Posted on 07/02/2002 3:37:44 AM PDT by WhiskeyPapa
The Osceola Sentinel SUNDAY, JULY 5, 1998 -- An Edition of The Orlando Sentinel
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historian: Civil War tales are pure bunk
History doesn't lie. Right? Well, the winners want history to make them look good. Sometimes the losers get their say, too.
Perspectives can change. Villains can be made to look like heroes. Interpreting the past can lead to lively debates. And because it is history, often the only confirmation comes from what was written down or told orally through generations.
Even so, care must be taken.
When talk turns to the Civil War and blacks' role with the Confederacy, there is no room for revisionist theories for Asa R Gordon.
For instance:
The Confederate states were interested in white supremacy.
The war between North and South was not about states' rights or a War of Southern independence. States' rights and independence are WHATS of the Civil War. The WHY of it was to preserve slavery, Gordon told a small group at St. James AME Zion church in Kissimmee last week.
Simply put, there should be no memorials honoring men like Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson. They and others resigned from the Union Army and fought against their country.
They were rebels, and they are traitors to the United States. Nations normally don't honor traitors, Gordon, a retired astrophysicist, said to a crowd that included a group from the Osceola Children's Home.
People normally don' t build memorials for traitors, racists or those who practice genocide.
There are no memorials to the Nazis.
In the United States, Confederate memorials dot the countryside. The flag is flown with pride. The Nazi flag - and Nazi leaders - inspire hatred.
It should he no different for Lee and others who fought for the South. The real heroes, Gordon said, are those Southerners who fought for the North.
As for those who try to promote the idea that blacks were willing soldiers for the South, Gordon's research disproves it.
In a lecture that was close to three hours long, the founder and executive director of the Washington, D.C. -based Douglass Institute of Government left no doubt about the fantasies and historical myths of Afro-Confederates.
"The South won in peace what it lost on the battlefield," Gordon said.
The commitment to the neo-Confederate movement is often emotional rather than intellectual, he said. It cannot stand the scrutiny of scholarship. The belief that blacks willingly served in the Confederate Army is ludicrous and harmful, he said.
"A slave didn't have a choice. If his master said he was going, the slave couldn't say no. He was a slave."
Those who say blacks fought for the South should look at Confederate documents, which ban blacks serving as regular members of the Army. They also need to look at records showing that those who did serve deserted when they got the chance.
Propagation of the present-day theories make it hard for people to realize that blacks were unhappy about their condition, Gordon said.
"How can you owe a people anything, if in fact they were so satisfied with the state that suppressed them?" he asked. "How can you correct that legacy if you are in denial about the true reasons?"
Gordon's visit was sponsored by Ann Tyler and Evan McKissic. McKissic, a retired Osceola teacher, has been critical of the theories of another retired local teacher, Nelson Winbush.
Winbush travels the country recounting the stories of his grandfather, who he said willingly and proudly served with Southern forces.
"I try to get the truth out. I talked with my grandfather, and I know what he said," Winbush said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mark Pino welcomes comments. He can be reached at (407) 931-5935, by e- mail at OSOpino1@aol.com, by fax at (407)931-5959 or by mail at The Osceola Sentinel, 804 W. Emmett St., Kissimmee, 34741.
According to the 1860 Census, there were only 27,721 Free Black males of all ages in Virginia. In fact, in all the Confederate states combined, there were only 62,968 Free Black males of all ages. But stand watie has every last one of them, from age 0 to 100+ serving in the Confederate Army plus another 17,000 who must have somehow magically appeared to defend the slavers.
These guys get more bizarre by the moment.
Brilliant deduction. No doubt you've heard of First Manassas? I could list the battle won by CSA generals with far less troops, supplies and equipment, but the amount of bandwidth won't allow it.
Lee was a good general, and a brave and honorable man. But he wasn't the best general of the war, or even the confederacy for that matter. I think Jackson was the better general for the southern side and Grant was the better general for the North. I would put Lee a close third, withGeorge Thomas a William Sherman battling it out for fourth.
Looks like we'll just have to agree to disagree. You will continue to pick and choose the data that you can hold up to support your contention. I will disagree with you, for I see the Civil War era wholly differently. Guess that's the way it will stay. However, one little friendly hint: it doesn't serve your argument by insinuating that the other party doesn't have a clue what they're talking about or is, otherwise, an idiot.
How is he 'picking and choosing'?
The world has grown dangerous again, and if we really are to be locked in a conflict that will last for many years and hit home again, we can expect this confederatist sentiment to subside, as we recognize that we are one country again. We will come togther as we did in 1941. Indeed most of us alredy have. But if the war against terrorism is already behind us, one can expect neo-confederatism, like other pernicious post-modern fashions, to persist and attract followers.
How could smaller units possibly be more ineffectual and tyrannical than the current status quo? Is yours an argument for One World Government as well? I thought competition and choice were good things to be encouraged, especially in commerce and government.
How can a return to a homogeneous culture under a severely limited government be a "pernicious post-modern fashion"? It is so 18th Century.
Do you deny that McPherson's professional history includes extensive and voluntary associations with the marxist movements of the radical left?
Do you deny that McPherson's appeared on a Bush bashing show from Mary Frances Berry's socialist Pacifica radio network?
Do you deny that on that show McPherson was interviewed by two openly communist hosts including one with ties to a black panther affiliated racial terrorist movement?
Do you deny that McPherson writes for the World Socialist Web Site, the internet wing of the Trotskyite marxist movement?
Do you deny that representatives of the World Socialist Website clearly identify McPherson as a "progressive" academic with credentials worthy of their movement's audience?
If you deny any of these things about your hero McPherson, by all means please say so and explain. Otherwise, consider your movement's preacher discredited as a socialist affiliated left wing shill.
But still not a commie, huh? Like I said, you're slipping.
...but the fact that Marx thoroughly embraced Lincoln's political agendas does speak volumes about those who supported the yankee cause. More importantly, your near identical use of Marx's argumentation even down to similar language itself to support Lincoln speaks volumes about where you get your tripe.
Doubt me? Consider your above quote about Lincoln. Look at the linguistic similarities:
"[Lincoln was] one of the rare men who succeed in becoming great, without ceasing to be good. Such, indeed, was the modesty of this great and good man, that the world only discovered him a hero after he had fallen a martyr." - Karl Marx, Address of the International Working Men's Association to President Johnson, 1865
Non Sequitur = "a statement that does not follow logically from what preceded it"
It helps to know with whom one is wasting their time arguing with.
May I take that to mean that you believe there is something wrong with referring to persons of openly communist political persuasion as "commies"?
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.