At National Review, Arthur Herman gives his best reasons why the public Confederate statues should remain in publicly owned spaces.   I do believe that Herman put the best foot forward of the "Keep the Statues" crowd. I disagree with him. These statues belong, if anywhere, in the Jim Crow wing of a history museum.  Herman received strong pushback in the comments to his article, many of these comments echoing my beliefs. Here are some samples of the comments critical of Herman's defense of the statues: "The timeless virtues of slavery. Symbols of Southern history of slavery." "Most of those statues were NOT erected in the days after the Civil War. Nor were they erected in the days since the 1970s, when Jim Crow was over." "They were put up as part of the wave of "Lost Cause" historical revisionism that swept the South in the first half of the 20th century. The purpose was to try to redeem *the cause for which the South had fought*." File-Lee_Park,_Charlottesville,_VA.jpg "I don't have a problem honoring the ordinary enlisted men--the privates and sergeants--who fought bravely on both sides of the Civil War. But the Confederate leadership--and this includes Lee--should not be honored because the cause they fought for was *to break up the United States*." Most of those statues were NOT erected in the days after the Civil War. Nor were they erected in the days since the 1970s, when Jim Crow was over. They were put up as part of the wave of "Lost Cause" historical revisionism that swept the South in the first half of the 20th century. The purpose was to try to redeem *the cause for which the South had fought*." "Thomas Jefferson is NOT honored because he had slaves. He is honored because he wrote the Declaration of Independence, which asserted the equality of all humanity before God. Tear down his memorial and you would be tearing down the Declaration of Independence too."