Confederate Memorials and Monuments - what history do they represent?

[Pete7469]

So, once all the Confederate monuments come down, everyone will be satisfied? Once the lovely Harriet Tubman replaces Andrew Jackson on the $20, we'll have racial harmony?

Is Harriet Tubman not worthy?

Nope. She wouldn't be even considered if she weren't female and, especially, black. But that's not the point. There would be no effort to remove Jackson and replace him with another white male unless the white male was truly a towering, nation-defining figure. Harriet Tubman is not a towering, nation-defining figure. She's a black female who did something no greater than what a thousand others do every year.

Harriet Tubman - Wikipedia

I think she did and stood for more then Jackson.

Lol...

YOU....

"Think"...?

Lol...

She got her ass kicked by a democrook union thug.

 

[Coyote]

So, once all the Confederate monuments come down, everyone will be satisfied? Once the lovely Harriet Tubman replaces Andrew Jackson on the $20, we'll have racial harmony?

Not if the bed wetters can keep marginalizing our society as some sort of modern 4th Reich.

ALL OF THE CONFEDERATE MONUMENTS ARE DEMOCROOK PARTY ENDEAVORS.

The KKK was a democrook party militant terrorist organization.

PERIOD.

Not seeing the relevance of this...it's really not a "party" issue.

 

[Vandalshandle]

So, once all the Confederate monuments come down, everyone will be satisfied? Once the lovely Harriet Tubman replaces Andrew Jackson on the $20, we'll have racial harmony?

Not if the bed wetters can keep marginalizing our society as some sort of modern 4th Reich.

ALL OF THE CONFEDERATE MONUMENTS ARE DEMOCROOK PARTY ENDEAVORS.

The KKK was a democrook party militant terrorist organization.

PERIOD.

Not seeing the relevance of this...it's really not a "party" issue.

You will have to forgive Pete. His email account was hacked years ago, and now has a virus that simply replicates the last mail he got from Rush on this subject which continues to print out year, after year, after year.

 

[MarathonMike]

I stand by my initial statement that this is a contrived crisis. It is elite Liberal White people saying to Black people "Now you need to look at these statues and be offended. Here is why you need to be offended and demand their removal". Their motive is to gain political leverage by "defeating White Racism" to create the illusion they accomplished something before the 2018 elections.

Charles Barkley put it best. "I've never spent a day of my life worrying about those stupid statues". They are just bronze, stone and pigeon poop. We should ignore them just like we've ignored them for the last 80 years.

 

[Coyote]

I stand by my initial statement that this is a contrived crisis. It is elite Liberal White people saying to Black people "Now you need to look at these statues and be offended. Here is why you need to be offended and demand their removal". Their motive is to gain political leverage by "defeating White Racism" to create the illusion they accomplished something before the 2018 elections.

Charles Barkley put it best. "I've never spent a day of my life worrying about those stupid statues". They are just bronze, stone and pigeon poop. We should ignore them just like we've ignored them for the last 80 years.

Statues represent something to certain people. Otherwise - why are people as upset at them being taken down as others are at their existence? Is one side valid and the other not?

 

[Pete7469]

Not seeing the relevance of this...it's really not a "party" issue.

My good lady...

You know that's bullshit.

The left is using the history of their own racism to inflame the emotions of their mindless drones and parrots and project it upon the GOP, which ended slavery and wrote the civil rights laws democrooks vehemently resisted until the overwhelming political will of the people forced LBJ to sign it.

Then he created the dependency that has...

those n!ggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years

Don't try to blow smoke up my ass. YOUR PARTY is the reason we have a racial problem.

No one else deserves the blame.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I see no issue with it being in the museums - that is the appropriate place imo.

Oh, yeah, that is how you feel now, but once the Marxists start demanding that they go from museums too you will cave and go along just like with the rest of the Marxist revelations to the unwashed hordes.

The statues were erected as an effort to reconcile Americans with each other long with things like the Army naming the posts after Confederate generals.

But this statue removal bullshit is nothing but part of the Marxist attempt to cause division among Americans and attack the very meaning of what this country stands for.

And that is FREEDOM.

"Hello, 911"

"I want to report something horrifying, just terrible, terrible...."

"What is that ma'am?"

"I was driving home from work and I saw a CONFEDERATE MONUMENT! Oh, the agony, the shame! What am I to do?"

"We will send someone from Belvue right on over, ma'am..."

 

[Pete7469]

Mark my words...

Next they will demand we blow the faces off Mt. Rushmore like the fucking Taliban did to Buddhist carvings.

Then they will demand we destroy monuments to Jefferson and Washington.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Mark my words...

Next they will demand we blow the faces off Mt. Rushmore like the fucking Taliban did to Buddhist carvings.

Then they will demand we destroy monuments to Jefferson and Washington.

Pete, you really do live in a special world of your own, don't you?

 

[MarathonMike]

I stand by my initial statement that this is a contrived crisis. It is elite Liberal White people saying to Black people "Now you need to look at these statues and be offended. Here is why you need to be offended and demand their removal". Their motive is to gain political leverage by "defeating White Racism" to create the illusion they accomplished something before the 2018 elections.

Charles Barkley put it best. "I've never spent a day of my life worrying about those stupid statues". They are just bronze, stone and pigeon poop. We should ignore them just like we've ignored them for the last 80 years.

Statues represent something to certain people. Otherwise - why are people as upset at them being taken down as others are at their existence? Is one side valid and the other not?

I agree. Which is why I call this a contrived crisis. Those statues mean a lot to the Daughters of the Confederacy, and what is left of the KKK and the smattering of White Supremacists in the US. To them, and only them, those statues represent a 'last stand' of sorts to the memory of the Old South, and distant families members who died in that Hellish war. To the rest of us they are just a part of history and should be left alone. Moving them to museums is a waste of time and money and a lame attempt to appease the guardians of PC. What have you accomplished by moving Robert E Lee's statue from a park to a museum? A political victory and nothing more.

IMO the Democratic Leadership saw an opportunity to create an explosion in Charlottsville and it worked to perfection. They blended the cocktail, they held back the Police and KABLOOOEEEE. Now we have statues being taken down in the middle of the night or being defaced and destroyed by mindless people who think they are fighting Nazis. And I think you know that it will not stop at statues.

 

[Vandalshandle]

OH, well, I suspect that if you and I were paying taxes to maintain statues of the Black Panthers, we might feel a little differently about it.

 

[Sunni Man]

Most were erected between the 1890's and 1920's - more then 30 years after the Civil War ended. They coincided with the rise in legislation essentially reinstalling slavery through a set of laws that segregated black people from white people

Which is about the average lag time between the end of a war and the dedication of monuments. And has nothing to do with political expediency. .....

WWll National Veterans Memorial ..... 59 years between end of war and dedication in 2004

Korean War Veterans Memorial ...... 42 years between end of war and dedication in 1995

Vietnam Women's Memorial ...... 31 years between end of war and dedication in 1993

 

[usmbguest5318]

I grew up in the deep South, and the Confederacy was a proud part of our legacy, UNTIL all things confederate were co-opted to stand for segregation. For example, as soon as the Supreme Court ruled in Brown Vs. Board of Education, my home state of Georgia put the stars and bars on to the Georgia flag in 1956:

It didn't stop there, of course, it is no longer the symbol of the confederacy. It is the tool of redneck racists.

UNTIL all things confederate were co-opted to stand for segregation.

Nobody, subsequent to the Confederacy's defeat, "co-opted all things Confederate" to stand for slavery, segregation and white supremacy. In the words of Alexander Stevens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America:

"The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization."

"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."

"With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system."​

Nobody co-opted history and thereby misrepresented the central belief about what the CSA stood for. Quite simply, and as seen from the words of the VP of the CSA, the Confederates' central belief about white supremacy and slavery formed the cornerstone upon which the CSA was built. Period.

J. Davis was talking to the plantation owners. Hardly any soldiers fought for slavery during the Civil War. They fought because their state had been "invaded". Whites did not compete with blacks in the cotton fields, and few soldiers owned slaves. For the average poor white, it was a non issue, until they lost the war. Then, it was all perceived as the blacks fault. This was REALLY brought home to them during reconstruction, when Northerners came down and had legislators elected who were illiterate blacks. That is when the personal hate really began. When President Arthur withdrew federal troops, the lynchings began.

Read the effing speech. Among other things, you'll find that Davis wasn't talking at all and that Stevens wasn't talking about plantation owners, he was talking to them.

 

[Yarddog]

I grew up in the deep South, and the Confederacy was a proud part of our legacy, UNTIL all things confederate were co-opted to stand for segregation. For example, as soon as the Supreme Court ruled in Brown Vs. Board of Education, my home state of Georgia put the stars and bars on to the Georgia flag in 1956:

It didn't stop there, of course, it is no longer the symbol of the confederacy. It is the tool of redneck racists.

I grew up in Maryland - kind of an "in between" state.

I'm curious...what do you make of the reason these monuments were erected - of how they coincided with segrationist movements and such? Was it something you weren't aware of (I wasn't)...?

Like I said - I found the Civil War history fascinating. My father used to take me to the Battle Field sites, and taught me a good bit about it. I'm near both Maryland and Pennsylvania and am frequently coming accross placards commemerating some Civil War event or another. But the monuments in question weren't battle field monuments. That kind of surprised me.

Do you think it might be time to retire some of these symbols to institutions of history, like Museums? I find it hard to imagine that black citizens living in those states could ever feel totally included with those symbols.

Serious thoughts - not trolling or anything.

In Georgia some wanted the Confederate flag removed from a Civil War Museum. Curator closed the museum.

I see no issue with it being in the museums - that is the appropriate place imo.

Yeah but you are not everyone. Most likely museums will be attacked for having them as well. Why wouldn't they be?
Why wouldnt blacks feel included just because some statues are around? Lot's of African Americans also fought to defeat these guys while wearing a Union uniform. How do you know many of them dont look on at those with a sense of pride knowing that these Generals were defeated? Not everyone feels like a victim. And really, do people need to remove a statue to prove their non-racism? I think it would have been a better move to add other monuments and statues in addition to these. It would have been much more interesting and perhaps surreal, and actually, maybe more meaningful to see them side by side. Of course, i probably have a strange way of seeing things.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I grew up in the deep South, and the Confederacy was a proud part of our legacy, UNTIL all things confederate were co-opted to stand for segregation. For example, as soon as the Supreme Court ruled in Brown Vs. Board of Education, my home state of Georgia put the stars and bars on to the Georgia flag in 1956:

It didn't stop there, of course, it is no longer the symbol of the confederacy. It is the tool of redneck racists.

UNTIL all things confederate were co-opted to stand for segregation.

Nobody, subsequent to the Confederacy's defeat, "co-opted all things Confederate" to stand for slavery, segregation and white supremacy. In the words of Alexander Stevens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America:

"The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization."

"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."

"With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system."​

Nobody co-opted history and thereby misrepresented the central belief about what the CSA stood for. Quite simply, and as seen from the words of the VP of the CSA, the Confederates' central belief about white supremacy and slavery formed the cornerstone upon which the CSA was built. Period.

J. Davis was talking to the plantation owners. Hardly any soldiers fought for slavery during the Civil War. They fought because their state had been "invaded". Whites did not compete with blacks in the cotton fields, and few soldiers owned slaves. For the average poor white, it was a non issue, until they lost the war. Then, it was all perceived as the blacks fault. This was REALLY brought home to them during reconstruction, when Northerners came down and had legislators elected who were illiterate blacks. That is when the personal hate really began. When President Arthur withdrew federal troops, the lynchings began.

Read the effing speech. Among other things, you'll find that Davis wasn't talking at all and that Stevens wasn't talking about plantation owners, he was talking to them.

Chill out, Xe. I know all about Stevens. He had been the governor of Ga. before the war. His heart had never been in the whole enterprise. You are looking at the whole thing simplistically. The entire war was about economics, as all wars are, really. My great grandfather fought for Tennessee from 1862 to 1865, captured twice, escaped once, paroled once, and carried a minette ball in his leg the rest of his life. He never owned a slave, and prospered after the war as the owner of a dry goods store, which building still stands today in Tennessee. In the town from whence he came, I seriously doubt if a single slave resided there.

In the old South, there was a huge difference between poor whites, and wealthy whites.There were very few of the latter, and they all owned the slaves. The poor whites did not consider it an issue at all. it was just the way things were, and had nothing much to do with them. The Southern hatred for blacks was primarily a post war phenomenon. Before the war, it was mostly just whites fearing another Nat Turner, or Haitian, uprising.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I grew up in the deep South, and the Confederacy was a proud part of our legacy, UNTIL all things confederate were co-opted to stand for segregation. For example, as soon as the Supreme Court ruled in Brown Vs. Board of Education, my home state of Georgia put the stars and bars on to the Georgia flag in 1956:

It didn't stop there, of course, it is no longer the symbol of the confederacy. It is the tool of redneck racists.

UNTIL all things confederate were co-opted to stand for segregation.

Nobody, subsequent to the Confederacy's defeat, "co-opted all things Confederate" to stand for slavery, segregation and white supremacy. In the words of Alexander Stevens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America:

"The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization."

"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."

"With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system."​

Nobody co-opted history and thereby misrepresented the central belief about what the CSA stood for. Quite simply, and as seen from the words of the VP of the CSA, the Confederates' central belief about white supremacy and slavery formed the cornerstone upon which the CSA was built. Period.

J. Davis was talking to the plantation owners. Hardly any soldiers fought for slavery during the Civil War. They fought because their state had been "invaded". Whites did not compete with blacks in the cotton fields, and few soldiers owned slaves. For the average poor white, it was a non issue, until they lost the war. Then, it was all perceived as the blacks fault. This was REALLY brought home to them during reconstruction, when Northerners came down and had legislators elected who were illiterate blacks. That is when the personal hate really began. When President Arthur withdrew federal troops, the lynchings began.

Read the effing speech. Among other things, you'll find that Davis wasn't talking at all and that Stevens wasn't talking about plantation owners, he was talking to them.

Chill out, Xe. I know all about Stevens. He had been the governor of Ga. before the war. His heart had never been in the whole enterprise. You are looking at the whole thing simplistically. The entire war was about economics, as all wars are, really. My great grandfather fought for Tennessee from 1862 to 1865, captured twice, escaped once, paroled once, and carried a minette ball in his leg the rest of his life. He never owned a slave, and prospered after the war as the owner of a dry goods store, which building still stands today in Tennessee. In the town from whence he came, I seriously doubt if a single slave resided there.

In the old South, there was a huge difference between poor whites, and wealthy whites.There were very few of the latter, and they all owned the slaves. The poor whites did not consider it an issue at all. it was just the way things were, and had nothing much to do with them. The Southern hatred for blacks was primarily a post war phenomenon. Before the war, it was mostly just whites fearing another Nat Turner, or Haitian, uprising.

I know all about Stevens.

It would appear you do not for were you to, you'd have address the point below.

In the old South, there was a huge difference between poor whites, and wealthy whites.

Stevens recognized that fact.

"With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system."

What resounding outcry of disagreement with Stevens remarks came from poor white Confederates? None of which I'm aware.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I grew up in the deep South, and the Confederacy was a proud part of our legacy, UNTIL all things confederate were co-opted to stand for segregation. For example, as soon as the Supreme Court ruled in Brown Vs. Board of Education, my home state of Georgia put the stars and bars on to the Georgia flag in 1956:

It didn't stop there, of course, it is no longer the symbol of the confederacy. It is the tool of redneck racists.

UNTIL all things confederate were co-opted to stand for segregation.

Nobody, subsequent to the Confederacy's defeat, "co-opted all things Confederate" to stand for slavery, segregation and white supremacy. In the words of Alexander Stevens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America:

"The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization."

"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."

"With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system."​

Nobody co-opted history and thereby misrepresented the central belief about what the CSA stood for. Quite simply, and as seen from the words of the VP of the CSA, the Confederates' central belief about white supremacy and slavery formed the cornerstone upon which the CSA was built. Period.

J. Davis was talking to the plantation owners. Hardly any soldiers fought for slavery during the Civil War. They fought because their state had been "invaded". Whites did not compete with blacks in the cotton fields, and few soldiers owned slaves. For the average poor white, it was a non issue, until they lost the war. Then, it was all perceived as the blacks fault. This was REALLY brought home to them during reconstruction, when Northerners came down and had legislators elected who were illiterate blacks. That is when the personal hate really began. When President Arthur withdrew federal troops, the lynchings began.

Read the effing speech. Among other things, you'll find that Davis wasn't talking at all and that Stevens wasn't talking about plantation owners, he was talking to them.

Chill out, Xe. I know all about Stevens. He had been the governor of Ga. before the war. His heart had never been in the whole enterprise. You are looking at the whole thing simplistically. The entire war was about economics, as all wars are, really. My great grandfather fought for Tennessee from 1862 to 1865, captured twice, escaped once, paroled once, and carried a minette ball in his leg the rest of his life. He never owned a slave, and prospered after the war as the owner of a dry goods store, which building still stands today in Tennessee. In the town from whence he came, I seriously doubt if a single slave resided there.

In the old South, there was a huge difference between poor whites, and wealthy whites.There were very few of the latter, and they all owned the slaves. The poor whites did not consider it an issue at all. it was just the way things were, and had nothing much to do with them. The Southern hatred for blacks was primarily a post war phenomenon. Before the war, it was mostly just whites fearing another Nat Turner, or Haitian, uprising.

I know all about Stevens.

It would appear you do not for were you to, you'd have address the point below.

In the old South, there was a huge difference between poor whites, and wealthy whites.

Stevens recognized that fact.

"With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system."

What resounding outcry of disagreement with Stevens remarks came from poor white Confederates? None of which I'm aware.

Xel, we have always been on the same side of the fence, and I am sorry that you find my position on the South, monuments, racism, and bigotry so hard to digest. I am just calling it as it is, a guy who's family, since 1657 has always lived in the South.

Just in case I have not made myself clear, I hate racism in all, forms. I do not apologize for the Civil War. I was not there at the time. I am not ashamed of my ancestors for fighting for their states. In a world that had no internet, tv, or radio, all they knew was what they read in the papers, which was, "The Yankees are coming, and they are going to take over your state". Before the Civil War, it was not uncommon for people to feel a deeper loyalty to their state, than to the union. For one thing, their states existed BEFORE their union.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I grew up in the deep South, and the Confederacy was a proud part of our legacy, UNTIL all things confederate were co-opted to stand for segregation. For example, as soon as the Supreme Court ruled in Brown Vs. Board of Education, my home state of Georgia put the stars and bars on to the Georgia flag in 1956:

It didn't stop there, of course, it is no longer the symbol of the confederacy. It is the tool of redneck racists.

UNTIL all things confederate were co-opted to stand for segregation.

Nobody, subsequent to the Confederacy's defeat, "co-opted all things Confederate" to stand for slavery, segregation and white supremacy. In the words of Alexander Stevens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America:

"The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization."

"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."

"With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system."​

Nobody co-opted history and thereby misrepresented the central belief about what the CSA stood for. Quite simply, and as seen from the words of the VP of the CSA, the Confederates' central belief about white supremacy and slavery formed the cornerstone upon which the CSA was built. Period.

J. Davis was talking to the plantation owners. Hardly any soldiers fought for slavery during the Civil War. They fought because their state had been "invaded". Whites did not compete with blacks in the cotton fields, and few soldiers owned slaves. For the average poor white, it was a non issue, until they lost the war. Then, it was all perceived as the blacks fault. This was REALLY brought home to them during reconstruction, when Northerners came down and had legislators elected who were illiterate blacks. That is when the personal hate really began. When President Arthur withdrew federal troops, the lynchings began.

Read the effing speech. Among other things, you'll find that Davis wasn't talking at all and that Stevens wasn't talking about plantation owners, he was talking to them.

Chill out, Xe. I know all about Stevens. He had been the governor of Ga. before the war. His heart had never been in the whole enterprise. You are looking at the whole thing simplistically. The entire war was about economics, as all wars are, really. My great grandfather fought for Tennessee from 1862 to 1865, captured twice, escaped once, paroled once, and carried a minette ball in his leg the rest of his life. He never owned a slave, and prospered after the war as the owner of a dry goods store, which building still stands today in Tennessee. In the town from whence he came, I seriously doubt if a single slave resided there.

In the old South, there was a huge difference between poor whites, and wealthy whites.There were very few of the latter, and they all owned the slaves. The poor whites did not consider it an issue at all. it was just the way things were, and had nothing much to do with them. The Southern hatred for blacks was primarily a post war phenomenon. Before the war, it was mostly just whites fearing another Nat Turner, or Haitian, uprising.

I know all about Stevens.

It would appear you do not for were you to, you'd have address the point below.

In the old South, there was a huge difference between poor whites, and wealthy whites.

Stevens recognized that fact.

"With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system."

What resounding outcry of disagreement with Stevens remarks came from poor white Confederates? None of which I'm aware.

Xel, we have always been on the same side of the fence, and I am sorry that you find my position on the South, monuments, racism, and bigotry so hard to digest. I am just calling it as it is, a guy who's family, since 1657 has always lived in the South.

Just in case I have not made myself clear, I hate racism in all, forms. I do not apologize for the Civil War. I was not there at the time. I am not ashamed of my ancestors for fighting for their states. In a world that had no internet, tv, or radio, all they knew was what they read in the papers, which was, "The Yankees are coming, and they are going to take over your state". Before the Civil War, it was not uncommon for people to feel a deeper loyalty to their state, than to the union. For one thing, their states existed BEFORE their union.

...I am sorry that you find my position on the South, monuments, racism, and bigotry so hard to digest.I am just calling it as it is.

Calling the Confederacy what it is/was does not include denying what its VP explicitly described as its "cornerstone." White supremacy and slavery are the things upon which the existence of all else in the Confederacy depended. The whole of the Confederacy's economy depended on it. The social culture depended on it. The legal and civil structure and institutions embraced and codified white supremacy by enshrining in the CSA Constitution the principle that blacks were property.

• Constitution of the Confederate States of America
  • Article I Section 9(4)
  • No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.
  • Article IV Section 3(3)
  • In all [territory admitted to Confederacy after its founding], the institution of negro slavery as it now exists in the Confederate States.
  • The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.
•  Robert Hardy Smith, An Address to the Citizens of Alabama on the Constitution and Laws of the Confederate States of America, 1861
  "We have dissolved the late Union chiefly because of the negro quarrel....We have called our negroes 'slaves', and we have recognized and protected them as persons and our rights to them as property."
• Recovering the Legal History of the Confederacy
  
• Statement of the National Trust for Historic Preservation
  "While some of these monuments were erected shortly after the war by grieving Southern families to honor the valor of fallen leaders and loved ones, many more were put in place for a more troubling purpose. Decades after the war, advocates of the Lost Cause erected these monuments all over the country to vindicate the Confederacy at the bar of history, erase the central issues of slavery and emancipation from our understanding of the war, and reaffirm a system of state-sanctioned white supremacy. Put simply, the erection of these Confederate memorials and enforcement of Jim Crow went hand-in-hand. They were intended as a celebration of white supremacy when they were constructed."
  
  Chart showing the quantity of Confederate Memorials erected by year.
  
  
  
  
  
  • Origins of the Lost Cause: Pollard to the Present
    
  • The Lost Cause

Simply put, the Confederacy was, more than any other thing, about white supremacy and establishing a nation where whites -- all of them -- were supreme and non-whites were property.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I grew up in Maryland - kind of an "in between" state..

I've lived in Maryland for nearly 50 years.
Maryland was not 'in between'. It was a southern state coopted by the north because of its proximity to DC.
The fascist academics on the U of MD campus removed the state song's melody from the campus chapel's clock chimes because some democrat fascist pointed out that the lyrics, written in 1847 or so, made reference to the 'tyranny of the north'.
Marylanders during the Civil War used the red and white Crossland portion of the state flag as their confederate battle flag.
If Maryland Democrat fascists want to be taken seriously then they need to be consistent and remove all vestiges of red and white from the campus and its sports teams, too. Good luck with that. Too much money at risk for the billion dollar sports industry there that Curley Byrd generated in the 1940's. Oh, BTW, the Democrat Nazis took Byrd's name off of the football stadium a couple of years back because he favored 'separate but equal' back in the 1950's. This was in spite of the tons of money he directed towards Maryland's black universities.

 

[cnelsen]

when (((Northerners))) came down and had legislators elected who were illiterate blacks.