Replies

A couple of years ago, before I’d engaged in some of these extended debates, I had a great deal of sympathy for the southern cause. I believed then, and still do to some extent, that historical revisionism was attempting to demonize the South and all southerners for their past history. I still respect southern military history. No group of men ever fought with greater heroism and honor, regardless of what I think of the cause for which they fought. A great deal of this sympathy has dissipated, largely because of abusive Confederate apologists like you and SW.

Thanks for this post, SL.

Your experience and mine have been quite similar.

Thanks.

Recently I’ve seen strong parallels between southern and “moderate” attitudes towards slavery in the 1850s and liberal attitudes towards communism in the 1960s thru 1980s.

In each case it was those who denounced a great moral evil who were held responsible for any disruption that arose. If everybody just pretended slavery (or communism) wasn’t evil then we could have peace in our time.

Anybody remember the uproar when Reagan called the USSR an “evil empire?” Most of those who criticized him at the time didn’t even bother to dispute the accuracy of his characterization, they were just infuriated that someone had dared to use forbidden language.

There was remarkably similar reaction to Lincoln’s rather more restrained statement that “a house divided against itself cannot stand.” Didn’t he know saying such things could lead to secession and civil war? Lincoln’s most effective counter-punch to his critics was to point out that they had an argument not with him, but with a somewhat higher authority, Christ, who first used the expression.

One significant difference between the reactions to Lincoln and Reagan is that Reagan’s policy was to drop the decades-old policy of containment and to drive communist forces back where possible.

Lincoln was only trying to reestablish the recently dropped policy of containment of slavery and prevent its further expansion.