Activists Pushed for Years to Topple These Confederate Statues. This Week They Came Down in Minutes.

It turns out all it took was some sledgehammers and rope.

Jeff Davis

Paint and protest graffiti covers the Jefferson Davis Memorial in Richmond, Va., Sunday, June 7, 2020, following a week of unrest in the U.S. against police brutality and racism in policing. Jefferson Davis was the president of the Confederate States of America during the Civil War. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Late Wednesday night, a group of protestors in Richmond toppled the statue of former Confederate President Jefferson Davis that has towered over Monument Avenue for 113 years. A few hours earlier, members of the American Indian Movement brought down a statue of Christopher Columbus outside the Minnesota state capitol in St. Paul. And in Portsmouth, Virginia, demonstratorsā€”equipped with ropes, bolt cutters, and sledgehammersā€”beheaded four statues that once formed a Confederate monument. ā€œA marching band played in the streets,ā€ the Virginian-Pilot reported, ā€œand other protesters danced.ā€

The protests that have swept the United States and other countries in the wake of last monthā€™s killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police, have led to renewed calls for the removal of white supremacist monuments. A statue of a slave-trader in England was thrown into the River Avon. A statue of King Leopold II, butcher of the Congo, came down in Belgium. Defacing monuments to oppressive figures is a natural outgrowth of a push to grapple with structural racism and its symbols. But whatā€™s striking, watching a seemingly endless stream of statue-toppling videos, is how activists have made a process that once seemed insurmountable look so easy.

Activists and their allies in government have been pushing for the removal of Confederate monuments for ages, but theyā€™ve been stymied and delayed by crafty legislators, lawsuits, and lack of political will. Now, it seems, theyā€™ve found a way to bypass that resistance.

There was a national push to remove Confederate monuments in 2015, after the white-supremacist massacre in Charleston, and in 2017, after the white supremacist rally in Charlottesvilleā€”which was itself in response to an effort to remove a Confederate monument. Baltimore (which was never part of the Confederacy) removed four monumentsā€”three celebrating Confederates and one honoring Chief Justice Roger Taney, who authored the Dred Scott decisionā€”in the middle of the night in August 2017. But most removal efforts unfolded more like what Mayor Mitch Landrieu experienced in New Orleans, when he sought to remove Confederate and Redemption-era monuments from the city. The cityā€™s efforts to take down the statues took two years. There were death threats and court battles. Landrieu worked so hard to build a good-faith case that the resulting speech was turned into a book.

As monuments began to come down, some state governments, such as Texas, tried to change their laws to make it even harder to remove statues. That effort failed, but a similar move in Alabama passed. Local Confederate groups have invoked old contracts and laws that were already on the books to thwart private and municipal efforts to turn the pageā€”Vanderbilt University only succeeded in renaming its Confederate Memorial Hall in 2016, 14 years after its President E. Gordon Gee first proposed to do so. It’s now “Memorial Hall.”

When I was in Richmond in 2017 covering the gubernatorial election, there were activists standing vigil beneath the Robert E. Lee statue on Monument Avenue. They were not protesting its existence; they were opposing calls for its removal. The city’s Democratic mayor, Levar Stoney, had formed a commission to look into removing or altering the monuments. The Democratic nominee, Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam (who is now governor) agreed with Stoney; in response, Republican nominee Ed Gillespie (who is from New Jersey) had said they should stay up. The Virginia Republican Party, which often seems to be participating in a performance art piece about its own shrinking relevance, charged that Northam had ā€œturned his back on his own familyā€™s heritage.ā€

At the time, the momentum for monument removal felt like it was all happening so fast. Just two years earlier, in 2015, then-Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a former Democratic National Committee chairman from Upstate New York, had called the Lee and Davis statues ā€œparts of our heritageā€ and emphasized many Confederate soldiers were not motivated by slavery. ā€œLeave the statues and those things alone,ā€ he said.

The monuments were still up this spring. Stoney’s commission recommended scrapping the Davis statue in 2018, and Northam signed a law in April giving municipalities more power to alter or remove monuments, but the legal battle continued apaceā€”on Monday, a federal judge blocked the state from getting rid of Gen. Lee until another lawsuit could be resolved. Meanwhile, in Portsmouth, the Pilot reported, protesters took matters into their own hands because they felt ā€œfrustrated by the Portsmouth City Councilā€™s decision to put off” the removal of that city’s monument. (There was a downside to going the less formal routeā€”one Portsmouth protester was injured during the removal and hospitalized.) A former councilman told the paper he had proposed getting rid of it at a meeting five years ago. A few hours before the crowd assembled that night, the council voted to delay any action on the monument for another month.

Protest movements, like pandemics, have a way of getting people to reimagine what’s possible in their lives. It turns out you can pay people to stay home, or sell cocktails to go, or cover a medical test for anyone who needs one. You can get Mitt Romney to start saying ā€œBlack Lives Matter,ā€ and you can get your state government to repeal its law shielding police misconduct records from the public. The obstacles that stood in the way of such changes did not need to be there after allā€”or perhaps they were an illusion all this time. You donā€™t have to wait forever to get rid of monuments to white supremacy. It turns out all you need is a sledgehammer and some rope.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate