Someone at The Gift That Keeps On Giving, aka The Southern Heritage Preservation Group, asks a question:
Mr. Smith, obviously arguing the factually incorrect position that slavery had nothing to do with the war, comes up against one part of the mountain of evidence that contradicts him–the mountain of evidence he’s obviously never come into contact with before. It’s probably not his fault. So he asks about it to a group that is guaranteed not to give him good information. To wit:
So the first guy admits slavery drove secession, but then, amazingly, he identifies the reason for the war as “freedom.” Yeah, sure. The freedom to deny freedom to others. Our second Einstein shows the lack of logic we’ve come to expect from neoconfederates. Apparently this genius thinks only one side fought in the war and never heard of Fort Sumter.
We now have some more mental midgets weigh in:
So one idiot has obviously never read what the secessionists had to say about anything. The other one lacks logic as well as intellectual integrity. The third is simply ignorant of history.
Now we enter an almost surreal zone of ignorance:
The first moron doesn’t think the southerners who seceded had any influence over their government. He obviously has no clue about how the US government is set up or works. The second moron has no idea what the secessionists said about why they were seceding. And the last idiot thinks every state in the Union had slavery in 1860.
This next person seeks to make himself feel good:
So according to this person, slaveholders were okay, slavery was on its way out anyway, blacks were better off as slaves, and the confederates were only victims of the evil “North.” When the truth hurts, some folks wrap themselves in a fantasy.
Next we have more of the same on display:
Ms. Holder is obviously thinking of the book, Secession Debated: Georgia’s Showdown in 1860, edited by William W. Freehling and Craig M. Simpson. Mr. McLendon is off on a tangent and tries to lay all the blame for slavery on blacks themselves. Then Ms. Holder thinks you can tell the slant of a book by the date it was published. Interesting.
So let’s head on down the line here and bring this home:
The bottom line is when people are “preserving” confederate “heritage,” they’re not interested in accurate history. For them, “heritage” is about making them feel good about themselves. A real view of history won’t do that.