Final session of #ncph2016! #s69, After Charleston: Exploring the Fate of Confederate Monuments in America

— Rebekah Oakes (@RebekahOakes01) March 19, 2016

So many familiar faces (& #twitterstorians) in #s69, After Charleston: Exploring the Fate of Confed Monuments in US. Good to see! #ncph2016

— Will Stoutamire (@wstoutamire) March 19, 2016

@EvanRSpencer #ncph2016 #s69 pic.twitter.com/vsgbwTfOCx

— Ashley B. Claybrooks (@NicNat_artifakz) March 19, 2016

Luskey: could also add counter-monuments, such as the 2008 Dred & Harriet Scott monument in Frederick #ncph2016 #s69 pic.twitter.com/wsW1kik25c

— Auni Gelles (@aunigelles) March 19, 2016

@AshleyWLuskey begins by outlining the complex, emotional, and politically charged questions raised by Confederate symbols #ncph2016 #s69

— Rebekah Oakes (@RebekahOakes01) March 19, 2016

Thomas Brown draws distinction between quasi-religious tenants of the Lost Cause and newer, consumer based Confederate memory #ncph2016 #s69

— Rebekah Oakes (@RebekahOakes01) March 19, 2016

Thomas Brown: not surprised Confederate flag came down at SC State House. Flag has been “on defense” since at least 1980s. #NCPH2016 #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

Brown: Haley addressed the flag bc it was politically easier to target than gun control #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Brown: Lost Cause mobilized force of religion, class, & whiteness to reinforce Southern power structures/Confederate icons. #NCPH2016 #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

Brown: Confederate flag was obvious avenue through which SC governor could take action after Charleston #ncph2016 #s69

— Rebekah Oakes (@RebekahOakes01) March 19, 2016

Brown: SC gov Haley called for Confederate flag to be taken down partly b/c it obscures discussion on guns & violence. #NCPH216 #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

Brown would be surprised to see civil monuments to soldiers actually come down #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Brown: Nathan Bedford Forrest extra controversial bc of connection to KKK #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

#s69 not first session w race theme w an all-white panel, this time talking abt Confederate monuments. Just saying… #ncph2016

— Will Stoutamire (@wstoutamire) March 19, 2016

@wstoutamire 🐸☕️

— Ashley B. Claybrooks (@NicNat_artifakz) March 19, 2016

@wstoutamire I was about to ask if this was an all white panel. Who allowed for that? Organizers didn't question? Sounds "exclusive" to me

— The Descendant (@Their_Child) March 21, 2016

@Their_Child No idea, but that was ultimately my biggest issue. Panel didn't reflect a broad enough range of views on a very complex issue

— Will Stoutamire (@wstoutamire) March 21, 2016

@wstoutamire sounds like it was almost as bad as this panel. Was there time for questions? pic.twitter.com/Tfz7jG43Af

— The Descendant (@Their_Child) March 21, 2016

@Their_Child There was, but it was very limited. Some expressed concern re: language (ex: "vandalism" by BLM), others asked for more (1/2)

— Will Stoutamire (@wstoutamire) March 21, 2016

@Their_Child internat'l context (ex: post-apartheid SA, post-communist E. Eur.), others that waysides work only in theory (most don't read)

— Will Stoutamire (@wstoutamire) March 21, 2016

Brown: Discussion of removing Confed monuments esp right after shooting was insensitive & avoided real issue of gun control #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Brown: Removing Confed monuments requires expending political capital that could be used elsewhere #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Brown claims that many monuments are dormant. If so, they are like volcanoes, always in the back of some people's minds #ncph2016 #s69

— Rebekah Oakes (@RebekahOakes01) March 19, 2016

Brown: it costs political capital to take down confederate monuments. Worth the cost in some contexts. #s69 #ncph2016

— Caitlin Starr Cohn (@velostarr) March 19, 2016

Brown: Suggested removal of monuments seems to be centered around Confederate generals & leaders, not women & common soldiers #ncph2016 #s69

— Rebekah Oakes (@RebekahOakes01) March 19, 2016

Brown: Expertise needed for removal decision is expertise on the community, not monuments generally. (But which communities?) #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

T Brown: the defining feature of Civil War monuments (N & S) is that they were local initiatives. Keep future decisions local #ncph2016 #s69

— Auni Gelles (@aunigelles) March 19, 2016

Koski is the "flag guy," so he'll talk about the battle flag #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Noting that we’re focusing a lot on the confederate flag as opposed to Confederate monuments so far. #s69 #NCPH2016

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

Brown: Removal of monuments should be a community-by-community decision #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Disagree w Coski that Confederate flag can be a symbol of rebellion w/o Civil war context or sympathy for Confederacy. #NCPH2016 #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

@NickSacco55 & the fact that some (majority?) will always see confederacy when they see that flag matters more. #ncph2016

— kristen baldwin deathridge (@k10death) March 19, 2016

@NickSacco55 seriously?!? I really would not have handled that panel well.

— The Descendant (@Their_Child) March 20, 2016

@NickSacco55 IMO he removes context too much. Even flag at Ole Miss fb was meant to send racial msg, not just "support" team #ncph2016 #s69

— Will Stoutamire (@wstoutamire) March 19, 2016

Coski: Dangerous trap to believe that what a symbol means to us is what it means #ncph2016 #s69

— Rebekah Oakes (@RebekahOakes01) March 19, 2016

John Coski: everyone seems to think their perception of the Confederate flag is universal. Reality: many coexisting meanings. #ncph2016 #s69

— Auni Gelles (@aunigelles) March 19, 2016

Confederate flag has always been a symbol of white supremacy and racial oppression – can't separate the symbol from context #ncph2016 #s69

— Rebekah Oakes (@RebekahOakes01) March 19, 2016

This. There's a disparity in political power between those who defend the flag & those who oppose it #s69 #ncph2016 https://t.co/CVnVw3DTnp

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

@AshleyWLuskey on how removal of Confederate monuments will not eradicate deep racial issues #ncph2016 #s69

— Rebekah Oakes (@RebekahOakes01) March 19, 2016

Of course removing monuments won't solve racism, but is that really the point? #s69 #ncph2016

— Caitlin Starr Cohn (@velostarr) March 19, 2016

@velostarr damn I hate that I missed this convo. Was someone actually asserting that removing monuments ends racism?

— The Descendant (@Their_Child) March 20, 2016

@Their_Child more like taking them down won't end racism as an argument to leave them up (with plaques or counter monuments).

— Caitlin Starr Cohn (@velostarr) March 20, 2016

@Their_Child my response was basically that saying they won't end racism is not a reason to keep them. They symbolize racism.

— Caitlin Starr Cohn (@velostarr) March 20, 2016

So the argument for letting the monuments stand is that tearing them down doesn't solve racism? WTF #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

@abbygateau right?!? No one thing is going to eradicate racism.

— Michelle (@MichelleAnt41) March 19, 2016

@michelle031580 If you can't solve easily, why bother trying at all?!

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

When has anyone argued that removing a flag or tearing down a monument solves white supremacy?? #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

So important. Sometimes both sides are not equally legitimate. #s69 #ncph2016 https://t.co/U1tf3kpraa

— Caitlin Starr Cohn (@velostarr) March 19, 2016

Luskey argues that keeping Confederate monuments in place can lead to “reclaiming” of meaning and furthering of dialogue. #NCPH2016 #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

Dr. Luskey: The reasons to remove or keep confederate monuments is different than the reasons they were erected #ncph2016 #s69

— Nicole (@amo_la_storio) March 19, 2016

@AshleyWLuskey: Removal/relocation of monuments will not eradicate deeply embedded racial inequality & power structures. #ncph2016 #s69

— Auni Gelles (@aunigelles) March 19, 2016

Not buying the “removing monuments doesn’t end racism” argument. Symbols matter – why else do they exist? #NCPH2016 #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

@NickSacco55 Passing the 14th Amendment didn't end racism, but it was still worth doing.

— Immigrants Civil War (@ImmigrantCW150) March 20, 2016

AH. You know who ELSE notices Confed memorials? PEOPLE OF COLOR. But oh no, we must protect the white ppl's feelings! #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Precedence for reinterpretation. Big question here: can interpretation and contextualization be enough? #ToughStuff #ncph2016 #s69

— Rebekah Oakes (@RebekahOakes01) March 19, 2016

Let's just put up waysides, bc that will def have the same level of impact as a GIANT MONUMENT TO WHITE SUPREMACY #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

I don't think monuments to problematic should always be removed, but I have trouble buying these arguments to keep them #s69 #ncph2016

— Caitlin Starr Cohn (@velostarr) March 19, 2016

#ncph2016 #s69
Make people read more to figure out why celebrating rebel slaveowners is a bad thing. Sounds totally worth doing.

— Dr. Jane Davis⁷ #BlackLivesMatter (@jdavis025) March 19, 2016

Luskey: instead of removing Confed. monuments, add context which has has been sorely missing through waysides. Still in place #ncph2016 #s69

— Auni Gelles (@aunigelles) March 19, 2016

Hmm idea of tacking on a wayside to mediate the confederate monuments? A historian's voice is still not everyone's voice #ncph2016 #s69

— Nicole (@amo_la_storio) March 19, 2016

I would like to read a comprehensive study on how people commune w historical markers. Are they really that effective? #NCPH2016 #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

@aunigelles Waysides may make public historians feel better, but it's not clear they address the issues at hand. #ncph2016 #s69

— Kevin M. Levin–Historian, Teacher, Public Speaker (@KevinLevin) March 19, 2016

I do like the idea of counter-monuments better that waysides. Seems more productive and thought provoking. #ncph2016 #s69

— Michelle (@MichelleAnt41) March 19, 2016

Counter monuments can so easily make it seem that both sides of the story are equally valid. #s69 #ncph2016

— Caitlin Starr Cohn (@velostarr) March 19, 2016

Counter monuments are a better solution, but should discuss why these monuments have to exist as counter & not on their own #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Why do we accept that public historians KNOW what should be done with Confederate monuments? Should be assisting public. #ncph2016 #s69

— Kevin M. Levin–Historian, Teacher, Public Speaker (@KevinLevin) March 19, 2016

Would like to echo @velostarr’s point that placing Confederate monument debate within an international context is necessary. #NCPH2016 #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

Confederate monuments session will have about 3 minutes for audience comment. #ncph2016 #s69

— Devin V. Hunter (@dvhunter) March 19, 2016

In all seriousness NCPH should have a mini-con or three about this.

— Devin V. Hunter (@dvhunter) March 19, 2016

@dvhunter Is this panel as crazy as the tweets make it seem?

— Kenneth Owen (@kenneth_owen) March 19, 2016

Could we use apartheid-era monuments in SA as comparative? #ncph2016 #s69 https://t.co/o1dYuu1TIe

— Victoria Jackson (@HistoryRunner) March 19, 2016

Not sure I buy power of place argument for leaving confed mons. Landscapes are dynamic, can change to reflect current values. #s69

— Michelle (@MichelleAnt41) March 19, 2016

@Crutch4 there is no rational reason for you to have to wait #s69

— Dr. Jane Davis⁷ #BlackLivesMatter (@jdavis025) March 19, 2016

@Crutch4 the lack of concern for the negative impact these monuments have on many people is . . . concerning. If sadly typical.

— Caitlin Starr Cohn (@velostarr) March 19, 2016

@life_of_sources @Crutch4 yes! Absolutely!! No one discussing how harmful and hurtful these symbols are!! Coddling white supremacy. #s69

— Michelle (@MichelleAnt41) March 19, 2016

@Crutch4 completely disappointing that this perspective was completely absent from panel.

— Michelle (@MichelleAnt41) March 20, 2016

How about monuments as vaccines for racism? Kill the live virus & inoculate from the disease. It'll take more than a plaque, though. #s69

— Dr. Jane Davis⁷ #BlackLivesMatter (@jdavis025) March 19, 2016

@lwalterscooper That's fair. It's an interesting convo on perspective as frustrating as it is. I am interested in hearing the discussion.

— Priya Chhaya (@priyastoric) March 19, 2016

@ceceliamoore do you mean it isn't representative of what is actually being said? Meanings can get lost… #s69 #ncph2016

— kristen baldwin deathridge (@k10death) March 19, 2016

Titus: Removal should be on the table in cities, but maybe not at Gettysburg where it's actually part of a commem landscape #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

#s69 #ncph2016 while I definitely want to contextualize the existing monuments, not sure how to do that in a way that actually confronts

— Evan Spencer (@EvanRSpencer) March 19, 2016

#s69 #ncph2016 (contd) rather than giving them an added level of legitimacy. New monuments is a good idea, but again, it grants legitimacy

— Evan Spencer (@EvanRSpencer) March 19, 2016

#s69 #ncph2016 if we could get people to understand the context of creation of these monuments, we would. How best to do that?? No clue

— Evan Spencer (@EvanRSpencer) March 19, 2016

#s69 #ncph2016 sad to miss this session. My historical area of expertise and my professional expertise colliding hard.

— Evan Spencer (@EvanRSpencer) March 19, 2016

#s69 #ncph2016 seems to me that the public that's ardently opposed to any dismantling would be totally unreceptive to our contextual lessons

— Evan Spencer (@EvanRSpencer) March 19, 2016

@EvanRSpencer yes! I think this is an important point!!

— Michelle (@MichelleAnt41) March 19, 2016

#s69 #ncph2016 same folks deny the CW had to do w slavery bc they've never seen it proved to them. *shows secession docs* *still adamant*

— Evan Spencer (@EvanRSpencer) March 19, 2016

?s we need to ask about all historical iconography: is this icon worthy of a place of honor? Does it represent our values? #NCPH2016 #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

Titus is a civil rights scholar, has a different perspective #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Am I insane that the very term counter monument is exclusive and highly problematic? #s69 #ncph2016

— Erin Bernard (@erincbernard) March 19, 2016

Titus shows SC monument at Gettysburg & points out how racially/politically charged the lang is #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

I hate to say it, but these kinds of discussions place public historians on the sidelines. Communities passing us by. #NCPH2016 #s69

— Kevin M. Levin–Historian, Teacher, Public Speaker (@KevinLevin) March 19, 2016

Jill Titus: Confed monuments at @GettysburgNMP erected during centennial (1960s) are an opportunity to link CW & Civil Rights #ncph2016 #s69

— Auni Gelles (@aunigelles) March 19, 2016

Really wish we had more time to hear from Titus & discuss–20min left in session #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Agree that context is important. Think the real rub is with monuments in civic spaces. #NCPH2016 #s69 https://t.co/W3MEMacuV2

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

K. That is what I got too! but wanted to be sure I was reading it right & not assume #s69 #ncph2016 https://t.co/TDziFVXU3u

— kristen baldwin deathridge (@k10death) March 19, 2016

Dr. Titus: confederate commemoratives at Gettysburg are so far not contested/ SC memorial is a way to remember state's rights #ncph2016 #s69

— Nicole (@amo_la_storio) March 19, 2016

Titus shows FL monument, which has a Cold War twist focusing on "Americans" bc segregation looked bad int'lly #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

We should be reflecting on the possibilities and limits of Public History in response to these debates. #NCPH2016 #s69

— Kevin M. Levin–Historian, Teacher, Public Speaker (@KevinLevin) March 19, 2016

Titus: Stories told by the monuments are impossible for visitors to grasp without interpretation #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Thanks everyone for this twitter convo about #s69. Making me question thoughts I had re: what should be done. #idonthavetheanswers #ncph2016

— Priya Chhaya (@priyastoric) March 19, 2016

Titus is pointing out the connections between the civil rights struggle & monuments about the civil war. THANK YOU. #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

#NCPH2016 #s69 1/2 visitors can't easily read below the face of monuments to understand what all is going on.

— Dr. Jane Davis⁷ #BlackLivesMatter (@jdavis025) March 19, 2016

2/2 #NCPH2016 #s69 But these are the same visitors who should be able to get something from more text.

— Dr. Jane Davis⁷ #BlackLivesMatter (@jdavis025) March 19, 2016

$$ is not the real problem. If we don't have $ to remove monuments, we don't have $ for new monuments. #s69 #ncph2016

— Michelle (@MichelleAnt41) March 19, 2016

Titus: Confed monuments are not artifacts of history, but artifacts of interpretation #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Titus: are monuments history? Yes. Great question. #s69 #ncph2016

— Caitlin Starr Cohn (@velostarr) March 19, 2016

Enjoying the open, disagreeing dialogue at #s69 at #ncph2016 about confed monuments. Important to present accessible history.

— Bethany Noel Nagle (@wagleface) March 19, 2016

Yes! "Understanding of history changes over time." #s69 #ncph2016

— Michelle (@MichelleAnt41) March 19, 2016

Titus quoting Phelps: Changing of the memorial landscape important part of revising history. Public historiography? #ncph2016 #s69

— Rebekah Oakes (@RebekahOakes01) March 19, 2016

I agree, I now have more questions to consider and #idonthavetheanswers #ncph2016 #s69 https://t.co/FnkA3F7DU5

— Nicole (@amo_la_storio) March 19, 2016

Who are the public historians that are working with communities on these issues? Enough talk already. #ShowDontTell #s69 #ncph2016

— Kevin M. Levin–Historian, Teacher, Public Speaker (@KevinLevin) March 19, 2016

Does removing monuments to a lie actually "change history" or is it our duty to represent the most accurate picture we have. #ncph2016 #s69

— Dr. Jane Davis⁷ #BlackLivesMatter (@jdavis025) March 19, 2016

Titus: What do we do with 3D representations of discredited historical interpretation? #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Titus: if we think of the pub sphere as pub historiography then what should we do with 3D legacies of interpretation? #s69 #ncph2016

— Caitlin Starr Cohn (@velostarr) March 19, 2016

Audience has been unleashed! #s69 #ncph2016

— Devin V. Hunter (@dvhunter) March 19, 2016

The issue here is that Confed memorials are rarely actually about the Civil War #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

where is the task force from within the field and the public to deal with the issue of memorialization? #s69 #ncph2016

— Erin Bernard (@erincbernard) March 19, 2016

@AMST_Anni yes! This issue-exclusive and often violent public space- came up in both #s69 and the #herstory session. #ncph2016 continues

— Erin Bernard (@erincbernard) March 20, 2016

An article worth reading in this discussion. Quoting @slavedwelling https://t.co/DwGyZymnQ8 #ncph2016 #s69

— Priya Chhaya (@priyastoric) March 19, 2016

Article by #s69 speaker Luskey #ncph2016 https://t.co/BJJpakUPr1

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

.@AshleyWLuskey: the size/scale of waysides will never outweigh massive equestrian statues. No guarantee they will be read. #ncph2016 #s69

— Auni Gelles (@aunigelles) March 19, 2016

This is also important. Is it possible to match the level of permanence with our interpretation? #s69 #ncph2016 https://t.co/tVUR8OzrUM

— Evan Spencer (@EvanRSpencer) March 19, 2016

@elizabethcatte Why weren't you on this panel?

— Kevin M. Levin–Historian, Teacher, Public Speaker (@KevinLevin) March 19, 2016

Oh, I should be there. https://t.co/rqlAmXB8SQ

— Brian Joyner (@BetterGuyX) March 19, 2016

Sitting at Walmart parking lot in Columbia, SC, pondering whether it's possible to reinterpret monuments to white supremacy. #s69 #ncph2016

— Evan Spencer (@EvanRSpencer) March 19, 2016

We’ve got a strange comment from an audience member about Union soldiers raping women in the South. Someone is uncomfortable #NCPH2016 #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

If you’re worried about the removal of Confederate icongraphy, change the subject and call Lincoln a racist. #winningargument #NCPH2016 #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016

BAD THINGS HAPPEN WHY ARE WE HATING ON CONFEDERATES #s69 #ncph2016 #pointmissed https://t.co/CGjWsZqhYl

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Suggest looking at the work of Sabine Marschall on the landscape of monuments in South Africa #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

That Reconstruction failed. #s69 @ncph2016 https://t.co/Ihf6rLXNEb

— cathystanton (@cathystanton) March 19, 2016

@katie_stringer @aleiabrown @craigswilder We've been tearing monuments down since 1776! 🔥Let's go! 🔥 pic.twitter.com/8qX7lXStUk

— The Descendant (@Their_Child) March 20, 2016

@katie_stringer I too thought about Nazi symbols. You can't erase history, but stop honoring shameful acts, events & the people involved.

— nuns with guns – 🇺🇦 Slava Ukraini! (@mdfkb) March 19, 2016

Kosik says it's very odd that the losers were allowed to venerate and celebrate their history, impact on culture #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

#ncph2016 #s69 Q:how is this dissimilar to leaving Nazi statues upright? A:in America the losers wrote the history rather than the winners

— Dr. Jane Davis⁷ #BlackLivesMatter (@jdavis025) March 19, 2016

@jdavis025: They were also allowed to selectively preserve history (Dunbar Rowland) #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Sounds like #ncph2016 is ending with a bang at #s69. Or maybe just on Twitter. Who knows

— Evan Spencer (@EvanRSpencer) March 19, 2016

Aud comment: calling them counter monuments legitimizes the history of white supremacy #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Excellent comment to end with re: language public historians are using in this debate. #s69 #ncph2016

— Devin V. Hunter (@dvhunter) March 19, 2016

TItus says a counter monument is a monument that challenges the idea of the authority of a monument at all #ncph2016 #s69

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Btw, we should absolutely be saying it's not appropriate to venerate the confederacy. Mistake we haven't done it sooner. #s69 #ncph2016

— Michelle (@MichelleAnt41) March 19, 2016

#ncph2016 #s69 right. I gotta get to the airport and calm down. Although I do have some ideas how to cheaply remove some monuments.

— Dr. Jane Davis⁷ #BlackLivesMatter (@jdavis025) March 19, 2016

Titus: Ex. Putting up a set of nuclear missiles next to the FL monument that refs the Cold War #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

ICYMI: I'm creating a #RadicalPublicHistory listserv, get in touch if you're interested! @ncph #ncph2016–perhaps of interest to #s69?

— Dr. Lyra D. Monteiro (she/zie) is not leaving. (@intersectionist) March 19, 2016

.@katie_stringer what does it say that most monuments were constructed in the 1890s-1900s alongside Jim Crow? #s69 #ncph2016

— Evan Spencer (@EvanRSpencer) March 19, 2016

Confirmation that the language of Public Historians is a poor substitute for meeting communities where they are. #s69 #ncph2016

— Kevin M. Levin–Historian, Teacher, Public Speaker (@KevinLevin) March 19, 2016

#s69 #ncph2016 this is the kind of context we need to provide. But getting people to listen and understand might very well be impossible.

— Evan Spencer (@EvanRSpencer) March 19, 2016

What I want to better understand is how I can best serve communities struggling w/what to do w/Confed iconography #s69 #ncph2016

— Kevin M. Levin–Historian, Teacher, Public Speaker (@KevinLevin) March 19, 2016

Fascinating to read tweets from #ncph2016 #s69. Must have been a lively session. Always interested to see who's ignored.

— Brooks D. Simpson (@BrooksDSimpson) March 19, 2016

Sometimes it appears that some public historians have just discovered the Confederate heritage debate. #ncph2016 #s69 Where have you been?

— Brooks D. Simpson (@BrooksDSimpson) March 19, 2016

@BrooksDSimpson Doing the work. #s69 #ncph2016

— Dr. Abigail R. Gautreau (@abbygateau) March 19, 2016

Lesson for public historians from #ncph2016 #s69: deal with the public. In this case, publics. Some do (NPS), some don't.

— Brooks D. Simpson (@BrooksDSimpson) March 19, 2016

If public (or any) historians talk only to each other, don't be surprised at resulting ineffectiveness. #ncph2016 #s69 It's a problem.

— Brooks D. Simpson (@BrooksDSimpson) March 19, 2016

@BrooksDSimpson @k10death not 100%! We do have some sessions that include community members. But yeah, #s69 was disappointing.

— Michelle (@MichelleAnt41) March 20, 2016

@michelle031580 @k10death So I gather.

— Brooks D. Simpson (@BrooksDSimpson) March 20, 2016

@k10death @ncph I've been engaged in these debates for years with the stakeholders. Maybe folks need to check me out. #ncph2016 #s69

— Brooks D. Simpson (@BrooksDSimpson) March 19, 2016

@artstuffmatters @collegeart Thanks. Start here: https://t.co/XgbY3juz8Z. I've been at this for some time: https://t.co/Qdx0eOI5xj

— Brooks D. Simpson (@BrooksDSimpson) March 20, 2016

Half glad I missed that session/half pissed I wasn't there. But I think my MTSU peeps & others held it down. Thank you. #s69 #ncph2016

— Sarah (@SarahCalise) March 19, 2016

#NCPH2016 #s69 tweets reinforce my belief that CSA monuments debate has remarkably little to do with history

— Michael L (@mlynch5396) March 19, 2016

@dvhunter Will, Katie, and I are enjoying these #s69 tweets from afar. #academicbloodbath ?

— Hope J. Shannon (@HistorianHope) March 19, 2016

@JeffreyLLauck These monuments have always been controversial – even when new https://t.co/YIY2DN9t2J

— Eli Pousson 🚮🚲👋🏼 (@elipousson) March 20, 2016

So after a long week at the #ncph2016 registration desk, I prop up my feet and log on to Twitter. What went down at #s69?

— Nicholas K. Johnson (@Tchoupitoulas89) March 19, 2016

Thanks to panelists and audience at #s69 #ncph2016 Helped to clarify my thinking even more. Blog post pending. https://t.co/ljMmfaiUXZ

— Kevin M. Levin–Historian, Teacher, Public Speaker (@KevinLevin) March 19, 2016

So much this #s69 #ncph2016 https://t.co/0CfzN7SErt

— Will Stoutamire (@wstoutamire) March 19, 2016

Having great discussions post #s69 at the hotel restaurant. So many good ideas floating across the table. #ncph2016 continues!

— Will Stoutamire (@wstoutamire) March 19, 2016

#ncph2016 and #s69 have inspired me to up my Twitter game

— Greg Waters (@Like_Waters) March 20, 2016

This is why the #s69 #ncph2016 debate is so pressing. It's time for the confederate monuments & flags to be museumed https://t.co/9rtgO82RpG

— P. Coleman (@PhoebeColeman) March 20, 2016

Protester wearing KKK-style hood kicked and punched at Trump rally | WATCH: https://t.co/AsCEiWHo0x pic.twitter.com/LFpQc97kMq

— The Hill (@thehill) March 20, 2016

Has #s69 been storified? @ncph2016

— Denise D. Meringolo (@DDMeringolo) March 20, 2016

@wstoutamire @wstoutamire there's always rope and a few strong backs #s69 pic.twitter.com/rQv4ObHMkX

— The Descendant (@Their_Child) March 20, 2016

Wish I made it to the #ncph2016 #ConfederateMonuments session #s69
Our study on Baltimore 👉🏽 https://t.co/YIY2DN9t2J pic.twitter.com/yUzrEYjCDB

— Eli Pousson 🚮🚲👋🏼 (@elipousson) March 20, 2016

Reading all the tweets on #s69 #ncph2016 and I am like 🔥🔥👀👀💅🏾💅🏾🐸🐸☕️☕️

— Courtney (@CuppaCourtney) March 20, 2016

More Talk About Confederate Monuments https://t.co/KuQIOya986 #ncph2016 #s69 #CivilWarMemory #PublicHistory

— Kevin M. Levin–Historian, Teacher, Public Speaker (@KevinLevin) March 20, 2016

After reading #ncph2016 #s69 tweets, I'm totally convinced there's no excuse for Confederate monuments to remain part of the landscape

— Susan Philpott (@Philpo1Susan) March 20, 2016

Finally, I’d like to give praise to Jill Titus’s talk at #s69, which I think got lost in the tweetstorm chaos of that session. #NCPH2016

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 20, 2016

.@JillOglineTitus demonstrated importance of location for contextualizing Confederate icons. https://t.co/JMO1VHBoOo #NCPH2016 #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 20, 2016

Think Titus’s talk got lost on Twitter as many of us tried to make sense of earlier talks. @abbygateau covered her thoughts. #s69 #NCPH2016

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 20, 2016

Great commentary on #s69 #ncph2016, based on the Twitter response https://t.co/jW3Uc0XTc4

— Dr. Lyra D. Monteiro (she/zie) is not leaving. (@intersectionist) March 20, 2016

Here’s @KevinLevin’s takeaways from #s69 at #NCPH2016: https://t.co/YeZESNiNiY

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 20, 2016

Why no one is listening to what public historians have to say about Confederate monuments https://t.co/KuQIOya986 #ncph2016 #s69

— Kevin M. Levin–Historian, Teacher, Public Speaker (@KevinLevin) March 20, 2016

We need 2 consider Herstory too. #mustread "@NickSacco55: Here’s @KevinLevin’s takeaways from #s69 at #NCPH2016: https://t.co/oz20A6P1GD…"

— Erin Bernard (@erincbernard) March 20, 2016

#NCPH2016: As much about Challenging the Exclusive Public Historian as much as it was Challenging the Exclusive Past https://t.co/0fE4bmb5HF

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 21, 2016

Thoughtful post from @NickSacco55 on his experience at #ncph2016 and the panel on Confederate monuments #s69 https://t.co/axDP0DizMk

— Kevin M. Levin–Historian, Teacher, Public Speaker (@KevinLevin) March 21, 2016

Lots of truth and questions here in @NickSacco55's post #ncph2016 blog post https://t.co/ofozOyH23B

— kristen baldwin deathridge (@k10death) March 21, 2016

As usual, I nod along as I read @NickSacco55 's reflection on #ncph2016: https://t.co/G8dimUnCFV

— Devin V. Hunter (@dvhunter) March 21, 2016

Just reading thru tweets re confed monuments from #s69 #ncph2016. very excited abt new gen of public historians on the back channel. #newday

— Jon Voss (@jonvoss) March 20, 2016

This was definitely one of most important panels at #ncph2016–& one of smallest audiences. Necessary for #s69 convo https://t.co/VFjAIFkwWt

— Dr. Lyra D. Monteiro (she/zie) is not leaving. (@intersectionist) March 21, 2016

Many thanks to our Diversity Task Force for conducting the #HistoryinMyImage tweet chat at #ncph2016! https://t.co/qjQZMEiUTi

— NCPH (@ncph) March 22, 2016

#HistoryInMyImage Storify from March 17, 2016, #ncph2016 https://t.co/vOhwyC1tUX

— Brian Joyner (@BetterGuyX) March 22, 2016

Absolutely–as someone noted already, all the panelists were white. Big oversight/blindspot of organizer #ncph2016 https://t.co/seOsRarUGq

— Dr. Lyra D. Monteiro (she/zie) is not leaving. (@intersectionist) March 21, 2016

@lwalterscooper for me part of the reason that session was such a shock is bc I spent much of the rest of #ncph2016 talking about this 1/2

— kristen baldwin deathridge (@k10death) March 21, 2016

@lwalterscooper and most of the public historians around me practice the "listen and help communities" version of pubhist #ncph2016 2/2

— kristen baldwin deathridge (@k10death) March 21, 2016

@lwalterscooper Diversifying the panel would have been a good starting-point, sounds like! #ncph2016 #s69

— cathystanton (@cathystanton) March 21, 2016

The Storify of #S69 by @RealConductorX is fabulous. #ncph2016 https://t.co/fPmwAYjAFC

— Denise D. Meringolo (@DDMeringolo) March 21, 2016

Never too early to think about next year's meeting! Something you hoped for but didn't see at #ncph2016? Submit! https://t.co/QBdOUVtKVz

— NCPH New Pro & Student (@NCPH_NPstudent) March 21, 2016

Can #s1 of #ncph2017 be a continuation of #s69 at #ncph2016? But perhaps with additional voices that were underrepresented in Baltimore?

— Greg Waters (@Like_Waters) March 21, 2016

For those interested in continuing the convo from #ncph2016 #s69, check out the upcoming webinar from @AASLH https://t.co/V9qXOrSMyo

— Ashley B. Claybrooks (@NicNat_artifakz) March 21, 2016

#ncph2016 #s69 ain't done yet! @historizen weighs in with a smart and thoughtful post today.
https://t.co/OFXNpP21g5

— cathystanton (@cathystanton) March 22, 2016

This has been one hell of a way to end #NCPH2016. #s69

— Nick Sacco (@NickSacco55) March 19, 2016