Posted on 01/28/2007 11:31:57 PM PST by bushpilot2
Any attempt to judge our history by today’s standards — out of the context from which it occurred — is at best problematic and at worst dishonest.
For example, consider the following quotes:
“So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished.”
“ ... there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.”
By today’s standards, the person who made the first statement, Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, would be considered enlightened. The person who made the second, President Abraham Lincoln, would be considered a white supremacist.
Many believe the War Between the States was solely about slavery and the Confederacy is synonymous with racism. That conclusion is faulty, because the premise is inaccurate.
If slavery were the sole or even the predominant issue in sparking the Civil War, the following statement by Lincoln is puzzling:
“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union and it is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slaves, I would do it.”
If preserving slavery was the South’s sole motive for waging war, why did Lee free his slaves before the war began? In 1856, he said slavery was “ . . . a moral and political evil in any country . . . ”
Why was Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation effective in 1863, rather than when the war started in 1861? And why did it free only the slaves in the Confederacy and not in Northern or border states?
If slavery was the only reason for the Civil War, how do you explain Texas Gov. Sam Houston’s support for the Union and support for the institution of slavery? In light of the fact that 90 percent of Confederate soldiers owned no slaves, is it logical to assume they would have put their own lives at risk so that slave-owning Southern aristocrats could continue their privileged status?
There are few simple and concise answers to these questions. One answer, however, is that most Southerners’ allegiance was to their sovereign states first and the Union second. They believed states freely joined the Union without coercion and were free to leave the Union at will. You could say they really believed in the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the “powers not delegated” clause. They believed the federal government should be responsible for the common defense, a postal service and little else. They viewed the Union Army as an invader, not an emancipator.
I am not attempting to trivialize slavery. It is a dark chapter in our history, North and South alike.
However, I am a proud Southerner and a proud descendent of Confederate soldiers. I honor their service because, to me, it represents the sacrifice of life and livelihood that Southerners made for a cause more important to them than their personal security and self-interest.
While I’m aware of the genocidal war conducted by my country against the American Indian, I’m still a proud American. And while I’m also aware of the atrocities that occurred at My Lai, I am proud of my service as a U.S. Marine in Vietnam.
If the Confederate flag represented slavery, then the U.S. flag must represent slavery even more so. Slavery existed for four years under the Stars and Bars and for almost 100 years under the Stars and Stripes.
If the few hundred members of racist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan want to adopt the Confederate flag as their symbol, over the objections of millions of Southerners, should we believe it has been corrupted for all time? Since the KKK has adopted the cross for its burnings, should churches across the country remove this symbol of Christian faith from all places of worship?
Should we diminish the service of the Buffalo Soldiers (Black U.S. cavalry troopers of the late 1800s), since those soldiers were an integral part of a war that subjugated and enslaved a whole race of people, the American Plains Indians?
No. We should not surrender the Confederate flag or the cross to the racists, and we should not tear down the monuments.
Retroactive cleansing of history is doomed to failure because it is, at heart, a lie.
We should memorialize and commemorate all of our soldiers who served honorably — those who wore blue or gray or served as Buffalo Soldiers — whether or not we completely support their actions in today’s enlightened world.
Hey, history twister. The south attacked first. And you act like they were just innocent little victims minding their own business while the rapacious northerners attacked for no reason.
The state's rights canard, is to slavery what the right to choose, is to abortion. And effectively achieves the same thing. Convenience for the more powerful.
Is that you jesse Jackson?
When elected representatives were statesmen.......
The following article from The Charleston Voice appears in the book War For What by Francis W Springer
In Mississippi on Feb. 1, 1890 an appropriation for a monument to the Confederate dead was being considered. A delegate had just spoken against the bill, when John F. Harris, a Negro Republican delegate from Washington, County, rose to speak:
"Mr. Speaker! I have arisen here in my place to offer a few words on the bill. I have come from a sick bed. Perhaps it was not prudent for me to come. But sir, I could not rest quietly in my room without contributing a few remarks of my own. I was sorry to hear the speech of the young gentlemen from Marshall County. I am sorry that any son of a soldier should go on record as opposed to the erection of a monument in honor of the brave dead. And, Sir, I am convinced that had he seen what I saw at Seven Pines, and in the Seven Day's fighting around Richmond, the battlefield covered with the mangled forms of those who fought for their country and for their country's honor, he would not have made the speech. When the news came that the South had been invaded, those men went forth to fight for what they believed, and they made no requests for monuments. But they died, and their virtues should be remembered. Sir, I went with them. I, too, wore the gray, the same color my master wore. We stayed four long years, and if that war had gone on till now I would have been there yet. I want to honor those brave men who died for their convictions. When my mother died I was a boy. Who, Sir, then acted the part of a mother to the orphaned slave boy, but my old MISSUS! Were she living now, or could speak to me from those high realms where are gathered the sainted dead, she would tell me to vote for this bill. And, Sir, I shall vote for it. I want it known to all the world that my vote is given in favor of the bill to erect a monument in HONOR OF THE CONFEDERATE DEAD."
When the applause died down, the measure passed overwhelmingly, and every Negro member voted "AYE".
http://www.scvcamp469-nbf.com/theblackconfederatesoldier.htm
Robert E. Lee was a traitor. And so was every other confedarate. And no, I'm not Jesse Jackson. I'm also a proud southerner. But I have very little honor for the traitors of the confederacy. And the modern day rockheads who try to take advantage of the ambiguities and inconsistencies that can be found with any issue and with most figures from history. But to suggest that slavery was not a fulminating debate that was not really much of a factor in the run up to, and cause of the civil war, is just a "cotton pickin" lie. The Republican party was founded specifically to at least stop the western expansion of slavery, and if possible, to abolish it. Acting much like today's Democrats, the confederates, shall we say, reacted poorly, to the election of the first Republican. To this day, Democrats, shall we say, react poorly to the election of Republicans. Stop trying to twist everything just so you can salvage that damnable flag.
Would it make you happy if the flag was banned?
If the few hundred members of racist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan want to adopt the Confederate flag as their symbol, over the objections of millions of Southerners, should we believe it has been corrupted for all time? Since the KKK has adopted the cross for its burnings, should churches across the country remove this symbol of Christian faith from all places of worship?As if the majority of the South was actually for civil rights (ie. voting without fear of having your shanty burned to the ground) if not for a few crafty KKK folks who hijacked, hijacked!, the meaning of the confederate flag. Them negroes really did enjoy the warm southern hospitality of the South from about 1860 to about 1960, a very defining century for the confederate flag, which was created after secession from the Union. If hoisting the the confederate flag were such a representation of southern values sans slavery and the civil war wasn't after all about slavery, then why not hoist the first rendition of the confederate flag that was created? Why not hoist the flags that their respective states (if this is indeed about states rights) created before the flag we know now as the confederate flag? The Confederate flag was perpetuated and celebrated as a symbol of southern defiance, and nothing represented that defiance more than subjugating other human beings as an example to the North that nobody was going to tell them what to do with their negroes. I am all for celebrating the Southern culture. Many of our best writers, artists, leaders, etc. came from there. But celebrating that flag is about celebrating the largest aspect of their culture that set them apart from the civilized world. Reveling in that is embarassing. Writing literary calisthenics to pretend that slavery was only a minor aspect, and even a disagreeable aspect, of the South is a re-writing of history that todays lefties who re-write the history of the Cold War would be proud of.
Pre 9/11 argument.
Second, the South seceded because they wanted the right to expand slavery.
Third, they wrote the right of negro slavery right into the Confederate Constitution.
Fourth, the attempt to compare the freedom that the American Flag has represented to the world and the Confederate flag defense of Negro slavery as a God-given right (see the Confederate Vice President A.H.Stephens Cornerstone Speach and the Confederate rejection of the Declaration of Independence)is an abomination.
Finally, The Confederate flag represents the rejection of American values and should be rejected as well.
One flag did represent freedom and one flag didn't, and attempts to blur the differences is simply moral relativism.
The Confederate flag belongs in a museum.
That's a duplicate post. ...different title and publication but the same piece.
Looking back at the Confederacy with modern eyes
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1774432/posts
...another link to the documents.
Declaration of Causes of Seceding States
http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html
Lincoln didn't "spark" the Civil War, the Southern secessionists did, and they admitted that they were seceding because they considered the election of a Republican a threat to slavery. Lincoln recognized that he was narrowly elected and that the (antislavery) radical Republicans did not even make up a majority of Americans in 1861. The secessionists were either correct in their prediction of Lincoln becoming an antislaverey president or the victim of their own self fulfilling prophecy.
If preserving slavery was the South’s sole motive for waging war, why did Lee free his slaves before the war began?
Lee was more of a Virginia loyalist than antislavery, and in any event he was a general who had no part in the decision to secede or Confederate politival policy in general.
Why was Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation effective in 1863, rather than when the war started in 1861?
Lincoln first thought that civil war could be avoided/won by setting aside the issue of slavery. He was wrong, but quickly saw the light.
And why did it free only the slaves in the Confederacy and not in Northern or border states?
Lincoln thought that the EP could only pass Constitutional muster if it were issued in his capacity as the commander in chief as a matter of military strategy. He followed it up of course with a puch for the passage of the 13th Amendment to abolish slavery and involuntary servitude.
If slavery was the only reason for the Civil War, how do you explain Texas Gov. Sam Houston’s support for the Union and support for the institution of slavery?
He's attacking a straw man. Who has ever asserted that the Civil War was "the only reason for the Civil War" or that all union supporters were antislavery?
In light of the fact that 90 percent of Confederate soldiers owned no slaves, is it logical to assume they would have put their own lives at risk so that slave-owning Southern aristocrats could continue their privileged status?
Yes. Most of them were conscripts or young men socially pressured into service, and almost all of those who joined voluntarily owned slaves or had relatives or friends who did. Keep in mind that the actual slaveowner in a family was the head of the family, not his young sons.
...most Southerners’ allegiance was to their sovereign states first and the Union second... They viewed the Union Army as an invader, not an emancipator.
They were a lot like the average Iraqis today who are too ignorant to know otherwise.
If the Confederate flag represented slavery, then the U.S. flag must represent slavery even more so. Slavery existed for four years under the Stars and Bars and for almost 100 years under the Stars and Stripes.
Let's see, that's 4/4 compared to 100/231. I guess math isn't the author's strongest subject. He's much better schooled in Southern mythology.
Should we diminish the service of the Buffalo Soldiers (Black U.S. cavalry troopers of the late 1800s), since those soldiers were an integral part of a war that subjugated and enslaved a whole race of people, the American Plains Indians?
The Indians were subjugated somewhat, but (thanks to Lincoln and the radical Republicans) not enslaved. In fact, they are now privileged in that they still have some sovereignty and thus can capitalize on the gambling habits of the people whose ancestors "subjugated" them.
Retroactive cleansing of history is doomed to failure because it is, at heart, a lie.
This is the about the only thing the author is right about. Despite the best efforts of the modern day Confederate glorifiers, most people don't buy their pseudo-history.
We should memorialize and commemorate all of our soldiers who served honorably — those who wore blue or gray or served as Buffalo Soldiers — whether or not we completely support their actions in today’s enlightened world.
Nothing wrong with that. There are even things to admire about the individual Germans who were fighting for Hitler and the Nazis.
Your post just proves the aptness of Ayn Rand's thoughts on slavery. She called it barnyard socialism. The legislator you cite as much as said so. Instead of the state being his parent, the missus, or plantation owner, was his parent. He didn't own the fruits of his own labor. Or even his own body. The plantation owner owned him and his labor, and the fruits thereof.
The fact that he had some emotional attachment to the people he lived with is understandable. Some Russians still have affection for Stalin. But remember. Those same confederates, (read: Democrats), soon after this speech you cite, promptly took action to run most, if not all, of the blacks out of any legislature in the South, and the country, initiate a segregated America, invigorate the Klan, and generally terrorize black people to the point where their rights were effectively non-existent until the civil-rights movement. There are always seeming inconsistencies in any given era, and any set of issues. But to continue to act like the confederate battle flag is due the worship that you want to endow upon it is just childish sophistry.
You can't wipe the stain off the confederate flag with your hopes and words. It is the flag of the traitors. Making war upon your own country is the definiton of traitor. And that is what the confederacy did. Much like today's Democrats. We're only waiting for the modern version of the Dems Fort Sumter. Will they fire upon their own country? Or will it just be a rhetoric war, a culture war, etc. John Kerry has, this very weekend, taken sides with a declared enemy. The only difference between then and now, is today the Dems use other countries to fire on us. And then take sides with them. Back then, the Dems took up arms, formed an army, and fired those arms at their own country. The confederate flag, the Klan, segregation, Jim Crow, sharecropping, et.al., and the commie terrorist loving Dems. All the same, to me.
"The Confederate flag belongs in a museum."
Glad you think so. Go back to New York and do what you want.
In Texas it isn't going to happen.
Another Southern-hating Troll I see. LOL
I'm from Tennessee. Life long resident. Mother is from Virginia. Grandmother from West-Virginia.
Robert E. Lee is second only to Christ.
So you believe in the quadrinity then. I see.
DAD?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.