An opposing view: Descendant of black Confederate soldier speaks at museum

Thomasville Times-Enterprise ^ | 24 Feb 2004 | Mark Lastinger

[4CJ]

Allow me to also *spit* at the memory of the Murderer of women and children and civilians!

His actions during the war amounted to war crimes. IIRC his men hung a justice of the Georgia Supreme Court in an attempt to learn the location of his 'gold' (this after taking over $10,000 in cash from him). Yet his actions after the war were far worse, as he attempted to exterminate Native Americans from the continent.

[Non-Sequitur]

IIRC his men hung a justice of the Georgia Supreme Court in an attempt to learn the location of his 'gold' (this after taking over $10,000 in cash from him).

Who?

[Gianni]

See? What did I tell you TLR?

[carton253]

Wow! Thanks for clearing that up!

[carton253]

I doubt the Patty Hearst incidence and the conversions to Islam after 9/11 are the same thing.

[WhiskeyPapa]

"It's pure fantasy,' contends James McPherson, a Princeton historian and one of the nation's leading Civil War scholars. Adds Edwin Bearss, historian emeritus at the National Park Service: 'It's b.s., wishful thinking.' Robert Krick, author of 10 books on the Confederacy, has studied the records of 150,000 Southern soldiers and found fewer than a dozen were black. 'Of course, if I documented 12, someone would start adding zeros,' he says.

"These and other scholars say claims about black rebels derive from unreliable anecdotes, a blurring of soldiers and laborers, and the rapid spread on the Internet of what Mr. McPherson calls 'pseudohistory.' Thousands of blacks did accompany rebel troops -- as servants, cooks, teamsters and musicians. Most were slaves who served involuntarily; until the final days of the war, the Confederacy staunchly refused to enlist black soldiers.

"Some blacks carried guns for their masters and wore spare or cast-off uniforms, which may help explain eyewitness accounts of blacks units. But any blacks who actually fought did so unofficially, either out of personal loyalty or self-defense, many historians say. "They also bristle at what they see as the disingenuous twist on political correctness fueling the black Confederate fad. 'It's a search for a multicultural Confederacy, a desperate desire to feel better about your ancestors,' says Leslie Rowland, a University of Maryland historian. 'If you suggest that some blacks supported the South, then you can deny that the Confederacy was about slavery and white supremacy.'

"David Blight, an Amherst College historian, likens the trend to bygone notions about happy plantation darkies.' Confederate groups invited devoted ex-slaves to reunions and even won Senate approval in 1923 for a "mammy" monument in Washington (it was never built). Black Confederates, Mr. Blight says, are a new and more palatable way to 'legitimize the Confederacy.'"

-- Wall Street Journal, May 8, 1997

Had there been the number claimed by the SCV and the League of the South, they were certainly shamefully treated after the war.

"After Lincoln's assassination in April of 1865, President Andrew Johnson alienated Congress with his Reconstruction policy. He supported white supremacy in the South and favored pro-Union Southern political leaders who had aided the Confederacy once war had been declared.

Southerners, with Johnson's support, attempted to restore slavery in substance if not in name. In 1866, Congress and President Johnson battled for control of Reconstruction. The Congress won. Northern voters gave a smashing victory -- more than two-thirds of the seats in Congress -- to the Radical Republicans in the 1866 congressional election, enabling Congress to control Reconstruction and override any vetoes that Johnson might impose. Congress passed the Reconstruction Acts of 1867 that divided the Confederate states (except for Tennessee, which had been re-admitted to the Union) into five military districts. Each state was required to accept the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, which granted freedom and political rights of blacks.

Each Southern state had to incorporate these requirements into their constitutions, and blacks were empowered with the vote. Yet Congress failed to secure land for blacks, thus allowing whites to economically control blacks. The Freedmen's Bureau was authorized to administer the new laws and help blacks attain their economic, civil, educational, and political rights. The newly created state governments were generally Republican in character and were governed by political coalitions of blacks, Northerners who had migrated to the South (called "carpetbaggers" by Southern Democrats), and Southerners who allied with the blacks and carpetbaggers (referred to as "scalawags" by their opponents). This uneasy coalition of black and white Republicans passed significant civil rights legislation in many states. Courts were reorganized, judicial procedures improved, and public school systems established. Segregation existed but it was flexible. But as blacks slowly progressed, white Southerners resented their achievements and their empowerment, even though they were in a political minority in every state but South Carolina.

Most whites rallied around the Democratic Party as the party of white supremacy. Between 1868 and 1871, terrorist organizations, especially the Ku Klux Klan, murdered blacks and whites who tried to exercise their right to vote or receive an education. The Klan, working with Democrats in several states, used fraud and violence to help whites regain control of their state governments. By the early 1870s, most Southern states had been "redeemed" -- as many white Southerners called it -- from Republican rule. By the time the last federal troops had been withdrawn in 1877, Reconstruction was all but over and the Democratic Party controlled the destiny of the South."

-- Richard Wormser

The fact that the whites in the south were able to reinstitute slavery in all but name is a big fly in the buttermilk over this "black confederate" crap.

It didn't happen.

Walt

[WhiskeyPapa]

He refused to extend the proclamation to the slaves in the North.

Any general text on the war will tell you that President Lincoln carefully limited the EP to areas in active rebellion because that was how far his war powers as president extended.

The extension and protection of slavery was clearly the reason for the rebellion.

Walt

[moonman]

Thanks for the post.

It appears that this is news to a lot of Northeasterners. It was to me also 18 years ago, when I moved to the South. After being the first of my direct decendants since 1620 to move south of the Mason/Dixon Line, I've learned a lot of history which was never taught me in public schools (1956-1968) and to appreciate the great contributions of the South and it's culture.

After these 18 years, I am proud to say that I am a proud Southerner. I made the right choice in moving here, both for me and my family. My grandson is the first native born Southerner.

Leave the ignorant Yankees believe what they wish. If I'd still live in that socialist bastion of a hell-hole, I'd be bitter every day also. It's because of the South's view on States' Rights and taxes (tariffs), along with the great weather, is why I live here. There is more opportunity (Florida has led the nation in economic growth and job creation for the last 3 years) then the Northeast has seen in over 30 years.

Last conservative to leave the Northeast, please turn the lights off.

[4CJ]

See? What did I tell you TLR?

Yep, prepare for a flood of cut-n-paste idiotic irrevalent information from a 'moderated' forum. I wonder if they are man enough to call Mr. Winbush et al a liar to their face? I mean, who should we believe - a historian with an agenda, or a man whose granfather fought for the Confederacy?

[4CJ]

After these 18 years, I am proud to say that I am a proud Southerner. I made the right choice in moving here, both for me and my family. My grandson is the first native born Southerner.

It might be belated, but 'Welcome to the South!'

[4CJ]

Congress passed the Reconstruction Acts of 1867 that divided the Confederate states (except for Tennessee, which had been re-admitted to the Union) into five military districts. Each state was required to accept the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution

Re-admitted - I thought they never left </sarcasm> But I can't seem to find anything in the Constitution that empowers the federal government to convert states into military districts, or to FORCE them to ratify amendments.

Thanks for bumping the thread.

[4CJ]

Any general text on the war will tell you that President Lincoln carefully limited the EP to areas in active rebellion because that was how far his war powers as president extended.

And ex parte Milligan stated that,

'The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine, involving more pernicious consequences, was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government.'

Regarding the EP as legitimizing theft of property, SCOTUS had already addressed that issue as well,

There are, without doubt, occasions in which private property may lawfully be taken possession of or destroyed to prevent it from falling into the hands of the public enemy; and also where a military officer, charged with a particular duty, may impress private property into the public service or take it for public use. Unquestionably, in such cases, the government is bound to make full compensation to the owner.

Our duty is to determine under what circumstances private property may be taken from the owner by a military officer in a time of war. And the question here is, whether the law permits it to be taken to insure the success of any enterprise against a public enemy which the commanding officer may deem it advisable to undertake. And we think it very clear that the law does not permit it.
Chief Justice Taney, Mitchell v. Harmony, 54 U.S. 115 (1851)

[Dante3]

Interesting.

[4CJ]

Interesting.

Yes it is. It changes a few misconceptions.

[4CJ]

Walter Williams - who happens to be black - wrote,

Horace Greeley, in pointing out some differences between the two warring armies said, "For more than two years, Negroes have been extensively employed in belligerent operations by the Confederacy. They have 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." General Nathan Bedford Forrest had both slaves and freemen serving in units under his command. After the war, General Forrest said of the black men who served under him "(T)hese boys stayed with me ... and better Confederates did not live."

[Gianni]

Last conservative to leave the Northeast, please turn the lights off.

If you forgot, I'm afraid they'll probably remain on indefinitely.

[Gianni]

Re-admitted - I thought they never left But I can't seem to find anything in the Constitution that empowers the federal government to convert states into military districts, or to FORCE them to ratify amendments.

Article II in the Vaporware section, near Executive suspension of habeas corpus.

Today our third party quotee has a different version of history yet again. My understanding was that the states didn't need to be kicked out of the Union for passage of the 13th, which passed voluntarily with the votes of the former rebels. It was the inability to ratify the 14th that led to the 'readmission' requirement being levied. Even then, the 14th was passed only by ignoring revocation of prior ratifications by Northern states.

[RobRoy]

I was indoctrinated about the war as much as anyone else here. I knew that we beat the south and freed the slaves.

As I studied the issue more and more, my mind slowly turned. I now am more convinced that it was not about slavery at all and they would have been freed even without a war. As we entered the industrial revolution, bringing mechanized farming, etc., slavery was no longer economically, nor socially, feasable.

This was a war about states rights, pure and simple.

[Dante3]

BUMP

[FR_addict]

Abraham Lincoln
FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS
MONDAY, MARCH 4, 1861

In Lincoln's Own Words:

"I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so...

No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of any law or regulation therein be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.

It is scarcely questioned that this provision was intended by those who made it for the reclaiming of what we call fugitive slaves; and the intention of the lawgiver is the law...
But if destruction of the Union by one or by a part only of the States be lawfully possible, the Union is less perfect than before the Constitution, having lost the vital element of perpetuity.

It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and that acts of violence within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances.

I therefore consider that in view of the Constitution and the laws the Union is unbroken, and to the extent of my ability, I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the States. Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my part, and I shall perform it so far as practicable unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite means or in some authoritative manner direct the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of the Union that it will constitutionally defend and maintain itself.

In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere. Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from holding the Federal offices, there will be no attempt to force obnoxious strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right may exist in the Government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so would be so irritating and so nearly impracticable withal that I deem it better to forego for the time the uses of such offices."