The National Review has published a defense of Confederate monuments and the “timeless virtues” they represent from the “extremists on both sides” and particularly the America-hating Left. The author is Arthur Herman, who describes himself in the piece as “a scholar, a historian — a Pulitzer Prize finalist historian, and the New York Times–bestselling author of nine books”. In other words, he’s one of those esteemed Right-wing intellectuals. And judging by what he puts to paper here, it appears the Right’s intellectual leadership is the equivalent of Tea Partiers who’ve been taken off the street, dropped in front of a laptop and handed a thesaurus – it’s the same racist nonsense, but with a thin veneer of respectability.
It doesn’t help when he starts off saying things like …
Yet even with all these policemen in riot gear, no one could control the violence when extremists from the left and extremists from the right battled each other in the streets in Charlottesville […]
You’ll forgive me for questioning the worth of his credentials, given that his Pulitzer participation prize doesn’t preclude him from apparently missing the point that the conflict was less between typical Rightists and Leftists and rather between actual fucking Nazis and the people who oppose them. That so many “both sides” apologists (including the fucking President) try to pretend the two camps are on equal moral footing is, itself, a damning rebuke of their priorities.
Throughout his piece, Herman makes the argument that the monuments aren’t really about celebrating the Confederacy, but rather the honor and bravery of the Southern soldiers who fought for it. He even states that “they are monuments to timeless virtues, not to individuals”. Funny, I didn’t know that virtue had the face of Robert E. Lee, or Jefferson Davis, or anyone else who fought to tear the Founding Fathers’ country apart in a bid to continue kidnapping and enslaving human beings. Sure, they didn’t turn tail the moment they faced Union forces on the field, and they may have believed they were fighting for a righteous cause, but when you consider that this cause boiled down to the right to own and dehumanize other people, all that talk about “virtues” really doesn’t mean much.