dagblog - Comments for "Confederate flag is a symbol of America's culture wars"

What is amazing is that when

rmrd0000 — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 18:26:01 +0000

In reply to Thanks for the links. Maybe O

What is amazing is that when you call out crap like that handed out by the Sons of Confederate Veterans or others, you are treated like you are the one with a chip on your shoulder. It cannot be that you realize that Confederate supporters have lied for years about the Civil War. The South was not handing out freedom if you joined the Confederacy. Confederate soldiers committed war crimes against black Union troops, freedmen, and escaped slaves

I'm aware of Without Sanctuary, but thinks for the link.

One thing I will be working on as a post is the issue of black Confederates and Southern Yankees. The Southern Yankees are those Southern White who supported the Union and the terrors they faced. There is actual documentation about the abuse of Southern Union supporters.

Thanks for the links. Maybe O

NCD — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 16:44:55 +0000

In reply to Here is the hilarious

Thanks for the links. Maybe O'Reilly can write a book Killing Slavery, on how black Confederates freed the slaves and saved the nation.

My eyes glaze over on anything written or spoken by Republicans.

They are hucksters and liars whose mission is keeping the willing dupes of The Base hopping mad, voting and convinced they are the victims.

Carnival barkers are a more honest breed.

The same white racists the Republicans have exploited for 40 years, 'the southern strategy', were still taking their families to lynchings until the 1940's.

Some are burning black churches today.

For a disturbing presentation of 20th century white racism and violence see Flash presentation on lynching postcards/photography at Without Sanctuary.

Here is the hilarious

rmrd0000 — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 14:53:24 +0000

In reply to The Sons of Confederate

Here is the hilarious response of the SCV to the classic TV miniseries "Roots". They had a book written about black Confederates and asked people for stories about black Confederates because "Roots" made the Confederacy and the South look bad.

http://cwmemory.com/2011/07/31/the-influence-of-roots-on-the-black-confe...

The Sons of Confederate

rmrd0000 — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 14:39:04 +0000

In reply to A Confederate Law authorizing

The Sons of Confederate Veterans have been one of the groups promoting the existence of black Confederates. They find no connection between racial hatred and their beloved flag. They distance the flag from the massacre in Charleston.

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/HaireoftheDog/archives/2015/06/22/sc-...

Here is a link to a takedown of the above nonsense by a person who has followed the misinformation put ou by the SCV

http://cwmemory.com/2015/06/24/black-confederates-to-the-rescue-again/#m...

The truth is the Confederacy thrived on rounding up black people at Gettysburg and slaughtering black Union troops at places like Fort Pillow and Crater, (see above link).

I live with black Republicans today like Clarence Thomas who waxes about dignity in slavery and the inability of two loving people to marry, and Ben Carson who finds Obamacare akin to slavery. I don't pull out my hair because they exist. I wouldn't be embarrassed if black Confederates were real. The problem I have is that there a lot of lying liars promoting black Confederates as a convince for a political position.

I don't know if rm is right

Aaron Carine — Mon, 29 Jun 2015 22:59:13 +0000

In reply to It is narrow because there

I don't know if rm is right that there are no documents at all. That is one of the things I'm going to try to find out. I think oral accounts have some value, although less if they are recorded long after the event. Forty years later, former Confederates may have had an interest in embellishing, and their memories would have been imperfect.

It is narrow because there

rmrd0000 — Mon, 29 Jun 2015 20:18:47 +0000

In reply to Your documentation request is

It is narrow because there has been much disinformation. I don't trust anecdotes without documentation. If there were organized black troops under the leadership of confederate officers let us see the proof. Isolated pictures of slaves with guns are insufficient. They could have been holding the guns for their masters. Many so-called soldiers were slave brought to the battlefield by their masters. Given the amount off effort put into labeling slaves as soldiers, why should my narrow criteria be rejected?

Edit to add:

The scenario about black Confederates is the same scenario we see with the Confederate flag. You blame people who call out the lies about the Confederate flag as wanting revenge on the South. Historians who point out holes in the story about black Confederates are said to be unwilling to accept that blacks served under the Confederacy. They turn skepticism into denial of facts. When you ask for documentation about black Confederate enlistees, you find no documents. You are then told to trust anecdotes.

OK, show me the anecdotes, I'll see if they have been found wanting by other historians.

Your documentation request is

barefooted — Mon, 29 Jun 2015 19:21:13 +0000

In reply to The problem here is that

Your documentation request is not unreasonable, rm. It's your increasingly narrow parameters of what you'll accept that is.

The problem here is that

rmrd0000 — Mon, 29 Jun 2015 19:07:18 +0000

In reply to Next you'll be demanding a

The problem here is that there has been a steady pattern of labeling slaves as soldiers. Read passages from John Stauffer cited above. Stauffer himself notes that many "soldiers" literally had a gun to their heads. These men were still slaves. The slaves ran for the Union lines when possible.

Edit to add:

If men were enlisted in the Confederate Army, it does not seem unreasonable that there is documentation of enlistment

Next you'll be demanding a

barefooted — Mon, 29 Jun 2015 19:00:08 +0000

In reply to The anecdotal stories of

Next you'll be demanding a handwritten letter authored by a black slave soldier pledging his undying loyalty to the Confederacy - dated within months of the start of the war, notarized and accompanied by scientific documentation of ink and paper period dating.

Then again, that would be anecdotal.

I think all you will have are

rmrd0000 — Mon, 29 Jun 2015 19:00:07 +0000

In reply to If we have evidence that a

I think all you will have are anecdotes.