Posted on 07/09/2015 11:15:43 AM PDT by Pelham
Hollis remembers the day the Confederate flag was hoisted over the State House to commemorate the war. The centennial kicked off on April 11, 1961, with a re-creation of the firing on Fort Sumter. The flag went up for the opening celebrations.
"The flag is being flown this week at the request of Aiken Rep. John A. May," reported The State on April 12. May didn't introduce his resolution until the next legislative session. By the time the resolution passed on March 16, 1962, the flag had been flying for nearly a year. (This explains why the flag is often erroneously reported to have gone up in 1962).
"May told us he was going to introduce a resolution to fly the flag for a year from the capitol. I was against the flag going up," Hollis said, "but I kept quiet and went along. I didn't want to get into it with the UDC girls." The resolution that passed didn't include a time for the flag to come down and, therefore, "it just stayed up," Hollis said. "Nobody raised a question."
Hollis said he doesn't recall any racist or political overtones within the commission regarding the hoisting of the flag.
The day the Confederate flag went up over the State House, the opening ceremonies of the centennial in Charleston were marred by controversy. Newspapers reported the open and ugly feuding between South Carolina and the national Centennial Commission, calling it "the second battle of Fort Sumter."
(Excerpt) Read more at scpronet.com ...
Correction...Robert E. Lee appears on four US Postage stamps.
If tariffs were such a big issue, Southerners could have stayed in Congress and kept the rates from increasing as much as they did.
The road to this conflict was paved with the Northern states successful efforts to count each slave as 3/5ths of a man, during the creation of the Constitution. Reason: the South wanted to increase their representation based on population, and to count slaves.
What would the just answer have been? To give the White minority population of South Carolina more seats in Congress to "represent" the men and women they held in bondage?
The North did not want the South counting them. The compromise kept the Northern hegemony in the Congress with the greater population/representation. The issue always was.... power.
Well, no. White Southerners were overrepresented in Congress. From 1810 to 1860, the Speaker of the House was much more often a Southerner than not. So was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. I believe the president was more likely to be Southern born than not in the years from 1820 to 1850. And this at a time when the free citizen population of the North was larger.
Further, more sane individuals proposed compensating slave owners, in the North and South both, by paying them for each and freeing the slaves. The war would have been averted.
That wasn't going to happen. Slaveowners wanted the slaves and a country of their own, not money.
The real John Singleton Mosby admitted that slavery was the main cause of the war. And he was there at the time. Why can't you?
I’m sure you neoConfederates have more in common with progressives since both want to enslave people.
I was there for the re-enactment of the firing on the Star of the West. I was a member of The Citadel Corps of Cadets who, 100 years before had fired those first shots of the Civil War. We were once proud of our Southern heritage . . . alas, we have lost so much.
What’s even more fascinating to me is how little political ‘credit’ the GOPe is going to get from this. It happens every single time - they try to please the mob, and must believe the mob will somehow reciprocate by ‘liking’ and ‘voting’ for them. But it never works that way. Idiots.
Won’t discuss this with the same little club here on FR with an agenda. Gonna “force” your views on slavery on someone who knows quite a bit more than you? Don’t have to admit to what kin said then (if you read, you’d notice the words “capital investment” in the State’s issues- perhaps that wasn’t clear) or what we’ve known all along from business records, diaries, bibles and be castigated for our heritage and our history. Family goes back to well before 1700. Armchair historians with an agenda are, well, pedantic and tiresome.
Not possible to have dialogue. Deo Vindice. He will.
you can’t even make all of this up anymore sadly.
The left and these black groups have gone into such a Salem witch hunt over the battle flag to erase history and to attack the south that is has become one of the most pathetic things I have ever seen for many many years
...Speaking of US Postage stamps.Robert E. Lee appears on three different US Postage stamps, Jefferson Davis appears on one, Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson appears on two, Rafael Semmes on one, Joseph Johnston on one....
Obviously, any collectors owning any of the above should immediately surrender them to the nearest Democrat office holder for prompt destruction..
“I’m sure you neoConfederates have more in common with progressives since both want to enslave people.”
The original ‘progressives’, Karl Marx and his buddy Friedrich Engels, hated the Confederacy and were big cheerleaders for Lincoln and the Union cause. This can be easily learned by reading their writings on the American Civil War which Marxist neoYankees conveniently have posted for your enjoyment:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1861/us-civil-war/
Moreover a sizable portion of the Union Army was made up of immigrant ‘48ers, European radicals who had failed in their attempts at revolution back home.
So yes, there definitely were progressives involved in the American Civil War, and they supported big, centralized government as progressives always do. In the 1930s during the Spanish Civil War a number of Americans formed units that fought alongside the communists- the ‘Abe Lincoln Brigade’ and the ‘John Brown Battalion’ being two of them.
They aren’t called “the Stupid Party” for nothing.
Meanwhile the confederate constitution advocated slavery period.
NeoConfederates like slavery just like marxists they used the govt to oppress just like marxists
“Meanwhile the confederate constitution advocated slavery period.” -RginTN
As noted you’re not the first to say it:
” The Confederate Congress boasted that its new-fangled constitution, as distinguished from the Constitution of the Washingtons, Jeffersons, and Adams’s, had recognized for the first time Slavery as a thing good in itself, a bulwark of civilization, and a divine institution.” - Karl Marx, New York Tribune 1861
“n TN they want to dig up Nathan Bedforst’s wife.”
Not just his wife. The General as well.
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.