Letter: Let the South lead by example

The West Liberty Index ^ | May 26, 2010 | Michael J. Schneider

[IrishCatholic]

I hope you don't get the wrong idea. The parts on the home page are because of the reoccurring incidents where neo confederates agitate for a renewed succession. Also, they seek to excuse the Confederacy as not being founded on the protection and propagation of slavery. It was.

That isn't bigotry, that is fact. One in which I do not have particular emotional investment any more than I do discussing the Spanish American conflict, World War One, or any other war.

As for slavery I do take the long view of slavery. I also take the international view where less than 5% of African slavery was to the US. (Can't reference that, it's from memory. Most African slavery was to the Caribbean and South America.)I also take the view that African slavery still exists in Africa today (Islamic attacks on Christian tribesman in the Sudan) and slavery is still a curse world wide.

Now, this is where the strawmen grow. When criticizing the Confederacy it is immediately translated by offended Southerners as an indictment of all things South. It is also an automatic strawman that I therefore praise all things North. I don't, but since the others automatically have framed me in that position, that is where the bigoted tag comes in. It is accurate and descriptive.

Now whatever tone you feel I used with you, it isn't contrived. You came across as sincere and someone that you could correspond with. But when I feel people sniping, or find the usual suspects from this discussion in the past, I am far less tolerant because there is a history there of cowardly or churlish behavior. I do not have tolerance there.

Now as for your three thoughts:
1. The Confederacy is part of American history, but it is a part where a portion of America revolted to protect the institution, propagation, and expansion of slavery. There was nothing noble about it. Yet Virginia was Virginia during pre colonial times, the Revolution, etc. So was South Carolina, Florida, etc. But Virginia today and Florida today isn't the same as it was then, any more than Kansas or Hawaii is. I can hold portions of history as dark without having any current animosity or take it out of context.

For example, I would, as a descendant of people forced out of Ireland, go to England today with no thought other than to see a country. I have no emotional baggage. But it would seem many current Southern posters here do have that baggage and can't understand those that do not. I have nothing against the South or the North, or the East. (Although I can't think of much good to say about California.)

2. The points on my home page illustrate points. They are not exhaustive examinations of historical context. How could they be? Have you ever read Carl Sandburg's series on Lincoln? Pretty hard to condense on a page where you also find yourself tagging Know Nothings and Code Orange Freepers. I find a common argument from both Southerners and neo Confederates that “states rights” was the reason for the secession. Yet, I do not have the entire Confederate Constitution pasted on my home page showing they pretty much copy and pasted the entire US Constitution plus federal system exactly for the Confederacy except to enshrine slavery. There is just so much you want to put on there. I see you have, what, three paragraphs on your home page? Yet you seem passionate about abortion. Do I denigrate that passion because you don't have it listed and defended there? The Civil War, and the steps leading to it, is far to big a topic to have on a homepage where I am not emotionally invested in the topic. I probably have more than I need now. Because some of the people I copy and paste it to cannot, will not, consider it.

Now some of the Freepers you listed are bigoted. I even provide the definition so as to explain why I use that word: “A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices. The correct use of the term requires the elements of intolerance, irrationality, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.” I am interested in discussing topics but not in rebuffing the same bigotry on thread after thread. Once again, I don't have an emotional investment in this. But I do find revisionism irritating in it's dishonesty.

3. While I applaud your anti abortion feeling. It is a mistake to call my disdain for the Confederacy as “antiquated hatred” when so often I find myself reading posts here that celebrate the Confederacy, distort its founding and function, and call for a new one. How many threads have you seen in the past months calling for Texas to secede? If you aren't aware that is going on, stick around. It happens quite often.

So, I hope your cake turned out good, laundry went well, and you are doing well. I think you would find that people are doing the same thing in Boston, Minneapolis, Seattle, Tuscon etc. That's the way it's done across the US, not just in the South.

It was nice to talk to you. We can agree to disagree on points of fact or interest. You seem like a sincere person and I am not contrived, sexist, or disparaging to you. Tone is often hard to read on a computer, but if you feel a comment from me is inappropriate, let me know and I will either explain it or apologize.
Irish Catholic

[IrishCatholic]

I’m not sure of what point you are trying to make.

You are bigoted about people in Delaware or the North in general? You just hate anyone who isn’t from the South?

You are angry about integration and want segregation back? You only want to drink from water fountains marked “Whites Only”?

You think State Farm agents are hypocritical for being racist and calling you for support? Or you blame them for integration?

It’s OK that you don’t agree about the Confederacy. Facts stand alone, they don’t need your support or revision.

[NTHockey]

Either you mock me or you refuse to see any view but your own. I’d expect that from liberals. My point is very simple: THE SOUTH IS NOT ALL BAD; NOR IS THE NORTH ALL GOOD.

The FACT is that the Southern states seceeded because the Yankees tried to impose their views on them. The FACT is that the Condfederacy was invaded. The FACT is that the Confederacy was overwhelmed does not diminish their valor.

Deo vindice

[IrishCatholic]

I was mocking you actually. Your post rated it. You railed against integration. I mocked you about it by showing without integration you would still have whites only drinking fountains, lunch counters, hotels, and liberal Yankee State Farm agents serving your needs.

You point, in capital letters: “THE SOUTH IS NOT ALL BAD; NOR IS THE NORTH ALL GOOD” seems to suggest I disagree with it. I don’t. I have never said anything even remotely to suggest that. In fact, I have been pondering relocating for a while and am looking at Virginia. I’ve always liked it when I have visited. (Of course, I will bring my bust of Lincoln and leave pennies face side up wherever I go. It’s an insurgency thing.)

Now to twist it a bit: “THE CONFEDERACY WASN’T ALL BAD; NOR THE NORTH ALL GOOD.” Wouldn’t argue with that either. I have never argued differently. These are strawmen automatically generated when anyone criticizes the Confederacy. One does not necessarily follow the other.

Now, for your facts. Lets flesh them out a bit:

“The FACT is that Southern states seceeded because the Yankees tried to impose their views on them.” Not quite. 7 states seceeded under President Buchanan in anticipation of a Republican Administration that was hostile to slavery. The only issue for secession was slavery. The Republican platform was to prevent the expansion of slavery into the territories. So much for that FACT.

“The FACT is that the Confederacy was invaded.” Interesting point but one that is also not a fact. The fact is that Southern states stole federal property and then then fired on The Star of the West attempting to resupply Fort Sumter, under President Buchanan’s order, and then on Sumter itself under Lincoln. The Confederacy began the belligerancy. They called the wind, they reaped the whirlwind. So much for that fact.

“The FACT is that the Confederacy was overwhelmed does not diminish their valor.” No it doesn’t. That fact you got correct. You are one for three.

But do you see how you can’t separate the SOUTH from the CONFEDERACY even though in all of the history of America it was only a four year failed slave regime? The South is so much more than that. I don’t reduce the Southern states to that identity. But it seems you do. I don’t think of Minnesota or Wisconsin as Yankees, I think of woods and fishing. I don’t think of Louisiana as slave holders, I think of rice and shrimp and New Orleans. I think of Florida as Southern New York and West Cuba along with manatees. I think of it all as America. I don’t parse it into pieces.

[NTHockey]

Oh, I am so sorry for not being as smart as you are. I do so deserve your talking down to me. I am just a poor old country boy, who ain’t so smart as you Yankees.

Problem is you totally missed the point. I don’t defend segregation; I do resent the federal government imposing its will. And know-it-alls who think they are so smart, while being more guilty than those they would punish.

BTW, leave your Lincoln coins at home; they are not accepted in the South. And I would reconsider your relocation plans. There are way too many people that want to recast the South in their own image - which is what caused the war the first time.

One more thing, the South vs. the North has been a battle since the Articles of Confederation. And no one in his right mind can consider this country as the United States. We are united in nothing.

Deo vindice

[IrishCatholic]

And the mask slips a little bit more-
Suddenly I am a “Yankee” How is that? Is that the definition of anyone that doesn’t have a Confederate flag on his wall at home? And as for talking down to you, is that what it was? You served up the false facts and they were easy to discredit. The fact you don’t like it is too bad.
As for my relocation plans, I’ll go where I please. If you think I even remotely consider what you want it’s laughable. Besides, I thought you invaded Delaware. Think of it as an exchange program. Although, it isn’t to me. I will go in America wherever I want without a by-your-leave from anyone. If Virginia is where I chose, or Delaware, or Florida, or anywhere else, the people there are just going to have to deal with it. Sort of like your State Farm agent getting black neighbors.

“I simply told him:”We do nothing because you damn Yankees have been shoving integration down our throats. Now it’s your turn.”
“One more thing, the South vs. the North has been a battle since the Articles of Confederation. And no one in his right mind can consider this country as the United States. We are united in nothing.”
I thought if this went long enough the mask would slip. You hate America. It’s alright to admit it. I would take honesty over hypocrisy any day. Your mistake is thinking those around you (besides the social group you might run with) think the same way. The modern South/North/East/West is always changing. People move. If you live in Delaware, are you a Yankee? If I move to Virginia, am I a Confederate? If someone is born in South Carolina but moves to Seattle, is he a member of a grunge band? Does the black person a block down in Delaware pine for segregation again? Does the black family in Alabama want segregation? It’s amazing how selective you can be when talking about what the people of the “South” want. Can’t you move on from 1865? Let it go already man!
Sooner or later the hatred pops out. Sometimes it’s projected on me, sometimes the person owns up to it. But the simmering hatred for America is there. You can rise above your bigotry**. You just have to face it.

**“A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices. The correct use of the term requires the elements of intolerance, irrationality, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.”

[NTHockey]

Contact me when you wish ti have a civilized discussion. It was you who started the name calling and made the derogatory statements. Till then, have a nice day wherever you rest your head. I’m sure that someone in America will be thrilled to have you for a neighbor.

[IrishCatholic]

Actually they love me.

It’s OK, you can go now.

[daisy mae for the usa]

Care to weigh in?

[daisy mae for the usa]

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I think we are on the same page in tone now. After reading your further responses to others I may have a clearer understanding of your view. Correct me if I am wrong.

From your perspective, the Confederacy was a time period in which people belonging to that time and place were involved in a failed slave regime and treason to America. Once the issue was resolved in war, the people located in the area that had been the confederacy were now plain and simply Americans. What had gone on before was no longer relevant. That is why you love the South and may even move there, because one has nothing to do with the other.

From my perspective, I believe it was God’s will to both destroy slavery and preserve the union. I see history through a much wider angled lens. For me, human ideology is one with human failing. Thus was the ideology of the confederacy. It was human in nature and doomed to fail. The ideals of the union was divine in nature and destined to succeed.

To the point of separation of the south from the confederacy—have you every had an accident in which a scar from that event was left on your body? Maybe you were responsible for the accident. Was the scar bigger and redder because you had caused the accident? No. A scar is a scar is a scar. Once one is obtained it must be reckoned with. So it is with those from the South. The scar of the confederacy is forever ingrained in their DNA for the better or worse of it. Just as similar scars exist for African Americans, Native Americans, Jewish people....the list is endless.

What puzzles me is your determination to get everyone to in effect, cry uncle, and agree with you that facts are facts—the confederacy was a failed slave regime. The fact is the confederacy was a failed human ideology which was based on worldly concerns. You can judge any ideology by that one criteria, and by looking at the fruits of the ideology. If the fruit bears mass murder, torture, depravity, forcing others to submit against their will, it is fruit of the world and a failed ideology. This is a basic fact that everyone in America must begin to see clearly. Otherwise, not just the south will fall to a failed ideology, but the nation as a whole will, too.

The cake turned out well. Tie Dyed. A big hit. With that, my lights are out. Remember, Irish Catholic, Solomon didn’t fully “get” God’s wisdom until he was older and found out the meaning of vanity. God Bless.

[nathanbedford]

Thank you, daisy mae for the usa, for the invitation to weigh in. I find this extremely interesting thread and one in which I would normally be delighted to the participate at my accustomed length but I am in the middle of a house move and have precious little time.

First, I quite agree that the ideals of the Confederacy must be judged in the context of their time and not according to presence political correctness standards. Second, the Confederates, much like the Yankees who exploited the south and Reconstruction, the Californians and Idahoans who enslaved Chinese in the mines long after the emancipation proclamation, New Yorkers who operated sweatshops, and many others one could cherry pick from our history, we are not solely one thing and not the other. The Confederates were not exclusively motivated to secede to protect slavery and they were not motivated to secede for reasons completely apart from slavery. Man has an infinite capacity to rationalize his perceived best interest and that is not a function of geography.

Speaking of geography, this whole notion of secession from the nation is quaint and fun but it is so 19th century. Think of George Soros, or Barack Obama for that matter, these men do not see the nation as a sovereign entity and they certainly do not see sections with in the nation as sovereign entities. Soros sees America as a series of markets dotted with airports, which he can access, serviced with highways and other magnificent infrastructure, and boasting an armed force which can be projected throughout the world. Mostly, he sees America as the primary obstacle to his ambitions for world control and government. Technology has rendered the matter of sovereignty for every nationstate in the world a real questionable long-term investment. That is not a doctrinal or philosophical assessment but the assessment of a long-term investor or a sports bookie. In other words, it is a description of what is and what is coming at an accelerating rate. The idea of sovereignty, is under the same attack as the idea of states rights has been in America leading up to the Civil War and afterwards.

The left is always seeking to change the rules of the game. They move from the local, to the state, to the federal, and ultimately to the international venue to get the results they want. They move from the polling place to the courts, to the treaty making powers, to the international courts, to gain the result they want.

We are in a world of technological miracles rendering our old conceptions of geography and sovereignty, the rule of law, and even patriotism more and more difficult to explain to the next generation. It will not be long until George Soros has a world in which it is as inconceivable for a next-generation to defend America's sovereignty as it is for a current generation of service age boys and girls to defend a new Confederacy in support of slavery.

Therefore, we as conservatives should move our thinking away from geography and toward the philosophy of liberty. The beau ideal of the Confederacy was the defense of the individual against the impositions of an alien government but that noble ideal was limited to the rights of white Southerners. This was an ideal entertained North and South for generations before the Civil War. The North changed in this understanding and they changed the rules of the game. One can write Uncle Tom's Cabin, and begin the process of changing the rules of the game. The Southerners understood what the George Soros of the time was trying to do to them. Whether self deceived or otherwise, they believed they were conducting a second American revolution for individual liberty. That concept did not extend to African-Americans. The North was changing those rules as Uncle Tom's Cabin changed their understanding of who the rules applied to.

I have repeated Nathan Bedford's maxim ad nauseum on these threads: all politics in America is not local but ultimately racial. The idea of racism has been used to shape the constitution since Uncle Tom's Cabin, and it is being used today. Sometimes the purpose and result are benign and sometimes they are malignant. It is one of the tools used by the left to change the rules of the game. Whether the purpose is benign or malignant, the process itself is malignant because it changes the rules of the game outside of the process by shutting it down.

So we conservatives have to decide what our ideals of liberty, boiled down to their very essence, mean in Universal application and fight like hell to preserve them. We should keep in mind that it is not geography but liberty which is our fixed and enlightened pole. It does not matter whether Texas could actually secede, the same undermining influences that applied in 1861 will still apply in 2011 only accelerated by technology. It does not matter if the Tyrol section of Italy which speaks German could succeed in rejoining Austria, they all live in the European Union and the idea of a large nationstate to defend one's borders in the atomic age is becoming less cogent.

The George Soros of the world will never rest. Their war on us is not one of geography. They do not see America as the shining city on the hill, they see it as a citadel of reactionary capitalism. In the sweep of history they see it as a whistle stop on the way to one world socialism. They see it as a market with an airport and a demographic which can be manipulated by a modern Uncle Tom's Cabin.

It is essential that we know what war we are in, what venue we are fighting in and why. Robert E. Lee elected to be ruled by Richmond and not by Washington. Today, Americans are trying to be ruled by Washington under a constitution but George Soros and Barack Obama are trying to make America ruled by some place abroad. We must understand the war we are in and why we are fighting.

[IrishCatholic]

“What puzzles me is your determination to get everyone to in effect, cry uncle, and agree with you that facts are facts”

It is a reoccurring thing with me, and not just on this topic. Here is my favorite quote from John Adams defense of British soldiers on trial for the Boston Massacre in 1770:

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”

By allowing things to go unchallenged, in this case my contention that connecting the Confederacy to the modern fight against the rise of socialism was a non starter, we give tacit acceptance and so lose our foundation of reason and society. Admittedly it quickly swung out of control into a retread of many past threads. But it remains the need to challenge false constructs.

For example: By allowing a baby to be renamed a fetus, we have depersonalized it, even though fetus is Latin for offspring. By calling it “fetus” we infer that it is less than human. Then, it is only a short step to decide that killing it is not killing a human. Abortion becomes “choice” and a “privacy issue” and the “personal decision between a woman and a doctor.” Now the person who remembers that a baby is a baby and protests is “anti-choice” and oppressive to women. Can you see how this goes? Our president wouldn't define when life began during the election, because if he did, he would have to acknowledge that abortion was murder. You can do it, you just can't say it. Forcing people to face the facts, means forcing them to acknowledge the humanity of an unborn baby.

Take homosexuality. It is a behavior and a mental disorder. In the spiritual sense it is a sin. People who engage in homosexual behavior are far more likely to kill themselves, have venereal diseases, multiple anonymous sexual partners, depression, drug use, etc. Yet we have allowed ourselves to redefine a behavior and turned it into an identity. Then by doing so, you attach a stigma to anyone who states it is a disorder. You are “homophobic”- A very useful, malleable word to marginalize anyone who would point out the fact the behavior is corrosive. Yet, isn't an identity. People do leave the lifestyle and can be helped. NARTH (National Association of Research and Treatment of Homosexuality www.narth.com) has been fighting for years to gain recognition and acceptance from the psychological community. There are people who have been treated. A recent European study showed the vast majority of homosexuals can, and do, leave the lifestyle. What does that mean? It means that it destroys the illusion of a permanent, fixed homosexuality. The myth means people get hurt. Demanding the facts means people get help.

The list can go on. But the long and short of it is the artificial constructs, the self delusions, are destructive and when they are promoted to others they are more so.
-Health Care is deficit neutral
-There will be no restrictions on health care for seniors
-Abortion will not be covered
These things kill. And, they kill the weakest and most vulnerable. Everywhere, North, South, East, and West.

I have no illusions as to the better nature of man. If it was noble in itself, pure and good, there would have been no need for Chirst. As it is, I am determined to drag people back and hold their noses to facts. But I also don't hammer them constantly. I don't chase Dr. Eckelberg around when he posts anti-Catholic rants. I don't chase The Magical Mischief Tour when he posts anti-police stories. I don't chase Central_VA when he posts his secession threads. I will never change their minds. If I find something particularly odious, I do jump in, but mainly find Free Republic as a place to pick up news, factual news, that can't be found in such variety anywhere else. I also value other perspectives, although it may not seem like it on this thread.

Now, I'm glad I got to write to you. You seem like a very nice person. I'm glad the cake turned out and hope the party was fun. If you ever have a question as to what or why I take a particular view on a topic, I would be happy to answer either publicly or privately. In fact, after talking to you I went back and looked at my home page with fresh eyes, it seems a bit piecemeal and negative being added to in chunks over time. On my weekend it could do with a makeover. So thank you for that.

God Bless you too.

[Mad Dawgg]

"For example: By allowing a baby to be renamed a fetus, we have depersonalized it, even though fetus is Latin for offspring. By calling it “fetus” we infer that it is less than human."

Exactly! I was once involved en a formal debate (though the rules were somewhat lax) concerning abortion. The question was: "Should Abortion be legal?" and I and my colleagues were arguing against it being legal.

The other side was well prepared and made a formidable argument and we could tell we weren't doing all that well (an abortion ended an innocent human life) The other side used the fetus approach (abortion kills a fetus not a human) and we had trouble picking it apart. But the other side was using the audience well by asking for a show of hands on certain points. So in a moment of inspiration a smart young lady on our team asked for a show of hands from the audience.

Is there anyone with us today who did not start life as a fetus?

No One in the audience raised their hands so she asked the next question OK then show of hands who did start out life as a fetus?

Our Opponents didn't raise their hands either time so she said: I notice our opponents can't decide whether they did or not? The confused looks on their faces when everyone looked at them made the audience laugh loudly.

We won the Debate handily.

Bottom line when someone uses the fetus argument ask them if they skipped that stage of life.

It totally punches a whole in their argument and then you can follow up with a truth tested statement. "All humans go through the fetus stage therefore killing a human fetus ends the life of a human."

[daisy mae for the usa]

Thank you Nathan Bedford for joining us even though you are moving. Hope all goes well for you. Your post was very thought provoking. Liberty. A beautiful word. I hadn’t realized it, until these days. George Soros makes my southern rage rise!

Irish Catholic,I see your heart is troubled by the same sorts of things we all are grappling with, yet you come to it from your own unique perspective, which has to do with facts. I can most assuredly appreciate that!

As we learn from the Bible, there is one body with many members. We attempt to recreate in human form this church vision in America, yet currently our many parts are at odds with each other. I want nothing more and nothing less than to save the republic. And the republic does need saving. But I submit to the Holy Father, and His will may not be the same as mine. Therefore, I daily remind myself that my true citizenship is in heaven and I belong to the kingdom of my Father.

Thank you, Irish Catholic for challenging us with the facts. We need that!

[IrishCatholic]

A well reasoned post. I enjoyed reading it. Good luck with the move.

[ronnyquest]

"That's why I don't think a civil war would happen. Americans can barely stomach having our troops Afghanistan to kill Islamic terrorists. Our rules of engagement are so strict that we're talking about giving medals for Heroic Restraint (or whatever it is). Would these same Americans really be willing to send in the troops to kill Americans in a state that wanted to leave? Ain't no way. Secession would be completely bloodless this time around. "

Hardly. The leeches in the "blue" states would soon realize that, without the producers in the "red" states, they might actually have to get jobs and work to eat. Mustn't have that. Food, cars, houses, and plasma TVs are basic human rights to that crowd. There would be rioting and then there would be a federal response to bring the secessionists back into the fold.

[ronnyquest]

"The more I reflect on it, the less forgiving I feel."

You did not live in that time period and, frankly, Southerners are not waiting for your forgiveness.

So, what, we're all supposed to hate the South for all eternity because some Southerners owned slaves 150 years ago? I have news for you, sunshine, I never owned any slaves, my family never owned any slaves, I don't know anyone who owns slaves around here, and we're proud Southerners. We also fought a war against an oppressive, overbearing federal government; we might just do it again before too long.

Every time that phrase, "the South shall rise again" comes up in any context, the absurd anti-slavery crowd (a bit late, to be sure) come out in droves to denounce the South and Southerners, presumably to keep us from getting uppity thinking that we've moved on. Do you also come out to criticize the Greeks for owning slaves? How about Arabs and Persians? How about descendants of Vikings? How about all those Northerners (New Hampshire, for instance) who kept Irish indentures and slaves? Hell, there wasn't even a war fought over them.

[IrishCatholic]

You are a little late to the party pal.
The war is over (again) and reconstruction already occurred.

Plus, strawman after strawman doesn't do you any credit. Take whatever you want out of context to help your own self esteem. I can't be bothered with your therapy right now.

[ronnyquest]

LOL, wow, you really just do not get it. Amazing. Yes, the war is over and reconstruction, to our detriment, did happen. Let it go.

[IrishCatholic]

Well, let's see- you have a drive by posting a week after the thread dies and you expect...what? The war and reconstruction comment was an allusion to the thread is dead.
Now my posts were: 3,17,18,20,24, 29,41,44,46, 48, 52,55. And what you come up with is
“LOL wow, you really just do not get it.”

Well, now you have my attention. What don't I get? Do you have something to debate or are you just humping my leg for attention?
Get to it or go away. There were two intelligent posters on this thread I talked to, Daisy Mae and Nathan Bedford. They were worth the time, so far you haven't produced anything.
So go ahead, you have my attention.