Which was largely an abject failure, ended swiftly (in no small part because representatives from southern states were back in congress and voting about it so quickly, plus the whole ‘widespread campaign of violence and intimidation against reconstruction-associated people’ thing), and was mostly rolled back, in law or in practice, in fairly short order.
Obviously, the Union didn’t make zero effort to reform the defeated Confederate states; but by the standards of, say, what we did with the Axis powers (arguably a benchmark for what it looks like when the US decides that some good, hard, reforming is in order), it was downright kid-gloves.
What if this is an elaborate troll? I can imagine taking checks from crazy people, and building the stupidest type of statue that I could possibly have designed. Wasn’t there a group that was sending emails when the rapture comes, so you could give away your stuff? They seemed like trolls to me.
So easy to vandalize. I wish I lived near there. They paid $3,000 for it, and the joy I’d get from knocking it down and dragging it away would make it worth every penny.
The preceding sentiments conveyed to me by born & bred Virginians who are more likely to found flying the winner flag of the USA. Which is of course a flag that has flown gaily over many atrocities, so it’s problematical too, but at least it’s not a loser flag.
The nature of freedom is that people are able to behave in ways you find objectionable, but can’t stop them. In return, they can’t stop you from behaving in ways they find objectionable.
It appears that you object to these wingnuts having freedom of expression, and are proposing to initiate violent acts to stop expression of ideas that you (and I!) find distasteful.
That’s not the American way.
The proposals to buy an adjacent lot and put up counter-signs is much better.
Had they won, World War One would have had a North American front. Clouds of mustard gas wafting across the Ohio River. This is what they damn near inflicted on America.
But had they been allowed to peacefully secede, they may have allied with the US rather than becoming bitter enemies.
but seeing the Stars & Bars implies that you think you’re from The Confederacy. Which you aren’t.
I’m not from The Confederacy, I am from a state that was part of what used to be The Confederacy. When we took the elementary school field-trip to the Georgia State Capitol building, that flag was incorporated in the state flag, and flying over the rotunda. And to answer your question: I lived in Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas; that one flag pretty much covers them all.
So apparently when you study under a southern civil war historian, you get a whitewashed version. But we all understand patriots make better apologists than historians when it comes to their own people, right?
What I learned was a far far cry from whitewashed, but it was balanced. Mandatory reading included the diaries and spoken word transcriptions of former slaves. Not somebodies version of history, but history in the first person. But instead of just quoting some white supremacist speech as comprehending the entire attitude of the Antebellum South, they spend some time talking about Southern Abolitionist and what was becoming a failed institution.
Actually you have it backwards. The slavery related complaints by Southern states at the time was:
The Federal Gov’t was prohibiting export of slaves to new territories (and soon to be states), especially those won in the recent Mexican War*
The Federal Gov’t wasn’t forcing Northern States to return escaped slaves back to Sourthern states
The Federal Gov’t was making some interstate slave transport difficult, particularly for politicians it wanted to keep them from brining their slave servants to Washington DC.
ALL of those items the Southern States immediately lost upon seceding. If those were the issues they were most concerned about then secession was the dumbest thing they could do. It deprived them of access to the new territories completely, severed any obligations the North had to return escaped slaves, and the whole DC thing is obvious.
What was much more important was the more mundane and inglorious reason: money. Prior to the 1850s Sourthern interests controlled the Federal Gov’t and kept it relatively small, frugal, and tariffs low because the Southern states depended on exporting cotton and other agricultural products to make money. Without a large Sourthern industrial base they also imported industrial goods and needed less infrastructure. An expensive gov’t with high import/export tariffs (the primary source of tax revenue) would cost them much more than it would the Northern States. When control of the Federal Gov’t flipped to Northern interests in the 1850s it raised tariffs to siphon off the profits from Southern exports and divert it to infrastructure projects that would benefit the industrializing North while at the same time also providing a protectionist effect for the North’s fledgeling industries. That is why the North couldn’t let the South just go on their separate way. It wasn’t about the holy indivisibility of the Union. It was to keep that big flow of tariff money from escaping their grasp. But that doesn’t sound so good in the history books.
Slavery was an issue, undoubtedly, as it was an emotional wedge issue between the Northern and Southern cultures. It is also something school books can safely focus on because we almost all agree now that the North was in the right on that issue. But saying it was the cause of the civil war would be like some future historian saying that gay marriage or federal funding to give free oral contraception pills to college girls will be the main cause of the American Civil War of 2015.
Did you really link to Stephens’ Cornerstone Speech to explain why the secession was about money and not slavery? The speech where Stephens states that “slavery is the natural condition of blacks” and also the “cornerstone of the south” is probably not the best example to put forth. It seems to me that the man used the same “it’s not actually about slaves, but rather about the major industries of the south that are supported almost entirely through slavery” rhetoric that Southerners who support the confederate flag under “states rights” are using.
I want to express my gratitude (with no artifice, irony, or hidden agenda) for the link in the BoingBoing post to the Mother Jones article, wherein I found a further link to the Cornerstone Speech
In nearly a half century of being somewhat alert to the history of the US Civil War (I’m not a Civil War historian by any means, but neither have I remained willfully ignorant) I had never yet even heard of the Cornerstone Speech, much less knew of its text.
Again, my thanks to the BoingBoing community for this important history lesson.
“STATES RIGHTS!!”
Best line I heard was on CrashCourse US history and the John Green guy said his teacher replied to that question one time “right to do WHAT?”
Awesome.
The motivations of the north, which I have no reason to believe were noble, are a different question than those from the south. I will accept that may have misinterpreted particulars of questions like exporting slaves, but here is what your link has to say:
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.
EggyToast called you on this, but I think it bears repeating. Here tariffs and slavery are the opposite of your version - tariffs are discussed as a thorn in the body politic; the enslavement of blacks, what diluded000 claims was likely ending, is singled out as the foundation of the new nation whose flag he flies.
If anyone were willing to consider the possibility that the the Confederacy was about white supremacy and their flag is nothing to be proud of, you would think reading that speech would persuade them.
Oh, The South. The Civil War is long, long over. Move on with your lives.The other 40 states are so over your sadsack whiny bullshit. Do ya’ll realize how pathetic you come across?
We could all argue until the end of time about the reasons for the Civil War but the end result is still going to be the same; narrow disagreements that fail to address all aspects. Ending slavery due to expansionist policies and not for altruistic reasons seems to me to be the most realistic albeit unpalatable reason. Lincoln wasn’t a saint, he was a pragmatist at best, and saw the danger of allowing slavery to continue during this expansionist period.
I do think that there is one thing we can agree upon, flying the Confederate flag is controversial. For the majority of people it holds a bad connotation. It would be so easy to break Godwin’s Law here but I’ll refrain from doing so. Instead I’d like to highlight what has happened in the 21st century in Belfast, NI. The BBC recently aired a doc on Petrol Bombs and Peace: Welcome to Belfast which highlights problems similar to those faced in the Southern US.
In my opinion people who use symbols of oppression as a defense against “suppression of their culture” are full of shit. They enjoy the fact that they can get away with it, and while they may not openly admit hatred for their perceived enemies it’s usually something they’ll admit in private. In the BBC doc it’s pretty flagrant hatred but never admitted on camera; KAT(Kill All Taigs) is written on the Irish flags burned every year on July 17th in Loyalist bonfires. But I seriously doubt if the loyalists would take bonfires with a Union Jack that had KAH(Kill All Huns) as anything less than an offense. Culture is a lot of things but discrimination against others isn’t culture it’s just sad.
Down here in Bama, we already got one of those on I-65, just south of Montgomery, that’s been up for years. (paid for by the Sons of Confederate Veterans) Its been up for years. Everytime I go home to Mobile, I raise a middle finger salute for it.
Cheap land, warmer weather, retirees… It isn’t about the culture, I’ll tell you that much. Funny to me as a former Southerner, because I have a whole gang of ex-Southern friends scattered around the U.S. who despite the lure of cheap houses/land would never go back because of the backwardness and the culture of bigotry. Luckily we can get together, make Southern food, and listen to Southern music just about anywhere…
Also, when I lived there in the 80s and 90s there were plenty of Southerners complaining about phantom Northerners all the time. We called them stupid rednecks.
By the way, send some of that “Northerner” Fed money that y’all love so much back to us tax payers “up here”, or in my case: “out there”…
