Violence, silence and the four truths: towards healing in U.S.-American historical memory

Abstract

The articles collected here argue that there is much at stake in how memory is made, particularly at public sites where the United States' exceptionalism and 'greatness' are contested. How is memory made in these places? Whose voices are represented and who controls access? How are communities taking back control, asserting their own stakes in iconic national stories and demanding recognition? Authors in this volume examine memories that haunt both diasporic and Indigenous communities to reflect upon the changing nature of historical memory at sites, up to and including the contemporary moment. This introduction considers 'white history,' the violence it emboldens and requires, four types of truth identified by Truth and Reconciliation Commissions, and public judgement. I integrate these concepts to advocate for working towards a reconciliatory process and healing truth.

The Removal of Confederate Monuments: Reflections on Power and Privilege in Shared Spaces

“…Although it is important to understand how these monuments may have been created and/or removed, if the ultimate goal is to bring members of society together in consensus, there is also emotional work to be done. Little remarks in her conclusion, “while the forensic truth is important and needs to be meticulously pursued, it is the personal and social truths, laden with all of their emotional baggage, that need careful attention while working toward the truths of public healing and reconciliation” (2019:637). While the conflict view of society focuses on power dynamics, the Durkheimian view instead highlights the role of collective memory, but emphasizes consensus and building social solidarity.…”

“…There has been a rise in both political and societal support to acknowledge the objective truth of the Civil War in recent years. Some argue that these monuments “glorify the Lost Cause mythology, an example of the way in which ‘white history’ rewrites history to hide the truth” (Little, 2019:632). The idea of “white history” (Seitz, 2012) can help to explicate how these monuments were built in the first place.…”

“…The idea of “white history” (Seitz, 2012) can help to explicate how these monuments were built in the first place. Little (2019) explains Seitz's (2012) concept of white history as “an amalgamation of selective memory, the glorification of privilege, and the suppression of truth” (Little, 2019:632). She argues that we need to stop glorifying and highlighting only the white versions of history.…”

“…She argues that we need to stop glorifying and highlighting only the white versions of history. Confederate monuments are one way that we hide or distort past events and focus on the “white” version of what happened (Little, 2019). Furthermore, some scholars have even argued that these monuments—especially those on public lands—can help to further institutionalized racism (O'Connell, 2019).…”

“…One example that can help to illustrate the role of agents of memory is the removal of four Confederate monuments in New Orleans in 2017 (referenced in the introduction). According to Little (2019), activists and citizens spurred this removal in New Orleans. In particular, the African‐American community could no longer bear to have the symbols of their oppression present in the city.…”