Ha, yeah just seeing that. So the problem is, and being from the south I've always subscribed to states rights and still do. Now I argue that idea the war wasn't about slavery is dumb. It absolutely was, just isn't made out to be the good versus evil that's taught in schools. It was about economics. Both the north and south needed it, but the north needed it less. Also, this notion that it wasn't about that as identified by the OP is "fake news." This idea didn't start to actually surface until well after the war more around the turn of the century, which is why you have mostly confederate statues in southern states. Most confederate statues were built in the early 1900s. Although BLM would try to argue it's to suppress the black man, it's actually there because the south needed to recreate it's identity as to why it seceded to begin with, i.e. it wasn't about economics and slavery, it was about patriotism

Edit: just FYI, I don't believe in removing statues if anyone took that from my comment claiming it was about rebranding.

Ha, yeah just seeing that. So the problem is, and being from the south I've always subscribed to states rights and still do. Now I argue that idea the war wasn't about slavery is dumb. It absolutely was, just isn't made out to be the good versus evil that's taught in schools. It was about economics. Both the north and south needed it, but the north needed it less. Also, this notion that it wasn't about that as identified by the OP is "fake news." This idea didn't start to actually surface until well after the war more around the turn of the century, which is why you have mostly confederate statues in southern states. Most confederate statues were built in the early 1900s. Although BLM would try to argue it's to suppress the black man, it's actually there because the south needed to recreate it's identity as to why it seceded to begin with, i.e. it wasn't about economics and slavery, it was about patriotism