Not sure what your last line meant, but there is an inflection point here that needs to be looked at honestly.
I’m guessing that many people of good conscience have pondered the meaning and effect of these monuments, at least in the last week or so. My own thoughts have some added nuance today. The recent pointing out that many of them were erected during Jim Crow and the rise of the Klan, alongside the historical awareness that the losing side suffered as great a loss of life, of fathers, sons, and brothers as did the Union. Many of the north did not fight for emancipation or equal rights and treatment of “the negro,” and many of the south did not fight for slavery. It is not out of the question that 60 years later that at least some of the desire to commemorate was just for the loss of their presence, and not so much of their cause. Yet another reason that war is the summation of all evils and must be avoided at all costs, because this one so distant and without living participants today, continues to vex us.
Recall that Lincoln counseled Grant and Sherman, as the end came into view to “Let 'em up easy.” This was not a backhanded endorsement of slavery or winking acceptance of the justness of the secessionists cause. It was the acknowledgement of their great loss, and the need to heal.
I myself would see all memorials that would legitimize the cause of the secessionists removed. But I am not a son of the south, and can’t personally feel that it is the very memory of my ancestors lives that is being delegitimized, and not just the cause that brought them to their end.