Why are we not going after Confederate History Month?

I understand that the omission of slavery was highly offensive, but surely the whole celebration of the Confederacy is offensive.
It is essentially a celebration of treason. Perhaps if it was called Civil War commemoration month, we could study the whole thing. But to talk about those wonderful and sacrificing confederate soldiers and not mention all those on the union side who also sacrificed and suffered thanks to the CONFEDERACY STARTING THE WAR seems really wrong. I am furious that the entire coverage has been about the omission of slavery and has lost sight of the fact that dimwit McDonnell is celebrating treason.

we can fetishize the "romantic" battles & patronize the re-enactment industry, but still be honest with ourselves about the history of the Confederacy.

and that Virginia was just defending itself.

They are desperate to make it a War of Independence,
rather than a War of Slavery.

Oh, and contributes to the culture of illiteracy amongst sections of our current US population.

We need a Union(United States) Victory Month! You gotta see the episode, classic!

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-april-8-2010/virginia-s-confederate-history-month---griffin-mascot

Here you go.

I'm old enough to remember the Civil War Centennial stuff, and I remember VERY clearly (I was in junior high in 1961)being told that no, no, no, the Civil War was not all about slavery, it was about states' rights. At that point the former Confederate states had enough political and social clout to enact a reframing of the Civil War. I remember thinking that it didn't make sense, that new reframing.

Oh, and at the time I lived in northern New York State, and the reframing of history was clearly taking place all over the country, if I was getting it there.

was to enshrine discrimination - in education, voting, traveling on a bus, etc.

of the reasons for the civil war. But, having read a lot of history (from noted historians including those OUTSIDE the south)the reasons for the civil war were more complex than just slavery, though it was certainly symbolic of most of the other issues. War is rarely the result of a single issue. I'm sure there is reframing going on, especially in the south, but I'd caution you not to try to make the issue so (literally) black and white. History is not like this. Look at the Iraqi War, for instance.

If you asked DUers the real motivation behind Bush*s illegal drive to war, I doubt that only one motivation would be listed. You would get reasons like: oil, GWBush*s own insecurity and need to stand up to his Dad, offense that his Dad had left the job undone in the first Gulf War, Saddam's supposed attempt to kill George HW Bush, the neocon's misguided belief that it would cause the Arab states to realign in a way that is far more favorable to US interests, and on and on and on.

Recognizing the role of all these issues is not rewriting history. It is recognizing the complexity of such issues. Something that I find very important to do, per my sigline.

of the south. The biggest instigator of the war, however, was the institution of slavery itself, and more importantly, what the southern states wanted, a continued expansion of it westward. They were, to being marginalized in the House and Senate with the expansion of free states, and they wanted to preserve their voting power in Congress, mostly so they can continue to preserve slavery as an institution.

ago at the time of the Civil War Centennial was that slavery as a cause was being almost totally discounted. That was wrong.

as a southerner i am always put on the defensive when the civil war comes up
there were as many reasons as there were combatants

and let me remind all that while the leadership of the confederacy may or may not have been guilty of acts of treason
the rank and file soldier was more likely than not
on both sides
a conscripted troop with his choice of uniform made for him according to his location
and no more choice in the matter than any other draftee in history

Just curious.

The date found in lots of places is 1799, but it only changed status of children of slaves born after that to slaves in NY in 1799, they were "apprenticed" until age 28/25. This allowed their status in some context to now be "indentured for life" and I believe this allowed them to be removed from the slave enumeration.

NY is extremely confusing and the laws initially appear better than the reality.

http://www.slavenorth.com has considerable info on what the laws really did. Freeing slaves into "indentured for life" was quite common in much of the North. They weren't slaves anymore!

There is some more-recent scholarship in this area, but that site is a good start.

have commemorated this for years. In fact, it went unnoticed that Georgia and, I think, SC and Mississippi have all designated April with similar proclamations-- likewise avoiding any mention of slavery. This isn't new... The VA governor was just stupid enough to be so damned vocal about it that it got lots of attention--beyond the fact he's being held up as the future of the RETHUG party.

I've lived most of my adult life in the west, where I was born. But much of my later childhood and youth was spent in the heart of the south. Confederate heritage is interwoven into just about everything, in both subtle and not-so-subtle ways. I remember writing an essay (at the request of an elementary or early junior high teacher) on something to do with Stone Mountain in Atlanta, Georgia. I'm sure I wrote nothing that would have been too controversial-- just my enjoyment of what was then, a state park with lots of recreational opportunities. However, I undoubtedly made mention of the famous/Infamous carving of the three confederate figures on its face. I can't remember much about it now. However, I was a good writer at that age and won. Well, to my confused amazement, I was expected to attend an awards ceremony (with my likewise astonished Mom) at a local church, where I received a really nice bronze medallion and certificate from the United Daughters of the Confederacy! These are the tight-knit group of dowagers, who spend much of their time maintaining the graves and cemeteries of the "fallen confederate war dead"! My Mom and Dad teased me about this for years. I think I still have the medallion--with the face of Stone Mountain and its famous/infamous carving of Lee, Jackson and Davis.

The line between southern heritage and something far more insidious is not a distinct one... It is harder for me-- after so many years outside the south-- to understand it, but even harder for those who have never lived there.

granted my ancestors in this state signed up with the Union from the papers we found. But we are a state that was, to put it bluntly, practically ripped in two during the civil war, and what's weird is I think we prefer to NOT talk about what happened(Note: This Statement not valid in the Bootheel or Missour-AH!), unlike much of the South, which frankly just can't get over it.

daughters of the confederacy. Doesn't matter where you live. Racism is racism.

What the hell is honorable about a bunch of slave-owning aristocrats duping a shitload of poor white southerners into killing their own countrymen to preserve an institution that not only enslaved an entire race of people, but suppressed their own wages and repressed their opportunities for advancement? What is there to be proud of?

do not forget... It reverberates through generations for some time. One need only look at the history of Germany after the loss of World War I and the nationalism that Hitler capitalized on to enable his horrible rise in power and his Nazi party. There is a human element that precludes many from being able to admit that everything they had believed throughout life is wrong. This permeates among southern males (in particular) this many generations later. For us not to try to understand that and deflect it is what allows the potentially dangerous fringe elements to emerge--the teabaggers, the militias, etc.

I wish it weren't so. I denounce their beliefs and the behaviors that frequently come through as a result. But, there is a psychology there that the rest of the country has largely failed to try to understand in a way that would make us more effective in neutralizing some of this dangerous philosophy.

as if it were a type of paradise, and that the aristocrats were genteel and worthy gentlemen, or some other such bullshit.

Handed down generations. It is amazing to think a generation could inherit the sense of devastation of self-esteem and pride from their ancestors and that it could be propagated through their peers, but that is exactly what happens. The mythical South is really not so different from the "mythical 1950s Leave It to Beaver" kind of world, that much of the social conservative Republicans long for. Neither world was really as they imagine. But it gives a sense of control to their lives and provides them the denial that allows them to avoid self-reflection and that really scary "CHANGE"...

ultimately, its like you are saying the South is grieving for a lost cause and cannot move on from that. And that is not healthy, for either the south or the rest of the nation.

The question is, how do we change it? Denouncing their beliefs, behaviors, actions, can chip away at the edges, but leaves others with even more entrenched attitudes. This has gone on for multiple generations. The RETHUGS have capitalized on these feelings with the Southern Strategy, albeit it has been a source of exploitation since reconstruction. Fundamentalist "Christianity" and racist movements have likewise fed on these feelings of alienation.

All poisonous combinations-- but, how do we effectively counter it?

and because of that, there is no effective counter. The problem is they are insular within an already insular nation, and are effectively putting themselves on the sidelines. You cannot help those who refuse to help themselves.

then we are going to have to be prepared to deal with violence and potential escalation now and well into the future. A population that feels alienated from the whole is a dangerous thing.

These myths work together to support the narrative that the evils of slavery and those who profited from it were in the South, and that what little involvement the North had with slavery ended soon after the Revolution.

This good vs evil paradigm means that those outside the South never have to face the facts about their states, their families, or the ongoing manipulation of the public discourse and government policies for private advantage and enrichment.

Some obvious examples:

The slave trade was based in the North, mostly RI and MA, and was by far the largest industry in New England, the basis for most of wealth for its industrialists, and continue unabated for 50 years after it became illegal.

"Free States" were usually also "White-Only States"; free blacks not allowed to immigrate to these states or faced obstacles - denied property ownership, legal rights to enter contracts, vote -- some obvious, others more subtle.

Lots more. We have had several threads recently discussing these matters, a couple of posts are saved on my journal.

Also learn about the DeWolf family and the slave trade.

Another resource to start is www.slavenorth.com.

the inability to accept defeat and move on, the inability to deal with the facts rather than create their own fantasied and self-aggrandizing narrative, the rigid black and white/ right or wrong/ all or nothing thinking, the inability to take responsibility and instead project blame, the chronic rage...all of these are indications of pathology. This is what fuels the GOP these days, and it is a sickness that is spreading. If this country is ever to find its way again, its people need to be able to look at reality and recognize it and learn to take responsibility instead of projecting rage-fueled blame.

But our stamping our feet and pointing out that their beliefs are "wrong" or "sick" or that they NEED TO CHANGE, is really not going to make it so.

Nancy, you are preaching to the choir here. We all denounce these views. But, I would argue that we ought to try to understand the complexity behind them so as to develop effective strategies to counter them.

without calling it wrong or sick? They backed a cause that, even back then, was considered immoral in most of the rest of western civilization.

trying to understand their side of it, which the more mainstream among them would argue encompasses far more than slavery. They don't believe what occurred was treason. Why is that? Like it or not, agree or not, they do have a side that they believe justifies them.

Those of us outside the south largely refuse to try to understand. We are right (certainly I'd argue so) because of the abhorrent underpinnings of slavery. The discussion typically ends there.

not really, all the arguments for empathy fall apart when the South's "peculiar institution" is the direct underpinning for all their justifications.

Most of us are too wrapped up in our own sense in right and wrong to try. Thus, the cycle continues.

The truth is that we have trouble separating the belief from the people. Just take a look at the anti-regionalism that occurs in posts here vis-a-vis the South. We become quite pious. They are the descendants of "losers" and because they fail to fully divorce themselves from the actions and beliefs of their ancestors--even to the point in continuing to hold some pride in their heritage, we can not forgive them. Is there any wonder they feel alienated?

Look, I relate to the emotion, confusion, and frustration expressed here towards those harboring these views. I had to leave the South because this all got to me. When you bring any of this up in the West they look at you like you are crazy. And, frankly, I prefer it that way. But, the fact is that this is all ongoing and even escalating and our furor is doing nothing to address it.

We were neither what you would call winners or losers in the Civil War. The state is still divided the whole "Missour-EE" vs. "Missour-AH" contingent geographically, generally. Frankly, to those of us in Missour-EE, the Civil War is portrayed as a tragedy on all sides, but a war that was necessary to end slavery and preserve the Union. Those in "Missour-AH" generally view things differently, and that leads to some interesting debates. One of my buddies had ancestors on the Confederate side, mine were Union, we had, *ahem* lively debates about that.

I understand totally and am very familiar. But even in the heart of Missour--EE, the likes of Jesse James and the Younger Brothers are held as heroes, which is intricately tied to their support of William Quantrill during and after the war. They weren't just celebrated as some kind of "Robin Hood" criminals, but rather those continuing to fight against the perceived "wrongs" inflicted on the people by the Union Army. Go to Kearney, Missouri or his home in St. Joseph. Go to the grave sites in Lees Summit, if you don't believe me.

its more confusing here than probably anywhere else outside of Kentucky.

As a licensed clinical social worker with a practice in psychotherapy, I see much of this right wing fringe pattern as a collective pathology. The problem is that it is seen as acceptable and positive by those who think this way. In therapy, one can only work with people who realize that they want to change and that at least some of how they operate is a problem. There is no awareness in today's right wing fringe that their perpetual rage and their distorted narrative is a problem. They celebrate it, but it will eventually lead to dire consequences when left unchecked. The Iraq War was based on lies and a refusal to see reality and eventually that fantasy crashed into the shores of reality. We are still there, bleeding and spending. The craziness of the right-wing fringe, left unchecked, may well lead to some kind of armed rebellion in the coming years. It is poised to create the very governmental suppression it seems to think exists now. (It doesn't, but they may be in the process of creating it, as often happens with people who neurotically see things that aren't there but act as if they are.)

The Confederacy obsession is just another chapter of this same tendency to distort reality in a way that is self-aggrandizing and fits with preconceived attitudes. The victim narrative is a big piece of this as well and permeates almost everything we hear from the right.

work well with the individual in many cases. But, while the discipline has developed effective tools for a person open to change, it has little to offer in population-based "disorders". With population "think" we have to deal with it in more innovative ways.

As you say, we all recognize the danger of escalation of these feelings and beliefs. Again, the choir is in tune. But, saying so is not effecting a solution. Denouncing as fantasy or pathological belief only angers those who hold this "group think" and adds to their sense of alienation as a group.

I would be interested in what the fields of social psychology and other related fields might present as interventions in more discrete and controlled environments where this kind of pattern is ongoing. Academia might hold some keys, which if translated more fully could make an impact.

I'm thinking of how Japan and Germany dealt with defeat, now, I know they were able to maintain sovereignty, but both were still defeated in war, and were devastated at least as severely as the South was during the civil war.

Germany may be an extreme example to use(not to mention unconstitutional) with banning all associations and expressions of Nazi sentiment or sentimentality. Japan may be a slightly more useful model, though they had denial and other cultural factors at play. Yet, even with the denial, for a long time, and even today, there's a strong anti-nationalist sentiment in Japan, and anti-military sentiment as well. It could possibly provide a useful model to adapt.

and our approach during the long post-war reconstruction and occupation?.... We allowed the defeated to maintain their dignity. As much as we denounced Nazism and imperial Japan, we allowed for the people to be more disparate in their beliefs and capitalized on that. We did not see the defeated as a monolith to systematically denounce for generations to come We tried to reverse the population devastation, to rebuild both physically and mentally--even among the vanquished (something that arguably did not happen in the US South). To this day, the bullet holes and reminders of Sherman's March to the Sea remain and Southerner's don't forget. And, I will tell you, that most southerners believe that they are all held equally responsible for the choices and mistakes made by their ancestors to this day. Thus, the reflex anger and alienation and determination to push back.

I will say that I don't believe in inherited guilt no more than I do inherited pride. Group and ancestral pride in general I don't understand, probably because I've seen it manifest itself in very ugly ways over the years. Modern Southerners should not feel responsible for what their ancestors did, but at the same time they should at least acknowledge that their ancestors backed the wrong horse, as it were.

"pile-on" that occurs when threads are posted that deal with an event or incident that happened to occur in the South. The truth is that they have a point in feeling defensive. The fact is that, however irrational, some of us DO BLAME those native to the South for the actions of their ancestors--if for no other reason than that they have not and do not continuously denounce the actions of their ancestors.

such as the "Southern Pride" nonsense that occasionally makes the news, then again I also denounce "American Pride" as nonsense as well. As I said, group pride makes no sense to me, pride in general should be reserved for what you DO, not what you ARE or where you were born. I'm not exactly what you would call a patriot.

is anti-Southern bigotry... which definitely exists on this site. I don't hold myself above some of these feelings, either. After all, I chose to leave the South to return to the West and admittedly some intolerance for the attitudes there aided that decision.

It is one thing to stand for your beliefs, as you suggest--quite another to hold an entire group of people responsible by nature of their residence with anti-South snide remarks for any story posted that just so happens to have occurred in the South. That happens to Southern DUers on this and other forums. Mods are usually pretty good at containing, but in this respect we are not better than the RW with their kneejerk attitudes towards Muslims. I feel for our southern DUers. It is hard enough to be a liberal/progressive in that part of the country without your own politically aligned colleagues seemingly requiring you to defend all that happens in the South.

that Southerners seem to have passed down to this day? Mind you, I still don't understand it, but the moment I started to appreciate it was upon watching the last performance of THE BAND in "The Last Waltz," the Martin Scorcese-produced documentary and concert movie.

I had heard many of THE BAND's songs over the years and in fact had heard their rendition of "The Night They Drove Ole Dixie Down" many times. But, in this, their last performance, drummer and vocalist Leon Helms (one of the few band members who was not only non-Canadian, but from the South--Arkansas, I think) belted out that song with an emotion in voice and face that was just remarkable. Watching him sing that on stage, it was as though he were living that period through that song--had traveled back in time. Seeing that, this whole phenomenon just clicked for me and really underscores some of the reasons for the defiance. Say, what you will, but his sense of pride of heritage is genuine.

Leon Helms was and is no racist--quite the opposite, in fact as a long term friend of the late Muddy Waters and strong supporter of other blues singers of the era. But, he, like many southerners have found a way to move forward from the South's racist past, without losing his ingrained sense of pride for Southern heritage.

but the attempts to justify the existence of slavery long after it ended by continuing to impose a badge of inferiority on former slaves and their progeny is what created and perpetuates the racial divide in this country.

is to get the victim to take responsibility for his or her actions and thoughts, and their ramifications. That is an alternative way to achieve empowerment than the usual rage and aggression and blame. For example, in today's world, it might be a first step to keep pressing on the connection between the rhetoric and the growing threats or actions of violence. But we may need to see more violence before people are willing to really take a look at that.

If you look at all the negative and non-fact based right-wing rhetoric of today, underlying it all is the identity with the victim role, which in turn leads to rage and violence. The intervention would be to move people into taking responsibility and move them away from their victimhood. Otherwise, the craziness will run its logical course, and those caught up in the self-sustaining delusion will eventually create the very thing they fear. All this talk of tyranny and fascism and government control justifies lashing out at the government which will in turn will create a more aggressive and suppressive response from the government than exists today.

and victimization and fueling the fire for their own ends enable the behavior. As difficult as it is to imagine an intervention to motivate a population of people to "move from the victim role, take responsibility for their actions and thoughts and ramifications," it can be done. However, the obstacle to doing so is frankly the empowered exploiters of such beliefs--the Republican party and others as well as the lack of a strong educational system to counter some of the propaganda. Given the changes in this latter regard going on in Texas, I don't hold out great hope.

While I agree that calling them on the ramifications of such rhetoric, including the threats of violence is one step, I remind you that we had more than a decade of New Gingrich and others demonizing the government and Federal workers before Tim McVeigh acted upon that rhetoric and outrage, justifying such actions on the supposed excesses at Waco and related incidents. Yet, what push back against this rhetoric have we seen? I was a Federal worker at the time and incensed that my safety was being put on the line through such inciting rhetoric for the political objectives of the Republican party. Today, we have the inciting and cascading influences of Faux News, Limbaugh and so many others. They learned no lessons, took no responsibility and we have no means to stop them from repeating and escalating these tactics.

You say, we may need to see more violence before people are willing to take a look at that. Well, I should think after the Murrah Building Bombing, we'd have reached that threshold that those inciting such action through their rhetoric would be addressed. That is not the case.

I certainly agree that getting the individual to move from victimhood to empowered responsibility, in order to effect change of attitudes and behaviors is the accepted and effective approach in clinical therapy. Yet, denouncing an individual's belief system, before they are able to accept such introspection can cause such beliefs to be even more strongly held and resistant to change. That only feeds the "victimhood" cycle. Certainly, the challenges of doing this on a population basis-- where ones peers' attitudes and other influences form obstacles to such acceptance and change-- is quite different and requires a much more comprehensive approach. I wish I had those answers. I am not sure any of us do.

and don't hold much hope. The endless lies that are circulated by Faux News and GOP "leaders" make it almost impossible. As for the Murrah building, people in this country have an incredibly short memory. To many, that is ancient history, and to others it, like the Confederacy, is something to be commemorated.

Probably the most important thing is for Dems to work very, very hard at controlling the narrative. They fell behind on that with health care and got into a defensive, ineffective crouch. It is very difficult with so many lies thrown out and repeated, but that would be a start, an endless repetition of a truthful and fact-based narrative to shape people's minds and to counteract Faux news. I am still waiting for a mailing that will clearly and simply describe how the new health care will unfold, what it is, what we need to do differently, and the time line for it.

;)

It is dangerous..going unchecked as it is by so many. Thank you for bringing this out in the light. I would hope that there are those with benevolent power who see all these Red Flags as you do and want to counteract before it's too late.

I had a nice encounter at The Co-op with a customer today(whom I had never seen before) when I was at the register.. who wanted to keep a quarter because she thought it looked interesting. Then she, "Oh, Alaska..I should have given it to you..I cannot stand sarah palin."

I said, "I see we're on the same page here!".."but, I refuse to let her ruin Alaska for me."..she considered that.:)

And, of course, it all goes back to our facist media and what they want the agenda to be. That's something else about President Obama & Team..they seem to take the "media" into consideration when trying to get their message out and striving for Victory. They had to know coming in what they would have to deal with.

We have to fight the corporatemedia, the gop sociopaths, hateradio, teabaggers, etc, etc,..Thanks for helping Nancy.

Speaking as a white North Carolinian who (barely) remembers "White" and "Colored" drinking fountains still encountered in tiny rural towns in the early 1960s, I can STILL testify that to most white NCers, the attitude is "Get over it, it was 145 freaking years ago and the South was WRONG!"

Of course, NC was conflicted all along, and being the last state to join the Confederacy is an indicator of that ambivalence.

The slave trade was the dominant industry in New England for over 100 years, including the ship building, sail makers, etc. and continued on a large scale for 50 years after it became prohibited by the Constitution in 1808. Essentially all of the "old money" families in Newport, Boston, and New York became super-rich from the slave trade. They endowed the Ivy schools (Harvard, Yale, Brown) and educated their sons there, became the respectable leaders of Newport society, and prominent abolishionists, while their family businesses continued the slave trade into the 1860's.

The primary destination for those African slaves was Latin America, not the English colonies in North America. The growth in slaves imported into Southern colonies in the mid 1700's resulted at least as much from the British/American ships no longer being allowed to bring slaves into areas controlled by Spain and the ensuing search for new markets for slaves as it did from any increased demand for slaves in the South. Several Southern colonies, including NC, had laws against importing slaves externally -- from Africa or the Carribean -- mostly motivated by fears of a slave rebellion like those in in the West Indies, but also reflecting the modest demand for slaves in the colonies prior to the invention of the cotton gin. Georgia became non-slave for a period in the mid 1700's.

The 20-year extension in the Constituion of the slave trade by Americans was primarily for the New England slave traders who had recently regained access to certain foreign markets and for their associates who were expanding sugar cane production. The invention of the cotton gin suddenly increased the demand for labor to produce cotton thuse creating a huge demand for more slaves which the New England slave traders continued to supply long after it had become illegal, even past the beginning of the Civil War,

In regard to enslaving an entire race, that was not the situation in the Upper South. Hereditary bondage, slavery, became limited to Negros in all the English colonies by the mid 1700's, but many Negros were not in bondage. In VA, MD, DE, and NC in particular, there were large numbers of free blacks whose familes had been free for generations. Some of these black families had never been slaves, though they might have been indentured servants, but that was also the case for over half of the white First Families of Virginia. In the Upper South for several decades after the Revolution, the number of free "people of color" increased rapidly, in large part from the large number of newly-freed slaves.

The political debates from the Revolution to the Civil War are much the same as those today. Phrases like Right-to-life versus Right-to-choose, or pro-choice vs pro-life represent how the majority of Americans American interact with majority"s

I urge everyone to alert to and of skeptical of everything involving slavery, race, and the Civil War. The language used to frame that debate are as loaded as "right to life" vs "right to choose" or "welfare queens". As I have noted, "free states" were often "white only states", and "free labor" and the "Protestant work ethic" were appeals to the rural and small town voters and their prejudices against the recent Catholic immigrants from Germany, Ireland, Italy,... who were not citizens yet or lacked the property or money to qualify to vote.

Many of the racists slurs and descriptions of laziness, lack of motivation, unsavory habits, etc. in regard to Blacks and Native Americans were the same as the ones applied to the Catholic immigrants in the 1800's. Few people notice at all when the same descriptions of inferiority are applied to white Southerners, sometimes co-minglingling their opinions of Blacks and Southerners.

First off, you are making excuses for the Confederacy, namely saying "The North Did it TOO!" which is childishly immature. Second, it doesn't matter, frankly, how many free blacks lived in the South, or how many states, North or South, had black folks, and I don't even understand the arguments about Anti-Catholic and Anti-Irish sentiment.

The fact of the matter is that the North was/is not a racial/ethnic utopia, and NO ONE argues that, plain and simple, so stop erecting straw men, ok?

I had not been making excuses for the Confederacy, nor for the behavior by some in today's South. I was responding to the discussion of current Southerners as mentally ill and delusional, unwilling to face facts and accept responsibility for their own immoral actions supporting slavery, pathologically delusional who have brought this on themselves, and will never be able to move past this until they admit they were wrong.

I am talking about present-day Southerners. Even worse, the RW fundamentalist rhetoric is routed in Northern Puritan Biblical interpretation and American exceptionalism flowing from God used by abolishionists like Seward (serving a higher law than the Constitution), as it did from those like William Yancey in justificaiton of slavery.

VA and NC had strongly opposed leaving the Union until Lincoln order them to provide militia (similar to today's state National Guard) to be used against SC, et al, made more inflammatory by being co-signed by Seward who was among those who saw the Constitution as an evil document in its support of slavery. VA and later NC were unwilling at that point to send troops to fight their neighbors and family, but were not anxious to fight anyone at that time. But they would fight to defend their own state troops invading from elsewhere.

Most people are woefully ignorant of everything leading up to the Civil War on all sides, and their were MANY sides. The Panic of 1857, the end of the Crimean War, bank speculation in railroads and land, the various political parties, and so much more. Now 150 years later would be an appropriate time to examine all of these things and how they interacted back then and why so much of it still dominates much of our public discourse today.

As long as almost every topic involving the South quickly degenerates into "slavery, losers, get over it, end of discussion (with you)", it will be impossible to move forward together.

When making political arguments, it's beneficial to not adopt the arguments of small children.

check out our "Birther" Attorney General. :crazy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-3nkQYONic

Remind them of that.

And who is "we"?

Are we all the same person?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8109823

But since their is no angle in the story that allows for the codemnation of the President it is not going to get the ire of DU up.

But the US was founded on treason. The Founding Fathers committed treason, however they won so it's ok.

It is also a matter of patriotism. I just wonder why these "so-called patriots" especially after September 11th are now supporting an anti-patriotic exercise which deeply wounds a portion of the American citizenry. As a result, the people who support the Confederacy are not only anti-patriotic; they also display their lack of empathy--especially when it has to do with how this event in history brutalized a group of people in a genocidal fashion. Furthermore, it lets everyone know loud and clear that racism still lives, even in a so-called "post-racial" America.

Anyone who has a sense of decency, heart and a notion of equality must fight to stop this history month.

when he sent a wreath to the Confederate memorial at Arlington. http://www.nowpublic.com/world/obama-sends-wreath-confederate-memorial-arlington-cemetery

But it fell on deaf ears, as expected.

Arlington National Cemetery, a FEDERAL cemetery, harboring the corpses of traitors! :sarcasm:

What DU's ideologues (in a shrill, risk-free effort to ramp up their liberal cred) fail to realize in their ignorance, is that Confederate veterans, by U.S. LAW, are U.S. veterans, and their graves and memorials are accorded the same full protection and privileges as those of veterans who fought in WW2 and any other U.S. war. Obama, as president and commander-in-chief, took an oath to faithfully execute the laws of the land, and his gesture - although a custom, and not a law in itself - has been observed by every president since the law went into effect nearly 100 years ago. This custom recognizes the LEGAL STATUS of Confederate veterans as UNITED STATES VETERANS. It's a helluva thing when people denigrate our veterans as traitors just because they disagree with why they fought. Then again, these are the same people who probably still call Vietnam veterans 'baby-killers' - just not out loud on DU, where they could be eaten alive. Hence, my comment above about denigrating Confederate veterans being a "risk-free" thing to do.

All that aside, DUers, who claim to lionize Abraham Lincoln, are kind of like fundies and the Bible. They claim allegiance, but have never read or understood him (ignoring his white supremacist views, or the unpleasant fact that in his storied debates with Stephen A. Douglas, it was Lincoln and not his opponent, who bandied about the 'n-word' in order to score political points with the crowd at hand).

They need to read his second inaugural, which calls for Union reconciliation with, and compassion for, their defeated American brethren in the south. The law recognizing the status of Confederate veterans came much later, but was enacted with this same spirit of reconciliation and forgiveness. Confederate veterans were not traitors. They were not seeking to overthrow the U.S. government and take it over with their own. In their minds, right or wrong, they were seeking independence, just like the American colonists of 1776.

I figure no one in the south owes anyone an apology until the federal government issues their own, just for the fact that our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, was authored by a slaveholder, and the principal architect of the Constitution was a slaveholder. Or when Massachusetts, that southern colony (*cough*) which introduced the slave trade to the colonies, issues an apology for their part in the long, sorrowful saga of slavery in our nation's history.

So hey DUers - splinter in their eye, plank in your own.

have a Confederate Memorial Day too. May 10th for the Tar Heel state.

Robert E Lee's birthday are state holidays. Confederate Memorial Day is a week from Monday and Robert E Lee's birthday is observed the day after Thanksgiving.

its amazing to me that the same people who berate obama for wanting to negotiate with iran, a country led by an avowed holocaust denier, can without compunction throw out this idyllic revisionism of the civil war as some great war of independence and honor. slavery was the american holocaust if these people want to acknowledge it or not....

http://www.old-picture.com/american-legacy/012/Confederate-President-Veterans-Wilson.htm

"According to the U.S. Department Veterans Affairs, the U.S. Government denied benefits to Confederate soldiers until 1958. That year, Congress and President Dwight D. Eisenhower pardoned the entire group—when they pensioned 80 year-old Minnie Cave, the last living confederate widow."

http://sonsofconfederateveterans.blogspot.com/2009/06/confederate-soldiers-to-be-included-in.html

I doubt that President Obama and Congress will revoke the pardon.

It's honoring one of the most thoroughly disgraceful periods in our nation's history. They broke from the union and sowed rotten seeds of discord that still show today. And to think Repubs celebrated this idiot's election as a symbol of Obama's unfortunate endorsement syndrome...well, here's what you got!

In all the romantic notions of the South, these "sympathizers" forget an entire race of people was brutalized and treated as less than second class citizens. There's nothing to celebrate when it comes to the Confederacy--especially when one's ancestors were treated like farm animals by said members of a begotten cadre of states during that period of time.

One must not forget that the legacy of the Confederacy was also tied to the KKK. After all, the KKK was started by a group of Confederate soldiers who wanted to mock the Reconstruction. So, if you want to celebrate this woe begotten time, maybe the South must also celebrate its ties with the KKK. So, why not have KKK day if one is so bold to treat Confederate soldiers as U.S. Veterans and recognize their status within America?

Hell. Let's go whole hog in our love affair with the South and the Confederacy, shall we? Celebrate the lynchings, the bombings and the burnings. Acknowledge the terrorism of Southern sympathizers, including John Wilkes Booth who loved the South and went out of his way to murder the 16th President as a reaction to the outcome of the Civil War. Devote a special day to him, since the Confederacy is loved so much in this country. Please don't forget about the sundown laws and Rosewood.

If you want to celebrate the Confederacy, celebrate everything and don't skirt over the ugliness that such an institution displayed.

The Confederacy lost and should have been treated as such to the point that the mere thought of raising that rebel flag should bring a genetically stamped and instinctive fear of being sentenced for treason.

middle.

:sarcasm:

This is the result of many years of trying to split the difference between right and wrong.