Blacks and the Confederacy

Townhall.com ^ | January 20, 2016 | Walter E. Williams

[Kaslin]

Last July, Anthony Hervey, an outspoken black advocate for the Confederate flag, was killed in a car crash. Arlene Barnum, a surviving passenger in the vehicle, told authorities and the media that they had been forced off the road by a carload of "angry young black men" after Hervey, while wearing his Confederate kepi, stopped at a convenience store en route to his home in Oxford, Mississippi. His death was in no small part caused by the gross level of ignorance, organized deceit and anger about the War of 1861. Much of the ignorance stems from the fact that most Americans believe the war was initiated to free slaves, when in truth, freeing slaves was little more than an afterthought. I want to lay out a few quotations and ask what you make of them.

During the "Civil War," ex-slave Frederick Douglass observed, "There are at the present moment many colored men in the Confederate army doing duty not only as cooks, servants and laborers, but as real soldiers, having muskets on their shoulders, and bullets in their pockets, ready to shoot down loyal troops, and do all that soldiers may to destroy the Federal Government and build up that of the traitors and rebels" (Douglass' Monthly, September 1861).

"For more than two years, negroes had been extensively employed in belligerent operations by the Confederacy. They had been embodied and drilled as Rebel soldiers, and had paraded with White troops at a time when this would not have been tolerated in the armies of the Union." (Horace Greeley, in his book, "The American Conflict").

"Over 3,000 negroes must be included in this number (of Confederate troops). These were clad in all kinds of uniforms, not only in cast-off or captured United States uniforms, but in coats with Southern buttons, State buttons, etc. These were shabby, but not shabbier or seedier than those worn by white men in rebel ranks. Most of the negroes had arms, rifles, muskets, sabres, bowie-knives, dirks, etc. They were supplied, in many instances, with knapsacks, haversacks, canteens, etc., and were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederacy Army. They were seen riding on horses and mules, driving wagons, riding on caissons, in ambulances, with the staff of Generals, and promiscuously mixed up with all the rebel horde" (report by Dr. Lewis H. Steiner, chief inspector of the U.S. Sanitary Commission).

In April 1861, a Petersburg, Virginia, newspaper proposed "three cheers for the patriotic free Negroes of Lynchburg" after 70 blacks offered "to act in whatever capacity" had been "assigned to them" in defense of Virginia.

Those are but a few examples of the important role that blacks served as soldiers, freemen and slaves on the side of the Confederacy. The flap over the Confederate flag is not quite so simple as the nation's race "experts" make it. They want us to believe the flag is a symbol of racism. Yes, racists have used the Confederate flag as their symbol, but racists have also marched behind the U.S. flag and have used the Bible. Would anyone suggest banning the U.S. flag from state buildings and references to the Bible?

Black civil rights activists, their white liberal supporters and historically ignorant Americans who attack the Confederate flag have committed a deep, despicable dishonor to our patriotic Southern black ancestors who marched, fought and died not to protect slavery but to protect their homeland from Northern aggression. They don't deserve the dishonor. Dr. Leonard Haynes, a black professor at Southern University, stated, "When you eliminate the black Confederate soldier, you've eliminated the history of the South."

[rockrr]

Well I wouldn’t put it past pokie to screw up even the easiest of quotes so I’ll withhold judgment - for now.

[HandyDandy]

Ummm,......it isn't very hard at all to find all the info you need about Napolitano and his self-admitted "contrarian" views about Lincoln. His "feelings" on the matter have been debunked by real historians. My advice, especially to CBW, would be to drop the matter and not sully a Civil War thread with the "judges" views on it. It is curious to me that CBW should put forth the views of a man who is thought to be, shall we say, light in the loafers. But perhaps that's what "cowboy way" means. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Meanwhile, CBW, I am hard at work on studying your question very carefully and working on my answer.

[rockrr]

Pokie is stuck on stupid. She doesn't think things through and she doesn't heed advice. I think she likes looking foolish.

[cowboyway]

His "feelings" on the matter have been debunked by real historians.

Post links to said "real historians".

My advice, especially to CBW, would be to drop the matter and not sully a Civil War thread with the "judges" views on it.

The thread went to crap when you False Cause losers showed up.

CBW should put forth the views of a man who is thought to be, shall we say, light in the loafers.

News to me but, if you say so. (I guess it takes one to know one.....)

I am hard at work on studying your question very carefully and working on my answer.

Don't strain yourself. I already know your answer.

[cowboyway]

“Snark, snark, snark! LOL! ;) ((snicker))” -— rockrr

[HandyDandy]

"..........detailed rebuttals of Napolitano's claims by historians like Eric Foner, James Oakes, Manisha Sinha - ........" See more at: http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/155092#sthash.PBaiAVeS.dpuf

Sorry, don't know how to put a link in a post. I'm new here.

Buttercup, you're the guy who quoted him and introduced him into this thread. You really ought to drop the matter.

[cowboyway]

HandyDandy's Weak Link

Wow! I would never believe in a million years that a liberal grade school teacher at a liberal private school in Massivetwoshits would come to the defense of disHonest Abe. /sarc

Sorry, don't know how to put a link in a post. I'm new here.

HTML has been around a while and isn't exclusive to this site.

Buttercup, you're the guy who quoted him and introduced him into this thread. You really ought to drop the matter.

Awwwww, the noobie's learning from his False Cause mentors and using terms of endearment.

You should go back to whatever libtard site you usually post on. This one's no good for you.

[BroJoeK]

cowboyway: "Ain't gonna change what I posted which is that honest people in lincoln's time and honest people today recognize that disHonest Abe was a tyrant and a war criminal"

Unless I've seriously misjudged Napolitano, he does not support your opinions.

cowboyway: "Do you own research, professor.
You appear to have ample free time on your hands."

Sometimes yes, other times not so much.
We'll see.

[BroJoeK]

HandyDandy: ""..........detailed rebuttals of Napolitano's claims by historians like Eric Foner, James Oakes, Manisha Sinha - ........" See more at: [here]"

Thanks for the link, it's highly illuminating.
I had no idea the "good judge" Napolitano was such an ignorant sob.
So cowboyway's quotes here are not just "out of context" or fleeting "by the way"-type remarks, they do in fact reflect Napolitano's considered judgment, developed over many years and expressed consistently in several of his books.

They prove that Napolitano is dishonest to the core and a lying SOS.

But the article you referenced makes no efforts to refute Napolitano's ludicrous claims.
It simply presents them in all apparent fealty & accuracy.

Point is: cowboyway, you have no need to fear this History News Network article from March of 2014.
It says just what you believe and have expressed on these threads many times.
And it makes no serious efforts to refute any of it, though it does make clear the author himself disagrees.

Question to rockrr: to your knowledge, have Napolitano's books and views ever been the subject of Civil War threads on Free Republic?
I promise you, this is the first I've seen or heard of it.
But all of his arguments we've seen many times, disassembled them and smashed their components, only to see that "transformer" machine reassembled and striking back the very next thread.

But I'm guessing Napolitano is not the originator of such rubbish, far from it, he's simply regurgitating pro-Confederate propaganda which began with the secessionists themselves.
So, logically, Napolitano's ideas would go on a bookshelf with others similar, to be followed by those who addressed and refuted their nonsense.

It would be nice to see a list of them -- who are the purveyors of lies & falsehoods about the Civil War, and who is out there defending the truth?

[rockrr]

Question to rockrr: to your knowledge, have Napolitano's books and views ever been the subject of Civil War threads on Free Republic? I promise you, this is the first I've seen or heard of it.

Yes and you posted to it. From 2013: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3055693/posts

That's OK - it's an utterly unforgettable thread about an utterly unforgettable u-toob video with the judge showing his ignorance.

I'm sure that pokie has used the quote elsewhere - she's never had an original thought in her life.

[cowboyway]

who are the purveyors of lies & falsehoods about the Civil War,

Here, let me help you out:
brojoek
rockrr
handydandy
the democrat party
the NEA
gubmit schools
far left libtard commies
all False Cause myth clingers

You self proclaimed conservatives here on FR have some interesting bedfellows.

[cowboyway]

never had an original thought in her life.

Unlike the oft quotable rockrr:

"Snark, snark, snark! LOL! ;) ((snicker))" --- rockrr

rockrr the original!!

You False Cause clingers are one pathetic bunch of losers.

[BroJoeK]

rockrr: "Yes and you posted to it. From 2013: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3055693/posts"

Thanks!
I reviewed those old posts and find them pretty surprising, in that the level of discourse is high, numbers of participants many.
I found nothing major that I said then which I'd say different today.

But I'd forgotten that the thread topic was Judge Napolitano's insane Civil War analysis.
It seems I've held a much higher opinion of the "good judge" than he, in fact, deserved.

[BroJoeK]

cowboyway: "You self proclaimed conservatives here on FR have some interesting bedfellows."

Sorry, but I was looking for a listing of actual historian authors and their books, both pro & con.
I'm saying: if we put Napolitano's on one book shelf and those opposing him on another, who are the other authors, and what are the books which would go on each shelf?

[HandyDandy]

CBW:Here, let me help you out: brojoek rockrr handydandy the democrat party the NEA gubmit schools far left libtard commies all False Cause myth clingers

You self proclaimed conservatives here on FR have some interesting bedfellows.

Yeah, sure, whatever. I'll let you be the "judge".

[rockrr]

I reviewed those old posts and find them pretty surprising, in that the level of discourse is high, numbers of participants many.

That's likely because pokie was incarcerated or institutionalized at the time.

[cowboyway]

if we put Napolitano's on one book shelf and those opposing him on another, who are the other authors, and what are the books which would go on each shelf?

Let's replace Napolitano in the sentence above with Ted Cruz. The Cruz opposition would far outweigh the lonely Ted Cruz book. Does that mean that Cruz is wrong about limited government and entitlement reduction? No. It simply means that the opposition is interested in maintaining the status quo.

Same with you False Cause losers. You like the nice little myth of yankee as hero as Southerner as the villain and are willing to publish whatever it takes to maintain the mythology.

[cowboyway]

Yeah, sure, whatever

Lincoln, 0bama, Hillary: one in the same. If you subscribe to Lincoln's view of big, centralized government then you're in bed with the libtards. (perhaps you still are a libtard)

[HandyDandy]

I can't help you guy. Ya got a burr under your saddle. You are living in some romanticized idyllic nostalgic view of the South. Of course, that means you have to make up lies about Lincoln the dishonest tyrant. If Lincoln had been a tyrant, you would not be here today to spew your filth. Lincoln had the most transparent administration you'll ever see. I know you have many questions. All of your questions have been answered in speeches and addresses by Honest Abe. You are a bird-brain in comparison to his intellect. He knew the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about the complete situation from beginning to end. He expounds upon it at length and in detail, in speech after speech. But you probably wouldn't understand the half of it. He even addressed your silly notion of a "Treaty" and expressed the idiocy of it. He will explain to you the step by step process that led up to the effort to create a "Confederacy". How it was slowly developed over the course of time by the actions of the likes of Taney, Douglass, Buchanan, Stephens and Davis. The only difference between the north and the south was the Slave Power Aristocracy which wanted to take its peculiar institution and run. The baloney about State Sovereignty rights, and right to secede was a bunch of hooey, and a smoke screen. The "Confederacy" was a group of racist slave states intent upon wringing the last drops of blood, sweat and tears from their peculiar institution. It had nothing to do with states rights. They had all the states rights granted by the Constitution without having to leave. The bone of contention was racial slavery.

Napolitano is an idiot, and you are an idiot. The only advice I can give you is to get your head out of your.....sources. You are reading bad shit. You are probably reading the exact same revisionist propaganda Nappy is. (Unless you are him?)

There was no difference between Johnny Reb and any Yankee soldier. Both were great Americans and the only real true Patriots. The Reb was a patriotic protector of his home and hearth and defender of his Liberty. So was your common Yankee soldier. The powers that were in the south f'd up big time, and there is nothing you can do to revise that. Trashing the greatest president this country has ever known just tells me you are trash. I am sorry that you will go to your grave never having ever really understood your own country's past. Get it through your head - the "Confederacy" never actually ever came to be. In four short years Davis was saying, "the Confederacy has evaporated." But cowboyway is going to defy Lincoln and Davis in his personal Lost Cause. By the way, I have never heard this expression you keep repeating, "false cause losers". When you get a chance, could you break down for me whatever the hell that is supposed to mean?

I will now ask you once, nicely, to never lump Lincoln in with those other two you mentioned. To continue to do so would reveal to me (what I probably pretty much already know) that you are stuck on stupid. Blaming Lincoln for the current behemoth that our goverment has grown into, with its insatiable and voracious appetite for more and more power, just shows you to be very far gone in your Lost Cause issues. You are reaching all the way back to the guy who kicked your ass in days of yore to blame for the sad state of affairs today? Pathetic. You are just lucky that Lincoln was around at the exact moment our country needed him. There would be nothing left of what the founding fathers created.

[cowboyway]

you have to make up lies about Lincoln the dishonest tyrant

You're such a farkin tool. Try reading something besides the yankee idiots that post here:
Lincoln Uber Alles: Dictatorship Comes to America---John Avery Emison
Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe---Thomas DiLorenzo
America's Caesar---Greg Loren Durand

I will now ask you once, nicely, to never lump Lincoln in with those other two you mentioned.

Lincoln was a radical. That's a historical fact. Lincoln exchanged letters with Karl Marx. That's a historical fact. Lincoln would be aligned with 0bama/Hillary/Sanders and other commies if he were alive today.

You can call me all the names you want (I'm assuming you have a signed copy of Rules for Radicals) and throw all the conniption fits that you want but the facts are that disHonest Abe is much more closely aligned with 0bama/Hillary/Sanders than with the Founders.

There would be nothing left of what the founding fathers created.

Fact: there ain't much left of what the Founders created and Lincoln bears a lot of responsibility for that.