South celebrates Civil War, largely without slaves

[Black Dog]

Secession in and of itself is not racist.

I agree it's not. In this case though, one of the driving forces for the rebellion was.

The SCOTUS opinion on the matter was only valid because the South lost. Had they won, it wouldn't matter what the SCOTUS says. And of course, they'd say it's illegal. That's part of the overall federal government there, it's there to preserve the Republic. Just because a government deems something illegal does not make it invalid. Revolution would most certainly be deemed illegal, yet can often times be valid. Revolution, after all, is a perfectly valid and proper tool of the People. As secession is for the States.

In this case most agree (an appeal to populism I know) it was not for the right reasons. On top of that they lost, so the victors law is all that matters.

 

[Ikari]

I agree it's not. In this case though, one of the driving forces for the rebellion was.

Slavery was one of the motivating reasons for seccesion. Not the only one, and not the one being celebrated by this new group. But yes, at the time it certainly was a motivator.

In this case most agree (an appeal to populism I know) it was not for the right reasons. On top of that they lost, so the victors law is all that matters.

I'm pretty sure I did say something like "The SCOTUS opinion on the matter was only valid because the South lost.". While now people can look back and say "of course slavery is wrong"; that wasn't the ideal back then. And what the South thought they were fighting for was their property and their liberty. We have the gift of hindsight to sit now and say "well of course slavery is wrong, and the South was wrong for endorsing it". A true statement. But the institution of slavery is not what is being endorsed nor celebrated by this other group looking to raise awareness of State secession.

 

[Black Dog]

Slavery was one of the motivating reasons for seccesion. Not the only one, and not the one being celebrated by this new group. But yes, at the time it certainly was a motivator.

It never said it was the only one. Yes it was a motivator.

I'm pretty sure I did say something like "The SCOTUS opinion on the matter was only valid because the South lost.". While now people can look back and say "of course slavery is wrong"; that wasn't the ideal back then. And what the South thought they were fighting for was their property and their liberty. We have the gift of hindsight to sit now and say "well of course slavery is wrong, and the South was wrong for endorsing it". A true statement. But the institution of slavery is not what is being endorsed nor celebrated by this other group looking to raise awareness of State secession.

It goes beyond the secession. The Southern states then enacted racist laws to stop blacks from voting and then interracial marriage. I am not even going into Jim Crow which only ended in 1964. I was alive then and my parents remember it well, as they had to leave the South to get married.

They are celebrating something that should have never happened and caused long string of situations that go up until today. They are celebrating a cause for a war they lost, and started for evil reasons. It can only be seen as hostile to blacks, it's like throwing it on our face.

Revolution for a bad cause is just that.

 

[Ikari]

The North recognized a lot of those laws too, particularly the marriage one. It had nothing to do with the secession movement. This is like that GOP candidate who liked to dress up and play war. He was enamored with a particular SS brigade (or whatever they're called, I'm not up on military jargon) because of the historical context of the unit itself. Fair enough. Dressed like a Nazi soldier during WW II reenactments. And what happened? The press got the picture, published it, and then all of a sudden people were saying that he was a Nazi. He believed in whatever nonsense the Nazi's said. He's celebrating Hitler, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. In short, the same **** you're trying to pass off now.

I didn't buy it then, I ain't buying it now. They're not celebrating slavery, no matter how much you really want to sit there and make the case. They are celebrating secession particularly as it relates to our current political environment. It is not an endorsement of slavery, they are not saying "bring back slavery". They are saying "Hey, these 11 States in the past seceded and you [government] need to be paying attention NOW. To what you are doing, how you are behaving, and how you are acting against us. We did it then, we can do it now, secession is a proper tool of the State". That's it. They're pissed off at the current incarnation of government and they made this celebration to blow off steam. It's not some ****ing celebration to slavery or any of that BS. So let's move on, shall we?

 

[Black Dog]

The North recognized a lot of those laws too, particularly the marriage one. It had nothing to do with the secession movement. This is like that GOP candidate who liked to dress up and play war. He was enamored with a particular SS brigade (or whatever they're called, I'm not up on military jargon) because of the historical context of the unit itself. Fair enough. Dressed like a Nazi soldier during WW II reenactments. And what happened? The press got the picture, published it, and then all of a sudden people were saying that he was a Nazi. He believed in whatever nonsense the Nazi's said. He's celebrating Hitler, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. In short, the same **** you're trying to pass off now.

Has nothing to do with my statements. I used to dress up as a rebel solider for civil war re-enactments, they have nothing to do with this.

As far as the North recognizing some, I never said they didn't. The South however was the main culprit.

I didn't buy it then, I ain't buying it now. They're not celebrating slavery, no matter how much you really want to sit there and make the case.

I am not all that concerned whether you buy it or not to be honest. I have already made my case.

current[/b] political environment. It is not an endorsement of slavery, they are not saying "bring back slavery". They are saying "Hey, these 11 States in the past seceded and you [government] need to be paying attention NOW. To what you are doing, how you are behaving, and how you are acting against us. We did it then, we can do it now, secession is a proper tool of the State". That's it. They're pissed off at the current incarnation of government and they made this celebration to blow off steam. It's not some ****ing celebration to slavery or any of that BS. So let's move on, shall we?

That is a typical libertarian view so I am not surprised. What they are doing has an undertone you chose to ignore.

 

[Hatuey]

Southerners celebrating the time they rebelled so that they could keep slavery going a little longer? Well color me shocked.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Southerners celebrating the time they rebelled so that they could keep slavery going a little longer? Well color me shocked.

As funny as I found that, twas a bit below the belt lol

 

[Ikari]

Has nothing to do with my statements. I used to dress up as a rebel solider for civil war re-enactments, they have nothing to do with this.

As far as the North recognizing some, I never said they didn't. The South however was the main culprit.

Yes it does, because it is in fact the same act. Here you have some people celebrating secession and you're jumping up and down screaming racism. They're honoring the history of the Civil War meaning they are celebrating the use of slavery in the South prior to. They are exalting the practice! This is in essence your argument. It's the same for those military history nerds who like to dress up and reenact wars. You can say the same damned things. But it seems that you won't. They're celebrating the war, they're upholding whatever values were expressed by the nation whose military uniform the reenactor is currently wearing. Oh this and that, blah blah blah.

You see in the end, it's a very stupid argument. You won't apply it to one side even though it fits pretty much with the case in which you are willing to apply it in. And a man thinks this is because you look favorably perhaps on one hobby such as historical war reenactment, but poorly on a group of people who wanted to throw a secession party. So given the personal bias, you apply your flawed logic in one case, but not the other.

I am not all that concerned whether you buy it or not to be honest. I have already made my case.

And a very poor case it is.

That is a typical libertarian view so I am not surprised. What they are doing has an undertone you chose to ignore.

Not jumping to conclusions? Yeah, I suppose that is a typical libertarian view. You want to pretend there's an undertone; that's fine. People who look to make the slightest thing into political fodder will often pretend things exist which don't.

 

[Albert Di Salvo]

White Southerners are simply celebrating their identity in the era of identity politics. If it's ok to celebrate St. Pattie's Day, Cinco de Mayo, Juneteenth, it's ok to celebrate Seccession Day. No big deal. America is not one country. It is many countries.

 

[Grimjack19]

White Southerners are simply celebrating their identity in the era of identity politics. If it's ok to celebrate St. Pattie's Day, Cinco de Mayo, Juneteenth, it's ok to celebrate Seccession Day. No big deal. America is not one country. It is many countries.

No, its actually just one country.

I have never understood the concept Southern pride, which I grew up around. I don't see anything the South, as a seperate region, has done or stood for that warrants respect and plenty that we should be ashamed of.

 

[TurtleDude]

No, its actually just one country.

I have never understood the concept Southern pride, which I grew up around. I don't see anything the South, as a seperate region, has done or stood for that warrants respect and plenty that we should be ashamed of.

self loathing and guilt is common in the left from what I have seen

 

[danarhea]

And really we get to the heart of it. Evil horrible racists hate the black people. Shocking, I couldn't have guessed that was really at the heart of the complaint and it was all based on stereotyping people.

To ignore the fact that racism played a major role, if not THE major role, in the Civil war is glossing over the truth. You hear many talking about it being over "states rights", while failing to mention the root cause of the Civil War - Slavery. The South supported slavery, while the North did not, and wanted to end that barbarian practice. The South treated human beings as property, and slave owners had a right to subject slaves to the whip, and even murder them, if they so desired. The heart of the matter is that slaves were not considered by Southerners to be human beings, but property, that the owners had the right to do what they wished with, much like a mule or a horse. The Civil War came about because forces in the North were working towards eventually banning slavery. States rights was a euphemism that really meant the right for some states to treat human beings as property, and nothing else.

Don't buy what I am saying? Then read this from the experts on what the Civil War was about. These experts knew the issue, as they saw it, perfectly, and put it all on paper, when the various Southern states issued their declarations of secession. Here is an excerpt from Mississippi's declaration of secession:

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product, which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

You can read the rest of the declaration, each sickening and disgusting sentence, at the link. This was not the spirit of States Rights. This was the spirit of monsters like Hitler and Pol Pot.

Never forget, and never give the memory of the Confederacy any chance whatsoever at legitimacy, for the Confederacy never was legitimate, not in the eyes of God, nor according to anything that could be considered, even remotely, as common decency.

 

[Hatuey]

To ignore the fact that racism played a major role, if not THE major role, in the Civil war is glossing over the truth. You hear many talking about it being over "states rights", while failing to mention the root cause of the Civil War - Slavery. The South supported slavery, while the North did not, and wanted to end that barbarian practice. The South treated human beings as property, and slave owners had a right to subject slaves to the whip, and even murder them, if they so desired. The heart of the matter is that slaves were not considered by Southerners to be human beings, but property, that the owners had the right to do what they wished with, much like a mule or a horse. The Civil War came about because forces in the North were working towards eventually banning slavery. States rights was a euphemism that really meant the right for some states to treat human beings as property, and nothing else.

Don't buy what I am saying? Then read this from the experts on what the Civil War was about. These experts knew the issue, as they saw it, perfectly, and put it all on paper, when the various Southern states issued their declarations of secession. Here is an excerpt from Mississippi's declaration of secession:



You can read the rest of the declaration, each sickening and disgusting sentence, at the link. This was not the spirit of States Rights. This was the spirit of monsters like Hitler and Pol Pot.

Never forget, and never give the memory of the Confederacy a chance at legitimacy, for the Confederacy never was.

Stop it.... stop it... revisionists don't really care how many times you point out that all 4 declarations of secession that exist put slavery as their central reason. It doesn't matter that the President of the Confederation put slavery as the central reason for secession. It doesn't matter that the South's subsequent sociological history shows there was an immediate backlash against slaves freed by the war. It doesn't matter that 100 years after slavery was over, the South as a region was still trying to implement laws which restricted the rights of blacks. None of that matters. It was all about states rights.

 

[digsbe]

The core of the Civil War was about slavery. The states tried to leave the Union because slavery was going to be made illegal. The South didn't want to comply, so they rebelled in the name of "states' rights." The states' rights they wanted to defend was the right of a state to enslave others.

 

[TurtleDude]

NO doubt that slavery was a main reason for the rebels doing what they did but did the average Union soldier channel John Brown?

 

[Black Dog]

Yes it does, because it is in fact the same act. Here you have some people celebrating secession and you're jumping up and down screaming racism. They're honoring the history of the Civil War meaning they are celebrating the use of slavery in the South prior to. They are exalting the practice! This is in essence your argument. It's the same for those military history nerds who like to dress up and reenact wars. You can say the same damned things. But it seems that you won't. They're celebrating the war, they're upholding whatever values were expressed by the nation whose military uniform the reenactor is currently wearing. Oh this and that, blah blah blah.

Wow! talk about a drama queen, lol. I am saying it has racist undertones, that's it. I am not jumping up and down or comparing it to reenactments. That is just silly.

So no, that is not my argument.

You see in the end, it's a very stupid argument. You won't apply it to one side even though it fits pretty much with the case in which you are willing to apply it in. And a man thinks this is because you look favorably perhaps on one hobby such as historical war reenactment, but poorly on a group of people who wanted to throw a secession party. So given the personal bias, you apply your flawed logic in one case, but not the other.

Wait, one celebrates the solder or a battle etc. The other celebrates a secession based on an immoral practices and a war they lost.

Yea I see your point. :doh

And a very poor case it is.

In your rather mixed up opinion. :mrgreen:

Not jumping to conclusions? Yeah, I suppose that is a typical libertarian view. You want to pretend there's an undertone; that's fine. People who look to make the slightest thing into political fodder will often pretend things exist which don't.

In this case it does. End of story.

 

[Black Dog]

NO doubt that slavery was a main reason for the rebels doing what they did but did the average Union soldier channel John Brown?

God I hope not. :lol:

 

[Albert Di Salvo]

No, its actually just one country.

I have never understood the concept Southern pride, which I grew up around. I don't see anything the South, as a seperate region, has done or stood for that warrants respect and plenty that we should be ashamed of.

No America is actually many countries, some of which are hostile to each other.

You have no more right to judge Southern Whites celebrating their identity and heritage than Southern Whites have judging anyone else. Judge not lest ye be judged. If Southern Whites can't celebrate their identity and heritage then no one else has the right either. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Any other position is philosophically inconsistent.

 

[digsbe]

Any other thing I really dislike is the confederate flag being flown with no opposition in many places in the South. I may be "prejudice" against it because I am originally from up north, but when I see that flag flying on poles or on peoples cars it offends me and makes me mad. I've gotten into arguments over it, to which those who express "Dixie pride" claim it's "heritage, not hate." The fact is that the confederate flag stood for the confederacy, which stood for enslavement, secession from the Union, and the killing of American soldiers in the bloodiest war in American history. Many of these people also claim to love America and be patriotic, yet they wave a flag that stood for breaking away from America. I find it to be equal to someone of German dissent (like me, well partially German) waving a nazi flag or banner in order to show support for Germany. The nazi flag stood for racism, war, and the death of soldiers (among these being American). Yet no one would find it acceptable (nor should they) if I were to innocently wave my nazi banner in the name of German pride and simply cast away the racist bloodbath that happened under nazi rule. Would this also be "heritage and not hate"? I do not think the confederacy should be revered or celebrated for any reason. It should be treated just like nazism: a racist nation that is responsible for the deaths of many and an enemy combatant against the United States of America.

 

[Hatuey]

No America is actually many countries, some of which are hostile to each other.

You have no more right to judge Southern Whites celebrating their identity and heritage than Southern Whites have judging anyone else. Judge not lest ye be judged. If Southern Whites can't celebrate their identity and heritage then no one else has the right either. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Any other position is philosophically inconsistent.

The problem is that it's not a celebrating of Southern identity and heritage. It's a celebration that ignores the basic facts of Southern identity and heritage.

 

[Black Dog]

No America is actually many countries, some of which are hostile to each other.

You have no more right to judge Southern Whites celebrating their identity and heritage than Southern Whites have judging anyone else. Judge not lest ye be judged. If Southern Whites can't celebrate their identity and heritage then no one else has the right either. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Any other position is philosophically inconsistent.

They are not celebrating culture or race. It is an excuse to celebrate a racist ideal and thumb their noses at people, nothing more. Not all of the people, but far to many.

 

[Black Dog]

Any other thing I really dislike is the confederate flag being flown with no opposition in many places in the South. I may be "prejudice" against it because I am originally from up north, but when I see that flag flying on poles or on peoples cars it offends me and makes me mad. I've gotten into arguments over it, to which those who express "Dixie pride" claim it's "heritage, not hate." The fact is that the confederate flag stood for the confederacy, which stood for enslavement, secession from the Union, and the killing of American soldiers in the bloodiest war in American history. Many of these people also claim to love America and be patriotic, yet they wave a flag that stood for breaking away from America. I find it to be equal to someone of German dissent (like me, well partially German) waving a nazi flag or banner in order to show support for Germany. The nazi flag stood for racism, war, and the death of soldiers (among these being American). Yet no one would find it acceptable (nor should they) if I were to innocently wave my nazi banner in the name of German pride and simply cast away the racist bloodbath that happened under nazi rule would this also be "heritage and not hate"? I do not think the confederacy should be revered or celebrated for any reason. It should be treated just like nazism: a racist nation that is responsible for the deaths of many and an enemy combatant against the United States of America.

I don't agree with you on the rebel flag.

It makes it much easier to recognize a dumb ass or rebel without a clue.

 

[Redress]

Dan, you get thanks just for linking to civil-war.net. What a wonderful website I had never visited, going to spend some time checking out the wonderful pictures and articles.

 

[Albert Di Salvo]

They are not celebrating culture or race. It is an excuse to celebrate a racist ideal and thumb their noses at people, nothing more. Not all of the people, but far to many.

Don't begrudge Southern Whites of the last shred of their history. To do so provokes alienation and estrangement because every single other group in this country gets to celebrate who they are.

Besides, the Stars and Stripes are just as much a symbol of discrimination and oppression as are the Stars and Bars. Seriously! There is no more reasaon to respect the Stars and Stripes than there is to despise the Stars and Bars.

Today parades are held in America where primarily Mexican flags are waved. Where I live Mexican Independence Day is about as big a deal as is American Independence Day. That being the case, it's hard for me to get worked up about the Stars and Bars and other accouterments of a past long gone.

 

[Hatuey]

Don't begrudge Southern Whites of the last shred of their history. To do so provokes alienation and estrangement because every single other group in this country gets to celebrate who they are.

German-Americans don't get to celebrate the Holocaust.

Besides, the Stars and Stripes are just as much a symbol of discrimination and oppression as are the Stars and Bars. Seriously! There is no more reasaon to respect the Stars and Stripes than there is to despise the Stars and Bars.

I can think of one.

Today parades are held in America where primarily Mexican flags are waved. Where I live Mexican Independence Day is about as big a deal as is American Independence Day. That being the case, it's hard for me to get worked up about the Stars and Bars and other accouterments of a past long gone.

Yes, and Mexicans were fighting to create a country that was not being oppressed by distant lords in Spain. Southerners were fighting to prolong their use of slavery. The two are not even remotely comparable.