Skip to comments.The Myth of Northern Innocence
Posted on 12/03/2012 4:55:51 PM PST by John S Mosby
Burly-and-bearded country singer Trace Adkins ruffled all the usual feathers and bruised all the usual feelings when he dared to wear a Confederate battle flag earpiece in full view of gasping national TV viewers while singing The Christmas Song in the Yankee stronghold of Rockefeller Center on November 28.
Adkins, who belches out such venerable neo-country chestnuts as Honky Tonk Badonkadonk and Brown Chicken, Brown Cow, was subjected to the predictably rage-stroking vilification that comes whenever anyone suggests that the American South has ever been anything beyond a rancid cultural cesspool of lynching, incest, bestiality, racism, toothlessness, retardation, and yes, racism, even though I said it twice.
(Excerpt) Read more at takimag.com ...
Not nearly enough.
Quite frankly I find that some Southerners constant whining about their victimhood to be quite tiring. Its as if they are trying to overcompensate for an emasculation that happened hundreds of years ago.
White and black Southerners should form a team so they can organize their constant bellyaching into a more collaborative unit. They both seem to blame everything on someone else, a long time ago.
It was also the flag of the Free and Independent State of Mississippi between secession and joining the Conederacy.
The title of this thread is “The Myth of Northern Innocence”. . and that it is, a MYTH. Scripture deals more with what the slave’s attitude toward his master should be rather than stressing the “eeeevils” of the slave master. . but keep feeling superior to all us “damn Rebels” here in the South. (Never mind Northerners were greedy slave sellers and trackers; but that’s just an inconvenient truth that doesn’t fit the myth.)
Slavery has been dead well over a hundred years; but we’re still paying reparations via Michelle’s lavish vacations. :o)
- Scripture deals more with the right attitude of the slave toward the master than it does any condemning of the master.
Few of the Confederate soldiers actually owned slaves.
- Now any talk of secession is moot, for anybody, for any reason - except maybe Texas; but I suppose the Northern liberal states would object with drones and bullets if she tried it.
There were men like Lee who thought secession was a bad idea but felt compelled to go with their state. But what of Southerners in states like Kentucky and Missouri?
I had an ancestor, born in Virginia, who was living in Missouri during the war and eventually spent 6 months in a Missouri Union unit. His brother, also living in Missouri, joined a Confederate unit. I never knew either one personally (although I did know two relatives who had personal memories of my Union ancestor, who later ran unsuccessfully for office as a Republican).
I have another ancestor, born in Virginia, living in Virginia in 1861, who fought for the Confederacy--his grave has a plaque saying "Confederate veteran."
I can't read their minds or know who was the better man.
And I must point out that the slave of bible days had a guaranteed means of redemption, with the only exception being an Old Testament practice of what would have been a freed servant voluntarily dedicating himself forever to a family. Compare to America’s pre-bellum implementation in which if a master did not want to give up a slave he was no more impelled to than he was to sell his house to a comer with enough money.
And so what if few SOLDIERS owned slaves. How many of those who perished in the 9/11 attacks were veterans compared to civilians? That didn’t change the result did it?
The idea should be to honor the soldier - irrespective of the actions of the leaders. They were all Americans.
I say “oranges”; you hear “apples” - and self-righteously so IMO. I am NOT wishing slavery back into existence; I do my own work. The cynical “Harry Reid” Dhimmicrat attitude toward blacks has rendered them sadly diminished & I suppose technically they’ve collected a sad form of “reparations” by way of welfare ever since before LBJ declared the “Waw on Poverty”. - Obama’s thrust to stir up hatred in this country has been . . successful; if that’s how one defines success.
We have enough trouble NOW without trying to fight the “War of Northern Aggression” over again. :o)
History as taught since 1970. 3rd World Feudal? You need to read Goad’s article. Lincoln was a railroad millionaire— the issue was WHO would be able to expand THEIR railroads in the WEST. There was only a FEW fair Northern legislators who proposed to pay the value of capital labor (amortized over time) to achieve manumission.
One can hardly argue that coolie labor was treated ANY differently by the Manifest Destiny Yankee industrialists/railroad trusts who put the railroads through— as they were “blessed” by the most annoying New England Puritans and Tory ministers in their “sacred” mission. Might want to ask the Indians about that.
There is an awful lot of history you have tossed away, in support of the prepared narrative. And, naturally, completely ignore the greater issue of State’s Rights (inclusive of slavery, and MANY other issues).
Correct! Knees are jerking all over FR! Adkins is a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans— bonafide descendant of
a soldier in the CSA. He has every RIGHT to his heritage and expression of it.
Just like La Raza has the right to show Toltec symbols in their idiotic claim that California should belong to them as Aztlan.
Expression is the right. In the case of Goad’s article— these are inconvenient truths—and Lincoln being used by marxist democrats (like the wealthy Spielberg— who has always supported the soviet line of WWII-— it was ALL the Nazis) is simply ridiculous.
The single star of the Bonnie Blue Flag has grown to be eleven!
It was a high stakes game for property, agriculture and cheap labor.
The coming industrial revolution (cotton gin, harvesters, mechanical inventions for agriculture) was to reduce the need for manual labor of any kind on the farm. And it was to solidify the conglomerates and bank control and reduction of the family farm.
Several panics and depressions later, brought on by the industrial/banking cycles of debt demand— brought us to today. Try as they did through the Grange movement and Co-ops, they could not overcome internationalism, a generated two World Wars that removed generations of inheriting farmers.
What is surprising here is that so many “conservatives” do not know how Progressivism masqueraded as “conservative” in the expansion of US colonial interests— at the expense of the family farm. And farce presidential elections like the one (another one) we just had. There are others in control now-— they think.
Maybe it is time to go Paleo-conservative, being fully informed now that we have gone from Lincoln through Teddy and FDR progressivism/socialism to full blown Marxist redistribution.
The Northern industrialists who expanded railroads to the West used slaves-— they were called coolies— and NO one cared a whit about that or Eminent Domain land grabs or any number of extra Constitutional actions of the ruling class.
The peculiar institution was both an asset and a liability for the South. This WAS a battle of the greater wealth holders of both regions, political and otherwise, as they both sought hegemony in Western expansion. And neither side cared a damn about slaves except as they presented as capital labor or a tool for socio-political advantage.
The “innocent” tag refers to the puritanical holier-than- thou anointing of the Northeastern social justice liberals in describing their “holy war” to free slaves. It was anything BUT that, and particularly disgusting to hear this crap repeated by the trust fund diaper baby descendants of Yankee industrialists in their academic sinecures as they live off the proceeds (oh, and secondarily denigrating the religion that produced the “holy war”). The old memes being trotted out against the Southern view are being broken down by facts— inconvenient ones.
It is absolutely hilarious to see, yet again, the marxist-socialists trot out Lincoln to try and paint this absolute “creature” of a present__dent with his characteristics. More of that “triangulation”, and always in a “crisis” (reminds one of Hitler as Hindenburg was dying, joining the job of chancellor and president of Germany- contrary to their constitution— an eerie similarity, that and the antisemitism of obamao).
The Progressive view of history. And, pro-Constitutional,too.
States really shouldn’t have any rights.
I agree, that's why it is so confounding to see so many continuing to fight the War of Southron Belligerance.
Hey, bubba, that is NOT what is going on here. We just went through another ridiculous farce of an election. And NOW the liberal marxist thugocracy is propping up the obamao as being like Lincoln!!
The derivation of our emasculated Repubican party of today began with Lincoln-— and now the demonrats are desperate for moral justification as they deconstruct what little is left of our Constitutional Republic. They certainly couldn’t cite Jefferson— not with what they are doing. No, you need a “holy” person of emancipation (despite ALL historical evidence to the contrary). There are no conservatives left. And, the South was right.
You’re right - states shouldn’t have any rights. States have powers.
If you think States have powers then the illusion is complete. However, we may be entering a time to re-determine the “power” of States. For this to happen it will take people of strong moral fiber and tenacity and governors who will draw the line, with their new conservative legislatures. If challenged further, like with federal force (extra judicial, judicial and military)— it remains to be seen how this would be sustained.
One thing is certain. If something is not done to both preserve US sovereignty and strengthen the individual States- we will soon have a country unrecognizable from the Founder’s vision. Deo Vindice.