Removing controversial statues erases history.
We must preserve all of our nation's history, even the problematic aspects of it.
< (1 of 4) Next argument >
Statues exist to remind current and future Americans of our nation's history. They safeguard our memory of history, preventing widespread ignorance of the past. Although some statues force us to recall the horrific institution of slavery, this recollection is necessary. We must remember our history, even though it disturbs us because our nation's narrative must be preserved. History is important, regardless of the discomfort it causes us. Furthermore, if we fail to remember our past, we will not learn anything from it. If we remove these monuments, Americans will forget history, and commit the same mistakes repeatedly. These statues prevent this. They shape the public consciousness toward regret and a "never again" conviction. For these reasons, we must not remove controversial statues.
Many scholars argue that controversial monuments promote a false version of history through valorizing leaders who committed treason, promoted violent colonialism, or supported racism. These statues portray these figures as heroic but they were actually on the wrong side. If this is the case, we would best promote honest narratives of America's history by removing controversial statues. Also, it might be irrational to claim that removing statues will erase our memory of history. We have many other institutions, like museums and schools, that teach us about the past. With these in place, it is unlikely that the American public will develop widespread amnesia of the past anytime soon.
[P1] Our nation's statues exist to remind us of our history. [P2] If we remove controversial statues, we will erase reminders of our history. [P3] For this reason, we must preserve controversial statues.