Evidently, the South did:
"*In late 1860 and early 1861, state-appointed commissioners traveled the length and breadth of the slave South carrying a fervent message in pursuit of a clear goal: to persuade the political leadership and the citizenry of the uncommitted slave states to join in the effort to destroy the Union and forge a new Southern nation.
Directly refuting the neo-Confederate contention that slavery was neither the reason for secession nor the catalyst for the resulting onset of hostilities in 1861, Charles B. Dew finds in the commissioners’ brutally candid rhetoric a stark white supremacist ideology that proves the contrary. The commissioners included in their speeches a constitutional justification for secession, to be sure, and they pointed to a number of political “outrages” committed by the North in the decades prior to Lincoln’s election. But the core of their argument―the reason the right of secession had to be invoked and invoked immediately―did not turn on matters of constitutional interpretation or political principle. Over and over again, the commissioners returned to the same point: that Lincoln’s election signaled an unequivocal commitment on the part of the North to destroy slavery and that emancipation would plunge the South into a racial nightmare.*"
The Union’s plan was to cordon off the Slave States, to grow the Western frontier as free-states, and to force the South to abandon slavery overtime. It only became an outright war when the South saw Lincoln’s election as President, and refused to go along with that result without the Union Government making concessions. Concessions Lincoln refused to make.
Incidentally, the cordon-off plan was precisely what Lincoln was planning on with the Loyal states; instead of forcing the abolition of slavery, he would allow them to get there overtime.
But, this is neither here nor there. Any talk on the Union, is just a distraction from where this discussion started.
Once again I remind, it was what the Confederacy was fighting for that people don’t want to be associated with. As that cause was, by the Confederates own words, by their own arguments to convince other states to join their cause, **for slavery. **Any monument dedicated to them, is thus a monument linked to the Racial Determinism they championed, and claimed as “superior” to the society of Free Men in the North (they state this). Superior to the system, and the Constitution, that the Founders gave us (they state this).
People today thus have a right to not see their money support that. At worst you are forcing people to commemorate a great evil, at best, you are coercing involvement on a difficult issue people are better left to decide for themselves. Either way, building and maintaining these monuments should be voluntary. Not compulsory. You have not put forth a single argument that disproves this. Bringing up evils of the Union does not make that argument. At best, it just tables if there’s another category of monuments we should reconsider.
The objection to paying for monuments to the Confederates would stand regardless. It’s rather dim to call people “whiners” if you want to be a “whiner” yourself for the opposite side.