Columnist Ricky Jones, a professor and the Chair of Pan-African Studies at the University of Louisville, has a column on reactions from neoconfederate classless, racist morons to his earlier column on the proposed removal of a confederate monument from the University of Louisville’s grounds. He details the lies, blatant racism, and utter stupidity of the neoconfederates, showing how truly disgusting these people truly are.
Both columns are well worth reading.
Student of the American Civil War 
I will have to leave it to the more experienced commenters to say what needs to be said; I could not finish the current article.
Indeed, both are very much worth reading. Good one, Al.
Thanks Al,
You always offer great articles and videos I would never catch otherwise.
The connection of what we see today with our neo-confederate “patriots” is a direct link to our past and America’s Civil War.
Isn’t it amazing when you read what pours out of the minds of some of those who are so willing to see “their” perception of history through a skewed lens?
One wonders how they look into a mirror when such illogical hatred stews inside their minds.
How do they balance other aspects of their lives to function in this society?
Is it any wonder we have large groups of people who literally cling on to any conspiracy theory they hear if it validates their perspective.
The many responses and comments about President Obama’s daughter being accepted at Harvard are a perfect example.
If the young lady doesn’t go to school she is called and referred to as someone less than human.
If she goes to Harvard still she is referred to as someone less than human. How sad and warped.
There is no way for her or people who share her ethnic traits to win in the minds of people so warped and skewed. Then for them to wrap themselves in this “flag” issue as if this somehow justifies their hate driven willful blindness is mind-boggling.
Talk about trying to use a re-written version of history to spread this propaganda of intolerance and hate should bring to mind what took place with similar propaganda leading up to the Civil War.
Richard Furman, a minister, published his dogma all based on the Bible to justify slavery.
The South had many such books published by ministers. These men were the prominent shapers of culture and perceptions of that day.
What is sad is often the same old arguments are used we hear from these the neo-confederates.
The articles you shared hit the nail on the head.
Thanks again,
Rob
Well stated, Rob.
Richard Furman’s exposition on slavery is available online at a site maintained by Lloyd Benson, a professor of history at . . . Furman University.
http://history.furman.edu/benson/alpha/www/docs/rcd-fmn1.htm
This and other exchanges have shown what the neo-confederates are really about. It keeps coming back to racism and white supremacy. They just hate the idea that they are really equal to people of different skin colors. We as a people are really at the point where racism is being rejected by the majority of Americans. Yet, the racists refuse to admit their views are flat out wrong.
The world is leaving these racists behind. They haven’t gotten that memo yet. They feel empowered by the Trump campaign which is letting them express their hatred and ugliness. I think they’re going to have a very, very bad election day in November and then their nightmare is going to slap them right in the face.
The hate is real and visceral. How Sanders supporters can think there is a “progressive populist wave across the United States” with such hate so easily displayed in public, many willing to sign their names to it, and Zipperhead auctioning his murder gun just defies logic.
On Facebook I was warned “stop using the pejorative neo Confederate”. I told her, it was a term coined by Gary Gallagher, and explained who he is. Her response, “I don’t care if some liberal Jack [edit] coins a word”. She’s not the only one. Why are they offended by “neo” Confederate?
They are dumb so they equate it with “neo-Nazi.” By the way, Gary Gallagher didn’t coin the term. The term was used from 1924 until about 1930, then fell off until the 1950s, when it steadily rose.
For what it’s worth, I got George Purvis upset when I used the term Neo-Confederate in reference to him. This is after he called me ignorant because of a comment I made here. It seems Old George likes to be called a “Confederate Heritage Advocate”.
I don’t usually respond to these folks but I was bored. By the way, at the end of our little discussion George admitted that he is biased and bigoted.
George Pervis is an idiot who’s really not worth our time.
Couldn’t agree more, but as i said I was bored. LOL
Al is correct — the term “neo-Confederate” goes back a long way, at least to 1930 that I’ve found. In 1934 the Richmond Times-Dispatch described neo-Confederates as those who are “convinced that Northerners are damnyankees, and that they ought to stop ‘meddling’ in Southern affairs.” Eighty-plus years later, that definition still works pretty well.
Some folks are offended by the term “neo-Confederate” because it’s most often used today as a pejorative. Nevertheless, it has a well-established meaning and is an accurate descriptor.
Thanks, Andy.
Thanks for confirming that “neo” is not always a negative term.
Thanks for correcting me about Gallagher.