http://scv2020reunion.com/
On the page for the reunion is a poster with the headline "We Don't Reconstruct .. We Reload."
There is a picture of a Confederate soldier reloading a gun. I am just wondering if this is the best image and slogan after the massacre in Charleston in 2015.
This is an article I had published in the Dallas Morning News.
https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/08/17/confederate-heritage-root-recent-tragedies-troubles
Thursday, February 28, 2019
Wednesday, February 27, 2019
What happened to the 2020 Sons of Confederate Veterans National Reunion website? UPDATE:
UPDATE: It is back up.
By the way, the slogan "We Don't Reconstruct ... We Reload," sort of makes me think of Dylann Roof.
THIS WAS POSTED EARLIER.
The Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) were gearing up for a national reunion in 2020 in St. Augustine, Florida. I let the activists there know about it. They started asking a lot of questions of city government about it.
Suddenly the website for the SCV National Reunion disappears.
Click on this link and you get a sort of empty BlueHost page. http://scv2020reunion.com/
But it did exist.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9xPjqyGH1QIJ:scv2020reunion.com/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
However, it is interesting that this website had instructions so archive.org didn't archive it. SCV is running scared.
And the cache is archived.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190227162915/http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9xPjqyGH1QIJ:scv2020reunion.com/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
There are two major development here and a minor development here.
1. The major development is that it seems the SVC fled. They were looking at activists making their reunion in St. Augustine an issue for over a year. Of course it could be that it is some secret website.
2. The archiving was blocked. That means that the efforts of the SCV are being self-erased from the historical record. They are diminishing themselves. When you go secret, you lose visibility. Preventing archiving and going with a secret website all means that you are diminishing your public presence and you are limiting your effectiveness.
As you make your activities more and more secret it makes what you are doing seem like a dirty secret.
Of course it could be that a website pops up later.
3. Another major development could be that the SCV for future reunions will have to avoid major urban centers and progressive regions and seek out places that are rural and in sympathy with their beliefs. It will be an ever shrinking geography.
At some point having an SCV reunion in your town will be a sign of backwardness and bring ridicule on the city and even in the most rural location some local resentment of the SCV's presence will exist.
By the way, the slogan "We Don't Reconstruct ... We Reload," sort of makes me think of Dylann Roof.
THIS WAS POSTED EARLIER.
The Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) were gearing up for a national reunion in 2020 in St. Augustine, Florida. I let the activists there know about it. They started asking a lot of questions of city government about it.
Suddenly the website for the SCV National Reunion disappears.
Click on this link and you get a sort of empty BlueHost page. http://scv2020reunion.com/
But it did exist.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9xPjqyGH1QIJ:scv2020reunion.com/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
However, it is interesting that this website had instructions so archive.org didn't archive it. SCV is running scared.
And the cache is archived.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190227162915/http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9xPjqyGH1QIJ:scv2020reunion.com/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
There are two major development here and a minor development here.
1. The major development is that it seems the SVC fled. They were looking at activists making their reunion in St. Augustine an issue for over a year. Of course it could be that it is some secret website.
2. The archiving was blocked. That means that the efforts of the SCV are being self-erased from the historical record. They are diminishing themselves. When you go secret, you lose visibility. Preventing archiving and going with a secret website all means that you are diminishing your public presence and you are limiting your effectiveness.
As you make your activities more and more secret it makes what you are doing seem like a dirty secret.
Of course it could be that a website pops up later.
3. Another major development could be that the SCV for future reunions will have to avoid major urban centers and progressive regions and seek out places that are rural and in sympathy with their beliefs. It will be an ever shrinking geography.
At some point having an SCV reunion in your town will be a sign of backwardness and bring ridicule on the city and even in the most rural location some local resentment of the SCV's presence will exist.
Sunday, February 24, 2019
Not so enduring anymore
The title of the book is "Confederate Monuments: Enduring Symbols of the South and the War Between the States.
Not so enduring anymore.
Thursday, February 14, 2019
About the "Disturbing Graves" pre-text. UPDATE: Texas Sons of Confederate Veterans upset with this post.
Seems I upset some neo-Confederates. I posted a link to a posting by the Texas SCV in DeConfederate Dallas.
https://www.facebook.com/edward.sebesta/posts/10158268078544829
They are deleting and reposting this item to break my links, so you might want to just go to their facebook page to see the post.
What you can see in this posting is that for neo-Confederates facts don't seem to matter.
ORIGINAL POST FOLLOWS
One of the issues that the Texas Sons of Confederate Veterans is trying to push that moving the Confederate War Memorial from Pioneer Park is somehow sacriligious because it will disturb graves.
https://www.facebook.com/edward.sebesta/posts/10158268078544829
They are deleting and reposting this item to break my links, so you might want to just go to their facebook page to see the post.
What you can see in this posting is that for neo-Confederates facts don't seem to matter.
ORIGINAL POST FOLLOWS
One of the issues that the Texas Sons of Confederate Veterans is trying to push that moving the Confederate War Memorial from Pioneer Park is somehow sacriligious because it will disturb graves.
This issue is worth examining to show how much the neo-Confederates like to just make stuff up and get sanctimonious about it.
https://www.facebook.com/TexasSCV/photos/a.1230244337023283/2074016415979400
https://www.facebook.com/TexasSCV/photos/a.1230244337023283/2074125912635117
https://www.facebook.com/TexasSCV/photos/a.1230244337023283/2074126705968371
The fact is when it was moved to Pioneer Park from its old location to make way for a highway there were no complaints about possibly disturbing graves.
The monument is actually made of individual units which can be detached and moved. The only thing that will endup being disturbed is the members of the SCV and they seem to have been already disturbed.
Further a Dallas Morning News article from 1966 shows how hypocritical the Sons of Confederate Veterans are being. It is titled, "Park Board Considers Relocation of Graves," July 6, 1966, page 12.
From the article:
"The board discussed two requests at the meeting.Who was making this request? From the article.
One was for reloca[t]ing remains of more than 100 Confederate war veterans. ..."
"John B. Hood Camp, Sons of Confederate Veterans, requested that the city relocate the remains of Confederate soldiers now buried in the Confederate Cemetery on Electra Street, just off Pine Street in South Dallas.
The organization wants them placed in an area adjacent to the Confederate monument in Pioneer Park, next to Dallas Memorial Auditorium. .... The group also has asked the city to change the name of Pioneer Park to Confederate and Pioneer Park or Confederate-Pioneer Park."The reason the Hood Camp gave for why they wanted these 100 plus Confederate soldiers to be dug up was that the new location would be more central in Dallas and seen by more people.
The Sons of Confederate Veterans seemed not to worry then about disturbing a grave even to the point of digging up and reburying the Confederate Veterans.
Dallas moves to remove another Confederate statue. Richmond however still stuck in the Confederacy
The Smithsonian article about the vote to remove the Confederate War Memorial in Pioneer Park. It is online here.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews-history-archaeology/dallas-city-council-votes-remove-massive-confederate-war-memorial-180971503/
This is the 2nd statue it is going to remove.
This Smithsonian has changed a lot since it was publishing stuff criticizing suggesting that Richmond, Virginia, which still hasn't gotten rid of any Confederate monuments, was somehow wiser than New Orleans which got rid of them all.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-richmond-has-gotten-right-about-interpreting-its-confederate-history-180963354/
When you are behind Dallas that must really hurt.
This is the town of M.E. Bradford and William Murchison. All their little dreams of neo-Confederacy Gone With the Wind!
As I have stated before, each time a statue is removed, the ones that remain seem more anomalous. With Austin, San Antonio having gotten rid of Confederate stuff, and Dallas moving forward, it won't be long until someone in Houston will decided it is time to move forward.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews-history-archaeology/dallas-city-council-votes-remove-massive-confederate-war-memorial-180971503/
This is the 2nd statue it is going to remove.
This Smithsonian has changed a lot since it was publishing stuff criticizing suggesting that Richmond, Virginia, which still hasn't gotten rid of any Confederate monuments, was somehow wiser than New Orleans which got rid of them all.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-richmond-has-gotten-right-about-interpreting-its-confederate-history-180963354/
When you are behind Dallas that must really hurt.
This is the town of M.E. Bradford and William Murchison. All their little dreams of neo-Confederacy Gone With the Wind!
As I have stated before, each time a statue is removed, the ones that remain seem more anomalous. With Austin, San Antonio having gotten rid of Confederate stuff, and Dallas moving forward, it won't be long until someone in Houston will decided it is time to move forward.
No major metropolis wants to feel their are more retrograde than Dallas. Houston will start moving to re-examine its memorials.
As time goes on smaller metropolises will want to look at getting rid of their Confederate statues also, since Confederate statues will stand as a mark of backwardness.
Neo-Confederacy is crumbling a statue at a time.
Friday, February 08, 2019
Clyde N. Wilson publishes guide to Civil War books, You can see who the neo-Confederate favorites are
Shotwell has published "The War Between the States: 60 Essential Books, A Southern Reader's Guide," and I am eagerly looking forward to going through it.
Why, because it shows which books are loved by neo-Confederates which tells something about the book and the book's author. It is amusing to see some books which I have always thought to be sympathetic to the neo-Confederate view, or having some very strong neo-Confederate elements in it, or just books I thought to be bad, are in this book which also promotes some real neo-Confederate fringe. The embarrasment of the association, well it should be there, but with some of these authors it probably isn't.
It also shows how different types of publishing work together to sustain neo-Confederacy.
Is this guilt by association? I suppose there could be a book written by an author which neo-Confederates could like, but the author abhors neo-Confederacy.
However, in many of these books it is fairly clear that they are sustaining of a neo-Confederate world view even though the author might have one view or another. The books truly deserve their inclusion in this set of recommended books.
Some of the books are:
"Confederate War" by Gary Gallagher.
"The Civil War" by Shelby Foote.
"So Good A Cause: A Decade of the Southern Partisan" by Oran P. Smith.
"The South Was Right!" by the Kennedy Twins
"Illustrated Confederate Reader" by Rod Gragg. It is a book where you would never read the declaration of causes why a state would secede.
This is a good book to establish the neo-Confederate canon for the Civil War.
Why, because it shows which books are loved by neo-Confederates which tells something about the book and the book's author. It is amusing to see some books which I have always thought to be sympathetic to the neo-Confederate view, or having some very strong neo-Confederate elements in it, or just books I thought to be bad, are in this book which also promotes some real neo-Confederate fringe. The embarrasment of the association, well it should be there, but with some of these authors it probably isn't.
It also shows how different types of publishing work together to sustain neo-Confederacy.
Is this guilt by association? I suppose there could be a book written by an author which neo-Confederates could like, but the author abhors neo-Confederacy.
However, in many of these books it is fairly clear that they are sustaining of a neo-Confederate world view even though the author might have one view or another. The books truly deserve their inclusion in this set of recommended books.
Some of the books are:
"Confederate War" by Gary Gallagher.
"The Civil War" by Shelby Foote.
"So Good A Cause: A Decade of the Southern Partisan" by Oran P. Smith.
"The South Was Right!" by the Kennedy Twins
"Illustrated Confederate Reader" by Rod Gragg. It is a book where you would never read the declaration of causes why a state would secede.
This is a good book to establish the neo-Confederate canon for the Civil War.