Posted on 04/10/2015 5:03:22 PM PDT by lqcincinnatus
One hundred-fifty years after Appomattox, many Southerners still won’t give up.
One hundred fifty years ago, on April 9th, 1865, Gen. Robert E. Lee surrendered at Appomattox Court House and the Union triumphed in the Civil War. Yet the passage of a century and a half has not dimmed the passion for the Confederacy among many Americans. Just three weeks ago, the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) appeared before the Supreme Court arguing for the right to put a Confederate flag on vanity license plates in Texas. Just why would someone in 2015 want a Confederate flag on their license plate? The answer is likely not a desire to overtly display one’s genealogical research skills; nor can it be simplistically understood solely as an exhibition of racism, although the power of the Confederate flag to convey white supremacist beliefs cannot be discounted.
Rather, displaying the Confederate flag in 2015 is an indicator of a complex and reactionary politics that is very much alive in America today. It is a politics that harks back to the South’s proud stand in the Civil War as a way of rallying opinion against the federal government—and against the country’s changing demographic, economic, and moral character, of which Washington is often seen as the malign author. Today’s understanding of the Confederacy by its supporters is thus neither nostalgia, nor mere heritage; rather Confederate sympathy in 2015 is a well-funded and active political movement (which, in turn, supports a lucrative Confederate memorabilia industry).
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
My bucket list includes visiting St. Louis and giving Gen. Sherman's tombstone a yellow shade.
Ill bet you didn’t know this. Whe Lincoln signed the emancipation proclamation. He did not free the Northern Slaves. You can’t make that up. All about states rights.
Actually it was the 14th Amendment. The 13th had been ratified by the end of 1865, long before reconstruction.
What the dumbasses don't realize is that there is a pretty large population of us in the south, who despise the idea of slavery, but wish to honor our conferdate fighting ancestors who showed valor in the face of overwhelming odds. Too bad the idiots in the KKK hijacked the battle flag. I wish there was a way to talk the SCV into adopting the Stars and Bars or Bonnie Blue Flag as an alternative.
Then it was kind of silly of them to start the war with the U.S., wasn't it?
Southerners. Classy to the end.
Poor analogy. Cotton in that time frame was among the most valuable feedstocks in the world. What you are saying would bascially be the same as saying what Texas has in oil is paper.
Yeah, classy just like that particular individual who may be the worst war criminal in our nation’s history. You keep it classy too bub, by defending the bastard.
I think literally armored war wagon.
Actually it translates to Armored Combat(struggle) Vehicle.
As you understand it.
You are blind to the reality of massive government.
You have lost the protection against double jeopardy. With ‘hate crime’ legislation, the feds can try a person for a crime that a jury of his peers in a state court had already found him not guilty.
Try to buy or sell raw milk
Try to buy a mercury free 100 watt light bulb.
Try to get a job in a coal mine or coal fired power plant.
California just banned lead in bullets.
Since the first edition of Ten Thousand Commandments was published in 1993, a touch less than 1.43 million Federal Register pages have been published. That’s an average of 71,470 pages per year. 0r roughly 286 pages of new laws per day. That is a lot of freedom lost.
But keep watching the government grow, taking more of someone else’s liberty. You are immune. Well, blind.
“It sure does live. It had very little to do with slavery. It was all about States rights.”
Whether or not Secession had anything to do with slavery is really irrelevant. I mean we can talk about how clear the north made it that they were not fighting over slavery, or how the South had many other reasons for leaving. All of that however is thoughts and opinions of people in conflict.
The real point is the right of secession and its role in retaining a fair and legitimate Constitutional Government subject to the Consent of the Governed.
Frankly without the right of revolution/secession all people and their states are prisoner subjects of the Federal Government just like the colonies were claimed so by the British empire. That of course invariably leads to abuse and tyranny not consent of the governed or constitutional government for that matter.
Lincoln’s arguments against secession were all specious on the grounds his understanding of contract law under a system of 3rd party judges & law superseding natural law. Even more hypocritically they came in direct opposition of his earlier pre-presidential opinion on the subject of the inherit right of revolution. Thus painting Lincoln and his supporters as power crazed and corrupted despots, more upset that some people did not want to be submit to their rule than anything else.
The Son’s of the Confederacy is as relevant as the DAR.
Neither organization has anything to do with their namesakes plight.
After 150 years you can wave your flags and argue about State’s Rights. The rest of us will yawn. Just as we do with the blue haired red jacketed DAR women.
California just banned lead bullets, effectively ending hunting.
Yeah the guy who ran Andersonville was a charm school graduate.
People do lousy things in wars.
Your statement is just silly.
Ok, you had the right to rebell.
The North had the right to kick the South’s ass.
And we did.
I believe, just for clarification, that the bases in Sevastopol were contracted, very similarly to how our base at Gitmo is leased.
I am NOT suggesting Russia takeover of Crimea was legit. But I believe their base is legit.
Everyone knew that secession wasn't defined in the constitution but everyone also knew that the only way to get into the union was through mutual consent. So any honest attempt at leaving the union had to occur the same way.
Only the south chose violent revolution instead of negotiated secession - they just tacked on the name to make themselves feeeeeeeeeel better about the betrayal they were committing.
There was nothing specious or hypocritical to it.
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.