Stone Mountain in Georgia hosts the world's largest bas-relief, featuring Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, and Stonewall Jackson. It was begun by the Daughters of the Confederacy on land purchased from two of the founders of the Second KKK, finished by the state government during the Civil Rights Movement, and opened on the centennial of Lincoln's assassination. There is absolutely no question that it was created to honor white supremacy, which is problematic in a state park.
The Democratic candidate for Governor of Georgia, Stacey Abrams, has called for the relief to be sandblasted off. There is a part of me that is deeply and viscerally bothered by this, because it brings to mind footage of the Taliban destroying the Bamyan Buddhas. And the Taliban, I am sure, found graven idols of a heathen prophet every bit as offensive as I found Stone Mountain. Now, I believe that morally there is no comparison between the two, even if the Bamyan Buddhas hadn't been far older, but I still can't shake the comparison I instinctively make.
Normally, my feeling on Confederate memorials is that they should be removed from public squares and ones which are in some way exceptional should be presented in museums. Stone Mountain is unquestionably exceptional, but there is simply no way to remove it and display it in a museum. The options are to leave it as is, Confederate flags and all (unacceptable, though a lot of Georgians support this option); try to recontextualize it in situ; or sandblast it into oblivion. Stone Mountain is a unique and outstanding natural feature, one which is also close to Atlanta. Given its size and the importance of Stone Mountain itself, I think that in this case, the right thing to do is, indeed, to sandblast it away.
Moreover, I can make another analogy, one which I think is more apt: brutalist architecture. I consider it an affront to good taste, and it angers me when brutalist architecture gets historic protections simply for being representative of a style which was inexplicably popular several decades ago. I would like to see all brutalist architecture disappear in the course of redevelopment. And if I feel that I can justify this for an architectural style which is merely an affront to aesthetics in the course of normal development, then it should be even more justified for relief designed to offend.