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 ...
Previously known as the "Abolitionists".
Washington freed his slaves, Jefferson (mascot of the RATs) RAPED his. Jefferson's black son worked in the mansion.
Thanks for the info. I like your tag line. Get ready for this Tuesday. 150 years since Lincoln was murdered. All the Johnny Reb wannabe’s will be happy as heck that day.
That part of your post I can agree with.
That is how I came to be aware of the other side of the story.
My comments had more to do with the "approved" versions of events that are taught to almost all school children, most of whom go on to believe it for the rest of their lives.
Going back to previous posts -
In schoolroom discussions of The Emancipation Proclamation most children are taught the cleaned up, dumbed down slogan "Lincoln Freed The Slaves".
There is usually little if any mention of the well documented fact that Lincoln cynically declared freedom for the slaves only in the southern states, areas he didn't control, that were still controlled by the Confederacy. He did not apply the Emancipation to slaves in areas where his word would actually have immediately freed some slaves. Such as those in the border slave states and those in southern areas under Union control.
Check 'DiogenesLamp' Post #97 on this thread for for a useful historical reference on this point.
By doing what? The south engaged in a bloody and protracted rebellion that killed hundreds of thousands of people. And once they surrendered they attempted to keep the same people who led the rebellion in power and enacted laws meant to keep the newly freed slaves in a position as closely resembling slavery as possible. And you think that there shouldn't have been any repercussions?
See: Harriet Beecher Stowe/Abraham Lincoln
(Brunswick Maine)
He did not because he could not.
The South went to war because they were invaded.
FIFY
Um, then who was that that opened fire on Ft. Sumter?
I’m so glad you’re happy and so sad you’ve got that lousy flu.
My mother is in a Catholic nursing home and it’s very nice - the nuns are straight out of the Sound of Music. So I know they can be pleasant if run properly.
We are moving closer to NYC (we gave up our city apartment) after owning a home at the Jersey Shore for years. Sort of a downsizing. Everything is just fine here, thanks.
Nope. I don’t think there should have been repercussions. Sorry about that. I’m an American and love my history. I love the Yanks and the Rebs - the whole enchilada. I’d rather spend my time hating the vicious regimes of China, Stalinist Russia and the world of the imams than spend time stewing in bitterness of Fort Sumter.
South Carolina opened fire on Ft Sumter - or are you ignorant to the fact that the United States is made of sovereign states?
As I am sure, that you are clueless to the fact that the Ft Sumpter standoff was in fact a standoff because Lincoln lied to the South Carolina delegation that came to Washington, telling them that he would not resupply the fort.
When the supply ship arrived, South Carolina knew that Lincoln had lied to them.
The ship was there to evacuate the forts garrison.
BS Look at the county election maps. You'd never get all the northern rural counties to accept communism. Look at the pushback in Wisconsin for Scott Walker. There is no difference between a rural northern county and a rural southern county. The difference is the north has larger cities that tip elections to the Dems, especially when the fraud is added.
It was socially unacceptable to vote for the Party of Lincoln in the South.
So they gave us the Stalin-loving, freedom-snatching commie FDR. Wow, that was real smart.
I would be very interested to see a link to an authoritative source that confirms this claim that Lincoln told anyone (much less a “delegation” from South Carolina) that he would not resupply the fort.
Visit Ft. Sumpter. U.S. Park Historian.
You must have misheard.
Only a stupid shit bird would call the South the "liberal" part of the country. What crapola. The Conservatives is the Democrat then are like the Conservatives in the Republican Party of today, they've got "now where else to go".
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.