Blogcritics: Comments on Constitution of Confederacy tells its tale today

Comment by Phillip Winn

Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:06:08 EST

Those who try hard to convince others that the war wasn't about slavery are either truly ignorant, or the very neo-confederates you seek, Dave. I'm not very big on labeling, so I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt. "Deep South," for example, probably believes what he's writing and would be shocked to travel back in history and see the truth.

Comment by Victor Plenty

Wed, 16 Mar 2005 15:53:36 EST

Slavery was the central issue of the Civil War. All other issues were secondary to it. Consider the following passage from the Mississippi 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.

Neo-Confederates include, among others, the modern revisionists who try to ignore what the Confederates themselves admitted they were fighting to preserve.

Comment by Dave Nalle

Wed, 16 Mar 2005 15:37:00 EST

Who on earth are these 'Neo-Confederates' referenced in this article? Never heard of such a thing. And the fact that there are two paragraphs protecting slaveholders rights doesn't exactly make the confederate constitution or the civil war all about slavery. There are a couple of passages about slavery in the US constitution too. Does that make it a pro-slavery document? More leftist dementia on display in this attempt to tar the entire right wing with the brush of racism based on basically nothing. Dave

Comment by Deep South

Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:37:20 EST

Let's not forget that the Confederacy had made binding agreements to begin the gradual emancipation of slavery with England, that was to take affect at the end of the war (if the South had won). Also, since only a very small minority of people in the South owned slaves, what makes you think that the rest of the people in the South would have been so eager to fight this war? No... This war was not about slavery as your Northern institutions still claim to this day. Even "Honest" Abe said himself that his war was to keep the Union together. He said himself that he was emancipate slavery if that would keep the Union together, or keep slavery if that would keep the Union together. The Emancipation Proclamation (Lincoln said himself) was to try to cause a rebellion of the slaves against their masters... But... that didn't work... So he let the hounds loose (Sherman)...

Comment by Eric Olsen

Mon, 3 May 2004 08:12:15 EDT

not separately, no

Comment by RJ Elliott

Mon, 3 May 2004 02:21:39 EDT

Should we not honor the roughly 300,000 AMERICANS who died on the wrong side of this war?

Comment by Mac Diva

Sun, 2 May 2004 21:55:57 EDT

Those celebrating Confederate Memorial Day in Alabama include its governor, Bob Riley. He has also been linked to the secessionist and white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens. According to Google News, ceremonies have been held or will be held commemorating the Confederacy throughout the South on the dates cited in the entry above.

Comment by Mac Diva

Mon, 26 Apr 2004 21:53:34 EDT

N, exactly. How can people who say they are in favor of more freedom be defenders of slavery? The Libertarians are really blowing whatever credibility they have by taking up with the neo-Confederates. Several Libertarian think tanks have been overrun by the very well-organized neo-Confederate movement. The most prominent is lewrockwellcom. Much of the commentary is devoted to the 'perfect Republic' before the Civil War, Lincoln hating and, lately, claims that the South's pre-Bellum economic policy was a good one. Very strange stuff to anyone but fellow travelers.

Comment by sheri

Mon, 26 Apr 2004 14:57:14 EDT

Read it twice.

Comment by sheri

Mon, 26 Apr 2004 14:55:45 EDT

Then again, how can I be impressed by something you have failed to do? On account... I will be having lunch tomorrow with my very good FRIEND, who MUST be one of your "opportunist" sock puppets. Because she's black.

Comment by sheri

Mon, 26 Apr 2004 14:55:10 EDT

Then again, how can I be impressed by something you have failed to do? On account... I will be having lunch tomorrow with my very good FRIEND, who is MUST be one of your "opportunist" sock puppets. Because she's black.

Comment by NWinn

Mon, 26 Apr 2004 14:48:40 EDT

I have a dear friend, a Libertarian, who will correct "The Civil War" with "The War of Northern Agression". Oddly enough, he's from upstate New York, then Kansas, then California. I understand those who say America's government is more intrusive or controlling now than it was before "Lincoln's War". I just wonder why they don't understand that the freedom allowed before the war was not available to all. Sure the North had it's faults. But in the spirit of the log and the speck, I fear for those who don't see slavery as a large enough problem to have deserved Reconstruction.

Comment by sheri

Mon, 26 Apr 2004 14:39:33 EDT

More of the same... Fact: I have lived in Georgia all of my life, and until this post, I NEVER KNEW THIS HOLIDAY EXISTED. So a reader is lead to believe, upon, first glancing at this aticle, that the state of Georgia still advocates slavery.Somehow endorsed(but kept "lowkey")by the UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA. You may mention the certain groups that may be interested in celebrating this holiday in the spirit of a slave loving confederate rebel, but it is artfully lost in translation.Thus, you anger everyone by agitating their emotions. By wrapping your name calling, transference, generalizations, etc., to fit your agenda, you have done it once again. If it didn't make me so sick, I would be impressed.