Posted on 04/30/2017 9:49:31 PM PDT by pboyington
The War against the Confederacy is a War against America.
The War against the Confederacy is a war on American history.
The War against the Confederacy is a war against all of us and a war on America’s institutions.
The War against the Confederacy is being waged by militant leftists, big government lackeys, aggrieved snowflakes and the hate America crowd.
Since a psychotic young man, who owned a Confederate flag, killed nine parishioners at a black church in South Carolina in June of 2015, the radical left, big government crowd in this country is doing something they’ve wanted to do since 1861, completely eradicate the Confederacy and every last vestige of its history.
For two years, the nation has watched as Confederate flags have been ripped down from city halls and state capitol buildings and have been banned from selling on Amazon, although one may freely purchase a Nazi, Soviet, Italian Fascist or a North Korean flag on the website. The harmless TV show, the Dukes of Hazzard was permanently cancelled by TV Land, even though it is one of the most popular shows in TV history. The reason being that the main characters drove a car named the General Lee that had a Rebel flag on the roof.
Yeah, those Duke Boys were some real racists.
It would be laughable if it wasn’t true. But, this is America in 2017, where cultural Marxists are running wild.
In every corner of the New South, the history of the Old South is being destroyed to placate the wishes of people who are motivated by the 21st Century version of fascism known as political correctness.
There is not a week that goes by now without seeing a news report concerning a Confederate monument that has been vandalized or is being torn down, in scenes that mimic the actions of ISIS in the Middle East or the SA in Nazi Germany. Statues of General Robert E. Lee are being carted off feet first, from Virginia to Texas, as if he was a deposed despot, instead of the most beloved general in American history.
In fact, last week in New Orleans, city officials began removing Confederate monuments that include statues of Lee, General P.T. Beauregard and Confederate President Jefferson Davis.
There is a dangerous trend infesting this country like malignant cancer cells. Anyone on the left who feels triggered or psychologically injured by a book, a speaker, a statue, a monument, a flag or a song, can claim some kind of special candyass status and demand that the speaker or in the case of the Confederacy, the flags, the statues and the monuments are destroyed.
You can’t eradicate history simply by removing statues, but that won’t stop the radical left.
Of course the most common argument for removing symbols of the Confederacy is that the symbols represent racism.
Is the Confederate flag racist? If it is in the hands of members of the KKK who are waving it, yes.
But, what about the person from North Carolina, for example, whose great, great grandfather served in the Army of Northern Virginia? Do they see that flag as a symbol of racism, or as the symbol of military history, or American history? I would assume the latter.
And, who has the right to tell them how to interpret history? When others order you to remove symbols of history, or to think a certain way that is simply fascism; nothing more and nothing less.
Still others would say that Robert E. Lee was a racist because he fought for the Confederacy. But, Lee himself never purchased or owned any slaves. He did inherit slaves from his father in law, George Custis. Some of the slaves were freed in 1857 and the rest in 1862. In fact if you had asked him, he would have told you he was opposed to slavery and that he fought the Civil War because his home state, Virginia, had been invaded by the Yankees.
What many of the wailing little fascists in America don’t know is that General Ulysses S. Grant, the man who prosecuted the war against Lee, the man whom Lee surrendered to in 1865, owned a slave named William Jones, whom he freed in 1859. In fact, Grant’s wife, Julia had four slaves, although they may have officially belonged to her father.
One would think the snowflakes and the liberal whining mayors would be demanding a removal of all Grant statues across the nation.
But, logic has never been a factor in the liberal thought process.
Do the liberal mayors, the PC governors and the little vandals of America know that only six percent of the soldiers fighting for the Confederacy actually owned any slaves?
If asked, Confederate soldiers would have said they were fighting because the North had invaded their land, or they were fighting against big government and the right to be left alone. Big government vs. small government; sounds familiar doesn’t it? It’s almost like it never really got resolved. Very few men were fighting to protect slavery, or the profits of King Cotton.
If asked, most soldiers in the Union Army would have said they were fighting to save the union. Except for abolitionists wearing blue, a majority weren’t fighting to free the slaves.
Sounds a little racist to me…
And, what about President Lincoln?
In 1861, Lincoln supported the original 13th Amendment or the Corwin Amendment. The Corwin Amendment was a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that would shield “domestic institutions” of the states (which in 1861 included slavery) from the constitutional amendment process and from abolition or interference by Congress. It was passed by the 36th Congress on March 2, 1861, and submitted to the state legislatures for ratification. Senator William H. Seward of New York introduced the amendment in the Senate and Representative Thomas Corwin of Ohio introduced it in the House of Representatives. It was one of several measures considered by Congress in an ultimately unsuccessful attempt to attract the seceding states back into the Union and in an attempt to entice border slave states to stay.
The official text of the amendment reads: No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.
President Lincoln, in his first inaugural address on March 4, said of the Corwin Amendment:
I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution—which amendment, however, I have not seen—has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service … holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.
Hmm…Sounds a little racist to me. Strangely, Steven Spielberg deleted any mention of the Corwin Amendment in his film, Lincoln. What a surprise.
Before the amendment could be ratified by all states, war broke out. But, the following states did ratify it: Kentucky, Ohio, Rhode Island, Illinois and Maryland.
Lincoln was a realist who would have done just about anything to save the Union, including tossing the constitution out the window, which he frequently did. Emancipation was a political legerdemain, to distract the nation from the series of Union Army defeats in the Eastern Theater and a litany of incompetent Union Army commanders. Lincoln needed the abolitionists behind him and something to rally the North; hence, the Emancipation Proclamation. Two years after emancipation, Lincoln was concocting ways for the black population to be relocated to British Colonies in the Caribbean before he was assassinated.
Whoaa…
Dirty little secret lefties, what if Lincoln was more of a racist than Lee?
Oh my God!
I bet your Marxist professor didn’t tell you that.
The victors wrote the history and sold the snake oil that they were the holy saviors defeating those evil slaver holders, even though almost all of the men they fought never owned a slave in their whole lives.
To compensate for their incompetence on the battlefield, the North developed the ‘holier than thou’ attitude. Lee may have run rings around the Army of the Potomac, but so what, he was evil and so was Jackson, Stuart, Longstreet, the entire Army of Northern Virginia and the Confederacy. Also included in the group of white nationalist racists were George Patton’s Confederate grandfather who was killed in 1864, Chesty Puller’s Confederate grandfather who was killed in 1863 and Woodrow Wilson’s father who was a CSA chaplain.
Combine a 150 year arrogant attitude with modern day political correctness and you have the current War against the Confederacy.
Don’t think for a moment that it will stop with Lee and Davis. There is no end to the militant fascism raging among left wing snowflakes.
Those who come for Lee today, will come for Lincoln tomorrow.
Soon, they will be demanding that statues of Jefferson, Washington and Andrew Jackson are destroyed. In fact Jackson has been run off the $20 bill to be replaced by Harriet Tubman.
After they are finished with them, they will go after Custer, Grant, Wyatt Earp, Teddy Roosevelt and FDR; after all he imprisoned the Japanese during WWII. When they’re done with FDR, they’ll come for Ike and Ronald Wilson Reagan.
Don’t think it will just be flags and statues. Next, there will be book burnings and destruction of private property belonging to people deemed enemies of the state.
It won’t stop until Americans put their feet down and say enough is enough. Frankly these people who try and tell us how to interpret our own history are nothing more than tyrants.
The War against the Confederacy is a war on freedom itself.
N.B. I’m not a Southerner. I’m from Northern Illinois and my relatives fought for the Union. In fact, my great, great, great uncle who served in the 2nd Indiana Cavalry, was captured during McCook’s Raid on Atlanta on July 30, 1864 and spent the rest of the war in Andersonville Prison.
He survived. But, it looks like American history won’t.
It’s a war against actual truth.
Liberals can’t handle shades of gray.
I don’t think the parties have been static
That’s simpleton logic suited for south bashers here
The radical GOP of thev1860s and 70s is in no way similar to today
They were super statists
Fixed.
Aside from rockrr and mac truck nearly every south hater here was also a. Nevertrumper
Just an observation
That your people draw the most frenzied hissy fit of the Leftist international types, is a tribute to your fidelity to a proud and honorable history. That is the one thing that those who hate our civilization simply cannot tolerate.
By the way. If one puts in juxtaposition the clear testimony of Booker T. Washington, and the snarling idiocy of the contemporary South haters--as you have observed also the Trump haters--it is not hard to recognize that the hatred of the Old South, clearly includes hatred of its Negro inhabitants, as well as the White leadership.
Consider Booker T. Washington Testimony.
The ultimate objects of this demonstration of pure hatred by the Left are just about anyone, who understands heritage & the Fifth Commandment. But see again, what Booker T. Washington had to say about the personalities involved, in the post war South:
Being against the lunacy of the confederates doesn’t make one a “south hater”.
Just and observation.
I am not saying that anyone flying the flag is racist. Personally, I’ll side with that until I know otherwise because only an idiot would not realize the flag has been co-opted. And don’t equate people not wanting that flag flown, wanting it in a museum, as somehow not being conservative. I’m quite conservative and so are most of the people I know. I didn’t not but briefly grow up in the south. I associate the flag with racism, KKK, killing Americans and all that. That doesn’t make me less conservative, just that I have a different view. Again, look at the common usage of that flag over the past 100 years. I will not mince words on this. It has not business being flown than does a Nazi flag. You wouldn’t suggest descendants of Nazis or people from Germany fly that flag, would you? Someone shows up at work with Nazi or Confederate flag, I’d fire them.
Oh, my goodness, but Democrats then were exactly alike today in everything important:
But Democrats never did like our Constitution and try at every possible moment to bend or corrupt it more to suit their own purposes.
I could go on, but that's a good start.
Anyone else want to add to it?
Where do you reach that conclusion—dislike confederate flag must be a nevertrumper. No, not true. Wrong to try and create that division. Besides, Trump has NEVER said anything to support or defend the flying of the confederate flag. I seriously doubt he has one or has ever had one. You won’t find one on any property he is associated with. So, please, be intellectually honest and keep Trump out of your defense of the confederate flag.
Is that supposed to be the Statue of Liberty on a Ku Klux Kreep float? ROFL!!! Among other things, the KKKreeps were violently anti-immigrant. And that refers to legal immigration, not to illegal invasion by hordes of foreigners bent on conquest.
According to Hitler's lawyer, Hans Frank, Hitler's grandfather was a young Jewish man named Leopold Frankenberger, whose son to Maria Schicklgruber later became Alois Hitler, Adolf's father.
Scholars today discount Frank's story as impossible and say Adolf's real father was most likely Johann Georg Hiedler, who later married Maria and adopted her son Alois.
However, Hitler himself was concerned enough in 1931 about possible Jewish ancestry to order an "investigation" which, not surprisingly, found no such evidence.
So Hitler's alleged Jewish ancestry may be an anti-Nazi or anti-Semitic political myth, but if Hitler himself was worried about it enough to take action, I'd not dismiss it 100%.
You would make such an equivalency between the nazis and the confederacy? You’re nuts.
The Democrats opposed the US Constitution because they believed it gave the Federal Government excessive power and the States too little. In other words, they did so for exactly the opposite reasons. You can agree or disagree with Federalism, but isn't it completely dishonest of you to say that today's Democrats are "the same" as those of the 19th Century when today's oppose the Constitution because it gives the Federal Government insufficient power while those of 200 years ago thought it gave the Federal GOvernment excessive power?
I'm guessing that you understand this, but are just engaging in dishonest rhetoric to support your own position.
Regarding flying the Nazi and Confederate flags, absolutely.
Remind me again, when did the Confederacy attempt to exterminate entire ethnic or religious groups? While you're at it, maybe you can provide a list of sovereign nations the Confederacy invaded, looted and turned into puppet regimes. When you can do that, we can start taking the comparison of the Confederacy and Nazi Germany seriously. Otherwise, it just sounds like the sort of propaganda we get from BlackLivesMatter activists.
What conservatives who cheer the destruction of Confederate monuments refuse to understand or acknowledge is that the radical groups who agitate against the Confederate Flag and Jefferson Davis memorials today will agitate against the American flag and George Washington memorials tomorrow. The Confederacy is just an easier target at the moment. This isn’t really about the Confederacy as much as it’s about the abolition of American history and the triumph of politically correct multiculturalism.
Lee never purchased slaves. He inherited them.
Lincoln did throw away the constitution, as in the case when he arrested the Maryland legislature because it was pro-secession. And, here’s Honest Abe’s executive order shutting down NY journalists:
Major-General John A. Drx,
Commanding at New York:
Whereas there has been wickedly and traitorously printed and published this morning in the New York World and New York Journal of Commerce, newspapers printed and published in the city of New York, a false and spurious proclamation purporting to be signed by the President and to be countersigned by the Secretary of State, which publication is of a treasonable nature, designed to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States and to the rebels now at war against the Government and their aiders and abettors, you are therefore hereby commanded forthwith to arrest and imprison in any fort or military prison in your command the editors, proprietors, and publishers of the aforesaid newspapers, and all such persons as, after public notice has been given of the falsehood of said publication, print and publish the same with intent to give aid and comfort to the enemy; and you will hold the persons so arrested in close custody until they can be brought to trial before a military commission for their offense. You will also take possession by military force of the printing establishments of the New York World and Journal of Commerce, and hold the same until further orders, and prohibit any further publication therefrom.
A. LINCOLN.
Keep up the hero worship of the tyrant Lincoln.
Excessive power?
Do you mean like Fugitive Slave laws, forced on Northern states which had already abolished slavery?
No, of course you don't.
Those are exactly the kind of constitutional Federal powers Democrats loved and supported!
ek_hornbeck: "In other words, they did so for exactly the opposite reasons.
You can agree or disagree with Federalism, but isn't it completely dishonest of you to say that today's Democrats are 'the same' as those of the 19th Century when today's oppose the Constitution because it gives the Federal Government insufficient power while those of 200 years ago thought it gave the Federal GOvernment excessive power?"
No, not the opposite reasons, the same reasons.
From Day One of our free republic Democrats have always supported more Federal power in support of their institutions, such as slavery then or "welfare" today.
They only care to limit Federal powers in areas (i.e., sanctuary cities) where it would be adverse to their political base.
How can that be anything but totally obvious??
ek_hornbeck: "I'm guessing that you understand this, but are just engaging in dishonest rhetoric to support your own position."
No, I'm being totally honest and you are ignoring simple facts which don't fit your own misleading narrative.
There's no legitimate comparison of Confederates with Nazis I can think of, except perhaps that both, let us say, bit off more than they could chew.
So have many others throughout history.
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.