Thank you for putting this up, AJ. It is a heart breaker, for sure.

I'm reminded of a newsreel from Nazi Germany recording a "book burning" where so many young people took relish in adding to the pile.

Would it be even possible to find a way to preserve the historical record so it may be rediscovered centuries from now after this coming age of madness finally burns itself out?

History is constantly being rewritten, by the victors of physical or political conflict. The most grievous form of rewriting is by omission. While Confederate military leaders are reviled for their ownership of slaves, you have to hunt to discover that Union General Ulysses T Grant did not release his own slaves until after the conflict was over. While Union General William Tecumseh Sherman is praised for his swift, efficient March to the Sea campaign that destroyed Confederate morale, you have to read the journals of the Prussian observers to discover the war crimes he committed. The Prussians learned how to commit atrocities from Sherman's practice of executing ten southern civilians for every Union soldier killed by rebel partisans, an act they repeated during both world wars.

The dictatorial acts of President Woodrow Wilson have been hidden from schoolchildren for decades, only now being "discovered" by investigative historians. It's still not easy to uncover the executive actions by FDR that make anything Trump has proposed look innocent by comparison.

Details of the JFK assassination that were supposed to be declassified by now, are still under wraps. We have to wonder if it's less about exposing living people, and more about inherent corruption in our intelligence apparatus.

The truth is out there, but it takes dedicated digging to find it. With today's alternate news pathways, we should make a determined effort to be sure the truth is made available to those who seek it.

Cut these money pit universities from the fiscal teet. Out law foreign money used as a weapon influenceing the subversion of USA. These places are fraudulent at best , ex...In the background is the conviction that we, blessed members of the most enlightened cohort ever to grace the earth with its presence, occupy a moral plane superior to all who came before us. Consequently, the defacement of murals of Christopher Columbus—and statues of later historical figures like Teddy Roosevelt—is perfectly virtuous and above criticism since human beings in the past were by definition so much less enlightened than we.

The English department at the University of Pennsylvania contributed to the monument controversy when it cheered on students who were upset that a portrait of a dead white male named William Shakespeare was hanging in the department’s hallway. The department removed the picture and replaced it with a photograph of Audre Lorde, a black feminist writer.

History is a set of lies agreed upon ~ Napoleon Bonaparte. History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there ~ George Santayana.
History at best is a report that was often written by the court apologists and is oft interpreted to be an account of men with almost infallible virtue. When you study what the men who signed The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution it won't take long to realize that most used very convincing arguments for freedom as long as they were the ones in charge of determining exactly what that freedom would mean. When asked after succeeding with the revolution to make all men free if any would release their slaves they scoffed at the idea. Although they may have got some things right in how to sell the idea of government to the people they now claimed the right to govern they were quickly trying to find ways to benefit from being in the position of authority.
I have used an example of religion when discussing politics with religious people, I construe the bible stories into a current vernacular as though I am talking about current states or governments and religious people are quick to point out the immoralities and inconsistencies, when I reveal that I was talking about a particular personage in the bible they suddenly began to rationalize how it was okay then because it was what God wanted and somehow being immoral was how morality was attained.
How this relates to history is that we need to be very careful about deifying those who had anything to do with the government and its construction, or any history. Instead of analyzing history if we are to maintain good moral standards we need to rationally identify the standards and use them in our lives, not quote (usually misquoting) someone who has been deified as justification for the acceptance of a moral standard to live by.
As far as the current example of southern vs northern, there were good and bad on both sides and the killing of 650,000 was unnecessary to eliminate slavery (which the constitution did not allow) and was more about the power of the federal government to maintain an authority over the states that was not granted by the constitution. Lincoln even conceded in his writings that it was not about slavery as much as the Federal Governments power to ensure that the states were not sovereign. As Lysander Spooner put it; "Lincoln won the war, freed the chattel slaves and made political slaves of everyone!"

History is history and cannot and should not be "changed". It was what it was, good or bad.

As a Southerner who has always enjoyed studying Southern history and tradition, this is especially relevant to me. The ongoing effort by liberals to eradicate any reference to the Confederacy and blacken the names of anyone associated with it greatly disturb me. The Civil
War occurred and should be studied from both the Northern and Southern viewpoint. Great leaders like Robert E. Lee can still be studied and even honored even if one disagrees with the Southern cause. I have no problem honoring great Northern leaders like Ulysees S. Grant. The removal of the Confederate statue honoring students that fought in the Civil War from the UNC campus is another example of this historical purge by the left. One sadly wonders where all the evil will end.

The article is indeed dis-spiriting. However, I disgree with its basic tenet. This is why.

The Constitution "counter-revolution" traded out small govt for large govt. It was a risk, and included (essentially) one provision to ensure that we, as individuals, had final say. The FFs gambled that individuals - not The People - would take up the defense. They did not.

The vital power was, is, the power of the purse. As long as individuals do not understand income taxation and continue to mis-file (in nearly all circumstances, by filing a Form 1040) then individuals will continue to cede the most powerful control against the shenanigals and power accumulations the article presents.

note bene - This isn't anything radical, like not filing, going to jail &c. I posit that the simple action of filing a CORRECT return lassos all of the nonsense.

Just remember what your mother told you. "You can't defend yourself against gossip and you are a fool if you try. And, I didn't raise any fools."

....I was kicked out of the tea party for pointing out their self-defeatist mentality....

Re: Charlottesville: I understand that one of the "Anti-fa" people threw a bag of urine on somebody. There was blame to go around, true.
But I'd just as soon see the Confederate statues come down. It's one thing to recognize that history has taken place, it's another to celebrate and glorify what has taken place. And I do not think that the Confederate cause was great or noble. It might be a good thing to donate the Confederate statues to museums (at the museums' expense) and to replace them with signs stating which statues once stood there, how long they stood there, and where they are to be found.
As to "Huckelberry Finn", it is indeed unfortunate that people don't understand the book. It is anti-racist; Huck is not presented as a perfect person (neither does he so present himself); it shows how he comes to understand Jim as a human being.
A lot of this :"political correctness" comes from enshrining education as a function of government (which, properly, it is not).

Defacement and ignorance of the past will surely cause them to repeat that same history they hate so much...Is it me or does it sound like the Spanish Inquisition all over again? (yes, it was about power and so it is today)

I get Imprimis, but thanks for posting, I hadn't had the chance to read it.

"In the background is the conviction that we, blessed members of the most enlightened cohort ever to grace the earth with its presence, occupy a moral plane superior to all who came before us."
I really think we do. Standing on the shoulders of people in the past we have the ability to hold ourselves to a higher standard. George Washington helped turn what must have felt like a utopian dream of building a state based on philosophers' ideas of personal liberty into reality. Two hundred years later we are appalled he participated in slavery.

This article is about what to do with our enlightenment. Now we're uncomfortable that an historic public area has a statue of Columbus bu not Bartolome de las casas. Do we cover it up? The author appears outraged at the very question and then says, apparently without irony, "how delicate they are, how quick to take offense!" Wow. I thought the whole theme of the piece was about the author's delicate sensibilities.

The author dismisses the issue has virtue signaling. I say don't avoid virtue but celebrate it. I don't know if that means covering a statue or facing our past squarely. But celebrate our long struggle for liberty. He calls this self-infatuation and self-despising. It seems like he's really just against celebrating human achievement and admitting our frailties.