Confederate Heritage is a Heritage of Hatred

We have this story out of Atlanta regarding Stone Mountain and the confederate heritage demonstrations. There was a confederate flag rally held at Stone Mountain last month, and while a member of the group claimed the KKK wasn’t there, “the Klan was there, offering salutes and wearing clothing featuring white supremacist slogans and KKK symbols. And why not? Stone Mountain, the spot where the modern Klan was born a century ago, holds special meaning for them.”

These confederate heritage demonstrations at the modern KKK’s birthplace only serve to underscore the fact that confederate heritage is a heritage of hatred, white supremacy, and racist terrorism as well as treason against the United States. “In fact, members of the International Keystone Knights of the Ku Klux Klan organized the Nov. 14 rally — and officials at Stone Mountain Park knew about it.” They’re now planning an openly white power demonstration in April, where you can bet the confederate flag will be prominently displayed.

Richard Rose, president of the Atlanta Chapter of the NAACP, knows what confederate heritage is: “People never want to be called racist, but the actions speak for them. The only heritage of the Confederacy is discrimination, suppression, white supremacy and hate. This flag is the flag of the Klan. It was the flag of the Army of Northern Virginia but the Klan adopted it.”

According to one racist confederate heritage person, “Us as white people — and Southerners, period — that’s kind of our last real monument, something to hang on to.”



  1. Randy Lucas · · Reply

    All Confederate heritage is hatred? What a ridiculous assertion.

    1. It celebrates an entity whose existence was dedicated to white supremacy and the perpetuation of slavery as well as treason against the United States. It can’t be anything other than a heritage of hatred.

      1. Randy Lucas · · Reply

        You are certainly entitled to your views, but I am just as free to say what utter nonsense they represent. White supremacy was, in the 1860’s and even well beyond, the law of the land North and South and even East and West. Nothing like trying to foist the sins of the nation solely upon those of us who are not willing to be forced to be ashamed of our Confederate ancestors. One would think that a self styled historian would recognize that simple truth.

        1. What is nonsense is the ignorant view that white supremacy being rampant in the 1860s makes celebrating an entity that thought it wasn’t rampant or virulent enough in the 1860s and fought to make it even more virulent okay. Celebrating the confederacy is celebrating racial hatred and treason against the United States. It’s no mere coincidence that the racial terrorists of Reconstruction were mostly confederate veterans. Claiming I’m foisting “the sins of the nation solely” on confederate heritage people is simply a lie. But lying to people is what you seem to do best, Randy. We can ask the Tennessee Supreme Court, which has censured you for unethical conduct, about it. I guess it didn’t take the first time, because the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility found you guilty of, among other offenses, engaging in “conduct involving fraud, deceit, dishonesty, or misrepresentation.” You may get away with dishonesty in other forums, but I’m not going to let you get away with it here. Nowhere have I blamed confederate heritage people solely for “the sins of the nation.” The fact that confederate heritage is a heritage of hatred is clear to anyone who reads actual history. That doesn’t make them responsible for any other problems the nation has had, nor does it make them responsible for the existence of racism itself, and I’ve never claimed it does. It doesn’t make them responsible for anything other than that for which they are responsible, and I haven’t said they were. One would think even a lawyer who’s been disciplined for ethical violations would recognize that simple truth. But perhaps you do, and perhaps the truth simply doesn’t matter to you. Celebrating confederate heritage includes, among other things, celebrating a group of worst terrorists than ISIS, responsible for more murders of Americans during Reconstruction than bin Laden. Celebrating confederate heritage is also celebrating treason against the United States.

          You want to commemorate an ancestor? Fine. You can do so without celebrating the confederacy. And you can do so while being truthful and understand that what that ancestor did constituted treason against the United States, and understand what their success on the battlefield meant to African-American families and how it threatened the continued existence of this great country.

          And I’m not a historian, self-styled or otherwise. I’ve been very clear about that. Look at the title of the blog. It doesn’t say “Historian of the American Civil War.” You’re just lying again, but we should expect nothing but lies from you.

          1. Jimmy Dick · ·

            You would think by now they would actually read some history instead of mouthing off the usual litany of male bovine excrement, but we both know they don’t want to read actual history. Good response to Randy, Al. I would suggest they read Eric Foner’s Reconstruction as well as take his online EdX course on the subject, but that would involve the use of facts in the learning process so it will not happen.

            Randy just flat out lies [edit] and as you pointed out, he has been caught doing so repeatedly. So he has zero credibility except with his group of liars.

          2. Randy Lucas · ·

            Yes, I am a flawed person. Rather though, than attacking me, you might be better served by showing where what I said was demonstratively false. All I have asserted here is that to suggest all Confederate heritage is hatred is nonsense. I stand by that assertion. Attack me all you like, but it does not change the simple truth that one can honor their Confederate heritage without hating anyone. If that is a lie, as you assert, please, by all means, demonstrate its falseness.

          3. I’ve demonstrated the falsehood of your claims. As usual, you ignore the inconvenient facts.

          4. “What is nonsense is the ignorant view that white supremacy being rampant in the 1860s makes celebrating an entity that thought it wasn’t rampant or virulent enough in the 1860s and fought to make it even more virulent okay.”

            Al, Al, Al … please. That is not what the fight was about, and you know it. And you must also know that every syllable that extols the Union Army extols the virulently white supremacist society that sent it south to kill Southerners — not to free slaves; that was tacked on well into the fighting, and you know that, too. And for most heritage folks, the fight against that murderous invader is what honoring Confederate soldiers and their flags is all about. You know this. You’ve been told and told this. You just don’t want to believe it, because you’d rather believe the lie that a handful of white supes at Stone Mountain are “Confederate heritage.”

            Well, believe the lie if that’s what it takes to make you happy, but you make yourself look foolish and, dare I say it, slavishly devoted to your murderous, white supremacist U.S. military, which did its best to kill off red people in the western states, to take THEIR land … you know, the same U.S. military that, in a different generation, dropped atom bombs on yellow people in Japan, and later killed more yellow people (who had done nothing to us) in Vietnam and still later killed brown people in the Middle East….

            You’re a colossal hypocrite, Al. CO-LOS-SUL HYP-POH-CRIT.

          5. That is exactly what the fight was about, Connie–for the confederates. Read Stephen Hale’s letter to Beriah Magoffin, the Governor of Kentucky, for a succinct statement.

            As you do so often, you completely flub the history of the Civil War through your strawman fallacy and your red herring fallacies. I never claimed the Federals had freeing slaves as their primary goal; however, freeing slaves did become a Union war objective during the war itself. The Lincoln administration was freeing slaves from August of 1861 onward. You care less for Native Americans, less for Asians, and less for Middle Easterners than you do for African-Americans, which is not much at all. So spare us all your phony posturing and your lying. All one has to do is look at the Islamophobic bigotry you spew to see that what you posted about the US military is not sincere in any way, shape, or form. I’m not a hypocrite, but you are a bigoted liar with but a scant knowledge of actual history.

          6. Islamophobic bigotry? Nope, I’m just opposed to Shariah law superseding US. law in our land; I am opposed to jihadist terrorism. I am opposed to Islam’s rotten treatment of women. I am opposed to “marriage” between a 50 year old man and a 9 year old girl. I am opposed to the barbarism of beheadings, burnings alive, drownings…. That’s just ISIS, you say? Just the extremists? The how come moderate Islamics aren’t opposing it? There’s supposed to be, what, about a billion of them? You’re for all this?

          7. Connie, only you would try to deny Islamophobic bigotry with Islamophobic bigotry.

  2. Al you surprise me as an educator I would think you would not use such a broad brush but then I guess it really doesn’t matter to you as you had no ancestor who fought in that terrible conflict. You just jump on the winners bandwagon shouting look at me I am a great American patriot.

    1. Jessie, it’s the ugly truth behind confederate heritage. You have to honestly ask yourself why so many racists flock to the confederate flag and to confederate heritage. If you want to honor an ancestor, how do you do that by not being truthful about the entity that put him on the battlefield? How do you do that by making common cause with racists? How do you do that by denying the truth that what he did was the very definition of treason against the United States? How do you do that by telling the descendants of people who were enslaved and who would still be enslaved today if the confederacy had its way that their beliefs don’t matter?

      And I am a patriot. I don’t understand how anyone could celebrate a cause that would have destroyed this great nation and then call themselves a patriotic American.

      1. Al,
        Thanks for the thoughtful response, I don’t agree with your reasoning as the matter between the north and South was only settled by force of arms and not by law. You said “You have to honestly ask yourself why so many racists flock to the confederate flag and to confederate heritage.” I have asked that question but I also ask why many more racists flock to the US flag.The only thing I can come up with is that it is just human nature.

        “How do you do that by telling the descendants of people who were enslaved and who would still be enslaved today if the confederacy had its way that their beliefs don’t matter?”

        How do you know that Blacks would still be enslaved today? I am truly stunned you would make such a statement as you or I have no way of knowing if this would have been the case, but what I do know it took 100 years or so overcome the racism both north and South and a lot of those changes were led by white Southerners. So the north can not claim the moral high ground when it comes to race relations. There is a very good book out by a Black man from Mississippi named Al Arnold that you may wish to read( he explains the relationship between the races much better than me.

        “I don’t understand how anyone could celebrate a cause that would have destroyed this great nation and then call themselves a patriotic American.”

        Those Confederate Soldiers and Confederate leaders you want to demonize also help make the country what it is today. If the Confederacy had won the war how do we know if America would not have been much better(or worse) than it is today.
        I honor my Confederate ancestors and I am also an American patriot tried and true.
        Thank you for letting me comment. You and I shall never agree but thats O.K., have a wonderful weekend.

        1. Jessie, stay tuned because I’m in the process of posting the legal cases that impacted on and resulted from the Civil War. It was the confederates who appealed to trial by combat, and they lost; however, issues were also settled in the court room, and the fact that the confederates chose the gun instead of the court room to settle the issue shows, in my view, that they knew the law would be against them.

          How do I know African-Americans would still be enslaved today? Look at what I said. “If the confederacy had its way.” They existed for the perpetuation of slavery forever. If the confederacy had its way, slavery of African-Americans would continue forever. Slavery was a remarkably resilient institution. The available evidence we have shows that had it not been abolished it would have continued unabated. Absent the Civil War, we may very well have slavery to this very day. The mechanization of agriculture didn’t happen until the second half of the 20th Century, and only in response to the loss of labor on farms as farm laborers with freedom of movement moved from agricultural jobs to factory and other jobs in the cities. If the labor force had been enslaved and didn’t have free mobility, they wouldn’t have been able to leave the fields, and thus there would have been no impetus for mechanization of agriculture. Remember also that an enslaved person can perform any type of labor. They aren’t limited to agriculture. They could work in mines, in factories, in homes, on ships, in shipyards, and anywhere else. The Civil Rights Movement came about because African-Americans were free to speak out. Had slavery still existed, they would not have had that freedom. Southern leaders like Dr. King would have been stuck on plantations and made examples of by being murdered before they led any type of movement. As it was, Dr. King was murdered while he was leading a movement. It would have been even tougher had he been enslaved and trying to change things.

          Had the confederacy won, there would have been two nations, along with the precedent of a part of the nation leaving because they didn’t like the results of a free, fair, constitutional election. What would happen the next time a group of states didn’t like the result of an election? More breaking up. Then there would be border squabbles and constant fighting among the small nations that resulted. Read the Federalist Papers. Our Founding Fathers foresaw the poisoning that breaking up the Union would bring. That’s why they wanted a strong central government under the Constitution.

          Look at this letter from Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor:

          Philadelphia, June 1, 1798.
          But our present situation is not a natural one. The republicans, through every part of the Union, say, that it was the irresistible influence and popularity of General Washington played off by the cunning of Hamilton, which turned the government over to anti-republican hands, or turned the republicans chosen by the people into anti-republicans. He delivered it over to his successor in this state, and very untoward events since, improved with great artifice, have produced on the public mind the impressions we see. But still I repeat it, this is not the natural state. Time alone would bring round an order of things more correspondent to the sentiments of our constituents. But are there no events impending, which will do it within a few months? The crisis with England, the public and authentic avowal of sentiments hostile to the leading principles of our Constitution, the prospect of a war, in which we shall stand alone, land tax, stamp tax, increase of public debt, &c. Be this as it may, in every free and deliberating society, there must, from the nature of man, be opposite parties, and violent dissensions and discords; and one of these, for the most part, must prevail over the other for a longer or shorter time. Perhaps this party division is necessary to induce each to watch and relate to the people the proceedings of the other. But if on a temporary superiority of the one party, the other is to resort to a scission of the Union, no federal government can ever exist. If to rid ourselves of the present rule of Massachusetts and Connecticut, we break the Union, will the evil stop there? Suppose the New England states alone cut off, will our nature be changed? Are we not men still to the south of that, and with all the passions of men? Immediately, we shall see a Pennsylvania and a Virginia party arise in the residuary confederacy, and the public mind will be distracted with the same party spirit. What a game too will the one party in their hands, by eternally threatening the other that unless they do so and so, they will join their northern neighbors. If we reduce our Union to Virginia and North Carolina, immediately the conflict will be established between the representatives of these two States, and they will end by breaking into their simple units. Seeing, therefore, that an association of men who will not quarrel with one another is a thing which never yet existed, from the greatest confederacy of nations down to a town meeting or a vestry; seeing that we must have somebody to quarrel with, I had rather keep our New England associates for that purpose, than to see our bickerings transferred to others. They are circumscribed within such narrow limits, and their population so full, that their numbers will ever be the minority, and they are marked, like the Jews, with such a perversity of character, as to constitute, from that circumstance, the natural division of our parties. A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells dissolved, and the people recovering their true sight, restoring their government to its true principles. It is true, that in the meantime, we are suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war, and long oppressions of enormous public debt. But who can say what would be the evils of a scission, and when and where they would end? Better keep together as we are, haul off from Europe as soon as we can, and from all attachments to any portions of it; and if they show their power just sufficiently to hoop us together, it will be the happiest situation in which we can exist. If the game runs sometimes against us at home, we must have patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost. For this is a game where principles are the stake. Better luck, therefore, to us all, and health, happiness and friendly salutations to yourself. Adieu.
          P.S. It is hardly necessary to caution you to let nothing of mine get before the public; a single sentence got hold of by the Porcupines, will suffice to abuse and persecute me in their papers for months.

          Thomas Jefferson

          I have no problem with anyone who wants to commemorate an ancestor, but I think we need to be honest about what those ancestors fought for.

          Check out this video from former Governor William Forrest Winter of Mississippi:

    2. Jimmy Dick · · Reply

      I had ancestors on both sides of the conflict. Some fought to save the United States while others fought to save slavery. A lot of them were racists. Some owned slaves at one point or another. It is very obvious that most of today’s confederate heritage is really only about modern political ideology and since that involves the shall we say more extreme right wing view and the ugly racism and bigotry most of the more extreme right wingers exhibit on purpose, it is only correct to establish a correlation between the two.

  3. Speaking of “hate,” there’s plenty of hate going around. The thing I hate most of all, is how your ancestors set us up for a fall. How’s that fourteenth amendment working out for you??

    1. Thanks for proving my point. The Fourteenth Amendment is working just fine for those who aren’t racist bigots.

      1. So you think “anchor babies” is okay. [edit]

        1. Actually, troll, stupid racist bigots like you are more of a problem for this country than people who can’t pay taxes because of their status having babies. If I had my choice between deporting idiots like you and deporting a baby born of hard-working parents who are seeking a better life, I’d get rid of you idiots faster than it would take to burn a confederate flag. Buh-bye, bigot.

          1. [edit]

          2. And another troll bites the dust. With him gone, the average intelligence level of commenters rises.

  4. Jimmy Dick · · Reply

    As expected, your response to KKKonnie was outstanding. Well stated, sir, well stated.

    1. Thanks, Jimmy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: