Tag: statue genocide

bookmark_borderMy message to Kara Walker

Posted on by Marissa

I am an artist. I am not the most talented or skilled artist in the world. I don’t have much formal training. But I like to think that I possess a higher than average amount of artistic talent, and that I’ve improved my skills over years of practice.

I am proud of my talent and my skills. But I am even more proud of the meaning and purpose behind my art. Through my drawings, I honor historical figures. I try to showcase their beauty, uniqueness, and diversity. I bring the inhabitants of my imaginary world to life in this world, and I keep historical figures alive in the present. This is what I strive to accomplish with my artwork. I am proud of my artwork because of its beauty and also because of its significance.

My art is an expression of love, respect, and celebration.

Kara Walker’s art, on the other hand, is an expression of contempt. 

I’m not able to type out what Kara Walker did, because describing her act in words feels like it would trivialize its awfulness and moral repugnance. Google it if you are curious (and have a strong stomach). 

Kara Walker’s art (if it can even be called that) is an expression of contempt for Stonewall Jackson. Because he looked different from her, dressed differently, spoke differently, lived differently, and thought differently, she decided that he deserved to be cruelly dismembered, sliced to pieces, mocked, ridiculed.

Walker’s “art” is an expression of contempt for the original artist, contempt for the time, effort, care, and talent that he put into his sculpture. In a breathtaking display of intolerance, she presumed that she had the right to destroy his art and grotesquely reassemble it into a mockery of its original meaning. Because he saw the world differently from her, she decided that his perspective didn’t matter. Because he came from a different culture and a different time, she decided that his work ought to be erased

And worst of all, Walker’s “art” is an expression of contempt for the very idea of nonconformity, of resistance to authority, of being different. 

The message that Walker sends with the monstrosity that she falsely characterizes as art, is that only her perspective matters, only her feelings, only her thoughts. Those who are different deserve to be dismembered, sliced to pieces, destroyed. Our perspectives, feelings, and thoughts erased. Our pain mocked and ridiculed.

An artist had the audacity to create a sculpture honoring someone who rebelled against authority. So Kara Walker sliced the sculpture to pieces and reassembled it into a nonsensical monstrosity as if to say, see, this is what happens when you disobey. This is what happens when you don’t comply. This is what happens when you think for yourself, when you diverge from norms, when you live in a way that society does not approve of.

Only people like me matter, she proudly proclaims. Only people who are “normal,” only people who are like the majority.

I saw a social media post containing images of Walker’s monstrosity, as well as an earlier sculpture depicting her son holding a Confederate soldier’s horse by the tail. I was struck by the irony: the fact that Walker even has a son demonstrates her immense privilege compared to someone like me. The fact that she has a child demonstrates that has the capacity to enter into a sexual relationship with another person, as well as the capacity to be responsible for another human being. Due to my autism and post-traumatic stress, I am not able to form genuine connections with any human beings other than my parents. True friendships are impossible for me, and the prospect of having sex with another person is a complete nonstarter. This is why statues are so important to me, and their destruction so devastating. Yet Walker chooses to participate in that destruction. Enjoying a life filled with relationships that are considered basic to most people and that are outside the realm of possibility for me, she actively adds to my suffering, and then makes a mockery of my pain, all while claiming that because I happened to be born with light skin, I am “privileged.”

There’s nothing honorable about punching down, nothing courageous about beating up on those who lost a war, nothing thoughtful about attacking and condemning an unpopular minority, nothing creative about rubbing salt in the wounds of those who are already suffering.

My art is an expression of diversity and of inclusion. Through my drawings, I attempt to portray a world in which all different types of people thrive and coexist happily, a world in which all different people are represented, respected, included.

Kara Walker’s “art” does the opposite. It sends the message that only people like her have a right to exist, and that acceptance should be reserved for people who obey authority, comply with norms, and are like the majority. Her “art” is an expression of cruelty, of bigotry, of intolerance.

My message to Kara Walker is this: Inflicting harm, pain, and ridicule on people for being different does not give you the moral high ground. It’s actually the very essence of what it means to be immoral. You probably think that you’re being thoughtful, creative, revolutionary, subversive. But in reality, you’re just being a bully. 

bookmark_borderConfederate statue sanctuary in the works in Texas

Posted on by Marissa

Back in 2017, the city government of San Antonio, Texas – determining, apparently, that people who are different from the majority should no longer be able to feel welcome in public spaces or be represented in public art – decided to remove its Confederate monument. Like all similar instances, this decision was immoral, despicable, and an abomination that should never have even been considered as an option, let alone carried out. 

However, the reason why I am posting about this now is because there is one recent piece of good news to come out of this terrible situation. The city has agreed to donate the monument to an organization called the SS American Memorial Foundation, which plans to display it in a privately owned, but publicly accessible, park. After spending 8 years in storage in an undisclosed location, the statue will finally see the light of day. Craig Russell, the founder and operator of this organization, said that he plans to collect Confederate statues from across Texas and assemble them in the park, which will be located in the city of Seguin, Texas.

As Valor Memorial Park pointed out in this Facebook post, Russell’s park seems like it will aim to do for Texas what Valor has done in North Carolina. None of this takes away from the horror and pain of the atrocities that have been committed, but the prospect that some statues will find loving and respectful homes provides a glimmer of hope in what would otherwise be a completely demoralizing situation. This is an exciting new development, and I’m looking forward to seeing the park take shape. 

bookmark_borderConfederate statues from Wilmington, NC find a new home at Valor Park

Posted on by Marissa

Valor Memorial Park is getting two new statues!

In 2020, the government of Wilmington, North Carolina – determining, apparently, that people who are different from the majority should no longer feel welcome in public spaces or be represented in public art – decided to remove their two Confederate monuments. The statues, one honoring Confederate soldiers in general and the other honoring Confederate senator and attorney general George Davis, were held in storage for over 5 years. On September 19, the city reached an agreement to transfer ownership of the statues to Valor Memorial Park, a privately owned park that is dedicated to honoring all veterans and that currently has 3 beautiful Confederate statues. Despite how despicable, appalling, and immoral the actions of Wilmington’s city government have been, this is a small piece of good news to come out of a terrible situation.

As this post from Dixie Forever states, the statues are finally being relocated to a loving home.

And as Valor Park wrote in a social media post: “They are now home. These memorials will be preserved and restored with honor. Thank you to Courage and Sacrifice for their partnership. That partnership will continue as these are restored, cleaned, and repaired. They wont be hidden and will be open to the public.”

If you are interested in purchasing merchandise or making a donation to support the care and upkeep of the statues, you can do so here.

bookmark_borderRest in peace, Charlie Kirk

Posted on by Marissa

“The left claims that destroying a century-old Robert E. Lee statue by a great American artist represents ‘healing.’ The truth is the exact opposite. Letting the South publicly honor its experience during the Civil War was a major part of the nation’s post-war healing, and allowing different political factions to celebrate their own heroes is a key part of political harmony. Destroying the Lee statue isn’t about healing. It’s an act of aggression, a show of dominance and hatred by people who want America’s history, its historic values, and yes, its historic people wiped out.”

– Charlie Kirk

(source here)

I’ve written numerous times that the atrocities perpetrated against statues and monuments are the exact opposite of healing. Charlie Kirk thought so as well, and articulated this idea perfectly. This quote shows that Charlie truly understood. He had the courage to speak out for what is right, and he paid with his life.

Thank you, Charlie.

bookmark_borderHegseth is right to restore the Reconciliation Memorial… but not for the reason stated in this article

Posted on by Marissa

I recently saw a great opinion piece in the Hill by Donald Smith, arguing in favor of the decision to restore the Confederate monument at Arlington National Cemetery. Smith presents evidence that the “Naming Commission” that committed this despicable action did not actually have the backing of the American people. Although this may very well be true, in my opinion, this isn’t really relevant to the fact that removing the monument was wrong. So while I appreciate this opinion piece and Smith’s courage in speaking out in favor of the monument, my reasoning for opposing the monument’s removal is a bit different.

“By ordering the monument back, Hegseth is subverting Congress and the will of the American people,” said Ty Seidule, the intolerant bigot who served as the vice-chair of the “Naming Commission.” This may be true, and it also may be false, as Smith argues in his opinion piece. But the truth is that ordering the monument back is the right thing to do, regardless of the desires of Congress or the American people. This is because removing statues and monuments is objectively wrong, regardless of how many people support it. If undoing a horrifying, repugnant, and disgraceful atrocity constitutes subverting Congress and the will of the American people, then Congress and the American people deserve to have their will subverted.

In 2024, members of the “Naming Commission” stated that by passing the 2021 NDAA, which contained the provision to create the commission, “bipartisan supermajorities of 81 senators and 322 representatives declared it was time to try to end Confederate commemorations.” Smith argues that this wasn’t really the case, because the creation of the commission was merely one small part of the NDAA, which is a huge bill, and voting in favor of the bill itself doesn’t necessarily mean that one supports that particular part. This argument may be right, but more importantly, ending Confederate commemorations is objectively immoral. Ending Confederate commemorations inflicts horrific and unbearable pain on innocent people, destroys everything that makes life worth living, and sends the message that people who are different from the norm should not be allowed to exist. Merely reading the words “try to end Confederate commemorations” make me feel physically sick. The thought that anyone would even remotely support this is absolutely disgusting. Therefore, ending Confederate commemorations is morally wrong, regardless of how senators and representatives feel about it.

And in the commission’s final report, they state, “in passing the 2021 William M. ‘Mac” Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act, the United States Congress determined that Confederates and the Confederacy no longer warrant commemoration through Department of Defense assets.” Except that Confederates and the Confederacy do warrant commemoration. Because people who are different from the norm deserve to feel included, represented, and reflected in public art. We deserve to have lives that are worth living. We deserve to feel that we are allowed to exist. And without commemoration of Confederates and the Confederacy, none of these things are the case. Therefore, Confederates and the Confederacy do warrant commemoration. This is objectively true, regardless of what the U.S. Congress, or anyone for that matter, believes. Even if the U.S. Congress did actually determine that Confederates and the Confederacy no longer warrant commemoration, the only thing this signifies is that the U.S. Congress is wrong.

Seidule alleges that the Arlington monument “clearly commemorates the Confederacy and its purpose – chattel slavery.” First of all, I don’t get why it has become so popular over the last few years to call slavery, “chattel slavery.” Why not just call it slavery? Second, slavey was not the purpose of the Confederacy. Seceding from the U.S. and forming an independent country was. That’s why the Confederacy symbolizes rebellion, defiance, fighting back against authority, and being different. Third, yes, the monument clearly commemorates the Confederacy. And this is bad, how? That’s right. It isn’t. 

Removing Confederate monuments is objectively morally wrong, because it inflicts severe pain on innocent people, destroys everything that makes life worth living, and is a statement that people who are different from the norm should be obliterated from existence. The actions of the “Naming Commission” would be immoral even if they had the popular mandate that they claim to have. Removing Confederate monuments would be the wrong thing to do, and putting monuments back up would be the right thing to do, even if every single person in the U.S. and every single member of Congress felt otherwise. What is wrong is wrong, and what is right is right, regardless of the wishes, thoughts, feelings of the American people and their representatives.

bookmark_borderGood news from West Point

Posted on by Marissa

Another bit of good news for the historical figures who were subjected to the Biden administration’s brutal and heartless campaign of obliteration: the portrait of Robert E. Lee has just been returned to West Point!

The 20-foot-tall painting, showing the legendary general at the beginning of the Civil War, was removed from the library at West Point Military Academy by intolerant bullies in 2022. Under orders from the Trump administration, it is now back. 

Any small bit of reversal of the historical figure genocide is a beautiful thing to see, and this is no exception. 

Source: Newsmax

See also previous posts from Dixie Forever, Monuments Across Dixie.

bookmark_border“They should have done it during the day so we could see your tears”

Posted on by Marissa

Why, exactly, is it considered a good thing to take actions that inflict pain on other people?

Why is this considered something positive?

Why, when a person takes actions that harm another person, do you believe that this reflects badly on the person being harmed, rather than the person doing the harming?

Please explain, John Maxwell.

Because as far as I can tell, this is the exact opposite of how morality works.

Last time I checked, taking an action that causes another person to cry – in other words to suffer, to be harmed, to be in pain – is something bad, not something good. And therefore I’m confused as to why someone would advocate in favor of that.

Please explain, John, how you came to hold moral beliefs that are the exact opposite of how morality actually works.

“And like the ones we still have to hear about over a decade after Obama was your president twice as long as the confederate states lasted.”

Same questions. Why is it considered good to inflict pain on other people? Why is this considered positive? Please explain this, Ronald Wendel.

Additionally, what does the length of time something lasted have to do with whether it was good or bad? What exactly is the logical connection there? Please explain.

Yes, Obama was president for eight years. The Confederate States of America lasted for four years.

What does this have to do with whether Obama’s presidency was good or bad?

What does this have to do with whether the Confederacy was good or bad?

What does this have to with whether or not the Confederates were justified in seceding from the United States and forming their own country?

That’s right. It doesn’t.

Maybe next time. refrain from making statements that have absolutely no basis in logic and make absolutely no sense. Just a thought.

bookmark_borderExcellent post from the Confederate Cleaner

Posted on by Marissa

I follow and strongly recommend the Facebook page titled, The Confederate Cleaner. And I love this recent post in which he explains the motivation behind his work:

“As I started to discover just what the Southern soldier was truly made of, I wanted a way to tell their story. This page was created to do just that. In a way, I felt I was giving a voice to the Confederate soldier in a time where they were being constantly slandered.”

This is very similar to my motivation for my artwork and statues. I want a way to tell the stories of the historical figures, and to give them a voice, in a society that has decided that their stories should be erased and their voices silenced. The historical figures cannot stand up for themselves, so I feel a responsibility to stand up for them.

“Sometimes it’s easy to think we’re fighting a losing battle,” he writes. “That’s how they want us to feel! But, charge forward we must! Keep honoring those who fought so bravely in protecting the land we love so dear, Dixie!”

Amen to that.

Read the rest here.

bookmark_borderPossible good news on Christopher Columbus statue in Columbus, Ohio

Posted on by Marissa

The statue of Christopher Columbus in the city that bears his name, Columbus, Ohio, could potentially be coming back to public view. 

The organization “Reimagining Columbus” (I don’t really consider this an appropriate name for such an organization, but that will have to be explained fully in another blog post if I ever have the time and energy to write one) has unveiled its plan for a new park that includes the statue. The park, unfortunately, will not be centered on the statue. And it will include informational text about Columbus, which unfortunately has a high likelihood of being disparaging, somewhat defeating the purpose of returning the statue to public display. Visitors will be able to reach the statue after walking along a path lined with art and inscriptions and, interestingly, will be able to view the statue either by looking up at him from the ground, or from a hill where they could look him in the eyes. 

All in all, this does not sound like an ideal situation, but it is better than nothing.

Source: We The Italians