Published in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, June 8, 1999:
"Editor, Times-Dispatch:
I opened my paper the other day to find the mural of General Robert E. Lee taken down at the site of the new canal project. The reason: Black residents felt offended. I for one am furious. I feel my heritage is being sacrificed to appease a few ill-educated individuals.
Robert E. Lee, along with many Confederate soldiers, was not a racist. They fought to protect their homes, their families, and their states' representation in Congress. With the Mississippi River set as a natural boundary to slavery, new states being admitted to the Union in the 1860s were predominantly free. This - not racism or a love of slavery - led to an imbalance of power that led to the secession of the Confederate states.
My ancestors were slaveholders in Mecklenburg County. My great-great-grandfather, along with several of his brothers and cousins, went to war to protect their beliefs. I do not agree with the institution of slavery. However, I can respect my ancestors for standing up for what they believed in, just as I can respect El-Amin for his views. However, why should the mural come down to please his desires but not stay up to please mine?
I do not make a practice of suppressing the African-Americas' heritage; why suppress mine? Perhaps put up a mural to represent black Civil War history, as well as Lee?
My heritage is equally important. If Lee does not go back up on that wall I will never spend one dime at the canal, and that is a promise.
Kevin Lett"
"Editor, Times-Dispatch:
I opened my paper the other day to find the mural of General Robert E. Lee taken down at the site of the new canal project. The reason: Black residents felt offended. I for one am furious. I feel my heritage is being sacrificed to appease a few ill-educated individuals.
Robert E. Lee, along with many Confederate soldiers, was not a racist. They fought to protect their homes, their families, and their states' representation in Congress. With the Mississippi River set as a natural boundary to slavery, new states being admitted to the Union in the 1860s were predominantly free. This - not racism or a love of slavery - led to an imbalance of power that led to the secession of the Confederate states.
My ancestors were slaveholders in Mecklenburg County. My great-great-grandfather, along with several of his brothers and cousins, went to war to protect their beliefs. I do not agree with the institution of slavery. However, I can respect my ancestors for standing up for what they believed in, just as I can respect El-Amin for his views. However, why should the mural come down to please his desires but not stay up to please mine?
I do not make a practice of suppressing the African-Americas' heritage; why suppress mine? Perhaps put up a mural to represent black Civil War history, as well as Lee?
My heritage is equally important. If Lee does not go back up on that wall I will never spend one dime at the canal, and that is a promise.
Kevin Lett"
1 comment:
You can respect your ancestors for standing up for the institution of slavery for their own economic benefit? I had ancestors on both sides of the war. But this balance of power you speak of was the balance of economic power or more to the point, the protection of the means to economic power by enslaving other human beings. It is shameful that the US held out so long before outlawing slavery and it is pitiful that it had to be ended by a terrible war.
Post a Comment