Here’s an e-mail I got over the weekend:
Subject: Sterotyping and Logic Fallacies
Dear Mr. Warthen,
I have taught secondary school, undergraduate, and graduate history for a number of years. I frequently encounter those who refuse to respect Southerners’ heritage due to bigotry and stereotyping. Here’s a couple of photos I hope might show that stereotyping is wrong. The Kansas City Star newspaper ran a short column last week on a program I give around the country on black Confederate soldiers. The Battle Flag belongs to them as well. Over-generalizing is a logic fallacy. The Battle Flag’s meaning isn’t defined by a minority of racists any more than they can define the meaning of our U.S. flag that they use.
Regards,
Ed Kennedy
LtCol, US Army (ret)
Thank you for your service to your country, colonel. But I can’t resist sharing these thoughts with you:
To enlarge
your perspective, you should probably do a little research on the Wehrmacht’s
Ost battalions. There were likely more Poles and other Eastern Europeans in the
German Army than there were blacks in the Confederate — that doesn’t mean the
Nazis didn’t want to enslave (or kill) Slavs, or that they didn’t regard them as
subhuman.You might
also want to study up on the Stockholm Syndrome.When you
think about it, black soldiers in the Confederate army is hardly a more
surprising phenomenon than poor whites, who made up the vast majority of the
army. Both were dupes of the ruling class. Anyone who fought to support the
cause of secession who did NOT own slaves was a person risking his life for a
cause that was not his own, no matter what delusions he may have carried into
battle.… And it’s
spelled "stereotyping."
Related Posts
If you really research this issue you’ll find very few actual black soldiers in the Confederate army. It was practically unheard of. In fact until the very end of the war it was not even legal for blacks to serve in the Confederate army. Perhaps a miniscule number did but the Confederate army was probably as white as the Ku Klux Klan.
Probably, but I don’t care enough to spend time on it. It’s utterly irrelevant. However many black soldier there were, they were anomalous. We know why the Confederacy existed.
And you know what else? It doesn’t really matter why the Confederacy existed, in terms of whether the flag should fly. No flag of an extinct army anywhere at any time has any business flying on the lawn of our present-day seat of government. It’s just wildly irrational.
I only posted this because these people keep bringing up this bit of minutia as though it mattered, and I’m tired of it.
You notice how none of the folks who INSIST the flag has to be there to keep from dishonoring soldiers make any similar insistence about any monuments to other conflicts, such as the Spanish-American War monument about 30 yards away?
Well, we know why that is, don’t we? The flag has very little to do with honoring soldiers. It’s about flipping off people who don’t like it.
When the 30,000,000 illegal aliens get another round of Instant Citizenship and start demanding removal of monuments to the Mexican War and the Spanish American war, what will your position be?
Removal of the Confederate Flag is mostly about professional race baiters creating an issue to keep the donations coming in to fund their six-figure incomes as “Black Leaders”. For white liberals, it is a feel-good trip to stereotype Southerners as white trash, and disassociate themselves.
You know, it’s odd that the Confederate flag wasn’t raised over the SC Statehouse until it was apparent that the Civil Rights movement was gaining traction.
The rebellion had been lost for almost a century. The soldiers’ memory had survived quite well “only” having a monument on the statehouse grounds and numerous other memorials sans the rebel flag. Organizations like the Sons of Confederate Veterans etc. had paid tribute to those rebel soldiers without needing the rebel flag flying at the statehouse.
Yet, it wasn’t until old Jim Crow was threatened and it looked like the federal gubmint might force white South Carolinians to give equal rights to African-American citizens that the rebel flag suddenly needed to be resurrected.
Yep, it’s a mighty odd coincidence that resistance to federally forced integration preceded the raising of the banner of slavery and “states rights” over the statehouse.
There’s an old Texas saying applicable here: “Don’t piss on my head and tell me that it’s raining.” We all know what that flag really symbolizes– and it’s NOT the grand old memory of brave soldiers. It’s keeping African-Americans in “their place.”
The flag was ACTUALLY raised over the State House at the request of President Eisenhower, as part of a nationwide 5-year commemoration of the War Between the States. A lot of old cannons were put back together, and it was the beginning of re-enactments. My high school shop classes restored two calvary cannons as a project, under the guidance of a blacksmith and wheelwright who taught us how to make oak wheels and carriages from scratch.
The next time you see a camp of re-enactors, go up and talk to them. You might be surprised how many are from the North or Midwest, whose ancestors did not even come to America until the 20th century. You will meet a lot of black reenactors, too. WARNING: It may be shocking to find that they have more appreciation of history and heritage than you do.
The url below links to an article written by an Israeli about his country’s flag. It’s a very moving piece… and one that illustrates forcibly what powerful symbols flags can become. Check out the comments after the article – there were nearly 400 of them when I read it, some referencing our own Confederate flag.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/851079.html
MG,
Here’s an excerpt from Eisenhower’s proclamation of 1960 establishing the Civil War Centennial Commission:
“I request all units and agencies of government–Federal, State, and local–and their officials to encourage, foster, and participate in Centennial observances. And I especially urge our Nation’s schools and colleges, its libraries and museums, its churches and religious bodies, its civic, service, and patriotic organizations, its learned and professional societies, its arts, sciences, and industries, and its informational media, to plan and carry out their own appropriate Centennial observances during the years 1961 to 1965; all to the end of enriching our knowledge and appreciation of this momentous chapter in our Nation’s history and of making this memorable period truly a Centennial for all Americans.”
Note the reference in the last sentence to “all Americans.” Surely flying the flag over the State House (which was a decision of the SC General Assembly, not one proscribed by the Civil War Commission) was a reaction to the civil rights movement and not a gesture meant to appeal to all South Carolinians. When the flag was raised in 1961, it was routinely being used in southern states as a symbol of opposition to civil rights. In the weeks surrounding the riot sparked by James Meredith’s attempt to integrate Ole Miss, thousands of white Ole Miss fans waved Confederate flags and cheered Mississippi Governor Ross Barnett at football games, celebrating his defiance of the federal court desegregation order.
In the atmosphere of the early sixties, flying the confederate flag on the dome was clearly meant to provoke and to send an unmistakable message.
Brad,
I submitted a column last week to Mike Fitts that was a response to Sen. McConnell’s piece. It looks like he’s not going to run it. If not, you may want to post it on the blog (or I will with your permission). Thanks for pushing this debate. The flag will continue to hold us back until we reach some reasonable compromise, and we’re not there yet.
Sorry-change “proscribed” to “prescribed” above
Dr. DeMarco,
Where were you in 1961, when that proclamation was issued and the centennial activities began? Do you have a direct personal rememberance of the era, or only know what you read by someone who perhaps was also not present, or no an objective and knowledgeable observer?
It is inaccurate to insinuate that the Confederate flags were primarily and , “..routinely being used in southern states as a symbol of opposition to civil rights..”. They were not.
This was the school flag of Ole Miss, and all their fans waved the flags at games, long before 1961. It was also the flag run out on the football field at Clemson from the 1920s until Coach Ingram replaced it with the Tiger Paw in 1970.
If you want to stretch your imagination, and historical truth, you could also claim that the grey uniforms worn by the cadets at Clemson, Virginia Tech, VMI, and the Citadel were some sort racist uniform honoring the Confederacy, when in fact, these uniforms predate the Civil War by several generations, as any paintings of West Point cadets will demonstrate.
It is easy to sit here and slander previous generations by imputing motives which they never expressed. Please try to refrain from such uncivil behavior, and stick to what you KNOW.
Mr. Warthen,
With all due respect, as well as ‘Confederate’ history, you have Nazi/Slavic history wrong as well (I got people in both camps!)
I don’t want to be an ‘American.’ There really is no such thing; the Confederates excercised their constitutional right (read that again, please) of secession. The US is only a loose confederation; other than the original Constitution, with few exceptions, each state can be as different as the UK is to South Korea. We should share a common currency, allow interstate commerce, and have a common military to defend this continent. WE ARE NOT A NATION!!!
Slavery was not wrong; it was not evil; it just was. The so-called horror stories we hear/read about are pure fiction. I hope we never abandon the Western/Christian idea that children defer to adults, women defer to men, and those of lesser social status defer to those of a higher status.
The US flag should never fly over any property that is not governed by the US. That means the State House or any public school in SC. Fly it all you want on the POs and federal courts.
As far as the Nazi/Slav argument is concerned; there is no love lost between the two, but we aren’t dumb. The Nazis were honest–they killed most everyone they captured (but POWs were also fed the same as the Nazi Army). Roosevelt/Stalin/Yalta sentenced Eastern Europe to death for over 40 years with over 80,000,000 deaths. And how many did the Nazis murder???? Oh yeah, most were Orthodox Christians, and we all know that they don’t matter…
The Confederate battle flag; so what, who cares. When those who are offended by it can prove themselves worthy of republican representation, maybe we’ll review it. Sorry; I can’t stop laughing!!!!! All one has to do is watch the news at 5,6,7,10,and 11 in Columbia and check out the mug-shots! Also, (it may just be in our small-town SOUTHERN newspaper) but we still list births and the parents. Or rather, parent.
I’m still laughing!!!!!!
Brian in Kershaw Co.
Oh, now MG (aka BizWiz7 or Lee) demands personal knowledge of a historical event adequately covered by news organizations, history books and personal accounts.
His bar of “proof” is infinitely lower. He can analyze in depth and smear 32 murdered college students at VA Tech with only the sketchiest of details.
Of course, he only requires iron clad proof from the other side. Whatever nonsense some whitewashing, revisionist, neo-confederate pulls out his hat is fine with Lee.
Pres. Eisenhower requested the raising of the rebel flag over the SC Statehouse? Busted again, Lee– that’s absolute erroneous crap. Doc Demarco busted you and I’ll post the entire body of the declaration below. The raising of the symbol of a failed attempt to destroy the USA over the SC Statehouse probably never entered in Ike’s mind.
Such pathetic attempts to airbrush your worship of hate, slavery and bloody rebellion, Lee, insult the intelligence of your readers.
==========
CIVIL WAR CENTENNIAL PROCLAMATION
No. 3882
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION
The years 1961 – 1965 will mark the one hundredth anniversary of the American Civil War.
That war was America’s most tragic experience. But like all truly great tragedies, it carried with it an enduring lesson and a profound inspiration. It was a demonstration of heroisms and sacrifice by men and women of both sides, who valued principle above life itself and whose devotion to duty is a proud part of our national inheritance.
Both sections of our magnificently reunited country sent into their armies who became soldiers as good as any who ever fought under any flag. Military history records nothing finer than the courage and spirit displayed at such battles as Chickamauga, Antietam, Kenesaw Mountain and Gettysburg. That America could produce men so valiant, and so enduring is a matter for deep and abiding pride.
The same spirit on the part of the people back home these soldiers through four years of great trial. That a Nation which contained hardly more that 30 million people, North and South together, could sustain 600,000 deaths without faltering is a lasting testimonial to something unconquerable in the American spirit. And that a transcending sense of unity and larger common purpose could, in the end, cause the men and women who had suffered so greatly to close ranks once the contest ended and to go on together to build a greater, freer, happier America must be a source of inspiration as long as our country may last.
By a joint resolution approved on September 7, 1957, the Congress established the Civil War Centennial Commission to coordinate the nationwide observances of the one hundredth anniversary of the Civil War. This resolution authorized and requested the President issue proclamations inviting the people of the United States to participate in those observances.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, President of the United States of America, do hereby invite all of the people of our country to take a direct and active part in the Centennial of the Civil War.
I request all units and agencies of government, Federal, State and local, and their officials, to encourage, foster and participate in Centennial observances. And I especially urge our Nation’s schools and colleges, its libraries and museums, its churches and religious bodies, its civic, service and patriotic organizational, its learned and professional societies, its arts, sciences, and industries, and its informational media, to plan and carry out their own appropriate Centennial observances during the years 1961 to 1965; all to the end of enriching our knowledge and appreciation of this great chapter in our Nation’s history and of making this memorable period truly a Centennial for all Americans.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my had and caused the Seal of the United States of America to be affixed:
DONE at the city of Washington this 6th day of December in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and sixty, and of the independence of the United States of America the one hundred and eighty-fourth,
By the President:
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Brad, I let you know when I disagree with you on an issue. But today’s editorial about drunk driving issues was right on the money. I would just add this. Many states that have fairly weak laws against drunk drivers actually have low crash rates. Why is that? Apparently effective enforcement of the laws on the books, along with consistent, tough adjudication of the laws plays an important roll in the deterence process. Perception of what people risk if caught driving drunk is by far the most important factor. In SC people just don’t believe they will suffer adverse consequences, even if caught.
Keep these articles coming. We need more, many more like it.
MG,
It would be difficult to study or discuss history if one was confined to only the historical events at which one was present.
Since its inception, the Confederate flag has stood for opposition to civil rights. That’s why it became a useful symbol for those who opposed the civil rights movement of the 1950’s and 60’s.
I thought you wrote last week that you were done discussing the flag… I guess an editor’s word is worth about the same as a politician’s.
Thanks for posting the full text of what I told you – that the flags were flown at the request of President Eisenhower for the centennial recognition of the Civil War.
I don’t reject any knowledge except personal experience, but those of you who were not around during the 1960s, 1950s, etc, have to depend up someone who was present and attentive. I just ask you to question the veracity of your sources, especially when they offer simplistic stereotypes and general characterizations which I did not witness as a one who was there.
Brad
You never answer my question! If you move the battle flag,will you favor moving the monument,too?
Why don’t you answer me?
It was not the Confederate flag or monuments which attracted the neo-Nazis from Minnesota.
It was the media spotlight awaiting and inviting anyone who wants to protest, misuse and dishonor the South. Brad Warthen and Mike Fitts want to imitate the national media, hook up with the big city media, which hates the economic boom and much better race relations in the South.
They put out the welcome mat and encourage the NAACP, neo-Nazis, KKK, and other racist groups to use South Carolina for promotional demonstrations, to manufacture “news stories” by creating conflict.
I don’t care what you do with the monument. That’s the third or fourth position it’s been in, you know. Its original position was at Elmwood cemetery — that’s where the generation that actually KNEW and REMEMBERED those soldiers (as opposed to all these people who weep and moan about the loss of their ancestors they’ve never met, and who would have been long dead even if there had BEEN no war, which by the way there wouldn’t have been if we hadn’t started it) decided to put it.
So if you put it to me whether to move the monument and ask me to vote “yes” or “no” on it, I’d vote “yes.” But I’m not interested in pushing for it, and it’s a little hard for me to imagine that being an issue that gets voted on in my lifetime.
I mean, look at the realities — the flag flying there is absolutely indefensible, and you can’t get lawmakers even to consider the issue.
On another matter, where do you suppose this “Bill B.” character got the impression I wasn’t going to write about this any more?
Maybe the same place Moderate Guy got the idea that you and Mike Fitts want to “put out the welcome mat and encourage the NAACP, neo-Nazis, KKK, and other racist groups to use South Carolina for promotional demonstrations, to manufacture “news stories” by creating conflict.” Thin air?
Hey, Lee, one of the most ridiculous aspects of your argument to continue flying the rebel flag is that the commemoration HAS BEEN OVER FOR 42 YEARS.
Of course, the other ridiculous aspect is simply the very idea that commemorating the veterans would include flying the flag of a failed rebellion against the sovereign USA anyplace of official standing.
BEFORE you glommed onto this pretext of Eisenhower’s “request” for the flag to be flown (which is patently false as he made NO mention of the flag in the proclamation) you were more than happy to attribute responsibility for raising the flag to the Democratic governor of SC.
“Oh what a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive…”
Posted by Moderate Guy
“Removal of the Confederate Flag is mostly about professional race baiters creating an issue to keep the donations coming in to fund their six-figure incomes as ‘Black Leaders’. For white liberals, it is a feel-good trip to stereotype Southerners as white trash, and disassociate themselves.”
That’s basically what’s going on.
President Eisenhower did not give specific instructions on any particulars of how to celebrate, but he did appoint a commission, and there was national coordination of all the state centennial celebrations.
Since Ole Miss, Alabama, Georgia, Clemson, and dozens of other colleges already flew the flags for football games, it was not like they sneaked them into the celebrations.
But those who were not present, and want to believe hateful fantasy instead of reading genuine history, will never be convince by facts and eyewitness recordings of the events. Brad Warthen doesn’t even believe what was reported in his own newspaper at the time.
Busted again, Lee. You can make up, whitewash, misconstrue, twist and deny history but you can’t change your posts on here.
============
Thanks for posting the full text of what I told you – that the flags were flown at the request of President Eisenhower for the centennial recognition of the Civil War.
[…]
Posted by: Moderate Guy | May 1, 2007 8:27:08 AM
==============
President Eisenhower did not give specific instructions on any particulars of how to celebrate, […]
Posted by: Moderate Guy | May 1, 2007 1:15:58 PM
================
Only, he DID give some specific instructions:
“And I especially urge our [schools etc.] all to the end of enriching our knowledge and appreciation of this great chapter in our Nation’s history and of making this memorable period truly a Centennial for all Americans.”
As hard as you try to twist the facts, in 1961-65 the rebel flag DID NOT (and DOES NOT) commemorate anything but misery and hurt for African-AMERICANS whose forebears suffered under 200 years of inhuman bondage and exploitation before enduring another 60+ years of Jim Crow.
Moderate guy,
Since you obviously like to see solid, hard evidence, why not provide some of your own to demonstrate how that effectively flag represents all South Carolinians? Sorry, but it doesn’t, and actually never has. I previously pointed out how those events tore apart many families, with the result that many fought on opposite sides. While not like NC , which barely voted for secession, many in SC did not support secession at all.
Time to put that antique relic in a museum where it belongs. Doing so is no dishonor in the slightest. If anything, it is quite otherwise. Unless, of course, you can somehow convincingly prove that a museum display is “dishonorable”.
Brad,
You wrote, “On another matter, where do you suppose this “Bill B.” character got the impression I wasn’t going to write about this any more?”
My response:
On Apr 25, 2007 10:45:10 AM, in the blog entitled “Thanks to the flag, we’ve got Nazis on our steps” you wrote, “As for you being tired of the stupid Confederate flag — SO AM I. And after only writing about it three or four times in the last seven years before 11 days ago, I’ve had it.”
I took this as meaning that you were tired of discussing it… did I read this wrong? I realize your hobby appears to be beating a dead horse, so maybe I was wrong.
Man, when it comes to lying and spinning, these Yankees and scalawags are the best.
First it was the “flag went up because of desegregation”. When proven wrong and shown it was Ike’s idea, they never skip a beat,they don’t admit they were wrong, they just say “well Ike didn’t specifically say put up a flag”. When shown Ike did generally say that, they now say”but it was
50 years ago”.Kinda funny watching them squirm.
I find it amazing that people like ‘Hurl”
rant and rave about “200 years of slavery and Jim Crow”,events that occured under the
Stars and Stripes(89 years of slavery VS 4 years), yet he attacks the Confederate flag.
VASteve-
Nice bit of subterfuge, but there are some significant holes in your argument.
1) If you read the documents provided again, exactly whom did Eisenhower ask that we honor in those Centennial observances?
Was it in any way LIMITED to solely Confederates?
OR was it meant to HONOR ALL THOSE WHO DIED??? By any chance, does flying that battle flag in such a manner honor ALL THOSE WHO DIED?
Thanks for reminding us that slavery occurred in the US, but I’d like to remind you that it also ended under US hegemony as well. Since you’re obviously so quick with facts, please remind me, what the Confederate position on that issue again?
Jim Crow laws were passed by a few bitter, angry white men to “turn back” the tide of Reconstruction. Such laws were fully endorsed by the aforementioned Dixiecrats who chose to honor just ONE side of that conflict, not ALL THOSE WHO DIED. I do believe that RTH is right; those Dixiecrats kept that flag flying well after the commemoration was over- and for obvious fairly reasons.
In the end, you haven’t advanced a very good argument as to why that flag should stay where it is.
“I’ve had it” meant that I was fed up with all the evasion, with the nonsense that is offered as “reason” to keep flying the flag, and with the “compromise.”
In a sense, I was fed up with NOT writing about it. The NAACP has made it difficult, by approaching the issue all wrong — trying to coerce the state. Even if it worked, it would be wrong. If South Carolina doesn’t decide on its own steam to lower the flag, we have made no progress as a people.
The NAACP has frozen the discussion, by giving flag defenders an excuse to dismiss any further mention, asserting that if you bring up the flag, you’re helping the people who are seeking, although failing, to harm our state economically — the NAACP.
I’m fed up with that dodge. The flag needs to go. Ignore the NAACP. The boycott has no appreciable effect, so let’s focus on the right thing to do.
Just a reminder of what you are surrendering to:
“The government of the U.S. has any and all rights which they choose to enforce in war – to take their lives, their homes, their land, their everything….to the persistent secessionist, why, death is mercy, and the quicker he or she is disposed of the better”
“There is a class of people men, women and children, who must be killed or banished before you can hope for peace and order.”
“extermination, not of soldiers alone…but of the people”
General William T. Sherman
A few more:
“It is plain that nothing approaching the present policy will subdue the rebels. Whether we shall find anybody with a sufficient grasp of mind and sufficient moral courage to treat this as a radical revolution and remodel our institutions,
I doubt. It would involve the desolation of the South as well as emancipation, and a re-peopling of half the continent. This ought to be done, but it startles most men.”
Thaddeus Stevens, United States Senator, 1862
“Burn and kill, burn and kill…until the whole rebel race is exterminated!”
“Parson” Brownlow (Reconstruction Governor of Tennessee) at a Convention of Radical Republicans, 1866
These were Radical politicians.
You are surrendering to their (ethnic-cleansing) political descendants.
Unfortunately, no flag represents all South Carolinians. Lots of immigrants and migrants from up North have no connection to the War Between the States. It is none of their business, and most recognize that fact.
Then we have the illegal immigrants, flying Mexican flags in theh streets yesterday, and burning American flags, because they want all the benefits of citizenship given to them without the bother of legal process.
Here in South Carolina, many of the people who hate the Confederate monuments and flags also are uncomfortable with saying the Pledge of Allegiance, singing our national anthem, or joining in celebrations to honor the veterans of World War II, Korean, Vietnam, and our current soldiers in Iraq.
Tom & Va.Steve, I’m puzzled that you and other neo-confederates can tolerate living under the American flag. To y’all it seems to represent so many wrongs. How can you salute it and pledge allegiance to the country that it represents?
Or, do you?
I don’t claim that everything done in the name of the USA is irreproachable. Far, far from it.
The rebel flag represents a rebellion to maintain slavery. The American flag represents a flawed country that eventually moved to correct that blot on our national character.
In the century+ since the Civil War, the USA has moved erratically and slowly to enforce equal civil rights and discourage racism. One of the obstacles has been worshiping a rebellion fought to preserve one of the most heinous institutions of racism and unequal rights.
Those who persist in insisting that the War Between the States was only, or primarily, about freeing the slaves to benefit the blacks in the South, is avoiding the larger set of issues and agendas at that time, and which persist today.
Abe Lincoln and his followers were part of a movement which began with Alexander Hamilton and others to undermine the architecture of America as a confederation of states, and replace it with states under the control of a central government.
They replaced the state militias with a federal army of conscripts.
They replaced balanced budgets and gold backing for currency with fiat money and deficit spending.
They replaced a small government financed by small tariffs on the growth of international trade, with wage and salary taxes on the working class, and low taxes on the lending class.
They would like to take away many more rights from individuals, and continue to try to do so at every opportunity. So long as these usurpers consider themselves to be at war with the People and their Constitution, wise people must be at war with the traitors.
The loose confederation structure was tried and failed. The Articles of Confederation were replaced by the U.S. Constitution in 1788.
You insist that preserving slavery wasn’t the primary cause for secession and rebellion despite the words of South Carolinians who voted to leave the United States.
I guess that it’s just another inconvenient truth that you choose to ignore.
Just in case you missed this money quote:
So, if the free-states threatened slavery– as the men at the secession convention obviously believed– then threatening slavery meant dissolving the bonds of union between the states.
Northerners didn’t believe that the USA was based on slavery. Southerners did.
While neo-confederate revisionists may whine about how the northern states had slavery (until each abolished it, in turn); or, about Yankee atrocities; or, about northern racism; or, about “taxation without representation” (despite slaves being denied every other human right, never mind being represented for taxation)– they can’t avoid the fact that preserving slavery was the linchpin of all reasons for secession.
From the same source-
The Revolution of 1776 turned upon one great principle of self-government and self-taxation; the criterion of self-government. Where the interests of two people united together under one Government, are different, each must have the power to protect its interests by the organization of the Government, or they cannot be free. The interests of Great Britain and of the Colonies were different and antagonistic. Great Britain was desirous of carrying out the policy of all nations towards their Colonies, of making them tributary to her wealth and power. She had vast and complicated relations with the whole world. Her policy towards her North American Colonies was to identify them with her in all these complicated relations; and to make them bear, in common with the rest of the Empire, the full burden of her obligations and necessities. She had a vast public debt; she had an European policy and an Asiatic policy, which had occasioned the accumulation of her public debt; and which kept her in continual wars. The North American Colonies saw their interests, political and commercial, sacrificed by such a policy. Their interests required that they should not be identified with the burdens and wars of the mother country. They had been settled under Charters, which gave them self-government; at least so far as their property was concerned. They had taxed themselves, and had never been taxed by the Government of Great Britain. To make them a part of a consolidated Empire, the Parliament of Great Britain determined to assume the power of legislating for the Colonies in all cases whatsoever. Our ancestors resisted the pretension. They refused to be a part of the consolidated Government of Great Britain.
The Southern States now stand exactly in the same position towards the Northern States that the Colonies did towards Great Britain. The Northern States, having the majority in Congress, claim the same power of omnipotence in legislation as the British Parliament. “The General Welfare,” is the only limit to the legislation of either; and the majority in Congress, as in the British Parliament, are the sole judges of the expediency of the legislation this “General Welfare” requires. Thus, the Government of the United States has become a consolidated Government; and the people of the Southern States are compelled to meet the very despotism their fathers threw off in the Revolution of 1776.
….
And so with the Southern States, towards the Northern States, in the vital matter of taxation. They are in a minority in Congress. Their representation in Congress is useless to protect them against unjust taxation; and they are taxed by the people of the North for their benefit, exactly as the people of Great Britain taxed our ancestors in the British Parliament for their benefit. For the last forty years, the taxes laid by the Congress of the United States, have been laid with a view of subserving the interests of the North. The people of the South have been taxed by duties on imports, not for revenue, but for an object inconsistent with revenue – to promote, by prohibitions, Northern interests in the productions of their mines and manufactures.
There is another evil, in the condition of the Southern towards the Northern States, which our ancestors refused to bear towards Great Britain. Our ancestors not only taxed themselves, but all the taxes collected from them, were expended amongst them. Had they submitted to the pretensions of the British Government, the taxes collected from them would have been expended in other parts of the British Empire. They were fully aware of the effect of such a policy in impoverishing the people from whom taxes are collected, and in enriching those who receive the benefit of their expenditure. To prevent the evils of such a policy was one of the motives which drove them on to revolution. Yet this British policy has been fully realized towards the Southern States by the Northern States. The people of the Southern States are not only taxed for the benefit of the Northern States, but after the taxes are collected, three- fourths of them are expended at the North. This cause, with others, connected with the operation of the General Government, has made the cities of the South provincial. Their growth is paralyzed; they are mere suburbs of Northern cities. The agricultural productions of the South are the basis of the foreign commerce of the United States; yet Southern cities do not carry it on. Our foreign trade is almost annihilated. In 1740, there were five ship-yards in South Carolina, to build ships to carry on our direct trade with Europe. Between 1740 and 1779, there were built in these yards, twenty-five square rigged vessels, besides a great number of sloops and schooners, to carry on our coast and West India trade. In the half century immediately preceding the Revolution, from 1725 to 1775, the population of South Carolina increased seven-fold.
No man can, for a moment, believe that our ancestors intended to establish over their posterity, exactly the same sort of Government they had overthrown. The great object of the Constitution of the United States, in its internal operation, was, doubtless, to secure the great end of the Revolution – a limited free Government – a Government limited to those matters only, which were general and common to all portions of the United States. All sectional or local interests were to be left to the States. By no other arrangement would they obtain free Government, by a Constitution common to so vast a Confederacy. Yet, by gradual and steady encroachments on the part of the people of the North, and acquiescence on the part of the South, the limitations in the Constitution have been swept away; and the Government of the United States has become consolidated, with a claim of limitless powers in its operations.
The US Constitution creates a loose confederation of the states, in that the federal government had only those limited powers specifically enumerated in it.
Slavery was put a vote in the states at the time of ratification of the Constitution and South Carolina almost voted to abolish it. It is too bad they didn’t.
The Federalists immediately set about to undermine what they had been unable to codify Within 20 years, several New England states held a convention to discuss secession.
Lincoln, elected like Clinton on a 3-way split vote, repeatedly violated the Constitution by arresting the Maryland legislature, printing fiat money, drafting soldiers, hiring socialist outcasts from Europe as mercenaries, etc. Lincoln and his more radical backers destroyed the Union and made the South back into colonies of the large Northern states like New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Ohio.
Since then, we have had Woodrow Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Nixon, and everyone since FDR except Reagan, trying to create new rights and powers for the federal government at the expense of individual liberty and state autonomy.
Moderate Guy, you conveniently forget the failures of the Reagan administration. Failures that enhanced the power of the federal government at the expense of individual liberty. Take the war on drugs. Now there’s a good example of promoting individual liberty. Or the disasterous invasion of Lebanon. Ask the families of the dead marines how much liberty they have. And of course there was the Savings and Loan debacle. The people benefited from that bit of government de-regulation, a sort of liberation from their money. And of course spending, thanks to the wasteful military spending, corporate welfare at it’s worst, went through the roof during the Reagan years. And then there was trading arms for hostages. I guess liberating terrorist hostage takers from the tyranny of not having weapons counts in your world view as a good thing.
Let’s just ignore facts MG. That way you can always support your pre-conceived notion of how you believe the world is.
Nixon and Carter started the War on Drugs, and Reagan continued it. It is largely a failure because we have not sealed our borders against illegal aliens, many of whom are career criminals.
The US never invaded Lebanon. President Carter sent a few Marines there to assist in the evacuation of embassy staff and other US citizens, after Syria and Iran destabilized it. Marines were killed in a truck bombing during their withdrawal stage.
The Reagan tax cuts brought in enough money to balance the budget and bring Social Security back from insolvency suffered under Carter. Unfortunately, Democrats in control of the Senate and House overspent, looted Social Security by borrowing to finance huge deficits. Reagan should have vetoed every deficit spending bill. He did several, the the press howled about, “Reagan is shutting down the government”.
Is this Brad’s blog or Moderate Guy’s?
Is that all you can say to the facts?
There was also no “arms for hostages” trade with Iran. That is just a lie, oft repeated, in classic Goebbels fashion.
Reagan did ease sanctions a bit by dealing with the moderates in Iran, to increase their power and influence by their being able to deliver economic goods and medical supplies. The Democrats sabotaged that in a selfish and partisan campaign of hearings which found nothing wrong, but put the radicals back into power in Iran.
Good one, RTH. It’s pretty obvious who the “revisionists” are- those who want to EXCLUDE slavery from the history of the Confederacy, and deny the central role it clearly had.
Clearly, some of my fellow AMERICANS really like their head up where the sun don’t shine.
Moderate guy
1) Did I ever ask if JUST ONE FLAG would represent all of the state? Absolutely not. I asked if that flag represents all of the state. It obviously doesn’t. The stars and stripes include a lot more folks than you may be willing to admit.
2) Car to honor all of the dead? That’s what the centenary SHOULD have been about, but that was obviously lost on some folks.
2) The stars and stripes works very nicely for me, and I pledge allegiance to it. Insinuating that I don’t say the pledge is not only highly insulting, it’s just evasive tactic on your part, and therefore a cop-out.
3) You can’t vilify the union and then turn around and claim allegiance to it. In light of your incessant remarks, it’s seems clear where your allegiance lies, and it’s obviously not the stars and stripes.
4) Didn’t the Confederate patriot die-hards all move to Brazil, the Caribbean and Cuba in the wake of losing all in the war that they started?
5) In light of that, Maybe Fidel will let you fly the flag in Havana if you ask nicely-or Hugo Chavez? After all, they’re the only ones who trashes the union as viciously as the confederates historical revisionists.
Tom,
You neglected to mention who started the hostilities, Who ratcheted up the rhetoric, and who fired he first shot.
I never met a proud Southerner who wanted to deny the role of slavery in the War of Northern Agression. Most of them do recognize the equal and greater roles of other causes of conflict, and put the slave system into its proper place as part of the economic issues, affecting a small minority of people who were slave owners (some of themselves being black former slaves).
You might read Shelby Foote’s histories for a start.
ModerateLee,
I concur with your stated desire to study and use history as objectively as possible.
However, I think you miss the mark with your comment:
****************************************
The flag was treated with honor and respect, even by Yankee veterans and their children and grandchildren, until it was misappropriated in the 1950s by the KKK, motorcycle gangs and now by some neo-Nazis.
*****************************************
You seem to be arguing that that the Confederate flag was only “misused” by a few extremists and these few have ruined what is otherwise a sacred symbol to the vast majority of southerners.
That view is challenged by John Coski’s excellent book, The Confederate Battle Flag: America’s Most Embattled Emblem. Coski was Historian and Library Director of the Museum of the Confederacy in Richmond when he wrote the book in 2005, a position which lends him some credibility on this issue.
He presents a balanced perspective on the flag, stating that although “the battle flag was certainly a familiar part of the southern landscape before World War II, the nature of its presence changed dramatically after 1948.” (p.161) He argues that this shift occurred in part as a response to Strom Thurmond’s run for President on the segregationist Dixiecrat ticket. The battle flag was an unofficial emblem of his candidacy.
That was one of the first of many examples of the flag being misappropriated to promote segregation. The United Daughters of the Confederacy recognized this threat and the president of the UDC issued a statement in 1948 responding to the Dixiecrats’ flag use: “Our flag is not to be used in connection with any political movement…we must not permit improper use of it.” (p. 162)
Of course, this call went unheeded, and for the past half century, the flag has been “improperly” used in many ways. But this misuse has not been at the hands of just a few. The metamorphosis of the flag into a symbol of resistance to integration was a grass roots effort involving thousands of ordinary southerners who ignored the UDC’s call for reverence and restraint in displays of the flag. Each time the flag was flown by protesters opposing the integration of a local school (by families in that neighborhood) or displayed at a White Citizen’s Council meeting (by respected local businessmen) the flag became less sacred and more soiled.
I admire your desire to maintain the purity of the Confederate flag. I wish it had been unfurled only at solemn remembrances of Confederate dead. But too many in the southern white segregationist majority of the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s found it a convenient symbol for their views. The meaning they imbued into the banner can never be expunged.
Brad,
I totally agree. I also believe that a lot (well, at least some) of the people in the “Heritage” crowd are being defensive and lashing out because they’re scared that we’re going to call them names and tell them that their ancestors died in vain. What we need is to tell the story properly and assuage the fears of the moderates in the “Heritage” crowd.
You moderates of the “Heritage” crowd, I promise never to call (specifically or metaphorically) your ancestors: stupid, racists, Nazis, traitors, evil, or supporters of treason. I will always say that people fought with honor on both sides and that the US is better for having fought the Civil War.
Now, what type of memorial for the honorable Confederate soldier should we have on the Statehouse grounds? The flag that the person fought for … I think not. Flying the Confederate flag is inappropriate because a flying flag indicates a living government, and the Confederate government does not exist. Because the Confederate government does not exist, waving the Confederate flag from a flagpole says that the soldiers did die in vain, which I do not believe. The result of the Civil War is that we are a stronger nation, and the sacrifices that Lincoln described in his Gettysburg Address apply to soldiers on both sides.
I encourage reasonableness and civility on all sides. Brad, I hope that you can get some representatives of our legislature to work with The State Newspaper to host some open forums so that our Legislature can hear from the people, not just the special interests. It will be great for our state to have some real debates on this issue. We can encourage historians, politicians, and regular people to talk and listen to each other.
And after, we can get the flag down and progress as a state beyond this issue.
Thank you for providing this forum.
Regards,
Michael Rodgers
Columbia
The real issues of the American Civil War were political power and money. The slaves were used as pawns for those aims.
Tom,
A good deal of that money was made through the institution of slavery, was it not? Politicians were put in power to vote for Secession precisely because they felt compelled to defend it, did they not?
Pawns? My, how you trivialize the matter!
The economy, power, plantations, legacies, and even the streets in this state were BUILT by back-breaking labor of those “pawns”, at the order of their “masters”. The next time you walk on the cobblestones down in Charleston, consider the hands that put them into place.
Michael,
Thanks for your erudite post. Many who are so vociferously in favor of flying the flag fail to recognize that there are those of use who see the issue from both sides. We recognize that then, as now, families are torn apart by war. We also recognize that our state is great and thriving precisely because it is diverse. Apparently, some can’t seem to handle that fact.
Reply to zzazzeefrazzee
I left out a key part-
power & money were Northern motives.
Brad,
I’ve suddenly realized that Mark Sanford’s statement is on target and points us to the next step for us. Recall that when Steve Spurrier made his comments calling for removing the Confederate flag from the flagpole on the SC Statehouse grounds, Mark Sanford’s position was as follows, from his spokesman Joel Sawyer: “We’ve been very clear. It’s settled. The issue was settled … years ago.”
Now I say, correct. The so-called compromise happened and it’s done. There is no need to return to motivations and actions of the past. Let’s look to the future. Let’s have a new study of whether we want the flag to fly from the flagpole at the Confederate Memorial on the SC Statehouse grounds.
Memorials are studied and changed, or not changed, all the time. Philadelphia moved Rocky (I say good). The Taliban blew up Buddha (I say bad). Some people want Reagan on Mt. Rushmore (I don’t know). So, focusing on the Confederate Memorial, let’s get a commission to study the memorial and decide, whether we should add, take away, or move anything to or from the Confederate Memorial to make it a better, more appropriate memorial.
Here’s a suggestion for an addition: The SC Declaration of Secession should be made into a large historical plaque and placed there. Here’s a suggestion for a removal: The Confederate flag and the flagpole should be taken away. I hope the commission that gets formed is open to considering these and any other suggestions.
I know that the citizens of SC will help the commission see that the memorial will be a better one if flying the Confederate flag from a flagpole is not part of it.
Regards,
Michael Rodgers
Columbia, SC
Confederate Memorial Day was Saturday 05 May, 2007.
I recall seeing a story in The State where several ministers held a prayer vigil against the flag on the Statehouse grounds.
On Friday 5/4/2007, Saturday 5/5/2007, Sunday 5/6/2007 not one sentence was printed about there even being a Confederate Memorial Day.
So much for fair and balanced journalism.
Richard M. Freeman
Slave And Master Bondage
The simplest way to fasten rope bondage and a skill that most BDSMers benefit from. in the attit
Decorating for the Holidays Author: STEWARTlots of stuff similar to crafts done in her magazinei like martha stewart, subscribe to her magazine and bought last year’s christmas book, but this one is missing something. to me, lots of the ideas i’ve seen before either in her magazine or on her tv show. some of the ideas were great as usually, but they’re not worth the price of the book. a gorgeous book with ideas and text to savourThis is the most beautiful Christmas decorating book I’ve ever seen. The ideas…