“Contextualizing” Lincoln and Emancipation Monuments

I’ve said many times that the correct response to the American monument Taliban should be “No, shut up.”

But fair is fair, and the main argument that have made against traditional American monuments, but particularly Confederate monuments, has been that the monuments represent bad history and false “myths.”

With that in mind, perhaps it’s time to tear down or “contextualize” other monuments.

Take for example the Lincoln monument. The National Park Service asked if Americans should think of different ways to remember Abraham Lincoln.

The response was predictable from both the left and the right. Criticizing the American demigod is unacceptable.

Lincoln, of course, should be held accountable for ripping up the Constitution, the suppression of civil liberties, and his illegal war against the South, and if we want to include modern sensibilities, he was a racist. No one can deny this.

But hardly anyone on the left and no one on the mainstream right is calling for the “contextualization” of the Lincoln Memorial. He is beyond reproach. The man saved the Union.

Again, if we were being consistent, Lincoln would be subject to criticism.

Or take for example the newest monument in Richmond, Virginia. They tore down several Confederate monuments and added the “Emancipation Monument” last week.

You see, Confederate monuments were based on a false and hurtful past while this new monument is a symbol of the “heart” and inclusion.

It includes a glorification of Nat Turner, the man who led a murderous rampage throughout Virginia in the 1831 that resulted in the deaths of over 50 people, including women and young children.

Nothing says heart and inclusion like murder.

And it also lists a false date for emancipation. Slavery did not officially end until December 1865, but the monument lists January 1, 1863 as the date of emancipation. No historian would agree with that, not even the leftist buffoons. But there it is, in bronze, for all the world to see.

That’s fake history.

And if the history is fake, it should either be removed or “contextualized.”

I won’t hold my breath, but it does make excellent podcast fodder. I talk about it on Episode 520 of The Brion McClanahan Show.


Comments are closed.