remove the pyramids."

And then there was the meme that criticized people who wanted to remove the statues because they were neither slaves nor slave owners, so it didn't affect them, and they were just trying to change history.

Let's address the Neo-Nazis, first.  The "Unite the Right" march was purportedly merely to protest the removal of the statue of Robert E. Lee.  It had been planned for months, and it should be noted that they came armed with firearms and clubs, and wearing helmets, shields, and body armor.  En masse.  I've been to many rallies before and never seen people come prepared for battle like that.

They came bearing torches and flags with Swastikas and Confederate battle flags.  They wore swastikas and other emblems of what can only be described - by a Christian, at least - as evil.  They marched down the streets shouting Nazi slogans, including anti-Semitic threats when the passed a synagogue.  From reports I read, rifle-bearing Nazis stood in front of the synagogue for more than a half-hour staring in.

There were a lot of counter protesters, too, particularly the clergy of many different denominations and faiths.  They came in vestments and with other symbols of their faith, and they came to protest peacefully.  Some of them had been trained on how to take a beating without responding in kind.

Several others (including a colleague from our diocese) were in a church which the torch-bearing Nazis surrounded, not allowing worshippers inside to leave.  

From reports of several clergy, the Nazis "roughed them up" (to borrow a phrase popular with President Trump) and threatened to do them physical harm.  That is when the dreaded Antifa stepped in, standing between the Nazis and the clergy.  One pastor said that, although he did not and would not use the tools of Antifa, he was glad they were there because they prevented injury to many counter-protesters.  One pastor said he felt confident in saying that the Antifa saved his life and the lives of others.

There were no reports of Black Lives Matter members attacking anyone at all, and the only violence (again, if you trust the clergy from many denominations and faith) reported that every altercation began on the side of the Nazis).

Here, it's important to remember who came to town armed for battle.  It's important to remember who incited violence.  It was the white supremacists - and since the KKK and Alt-Right have allied themselves with the Nazis, I can put them all in one category. They came wanting violence.  That's where they excel.  They came hoping to instill fear and said as much.  One tweeted (and other re-tweeted) "The fear we instill in them today only fuels our victory tomorrow."  That is the definition of terrorism.

So I do not and can not give these anti-Americans a pass.  It IS responsible to stand up and condemn them.  It is the American way to not let them get away with it.  We've tried ignoring evil in the past, and we will pay dearly if we ignore it in our midst.  Just as the Germans how that went.  That's a question they won't dodge.

Now, the second part of this equation is the removal of Confederate statues.  That was the purported reason for this march.  Apparently, Nazis see Robert E. Lee as a kindred spirit.  But should these statues be removed at all?  After all, they are a part of history, just like the Confederate battle flag.

To address this, we first have to ask what the purpose of statues (and other monuments) is, because unless we understand what they're for, we won't understand what the fuss is about.

Statues are not history.  They certainly do not tell history.  Their removal does not change history.  Their purpose is either to hold someone up as an admirable role model or in the case of memorials that don't usually include images, to serve as a sobering reminder of a sad event.  But statues of people are essentially a way of saying, "This person did something we are proud of!"

In my town, there are a few likenesses of Franklin D. Roosevelt, arguably one of the most significant, and many would say greatest, presidents we've ever had.  In my hometown in central Illinois, there are statues of local boy Abraham Lincoln, another one of the greatest presidents.  These statues are warranted because, though each was a flawed person - and in FDR's case, he made a horrible decision with regard to the Japanese-American detention camps - they were US presidents who contributed greatly to the future health of our country.  That's something to look up to.

Can the same be said for the many statues of Confederate generals or politicians?  While Robert E. Lee may have been a fine man (and an Episcopalian), the fact remains that he inherited and used slaves, that he felt a white superiority over black people, and that his troops were allowed to raid settlements during major operations like the 1863 invasion of Pennsylvania to capture free blacks for enslavement.

The fact remains that he, and those similarly memorialized in statues, waged war against the United States of America.  Under normal conditions, that would be called treason.  The fact remains that the stated purpose of that war - on the part of the seceding states - was to preserve slavery and white superiority over African Americans.

So the first question people need to ask themselves is, "Is the preservation of slavery and the dissolution of the United States something worthy of emulating?  Is this a good role model?  Is this something I want my children to strive for?"

If you look at when most of these statues were erected, you might think that yes, that's exactly what people wanted.  Most of them were put up toward the beginning of the 20th century just as the Jim Crow era was swinging into gear.  There seems little doubt that these statues were not merely ways of remembering history - they were a way of glorifying the Confederacy, and they were doing it just as they were feeling emboldened to take away rights of black citizens.  

The next big surge in statues (and the return of the Confederate battle flag to many state houses) was during the 1950s and 60s during the Civil Rights era.  Again, this was not to tell history - it was to glorify a time when blacks had no rights.  It was a way of saying that they should still have no rights.

I keep saying that statues are not and do not tell history.  That's what schools and museums are for.  True, they can be biased.  For example, there was a time when Alabama history books never referred to "slaves" or "slavery."  They were "workers."  We can and must do a better - and dispassionate - job of relaying history, especially with primary sources (such as the actual declarations of secession by each of the southern states).  

Oh, and we should teach our kids that pyramids are not statues.  They are tombs.  Nobody I know of has asked that any tomb be desecrated (though Americans have plenty practice desecrating pyramids and the graves of other cultures).

But really, if we improve history teaching, does it matter if the statues remain?  Should we, as many suggest, leave the past in the past?  Which is their way of saying, "Leave the statues alone."  One meme I saw said that it was ridiculous because people who had never been slaves were battling people who had never owned slaves over statues of people from the past.

Well, if we really were leaving the past, they wouldn't care if the statues were removed.  They're just statues of dead guys, after all.  The fact is, they do care.  A lot.  They care because these statues represent something many still aspire to.  

Oh, and learning history - which is by definition the past - means that we have to deal with the present which is shaped by the past.  The effects of more than 200 years of slavery have never left us.  Slavery was followed by practical slavery as practiced in Jim Crow and then segregation and then the mass incarceration of African Americans going on today.  The rules simply ARE different for blacks, and if you think its reverse discrimination, I bet you most African Americans would be more than happy to trade their privilege for a white American's.  

This is not, by the way, a North/South issue.  New York was a huge slave state until just thirty years before the Civil War.  It once housed the second largest slave market in the country.  Even after slavery was illegal here, Wall Street profited immensely from the products of slavery.  New Yorkers hated being involved in the Civil War, which they felt was only going to hurt their bottom line.  Even today, New York City is one of the most segregated cities in the country.

It's only recently that we are beginning to grapple with our complicity in slavery and its aftermath.  New York finally put up a plaque commemorating the slave market, only relatively recently opened a museum for the African burial ground.  But it IS important to do these things.  It is important to put up markers that remind us that this happened, that it was lamentable, and that we should never again allow ourselves to be seduced into thinking it's okay to treat other human beings as property.  

Perhaps what towns and cities might do with those statues is place them in museums and give them context.  "This man owned slaves.  He fought a war against the United States because he no longer wanted to be part of it.  He wanted to be part of a country that saw people of color as less than human."  That sort of thing.  

So Nazis and Statues.  That's where we are today.  We need to ask ourselves, do we support Nazis?  Do we aspire to the goals of these Confederate soldiers?  

And if so, do we really want to be Americans?