Article in "The Atlantic," The True History of the South Is Not Being Erased.

Garrett Epps has this article, "The True History of the South Is Not Being Erased," in The Atlantic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-true-history-of-the-south-is-not-being-erased/529818/

The subtitle is, "Taking down Confederate monuments helps confront the past, not obscure it."

He has a reference to an earlier article, "The Motionless Ghosts That Haunt the South," in The Atlantic also. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/the-motionless-ghosts-that-haunt-the-south/526668/ In that article he says it is time to take the statues down.

He is mentioned as a "Richmond native."

The article "True History" is in response to the reaction he got from his "Ghosts" article.

Epps rejects the ridiculous claim that removing monuments is erasing history.

I post these two articles as a resource for when we start acting to bring down the Robert E. Lee monument and other Confederate monuments and face the usual excuses and rationalizations for them.

I plan on blogging these articles so that when have a full resource when we start our effort.

Kevin M. Levin talks down to Sarah Jones of the "New Republic" magazine.

Kevin M. Levin attempts to patronize Sarah Jones of the "New Republic." You can read the exchange here on Twitter if you are a member. I printed it out for my records.

https://twitter.com/KevinLevin/status/864241228333940737

In this conversation he is the expert talking down to Sarah Jones. He also uses his usual tactic avoiding debate on the issues by either questioning the competency of the individual or their right to debate the issue.

You really have to read the entire series this is one example. Not the capitalization of "WHY" and the expression "you would do well to consider."

Levin pulls out what he thinks will flatten Jones by asking whether she has been to Richmond. If Jones hasn't then she is some type of outside agitator. This is the theme of "Sweet Home Alabama" that Jones is an outsider.

Turns out that Sarah Jones is from Virginia and has been to Richmond many times.

Then it is more patronizing stuff.

Levin's patronizing of Sarah Jones is this article by Jones in New Republic.
https://newrepublic.com/minutes/142710/yes-tear-confederate-monuments

Levin blogs on this encounter.
http://cwmemory.com/2017/05/15/is-richmond-next/

Levin is bent out of shape that Sarah Jones doesn't think much of the efforts of the local historical societies and what cliques they make up and of which he is in good standing.

He can't comprehend that some figures in the larger national establishment are just coming out  and saying these statues need to go and really don't care what rationalizations or excuses or clever strategems the local historical cliques have come up with.

I wonder how long it is going to be before The Atlantic decides that Levin is retrograde.

"Atlantic" magazine has article that it is time for the Confederate monuments to come down

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/the-motionless-ghosts-that-haunt-the-south/526668/

What is interesting about this article is that the liberal establishment and neo-liberal establishment is deciding that the Confederate monuments need to go and are providing the space for voices against Confederate monuments to be heard. This is an important change from the past where these type of publications mostly didn't discuss Confederate monuments.

The old story was the Confederate flag hurt feelings of African Americans, but if the flag was gone, then everything was okay. You had to be a radical to be against Confederate monuments.

As one major journal of public opinion follows the next it will develop that they all will adopt a position that they are for the removal of Confederate monuments. Support for Confederate monuments will be confined to reactionary magazines and websites and support for Confederate monuments identified with reactionary opinion.

Arguments for contextualization will be seen for what they are, an excuse to retain monuments or just plan oddball.

Dallas is the city of boosterism and real estate development is its highest moral value. So as Confederate monuments start being removed elsewhere Dallas will increasingly look backward for having Confederate monuments in prominent locations.

Here is a quote from the article.

Those monuments, that reverence for the Lost Cause and its leaders, do lasting damage to all who live in their shadows. It’s no coincidence that Richmond was the ideological powerhouse of “massive resistance”—defiance of the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education—during the 1950s. That constitutional monstrosity flowed directly from neo-Confederate ideology.