Historical Understanding: Nietzschean

This paper deals with ways history can be interpreted and influences different interpretations have on society and individuals. This is explored through

For people who oppose the removal of Confederate statues, history is said to be their biggest concern. Many believe that “Ultimately, removal of the monuments will, quite literally, erase an unsavory – but important – part of our nation’s history” (Brophy 2015). They fear that by removing these symbols, America would be disregarding a huge part of its past. Yet, history itself would not be destroyed, as the impact of the Civil War lives on; only the tokens of oppression would be removed.

Thesis: As the debate continues on whether or not we should keep confederate monuments and symbols displayed publicly, it is important that we recognize both the benefits and downfalls of removing these symbols.

The Civil War continues to be a major talking point today -- a war that was fought over the extension of slavery. In 2017, a contentious conversation continues as the public debates the reasons of the Civil War, whether or not it was about slavery or states’ rights, and the ethics behind having massive monuments commemorating a time of our history that was so divisive. Symbols of the Confederacy, which includes the Confederate flag and monuments depicting leaders of the Confederacy, are seen to be racist and propaganda tools used by white supremacists. However, there are those who believe that these confederate symbols are misleading and leads to the false ideas that the South was patriotic and heroic during the Civil War. Through

A recent hot-button subject in the media has been what to do with Confederate monuments in the South. After the removal of a statue honoring Robert E. Lee, a general in the Confederate Army considered by many to be a hero for the part he played in the American Civil War, a clear divide has formed over whether it was the right thing to do. Some agree with this choice, calling the statues remnants from a time of racial oppression in the United States. Others are outraged, considering it desecration of their proud history. Still others don't understand either side of the issue, and see it as a pointless feud. It is imperative to understand that to many people, these are more than just statues. Whether their impression is positive or negative, this issue goes beyond physical monuments.

While Stars and Bars have long been associated by many with slavery, the latest campaign to remove Confederate emblems has extended beyond the flag to statues, memorials, parks and even school mascots. The debate over what symbolizes heritage and what stands for hate has never covered so much ground, as efforts to remove icons that have been part of the visual and cultural landscape of the South for decades are a foot at national, state, and local levels. In one Arkansas town, the school board voted unanimously Tuesday to ban the song "Dixie" for the next school year and phase out "Rebel," the school's mascot. "They are part of our history and not all of our history is dandelions and butterflies." - Mick Mulvaney, representative for South Carolina. In Maryland, Baltimore County Executive Kevin Kamenetz is trying to make a plan that would change the name of Baltimore's Robert E. Lee Park. A spokesman for Mayor Stephanie Rawlings, Blake told The Associated Press she supports the name change and is willing to work with the county to find an appropriate alternative name. Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers in Tennessee have called for a bust of Nathan Bedford Forrest, a Confederate general and early Ku Klux Klan leader, to be removed from an alcove outside the Senate chambers. The bust, with the words "Confederate States Army" engraved on it, has been at the state Capitol for decades. That bust is part of history, yes that guy may have been racist but that's how times was when slavery was around. It is a part of history so we can’t forget it or we might redo the whole situation over again.(“Debate over the confederate

Recently history has hit the headlines. The overwhelming issue of whether or not Confederate monuments should be removed has many up in arms- in some cases, such as Charlottesville, Virgina, literally. Those for the removal of the statues argue that they honor a cruel regime and support white supremacy, while those opposing the removal argue that removing the statues would damage the preservation of America's history and lead to the removal of statues depicting other historical figures like President George Washington. The article "Confederate monuments should be removed in their entirety and it shouldn’t even be an argument" by Lucas Johnson on The Badger Herald website, argues the pro-removal side of the issue. Johnson's article is a prime example of the pro removal argument as he seeks to convince the reader to agree with his stance on the issue by using historical facts and addressing the connection white supremacists feel towards monuments from that era in an attempt to sway his audience to his side of the dispute.

Many years prior to the Civil War, Confederate statues, monuments, and other historical figures were placed thoroughly through the nation to represent the the remembrance of the Confederacy. In the “Monumental Battle” article, Laura Anastasia tells of the growing controversy that this nation has about the removal of Confederate monuments. The statues were placed to instill fear in the hearts of African Americans and portray a dominantly white future. THESIS !

George S. Patton once said, “Prepare for the unknown by studying how other in the past have coped with the unforeseeable and the unpredictable.” As human beings we must be able to learn from our mistakes so we will never be forced to make them again. In spite of that, a large number of students have begun to take offense to learning about the not so glamourous parts of our history and those parts of history are quickly beginning to fade from the textbooks in fear of offending someone. A prime example of this is given to us in the article “Trigger-unhappy” where Professor Serhat Tanyolacar displayed Ku Klux Klan imagery on his campus. Even after making it clear that he was “using Klan imagery to provoke debate about racism”, Mr. Tanyolacar

Why should we allow monuments built for fighting equality and honoring pro-slavery figures to exist? In our world, brimming with advancements in technology and innumerous other intellectual achievements, antiquated stone figures of dead war generals have become a hot topic of debate. The reason is, simply, these Confederate monuments evoke painful memories of an era of American history in which many suffered, and they advertise a then-prevalent viewpoint that is today shunned by virtually all civilized citizens. Although many advocate for their downfall, these monuments serve an important purpose in current discourse. Confederate monuments should not be torn down because they are artistic achievements that can be used by Americans to learn about and preserve history.

The past always permeates the way in which people interact with the world in their present. Members of society frequently draw on their perceptions and understanding of what came before as reference points in seeking to deal with the dilemmas in their present. They use the past to gain a perspective on the world, to tackle the uncertainties of the future, or to impose familiarity on puzzling issues. An understanding of the past remains a vital tool to solve modern conflicts. In the ode “London, 1802,” the speaker calls his late role model, John Milton, to inspire creativity once more, while in “Douglass” the speaker seeks the late Fredrick Douglass to initiate a movement against racial inequality.

“One is astonished in the study of history at the recurrence of the idea that evil must be forgotten, distorted, skimmed over. The difficulty, of course, with this philosophy is that history loses its value as an incentive and example; it paints perfect men and noble nations, but it does not tell the truth.”

As a civil servant and author, Schlink attempts to alter his as well as later generations’ disposition towards not only the past, but also those who lived through the atrocities of that time. In “The Presence of the Past,” Schlink briefly describes that, while he was growing up, Germans lived under veil of the actions of the Third Reich, best seen when Schlink states, “The longer we live with the idea that the past is something we can and must come to terms with, the more paradoxical this proves to be” (35). As a part of a generation that involuntarily bears the weight of past events, Schlink believes that those who are oppressed by these burdens must not become fixated on remembering or forgetting the past, but alternatively must observe these events and learn from them. The process of learning from past events must include reflecting on history, which is best seen when Schlink asserts “It is righteous to prepare oneself for possible future situations by looking at past situations and pondering what one would have done in them” (31). Reflecting and learning from the past is integral to the healing of those who have felt its

Throughout the introduction article Howard Zinn elucidates the inevitability of historians taking sides. Zinn exemplifies his argument by displaying his disagreement of the common history curriculum taught through the prospective of achievements, not the consequences that occurred to obtain it. Zinns states, “In other words, my focus is not on the achievements of the heroes of traditional history, but on all those people who were the victims of those achievements, who suffered silently or fought back magnificently” (Zinn, Introduction). Zinn’s ideology about history is an argument which I strongly agree upon. Many lessons I’ve learned as an academic scholar was through the prospective of achievement, not the pain and suffering caused on the people who were oppressed during the process. Many people who lived through the achievements of one’s conquest, was their times of difficulty. The inevitable sides appear through ones prospective of a historical event.

The American Civil War was a clouded era where, by comparison to modern norms, judgement was ill evolved; during the American Civil War era, slavery was still acceptable in certain parts of the country. However, it was nevertheless a cultural turning point in the history of our nation. Our nation has not always been the cultural mixing pot it is now. To arrive to modernity, there are many factors that we ought to take into consideration so we can be knowledgeable about how we got to where we are today. In the past months, there have been events that have caused a big spark in the debate of Confederate monuments; such as the rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, where protesters and counter-protesters caused a riot, and a big part of their fight pertained to if specific Confederate monuments should be removed or be able to stay. Some argue that Confederate monuments should be removed due to the very apparent connections to slavery and racism and also that times are rapidly changing. However, I argue that Confederate monuments should be preserved, but the monuments should also be evolving with our ever-changing society, in order to be honest about our nation’s past even if those memorials are somber or difficult to talk about. If we were to keep Confederate monuments we should add placards where it talks about specific events that will help with maintaining the education and learning of the American Civil War.