Tennessee: VU professor's essay sparks 'Confederate' backlash

The Tennessean ^ | 12/1/02 | Holly Edwards

[TomServo]

Dixie Ping!!!

[stand watie]

just another dumb-bunny from the poison-ivy-covered halls of academia.

some of the most ignorant, arrogant, leftist, mean-spirited damnfools i know of put Ph.D. after their names.

free dixie NOW,sw

[archy]

Dixie Ping!!!

Jonathan Farley added to *Cheka* list.

-archy-/-

[Smolenstein]

"His racism is not his only "attribute". Notice the the portrait in the background of his official photo."

Yep. He is a commie. Look at his own web site:

http://www.math.vanderbilt.edu/~farley/

His agenda appears to be more than simply Confederate bashing.

[Search4Truth]

You mean this one?

[billbears]

Did you know Farley ran for office under the Green Party in TN

Farley 2002

Some of his more 'important' issues he ran on"

* reparations for slavery and segregation
* the removal of the Confederate flag from public view
* free public education through college or vocational school
* universal health insurance
* an end to the prison-industrial complex, the so-called war on drugs and three strikes
* freedom for political prisoners like Mumia Abu-Jamal and Leonard Peltier
* an end to corporate welfare
* the abolition of the death penalty
* a living wage
* proportional representation
* an end to the military-industrial complex
* a reappraisal of third world debt
* opposition to globalization
* exposing the crack-CIA connection
* statehood for D.C.

Let's see, 'Free Mumia' and reparations? And that ever present conspiracy of crack and the CIA. Forgive me, I thought this guy was as bad as Asa Gordon. I was wrong. He's worse!!

[Captain Shady]

From that picture we can deduce that Mr. Farley is not a "Red-neck" ,but he is "Red".

[Darlin']

He is something, isn't he ? First he writes a deliberately inflamatory article then complains over the reactions.

According to his biography he is a very intelligent, accomplished academician who supports any number of radical causes from anti-war to reparations. His father is a native Guyanan and his mother Jamaican so one must presume that neither are decendants of American slaves. This past summer he ran as the Green Party candidate in Tennessee's 5th Congressional District receivinmg 1,205 votes, 0.7%. However, he spent most of the campaign in Great Britian where he was a Fulbright Scholar and was an invited speaker at the Stop the War rally in London in November. He has worked with the Black Panther Party, was an Affirmaive Action and DC statehood advocate, opposes the death penalty and list Hannibal, Frantz Fanon, Che Guevara, and Jesus among his heroes. As I read his bio I was reminded of what President Bush said about Clinton in his acceptance speech at the RNC Convention:

"Our current president embodied the potential of a generation. So many talents. So much charm. Such great skill. But, in the end, to what end? So much promise, to no great purpose. "

[Restorer]

But today more and more often being a proponent of the Federal view of the Civil War means you have to tear down the Confederacy in the uglist terms possible.

Very good point!

You might also want to note that the same applies on the other side. The Union armies were excusively composed of evil men, and Old Abe was the direct spiritual father of Lenin, Stalin and Clinton. If you don't believe me, just hang around on this thread. I'm sure the troglodytes will be out shortly.

Personal opinion: Both sides were composed of good and evil men, who fought for both a variety of motives on each side. Regardless of motive, almost all of them fought as bravely as any men in history.

The South seceded to protect its institution of slavery, the conflict over which had led in the previous two decades to the increasing bitterness that made secession possible. No slavery, no conflict. Certainly none severe enough to lead to war.

Other factors were involved, as they always are, but slavery was the root cause of the war.

[Area51]

Sure read like a diatribe of HATE SPEECH to me! IMHO he should be FIRED for it.

[rebelyell]

The cause of the war? How about tyrant lincoln sending troops and supplies to provision a fort that was on S.C. soil? We were invaded, moron.

[Restorer]

How about tyrant lincoln sending troops and supplies to provision a fort that was on S.C. soil?

I must have been through this a hundred times.

Lincoln attempted to send only supplies (mostly food) to the beseiged troops. No arms, no reinforcements.

The whole Sumter argument was about whether the state of SC could unilaterally repossess a Federal fort paid for by the citizens of the entire US.

Since the Union did not recognize that secession had occurred, they were only attempting to hold onto what had been perfectly agreeable to SC for decades.

A (somewhat) similar situation: If tomorrow Castro fired on Guantanamo when the US attempted to bring in a supply ship, would he be legally justified? The base is, after all, on the island of Cuba. Maybe the Cubans want their land back. How would you justify the attack on Sumter, while denouncing that on our base?

Whoever made the decision to fire on Sumter wanted a war. It's very obvious.

The Confeds could have equally well prevented the ship from reaching Sumter by firing on the ship itself, as they had in previous cases. This had not precipitated war.

Plus Anderson had officially notified the Confederates that without resupply he would be forced to surrender within a few days. They couldn't wait those three days, since they wanted a conflict, not a peaceful resolution. As they say, be careful what you wish for ...

Why did they want war? I think that's equally obvious. The rush of states to secede and join the Confederacy had stopped. There was some evidence of a counter-movement in favor of the Union in the border and upper south states.

The rump Confederacy that existed at the time of Sumter had no hope of maintaining its existence in any future conflict. Their only hope was to force the hand of the Upper South and Border States.

It almost worked. They all seceded except MO and KY, which also came very close to pulling out. With the resouces of MO and KY subtracted from the Union and added to the Confederacy (something like a 50% increase in manpower for the South), Lincoln himself said the Union could not have won the war.

[sneakypete]

You provide a good example.

I almost never provide a good example. The truth is the only reason I did it was because I was traveling,and I was tired and in a bad mood. Punching somebody in the mouth would have cheered me up. It seems like people can sense that,and they tend to leave you alone when it's obvious you don't give a damn about how they react.

Now, what about all those cars parked right outside the front door of the grocery stores, causing a traffic jam while the minority person is inside shopping?

That always gets me hot too,but so far I've managed to not say anything. I HAVE gone inside and called the cops to come give them one of those high-dollar parking tickets,though. I don't really object TOO much to them parking close to the door,but when they park right in front of it and I have to actually walk around their cars to get out of the store because they have the door blocked,it really starts to steam me. It's only a matter of time before I run into one of these cretins while I'm having muscle spasms in my back and it hurts me to walk,and it's gonna get ugly. I ususally avoid those situations when I'm physically hurting by waiting until after 10PM to go to the grocery store. I do this to avoid having to stand in a line before checking out because that hurts too,but it has the added benefit of not seeing the people who block the doors.

Should Mrs. BE park right in front of them, and me right tight behind them, and then go in the store too?

I don't recommend risking getting into a confrantation with anybody while your wife is there.

[sneakypete]

I finally decided that I wouldn't patronize any business that gave me such shoddy service.

Which is exactly what we all should do,given a chance.

[GOPcapitalist]

Let's see, 'Free Mumia' and reparations? And that ever present conspiracy of crack and the CIA. Forgive me, I thought this guy was as bad as Asa Gordon. I was wrong. He's worse!!

And just you wait - Walt will be along any minute now singing this guy's praises and defending his positions. It truly seems that there is no marxist tree-hugging terrorist-loving pot-smoking homosexual hemp-wearing chomskyite black nationalist mohammedan vegan goth left wing kook out there that is below Walt's defense so long as the individual in question hates the south.

[GOPcapitalist]

Lincoln attempted to send only supplies (mostly food) to the beseiged troops. No arms, no reinforcements.

Actually that is not entirely true. He sent military warships on the mission and loaded them with heavy armaments for the possibility of use. The Lincoln's orders to the ship commanders specify very clearly a number of things were to happen. The warships were first to attempt to enter the harbor and reprovision Sumter directly with supplies - a situation The Lincoln likely knew would not be permitted by the southerners. His orders accordingly contained a clause directing them to open fire, fight their way in, and drop off troops in the event that any resistence to their entry into Sumter was encountered. The southerners were notified of a resupply effort but caught word that The Lincoln's fleet of naval vessles had set sail and preempted their arrival by firing on Sumter. The ships arrived a day late.

A (somewhat) similar situation: If tomorrow Castro fired on Guantanamo when the US attempted to bring in a supply ship, would he be legally justified?

The analogy is dissimilar as the preexisting agreement for Guantanimo has been honored by Cuba's government to date. No change is likely to occur between today and tommorrow that would alter the conditions for this agreement. But with South Carolina, the decision was made with the action of secession. A better analogy would be to those British facilities in place in America after July 4, 1776.

Whoever made the decision to fire on Sumter wanted a war.

Just the same, whoever made the decision to insight it by sending that fleet and by firing on confederate ships attempting to enter Charleston Harbor must've wanted war as well.

The Confeds could have equally well prevented the ship from reaching Sumter by firing on the ship itself, as they had in previous cases. This had not precipitated war.

They could have done this but doing so would have precipitated war unlike the previous cases as The Lincoln had specifically ordered his ships to open fire and to drop reinforcements in Sumter. Here's an excerpt from the order itself as given by Secretary of the Navy Gideon Welles to the captain of one of the ships intended for the expedition:

"Should the authorities at Charleston, however, refuse to permit or attempt to prevent the vessel or vessels having supplies on board from entering the harbor, or from peaceably proceeding to Fort Sumter, you will protect the transports or boats of the expedition in the object of their mission-disposing of your force in such manner as to open the way for their ingress and afford, so far as practicable, security to the men and boats, and repelling by force, if necessary, all obstructions towards provisioning the fort and re-enforcing it; for in case of resistance to the peaceable primary object of the expedition a re-enforcement of the garrison will also be attempted. These purposes will be under the supervision of the War Department, which has charge of the expedition. The expedition has been intrusted to Captain G. V. Fox, with whom you will put yourself in communication, and co-operate with him to accomplish and carry into effect its object."

[stainlessbanner]

This anti-Confederate sentiment seems like something that's relatively new

I think it is in large part due to focus by hate groups like the NAACP, SPLC, etc. IMO, they have put Confederate symbols in their cross-hairs and attacked them relentlessly. The reason? Decline in membership and/or interest in these groups. The civil rights movement is essentially dead and these groups are looking for ways to prolong their existence, justify their need.

Unfortunately, the CBF and other Confederate symbols are a convenient rallying point, used to spur emotions incited by hateful rhetoric. The South has been used as their whipping post for too long and these tactics have run out of gas as of late. The vast majority are sick of hearing about the silly boycotts and anti-American rants from race-baiters. Sadly, the same major issues face these groups who claim to "improve" their constituents: poverty, welfare, education, drugs, crime, and the family.

The socialist left-wing attackers of the South have been exposed time after time - including those masquerading on FR as conservatives. Their propaganda tiresome, their intentions misguided.

[stainlessbanner]

Thanks for posting that to Restorer. We covered the prelude to Sumter in depth last week on that other thread ; )

[philman_36]

That's because you haven't done any investigating of the causes of the southern rebellion.
My aren't you the presumptuous one to know what I have and haven't done and know and don't know!
The speeches, the secession declarations, the writings of the southern leadership of the rebellion all show that they were almost solely concerned with protecting the institution of slavery.
And what of the years leading up to those things? Don't you read about any of that? Is that too wide of a view for you or does it narrow things down too much and eliminate the slavery issue?
Ask yourself this...If the Civil War was over slavery then why was the Emancipation Declaration not declared before the war began? If it were "all about slavery" then that would've been the driving motivation from the outset. Slavery only became an issue as a recruitment drive, basically, for the northern States. The North was losing badly at the beginning of the conflict and they had to create a "noble, winning cause".
I think you're the one who hasn't continued investigating the Civil War as a whole, but then again, I could be wrong. Maybe it's just what you learned and from whom you learned such things.
Reeducation is alive and thriving in America.

[philman_36]

His father is a native Guyanan and his mother Jamaican so one must presume that neither are decendants of American slaves.
His chair ain't even got three legs...