Advertisement
4K Shares
Share

Pensacola Mayor Ashton Hayward on Wednesday called for the removal of a Confederate statue at the city’s Lee Square, becoming the latest Southern mayor to support the removal of such monuments.

Hayward made the comments in a radio interview with Andrew McKay of NewsRadio 1620.

Despite only having been in Confederate hands for about 16 months, Pensacola wasn’t immune to a wave of Confederate revisionism which swept the South after Reconstruction ended and during which monuments romanticizing the war were built in hundreds of cities. In 1889, the city renamed Florida Square, overlooking downtown Pensacola on North Hill, after Confederate general Robert E. Lee, and in 1891, a 50-foot Confederate monument was erected in the center of the park.

The monument is dedicated to Confederate president Jefferson Davis, Pensacolian Confederate veterans Stephen R. Mallory and Edward Aylesworth Perry, and “the Uncrowned Heroes of the Southern Confederacy.” The granite column is topped with a statue of a generic Confederate soldier, a copy of a similar monument erected in 1889 in Alexandria, Va.

“Pensacola has a rich and diverse history and it is important to honor our history,” Hayward said in a statement. “We will continue to promote inclusivity, but as you see across the nation, these Confederate monuments are becoming increasingly divisive.”

Detail of Pensacola’s Confederate monument at Lee Square. (Drew Buchanan/The Pulse)

Hayward added, “We are currently examining this monument’s history and purpose. We are also weighing our options as it relates to the law and discussing how to move forward. Mayor Hayward would like to see the monument in a better context that promotes inclusivity, but there is a process and laws that we need to abide by.”

In 2015, Hayward removed the Confederate flag from the city’s “Five Flags” displays at City Hall, the foot of the Pensacola Bay Bridge, and the downtown post office, replacing it with the Florida state flag.

In pursuing the monument’s removal, it’s unclear whether or not Hayward is bound by a city council policy passed in 2000 — before the city changed to a mayor-council form of government in 2010 — which calls for city council approval before historical monuments or markers can be removed.

The statue atop Pensacola’s Confederate monument at Lee Square is a copy of a statue in Alexandria, Va. (Special to The Pulse)

At least two city council members have voiced their support for Hayward’s plan.

“My thoughts are closely aligned with those that were expressed by New Orleans’ mayor, Mayor Mitch Landrieu, when he delivered an address on the removal of the city’s Confederate monuments in May of this year,” City Council President Brian Spencer said Wednesday. “I think his speech awakened the City of New Orleans, and the nation for that matter, to the distinction between reverence and remembrance for public monuments. For me, this expands the question from a simple ‘should we remove or not remove’ to one where we must ask ourselves if we are proud or ashamed of our monuments that revere intolerable actions of our past.”

“I want to join Mayor Hayward in condemning white supremacists, neo-Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan, and all other hate groups,” said Councilman Larry B. Johnson in a statement. “They are un-American and stand in opposition to the ideals upon which this country was founded. For many, Pensacola’s Confederate monument is a symbol of that hate and of a shameful period in our city’s past. I do not believe that the monument belongs in a public park overlooking our downtown. I absolutely support the mayor in his plans to remove the monument and hope that it can be moved to a museum or other appropriate location where it can be placed in the proper context.”

Pensacola’s Confederate monument in Lee Square overlooks downtown from North Hill. (Drew Buchanan/The Pulse)

Should Hayward move forward with plans to remove the monument, Pensacola would become just the latest in a wave of Southern cities which have removed similar monuments in recent years. The University of Texas at Austin removed a statue of Jefferson Davis in 2015, and officials in Lousiville, Ky. removed a Confederate monument late last year. Earlier this year, New Orleans became the largest Southern city to date to remove Confederate monuments when four statues were removed following a lengthy court battle.

Additional monuments have come down in the wake of a white supremacist terrorist attack in Charlottesville, Va. last weekend. Protestors on Monday toppled a Confederate monument in Durham, N.C., while monument in Baltimore, Md., Gainesville, Fla., and St. Petersburg, Fla. were removed this week on orders from city leaders. In recent days, mayors of other Southern cities, including Lexington, Ky. and Birmingham, Ala. have announced plans to pursue removal of Confederate monuments in their cities.

Drew Buchanan
Drew Buchanan
Publisher and Senior Editor

Drew Buchanan is a founding partner of The Pulse who currently serves as publisher and senior editor.

Related Posts

46 Responses

    • Rick Smith Reply

      I was born and raised in Pensacola and I don’t think we should be tearing these monuments down just because we don’t like our history. I think maybe we should be erecting a new monument near by so you can see where we stand now that way you have a sense of how we have grown as a city.

      • Ty Reply

        I agree, but my main point is that it’s a part of history good or bad. I dislike seeing things destroyed because people’s feelings are hurt it’s ridiculous no matter the reason. It’s AMERICAN history it’s not great but it’s a part of what made this country what it is. I’m appalled to hear citizens not care for personal reasons not facts.

    • John Brown Reply

      White Slaves, African Slave Traders, and the Hidden History of Slavery

      Black slave owners in the United States

      Little has been published regarding those Blacks who owned Black slaves in the USA, however, more research is bringing this little-known subject to light.

      Philip Burnham, in the article “Selling Poor Steven” published in the February/March 1993 issue of American Heritage, found that in the US Census of 1830 there were 3,775 free blacks who owned 12,740 black slaves.[32] Burnham wrote about the slave John Casor, who was denied his freedom by Black slave owner Anthony Johnson.
      “In the 1640s John Casor was brought from Africa to America, where he toiled as a servant for a Virginia landowner. In 1654 Casor filed a complaint in Northampton County Court, claiming that his master, Anthony Johnson, had unjustly extended the terms of his indenture with the intention of keeping Casor his slave for life. Johnson, insisting he knew nothing of any indenture, fought hard to retain what he regarded as his personal property. After much wrangling, on March 8, 1655, the court ruled that “the said John Casor Negro shall forthwith be returned unto the service of his master Anthony Johnson,” consigning him to a bitter lifetime of bondage. Given the vulnerable legal status of servants – black and white – in colonial America, the decision was not surprising But the documents reveal one additional fact of interest: Anthony Johnson, like his chattel Casor, was black….”[33]
      Carter G. Woodson, whose grandparents and father had been slaves, was one of the first to write about the Black slave owners. In Free Negro Owners of Slaves in the United States in 1830 (published in 1924) Woodson gives the names and number of slaves owned by free blacks counted in the U. S. Census of 1830, listing them by name and the number of slaves owned.[34]
      Michael P. Tremoglie, in “The Black Roots of Slavery” also noted the issue of Black slave owners.
      “There were many free blacks in the American colonies. They were enfranchised and as early as 1641, Mathias De Sousa, were elected to legislatures. These free blacks owned slaves – some for philanthropic reasons, as Carter G. Woodson suggests. However as John Hope Franklin wrote, “…free Negroes had a real economic interest in the institution of slavery and held slaves in order to improve their economic status.”

      The census of 1830 lists 965 free black slave owners in Louisiana, owning 4,206 slaves. The state of South Carolina, lists 464 free blacks owning 2,715 slaves. How ironic it is that so many blacks owned so many slaves in South Carolina. Yet, no one seemed to mention this during the flag controversy.

      Some blacks served in the Confederate army, which is another omission in our popular culture. The movie Glory did not happen to mention that blacks served in the Confederate army. It did give the impression that the black soldiers in the 54th Massachusetts were former slaves – which was not true.”[35]
      Harry Koger, in Black Slave Owners. Free Black Slave Masters in South Carolina, reported on the success of Black women in Charleston.
      “By 1860, so many Black women in Charleston had inherited or been given slaves and other property by white men, and used their property to start successful businesses, that they owned 70% of the Black owned slaves in the city.”[36]
      From Kroger’s work, it is noted that free Black slave owners resided in states as north as New York and as far south as Florida, extending westward into Kentucky, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Missouri. According to the federal census of 1830, free blacks owned more than 10,000 slaves in Louisiana, Maryland, South Carolina, and Virginia. The majority of black slave owners lived in Louisiana and planted sugar cane.[37]

      John Hope Franklin and Loren Schweninger, in Runaway Slaves: Rebels on the Plantation, revealed that conditions under Black masters could be such that slaves would run away.
      “The largest black slaveholder in the South, John Carruthers Stanly of North Carolina, faced a number of problems in the 1820s in dealing with a slave labor force on his three turpentine plantations in Craven County. With a total of 163 slaves, Stanly was a harsh, profit-minded taskmaster, and his field hands would run away. Stanley dealt with this through his two white overseers and with a spy network that included a few trusted slaves. Brister, his slave barber in New Bern, was responsible for relaying to his owner rumors of planned escapes …Nor did Stanly have any pangs of conscience about selling children away from their parents or holding free blacks in bondage.”

      “Free black slave owners who lived in urban areas – Charleston, Savannah, Mobile, Natchez, and New Orleans – also faced difficulties with their slave property. Free mulatto barber William Johnson of Natchez was not certain what had happened to his recently purchased slave, Walker, when he disappeared in 1835. He had either been stolen or had run away to Kentucky to rejoin his wife. When on 4 July 1833, authorities in Ascension Parish, Louisiana, jailed the twelve- or fourteen-year-old black boy named Isaac taken off the steamer Watchman, he admitted he was owned by a ‘free woman of color in New Orleans named Jane’.”[38]
      In “Dixie’s Censored Subject: Black Slaveowners”, published in The Barnes Review, Robert M. Grooms furnished several examples of Black slave owners in the USA.
      “In the rare instances when the ownership of slaves by free Negroes is acknowledged in the history books, justification centers on the claim that black slave masters were simply individuals who purchased the freedom of a spouse or child from a white slaveholder and had been unable to legally manumit them. Although this did indeed happen at times, it is a misrepresentation of the majority of instances, one which is debunked by records of the period on blacks who owned slaves. These include individuals such as Justus Angel and Mistress L. Horry, of Colleton District, South Carolina, who each owned 84 slaves in 1830. In fact, in 1830 a fourth of the free Negro slave masters in South Carolina owned 10 or more slaves; eight owning 30 or more.

      … The majority of slaveholders, white and black, owned only one to five slaves. More often than not, and contrary to a century and a half of bullwhips-on-tortured-backs propaganda, black and white masters worked and ate alongside their charges; be it in house, field or workshop. The few individuals who owned 50 or more slaves were confined to the top one percent, and have been defined as slave magnates.

      In 1860 there were at least six Negroes in Louisiana who owned 65 or more slaves The largest number, 152 slaves, were owned by the widow C. Richards and her son P.C. Richards, who owned a large sugar cane plantation. Another Negro slave magnate in Louisiana, with over 100 slaves, was Antoine Dubuclet, a sugar planter whose estate was valued at (in 1860 dollars) $264,000 (3). That year, the mean wealth of southern white men was $3,978 (4).

      Interestingly, considering today’s accounts of life under slavery, authors Johnson and Roak report instances where free Negroes petitioned to be allowed to become slaves; this because they were unable to support themselves.

      … [regarding Black ex-slave William Ellison] As with the slaves of his white counterparts, occasionally Ellison’s slaves ran away. The historians of Sumter District reported that from time to time Ellison advertised for the return of his runaways. On at least one occasion Ellison hired the services of a slave catcher. According to an account by Robert N. Andrews, a white man who had purchased a small hotel in Stateburg in the 1820s, Ellison hired him to run down “a valuable slave. Andrews caught the slave in Belleville, Virginia. He stated: “I was paid on returning home $77.50 and $74 for expenses.

      …Following in their father’s footsteps, the Ellison family actively supported the Confederacy throughout the war. They converted nearly their entire plantation to the production of corn, fodder, bacon, corn shucks and cotton for the Confederate armies. They paid $5,000 in taxes during the war. They also invested more than $9,000 in Confederate bonds, treasury notes and certificates in addition to the Confederate currency they held.”[39]
      As an interesting sideline to Black slave owners in the South of the USA, is that there were also an estimated 65,000 Southern blacks in the Confederate military, including over 13,000 who fought against the North in battle.[40]

      A well-known and favourably reviewed novel, The Known World, by Black author Edward P. Jones, has tackled the issue of Black-owned slaves, much to the surprise of those readers who had never heard of Black slave owners.[41] However, the interesting story of Blacks who owned slaves is largely ignored by the media and educators.

      White Slaves, African Slave Traders, and the Hidden History of Slavery

  2. Sebastian Reply

    Given the history of our beloved city i dont think that it is a aise decision to remove that statue. You are going to have a lot of people angry for removing part of their history and blindly jumping on the band wagon when you should put it to vote.

  3. James Shafer Reply

    Moving historical monuments, just to appease some, does not make history go away. Where have these people, ones who want flags and monuments torn down, been over the past 100 years?
    I know, it has become popular lately to say, “That’s offensive”. Well folks, like it or not, slavery was a part of this nations history. Hiding it will not change the fact that it had happened.
    Something else, if you know your history, slavery was not the reason for why the Civil War started, it was part, but not the main reason.
    I am willing to bet, Anyone, who is offended by a historical flag or monument, Can Not tell me who their ancestors were, the ones who lived during that era.
    I realize I may have opened a can of gas, HYPOTHETICALLY!!, and with this next comment I am striking the match, HYPOTHETICALLY!!. For those of you who are So Offended by the past…..
    …….Why haven’t you changed your last name yet? For those who are puzzled by that question, I will be happy to clarify.
    Slaves were given the “last name” of the family/owner who owned them….So…..if you had an ancestor, who was a slave, And you have their last name, you should be offended by that fact as well, and go get your last name changed.

  4. Glen E Padgett Reply

    How about back to 1700s, that far enough back for you. Also for your information I have black friends that bear my name. Am I proud that somewhere along the way my family saw fit to own a person, hell know and further more I don’t need a bigots monument to remind me of our past. I saw integration take place in rural Alabama and the ugly response by our upstanding community leaders. Taking down the monuments want change history but at least it will be step forward and remove the constant visual reminder of just how sadistic our fellow man was and still is.

  5. Robert Reply

    To the pulse
    Why aren’t there any monuments to other U.S, vets downtown?
    If this s really about history?

    • Valerie Reply

      WOW…are you unaware of The Wall South??? That entire park is dedicated to our vet’s

  6. MarWes Reply

    What these fanatics don’t understand is that these statues have been the symbols of national reconciliation, stressing the fact that Americans fought on both sides. Even Abraham Lincoln, when he heard about the capitulation of the South, ordered a military band to play “Dixie”. Nowadays, though, America is divided again, this time by a fever of anti-white hatred.

    • Eduardo Suave Reply

      Respectfully, that is historically inaccurate. These statues were erected not in the spirit of “national reconciliation,” but rather as part of a 1890s-1920s campaign, largely by the United Daughters of the Confederacy, to glorify and romanticize the so-called Lost Cause. However, there is no glory or romance in a cause dedicated to preserving the subjugation of human beings in slavery. It is deserving of no more glory than the Third Reich. It is a stain on the American soul. And it is time to take the stain out and move forward.

  7. Bobby Reply

    You cannot erase history by removing what we might find offensive. Instead of destroying our history why don’t we build new monuments to show our progression?

  8. Mark Reply

    I understand all points but respectfully disagree with Sebtastian and James. Here’s a question, tell me what separates the swastik nazi flag and the confederate? Both represent “heritage”, both have the blood of warfare and both oppressed a large group of people with force. The same way the Jewish view the swastik flag and its symbol, related statues and history is exactly how African Americans view the confederate flag and the supporting monuments such as statues. It is correct, we can’t erase the history of our country, but why must we be reminded of it? To this point why are we glorying those soldiers who faught on the wrong side of freedom and equality. James for the record, the civil war was 100% about slavery. The south not wanting to abolish slavery because of the economic impact it had and not wanting to confirm with the unions laws that would prohibit. Thus, the succession and eventually war. Also FYI all blacks last names do not come from slave owners as all blacks were not slaves. Many blacks were free northerners. Understand history before speaking on it.

    • DUSTIN Reply

      “My policy sought only to collect the Revenue (a 40 percent federal sales tax on imports to Southern States under the Morrill Tariff Act of 1861).” reads paragraph 5 of Lincoln’s First Message to the U.S. Congress, penned July 4, 1861.

      “I have no purpose, directly or in-directly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so,” Lincoln said it his first inaugural on March 4 of the same year.

      ——

      0% about Slavery. Nice try rewriting history.

  9. kittyfs Reply

    How is it appropriate to shove the shameful history of slavery in every black’s face with each memorial, celebrating it?

  10. George Reply

    Lets just erase the day hayward was elected.. its in the past, tomorrow is another day..

  11. Jason McKnight Reply

    Pretty simple if you do not like the area you live because of the environment move. Quit wearing your emotions on your sleeves. Bring it to a vote and majority wins. If they gotta go then the group that respects the statues buy some land near a high traffic area and place them there. I feel this discussion is really only important to the select few and not mostly hard working productive citizens. I’m sure we should be discussing roadways and storm drains for our city streets. Get to work mayor.

  12. Jimmy Reply

    I am always suspicious of people who want to erase or change history. Especially when they attack free speech at every turn. Better dead than red. Let’s get real folks! This is 100% about Trump. There was plenty of time during Obama’s 8 years to tear down all the monuments. Mayor Zoolander, oops, I mean Mayor Ashton Hayward has had plenty of time to fight against “racism” since becoming mayor, but he spent his time turning parking spaces backwards instead. Trump derangement syndrome is out of control. There are only two genders people. Get on your knees and beg God for mercy. You’re going to need it.

  13. Angie Reply

    I think Glen and Mark had wonderful points. It is important to not forget our history but we also need to understand that these monuments carry incredible weight in blood. Removing them does not change history but it does show that we aren’t honoring an age where our fellow man was so violently persecuted.

    So here’s my proposition: Take them down, put them in a museum. The Wentworth is right there. Let them be seen in that light so that we may learn of their error. Replace the statues with true American heroes we can look up to. How about our fallen Blue Angel pilots? Lets put what we’re proud of on display in our city.

    • Jimmy Reply

      I think Angie has wonderful points. Take it down and put it in TT Wentworth. Replace it with a statue of Trump! He is undeniably a true American hero that we can all look up to!

  14. KC Reply

    Since we are taking down all the statues let’s not forget the bust of Martin Luther King on Palafox. Yes it’s a part of history but so are the other monuments that are being removed. I am sure it offends someone out there so to be fair to all it needs to go too.

  15. Ludicrous Reply

    Hawyard must have forgotten where he lives; I guess he wants an early retirement.

  16. Kerrie Kanda Reply

    I love that so many are having these discussions, but I noticed even in the news and NPR, no one is mentioning the fact, that both the Confederate & Union & many others wiped out at least ten million Native Americans that had been here for thousands of years. The very beginnings of the US is literally based on genocide and slavery…Makes me very sad, our entire country has forgotten about the First Nations People..And it was the Navajo Codetalkers in WWII, that saved our country…I just had to add that for our Blessed Original Americans. Thank you!

  17. Yvonne T Reply

    I personally believe that Mayor Hayward is doing great things for Pensacola, and is fulfilling most of the goals he set forth in his pre-election “Candidate Biography and Questionnaire,” which can be found here: http://www.lwvpba.org/voterinfo/City%20of%20Pensacola%20Mayor%20Hayward.pdf

    I believe Mayor Hayward to be an intelligent, open-minded, highly competent, progressive and publicly accessible Administrator.

    I am extremely proud of living in this area, and am happy that he came forward to denounce the evil, hate-filled and illegal events of the recent past. The idea to view the issue from every angle, and to place it in its proper context, demonstrates maturity, restraint and above all, respect for all parties involved. I believe his possible solution to relocate the Confederate monuments within our city…which only serve to divide people, not unite them…to a museum is a fair solution and provides the monument(s) its/their rightful place in America’s history, as ugly as that history may be.

    To listen to the Mayor’s latest podcast: http://podcast.newsradio1620.com/index.php/post/4612/Ashton_Hayward_-_Mayor_of_Pensacola

  18. Franklin Reply

    Hey Kerre I know you are up on your history so this will not be a surprise to you but the Native Americans had slaves.

    The cherokees during the walk of tears took their slaves with them.

    The Native American fought each other for their land and possesssions. The winning tribe took the women for themselves, turn the children into their tribe and used the men as slaves.

    Just saying!

  19. Venetta Schang Reply

    Has anyone ever stopped at the statue and been close enough to see how tall it actually is? It is huge. Several have suggested taking it to the Wentworth museum. I don’t think even with the multi stories of the museum that it would fit height-wise into their present building not to mention the cost of moving and somehow getting into the building. It is made of solid granite. Have no idea of the total weight, but massive in weight. I have lived in this area my whole life – 59 years – and until a couple of years ago when I decided to stop on a whim – had no idea what the memorial was even for. Not until I was next to it and could actually read the info on all 4 sides did I know it was a CSA memorial. Two of the people it is dedicated to were native to Pensacola. One was the CSA secretary of the Navy. It was erected and dedicated in 1891, but funds were raised for 10 years starting in 1881 from private contributions. A few months before the deadline they held several fundraisers of all types in Pensacola to finish the needed funding. My stop provided quite a history lesson that I never got from my history books in school !

  20. Mark Reply

    Dustin you are correct in regards to Lincolns address of 1861. It was not slavery he was seeking to interfere with as it was taxes. If you read my comment I mentioned how much of an economic impact slavery had. The United States “union” wanted an indirect part of this through taxes. The south was not willing to compromise on this. It was that point that the union proceeded to seek abolishing since they could not have a portion of the pie. So to say the civil war had nothing to do with slavery is highly inaccurate. Not sure how long it took you to do your research before commenting, but look a bit deeper. Not trying to re write history, I just educate myself on factual content. I also saw some comments that had an eye for an eye complex in removing MLK statues since civil war “heros” are being discussed for removal. Please, tell me how a civil rights activist that faught non violently for peace and equality compares to those who faught to keep the establishment of slavery?

  21. Dana Reply

    People are saying you can’t erase history but the reaility is that the history of these events is not over yet. You might say this marks a stage in the war but it’s very definitely not over.

  24. Jaddy Baddy Reply

    No one agrees with these left handed Nazis more
    than Al Qaeda, the Taliban and ISIS. The good
    news is: you can bring the troops home, because
    ISIS has won.

  25. Paul Tate Reply

    I am of Japanese descent and I guess I should be offended by any statue of President Roosevelt, who put thousands of Japanese-Americans in internment camps during WWII. The gay community should demand removal of the bust of Martin Luther King because he condemned the act of homosexualty (“love the sinner, hate the sin”). Where does this silliness end? I readily acknowledge the flaws in our history, but to remove statues and monuments is very “ISIS and NAZI like”. I would suggest we put up new monuments and statues of today’s heroes (future generations would probably find fault with them and this whole process would probably be repeated). Removing them would not improve race relations one bit! We are the greatest nation on earth, and we ALL need to work together to keep it great. Our political leaders should not allow themselves to be held hostage by a few thugs. Thank God we have a President that is not afraid to speak his mind on this issue – and I hope everyone takes notice that he left this issue up to the States (ie.-he’s not over stepping his bounds). Thankyou

    Paul Tate

  26. Mark Reply

    Paul, very hypocritical to suggest MLK statue should be removed off the basis of disagreeing with homosexuality (although in the Bible) and support a president who just put a military ban on those individuals who are apart of this community. Speaking your find is not the true sign of a great leader.

    • Paul Tate Reply

      Mark, I appreciate your response, but the removal of the MLK bust is not the point. I was trying to show the ridiculouseness of this whole “statue removing” issue. EVERYONE is offended by some statue, monument, park name, etc.. If we were to remove statues and monuments based on “hurt feelings”, we wouldn’t have any.

  27. Lenny Collins Reply

    IF YOU JUST HAVE TO MOVE IT THERE IS AN IDEAL RESTING PLACE WHERE HE CAN BE WITH HIS FALLEN TROOPS AT THE CIVIL WAR CEMETERY DOWNTOWN PENSACOLA WHICH HAS ALREADY OFFERED A HOME FOR THE MONUMENT.

  28. Harold Reply

    I apologize in advance about the length of this post. Some people will not read it because it is long. Some will not read it because they really do not care. I care enough to write it and hope you care enough to read it.

    The Confederate monument at Lee Square, dedicated to our Confederate dead, should NOT come down. Nor should any other Confederate monuments and memorials come down anywhere in Pensacola, in Florida and other states. They are a part of our city, county and country history and a part of the Southern heritage. Confederate soldiers were Americans just as were Union soldiers.

    For most Americans today, this issue is not about race or slavery, but history, heritage and culture – things that should be preserved for all races/cultures. Sadly, there are those who make it about hate. Hate and violence spewed by groups such as white supremacists, the KKK, neo-Nazis, and others are unacceptable in our community, state and country and must not be tolerated. However, this is not a one way avenue. There are hate groups in the black community as well; and, the hate and violence they bring to the table is also unacceptable and must not be tolerated. It may be better for all if our politicians in Washington criminalized ALL hate groups and make them illegal. Do not even give such people an opportunity to act out. Peaceful protests by non-hate groups are acceptable. Violent “protests” and rioting by anyone are criminal and all participants should always be arrested and prosecuted. It matters not who they are and what their race, color, sex, religion, political ideology and so forth is.

    Yes, it is true – there are white racists in this country and there are also black racists in this country. Racism by anyone, regardless of color, is wrong. Politicians, however, seem to only see one side of this. If they try to see the other side, they get quickly labeled “racist”. Some will likely label me “racist” just for writing this. Those who know me, black and white, know that I am far from that. I am, however, a patriotic American and I believe in one America for all of us.

    Politicians – town, city, county, state and federal – should be about community and country and preserving their history/heritage/cultures for all. They should strive to make life better for ALL Americans, regardless of race, color, religious creed, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, age, genetic information, military service, or disability, etc. That’s their job, duty and responsibility. They represent, or at least they should, all citizens. They should not cave in to any group that wants to destroy, because of hate, another group’s history/heritage.

    Mayor Ashton Hayward has condemned white supremacists, neo-Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan, and all other hate groups. He is right to do so – there is no place in our society for such groups. He and others, however, should not be ignorant of the fact that there are also black hate groups; and, he should also publicly condemn those. No hate group, regardless of race, religion or political ideology should be tolerated by society.

    Councilman Larry B. Johnson said that he supports Mayor Hayward’s condemnation of hate groups and said that, “They are un-American and stand in opposition to the ideals upon which this country was founded.” Does he include black hate groups in that statement or does he mean that only white hate groups are un-American?

    Mayor Ashton Hayward said that “Pensacola has a rich and diverse history and it is important to honor our history.” I agree with that. We do have a diverse history, some bad and some good. Like it or not, it is all part of our history and should be honored as such. Remember it, learn from it, do not repeat the bad, but do not remove anything. Erasing history does not change the past.

    Mayor Ashton Hayward also said, “We will continue to promote inclusivity, but as you see across the nation, these Confederate monuments are becoming increasingly divisive.” Yes, they are becoming divisive because of hate groups on both sides and because of politicians who do not have the courage or the will to stand up to those hate groups and to listen to what the majority of the people want, which is to leave the monuments alone. How can you, Mr. Mayor, promote inclusivity by removing the monuments? If you want inclusivity, where are the monuments to women or to people with disabilities, for example? Speaking of that, why are some monuments not already accessible to the disabled? Where is their inclusivity?

    Mayor Ashton Hayward is wrong about removing the Confederate monument. He is wrong about removing the Confederate flag. He wants to change Pensacola’s and Escambia County’s history/heritage. And he wants to do it for all the wrong reasons. Perhaps he is only interested in votes and appeasement. He may believe that leaving such things in place is divisive because some view them with hate and want them removed. Is he not considering that there are many others who see them as a part of our community’s history/heritage and do not want them removed? Removing them will be no less divisive.

    For the record, I believe that slavery was and still is wrong and should never be allowed, even though it still exists today in many parts of the world. What is the United Nations doing to stop that? Human bondage still exists in the USA, and it knows no race or color boundary. What are the politicians doing to stop that?

    So it would appear that the Confederate flag, as well as Confederate monuments, should be removed because they remind some people, black and white, about slavery. If that is the case, and Mayor Hayward and other politicians support that idea, then consider this. It was not the United States or the Confederate States that introduced slavery into the Americas. That was done long before the USA existed. British, French and Spanish colonies in the Americas used African slaves. So, I suppose that the British, French and Spanish flags should also be removed. I guess Pensacola is really the City of One Flag – right, Mayor Hayward?

    Also, slaves were used to aid in the production of such crops as tobacco and cotton. So, I suppose that those items remind some of slavery and both tobacco and cotton products should be banned – right Mayor Hayward?

    Also, Africans bear some responsibility themselves: some African societies had long had their own slaves, and they cooperated with the Europeans to sell other Africans into slavery. Slave trade started in Africa and was aided by Africans, so Africa should be banned – right Mayor Hayward?

    As for the Confederate soldiers who fought during the Civil War, the vast majority of them never owned slaves. A few, wealthy Confederates did, as did some in the Union. Since some in the Union were slave owners, maybe even the national flag should be removed – right Mayor Hayward? Pensacola – the City of no flag?

    When does it all end? What else needs to be removed so that we can all forget our country’s history? What else has to happen to appease all who see themselves as victims even though slavery ended more than 150 years ago? All of this negativity is counterproductive. That energy would be better spent dealing with the present and working hard to make things better today and for a brighter future for everyone – all citizens.

    Councilmen Larry Johnson and Gerald Wingate are also wrong. They say that for many the Confederate monument is a symbol of hate and must come down. Perhaps it is for them, but they ignore the masses that do not see it as a symbol of hate and the fact that those who want it to come down say so with hate in their hearts. What gives the Mayor and these Councilmen the right to decide that one group is more important than another and that hate outweighs historical/heritage importance?

    If all the Confederate flags, monuments, memorials, etc. are removed across the country…if everything associated with the Confederacy is removed from our history…if that part of Southern heritage is removed…then what? Will all African-American flags, symbols, monuments and so forth also be removed? If not, why not? What about Hispanic cultures, Native American cultures, Asian cultures and others? How can all the history/heritage be removed from any one culture and not from all cultures? All or none.

    What is going on in this country today? What are our politicians thinking? What are our peoples thinking – all of us? Why can’t we collectively just let go of the fruitless hatred and just get along? I am an American citizen and am proud of that in spite of the craziness I see around the country every day. Why can’t we all just be Americans, be proud of who we are, call ourselves “American”, and work together to make our communities and our lives better for everyone?

    If we simply do not want to do that…if we simply cannot do that…then why don’t we all just go back to wherever our ancestors came from and give the land back to the Native Americans? We are dooming our country anyway if we do not change for the better and become united as Americans.

    I respectfully ask that the leaders of Pensacola, as well as all good citizens, stop this nonsense. Do not remove any historical/heritage monuments, memorials, flags and so forth. Leave them in place. Work together to educate all to not repeat past atrocities. Our young, as well as our adults, need to be aware of the past but to not dwell in it, to recognize that some things were bad and we should not allow them to happen again. Bad things happened to our ancestors, black, white, Native American and others. Many were victims. None are here today, but we are. We should all work together to make things better for our communities, ourselves and our families. Focus on now. Make things better moving forward. Trying to erase/remove part of any culture’s history/heritage is wrong. Don’t do it. Don’t let hatred from either side influence such actions.

    • Paul Tate Reply

      My sentiments exactly! This post is definitely worth reading and I hope everyone on both sides of this issue will read this.

  29. Lewis Fulk Reply

    The Antiquities Act” of 1906, (Pub.L. 59–209, 34 Stat. 225, 54 U.S.C. § 320301–320303), passed by the United States Congress and signed into law by Theodore Roosevelt on June 8, 1906 to PROTECT ALL AMERICAN MONUMENTS IN PERPETUITY.
    So seems like a lot of people want to defy the Federal Law that protects ALL Monuments!!!! I think someone should file a lawsuit against those who are ordering for these to be removed…PLEASE COPY AND PASTE SHARE EVERYWHERE

  30. Mark Reply

    Paul, I understand your point and may I add a valid one. I also would like to tip my hat to everyone in this forum who shares different opinions but have all shared them respectfully. I sorry though, I just find it humorous when some throws out “southern heritage” and backs it up with saying support of the confederate monuments and flags don’t represent hate. Of course it does. That whole basis of the union army was to fight to keep the slavery of a whole race in session. Germans don’t wave s nazi flag and called “heritage” anyone with a brain knows what it represents. In all of the education you were providing which I agree was valid, did you mention, the confederate army semi training slaves forcefully to fight on the front line because they would die first? Is that not hate? Rape, lynching, removal of bodily parts, brutally torture mentally and physically. All this was done under the waving of the confederate flag. Why would blacks not associate this with a symbol of hate? And years later people defend this as heritage? I know this unltimately won’t make wave with most of you. I get it, and I finally realize the area I’m in. Pensacola is a very racist and devided city. Nothing like the rest of Florida. Many of you have had very limited to no interaction with a black so can only resort to perspective from research. None of this is to insult I just hope someday people step outside their comfort zone to think about and see the world a different way.

  31. Mike Reply

    Removing confederate monuments is about cultural purge of the South which is something historically associated with tyrannical regimes and unworthy of a free nation. Let’s face the facts that it’s a poor representation of negative history against the United States to keep people in slavery. In today’s society what happen to respect and tolerance of human being? Where is the beauty in millions of human lives being destroyed by the underlying cause of hatred for a symbol of oppression? Symbols meant to intimidate black people and remind them of their rightful place. I’m wondering if the American populations can get behind the idea of dismantling objects meant to terrorize, while it is not meant to ease history.

  32. Boss Hog Reply

    Seems to me these people want to erase WHITE history and The white population from history and will scream with rage until they get what they want.In the left’s eyes it is ok for Democratic Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal to say what she did but if a white person would say they would like to see her assassinated they would be a racist, what is she?

  33. Mark Reply

    Boss Hog, Its a bit unclear what you’re referring to when you say white history, considering the initial topic of this forum was about the civil war that included white and black. Is that what people mean when they hide behind the term “southern heritage “? Hey I’m an African American and I can say for me in no way am I trying to remove white history or black history. Why, because it’s all American history. I do think it’s time for many to realize that the confederate was on the wrong side of the battle in the fight for humanity and equal rights. If your brother, sister, mother, grandmother etc were in -slaved, raped, killed and treated like less than half a human, would you want to see those that were responsible glorified as if they are American heroes?? Honestly I could care less about political stance, liberals and conservatives alike. There are values I have and agree with on both sides. Political party IMO is set for cowards who are to afraid to stand on what they feel so they hide behind a cover of mass agenda pushed rather right or wrong. FYI there are many areas of white history that I fully support and glad we as a country recognize just like black, Latino, Asian and Indian history.

  34. DON Reply

    I an retired from the United States Army. My father retired from the United States Air Force. We both love our country and we both love the state of Florida. If you are looking at the average soldier in the War between the States there were very few slave holders, The plantation owners funded the war but sent the soldiers from working families. If you are from Pensacola High School you support your school when they play Washington High School. Does this make you a Tiger bigot? If Florida were to separate from the United States today, how many of us would move to Alabama or Georgia? How many of us would elect to stay in Florida? The Confederate soldiers were in support of their state as the states were much more independent in those days and the people put their faith in the state over a national government. You should never blame the average soldier in a war. There are always exceptions such as the SS soldiers in WWII but the average soldier in the Wehrmacht was supporting Germany and his town. The soldier depicted upon the Lee Square Memorial is just a depiction of a local son. He was not fighting to protect slavery. He was fighting to protect a little shack on Palafox Street. Let us look at this from all angles. If the statue goes away, so be it. If the statue stays, so be it. I will still be me. I will still go to work each day. I will still pay my bills. I will still love the United States of America and the state of Florida. I will still love all of you.

  35. Doug Reply

    The Civil War was fought over MONEY. The Morrill Tariff Act of 1860 is what did it. Learn your history!

Comments

4K Shares
Share
Tweet
X