Last month Governor Nathan Deal signed an order to have a statue of former GA (late 19th and early 20th century) Congressman Tom Watson. The reason? Not because many people find the statue offensive and have signed a petition asking to have it removed, but because they’re doing some extensive renovations and the statue is in the way. Moving it to the Park Plaza is expensive—and moving it back would be even more so.
The inscription at the base of the statue reads:
Thomas E. Watson
Born September 5th 1856
Died September 26th 1922
Honor’s path he trood
Editor, lawyer historian
Author, orator, statesman
Author of Rural Free Delivery
A champion of right who never faltered in the cause
http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg.edu/...
Doesn’t sound like a bad guy, does he?
To some he is a hero, a Populist who championed the old agrarian South. He was never a member of the Farmer’s Alliance, but fought for their issues in Congress. Farmers' Alliance platform included the reclamation of large tracts of land granted to corporations, the abolition of national banks, an opposition to paper money, an end to speculation on f arm commodities, and a decrease in taxes levied on low-income citizens. The only thing he succeeded in getting was Rural Free Delivery.
Is that enough to excuse his racism and religious intolerance?
his Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Watson also produced a magazine and a weekly newspaper that achieved widespread circulation throughout the South and in New York. Watson's Jeffersonian Magazine in particular became an outlet for lengthy editorials on anti-capitalistic political philosophies and for strong diatribes reflecting his increasing racial and religious bigotry.
Although Watson had long supported black enfranchisement in Georgia and throughout the South, he changed his stance by 1904. Resentful of Democratic manipulation and exploitation of black voters and strongly opposed to the increased visibility and influence of such leaders as W. E. B. Du Bois and Booker T. Washington, Watson endorsed the disenfranchisement of African American voters, and no longer defined Populism in racially inclusive terms. During his 1908 presidential bid he ran as a white supremacist and launched vehement diatribes in his magazine and newspaper against blacks.
Watson also launched an aggressive campaign against the Catholic Church. He took issue with the hierarchy of the church and railed against abuses by its leaders. He mistrusted the church's foreign missions and its historic political activities. The Catholic Church responded by putting pressure on businesses that advertised in Watson's publications, resulting in an effective boycott. In 1913, during the trial of Leo Frank, Watson's strong attacks on Frank and on the pervasive influence of Jewish and northern interests in the state heavily influenced sentiment against Frank, who was lynched by a mob in 1915.
http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/...
"I think there's room for all of it. And just because I disagree with what somebody stood for, doesn't mean that I would oppose their monument," Benton said.
Watson's background as a white supremacist doesn't disqualify the statue's placement on the Capitol's grounds "because of the good things that he did," Benton said.
http://www.11alive.com/...I'm still trying to figure out what those good things were.
Then there’s Richard Russell, a Senator from Georgia.
his stand in support of segregation would define this Georgia political icon. Growing up the racially segregated South, Russell not only defended his conviction that segregation was the only way of life for Georgia, he voted his conviction and in the end, paid the price for his way of thinking.
Richard B. Russell
Russell actually had a pretty good chance at the nomination, with strong support in the South and many Democrats privately supporting him across the United States. Realizing that segregation would not sell in the north or the west coast of the United States, these Democrats asked Russell to renounce his stand on segregation. Russell refused, stating he believed ending segregation would destroy the fabric of Southern society. The Democrats chose Adlai Stevenson as their candidate.
From 1952 on, Russell fought a hopeless battle, trying to preserve the institution of segregation as it was dismantled piece by piece.
http://www.aboutnorthgeorgia.com/....
He helped form a “Southern bloc” which voted against any legislation which would give equal rights to black
He has a statue on the lawn of the Capitol too.
And let’s look at General John Brown Gordon, a hero of the Confederacy, many times wounded in ists service. His gallantry on the field of battle is undisputed. He also served as a U.S. Senator, defending the honor of the South.—the WHITE South. He was also elected governor.
Not so bad?
Except for one fact: he had strong ties to Ku Klux Klan. As Wikipedia says:
s the government of the State of Georgia was being reconstituted for readmission to the Union, Gordon ran for governor in 1868, but was defeated. He was a firm opponent of Reconstruction and endorsed measures to preserve white-dominated society, including restrictions on freedmen and the use of violence. Gordon was thought to be the titular head of the Ku Klux Klan in Georgia,[2] but the organization was so secretive that his role was never proved conclusively. During congressional testimony in 1871, Gordon denied any involvement with the Klan, but did acknowledge he was associated with a secret "peace police" organization whose sole purpose was the "preservation of peace."[
Another Southern gentleman was
Eugene Talmadge, whose monument reads:
Eugene Talmasge
1884-1946
Farmer-Lawyer-Statesman
Elected governor of GA on four separate occasions
A superb orator
A safe but progressive administrator of public trust
http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg.edu/...
What it eaves out is the fact that he was a man who hated African Americans with a deep passion.
Talmadge was a critic of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his official proximity with African-American people. Talmadge returned to the Governor's office in 1940. During his third two-year term, he urged that the state university board of regents not rehire Walter Cocking, a dean at the University of Georgia whom he accused of communist and pro-integration sympathies. After the board voted to rehire him, Talmadge had three of its members removed and replaced with his supporters. They then dismissed Cocking. This incident caused the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools to remove accreditation from the Georgia state universities, and it contributed to Talmadge's defeat by Ellis Arnall in 1942. He was thought by some as a fierce racist and segregationist, he regularly attacked blacks and the poor, and he once praised Adolf Hitler as "a mighty fine man," according to news reports.
http://answers.yahoo.com/...
His son Herman followed in his footsteps, a dedicated opponent to desegregation. He has a statue too.
Reactions to the Talmadge family are mixed. Take Rep. Brooks, an African American who called him
“a man whose politics gave chills to the grandmother of Rep. Tyrone Brooks (D-Atlanta).
"She said when you grow up and start voting, you can't vote for a Talmadge," Brooks said Monday. "He was one of those men that would compare black women to milk cows. .."And you say my God, how could the people elect someone like that?" Brooks said. "But they did. Four times!"
But Benton argues that Talmadge was merely a man of his times.
"Talmadge was the hero of the common man," Benton said. "Well, the common white man…”
http://www.11alive.com/...
How do I feel about this? I think getting rid of Watkins is a fine idea. He’s no loss. As to the others, fierce racists all, well, I’d let them stay---but only if there is a more honest inscription on their monuments, something which notes their racism and intolerance. Right now, they’re portrayed as heroes, role models of Southern Gentlemen. They weren’t. They were, as someone on e on a newscast I watched called them, first class haters. Put them together in a corner of the lawn in a sort of rogue’s gallery—what today’s Georgians shouldn’t emulate.
I know I am going to be told that their statues represent Southern Heritage, not hate. I’ve been told that many times in the 16 years I’ve lived in North Florida and Ga. I’ve stopped believing it. If these monuments told the truth, I could deal with it, but as of now they are holding up a pack of haters.
My mother loved Gone With the Wind. I saw the movie when it was re-released around 1960. I read the book when I was ten. I do understand the romance of the lost cause (hell, I am Irish American; we lost for 800 years). I even wrote a screenplay for class that was set in the antebellum South. The thing is, I did my homework, and I read primary sources, including slave narratives and the diary of Mary Chesnut, wife of a high-ranking Confederate politican, who spoke candidly and with a jaundiced eye about slavery and the position of women, Black and white, in the South. I’ve never been able to watch Gone With the Wind again (there’s a bust of Margaret Mitchell on the Capitol BTW). I simply don’t understand the longing for a past which was built on the backs of human beings who were considered property. I think there comes a time when revering such a dark past crosses the line from heritage into hate.
Yes. Some of the statues remember worthy people like Jimmy Carter and Mary Latimer McLendon who worked for prohibition of alcohol and for women’s suffrage./ But the only statue I actually love is one entitled “Expelled Because of Their Color:.
Erected in 1976 by the Black Caucus of the Georgia General Assembly, "Expelled Because Of Their Color" tells the story of the progress of Georgia’s African-American citizens - from the shackles of slavery to the seat of political power.
The story of the original 33 legislators is an important and tragic chapter in Georgia history. In the first election following the Civil War in 1868, blacks for the first time were allowed to vote, a right guaranteed by the 13th Amendment.
But while former slaves could now cast ballots, there was no law that permitted black representatives to actually hold office.
The 1868 election was bloody and violent; some 500 Georgians were killed. The 33 African-American men who were elected to the General Assembly were promptly expelled. It would be another two years before the Supreme Court ruled that blacks could not only vote – they could hold political office.
The rock base of the statue, flanked by the names of the 33 legislators, represents the foundation of African-American citizens in Georgia. The story of their progress unfolds in tiers. The first tier depicts a sailing ship full of slaves arriving in Georgia. The second tier shows black soldiers who served in the American Revolution. On the next level, antebellum columns represent southern plantation life.
http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/...
What is perhaps telling is the statue that isn’t there. There is no monument to Martin Luther King, who lived in Atlanta and preached at the Ebenezer Baptist Church. If there’s room for men like the Talmadges and the other segregationists, why is there no acknowledgement of their opponent?
I am asking for civility here. I am not calling all Southerners racists. Most of the people I know here aren’t racists overtly. And frankly, I know every white person in this country has a streak of it a part of our beings: that instinctual tribal tendency to make anyone different The Other. I’ve also heard the argument that men like Watson were just reflective of their times. Sadly, that’s true—but then why enshrine them as heroes? Why not find better heroes whose legacy isn’t based on hatred and prejudice?