Argumentative Essay: Should Monuments Be Removed?

837 Words4 Pages

Should monuments be removed?

For many years people have been arguing whether certain controversial monuments, such as statues, should be destroyed or removed. A common type of monuments in this situation are the Confederacy monuments. These are various statues across the US which honor Confederate leaders or “heroes”. Many see these offensive since those people basically oppressed African Americans for years and were fighting to keep doing so. Some argue that the monuments should not be damaged or tampered with anyway since, even though the person might not have been the best, it is a historical artifact which therefore, should be preserved. The conflict surrounds whether the monuments should be destroyed, stored (in a museum etc), or left to remain. Personally, I believe that monuments, if historical, should not be damaged in anyway, but left to remain, or in specific occasions, preserved in a museum. A monument being destroyed is going too far in some instances. Historical monuments should be preserved and studied. They don’t have to be kept in a public space, but maybe in a museum. Destroying a monument is not erasing …show more content…

However, these monuments are history and although they may not be suitable for a public place nowadays, they are sure a great piece of history for a museum. These monuments are part of all that is left from a certain period in our history. Even though the Confederate period, for example, is not the period of the United States that many are proud of it still happened and it is still history. These monuments should be saved for the sake of knowing about the past, not for personal gain. Some monuments can stay in public for everyone to see. One must keep in mind that, monuments may never make everyone happy. As long as a monument was not made with the intention of attacking a group of people it deserves to be

Open Document