Any statement in a discussion on human affairs that is absolute, should be scrutinized carefully. All interactions and most certainly a civil war as bloody as the US Civil War of 1861–1865 are incredibly complex and fraught with misinformation.
Many (but not all) Confederate monuments were erected for virtuous reasons by grieving families trying to make sense of a horrific bloodbath. Not every Union General was a freedom fighter, not every Confederate General was a slave master.
The rank and file soldiers were almost completely ignorant of the larger reasons for the war. I suspect that if both forces were volunteer only, very few boys from the north would have signed up only to free the black man in America. Even Lincoln tarried until 1863 to emancipate the slaves.
Similarly, Johnny Reb would have stayed home if the only reason for fighting was to keep the institution of slavery alive and well. Particularly after the realities of warfare with rifled muskets and cannon began to manifest themselves within the still Napoleonic tactics of the day.
However, conscription ruled the day and the nation suffered through its bloodiest war and emerged tattered, but while. Brilliant men on both sides worked hard at healing and the United States emerged more tightly bound together than before.
An important part of that healing was allowing the South to remember its loss on its own terms, with monuments to Southern heroes. The victorious union (Lincolns words) “let the south up easy”… and that allowed the nation to come back together stronger.
So in closing, I think revision of History without very careful consideration is a mistake. Certainly, allowing a mob to pull down a monument is unacceptable. We should consider each case and bow to the will of the local population, remembering the spirit of Lincolns guidance for the treatment of the vanquished south.
