The Confederate Problem
It's interesting that a distinguished journal like The Atlantic would dedicate so much space and energy on the topic of the South and its most famous symbol. The main article by Megan McArdle features some good thoughts and bad. For example:
Owning/supporting a Confederate flag is generally understood to be no more intrinsically racist than, e.g., supporting, or owning the logo of, the Washington Redskins. The understood symbolism simply isn't racial.
On the other hand, there is no getting around the history of the Confederate flag, and no excuse for that history. Whatever people may intend by it now, it was, as Matt Yglesias writes, "a banner of violent white supremacist ideology."
And the 130 and counting reader responses, as you might guess, reflect the same muddled view of Southern history and culture. Definitely worth a look.
posted by Michael Tuggle @ Wednesday, April 09, 2008
8 Comments
8 Comments:
The more I read about the causes of the War for Southern Independence, the more confusing it gets. President Lincoln ostensibly fought the war solely to "save the Union", but certainly had strong abolitionist sentiments going back well before his Presidency.
Alternative histories in which the South won the war seem to agree that the Confederacy would have abolished slavery in the 1880s, either because it was no longer economically viable, or as the result of international pressure.
I understand that the United States was the only nation to abolish slavery by military force. It also appears to be the only nation (other than South Africa) that endures a legacy of racism.
In hindsight, perhaps the most sensible solution in 1861 would have been for the government to buy out the slaveowners.
But then we still have the greed of Eastern banks, the tariff issue, etc., etc., etc.
While I genuinely understand the Southern motivation to honor its past, perhaps in discussions with the "Yankees" *, it would be better to emphasize solutions for the future. The Ohio heritage of creative innovation might come in handy here...
* of which I am not one, not having ancestors from New England (half of mine were from Pennsylvania, the other half from Botetourt County, Virginia).
Wow. Where could one start? The author's own hypocrisy as to not giving offence is flagrant to me. According to her idea of virtue, one may not offend others even when right!
I had to quit reading the comments. Even those defending the St. Andrew's Cross defamed the CSA! The government schools have succeeded in indoctrinating an occupied South. This article and comments following presuppose that all Southerners were racist and that all Yankees were gentle, benevolent, and compassionate lovers of the darker man. Hogwash! What will they do with H.K. Edgerton who is a black Confederate that is historically correct?
I can deal with a certain degree of ignorance on the part of the Scalawag and Yankee, but when under the guise of historical, political, or religious authority, this same ignorance is abhorrent and unexcusable.
Ms. McArdle goes on to say, "Confederate History Month should be ended, and the Confederate flag should be discarded, replaced, as Yglesias suggests, with "some less provocative emblem of Southern folkways". The Confederacy and the Confederate flag are not worth celebrating. Their revolting history is too inescapable."
Perhaps a better idea would be to end the 12 months of Yankee history mythology and replace it with REAL history. Then instead of discarding this "provocative emblem of Southern folkways," we should discard all bastardized images of the Northern folkways starting with every statue, memorial, and "honorary" image of that wicked tyrant Lincoln. Not ours but THEIR revolting history is too inescapable!
In closing, I will iterate my first point. Ms. McArdle, by saying that the Confederacy is not worth celebrating, has trampled the dead CSA men and women and spit in the faces of the great men who fought and/or died in their valiant attempt at securing liberty and independence for their respective states. How much more could one offend a group of people than to tell them their history, their dead, and their culture are worthless?
harold thomas,
Keep in mind that Dishonest Abe wanted to ship the freed slaves back to Africa.
His "abolitionism" was for show only -- he favored a compromise that would've allowed the South to keep its slaves as long as it renounced secession. Some abolitionist.
damon crowe,
Thanks for the energetic and heartfelt response. Yes, the induced ignorance is amazing, isn't it? That's why I favor building a big wall of separation between education and State.
I've gotten past the point of trying to change someone's mind about whether we are "racist" or not. It is a waste of time for the most part. Let us endeavour to build up whatever bit we have left of our past to shape our future. Join the League of the South today! Deo Vindice
I have lost hope for this Republic and its euro-democracy leanings. It is an exercise in futility to endeavor an intelligent discourse with the likes of “those people”(Yankees).It would be my guess at this point, that there is nothing that would convince them against the attempt to infringe another of our supposed rights, that of free speech and expression, not to mention the right to bare arms. They make it very hard to co-exist in close proximity to their likes, and I can see all to will why my/our ancestor other than “compromised principles” wished to form their own nation. If secession were an option today, and war was to be the contest, I would have no problem with the emulation of my ancestor.
dixieforever,
You're right. The word "racist" is a silly-putty accusation that can stick to just about anything the left dislikes.
Vindiciamus,
Of course, the real irony is that the intellectual and political inheritors of the victors of 1865 are undermining the foundations of the consolidated nation Lincoln created.
After they're finished destroying the US, we can begin rebuilding our own country.
Post a Comment
<< Home