argument top image

Should confederate monuments be removed? Show more Show less
Back to question

Whether or not confederate monuments should be removed is hotly debated. On one hand, confederacy has a negative history. Automatically, it’s associated with slavery and Civil War. On the other hand, confederate monuments are simply a representation of history. Shouldn’t all history, good or bad, be put on display?

No, confederate monuments should not be removed Show more Show less

Confederate monuments are just another part of history. They aren’t hurting anyone and should be an honored reminder of our past.
< (2 of 2)

It’s a part of Southern history

Southern history includes the horrific consequences of the Civil War. But painful pasts should be embraced since no one can run away from them.

The Argument

Confederate monuments are a part of Southern history. The nation doesn’t have to value the importance of the Confederate monuments, but to the ancestors of people who live in the southern ex-Confederate states, that’s a part of their history that they can’t ignore. Monuments are used to be reminders of a notable event.[1] Instead of being ashamed of it, history should be embraced.

Counter arguments

There are different ways to express Southern pride. While it’s a part of Southern history, it was horrible for everyone. Over 620,000 people died.[2] There are better monuments to be revered.



[P1] Confederate monuments are part of Southern history. [P2] People should embrace their history.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P2] The Civil War was horrible, and no one should be proud of it.




Not sure yet? Read more ↑


This page was last edited on Tuesday, 17 Mar 2020 at 12:13 UTC

Explore related arguments