Tuesday, December 21, 2010
This article was picked up at the History News Network at this link:
2. http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/12/20-7 Short item about slavery and states' rights.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Anyways, Haley Barbour in an interview here, http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/boy-yazoo-city_523551.html?page=3, has Barbour explaining that the White Citizens' Council's as a force for good in race relations.
The Internet is having articles popping up all over about it.
Actually, the Citizens' Councils were extremely racist. You can read the entire run of their newspaper here: http://www.citizenscouncils.com/.
Blogger Yglesias here has a review of the Weekly Standard's interview here:
Yglesias blog has a link to http://www.citizenscouncils.com/
A lot of blogs are linking to Yglesias' blog which means a lot of people will get a link to the Citizens' Council web page.
Another interesting article at Salon.com.
An interesting article by David A. Love. It mentions my Citizens Council website.
Monday, December 13, 2010
We have another article planned for publication with a very prestigious journal and additionally hope to have a book sometime in the future. I am proposing the title, "The Lost Highway to White Supremacy." I am open to other ideas.
Friday, December 10, 2010
|The Daily Show With Jon Stewart||Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c|
|The South's Secession Commemoration|
I think video shows how the Lost Cause has really been rejected so thoroughly by such a widespread segment of the nation that it is now being ridiculed openly and emphatically. I also like that they refer to primary source documents.
This is the link to the embedded video, http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-december-9-2010/the-south-s-secession-commemoration
A lot of people probably haven't thought through the issues regarding the Confederacy and neo-Confederate rationalizations. So the Secession Ball has resulted in responses in print and on video that explain what the Confederacy was all about to people who probably didn't know a lot of the historical record and hadn't thought through the Confederate "heritage" rationalizations. In the end the Secession Ball has probably hurt neo-Confederacy more than my two books combined had done so far.
On the more serious side, here is a really interesting article of Cambodia addressing the issues of the history of the Khmer Rouge.
Perhaps they can have a Museum of the Khmer Rouge which will be a reliquary for artifacts of that era and hand out prizes to burnish their reputation.
Sunday, December 05, 2010
The video segment on the NBC website has been pulled, but you can see it at the above link. Warning some bad language.
What I think is significant is that leading figures are not hesitant to reject Lost Cause rationalizations for neo-Confederacy and are quite quick to belligerently express their opposition.
It will be interesting to see if in opposition to Keith Olbermann some conservative commentators defend the Secession Ball. The website for the ball is here: http://www.scsecessiongala.org/
Friday, December 03, 2010
This is the URL for the book:
Unfortunately it seems that they are going to consider the book for the award anyway. As was explained by John Coski, in an email sent to me earlier today, it isn't my decision. Of course they are right, it is their award and I don't have a say, but I was hoping my letter to them would bring sure rejection of any award.
This is an eventuality that I didn't plan for and at this time, I don't have a plan other then it is probably time I did writing critical of the MOC. I am very unhappy over this possibility. I am thinking of an emergency plan. I suppose this blog post is the first step. I really don't want any book of mine to receive an award from the MOC. I am going to write about an interesting speech at the MOC about the MOC published in the Southern Partisan as the next step.
The following is the text of the letter sent to four judges and copies of each letter sent to S. Waite Rawls.
I am writing you to tell you that I do not want any book of mine to be considered for any award by the Museum of the Confederacy. More specifically I don’t want “The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader,” co-edited by Edward H. Sebesta and James Loewen, University Press of Mississippi considered for an award by the Museum of the Confederacy either for 2010, or in the future.
Not to be presumptuous that the “Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader,” would win any award from the Museum of the Confederacy, but if the book did win some type of award, I would reject the award publically and use the occasion to criticize the Museum of the Confederacy.
Finally, I should let you know that in debate with James McPherson, noted Civil War historian, I have spoken out against the Museum of the Confederacy on Pacifica Radio Network.
You would think that would be enough to put an end to any consideration, but evidently not.
As a preliminary to better understand my opposition to the MOC I suggest people might read www.templeofdemocracy.com/breaking.htm.
It is two pages so click to the next page.
David A. Love is Executive Editor at www.blackcommentator.com.
Wednesday, December 01, 2010
James Loewen, Heidi Beirich, Euan Hague and I mentioned in article on Neo-Confederates in "Mother Jones" magazine
James Loewen, Heidi Beirich, Euan Hague and I are mentioned as "great historians" with a link to my blog where they can find out about both books.
Article is here:
James Loewen says:
Most historians say it is impossible to carve out slavery from the context of the war. As James W. Loewen, a liberal sociologist and author of “Lies My Teacher Told Me,” put it: “The North did not go to war to end slavery, it went to war to hold the country together and only gradually did it become anti-slavery — but slavery is why the South seceded.”
In its secession papers, Mississippi, for example, called slavery “the greatest material interest of the world” and said that attempts to stop it would undermine “commerce and civilization.”
The story got picked up and seems to be everywhere on the Internet. Ta-Nehisi Coates commented on the New York Times article with an extensive quote from our book.
Mr. Coates is using our book just the way it was intended to be used. When some neo-Confederate makes his wild historical claims, you can just quote the Confederates in their own words, and dispel the neo-Confederates' stuff and nonsense.
History News Network picked up on the story in Breaking News here:
Generally the book hasn't been mentioned, but some people will take the initiative and find Loewen's books including our book.
It isn't even 2011 yet, and it seems that the Sesquicentennial will be very different than the Centennial of the Civil War. No neo-Confederate nonsense seems to be the theme.
Thursday, November 25, 2010
I also don't find cursing or swearing or obscenities or blasphemies acceptable by using asterisks or acronyms. I find this so so stupid and idiotic. You either are expressing the concept or not.
I am going to use the term "swear" as a catch all for swearing, use of obscenitites, cursing, and blasphemies.
Recently I found a reputable Civil War blogger having used an obscenity in one of his posts.
Not a single commentator pointed out the obscenity or critcized it. I was surprised at both the obscenity and the lack of criticism of it.
I subsequently realized this morning that one of the benefits of researching neo-Confederates on the internet is that generally they don't swear.
So I am going to explain why swearing is bad. Some this argument are some things taught to me by teachers, but some I think you will recognize as uniquely my own. I give these four reasons.
1. It has no affect. Especially in contemporary society, where swearing is so common it has no effect. It used to be insulting in that in using such terms against a person was seen as insulting to that person's class. However, now, swearing is just tuned out. After the first term is uttered, the brain just thinks, "take note, person upset with me," and nothing more. After that point swearing is just adding hot air to the room.
Swearing doesn't add a sense of exclamation to your expression.
However, an insult without swearing, will engage the attention of the person to whom it is directed. It will be more deadly in effect, if you think exactly what you wish to criticize and conceive your insult to express that. I would also always call attention to a person's swearing if being sworn at with some expression like, "What a gutter mouth!" They may not react in your presence to what you said, but they will think of it, when they swear.
Some insults can have interesting delayed impacts. Sometimes I say to an obnoxious person, "I hope your children grow up just like you." I say this clearly in the context of my hoping something bad happens to them. They are puzzled, they have to assemble the insult in their minds, and then they realize what the insult is, and they had to think through the insult, and thereby hear it, and remember it. Sometimes they are stunned.
My favorite rejoinder to the expression, "I will never speak (or whatever) to you (or here) again," is "Promises, Promises."
However, have your comment speak to the issue at hand and perhaps a little personal insult thrown in. The vulgar person might bay "bull shit," but I would say, "Your argument, like yourself, totally lacks logic and reason." "Nonsense" or "Nonsensesical" isn't bad, but doesn't sting, but keeps you from saying stupid things like "bs." "Stuff and nonsense" is an old classic. What someone is saying might be a sham, or a rationalization, or a pretense. An insulting remark that speaks to the issue is powerful. You might say, "This is just a rationalization which I don't find surprising coming from you."
When you stop swearing you insults will tend to be more deadly and you should consider when using them. You might want to just say, as a modification of one the above insults, "Your rationalizations tire me." You are still saying what he is saying is a rationalization, and that it isn't surprising coming from him, but further it is a continuing practice such that you are tired by it. You establish that you are the injured party and your insult is now a plea, lessening anger, but still really an insult.
In the case where swearing isn't for insults, but for an expressions of exclamation, it isn't necessary also. You can say, "I am flabbergasted," or "Jumping Jupiters" or "OMG" or "what in the world." There are a lot of fun expressions to do this.
2. It is aethetically unpleasing. Think of swearing as defecating through your mouth. Sorry for this foul image, but I wish to make this point forcefully. It is also accurate.
3. It is intellectually lazy and represents intellectual laziness or it means you are so upset you have lost control of your thoughts. Swearing can imply that it doesn't take much to get you to lose control of your thoughts, since you are shallow, when the provocation isn't much.
4. It can represent a limited range of being able to express yourself.
Finally, there are some who think swearing makes them more authentic, or more of the people, or something like that. It is insulting to everyday people. It is slumming. It is an affectation.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Monday, November 22, 2010
The book review by Charles J. Holden is online here:
Some quotes: (Note comment about juvenile emotionalism)
The contributors to Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction show admirable patience and steadiness with their subject matter: the often frantic, willfully ignorant, and paranoia-laced movement among some white southerners toward modern-day secession. This even, strong volume of essays, edited by Euan Hague, Heidi Beirich, and Edward H. Sebesta, explores the cultural, historical, gendered, white supremacist, and political components of the neo-Confederate ideology. The authors painstakingly explicate the writings and speeches of the main neo-Confederates such as Clyde Wilson, John Shelton Reed, Michael Hill, and other leading figures of the Council of Conservative Citizens and the League of the South.
Again, there is much to admire in the tone adopted throughout Neo-Confederacy. The editors and authors carefully point out the slender grasp of historical fact, the political insecurities, and the juvenile emotionalism that appear to fuel so much of the neo-Confederate movement.
The word about the neo-Confederate movement is getting out there.
I was informed today that the publishers of the "Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader" have just contacted 3700 professors about the book.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
From the "About" page. http://zinnedproject.org/about
The Zinn Education Project promotes and supports the use of Howard Zinn’s best-selling book A People’s History of the United States and other materials for teaching a people’s history in middle and high school classrooms across the country. The Zinn Education Project is coordinated by two non-profit organizations, Rethinking Schools and Teaching for Change.
Its goal is to introduce students to a more accurate, complex, and engaging understanding of United States history than is found in traditional textbooks and curricula. The empowering potential of studying U.S. history is often lost in a textbook-driven trivial pursuit of names and dates. Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States and Voices of a People’s History of the United States emphasize the role of working people, women, people of color, and organized social movements in shaping history. Students learn that history is made not by a few heroic individuals, but instead by people’s choices and actions, thereby also learning that their own choices and actions matter.
We believe that through taking a more engaging and more honest look at the past, we can help equip students with the analytical tools to make sense of — and improve — the world today. For a more complete description, read A People’s History, A People’s Pedagogy.
In 2008, with support from an anonymous donor, the Zinn Education Project distributed 4,000 free packets for teaching people’s history to educators across the country. In a follow-up survey, the recipients requested more resources, which led to the creation of this upgraded website to provide teaching materials online. Read the full report (in PDF) on the distribution of the 4,000 packets here.
The word about what the Confederacy and neo-Confederacy was really about is getting out.
Friday, November 12, 2010
I think the investigators reveal an example of misrepresentation that is fairly typical for what passes as neo-Confederate scholarship regarding so-called black Confederate soldiers.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
The title is "A War to Remember - but How?: How Obama should remember the Confederacy as the 150th anniversary of the Civil War approaches" and is by Cragg Hines.
From the article:
The President may need all the historical understanding he can muster as the nation begins to mark the Civil War’s 150th anniversary next spring and our first African-American chief executive becomes a focus.
For Obama to take a leading role in commemorating the Civil War “is what Americans expect—it’s what the world expects,” says Frank Smith, founding director of DC’s African American Civil War Memorial & Museum. But as McDonnell’s misstep illustrated, politicians had best proceed carefully when dealing with a war that many historians see as the most divisive—and decisive—time in the nation’s development.
“It’s not only appropriate but necessary for the President to recognize it in a relatively forceful way,” says S. Waite Rawls III, president of the Museum of the Confederacy in Richmond.
Obama already knows the sort of controversy that can flare up. Over the protest of academics, he has continued the tradition of sending a Memorial Day wreath to the Confederate Monument at Arlington Cemetery. His response to complaints was also to send one to the African American Civil War Memorial on DC’s U Street.
For those wishing to read the 2009 and 2010 letters to Obama requesting him not to send a wreath to the Arlington Confederate Monument you can read them at this blog. http://arlingtonconfederatemonument.blogspot.com/
The individual letters are at these URLs:
There is a 2011 letter that is in progress and there will be a questionnaire sent to all the potential presidential candidates for the 2012 election.
The questionnaire is online here:
Tuesday, November 09, 2010
James Loewen is interviewed by the Santa Fe Radio Cafe' here:
And by Remapping the Debate in the following video:
This is a five part video and the total time is over 70 minutes, but since they divided it into five segments you can view it by parts and not sit through all 70+ minutes at once.
Sunday, November 07, 2010
It was originally broadcast on November 4, 2010. This program plays at 8:30 am in the morning so a lot of commuters can hear it as well as persons at home.
Incidentally, I will be adding more material to http://www.confederatepastpresent.org/ as I get time, have been tied up with two writing projects.
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
From the review:
"Mississippi’s is quite clear: “In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course. Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery, the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of the commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization.”
Loewen and Sebesta also include a number of speeches made before, during and immediately after the war. They all embody a single theme: the need to protect the institution of slavery. On April 29, 1861, Jefferson Davis delivered one of the most important speeches of the time, when he urged the Confederate Congress to adopt the proposed Confederate Constitution. The speech was a long one, though clearly Davis felt the need to lay out in great detail the historical events that led to secession. The entire speech was about slavery.
In this excerpt, Davis took great pains to defend the practice: “Under the mild and genial climate of the Southern States and the increasing care and attention for the well-being and comfort of the laboring classes, dictated alike by interest and humanity, the African slaves had augmented in number from about 600,000 at the date of the adoption of the constitutional compact to upward of 4,000,000.
“In moral and social condition they had been elevated from brutal savages into docile, intelligent and civilized agricultural laborers, and supplied not only with bodily comforts but with careful religious instruction. Under the supervision of a superior race their labor had been so directed ...”
What comes across after reading the documents Loewen and Sebesta have compiled is the clear sense that southern leaders were proud of what they had accomplished on the backs of millions of slaves. They had convinced themselves that white was superior to black, even ordained and blessed by God.
In the review, the reviewer makes reference to the Mississippi controversy over its flag. Jackson is the capitol of Mississippi, and the Jackson Free Press is the cities alternative weekly. Intelligent and educated people in that city will come to know of the book and its contents and realize that they have the material to support a challenge to the Mississippi state flag. As this book becomes known about in Mississippi, there will be a realization that the present Mississippi state flag is intolerable.
Tuesday, November 02, 2010
1. Tom Tancredo is projected to lose the race for the Colorado governor. He ran as a candidate of the American Constitution Party which is involved with neo-Confederate ideology.
Though it is disturbing that about one out of three voted for a person who is totally irresponsible and whose political philosophy is to inflame.
2. Rand Paul, son of neo-Confederate Ron Paul has won the election to be a U.S. Senator from Kentucky. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/us/politics/03kentucky.html
3. Texas governor Rick Perry who talked about secession has won relection.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Halloween Special: "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter" a book even less believable than Thomas DiLorenzo's book.
There is a new genre in which classics are rewritten as horror novels. For example there is the book, "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies" a rewrite of the Jane Austen novel. You can read about it here.
or this article:
Evidently the book is selling quite well and there is a bidding war for the movie rights. (Or a movie may be already be forthcoming since the above article was published.) So the author of "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies," Seth Grahame-Smith, wrote another book, "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter" which is selling well and its going to be made into a movie.
This is the "Los Angeles Times" article on it.
The following URL is for an article about it being made into a movie.
Evidently 20th Century Fox is scheduled to release the film June 22, 2012.
There is something hilarious about how this pseudo-history that is so fantastic and unbelievable. Perhaps Seth Grahame-Smith was inspired by reading neo-Confederate accounts of black Confederates and realized that the sky is the limit for invented history. After all if it can be claimed that Stonewall Jackson had two black battalions why not have Abraham Lincoln be a vampire hunter?
The book is evidently selling quite well and there is actually a trailer for the movie that is in the works. On Youtube it has had over 400,000 viewers. The URL is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X58RPS665V0. The YouTube version is larger than what I can fit into this blog.
In the book and the movie the Confederates are on the side of the vampires. Someone should alert the Sons of Confederate Veterans that there is a heritage violation.
It should be observed that this book is no more fantastical or outlandish than the claim put forth by the Sons of the Confederate Veterans that Abraham Lincoln was part of a communist conspiracy. I quote them here in another blog at this URL: http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2010/01/was-lincoln-communist-scv-neo.html
So Seth Grahame-Smith is only marginally, if at all, more fantastical than the Sons of Confederate Veterans writings of black Confederates, claims of a Communist Lincoln, and of course the usual claim that the Confederates didn't secede over slavery.
Happy Halloween, don't eat too many marshmallow pumpkins.
Update: This web page covers the other "Monster Mashups" of the classics and the horror genre. The titles are a hoot to read, such as "Little Women and Werewolves."
Watch this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jZVE5uF24Q
Saturday, October 30, 2010
It will be in the print version of the Post tomorrow, Sunday, 10/30/10.
Bruce Levine is the author of "Confederate Emancipation: Southern Plans to Free and Arm Slaves During the Civil War," pub. Oxford University Press. It is an excellent book.
This is the link to it at Amazon.com:
The Sons of Confederate Veterans had a book review by Cassie A. Barrow criticizing the book in the Confederate Veteran, Sept./Oct. 2006, page 46. I sent a copy to Bruce Levine who was greatly amused by it.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
1. Peoples Bank & Trust Co., North Carrolton, Mississippi.
2. All American Realty & Insurance, Rupert E. Dunkum, Webster, Florida.
3. Harry Sanders Grocery & Market, North Carrolton, Mississippi.
4. Hudson Flower Shop, Calhoun City, Mississippi.
5. Gaines B. Smith, Jewelers Inc. Batesville, Mississippi.
6. Swiney's Barber Shop, St. Ann, Missouri.
7. A.J. Barker Window and Siding Company, Clemmons, NC.
8. The Crystal Grill, Greenwood, Mississippi.
9. Q-Ball's Bar-B-Que, Indianola, Mississippi.
10. Stanford's Farm & Feed, Carrolton, Mississippi.
11. Christopher JM Cummins, MD, Ripley, Mississippi.
Some of the genetic material in us isn't very critical and seems to be along for the ride, and some of the other material is of course critical and if mutated is the cause for so many diseases. Though exactly what isn't really critical continues to be a subject of discovery and further investigations. Then there is epigenetics which is a whole other level of complexity.
The mitochondria are inherited from the mother, though there was some discussion whether in rare occasions a mitochondria might come from the father, but I never did read what the end of that discussion was. This DNA can be sequenced, it exists in a circle in the mitochondria, and since it isn't involved in reshuffling in sexual reproduction from two sources it is a great source of information to trace evolutionary relatedness.
Changes in this mitochondrial DNA is solely through mutations and the variations in the non-critical parts changes over time. You can thus with sequences map the relatedness of the human species. Of course scientists understanding that they could do so did so and what they found was that in the scheme of things everyone outside of Africa were part of a sub-sub group, I am not sure how many subdivisions down, of one of the African groups. Africans are divided into three groups with a lot of mitochondiral differences. Out of Africa is a scientific reality.
A scientific question over the years has been whether Neanderthals and modern humans ever interbred and the debate has gone back and forth. DNA sequencing a piece of tissue left from a Neanderthal would help resolve this. However, there are real problems in doing so. As the DNA is older it is degraded and results less clear. Also, you have to make sure that the sample isn't contaminated by human DNA such as the dead skin cells people are shedding all the time.
However, recently one researcher has done an analysis, reportedly successfully in the scientific press, and has come up with 4%. This is a very interesting result, but needs some replication since it is just one sample and one analysis. Once we have three or four analyses and similar numbers we can start to perceive this as result which more confidence can be placed.
However, the goofologists at the Conservative Citizens Council at the following link see this one scientific result as the basis of delusional claims. http://cofcc.org/2010/10/new-discoveries-disprove-out-of-africa-myth/
"The “Out of Africa” theory was not created by actual scientists. It was cooked up by left-wing college administrators and forced onto the science departments. It was a myth designed to promote the left-wing agenda on multiculturalism. Every new discovery in the fields of anthropology and genetics continue to completely disprove this left-wing fantasy. Europeans and Asians have substantial amounts of Neanderthal ancestry, while Sub-Saharan Africans do not. Further, the Neanderthal genome project has revived the groups placement as “proto-Caucasian.” Neanderthal can be divided into at least three regional sub-groups. Some Neanderthal, at least those living in Europe had members with fair skin and red hair."
First there is the denial of years of scientific research and publication, with the claim that the conclusion of this research was "cooked up by left-wing college administrators." Then there is the claim of "substantial amounts of Neanderthal ancestry," instead of mentioning it is just 4%.
The mitochondrial evidence is real and not subject to hysterical delusion and exists as scientific evidence independent from nuclear genetic material.
However, these http://www.cofcc.org/ posts just show that what passes for scientific thinking among the members of that organization's membership is actually some type of crazed racism grasping for straws and has no understanding of the underlying science involved.
Update: It occurs to me that it is somewhat ironic that the Council of Conservative Citizens which is hysterically aghast over interracial relations, regards very positively interspecies or perhaps it might be called intersubspecies relations.
Friday, October 22, 2010
The Confederates were fairly hostile to the idea of any African American troops until the last few weeks of the Civil War when they were really desperate.
Charles Kelly Barrow is so pathetic when he says, "Some people just don't like the truth." Would that include Robert E. Lee? Robert E. Lee towards the very end of the Civil War wrote a letter endorsing the idea of Afro-Confederate troops saying that it would be better for the Confederacy if they freed slaves under their terms than the Union doing so.
Was Robert E. Lee a liar and there were thousands of African American troops all along? Or was Robert E. Lee a heritage violator and wanted to defame the Confederacy? Or was Robert E. Lee out of touch?
Mr. Barrow would that include the Confederate Veteran magazine of 1893 to 1932? In more than one article, the Confederate Veteran discusses the issue of Black Confederate troops and the opposition to them and how they weren't adopted until the very end. Was the Confederate Veteran not liking the truth about Confederate history? Were the individual Confederate veterans heritage violators?
Though, this constant claim of Afro-Confederate troops has a good benefit. It discredits the neo-Confederates generally as being deluded and bogus.
Monday, October 18, 2010
From the article:
"Loewen will give the opening address of the three-day conference, which begins Thursday at the Filson Historical Society.
The conference topic, “Secessions: From the American Revolution to the Civil War,” coincides with the 150th anniversary of South Carolina's secession from the Union and will explore moments in U.S. history when Americans threatened or acted upon a perceived right to secede from state or national authorities."
"In true Loewenesque fashion, the University of Vermont professor's address is titled “Lies My Teacher Told Me About Secession.”
Friday, October 15, 2010
Of course there is a question, #8, about sending a wreath to the Arlington Confederate monument.
The question about secession may seem a little crazy, but we already have the Governor Rick Perry talking about secession and a Minnesota Republican Congressional district convention passed a resolution that a state had a right to secede. Secession is back as an issue in politics.
There were other questions we might have asked, but we wanted the questionnaire to be short. Also, these twelve questions will give a fairly good indication where a candidate stands in general regarding the Confederacy and neo-Confederacy.
We will likely start sending out the questionnaires after the November elections.
The questionnaire is as follows:
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE NEO-CONFEDERACY QUESTIONNAIRE
The questions are divided into two sections. The first section pertains to how neo-Confederacy impacts policy; the second seciton contains cultural questions in which the issue is who we are.
1. Do you support the 14th Amendment to the Constitution in its entirety?
Yes, No, Undecided, Other
2. Do you think that nullification is a legitimate action?
Yes, No, Undecided, Other
3. Do you think a state has a right to secede?
Yes, No, Undecided, Other
4. As President would you nominate or appoint a person who is a member of a neo-Confederate organization such as the Sons of Confederate Veterans, League of the South, United Daughters of the Confederacy, or Council of Conservative Citizens to any position in the Federal government or judiciary?
Yes, No, Undecided, Other.
If Yes, to what positions might you appoint or nominate a neo-Confederate?
5. As President would you oppose the involvement of neo-Confederate organizations such as the Sons of Confederate Veterans, League of the South, United Daughters of the Confederacy, and the Council of Conservative Citizen in the Reserve Officer Training Corps or the Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps?
Yes, No, Undecided, Other.
6. As President would you oppose the U.S. military participation in the activities of neo-Confederate organizations such as the Sons of Confederate Veterans, League of the South, United Daughters of the Confederacy, and the Council of Conservative Citizens?
Yes, No, Undecided, Other.
7. Are you a member, regular, associate, honorary, or otherwise of a neo-Confederate organization such as the Sons of Confederate Veterans, League of the South, United Daughters of the Confederacy, and the Council of Conservative Citizens?
Yes, No, Undecided, Other.
8. As President would you send a wreath to the Arlington Confederate monument?
Yes, No, Undecided, Other.
9. As President would you fly or display the Confederate flag at the White House or elsewhere?
Yes, No, Undecided, Other.
10. As President would you declare a day, week, or a month of Confederate memorialization?
Yes, No, Undecided, Other.
11. As President would you participate in a celebration, observance, or ceremony to honor, memorialize, or celebrate the Confederacy or a member of the Confederacy or send a representative to do so?
Yes, No, Undecided, Other.
12. As President would you support having Civil War battlefield parks explain the role of slavery in the Civil War?
Yes, No, Undecided, Other.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
James Loewen discusses our new book, "The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader: The 'Great Truth' About the 'Lost Cause'" in this video.
Saturday, October 09, 2010
The link is here:
Read the article. Does it remind you of any "heritage" groups that you know?
Sunday, October 03, 2010
The cover letter has been written and the questions have been defined. We started with 20 or so and whittled them down to twelve questions. These questions may not cover every issue, but I think that answers to the questionnaire will give a person a fairly good picture as to where the candidate stands.
What isn't complete is the briefing and background information papers which will go to journalists. We are still working on these papers. We will want to have a brief paper on what neo-Confederacy is, I don't expect reporters to want to read a book. We need to write up a back ground for each question. We are also going to have a paper with background information on the presidents and the Confederacy and neo-Confederacy from Franklin D. Roosevelt to the present. I have accumulated materials over the years and have some interesting materials.
The questionnaire is about where America is heading and about what direction the presidential candidate would take America if elected. It isn't about debating the 19th century or the president's interpretations or understanding of 19th century history. It is about who we are and where we are going which is something everyone is interested in.
So we have the questions in two sections, one section concerns policy, and the other concerns national identity, what type of nation we think we are. Once a nation has an idea of who they think they are and what type of nation they should be, politics, policy, actions are largely derivitive actions.
I think we have fairly good chances of getting a response to our questionnaire. There are a great many candidates for the presidency on the Republican side and I think one or two would be interested in answering our questionnaire, if only to differentiate themselves from the pack. Republican candidates for South Carolina governor met with a neo-Confederate front group to be video taped as to their views on the Confederacy among other topics. The South Carolina presidential primary is a critical gate in the primary season for presidential candidate and after New Hampshire, an opportunity for a candidate to gain the lead. George W. Bush derailed John McCain's presidential aspirations in 2000 by having a pro-Confederate flag front group attack McCain. Huckabee when campaigning there in the 2008 presidential primary wanted to make sure that voters knew that he supported the Confederate flag. I suspect that neo-Confederate groups are already planning a questionnaire or video interviews to screen the presidential candidates as they did the candidates for governor of South Carolina.
On the Democratic side, there well may be some other candidates besides President Obama in the next primary cycle and who might want to answer the questionnaire.
We are working on all the papers to have them ready by Nov. 2010. The campaign for the presidency I think really starts in January 2011. The mid-term elections will be over, the holidays will be over, and the new congress in session.
We will post the questionnaire later.
This blog will keep you updated as things develop.
Also, at this blog you can read the letters of 2009 and 2010, or you can read them at the History News Network.
I think in 2011 we will be able to garner a great many more signatures for a variety of factors. The second book is out and a great many people are reading it. I have two new web sites for scholars and students to use as a research resource. It means when I "cold call" for a signature, it is going to be much easier to get a dialog going and get support.
Governor McDonnell and former Gov. George Allen publicly reject Confederate History Month. However, it is not clear whether State Attorney General Cuccinelli has given up Confederate History Month.
Saturday, October 02, 2010
The event notice is here:
Some of James Loewen's engagements can be viewed at his website: http://sundown.afro.illinois.edu/
Thursday, September 30, 2010
The "Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader" recommended by www.rethinkingschools.org and www.teachingforchange.org
This is the web page of "Rethinking Schools" recommending our book.
This is the notice which will be in the Fall 2010 print edition as well as the web page.
The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader: “The Great Truth” About the “Lost Cause” Edited by James W. Loewen and Edward H. Sebesta(University Press of Mississippi, 2010)424 pp., $25
James Loewen, author of Lies My Teacher Told Me, co-edited this collection of primary documents because the story they tell about the Civil War is not found in textbooks. The editors explain that “the declarations supplied by the 11 Confederate states as they left the union are among the most important documents in the history of our nation.” Yet not only do textbooks avoid the documents, “the accounts they provide contradict the historical record.”
The result is widespread misinformation about the cause of the Civil War. In surveys across the country, Loewen found that the great majority of audiences (including teachers) thought states’ rights was the cause. Only 15 percent named the preservation of slavery as the key factor. In addition to a well-organized and annotated collection of primary documents, the editors provide background on when and why the narrative about the causes of the Civil War was rewritten in American consciousness.
And this is the web page of Teaching for Change recommending our book.
This is the online article.
On September 20, 2010, James Loewen, author of Lies My Teacher Told Me, spoke to a full house at Busboys and Poets about his new book The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader: “The Great Truth” About the “Lost Cause" (University Press of Mississippi, 2010). The event was coordinated by Teaching for Change’s Busboys and Poets Bookstore. Co-edited with Edward H. Sebesta, this book is a collection of primary documents on the Civil War. Loewen explained that, “the declarations supplied by the 11 Confederate states as they left the union are among the most important documents in the history of our nation.” Yet not only do textbooks avoid the documents, “the accounts they provide contradict the historical record.” The result is widespread misinformation about the cause of the Civil War.
Loewen opened the evening with a one-question, multiple choice survey, explaining that everyone had to vote and that they could only vote once. The question was: “Why did the Southern states secede?” and the audience had to select from four options: slavery, states’ rights, election of Lincoln, tariffs and taxes. At Busboys and Poets, the majority selected slavery. Loewen said this response was highly unusual. He has conducted this survey with audiences across the country and the vast majority (including teachers) selected states’ rights as the cause. Only 15 percent named the most correct answer, the preservation of slavery, as the key factor. In his talk he described when the myth of states’ rights as the cause developed and why.
There was a lively discussion following his talk, with audience members thanking Loewen for providing this invaluable resource and asking how to help use the book to shift public understanding. A 5th grade teacher from EL Haynes Public Charter School, Mr. Kiplinger, said that when people tell him the motive is “states’ rights”, he asks them, “Which states’ rights?” Invariably they respond “The right to own slaves.” This answer helps him point out that therefore slavery was really the root cause or motive.
Author Richard Morris wrote about the event on his blog and commented, “Once again, Barbara and I were delighted to travel to Busboys & Poets at 14th and V Streets in Washington, D.C. on Monday evening to hear this consummate truth-teller make another compelling presentation to a packed audience.”
The book has been a best-seller at Teaching for Change’s Busboys and Poets Bookstore and is available from our webstore.
Monday, September 27, 2010
CIVIL WAR TO CIVIL RIGHTS
A NATIONAL DIGITAL HISTORY PROJECT FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
The coming year, 2011, marks the 150th anniversary of president-elect Abraham Lincoln's inaugural train trip from Springfield, Illinois to Washington, DC and the presidency of a nation on the eve of civil war.
Inspired by that anniversary, the National Park Service invites high schools classes to join in a national digital project on the broader theme of inaugurations - new beginnings.
The National Park Service invites students to create short digital narratives on one of three themes:
* My area in 1861 - using maps, photos, illustrations, census
data, telling incidents from local newspapers, and (if available) national parks materials - students will create a portrait of where they live as it was just before Lincoln set off to Washington.
* A civil rights hero from my area one hundred years later, in
1961, -- by seeking out and interviewing a veteran of the struggle for equal rights, or finding existing oral histories, and/or maps, photos, illustrations, census data, and local news stories and national parks materials, students will tell the story of someone in their area who brought about change in the 1960s.
* The road ahead - students will define the changes they intend to
inaugurate in their adult lives.
Narratives will be gathered from schools throughout the nation and placed on a special National Park Service website. Participating students, their communities, and a broad national parks audience of all ages will then be able to use the site as window into key moments in our national life, as they were experienced locally, and as a virtual memorial for the momentous journey upon which President Lincoln embarked 150 years ago.
This project was developed by Dr. Marc Aronson (www.marcaronson.com ) in cooperation with Charles Forcey of Historicus, Inc. In the fall of 2010, the project team will provide a kit on the three themes, primary source samples and suggests, as well as links to Common Core Standards. Materials will be submitted through online forms; technical and editorial support will be available all along the way. A suite of digital resources taken from the National Park Service and Library of Congress sources will be available for all participating schools.
Evidently this is going to be a theme of the National Park Service's observance of the Civil War Sesquicentennial as shown by this item.
If you search on Google for "Civil War to Civil Rights" you see that this is the theme of books and various activities large and small.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
James Loewen will be the awards banquet speaker at the annual meeting of the American Association for State and Local History in Oklahoma City, OK.
Friday, Sept. 24, 6:30 to 9:30 pm.
I think among other things the word about "The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader" will get out to historians across the nation.
UPDATE: The AASLH was a sellout for the "Reader." Additionally, some major contacts were made potentially opening up new venues for the book.
Also, James Loewen will be speaking in Richmond, Virginia on Oct. 7, 2010 at an event of the Richmond Diversity Network and the Virginia Commonwealth University. It will be 10:00 am to 3pm at St. Catherine's School. The topic is "Lies My Teacher Told Me and How to Do Better."
Saturday, September 18, 2010
The blog is at:
Addendum: Actually the Vermont 2nd Republic people would be more accurately described as neo-Confederates, reactionaries of various types who write for Chronicles magazine or are reactionaries written about in Chronicles magazine, or other miscellaneous reactionaries who have written for Southern Partisan.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
The website http://www.seeingblack.com/ has a notice here about the interview with a link to the interview.
James Loewen's schedule of appearances is at this blog post:
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
You really need to look at the photos here:
The Gawker.com story is here:
And the other photos here:
These are the photos of particular interest.
Monday, September 13, 2010
You can read about them at:
However, they "forgot" a few details. Jack Kershaw was a major figure in the Tennessee Federation for Constitutional Government which campaigned for segregation in Tennessee attempting to reverse Brown vs. Brown.
The book, "Where No Flag Flies," a biography by Southern Partisan writer Mark Royden Winchell, about Donald Davidson details both Davidson's and Kershaw's activities against integration.
This article will tell you something about Kershaw during the Civil Rights Era, schools being blown up and Jack Kershaw in Clinton, Tennessee working with extremists.
Kershaw's "notable" sculpture can be seen here. http://www.tennessee-scv.org/camp28/project7.htm. Look at the 2nd picture down. The statue is made of resin, but a merry-go-round isn't missing a pony.
Oddly enough, the fact that Jack Kershaw was James Earl Ray Jr.s' lawyer isn't brought up, one of Kershaw's most notable roles. Everyone deserves a lawyer, so I don't count that against Kershaw, but it seems the LoS has sanitized Kershaw's biography to be "politically correct," a phrase they are so fond of using. [James Earl Ray Jr. assassinated Martin Luther King.]
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Friday, September 10, 2010
James Loewen Radio Schedule for the "Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader," 18 radio engagements in two months.
This is the complete Radio Schedule for interviews with James Loewen about our new book, "The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader." These speaking engagements are all over the nation, many in major cities, some are syndicated. Radio stations often now days broadcast online in real time, and often have shows stored online.
1. Sunday, Sept 12, 8:30 a.m. ET
1/2 hr. taped interview
WFNY “The WFNY Free Forum”; NYC
2. Sun. Sept 12, 10:30 a.m. ET
30-40 min live interview
“Radio with a View” - WMBR
3. Mon. Sept 13, 11 a.m. ET
20 min. live phone interview
WASN “The Louie Free Show”
Youngstown, OH and the web
4. Mon. Sept 13, 2:00 p.m. ET
40 min taped interview
Americans United for the Separation of Church and State "Culture Shocks"
- syndicated to 6 stations
5. Mon. Sept 13, 3:20 p.m. ET
30 min. taped interview
“Issues & Ideas”
KCBX - FM, (NPR) San Luis Obispo
6. Mon. Sept 13, 4:00 pm ET
25-30 min. taped phone interview
KSFR "Santa Fe Radio Cafe"
Santa Fe, Santa Fe Public Radio,
Airs in the entire State of New Mexico
7. Tues. September 14, 9:10 a.m. ET
20 min. live interview
The 8:00 Buzz – WORT-FM
8. Tues. September 14, 10:00 a.m. ET
20-30 min. taped phone interview
KVON-AM, “Late Mornings” Napa, CA
9. Tues. Sept 14, Noon ET
12-20 min. taped interview
WTIP-FM, Grand Marais, Minnesota
10. Thurs. Sept 16, 8:00 p.m. ET
30-40 min. live interview
KPFT “The Progressive Forum”
Houston, TX (Pacifica)
11. Mon. Sept 20, 8:40 AM ET
10 min. live interview
WCBQ--Oxford, NC; WHNC--Henderson, NC
12. Mon, Sept. 20, 10:30 a.m. ET
15 min. live interview
KPOJ “The Morning Show w/ Carl Wolfson”
13. Mon., Sept. 20, 4:00 pm ET
50 min. live phone interview
WBAI "Talk Back"
New York, NY
14. Tues. Sept 28, 3:00 p.m. ET
30 min. taped interview
Michigan Public Radio (NPR)
15. Tues. Sept 28, 7 p.m. ET
20 min taped phone interview
Beneath the Surface – KPFK, N. Hollywood
16. Wed. Sept 29, 10:30 a.m. ET
10 min. taped phone interview
KAXE (100,000 watt NPR affiliate)
Grand Rapids, MN
17. Friday Oct. 1, 3:00 p.m. ET
45 min live phone interview w/breaks
Civil War Talk Radio
18. Wed. Oct 20, 11 a.m. ET
20-25 min. taped interview
Voices of Our World
Nationally syndicated to over 100 stations
(programming run by the Maryknoll, progressive religious community)
Tuesday, September 07, 2010
Uprising Radio Program with James Loewen discussing "The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader" is online
And you can listen to the interview at this link:
From the web page:
"Ask Americans about why Southern states ceded in 1861 to form the Confederate States of America, and chances are, they will describe it as a battle over states’ rights. That’s what author and historian James Loewen has found in his travels across the country. But in delving into the actual documents of the time, Loewen shows that the cessation of 11 Southern states centered on the institution of slavery. In his new book The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader: The “Great Truth” About the “Lost Cause,” Loewen sets the historical record straight about a time in American history that is often invoked by conservatives today. Nearly 150 years after the Civil War he makes the definitive case that cessation and the Confederacy were about preserving slavery and white supremacy. "
Sorry about the very short notice.
He will be speaking on the "Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader." The show is syndicated across the Pacifica network.
Jim tells me that he is doing two radio shows per day, so we are getting the word out.
Friday, September 03, 2010
This is the actual text.
His Britannic Majesty, acknowledges the said United States, viz. New-Hampshire, Massachusetts-Bay, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North-Carolina, South-Carolina, Georgia, to be free sovereign and independent States; that he treats them as such; and for himself, his heirs and successors, relinquishes all claims to the government, propriety and territorial rights of the same, and every part thereof.
You can read it online as it was printed in the Statues-at-Large here at http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lawhome.html and go to the Statues at Large, Vol. 8, page 80. On page 81 is Article 1.
First note that it is "independent States," and that "States" is capitalized. It is a proper noun and is not referring to states in general. "States" is short for United States. If you take the viz. clause out, the sentence is:
His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States to be free, sovereign and independent [United] States; ....
The treaty is saying the United States is an independent [United] States. "States" is short for United States. The viz. is just explaining of which former colonies these States are. It wouldn't do to have the United States be declared independent while his Britannic majesty was still claiming one of the former colonies.
Neo-Confederates sometimes like to have the Article 1 in capital letters so that the meaning of the text is obscured or have "States" with a lower case "s" to obscure its meaning.
Article 1 is merely saying, the United States is independent and making sure that all the former colonies are included.
Finally, when does the King of Britain define what American government would be, or a peace treaty with a formerly hostile power define what American government is? What the King of Britain thinks American government is or is not is irrelevant. That is what independence was all about. The first constitution of the United States was The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union.
It the intention was that each state was an independent sovereign state individually, the word "each" would be used and "States" not capitalized.
The rest of the treaty implies that it is one sovereign nation involved. For example, the boundary described in the treaty is for the United States as a whole, and the boundaries of the individual states are not described.
The mind of neo-Confederacy is constantly straining to grasp straws. When they are contradicted they resort to name calling.
Thursday, September 02, 2010
The web page for the bookstore is at:
I plan to blog a notice for each speaking engagement by James Loewen concerning the book.
Monday, August 30, 2010
The editor's column on the web site is here:
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Friday, August 27, 2010
It is the daily newspaper of the Civil War since 1996.
They have 1.5 million hits per month. (Ref. http://www.civilwarinteractive.com/advertising3.htm)
Popular Posts Last 30 days
Historian Eric Foner interviews historian Matthew Karp about his book, "This Vast Southern Empire: Slaveholders at the Helm of American Foreign Policy"The interview is at this link: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/03/slavery-civil-war-us-south-dubois-foner-karp/ I am reading Matthew Kar...
I was down in Harrisburg, PA to visit and review the National Civil War Museum and listen to Kevin Levin's presentation. CLICK ON ALL PI...
http://ew.com/tv/2017/02/14/portlandia-clip-kyle-maclachlan-portland-secedes/ The link has some clips of the show "Portlandia" w...
Andrew P. Napolitano claims to have been on a list of possible Supreme Court nominees. He is a prolific writer for Lew Rockwell.Andrew P. Napolitano's claim to have been on a list of possible Supreme Court nominees is in the news. http://www.politico.com/story/2...
It is reported that Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant is a dues paying member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans in this article in the New ...
Letter to President Trump asking him to not send a wreath to the Arlington Confederate Monument is done. UPDATE:The letter has gone through five drafts, but it is finished. Also finished is a reference sheet for the letter documenting sources for vario...
This Vanity Fair article is very useful in discussing Stephen Bannon's ideology. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/03/what-steve-ba...
I visited a white nationalist park in a city dedicated to maintaining that interpretation. I spent three days there. Did plenty of pictures ...
Geraldo Rivera resigns from Yale University post in protest over Calhoun College being renamed Grace HopperThe following are links to articles about Geraldo Rivera resigning as a Calhoun associate fellow because of the renaming of Calhoun College ...
Turns out that the EU official is being humorous. https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/03/juncker-ohio/521385/ However, I don...
Popular Posts All Time
Interesting column in the "Washington Post" about the Republican party's effort to repeal the 14th AmendmentThe article is here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/10/AR2010081004586.html?hpid=opinionsbox1 Incidentally...
At this link is an article on the response to the likely election of Obama as president of the United States in the Canadian National Post ....
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 stumb...
Washington Post columnist Colbert King has an opinion piece "Rise of the New Confederacy," about the Republican Party and the Tea...
There is a new movie coming out, "12 Years a Slave." The link to the review and a trailer is at this link: http://www.slate.com/...
The title of the essay is, "Time to Lose the Confederate Flag: Some Heresies for the Civil War Sesquicentennial," by Craig Silver....
The League of the South (LS) put up a bill board in Alabama like their billboard in Florida. This is a link about the Florida billboard at...
The Southern Baptist Convention has passed a resolution condemning the Confederate battle flag. An article announcing the passage of a res...
The "Daily Beast" has an article titled, "Racists on the Prowl," which is about the head of the Towson White Student Uni...
Very interesting article at: http://www.frumforum.com/its-hamilton-vs-jefferson-all-over-again More and more people are beginning to gras...