George Mason University's
History News Network
Dear President Obama: Please Don't Honor the Arlington Confederate Monument
By Edward Sebesta and James Loewen
This letter was written by Edward Sebesta and James Loewen and signed by the scholars listed below.
May 18, 2009

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Obama:

Since the administration of Woodrow Wilson, presidents have sent annually a wreath to the Arlington Confederate Monument. Prior to the administration of George H. W. Bush, this was done on or near the birthday of Jefferson Davis.  Starting with George H.W. Bush, it has been done on Memorial Day.

We ask you to not send a wreath or some other commemorative token to the Arlington Confederate Monument during your administration or after.

There are several reasons as to why this monument, a product of the Nadir in American race relations, should not be honored, and we list and explain them in this letter.

The monument was intended to legitimize secession and the principles of the Confederacy and glorify the Confederacy. It isn’t just a remembrance of the dead. The speeches at its ground-breaking and dedication defended and held up as glorious the Confederacy and the ideas behind it and stated that the monument was to these ideals as well as the dead. It was also intended as a symbol of white nationalism, portrayed in opposition to the multiracial democracy of Reconstruction, and a celebration of the re-establishment of white supremacy in the former slave states by former Confederate soldiers. In its design it also tells wrong history, boasting fourteen shields with the coat of arms of fourteen states.  Thus it claims that Missouri, Kentucky, and Maryland were part of the Confederacy. They weren’t.

The monument was given to the Federal Government by the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC), which raised the funds to erect it. The UDC’s reasons for the monument are instructive. In the address of Mrs. Daisy McLaurin Stevens, President General of the United Daughters of the Confederacy at its dedication, she makes clear that the monument is to glorify the ideas of the Confederacy:

Great ideas and righteous ideas are alone immortal. The eternal years of God are theirs. The ideas our heroes cherished were and are beneficial as they are everlasting. These were living then; they are living to-day and shall live to-morrow and work the betterment of mankind. Thus our heroes are of those who, though dead, still toil for man through the arms and brains of those their examples have inspired and quickened to nobler things.

Since the United Daughters of the Confederacy upheld in multiple publications in the early 20th Century that the Ku Klux Klan was the heroic effort of the Confederate soldier, we have an idea what the “noble past” and “ideas our heroes cherished” were. Of course one of these “ideas” was secession to preserve the institution of African slavery.

Likewise General Bennett H. Young, Commander-in-Chief of the United Confederate Veterans also defends the cause of the Confederate soldier, the neo-Confederate cause of their descendants, and defends secession in his speech as follows:

At this hour I represent the survivors of the Southern army. Though this Confederate monument is erected on Federal ground, which makes it unusual and remarkable, yet the men from whom I hold commission would only have me come without apologies or regrets from the past. Those for whom I speak gave the best they had to their land and country. They spared no sacrifice and no privation to win for the Southland national independence.

I am sure I shall not offend the proprieties of either the hour of the occasion when I say that we still glory in the records of our beloved and immortal dead. The dead for whom this monument stands sponsor died for what they believed to be right. Their surviving comrades and their children still believe that that for which they suffered and laid down their lives was just; that their premises in the Civil War were according to our Constitution….

The sword said the South was wrong, but the sword is not necessarily guided by conscience or reason. The power of numbers and the longest guns cannot destroy principle nor obliterate truth. Right lives forever, it survives battles, failures, conflicts, and death. There is no human power, however mighty, that can in the end annihilate truth.

In fact, most white Southerners in 1914 agreed that both slavery and secession were wrong.  Not Young.  No apologies.  No regrets -- despite the historical record of Confederate soldiers having committed racial atrocities of massacring surrendered African American soldiers on at least eight occasions.

Hilary A. Herbert, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Arlington Confederate Monument Association, makes it clear that the monument stands for the legitimacy of secession, in opposition to Reconstruction, and for white supremacy. In his History of The Arlington Confederate Monument at Arlington, Virginia, he writes:

In 1867 the seceding States were subjected to the horrors of Congressional Reconstruction, but in a few years American manhood had triumphed; Anglo-Saxon civilization had been saved; local self-government under the Constitution had been restored; ex-Confederates were serving the National Government, and true patriots, North and South, were addressing themselves to the noble task of restoring fraternal feeling between the sections.

Within a generation after Congressional Reconstruction, American historians condemned it ….  as “a crime against civilization,” and public opinion seems to have approved the verdict.

Herbert goes on to refer to the Confederate soldiers who joined the Ku Klux Klan and Red Shirts as being heroes for restoring white supremacy and overthrowing Reconstruction, referring to “the soldiers who fought the battles of the Confederacy and … by their courage and devotion during the two decades after the war, were saviors of Anglo-Saxon civilization in their section.”

The monument itself has a Latin motto, “Victrix causea Diis placuit, sed victa Catoni.” It translates, “The winning cause pleased the Gods, but the losing cause pleased Cato.” This is a classical reference which to the cognoscenti implies that Lincoln was a despot and the Union cause unjust; Cato, the stoic believer in “freedom,” would have sided with the Confederacy.

The Arlington Confederate Monument is a denial of the wrong committed against African Americans by slave owners, Confederates, and neo-Confederates, through the monument’s denial of slavery as the cause of secession and its holding up of Confederates as heroes.  This implies that the humanity of Africans and African Americans is of no significance.

Today, the monument gives encouragement to the modern neo-Confederate movement and provides a rallying point for them. The modern neo-Confederate movement interprets it as vindicating the Confederacy and the principles and ideas of the Confederacy and their neo-Confederate ideas. The presidential wreath enhances the prestige of these neo-Confederate events.

Fr. Alister C. Anderson, as Chaplain-in-Chief of the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV), at the 85th anniversary of the dedication of the Arlington Confederate Monument in 1999, gave a lengthy speech explaining its meaning. His understanding of the Arlington Confederate Monument can be said to be fairly representative of modern neo-Confederate opinion.

Anderson believes that the Civil War was a holy war between an orthodox Christian nation (the South), a view widespread in the neo-Confederate movement, and what he feels was an un-Christian and heretical North, as he explained in a series of articles in the Confederate Veteran as Chaplain-in-Chief of the SCV. This explains some of the passages of his speech at the Arlington Confederate Monument.  In his speech Anderson explains regarding the monument:

… It reveals and concentrates in beautiful, rugged bronze nearly every idea that a true Southern historian, theologian, statesman, and patriotic citizen could present about the religion, culture, morals, economics, and politics of a civilization from out of which the Confederate States of America evolved. The monument captures the ideals and accomplishments that still existed at the end of the War for Southern Independence. Thank God it does not depict the beginning of the Reconstruction Era, the most disgusting and destructive period in United States history from which the South has never really recovered.

Anderson goes on to note Washington’s presence in bronze:

It depicts George Washington on horseback with the Latin inscription DEO VINDICE, which means, “God Vindicates.” Southerners believed under the Constitution they had the right to secede if they were being harmed by a tyrannical government.

To Anderson, as to other neo-Confederates today, the Arlington Monument exists to glorify the ideas of the Confederacy, which he sees as the ideas of the neo-Confederacy.

Anderson goes on to explain, correctly, the meaning of the main inscription on the monument, “Victrix causea Diis placuit, sed victa Catoni.”  This is a line from a poem Pharasalia by the Roman poet Lucan, used to represent Lincoln as a tyrant and the North as tyrannical.  Fr. Anderson explains:

Victix causa, “the winning cause (or side)”, referring to Julius Caesar’s inordinate ambition and his lust for total power and control, is compared with President Lincoln and the Federal Government’s desire and power to crush and destroy the South. Next we read diis placuit which translates “pleased the gods.” In this context, gods are with a small “g” and refer to the gods of mythology; the gods of money, power, war and domination, greed, hate, lust and ambition. Next we come to the noble climax of this quotation, sed victa cantoni which translates “but the losing side (or cause) pleased Cato”. Here Lucan, the poet, refers to Pompey’s fight to retain the old conservative, traditional republican government of Rome. Even though Pompey was defeated by Caesar’s greater military power, his defeat, nevertheless, pleased the noble Cato. And here, of course, Cato represents the noble aims of the Southern Confederacy. The South fought politically to maintain the Constitution which had guided her safely for eighty-seven years. She merely wanted to be left alone and governed by it. The aggression-minded totalitarian Northern government would not permit that and so she pleased the gods of abolitionism, transcendentalism, utopianism, state centralism, universalism, rationalism and a host of other “isms.”

Anderson here denounces abolition, the anti-slavery movement that ultimately led the United States of America out of the moral evil of slavery, as an evil itself.

Sending a wreath to the Arlington Confederate Memorial Monument enhances the prestige of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, an organization with a long history of racism from praising the Ku Klux Klan in the early part of the 20th century, to publishing articles against the Civil Rights movement in the Civil Rights Era, to promoting neo-Confederacy today. When the president of the United States of America enhances the prestige of this monument and of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, he strengthens a group working to set back America’s progress in race relations. 

Finally, in 2009, the main speaker for the annual observance at the Arlington Confederate Memorial is Ron Maxwell, director of the movie “Gods and Generals,” whose neo-Confederate meaning he made clear in an interview in Southern Partisan. He also has written expressing his fear of Hispanic immigration leading to civil war in the notoriously racist Chronicles magazine, the organ of the ultra-right Rockford Foundation.

For the president of the United States of America to send a wreath to the monument this year would contribute to providing Ron Maxwell with a more prestigious setting for his speech. It would aid and abet the ongoing use of presidential prestige and this monument for their neo-Confederate agenda.

We ask you to break this chain of racism stretching back to Woodrow Wilson, and not send a wreath or other token of esteem to the Arlington Confederate Monument. This monument should not be elevated in prestige above other monuments by a presidential wreath.

Sincerely yours,

Last NameFirst NameInstitutionBiographical Information (for identification purposes only)
AlexanderShawn LeighLangston Hughes Center, Kansas UniversityAssistant Professor African and African American Studies, Interim Director, Langston Hughes Center
AttieJeanieLong Island UniversityAssociate Professor of History
AyersBillUniversity of Illinois, ChicagoProfessor of Education
BarberDavidUniversity of Tennessee, MartinAssistant Professor of History
BlakelyAllisonBoston UniversityProfessor of European and Comparative History; George and Joyce Wein Professor of African American Studies.
BridgesRoger D.Rutherford .B. Hayes Presidential CenterExecutive Director Emeritus
BrownJoshuaThe City University of New YorkExecutive Director American Social History Project/ Center for Media and Learning, Professor of History, Ph.D. Program in History, The Graduate Center.
BurtonOrville VernonCoastal Carolina UniversityBurroughs Distinguished Professor of Southern History and Culture at Coastal Carolina University. Formerly he was Director of the Institute for Computing in the Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences (ICHASS) at the University of Illinois, where he is Professor of History, African American Studies, and Sociology. He is also a Senior Research Scientist at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA), where he is Associate Director of Humanities and Social Sciences. In addition, he is Executive Director of the College of Charleston’s Program in the Carolina Lowcountry and Atlantic World.
ChristieThomasLincoln Public Schools, Lincoln, NebraskaMulticultural Administrator
DavisSimoneMt. Holyoke CollegeProfessor of English
EwertGeorge Former Director of the Museum of Mobile
FarleyJonathanInstitute fur Algebra Johannes Kepler Universitat LinzTeaching and Research Fellow
FellmanGordonBrandeis UniversityProfessor of Sociology
FinkLeonUniversity of Illinois, ChicagoDistinguished Professor. Director of WRGUW (Graduate Concentration in the History of Work, Race, and Gender in the Urban World)
Department of History
FinkelmanPaulAlbany Law SchoolPresident William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law
GundakerGreyCollege of William & MaryProfessor of Anthropology
HagueEuanDePaul University, ChicagoProfessor of Cultural Geography, editor of "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction."
Hayes-BautistaDavid ESchool of Medicine, UCLAAuthor of numerous articles on  Calfornia Hispanic history
HicksDavidVirginia TechAssociate Professor of History and Social Science Education
JacksonKenneth T.Columbia University, NYCProfessor of History and Social Sciences
JenningsMatt H.Macon State CollegeStudent
KatznelsonIraColumbia University, NYCRuggles Professor of Political Science and History
KennedyRoger G.National Museum of American History (ret.), National Park Service (ret.)Director Emeritus, National Museum of American History, Former Director, National Park Service
KeyBarclayWestern Illinois UniversityAssistant Professor of African-American History
KeyDeWayneMars Hill Bible School, Florence, Alabama 
KnappPeterVillanova UniversityProfessor of Sociology
LeibJonathanOld Dominion UniversityAssociate Professor of Geography
LoewenJamesUniv. of VermontProfessor Emeritus of Sociology, Univ. of Vermont; author of "Lies My Teacher Told Me," "Lies Across America," "Sundown Towns," etc.
LoveDavid, A.CommentatorColumnist at www.blackcommentator.com
McPhersonJamesPrinceton UniversityProfessor of History
MillerWillaim LeeUniv. of Virginia 
MitchellDonSyracuse UniversityProfessor of Geography
MizellLindaUniversity of Colorado at BoulderAssistant Professor, School of Education
MurrayPaulSiena CollegeProfessor of Sociology
NietoSoniaUniversity of Massachusetts at AmherstProfessor Emerita, Language, Literary, and Culture
OwensDeirdre CooperUniversity of MississippiAssistant Professor of History
ParentiMichael On advisory boards of Independent Progressive Politics Network, Education Without Borders, the Jasenovic Foundation, New Political Science, and Nature, Society and Thought. Author of many books in political science.
PhillipsMichaelCollin College, Plano, TexasHistory Professor,  Author of "White Metropolis" 
RoismanFlorence W.Indiana University School of LawWilliam F. Harvey Professor of Law
SchmeeckleMariaIllinois State UniversityAssociate Professor of Sociology
SebestaEdward H.Independent researcher. Editor of "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction," University of Texas Press. 
ShabazzAmilcarUniversity of Massachusetts at AmherstProfessor and Chair of the W.E.B. DuBois Department of Afro-American Studies
SinhaManishaUniversity of Massachusetts at AmherstAssociate Professor of Afro-American Studies and History
SleeterChristineCalifornia State University Monterey BayProfessor Emerita,  College of Professional Studies
SowaMaureenBristol Community CollegeProfessor of History
WebsterGerald RaymondUniversity of WyomingChair, Department of Geography
WhiteGeorge, Jr.York College, CUNYAssistant Professor of History
WienerJon University of California, Irvine; The Nation MagazineContributing Editor at "The Nation"; Professor of History at UC-Irvine. 

 

Author: 
Edward Sebesta and James Loewen
Bio: 
This letter was written by Edward Sebesta and James Loewen and signed by the scholars listed below.

[comment removed]

[Comment removed due to pseudonym use.]

Re: Letter to President Obama

Dear Mr.President,

In my brigade of the SCV Sons of Confederate Veterans we are well represented by African Americans as well as Hispanics,there is no etnic distintion in membership as these "learned" people proclaim.The Confederate government was fully intergrated from Horace King a former slave who became the architect of the Confederate navy,Judaha Benjiman a Jew who held many cabinate post in the Confederate government,Chief Stan Watee who was a Confederate General as well as African American officers yes officers in the Confederate military.This can be verified by the Official Records War of Rebellion 1861-1865 Library of Congress as well as The Official Records of the Confederacy.The credibility of these learned people is on the line and in order to have a truly diverse nation the people of the south demands that people such as these who signed the petition should be publicly abmonished by the placing of the wreath and honouring the dead.The monument was designed by a jewish graduate of VMI who was also a Confederate veteran.Lastly after the war the northern states were still allowed to retain thier slaves until the passage of the 13th amendment.The secession was over states rights for only 7 percent of the population in the south owned slaves even the black population owned slaves Re: official cencus 1860.Lastly President Jefferson Davis adopted a black child legally through the courts during the war which this raciest group of learned people fail to mention.The south is in fact diverse please show your support as well as your compassion by showing the world what a great man you truely are by placing a wreath at the monument.

2 comments??

There was supposed to be two comments regarding this article. Where are they? I hope to goodness that two snivelling mouth-breathers did not post anything offensive.

Just wanted to express solidarity with the signatories to the above letter and wishing you all every success.

Monument

I wonder what/who will be blamed for racial tensions when all reference to the Civil war is removed from our history?

Will the next "project be for the removal of all reference to Dr. King from history? After all without the Civil War what could anyone find to complain about?

Shame on the "educated"

It appears that the editors of this site only post comments that they consider agree with their point of view. Shame on the "educators" and shame on those that still harbor intollerance, racism, and ignorance of our history. Mr Obama, please overlook the ignorance and bigotry of the "educated". Place the wreath of honor on the Confederate memorial. They too were Americans. President Reagon, while in Europe, placed a wreath on the graves of the fallen German soldiers. We are all Americans and as such, we should be above intollerance and bigotry. Shame on the "educated".
Semper Fi
Doc Halliday
Semper Fi

Sniveling Mouth-breather to Lorraine Paul

Nice one. We'll remember that.

HNN Comments Policy

HNN does not remove comments unless they violate our stated policy on comments and conduct. This includes the requirement that commenters use real names, instead of pseudonyms. That was the reason that one comment was removed. I'll see if I can restore the second, but the HNN comment system isn't very flexible in that regard.

honoring fallen soldiers

While we're at it, let's urge the President not to honor American soldiers who fell in the Iraq War (since it's an unjust and illegal, imperial occupation), the Vietnam War (for the same reasons), and World War II (forced Japanese-American internment; the targeting of citizens at Hamburg, Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki).

You get pathetically stupid letters like this when "educated" people decide to apply contemporary value judgments to EVERYTHING in the historical record. Do the authors honestly believe that all Confederate soldiers were vile racists? Were they hoping to perpetuate a system that only benefited a select few in that southern plutocracy? How would ending this wreath tradition strengthen the President's goals for unity? Would the ending of this tradition by an African-American President strengthen race relations in this country? Would continuing this tradition convince us all that the Confederate cause was a noble cause? Maybe we should sanitize the monument, so it’s not so politically incorrect.

The only reason the President should reconsider sending the wreath is that those who fought for the Confederacy took up arms in a bloody rebellion against the American government.

Lincoln's racism

While we are stopping politically incorrect ceremonies, we should stop honoring Lincoln.

Lincoln is mistakenly credited with being a friend of black people. But Lincoln did not believe in racial equality. Many times in his political career, he makes his position on the matter of race and slavery quite clear.

Discussing the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, he said: "[When slave owners] remind us of their constitutional rights [to own slaves], I acknowledge them, not grudgingly but fully and fairly; and I would give them any legislation for the claiming of their fugitives."


In debate with Douglas in 1858 at Ottawa, Illinois, Lincoln said: "I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality; and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary."

Lincoln repeated these beliefs several times . In his First Inaugural Address in 1861 he said he had no "purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery, in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so." Instead Lincoln dedicated most of the speech to denying that States could legally secede from the Union by arguing that the Union was older than the Constitution.

Lincoln's "solution" for black people in the United States was to colonize them back to Africa. He toyed with several plans to do that, which prompted William Loyd Garrison, the abolitionist, to denounce him: "President Lincoln may colonize himself if he choose, but it is an impertinent act, on his part, to propose the getting rid of those who are as good as himself."

The Emancipation Proclamation was confessed by Lincoln himself to be a political move during the war to keep England and other European countries from recognizing the Confederacy as a separate country. The Proclamation did not apply to States which were loyal to the Union where it would have meant that slaves would actually be freed, but to the states of the Confederacy where Lincoln had no control over the matter. Lincoln's own secretary of state William Seward, mocked the Emancipation Proclamation by saying, "We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free.'"

Lincoln's preoccupation was preventing the dissolution of the Union, not freeing the slaves. In a letter to Horace Greeley, he said that if some slaves could be freed to save the Union, he would do that, and if the Union could be saved by not freeing any slaves he would do that.

Kearney Smith, Ph.D.

Scholars?

Those who signed the letter are referred to as scholars. Pardon me while I laugh! I won't bother trying to present any historical facts since these myth-loving "scholars" and their kind are so deeply programmed with Marxist propaganda. It would go in one ear and out the other. And, frankly, I would also prefer that Hussein not lay a wreath at the Arlington Confederate Memorial. It's a place of honor and he would be out of place there.

Honoring Confederate Memorial

Frankly, I agree wholeheartedly with the signatories and, in fact, I hope that they are successful in keeping Obama and his sycophants far away from the Confederate memorial.

The dishonorable, corrupt, malignant, tyrannous and wicked cannot “honor” anything and this whole group starting with the Fraud-in-Chief right on down to the signatory “scholars” - pseudo “historians”, over-the-hill terrorists and purveyors of “the acceptable (i.e. fraudulent) version of history - are incapable of bestowing ANY noble attribute. Remember, it is just as praiseworthy to be despised by the despicable as to be admired by the admirable.

Indeed, the SCV, the UDC and the LoS should establish a cordon of good Southern men and women around the monument to make absolutely sure that no politician or leftist academician gets anywhere near it! I sincerely hope that your noble dead are spared the attentions of the present government. Let them go and honor Lincoln, a man who deserves the praise of the hypocrites, grafters and murderers.

Another View

For another view from a prominent Democrat and Obama supporter, check this out:

http://www.jameswebb.com/speeches/speeches-confedmem.htm

another blemish

Though this letter provides some interesting trivia, I think it serves as yet another blemish on the academy. I wonder if future historiographers will mock these highly politicized petitions with the same vigor used by current academic historians to mock the stupidity of the masses.

Honoring Diversity

Love them or hate them, the English-speaking, Christian, Anglo-Saxon freemen of the southeast of America had a right to self-identify as a single ethnic group and fight for their own country. Whether or not the Federal government, which has been responsible for MANY more atrocities than any Southern army, should acknowledge the valour of its one-time foe is a different question. The letter and its too-big-for-their-breeches signatories are just another example of folks in power trying to destroy history. The South had a justifiable cause; it might not have been a worthy cause for someone who would like to see a nation without a white, Anglo-Saxon majority, but it was certainly a sensible cause for those who fit that category. You don't have to malign the South and pretend that it was the one committing war crimes (think Sherman's march to the sea for the Yankee example of benevolence in war) in order to say that you just don't like the Southern cause and wish that everyone felt the same.

Reason or just the absurd by petition?

The wonder of America is that freedom to express views that may be brilliant or boringly absurd (as the letter/petition documented here). Many of the revisionist tendency lack an ability to allow that freedome of expression they claim for themselves; one must nite the presence of an "aging and retired terrorist" in the list of signers that indicates the character of the letter and its intent. What more extreme enemy of free expression and opinion can there be than someone who would use fear and the threat of death to crowd out others' rights to hold any views they wish?

In hitory, context is the shaper of fact--cintext does not change fact, but makes sense of it. One only has to read the statement by Senator James Webb on the memorial and its significance to him to place this "letter/petition" in the context that it deserves. Whatever Mr. Obama does or does not do with regard to the monument, matters little. One must, howebver, always wonder that supposed "scholars" too often seem to miss the mark when it comes to tolerance, never mind an effort to understand.

Confederates Not the Rebels

The rebels who caused the bloody rebellion (refer to post by Conally) were not the Confederates, who had the legal right to secede.
The rebels were Lincoln and his supporters who refused to honor the Constitutional right of secession. Lincoln rebelled against the Constitution and caused the unnecessary deaths of 700,000 people.
Sherman and his troops carried out war crimes against Southern civilians (black and white): looting, raping, maiming and killing. The bloody rebellion was caused by the tyrant, Abe Lincoln.

Re: Lincoln's racism

Dear Dr. Kearney Smith, I wish that you would dig even deeper and find the sources for this: Somewhere I saw a letter or memo that Lincoln had written to one of the Governors, OH, IL or IN that they should not worry that blacks would be coming their way, that he Lincoln, would make sure they were bottled up in the South.

That the South was treated as a colony of the NE after the war up until WAR II when they needed us to fight their war has many references, I would like to see this chronicled.

We Confederate Southern Americans, the descendants of the First Revolution and founders of this country have done more than was asked of us and still they hate us. They hate us because we believe in the Constitution and uphold its ideals.

Re: Scholars?

I agree, and the Kevin Levin is one of their ilk! They are in to present ism, South Bashing, and hatred of the Sons and Daughters of the Confederacy. Levin is born in the North teaching students n VIRGINIA! Keep your eyes peeled for him and let him have it with both barrels.

Re: Honoring Confederate Memorial

AMEN! Sic Tyranus

Doug Wilder

In 1990, Douglas Wilder, a Democrat and the Nation's first black governor, proclaimed April 7 to 15 the “Final Chapter of the Civil War Days,” recalling “those who sacrificed in this great struggle.” His document praised Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, as well as President Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant.

Also, Wilder did not remove portraits of Lee and Gen. Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson from his office while he was governor from 1990 to 1994.

There is Nothing About the Confederacy to Honor

One hundred and fifty years ago most of the slave states mounted a rebellion to preserve slavery--or as they said, to protect their property.

They were defeated. Some fought very bravely for this bad cause, some less so. Stirring speeches were made, though most of them begged the question. Much blood. Eventually most of the southern soldiers gave up on this bad cause and went home and the forces of the United States won. Slavery was abolished.

So what exactly are we supposed to honor about the Confederacy? Their devotion to slavery? Their embrace of treason?

Every nation and every region has good and bad in its past. We can honor the heroism of southern soldiers who fought in the nation's wars from the Revolution to Afghanistan. We can celebrate southern arts and literature, southern cuisine, southern hospitality. We can honor the south for the many things which are honorable about it.

But the Confederacy is not one of those things. It is a shameful episode that should be not be forgotten--nor honored.

Re: There is Nothing About the Confederacy to Honor

Well Larry, my 3 great-great grandfathers fought because their home was invaded. None of them owned slaves. Did all the men who fought in Vietnam go to prevent the "domino effect?" I'm sure that's what every soldier had on his mind when he joined or was drafted. Yeah, just keep repeating that until you believe it.

Secession, though perhaps not the smartest thing the South could have done, was not treason. Any layman can read the founding fathers and realize the Union was entered into voluntarily by the states with the understanding they could also leave voluntarily.

Secession was not original w/SC. As you well know, several New England states threatened to secede decades before any Southern states did.

I honor my ancestors' bravery, sacrifice (2 of them served time in Union prisons), and love of their native sod.

You don't speak for me, or for them, sir.

Only One Place Left for Confederate Monuments and Flags

As then Senator Obama remarked some time ago, the only place for the Confederate flag is...a museum. As for the KKK and neo-Confederates, we will send them south...to lockdown in Gitmo!! Ha-ha-ha

Re: Letter to President Obama

Mr. Mullis needs to read ANY of the declarations of secession, beginning with South Carolina's. They are all about slavery. They say NOTHING about states' rights, except to oppose such, and they list which states and which rights upset them and prompt them to secede. The document is readily available: "Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union."

Re: Monument

Of course the signers of this petition have no desire to remove the Civil War from our history. Many of us have spent years (decades in some cases) writing about precisely that war. We do not even advocate removing this monument from Arlington. We do suggest stopping the silly practice of singling out this memorial for presidential honor. Did the poster mis-read our petition?

Re: honoring fallen soldiers

Amen to the last sentence. Plus, the memorial is monumentally wrong (sorry) in its history, as our petition notes.

Re: Lincoln's racism

Lincoln was indeed a racist. He was also an anti-racist. The world is more complex than these two folks believe.

Re: Honoring Confederate Memorial

Sic Tyranus stems from the phrase John Wilkes Booth shouted seconds after he murdered Pres. Lincoln, of course, leaving out the word "semper." Neo-Confederates today sell t-shirts and bumper stickers with this slogan. It is a chilling notion, to identify with Booth.

Re: Honoring Diversity

Sherman's march to the sea was not a war crime. A little scholarship, please!

Re: Confederates Not the Rebels

Secession is not a "Constitutional right." I looked. Even Buchanan, a member of the pro-slavery wing of the Democratic Party, agrees with that conclusion.

Re: Doug Wilder

April 7 to 15 WERE "the 'Final Chapter of the Civil War Days.'" Many DID "sacrifice in this great struggle.” No quarrel there.

Re: Doug Wilder

Nor here.

Re: Letter to President Obama

Loewen is wrong. The South Carolina Declaration justifies the idea of state sovereignty. It demonstrates that the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the Treaty of Paris, and the Constitution of the United States all support the sovereignty of the states. Anyone who reads the document can see that.

Re: Honoring Confederate Memorial

"Sic Semper Tyranus" means "thus always to tyrannts." The phrase occurs on the flag of Virginia and the great seal of Virginia. George Mason, one of greatest founding fathers, suggested its placement there. The only people who should find the notion chilling are tyrannts and those who support them.

Re: Confederates Not the Rebels

The Constitution does not say that a state cannot leave the Union. The Tenth Amendment says that "[t]he powers not delegated to the United States by by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." You figure it out.

orrection

Sebesta's petition states that "This monument should not be elevated in prestige above other monuments by a presidential wreath." In reality, the president has traditionally sent wreaths to the Maine memorial, the Spanish-American War memorial, and the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier as well.

Re: Monument

Loewen is wrong again. Sebesta began his career as an "Anti-Neo-Confederate" by trying to get a Dallas park to take down a Robert E. Lee statue. The third signer on the list, Bill Ayers, began his career as a terrorist by blowing up a monument to Chicago police officers who died in the line of duty. That real historians like McPherson and Finkelman would associate themselves with such people shows a lapse of judgement.

Re: Honoring Diversity

Since everyone is applying contemporary values to historic events, how can one say that Sherman’s March to the Sea does not qualify as a war crime? I have read the “extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly," “intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects,” “attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives,” and “intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected" all used in defining "war crimes." I discovered this interesting story at http://www.alabamaheritage.com/vault/UAburning.htm while working on some genealogy:

- Librarian Deloffre pleaded for the library. Surely this one building could be spared. Colonel Johnston agreed that it would be senseless destruction to burn one of the finest libraries in the South. Hurriedly he scrawled a message to General Croxton asking permission to spare the building, noting that it had no military value. No record exists of the conversation between Johnston and the professors as they waited for a reply, though Dr. Wyman later described Johnston as a “man of culture and literary taste.”

When at last the courier returned, the general’s answer was disheartening. “My orders leave me no discretion,” wrote Croxton. “My orders are to destroy all public buildings.”

What happened next has become a part of the University of Alabama’s mythic fabric. It is said that Colonel Johnston, lamenting the destruction of such a fine library, decided to salvage one volume as a memento. Perhaps he sent one of his aides, or perhaps he sent Librarian Deloffre, or perhaps he went himself, to take one book from the library. The book saved was an English translation of The Koran: Commonly Called The Alcoran Of Mohammed, published in Philadelphia in 1853.

Federal troops then began throwing flaming combustibles through the open door of the Rotunda and onto the roof. In a matter of minutes, the building was engulfed in flames. The raiders then turned their attention to the other buildings, and soon almost the entire campus was ablaze. One witness recalled years later that “as I looked in astonishment, the flames from the tall buildings reached far above the tree tops.” The University cadets, from their position on Hurricane Creek, eight miles away, could see the billowing smoke…

Because the University of Alabama was destroyed so near the end of the war, one can easily imagine a scenario in which the University survived unscathed. Indeed, on the day following the burning, General Grant, several hundred miles away, told General Sherman, “Rebel armies are now the only strategic points to strike at.” But the University did not escape unscathed, and the events of April 3-4, 1865, set back the course of higher education in Alabama for decades. With no dormitories, classroom, or public buildings, little money, and no library, the University of Alabama started over. –

How many churches, city halls, libraries, and universities were burned during Sherman’s March? This goes well beyond my frustrations in tracking southern branches in my family tree. The destruction of a people’s cultural institutions definitely qualifies as a war crime.

My Opinion

If they are good enough to rest at Arlington, they are good enough to receive an ephemeral wreath from our president. And if the commemoration of slaveholders is wrong, then we as a nation will have to tear down the Washington Monument and the Jefferson Monument. No thank you.

Re: Letter to President Obama

So, Loewen is wrong? Well, let's quote the document. Of course, it does claim the right to secede. But most of it, as its title implies, is concerned with giving REASONS for secession. Not ONE of these reasons has anything to do with states' rights, EXCEPT to OPPOSE them. The convention takes pains to name the states and the rights that prompt them to secede: "We assert that fourteen of the States have deliberately refused for years past to fufill their constitutional obligations, and we refer to their own statutes for the proof.
The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows:
“No person held to service or labor in one State under the laws thereof, escaping into another..." Then it goes on: "The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the acts of Congress, or render useless any attempt to execute them...."
I rest my case with the document. Or with Texas's ordinance of secession, which says the same thing. Or Mississippi's. Or ....

Re: Monument

Did the poster mis-read our petition? Does it say anything about removing the monument?

Re: Honoring Diversity

Scholarship on the "path of destruction" indicates that particularly in Georgia, more destruction was caused by Confederate defenders than by Sherman's men. Moreover, there were almost no crimes against persons. Compare to ANY of our wars against nonwhite peoples!

Re: orrection

True. And to other Civil War monuments? Of which there are at least 2,000?

Re: [comment removed]

You said the document says "NOTHING about states' rights, except to oppose such...." You were and are wrong.

Re: Monument

Give me a break. I can recognize a stalking-horse. If the tallest monument in our most prestigious cemetery "implies that the humanity of Africans and African Americans is of no significance[,]" then the real problem is not a silly little wreath.

Re: My Opinion

Your logic is faulty. Dont use Washington and Jefferson, who warned in his letters that slavery must end lest the wrath of God destroy the nation, as alibis for traitors to the United States who would destroy the Union to continue holding Africans in chains in perpetuity under white supremacy. Once defeated, the bitter traitors became terrorists: the Ku Klux Klan. There is no place for them , or nostalgia for them, in our country today.

Re: Honoring Diversity

I am a northerner, born and bred. During my formative years and throughout my collegiate experience, I accepted as gospel that many of the stories of wanton destruction and carnage from Sherman's March was just southern hyperbole. I always believed that if there was some truth to it all, so what, they deserved it. The south perpetuated a cruel and inhuman system of involuntary servitude through a minority of plutocrats, they seceded from the union, they convinced the majority of their population (non slave holders) that their fight was noble, and they brought on a violent war that killed hundreds of thousands.

Over the past couple of years, I decided to trace my roots through genealogical research. One branch happens to come from Tennessee, with Virginia, Georgia, and South Carolina origins. In trying to discover information on my earliest ancestors, I discovered the records in over a dozen counties (in the three previously mentioned states) going back no further than 1864. These include birth, marriage, and death records, along with land deeds, civil court files, and church records. In reading the correspondence and diaries from the Civil War generation residents of these counties (found in several prominent university archives), I found many overlapping references to federal troops under Sherman's (or some underling of his) command firing the town. I guess it's possible that all these individuals got together, burned their own buildings, and decided to say that federal troops did it in all their personal correspondence and diary entries, but that sounds a little thin. I have no doubt that some supply depots, factories, and other structures were torched by locals to prevent them from falling in federal hands. However, torching their own homes, city halls, libraries, universities, and churches does not make any sense. Many of General Sherman's orders to his subordinates from that campaign are also quite illuminating.

I now feel some sympathy for those southerners. Many towns lost an entire generation of young men and more. Many also lost much of their local identity as their institutions burned. Most were not slave owners and most were just as racist as northerners - by contemporary standards.

Also, if you believe we reserve all our ferocity for nonwhites in our military engagements, try imagining the horror the citizens of Hamburg and Dresden experienced during the firebombing of their cities during WWII. It was much more destructive than Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Dr. Loewen, you criticize others on this thread for ignoring the complexities of the issue. Please heed your own advise.

Re: My Opinion

From the British point of view Washington and Jefferson were traitors. The only real difference betweeen Washington and Lee is that the latter lost.

Do you think that setting of bombs in the Pentagon during the Vietnam war counts as treason? If you do then the third signature on the list above comes from a traitor.

And very few post-war Southerners joined the klan. Lee certainly did not. In fact, the biggest klan group in history was in Indiana in the 1920s.

Re: My Opinion

Oh, and by the way, read Lincoln's First Innaugural. He promises a constitutional amendment so that the South could hold slaves forever. With the South out of the Union both houses of Congress passed that amendment with the requisite two-thirds majority. And three states ratified it. Did that bring the South back into the Union? No.

And if you think that Jefferson deserves his reputation as an antislavery advocate, you should try reading some of the many books and articles published by the fifteenth signature on the list: Paul Finkelman.

Correction

Well, here's a proposal from an editorialist at the Washington Post. Your bigoted co-author denounces it as "disappointing." I think it is a great idea:

"President Obama, why not send two wreaths? One to the Confederate Memorial in Arlington Cemetery and another to the African American Civil War Memorial in the District, which commemorates the 200,000 black soldiers who fought for liberation from slavery in the Union armed forces. Here is an opportunity to remind us what real reconciliation, in this day and age, would mean. Send two wreaths with one common message: that the descendants of slaves and the descendants of slaveholders should recognize each other's humanity, and do the hard work of reckoning with the racial divide that is slavery's cruelest and most enduring legacy."