Essay by James Lowen on Obama and the Arlington Confederate monument online at the History News Network

A short essay by James Loewen has just been published online at the History News Network.

http://hnn.us/articles/87913.html

Incidentally, I have a new blog http://arlingtonconfederatemonument.blogspot.com/ where I will be tracking the campaign around the Arlington Confederate monument.

The anti-Confederate and pro-democratic American flag

I have been working on an anti-Confederate flag design for some time. I have thought about it in terms of the history of American flags with anti-Confederate meaning such as the Phalanx flag and others. The above is the anti-Confederate flag. The right side of the flag has a swallowtail ends.

Introduction

The anti-Confederate flag was designed with several considerations in mind to make sure it would be a very good anti-Confederate flag.

Considerations

First, the anti-Confederate flag shouldn’t contain a Confederate flag. For example there have been attempts to design an anti-Confederate symbol by putting the international prohibition sign over the Confederate battle flag. As a design it doesn’t work out well since the Confederate battle flag has a cross on it and the slash in the prohibition sign goes over a cross bar in the Confederate flag. Additionally from a distance it looks like you are wearing the Confederate flag. We don’t want to wear Confederate flags, not even with prohibition signs. Also, we want our flag to express pro-democratic values and not just a negation of the Confederate flag. We want to be for something in opposition to the Confederate flag.

Second, we want to have this flag be accessible to everyone, a flag that everyone who is for democratic values can call his or her own. We want an anti-Confederate and pro-American democratic flag that doesn’t exclude anyone and draws together different people to be united in their opposition to the Confederate flag and neo-Confederacy. The flag can’t specifically oriented to any one group in society since that would make it one group’s flag and hence not others’ flag.

Third, we want a flag that is distinctive from other flags and not likely to be confused with any other flag.

Fourth, we want a flag that is readily recognizable and stands out and draws attention.

Fifth, it needs to be a flag with a design compatible with flag design.

Sixth, it would be nice if it drew on anti-Confederate flags in history.

Seventh, the flag should have an appealing design so that people want to wear it because it has an appealing design.

Anti-Confederate Flags in History

During the Civil War there were many anti-Confederate flags. These were modified American flags. Some Americans rearranged the stars in the phalanxes or square pattern symbolizing readiness to face attacks on America from any direction.[1] The popularity of flying an American flag started with the Civil War. Prior to the Civil War American flags were flown at Federal buildings such as the Post Office. With the Civil War the manufacturers were suddenly faced with a tremendous demand for American flags which people flew as anti-Confederate flags. The American flag with or without modifications was seen as the anti-Confederate flag.[2]

The nickname “Old Glory” for the American flag comes from one Civil War episode. Capt. Driver, a retired sea captain, who moved to Tennessee in the Nashville area before the Civil War, had taken with him in his retirement the American flag he had flown on his ship. He was very proud of this flag and exhibited it frequently and called it “Old Glory.” When the Civil War broke out his flag was threatened and he hid it inside a quilt. When the American armies liberated Nashville, he was brought before the liberating troops and Capt. Driver exhibited his flag. This episode was picked up by the press at the time and though Capt. Driver and his flag are largely forgotten, the nickname “Old Glory” is still remembered.[3]

The Confederates saw the American flag as an Anti-Confederate flag. Mobs in New Orleans tore down an American flag and dragged it through the mud of the streets and then “tore it to shreds, and distributed the pieces among the crowd.” In Memphis the burial of the American flag was publicly celebrated.[4]

Unfortunately, with the overthrow of the multi-racial democracy of Reconstruction and the nation rejecting an Abolitionist vision of America, by the 1920s the Ku Klux Klan felt comfortable flying the American flag and even claimed that they were representative of 100% Americanism. So the American flag by itself has lost an anti-Confederate meaning.

The Phalanx flag and Capt. Drivers flags can’t be used since they are so similar to an American flag they aren’t distinctive and readily recognized as being something other than an American flag.

The Anti-Confederate Pro-American Flag Design

This anti-Confederate flag meets all seven of the considerations listed above. One, it doesn’t contain a Confederate flag. Two, it is for every one of all backgrounds, it isn’t specific to one group. Three, it is certainly distinctive from any other flag. Four, it is readily recognizable, even from a distance. Five, it is compatible with flag design. Six, it draw on the Civil War history of Anti-Confederate flags by being based on the American flag. Finally, Seven, it is a design that is appealing to people.

It isn’t just a flag against something, is a flag for the modern multi-racial democratic America against the anti-democratic and racist values of the Confederacy.

It has fifty stars in a blue region like the American flag and has red and white strips like the American flag. However, both the blue canton of the American flag and the stripes has been transformed. This gives the flag a novel and distinctive appearance so it won’t be confused with an American flag, but still will suggest the American flag. It is also an energetic pattern suggestive of an active struggle against neo-Confederacy. The swallowtail ends of the flag on the right side give the flag charm and further novelty.

[1] The Phalanx pattern is shown on page 131 in “The Stars and the Stripes: The American Flag as Art and as History from the Birth of the Republic to the Present,” published by Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1973.
[2] Guenter, Scot M., “The American Flag, 1777-1924: Cultural Shifts from Creation to Codification,” Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1990. For history of the American flag during the Civil War is Chapter 4, “Symbol of the Union: Flag Use During the Civil War,” pages 66-87. For changes in flag manufacturing to supply demand during the Civil War page 89-90.
[3] Harrison, Peleg D., “The Stars and Strips and Other American Flags,” pub. Little, Brown & Co., Boston, 1917, pages 304-307.
[4] Preble, George Henry, “Origin and History of the American Flag,” 2nd Edition, Vol. II, pub. Nicholas Brown, Philadelphia, 1917, pages 468-493.

Even More news coverage of the Letter to Obama

The Letter to Obama made the Dallas Morning News, URL for the story is:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/nation/stories/DN-obamaconfed_24nat.ART.State.Edition1.50cc1ac.html

Other newspapers across the nation have started to pick up the story from the DMN.

The Associated Press has sent a short item out on the Arlington Confederate monument.

More news coverage of the Letter to Obama/ Example of WHITE Left thinking

ABC News has a news article and our entire letter on the web here"

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=7657749&page=1

I just finished talking to a major daily newspaper that is going to run the story on the web.

Here is an example of WHITE Leftist writing:

http://blog.buzzflash.com/analysis/773 Basically the idea is that health care is everything and anti-racism is nothing. I think it is a good example of banal white nationalism, which you can read about here: www.templeofdemocracy.com/breaking.htm.

Another disappointing op-ed was by Kirk Savage at the Washington Post. You can read it here.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/22/AR2009052202999.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

"The Daily Beast" has article on Obama and the Arlington Confederate Monument, Updated other websites pick up story.

The article is online here:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-05-21/should-obama-honor-dixie/

This site has a large readership.

I will keep Anti-Neo-Confederate updated as the story starts appearing in the major press.

The number of signatures is now over 60.

Frederick Clarkson has an article on it at "Daily Kos" at this URL:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/5/22/734253/-Will-Obama-Honor-the-Confederacy-This-Year

History News Network Publishes Letter to Obama, Update

James Loewen and I have gotten our letter published on the History News Network along with the list of persons who co-signed.

The link is at:

http://hnn.us/articles/85884.html

Other press coverage in progress. I will update as I can. More co-signers are expected and I need to continue to update the table.

"Moderate Voice" has a short commentary at this URL:

http://themoderatevoice.com/32640/not-only-should-obama-not-send-flowers-for-the-confederate-monument-at-arlington/

Black News Junkie also mentions the HNN item.

http://blacknewsjunkie.com/stories/116964/Dear_President_Obama_Please_Don39t_Honor_the_Arlington_Confederate___History_News_Network.html

Roger G. Kennedy, former Director of the National Park Service, Director Emeritus National Museum of American History co-signs letter.

Rogert G. Kennedy, former Director of the National Park Service and Director Emeritus, National Museum of American History has agreed to be a co-signer.

Letter is at: http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/ObamaLetterNR.pdf

2nd Wave of Signatures for Letter to Obama coming in.

James Loewen is now working his list of contacts and some very prominent names are co-signing the letter.

See my earlier postings for details of how this project is coming along.

The letter is online at:

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/ObamaLetterNR.pdf

Contacted Texas Senator Cornyn asking him to not send a wreath and to ask Obama not to send a wreath.

I have contacted both of my U.S. Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn. The following is the automated reply from Cornyn and the text of my letter to him.

Dear Edward Sebesta,

Thank you for contacting my offices. Your correspondence has been received, and we will respond to you as quickly as possible. A copy of your message is attached below for your records.
If you need immediate assistance regarding an urgent problem you are experiencing with the federal government, visit the "Help With Federal Agencies" section of the website for details on how to proceed so that your difficulties are brought to my attention as soon as possible.
If you are seeking information or services from my offices that are NOT related to my Legislative duties, please visit my "Services For Texans" section for more information.
Warmest Regards,

U.S. Senator John Cornyn
---------------------------------------------------
Name/Email:
Edward Sebesta (esebesta@tx.rr.com)

Your Message:
Civil Rights

Dear Senator Cornyn:

A group of prominent scholars across the U.S. have co-signed a letter asking President Obama NOT to send a wreath to the Arlington Confederate monument.
The letter is online at this URL:

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/ObamaLetterNR.pdf

I ask you, yourself not to send a wreath and encourage President Obama not to send a wreath. This monument embodies the values of white supremacy and radical neo-Confederacy.

Sincerely Yours,
Edward H. Sebesta

Letter to Obama asking him not to send a wreath to the Arlington Confederate monument posted online.

The link to the letter is:

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/ObamaLetterNR.pdf

So far co-signers are James McPherson, James Loewen, Paul Finkelman, William Lee Miller, and others. Signature forms are still coming in.

Signatures for Letter to Obama come flooding in.

Signatures have come flooding in. For each respondent, I have asked them to forward the letter to their friends. I am going to have to spend tonight entering all the names into a table.

See prior post for details.

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2009/05/letter-to-obama-asking-him-not-to-send.html

Letter to Obama asking him not to send a wreath to the Arlington Confederate Monument, Update

James Loewen and I have written a letter asking President Barack Obama not to send a wreath or other token of commemoration to the Arlington Confederate Monument.

We have sent out copies of the letter, along with signing forms, to prominent academics and are in the process of collecting signatures. For each person we contact, we will ask them to forward the letter and signing form to their contacts. This should result in an expanding network of contacts. This way we should be able to collect a good number of signatures for the letter. I have gotten the most enthusiastic initial response.

The history of the monument involves white supremacy and some other radical neo-Confederate sentiments. I plan on posting the letter later.

I think with President Barack Obama he will not sending a wreath or any other token to the Arlington Confederate Monument if asked. It is just a matter of letting him know that this has been done in the past and Obama preventing some functionary accidentally sending a wreath because sending one is on some White House to-do list left over from the previous administration.

President Barack Obama has a prior history of opposition to Confederate memorialization. There is an article in the Chicago Sun-Times, Oct. 3, 2005 about him objecting to a display of the Confederate flag.

UPDATE (5/10/09): I have gotten two very prominent scholars to sign so far just today. I expect that Monday the effort will really take off when people get in to read their emails.

Secession Support in the South, item from "Washington Monthly"

The Washington Monthly had this item online:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_05/018062.php

It seems that secession is much more favorably received in the South than elsewhere in the United States. This should not be surprising when some states in the South have Confederate flag designs incorporated into them, and there are statues honoring secessionists most everywhere, and counties, cities, streets, etc. are named after secessionists.

Historical remembrance has an impact.

What would be interesting would to see how these Southern attitudes broke down by race. I think you would find that African Americans, (besides H.K. Edgerton), would not be terribly sympathetic to secession. The Research Poll showed that secession was rejected by African Americans at a much higher percentage than by whites. I suspect the percentage of support for secession in the South would be much higher for whites in the South, and even higher for Republicans in the South, than the 8% reported for the South as a whole.

The poll numbers are at this link, go down the page a little:

http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/4/30/US/298

"Southern Partisan" is back, not surprisingly they don't like Obama.

I got a copy of the "Southern Partisan" in the mail yesterday. They are going after Obama, which shouldn't surprise anyone. The major topics are the life of Jabez Curry and and interview with Felicity Allen about her hagiograpy of Jefferson Davis.

A T-shirt sold by the "Southern Partisan" seems truer now than ever.

For a context for this posting read this blog post.
http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2009/04/republican-party-becoming-confederate.html

Except for the "Majority" part it seems to be becoming true.

Secession and Patriotism

For a context for this article see this earlier post of the day.

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2009/04/republican-party-becoming-confederate.html

There have been those perplexed by support for secession by Texas Republicans who otherwise have this image of boisterous patriotism. After all seceding from a nation, is hardly patriotic towards the nation you are seceding from.

It isn't as contrary as it might seem. As understood in cultural geography, nations are imagined. We don't know everyone personally in a nation, but we imagine that we have an overarching commonality that makes all of us a part of a group. I think for some, the nation they imagine is a banal white nationalist nation. I explain the concept of banal white nationalism here:
http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/breaking.htm.

I think for a lot of Texas Republicans that they were loyal to a white nationalistic America and not to a multiracial democratic America, and with the election of Obama and with the Democrats in control, they feel at some level, maybe not consciously, that their America no longer exists, but with an independent Texas they could have a white nation. So they are patriotic to their nation as they conceive it, but not to a multiracial America.

Will Obama comment on secession?

See my just previous post for a context for this post. http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2009/04/republican-party-becoming-confederate.html


Obama briefly made a snide comment about Rush Limbaugh earlier this year to Republicans meeting with him, that they shouldn't allow themselves to be led by Limbaugh. I don't think Obama said it casually, I think it was a comment carefully calculated to sound like a casual off hand remark, but also calculated carefully to make Rush Limbaugh the leading representative figure of Obama's opposition and the Republican party. Obama knew that Limbaugh would jump at the chance no matter how damaging it might be to the Republican party. I think also Obama calculated that the Republicans would either not resist identification with Limbaugh or suffer damage if they did.

All Obama needs to do, to really send conservatism, Talk Radio, and the Republican party into the wasteland is to make some casual sounding comment about secession. Talk Radio would not, could not resist taking the bait. With Talk Radio ranting on secession, even Limbaugh would have to go along. Then the Republican party would stand around, like in the case of Limbaugh, not saying anything to refute secession, like they were unwilling to refute Limbaugh.

Republican Party becoming a Confederate Party?

As regular readers may know, (Do I have any regular readers besides neo-Confederates?) I have been thinking about the question of the Republican party being taken over by radical reactionary elements. I have also considered the question of the Republican party becoming neo-Confederate. See links to some earlier posts below.

Also, Euan Hague and I in our book on Neo-Confederacy, discussed the mainstreaming of neo-Confederacy. http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exhagneo.html

Well recent events have surprised even me. I thought neo-Confederacy in the Republican party would be wearing a mask if it came to be dominating the party, that is, there would be advocacy for neo-Confederate policies but without the overt and recognizable neo-Confederate elements. Then there is Gov. Rick Perry talking about secession:

“When we came into the Union in 1845, one of the issues was that we would be able to leave if we decided to do that,” he told reporters on Wednesday. “My hope is that America, and Washington in particular, pay attention. We’ve got a great Union. There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, who knows what may come of that?” (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/18/us/politics/18texas.html?ref=global-home)

Wow! No disguises here. So secession became a polling question with one poll showing that a slight majority of Texas Republicans, 51% versus 47%, approve secession. Though it is a Daily Kos poll. http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/04/texas-republicans-like-perry-o.html
or http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/4/22/TX/288.

John Shelton Reed, Univ. of North Carolina professor, former editor of "Southern Cultures," sociologist, one of the key founders of the neo-Confederate movement used to include the question of secession in his polls and be encouraged if he got 10-15%. I am sure he is quite excited by these results. He is probably more excited by the fact that secession has become a question for main stream polling, not just a polling question for a covert neo-Confederate poller like himself. Secession has entered politics.

Then there are all these state's rights resolutions, which seem mostly just talk without a real call for action, but one or more call for secession, and even state a trigger, an action, that would initiate secession. The following is an opinion piece where the vote was 43 to 1 in favor of a secession resolution. http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/stories/2009/04/16/bookmaned_0416.html

Though it turns out a lot of Georgia State Senators hadn't bothered to read it. It also shows that Democrats, including African American Democratic elected officials are asleep at the entry gate. ( I was going to say "asleep at the switch," but do young people know what that means anymore?)

Still it did get passed.

Well the question of secession has resulted in a blizzard of news articles on it. Just go to Google News.

Where will all this lead? It might be the subject of the week, but be completely over next week. Or it might be go on for months. If the Democrats take a stand against secession, Talk Radio conservatives might reflexively take a stand for it. I haven't really surveyed what the reaction of conservatives has been. However, secession has now gone much more mainstream than it has ever been since 1865.

It will be interesting to see how many more major elected Republican officials start talking about secession. It will be interesting what Rush Limbaugh's position will be.

Links to posts on the Republican party becoming neo-Confederate or taken over by radical elements:

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2007/04/bilboization-of-republican-party-neo.html

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2007/01/bilboization-of-republican-party-in.html

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2006/11/fever-swamps-rule-trent-lott-elected.html

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2008/11/republican-party-becomeing-confederate.html

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2007/06/possible-implications-of-recent-failure.html

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2006/11/fever-swamps-rule-trent-lott-elected.html

Links to posts on the Republican party becoming a sectional party.

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2008/12/washington-post-columnist-gop-goes.html

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2008/12/gop-concerned-about-being-too-southern.html

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2008/11/republican-party-becomeing-confederate.html

Links to related posts

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2009/02/so-called-state-rebellions-neo.html

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2008/11/republican-party-becomeing-confederate.html

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2006/11/dick-armey-is-on-loose.html

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2006/09/texas-us-senator-john-cornyn-to-speak.html

Council of Illiterate Conservative Citizens; Updated, one error corrected, one clung to.

The Council of Conservative Citizens is up in arms over a History Channel show on the Punic wars and Carthage. They claim that Hannibal is being portrayed as sub-Saharan African.

The item is at: http://cofcc.org/?p=4376

Irately they proclaim:

"Afro-centrists are always scavenging about for crumbs to glorify a Negro history that never existed. The city-state of Carthage was Greek, not Sub-Sahara African. The inhabitants of North Africa at the time of Hannibal were white, not black. The Berbers of Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia are still Caucasoid, not black."

The Carthaginians were Phoenician, not Greek! Anyone who has even a passing knowledge of ancient history knows this. I have no idea why the race of the Berbers is brought up either. Berbers are not some modern day group descended from Phoenicians. They are not descended from the Greeks either but are a people indigenous to Africa.

The above is fairly representative of what passes for the Council of Conservative Citizens' historical analysis, a mental process thrashing with rage, rather than reason.

UPDATE:

Well the post on the CofCC blog has been updated, they seem to realize the Carthaginians were Phoenician. However, they are still rattling on about Berbers. The Phoenicians weren't Berbers either. They immigrated from the eastern coast of the Mediterraneans and were the competitors of the Greeks in the ancient world. You would have to have slept through your ancient history classes not to know this. However, the hysteric historians don't seem to realize this.

Maybe "Southern Partisan" is dead after all.

There hasn't been an issue of the Southern Partisan (SP) for some time, about a year. I was doing some Internet researching and I stumbled across this post reported to be from Tim Manning Jr., former Assistant Editor of SP and dated Jan. 2008.

http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5446

Some notable statements (any errors in the original) in the posting are:

"I resigned from Southern Partisan today. Here’s why. It’s going nowhere. The Editor is a moron. There are reasons to admire someone without a college education, but with Chris Sullivan, this is not the case. He dropped out of Furman during his first semester."

"In reality, you can immediately determine anything that is actually written by the Editor by his eighth-grade level literary skills."

"Southern Partisan subscriptions were over 10,000 when they first hired Sullivan almost 10 years ago. Today, there are barely 2,900 paid subscribers. Sullivan refuses to publish on time and to run a functional and newsworthy or intelligent website. He once told me he had never read I’ll Take My Stand."


I did note that Google gives this URL for Manning and Southern Partisan, but it it has been pulled.

http://www.southernpartisan.net/author/tim-manning-jr/

Tim Manning evidently tried to start up his proposed online publication, The Southerner, http://www.thesoutherner.org/ but it seems to be gone also, though in the Internet Archives a single capture exists.

The Internet Archive (Way back machine) shows that this web location was first used for a student newspaper for South High School in Minneapolis, from 2002 to 2005, but that in 2008 Manning did set up http://www.thesoutherner.org/.

It seems that Tim Manning Jr.'s The Southerner lasted less than a month. The website no longer exists and the Way Back machine only has a single Jan. 2008 archive. It seems to have been a blog format.

So it could well be that the Southern Partisan has died. It would be a strategic victory over neo-Confederacy. Manning, in this reputed Manning post, claims that the number of paid subscribers has dropped from over 10,000 to 2,900.

An interesting analysis of the election results. The Confederacy lives.

This is a very interesting article on the white vote for McCain by state.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/06/AR2009020603332.html

The former Confederate states stand out from the rest of the United States of America.

Confederacy of rejection of unemployment benefits. Plantation economics in action.

This is an interesting article in the "New York Times" on governors talking about rejecting unemployment benefits.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/27/us/27govs.html?pagewanted=1&ref=economy

In your mind map out the states considering rejecting the unemployment benefits and see what you see.

So-called State Rebellions; Neo-Confederate hype in action

There is a lot of talk about the states in rebellion.

Such as at this link:

http://www.dixienet.org/rebellion/2009/02/nh-lawmakers-threaten-secession.html

Or this link:

http://www.thehopeforamerica.com/play.php?id=389

But examining the case of New Hampshire is instructive, it isn't a state in rebellion, it is just four lawmakers. In an article ridiculing the four Republican lawmakers the Nashua Telegraph editorial says "Memo to Lawmakers: The Civil War is Over."

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090216/OPINION01/302169973/-1/OPINION04

As explained in this website the size of the New Hampshire House is limited between 375 to 400.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/abouthouse/housefacts.htm

So four Republican house representatives are about 1% of the New Hampshire House.

So New Hampshire isn't in rebellion no matter how much Fox News might want their viewers to think so as shown in this video excerpt. http://www.thehopeforamerica.com/play.php?id=389.

I suspect that for the other 19 states supposedly in rebellion it really is just one or two stray state legislators here and there getting a little too wound up by talk radio, but it is not states in rebellion.

The weasel words here is "states legislatures are considering" or some other variant of this phrase. If just one legislator proposes a bill, a body of the legislature, such as a committee is considering it, if only to reject it immediately.

So there is not some state's rights rebellion out there.

J. Michael Hill on egalitarianism

J. Michael Hill, president of the League of the South has put online his essay against egalitarianism.

http://dixienet.org/New%20Site/theuniversalwolf.shtml

He is being a bit obscure on one part. When he talks about equality under the law. What he means that each person has a right to seek justice under the law. However, this doesn't mean equality in any other sense, it just means that they have an equality to seek under the law what rights they may or may not have in their station in the law. The law could be that some people are serfs and some people are lords and that they both have an equal right to seek the protection of the law for what the law might provide to them as a serf or a lord.

When reading neo-Confederate writing, words and expressions can have meanings that a modern reader might not comprehend. Neo-Confederate thinking often has a pre-modern viewpoint that is difficult to understand in a modern world.

The story of Confederate House in Levittown

Jonathan Yardley has the story of Confederate House in Levittown.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/12/AR2009021203324.html

"What followed was a protracted period of tension punctuated by frequent small riots and near-riots. Led by a "hulking flattopped man" named James E. Newell Jr., "a thirty-year-old electrician from Durham, North Carolina, who lived around the corner on Daffodil Lane," and his "sidekick, an unemployed forty-eight-year-old named Eldred Williams," a small but noisy and openly racist group of Levittowners made life so miserable for the Myerses that they took their children out of town. Police protection was half-hearted at best; "the local police . . . sat by and watched the harassment . . . for weeks." The Ku Klux Klan arrived on the scene and found eager supporters. Crosses were burned, epithets were painted on the Wechslers' house, and an empty house at nearby 30 Darkleaf Lane was rented to new neighbors, who turned the place into a kind of clubhouse:

"The Myerses and Wechslers recognized in horror the familiar faces of their tormenters, including Newell, and even the mailman who had started the riot after he'd delivered the first letter to Daisy Myers on that August day. Outside, the caretaker of the house, Eldred Williams, walked his black dog up and down the yard. He had renamed the pet in honor of this day. 'Here, Nigger,' he called to the dog, 'come here you, Nigger.' The neighbors had arrived."

They called the place 'the Confederate House,' and 'called themselves the Dogwood Hollow Social Club.' "

Confederate Culture in Action, harrassment of African American workers restoring power to electrical cooperative

The story is here:

http://www.arkansasleader.com/2009/02/editiorial-icy-reception-for-repairmen.html

Hispanics for the Union in San Francisco during the Civil War

I found this very interesting article about Hispanics rallying for the Union during the Civil War in San Francisco.

http://egpnews.com/?p=7032

A quote from the article:

Finally on the night of October 16, 1864, the pro-Lincoln parade was to begin. Excitedly, members of the Club Unionista crowded into the rooms of the Terpsichore Hall. At the command of Captain Guillen, the Artilleros marched forward. Behind them, four abreast, the Club Unionista members marched out into the street, holding their flaming torches aloft. The mounted officers came behind, astride their spirited horses.The banners and signs carried by Club Unionista members bore evidence of their bi-lingual and bi-cultural heritage. One bilingual sign that tied together the American Civil War and the French Intervention in Mexico read:

“Honest Abe is our man—Muera Maximiliano” (Death to Maximilian)

Another banner listed the civil and military heroes of the war on both fronts, Mexico and the Atlantic coast: “Lincoln—Juarez, Grant—Negrete”

Yet another gave a decidedly negative opinion of the leaders of the Confederacy and the French in Mexico: “Maximiliano el usurpador — Davis el traidor” (Maximilian the usurper, [Jefferson] Davis the traitor).

And still another banner made reference to Lincoln’s emancipation of the slaves: “Dios hizo al hombre y Lincoln lo declaró libre.” (God created man, and Lincoln declared him free)

Ann Coulter defends the Council of Conservative Citizens

The SPLC has a report on Ann Coulter defending the Council of Conservative Citizens. The following is the link.

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2009/02/13/columnist-ann-coulter-defends-white-supremacist-group/

The link to the Council of Conservative Citizens is www.cofcc.com

Interesting news about Ron Wilson

Ron Wilson is former Commander-in-Chief of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and used to write for the "Citizen Informer" a publication of the Council of Conservative Citizens. www.cofcc.com

This morning I read a blog about some interesting financial arrangements he had for Anderson county in South Carolina. The following is an article in the The Journal in Williamston, SC.

http://media.iadsnetwork.com/quickpagepdf/pdfs/64000/64650.pdf

This blogger, in a blog titles "Confederate Cronyism, Nepotism" reviews the article.

http://www.fitsnews.com/2009/02/13/confederate-cronyism-nepotism/

Christian Conservative David Burton Against Neo-Confederacy

Bud Kennedy of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram has a column about a web page by John Burton of Wall Builders.

The Kennedy's column is at: http://www.star-telegram.com/855/story/1162383.html

David Burton's online article is at:

http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=92

Evidently the neo-Confederates are up in arms about it. It seems Burton has done considerable work assembling historical sources to show that the Civil War was over slavery.

Of course that this view is being adopted by conservative Christian southerners gives the neo-Confederate worry.

A "New York Times" article to upset the neo-Confederates

This article is the nightmare of neo-Confederates present and of neo-Confederates for generations in the past.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/21/us/politics/21family.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

Writing Obama

I plan to write Obama about the issue of neo-Confederacy. I have been thinking about writing each issue individually, but I am now leaning to just writing one long letter and address all the issues about the Presidency and neo-Confederacy.

I know the president is busy with the issue of the economy. However, much of what my letter will concern itself with is things that Obama shouldn't do to support or pander to the Confederacy. That is they are actions that he should and could drop and lighten his load. I think actually much of the matters in my letter can be dealt with by minor administrators.

I am also going to think about getting some co-signers for the letter.

I am going to publish the letter on this blog after I mail it to Obama.

"Southern Partisan" -- Alive or Dead

The last issue of Southern Partisan was sometime early 2008. There is a fairly inactive website also http://www.southernpartisan.net/ and the latest story there was August 19, 2008. So is the Southern Partisan defunct? I don't think it is. Its editor, Christopher M. Sullivan, has been the Commander-in-Chief of the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) and I think probably very busy running the SCV. With the recent election of new officers for the SCV, Sullivan is now freed up to get Southern Partisan going again, which I think he will. I think the Southern Partisan has a loyal base which will support the publication through interruptions in regular publishing.

However, I think it does face challenges. After the press reporting on Southern Partisan in 1998 and 2000 over Trent Lott and Ashcroft respectively, prominent persons haven't been showing up in the Southern Partisan, unless they are retired and their careers are over. Thomas Woods Jr. omits any mention of his League of the South and Southern Partisan past at his website http://www.thomasewoods.com/. I think Gutzman hopes that the public isn't aware of his book reviews in the Southern Partisan. With the absence of U.S. Senators, prominent conservatives, authors, TV personalities like Willard Scott, the Southern Partisan loses some of its prestige and ability to attract readers.

Also, the type of university contributors that contributed to Southern Partisan are passing away. The English Dept. of universities in the South are no longer the habitats for neo-Confederacy like they once were. I don't think members of the Obama administration will want to interview with the Southern Partisan like members of the Reagan administration did.

I don't think the Southern Partisan is going to want contributors like those who wrote for Southern Mercury, the publication of the SCV Educational PAC. (I have put some short reviews of Southern Mercury articles online at www.templeofdemocracy.com/southernmercury.htm.)

Nor do I think the Southern Partisan will want to publish fringe articles by persons who worry about the Illuminati and other conspiracy theories.

So there is going to be a challenge for the Southern Partisan to find contributors, but I think they will be able to find contributors. It will be interesting who they find. It might be people like John J. Dwyer. http://www.johnjdwyer.com/ Maybe Douglas Wilson in Idaho, http://www.dougwils.com/.

On the other hand it could be that Southern Partisan will produce a few more issues and then be finished. The whole academic branch of neo-Confederacy might be dying out or no longer willing to publish in the Southern Partisan. When and if the Southern Partisan does terminate, it will take a few years to know for sure.

Presidential Candidates for 2012 and neo-Confederacy

I have started a web page for 2012. The link is www.templeofdemocracy.com/PresidentialCandidates2012.htm

Right now it is just a skeleton. I mostly copied over the 2008 page and eliminated those who have no chance of running for president in 2012. I have some updates in it also. There is the Black Commentator web page on Bill Clinton and the UDC. I have The New Republic article on Ron Paul and his newsletters. I need to ad to the Huckbee entry his pro-Confederate campaigning in 2008. I don't have anything in the Sarah Palin entry except her name and office. The Alaska Independence party is neo-Confederate and she was supportive of them. I will have to get together the documentation on this.

I will be writing Obama some letters regarding various Federal Government policies which support neo-Confederacy and will post the replies in the Presidential Candidate 2012 web page. I am none partisan and Obama will be treated like any other presidential candidate.

I do plan on sending out a questionnaire at some point to the candidates in 2011.

I have only three potential democratic candidates at this time, President Obama, Vice-President Biden, and Hillary Clinton.

I will be adding Republican candidates to the list as I am able to find out who are considered likely candidates.

"Washington Post" columnist, "The GOP Goes South"

Another article on the Republican party becoming a sectional party by David S. Broder.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/26/AR2008122601129.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Trent Lott said in a Southern Partisan interview that the Republican party was the party for the descendants of Jefferson Davis. It seems that it is becoming truer by the day. This is an extract from the Southern Partisan interview, Vol. 4 No. 4 Fall 1984.

Page 44

Partisan: At the convention of the Sons of Confederate Veterans in Biloxi, Mississippi you made the statement that "the spirit of Jefferson Davis lives in the 1984 Republican Platform." What did you mean by that?

Lott: I think that a lot of the fundamental principals that Jefferson Davis believed in are very important today to people all across the country, and they apply to the Republican Party. .... After the War between the States, a lot of Southerners identified with the Democrat Party because of the radical Republicans we had at the time, particularly in the Senate. The South was wedded to that party for years and years and years. But we have seen the Republican Party become more conservative and more oriented toward traditional family values, the religious values that we hold dear in the South. And the Democratic party has been going in the other direction. As a result of that, more and more of The South's sons, Jefferson Davis' descendants, direct or indirect, are becoming involved in the Republican Party. The platform we had in Dallas, the 1984 Republican platform, all the ideas we supported there --- from tax policy, to foriegn policy: from individual rights, to neighborhood security --- are things that Jefferson Davis believed in.

Obama Appoints Ron Kirk, pro-Confederate African American

Obama has appointed Ron Kirk to the post of U.S. Trade Representative. Ron Kirk declared a Confederate heritage day for the City of Dallas. He was able to do this, but never get a human rights commission started for Dallas. You can read about his dubious past by pulling up articles from his term of mayor at the Dallas Observer website. http://www.dallasobserver.com/search/archive_search

This column in the Dallas Observer details how Ron Kirk tried to take stands on both sides of the issue of the Confederacy. Weasel is the word that comes to mind.
http://www.dallasobserver.com/2000-02-24/news/buzz/

I wrote this letter to Ron Kirk asking him to retract his declaration of a Confederate heritage day for Dallas. I never got a reply and there never was a retraction of the declaration.

---------------------

June 24, 2000

Mayor Ron Kirk

Dear Mayor Kirk:

As you know, you declared October 12, 1997, a Confederate heritage day for Dallas. It was reported in the UDC Magazine, Dec. 1998, page 28. I know because I do research on the neo-Confederate movement. Worse yet, you gave Edward Smith, notorious promoter of the Black Confederate myth the keys to the city.

As most everyone knows, John McCain recently publicly apologized for his support for the Confederate flag in South Carolina. I am sure it was difficult for John McCain to admit being wrong, given he is strong willed, but nevertheless he did.

I ask you to publicly retract your declaration of Confederate Heritage day for Dallas.

I have amply documented the pernicious nature of this civil religion of white supremacy at my website .

Texas Governor George W. Bush has gone from being a booster of the Museum of the Confederacy to realizing that the Confederacy should not be part of our civic faith. I think you can consider coming to a similar realization and help make this a city with a democratic civic tradition, not a Confederate one.


Sincerely Yours,



Edward H. Sebesta

CC: Dallas City Council members

-------------------------

GOP concerned about being too Southern.

The article is online at politico.com and is a front page article there for the moment. You can read it here: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16269.html

Evidently there is a struggle within the Republican party to keep it from becoming the party of the Confederacy. The code word here is "regional." Some quotes:

"As the GOP wrestles with criticism that it is in danger of becoming a regional party rooted in the South, rather than one with broad appeal across the nation, the contest for chairman is shaping up in no small part as a referendum on just how much Southern flavor the party should have at the top in the wake of a sound electoral defeat in every other region of the country."

and

"For RNC contenders, any misgivings about the party's Southern bent may take a back seat to short-term political necessity. Every candidate running for chair would love to draw support from social conservatives, who make up a sizable proportion of the 168 voters that will select the next party chair-and many of them hail from the South."

So some Republicans are worried about the party being a Confederate party, but it seems that the former states of the Confederacy is where a lot of the political power is. No matter how Republicans try to finesse this, it seems somewhat insulting to persons with southern nationalist sensibilities. I think it could provoke a reaction in the South. This would force some southern Republicans to become more publicly southern identified.

However, it could be that nothing is really needed to force any southern Republicans to be more publicly southern identified. In a crowded field of candidates looking to be Republican party leaders, one candidate could stand out from the pack, escape from obscurity, and capture a sizable base by being southern identified. This applies to other possible political ambitions in the Republican party. Being a defeated Republican party presidential candidate in the national election is better than being nobody. Being selected as the Vice-Presidential candidate would be better than being nobody. Having a regional political base is better than being nobody. Some southern Republican will figure that out. Huckabee was picking up on that by supporting the Confederate flag in South Carolina during the Republican primary there.

If one Republican candidate or leader picks up the Confederate flag there might be a lot of pressure on other Republican leaders in the south to move in a direction of supporting the Confederate flag.

Another factor in the direction of the Republican party will be how Obama performs as president, in particular the currently crashing economy.

If the public thinks Obama is performing poorly then I think there will be a lot of discontent nationally and the Republican party will pick up outside the South and not be regionally based.

If the public thinks Obama is doing a good job with the economy the Republicans will continue to be regionally based. However, many individuals will avoid the Republican party to pursue a political career in the Democratic party leaving the Republican party to be dominated by its more hard core elements.

I am not sure what will happen if there is a mixed perception regarding Obama's handling of the economy. I think there will be conflict and discontent. This I think would radicalize the Republican party also.

I think though these thoughts I write here may be superseded by events. If real unemployment reaches 15 or 20% and an even larger fraction of the American public starts losing their homes or become homeless we will enter uncharted political territory. I can only predict that extremism will flourish. This is of course what is exciting the neo-Confederates.

I am not sure we will know which way the Republican party is moving relative to the Confederacy. Perhaps it will be in Republican primaries in the south in 2010. Perhaps it will be revealed in campaigns starting now for the Republican nomination in 2012. Perhaps it will be in local and state elections. I will just have to watch and wait.

Preview "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction" online

Google books has a limited preview of "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction" online at this link:

http://books.google.com/books?as_q=&num=10&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_brr=0&lr=&as_vt=&as_auth=sebesta+hague&as_pub=&as_sub=&as_drrb=c&as_miny=&as_maxy=&as_isbn=

Just search Google books with the author set to "sebesta" and "hague" and it is the online book that shows up in the search.

You can also read the introduction at this url:

http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exhagneo.html

If you order it online at Univ. of Texas it is discounted.

Copies of "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction" show up in the mail.

I got a package with the author copies of the books in the mail yesterday. You know intellectually that the book is going to be published, but there is something about holding it in your hands and opening it up and reading it that makes it real.

I have spent my life reading books. Now I am the editor and an author for a book and I have joined the world of ideas. Books once in circulation circulate a long time. I purchase books from the 19th century. With this book, the contributors, and the other editors and I initiate a dialogue that goes into the future long after we are gone.

Finally, after all these years there is a book on the neo-Confederates and by a major academic press. People are going to find out what this movement is all about and once understanding what it is they will recognize it when they see it. One of neo-Confederacy's advantages has been is that it isn't recognized for what it is, so it is able to do things unopposed. That advantage will be soon gone. Also, Confederate symbols and monuments will be perceived differently once people realize that there is a neo-Confederate movement.

You can pre-order a copy at this URL. The book is released on Dec. 1, 2008 which is next Monday. http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exhagneo.html

Russian professor Igor Panarin predicts U.S.A. to break up, neo-Confederates excited. Real issue missed by media and bloggers.

The Drudge Report http://www.drudgereport.com/ had an item about an Igor Panarin, member of the the diplomatic academy of the Russian ministry of foreign affairs predicting that the United States would suffer financial collapse and then break up into six states.

Bloomberg has an article about Panarin's prediction here.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a3sayDZz.QKc&refer=us

The UK's right wing paper, The Telegraph has an article here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/3521671/US-will-collapse-and-break-up-Russian-analyst-predicts.html

The neo-Confederates saw this report as validating their fringe ideas. They have been promoting the idea that the United States would collapse. See this blog for a typical neo-Confederate view: http://dixienet.org/rebellion/rebellion.html

Frank James of the Chicago Tribune points out that Panarin's prediction is silly in this posting.
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/11/us_disintegration_a_russian_fa.html

I am not interested in discussing the possibility of the United States breaking up. I think it is a very remote possibility even with a severe economic crisis. I think the media and bloggers are missing the important issue of Panarin's prediction. Why did he make it and to what purpose?

Panarin is closely associated with the Russian foreign ministry as a member of its diplomatic academy. The article was published in Izvestia, a major paper in Russia. I don't think he would say something that he thought would annoy the Russian government and neither would Izvestia likely print it. Major media in Russia we are told is beholden to the Russian government.

It might be possible that Panarin's interview published in Izvestia is to undermine foreign confidence in the United States and its abilities to make payments on its debts. Perhaps Panarin and the Russian government takes seriously American secessionists, not realizing that they are little more than web pages, excepting the neo-Confederates, and hope to encourage secessionists in the United States.

I think Panarin's article was some attempt to irritate the United States and poke fun at the United States. Of course if the Russians attempt to give aid or comfort to secessionist groups in the United States that would be another thing entirely.

It will be interesting what other media outside the United States make of it.

Nieman Marcus sells the Confederacy. Boycott Nieman Marcus. Or Nieman Marcus is dreaming of a "White" Christmas

Nieman Marcus is selling the Confederacy. Boycott Nieman Marcus.

It turns out that Nieman Marcus is selling the Confederate Fighter Motorcycle from Confederate Motor Works.

http://www.neimanmarcus.com/store/sitelets/christmasbook/fantasy.jhtml?cid=OCBF9_NMO3594&cmcat=Christmas

http://dailyabsurdities.com/2008/11/18/confederate-fighter-bike/

This is very Dallas, where the upper class wouldn't see any problem in celebrating the Confederacy. Dallas, unlike most major cities in America, and unlike Fort Worth, doesn't have a human rights commission.

This also should inform the reader that the love of the Confederacy isn't confined to lower income whites, who I think are maligned by stereotypes, but extends to educated upper class whites.

There are still companies that sell consumer goods with a Confederate identity.

Boycott Nieman Marcus

Fear of a Black President

A fraternity was penalized for flying a Confederate flag at a North Carolina University. The story is here.

http://townhall.com/columnists/MikeSAdams/2008/11/10/the_president_is_black,_hide_the_confederate_flag

This puts Mr. Adams in a rage. What is interesting is that he relates this university matter to the election of an African American president. It is a fear of the loss of white privilege.

It is the theme of the article also, that whites are being persecuted by having separate standards applied to them versus African Americans. It is the loss of white privilege and worse yet in Adams' mind, subordination of whites. Adams is thinking "the bottom rail is on top."

Adams' approach could have been that the university should not have Rap music with such obviously offensive lyrics. It would be an article about his visit and the lyrics and how the lyrics are contrary to the values of Obama and feminism. However, Adam's discussion of the Rap music is just a device to defend the fraternity's flying the Confederate flag and express through his column a fear of a loss of white privilege with the election of Obama.

Republican Party becoming a Confederate Party?

An interesting article in the New York Times, titled "For South, a Waning Hold on National Politics." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/11/us/politics/11south.html?hp

Discusses how the Republican party is becoming a regional party of the South.

Some comments from the article:

"The Republicans, meanwhile, have “become a Southernized party,” said Mr. Schaller, who teaches at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. “They have completely marginalized themselves to a mostly regional party,” he said, pointing out that nearly half of the current Republican House delegation is now Southern."

And

"Even the Democrats made use of the Southern strategy, as the party’s two presidents in the last 40 years, Jimmy Carter and Mr. Clinton, were Southerners whose presence on the ticket served to assuage regional anxieties. Mr. Obama has now proved it is no longer necessary to include a Southerner on the national ticket — to quiet racial fears, for example — in order to win, in the view of analysts."

It will be interesting to observe and see if the Republican Party continues to evolve into Dixiecrats.

Will Obama place a wreath at the Confederate Memorial in the Arlington Cemetery next June 2009?

Will Barack Obama place a wreath at the Confederate Memorial in the Arlington Cemetery next June 2009?

Every president has placed a wreath there since the Woodrow Wilson administration. Wilson both started sending wreaths to the memorial and started segregation in the Federal government and went after African American federal employees. I have started to read "Jim Crow and the Wilson Administration: Protesting Federal Segregation in the Early Twentieth Century," by Nicholas Patler.

As to the question, I am not sure whether Obama will or won't send a wreath to the Confederate Memorial on or near Jefferson Davis' birthday next June 2009. I certainly plan on writing Barack Obama asking him not to send a wreath and encourage others to write him also asking that he not send a wreath.

I am also going to write some letters about some other issues, such as the UDC Confederate awards at the nation's military academies.

Obama's campaign is undoubtedly aware of this web page:

http://www.blackcommentator.com/274/274_clinton_udc.html

I don't think it is impossible that Barack Obama will send the wreath to the Confederate Memorial. However, I don't think Barack Obama will want a web page like this for himself and I am sure I will be able to find someone to do such a web page if Barack Obama proves to be indulgent of the Confederacy.

However, it may not be such an effort to get Barack Obama to stop the wreath and stop Confederate activities in the U.S. Military. An Barack Obama election victory will show that the influence of a certain reactionary crankiness, such as neo-Confederates are over as a political force in this country. In fact I may be asked as to what else needs to be done to remove neo-Confederacy from the Federal government and its programs, projects, parks, and properties. I will be willing to help out if they ask.

COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TOPIC

Here are some fun YouTubes of Eastern music I found which I think are quite interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldPMifPbngc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hncJzoAiAw&feature=related

I thought I would add a few fun things to the blog once in a while.