I've pretty much stayed out of the whole discussion, neither taking one side nor the other as I am far more wrapped up with the Global War on Islamofacism, judicial confirmations, the economy, reforming the UN, and watching Frist stand up for the Second Amendment for the first time in his political career.
But as I was reading the email messages in one Yahoo group to which I belong a particular moonbat struck a nerve. Among the usual rantings about how racist it is to try and remember history is this tidbit:
Even as a kid I remember first recognizing what those monuments stood for and not understanding why they were put up in the first place.And that is the problem. The controversy of renaming the parks is a like a rash -- a manifestation of a much deeper problem. To illustrate, some facts:
Forrest is often praised for his speech at the Independent Order of Pole-Bearers Association in 1875 because he was the first white man to address the organization which was a precursor to the NAACP. But his activism for civil rights began before that speech:
After the Civil War, General Forrest made a speech to the Memphis City Council (then called the Board of Aldermen). In this speech he said that there was no reason that the black man could not be doctors, store clerks, bankers, or any other job equal to whites. They were part of our community and should be involved and employed as such just like anyone else. In another speech to Federal authorities, Forrest said that many of the ex-slaves were skilled artisans and needed to be employed and that those skills needed to be taught to the younger workers. If not, then the next generation of blacks would have no skills and could not succeed and would become dependent on the welfare of society.Imagine if people had listened to Forrest — but no, Northern carpetbaggers were intent on raping the South and had little time to spare for freed slaves.Forrest's words went unheeded.
Now imagine if our schools were accurately teaching history rather than revisionist, politically correct mythology with which our children are indoctrinated. It's obvious from Forrest's life that there is much to hate and to admire about the man, but the hatemongers only portray the one side and have tried to erase the three dimensional truth of the man.
The moonbat in question (remember the moonbat? He's the inspiration for this rather long post) also went on about how the civil war was trying to defend slavery and anything else is a blatant lie.
And you know what? The moonbat is right, the Civil War was about slavery. But to suggest that it was only about slavery is to oversimplify a complex and stressful socioeconomic time in our history.
The moonbat should do some research on the "Tariffs of Abominations". The north had a greater population but the south paid all the bills. With no income tax, one of the primary sources of federal funds were tariffs. In 1840, the South paid 84% of the tariffs, rising to 87% by 1860. Tariffs grew so high that Southern growers were forced to send their raw materials to Northern factories because British manufacturers could not afford to pay the price. The lack of competition suppressed prices, adding to the economic woes of the South.
Yes, the war was about slavery. It was also about the North forcing the South to be its bitch.
And of course the moonbat had a notion that President Lincoln's statue should be put up in place of General Forrest. To which I say, compare Forrest's words above with these from Lincoln:
I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races -- that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.Yes, friction over than names of our parks is like a rash. It masks the true problem -- that of a poor educational system and a leftist movement that stirs up hatred over issues like the names of our parks just so it can benefit from the increased sense of victimization and entitlement.
— Lincoln, 18 September 1858 during a debate with Douglas
I don't care about the names of our parks because our sense of Southern history has already been lost to this generation. I care about fixing the problems in our schools so our history isn't lost to our next generation. And so black children (and those of all colors) can grow up to be "doctors, store clerks, bankers, or any other job equal to whites", just as Nathan Bedford Forrest envisioned.