The Confederate flag is down the tubes in South Carolina, elsewhere Confederate flags are going to be increasingly rejected

This article is titled, "SC GOP scuttles Confederate flag proposal before convention."

http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article150186207.html

With Sheri Few's campaign for congress based on defending the Confederate flag went down to defeat and she only got 5% of the vote in the Republican primary, I think the South Carolina Republicans realized that there is really no substantial or even minor or slightly significant support for the Confederate flag in South Carolina and the Spartanburg County GOP resolution was dumped in the garbage.

The South Carolina Republican Party has dropped the Confederate flag and it is probably really clear to any politician with any ambition that supporting the Confederate flag will make you unwelcome in the Republican Party and additionally get you identified with Sheri Few http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2017/05/sheri-few-they-dont-love-you-gets-less.html#.WRZl-tIrKrw and Chris Corley http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2016/12/south-carolina-rep-chris-corley.html#.WRZl09IrKrw

Republicans in other states will see a developing trend and the Confederate flag isn't going to be welcome in a lot of places.

Mississippi Republicans will likely be informed that they are embarrassing the Republican Party nationally and that they should change their flag.

I think the battle over Confederate flags is going to be over Mississippi and a few rural towns. Now it is going to be over Confederate monuments

ABC News uses expression "Cult of the Lost Cause" in a headline.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/orleans-removes-confederate-statues-honor-cult-lost/story?id=47346477

Above is the URL to a story which used "Cult of the Lost Cause" in the headline. When they start calling something a "cult" it is a sign that whatever it is is seen as being something bad.

The article has some really good explanations as to why the monuments need to go.

I think this article shows how there is a shift in the establishment favoring the removal of these monuments.

The revolution against Confederate monuments has started in New Orleans

A second Confederate statue in New Orleans, one of Jefferson Davis, has come down last night.

I was reading this article on ABC News.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/orleans-school-warns-parents-confederate-statue-removal/story?id=47339045

In particular I noticed the picture of members of the African American fraternity Alpha Phi Alpha shown holding hands and praying. I could see in their faces that the statues coming down was a revolutionary experience, deeply felt.

I doubt they are interested in chattering about contextualizing these monuments or putting interpretive plaques or some "fearless girl" contextualization or redoing a monument of a Confederate leader for one of their non-Confederate actions in life. I rather doubt that they are interested in the silliness express in these blog postings.

http://cwmemory.com/2017/03/28/does-the-robert-e-lee-monument-need-a-fearless-girl/

http://cwmemory.com/2017/05/08/the-redeemable-confederate/

These people praying aren't interested in a "redeemable" Confederate.

I don't think the chattering about erasing history or "teachable moments" will be taken seriously.

The other statues are going down and staying down. I don't think that the state of Louisiana has the power to keep them up. If they try the state of Louisiana will be in an uproar.

But this wasn't the most important thing I realized in reading the article and thinking about what is happening.

When the 4th statue goes down it will show that it can be done when the people of a city decide that the Confederate statues need to go. It shows that it can be done and only needs determination that it shall be done against all obstacles. City of Baltimore, are you paying attention?

It has also made clear to the public who really is behind these statues, it isn't just some small white nationalist groups, or the United Daughters of the Confederacy or the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

It has been revealed that the real supporters of the Confederate monuments are the historical societies and sections of the white establishment. The mask has fallen and years afterwards people in New Orleans will remember who came out to support the Confederate monuments.

And then the question will be raised in every major city with a significant African American community why does that city still have Confederate monuments? I think it could happen that the African American leadership in a city will find that they are judged by both residents of the city and nationally on whether they have gotten rid of the Confederate monuments in their city.

I don't think excuses will be accepted. I think also how leaders in a community act in regards to Confederate monuments will be it really clear to the public what type of individuals they are.

So monuments elsewhere will come down. Even where state legislators have passed laws preventing their removal, because legislatures can be picketed, denounced, and be in an uproar of controversy when it is determined by the residents of a city that the monuments need to go.

When the monuments in New Orleans go down, what will the reaction in Baltimore where their Confederate monuments are still standing not going anywhere?

When monuments stay I think it will reveal which African Americans are really owned by white elites.

The victory over Confederate monuments in New Orleans will inspire activists in every city to try to get their Confederate monuments taken down and to persevere. Often the effort is a 3 month thing and then activists give up. Another lesson of New Orleans is that perseverance pays off.

As one city gets rid of Confederate monuments the pressure and drive to get rid of Confederate monuments in other cities will increase.

When most of the major cities have their Confederate monuments removed, the major cities which still have them will look bad, racist, backward, stupid and their chamber of commerce group and other groups interested in attracting employers will decide that the Confederate monuments need to go.

For small towns which still have Confederate monuments, they will find that observers will point to the Confederate monuments, as a sign of the town being retrograde, and a quick short hand to summarize the town as being retrograde. People will stay, "It is the type of town that still has a Confederate monument."

Groups having economic interests in that town will want the Confederate monuments to go.

It all depends on the 3rd and 4th monument going. If the process is halted successfully the movement to get rid of Confederate monuments could stall out or halt. But when the 4th monument goes down, the whole revolutionary process will open up across the nation.

I hope mayor Landrieu hurries, because the Sons of Confederate Veterans are working to stop the process. I think they know very well what is at stake and will undertake any effort necessary to stop. They know as well as anyone that when the 4th monument goes down, neo-Confederacy will start going down with it.

I personally hope to help these efforts. I retire shortly and I will be glad to drive to cities and introduce myself.

This article shows Jefferson Davis being taken away. All strapped up and being carried away.

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/05/confederate_monument_jefferson.html

At the trial of Roy Oliver, the police officer charged with the murder of Jordan Edwards, they need to exclude neo-Confederate jurors.

The following reporting on the shooting of Balch Springs, Texas teenager Jordan Edwards brings up many details I haven't seen before.

After Jordan Edwards was shot by the police and his brothers saw Jordan bleed out, they were handcuffed. As is often the case, I found this information about the handcuffs in a news source outside of Dallas.

http://www.kens5.com/news/politics/lawmakers-demand-change-after-police-shooting-of-balch-springs-teen/437442222

It turns out that the police chief had to state a retraction of Roy Oliver's claim that the car was backing aggressively towards them because the video showed that it was some young people trying to leave a bad situation. How many other times was Roy Oliver's testimony not really true? How many people have been convicted?

One thing I think should be done, if a police officer is caught out with testimony  or an account at great variance with the facts, we don't have to decided whether it is lying, all court cases where the testimony of the officer was critical to the conviction need to be thrown out and the prisoner is still in jail released immediately. Traffic tickets should be subject to an immediate refund.

Convicting Roy Oliver will be tough experts say, even though it is fairly obvious as is explained in this news article.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/article149021384.html

Police officers are let off the hook for murders and other violent behavior.

http://www.twincities.com/2017/05/04/st-paul-police-officer-michael-soucheray-not-guilty-after-being-charged-with-striking-teen/

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/02/us/alton-sterling-justice-department.html?_r=0

I think that one reason contributing to police officers being let off the hook is that jurors with racial attitudes, especially those with racial attitudes that they don't recognize as such are allowed on juries and they find some rational to let these violent officers off the hook.

When I in jury selections they will ask if anyone is a white supremacist or a member of a white supremacist group. No one leaves. Though there shouldn't be any white supremacists on a jury, this question should be recognized as incompetent or an avoidance of asking the critical questions to exclude people with racial attitudes.

The chances of a person who is self-identified white supremacist is rather small. The chances of a person with racial attitudes is rather high, probably a large percentage. What needs to be done is to have questions to screen out these individuals so that they are not in the jury and in particular they can be screen out with cause.

The attorneys are allow to screen out a few jurors without cause. This means usually the attorney for whom it is advantages screens out all the African American jurors and the jury ends up being biased against African Americans.

I think one question to screen out jurors should be "Have you ever used the expression, 'I am not prejudiced, but ...'"  In Dallas, Texas after asking that question you might have a greatly reduced pool of white jurors left over from the screening.

I think historical questions would be good to identify attitudes. I think that it should be asked whether the person is a member or has been a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, United Daughters of the Confederacy, Dallas Southern Memorial Association, Children of the Confederacy, League of the South, and Council of Conservative Citizens.

Further it should be asked if they participate in any Confederate re-enactor unit.

But most importantly their attitudes towards the Confederate flag, monuments and the Confederacy itself should be inquired. I think it would go a long way towards excluding persons who say, "I am not prejudiced, but ..." or have racial attitudes.

Dr. Euan Hague and I propose this in this online Black Commentator article.

http://www.blackcommentator.com/507/507_confederacy_jury_selection_sebesta_hague_guests_share.html

For example, a majority of Americans don't think the Confederate flag is racist. I think excluding these individuals would go a long way to correcting the composition of a jury.

Other lines of historical questioning could be done also. I don't think support for the Confederacy is the only thing. Did the person think Africans were benefited by being brought over from Africa? I  run into this sometimes in Dallas.

Right now we are on track to having a trial where Roy Oliver will be acquitted.

Corey Stewart in Virginia, next election to watch

Corey Stewart, candidate for governor of Virginia, is making his support for the Confederate monuments a major part of his appeal for voters. This is an article detailing Stewart's neo-Confederate efforts.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/04/25/minnesotan_corey_stewart_confederate_monuments_and_virginia_governor_s_race.html

These are some of his neo-Confederate videos on YouTube

This is his YouTube page.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9C-N-GmHHShkjO9ws97quw

At the moment the lead video on his page is the video where Corey Stewart is promoted as a defender of Confederate monuments and his political opponent as being against Confederate monuments.

This is the direct link to the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2tIZxud4J8

CLICK ON VIDEO TO SEE THE WHOLE THING. Blog post continued after video.




This is his stand on the issues. I don't see the Confederacy mentioned, but I found it in his news items.

http://www.coreystewart.com/issues


Confederate related news items on his web page are:

http://www.coreystewart.com/they_will_not_stop_with_lee_and_beauregard


http://www.coreystewart.com/stewart_to_charlottesville_city_council_stop_this_historical_vandalism


Like Sheri Few, Corey  Stewart is running a campaign in imitation of Donald Trump hoping that like Donald Trump he will win.

The risk to the neo-Confederates is that if like Few, he doesn't do well at the polls there will be an assessment that the political support for the Confederacy is much less than might be imagined.

Also, an electoral defeat for Stewart, along with the defeat of Few, which reinforce each other. It might be argued that if one lost and one did well, that the losing campaign was an exception. If both lose it will be considered that the political advantage of campaigning for the Confederacy isn't there and in fact a negative factor in an election.

If both do badly it is not likely that any serious candidate in the future will see campaigning as a supporter of the Confederacy advantageous and will in fact see it as a negative thing to be avoided. Being thought of being pro-Confederate itself will be seen as negative to be avoided.

This will not just be in Virginia and in South Carolina but in all states with Confederate monuments. As monuments start being removed, places with monuments will be perceived as being backward and undesirable places. Companies will worry about locating factories there because it will be difficult to relocate talent there.

Mississippi with its flag will seem really retrograde and undesirable.

I think state legislators and local officials might still show up at Confederate events, but I think this will decline also.

I notice that the word "neo-Confederate" is entering general use. As neo-Confederates lose political influence I think more people will be willing to use it.

Sheri Few they don't love you. Gets less than 5% of the vote. The Confederacy is going down.UPDATE:

Sheri Few running in a Congressional primary in South Carolina to replace a Republican who went on to a position in the Trump administration.

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/TheBattery/archives/2017/05/03/the-agenda-voters-reject-gun-toting-confederate-flag-candidate-sc-delegation-divided-over-drilling-demint-officially-out

Her campaign denounced the lowering of the Confederate flag off the Capitol grounds. She had videos with a military style rifle.

I suspect that she thought that she could win the primary or be in the run off in a Donald Trump type campaign.

As it is, she got less than 5% of the vote.

People prior to the election probably weren't sure what the result might be. However, now it is revealed that there isn't a base of support for the Confederate flag, even in a conservative Republican district, and she is simply ridiculous and those who supported her thought of as being ridiculous also.

Hopefully her career is over. Besides the fact that she is probably not very well liked by the Republican Party establishment and many who have hopes for the Republican Party's future prospects others will not want to back a person who has lost so badly and has taken a stand strongly offensive to public opinion.

The larger impact then the termination of the political career of a loony is the message this election sends to other politicians. Not just politicians in South Carolina, but across the South.

Up to now it hasn't been clear really how much popular support there was for the neo-Confederate agenda. The Sons of Confederate Veterans and the United Daughters of the Confederacy probably could intimidate some rural state legislators.

Now it is revealed that there really isn't much of a constituency for the Confederate flag and similar things, and not many votes. Additionally pandering to the Confederacy risks a person being compared to Sheri Few. I can see a politician ridiculed with the slogan, "Who are you, Sheri Few?" Or some such thing.

Plus support for the Confederacy has been revealed as not having a lot of political support,  it is time to go get South Carolina Confederate monuments removed also.

With the antics of Sheri Few and former South Carolina Rep. Chris Corley, support for the Confederacy will tend to seem crazy in the public's mind.

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2016/12/south-carolina-rep-chris-corley.html#.WQ6BjNIrKiM

UPDATE

This is what happens when Republicans realize that pro-Confederate have not political clout.

http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article150186207.html

South Carolina GOP drops Confederate flag proposal passed by the Spartanburg County GOP.

I probably think that the Spartanburg County GOP who passed it, probably where encouraged to not do it again by the South Carolina state leadership. Alternatively the county passed it knowing that the state leadership will dump it.

So support for the Confederate flag is largely dead in South Carolina. Perhaps some errant municipality will fly a flag but it really is over for the Confederate flag there.

And if the Confederate flag is dead in South Carolina it is largely dead across the United States except for Mississippi and a few other regions.

Cinco de Mayo the Anti-Confederate holiday.

I refer readers to an earlier posting with photos of an exhibit at the Plaza de Cultura Y Arte

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2012/09/cinco-de-mayo-civil-war-exhibit-pictures.html#.WQxgg9IrKrw

Trump has "blundering generation" view of the Civil War. UPDATE.

TRUMP GIVES BLUNDERING GENERATION EXPLANATION FOR THE CIVIL WAR.


This is taught in our school books so it shouldn't be surprising that Donald Trump believes in it.

Not just marginal textbooks, but some of the most prominent and respected textbooks.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/trump-magna-cum-laude-from-the-dunning-school/524892/


UPDATE:

Incidentally, sign our petition asking Trump not to send a wreath to the Arlington Confederate memorial.

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/sign-2017-petition-to-president-trump.html

With supporters like these, Confederate monuments don't need enemies

http://www.wbrz.com/news/miss-man-upset-over-nola-confederate-monuments-removal-arrested-for-threatening-public-official/

John Steiner of Meridian Mississippi made a threat to kill officials in New Orleans to stop the removal of Confederate monuments. He also had this to say according to the article:

Steiner reportedly stated that "the only thing that would stop all this nonsense is that all coons had to die," according to arrest records. Steiner claimed that he would be coming to stand in front of the monuments with his guns and would shoot anyone who would stop him, according to arrest records.

I can't but think that John Steiner's statements will be an incentive to remove other statues. There will be those who would love to get racists to make fools of themselves and land themselves in jail.

Another story on John Steiner.

http://www.theadvocate.com/new_orleans/news/article_7a78d812-2ce4-11e7-8f64-7b074298fcb0.html


Maybe the following story should be filed unter "Heritage Not Hate."
 http://www.theadvocate.com/new_orleans/news/article_5e1296b2-2baa-11e7-b97b-174ab456e171.html

Driving across America to fight secession. Avoiding flying.

One antidote I think to secession is long distance driving. The United States of America is an amazing country with a beautiful landscape in most areas.

I think when you drive across America you have the opportunity to see vast landscapes and feel the immensity of our nation. You are also away from the television or other video devices and can just listen to music and reflect on things. It is perhaps a uniquely American form of meditation.

It also is a great way of learning in an intuitive way how secession is a totally stupid idea. While you are driving you can imaging what it would be like to dive 500 miles and having to stop several times and present a passport and perhaps a travel plan and have your car inspected, perhaps you might be part of a random pat down, and your baggage searched and your laptop and cell phone checked. Also, as you drive out of your little nation you are no longer among your fellow citizens, but you are a foreigner. As sure as the sun rises, there will be stereotypes and prejudices about your nationality.

Instead we can drive across the nation and where ever I go I am an American among Americans. I do need to acknowledge that for minority members of our society it is not this simple. However, I would say that being divided nationally would put another layer of division over this layer of division.


Also, if the place you are going is 600 miles or less I really have to wonder why you are flying. For 600 miles is the break even point for me to fly. If it is over 600 miles I might fly, but I will not fly less than 600 miles. There is no advantage to flying less than 600 miles and every reason not to.

1. You either have to drive to the airport and pay parking for the duration of the trip, or get someone to drive you there, or schedule a driver and be ready to go at the time of driver pick up. When you drive yourself you can leave when you want and any driving you do is in the direction of your destination.

2. You have to arrive at the airport really early. There can be traffic jams on the way to the airport, the airport can be suffering from traffic problems. Then there is the TSA which can have really long lines with some lanes idle. The wait can be long while you are lugging your brief case, suit case, etc.

3. Then there is the TSA security. You take off your shoes, take out your keys, take off your belt, laptop, cell phone, coins, which go into a bin which is X-Ray scanned. You watch it really closely. Then after you are through being scanned you run to get your bin and get your cell phone and stuff before it is stolen. The benches are often not really well placed to get your shoes on.

Then there is the chance you might get a pat down or strip search.

4. Then you wait in a place with lots and lots of noise and endless announcements. The food and drink is way over priced.

5. You wait in this noisy place until the plane arrives at the gate, unless they move the gate and you are running to it.

6. When you get on, there can be overbooking and you might be selected to be removed.

7. Then your plane can be delayed for boarding or once boarding is completed it can be delayed.

8. Boarding is really a hassle. They have crammed more seats in and everyone is bringing on luggage and not checking it which we will discuss. It is slow. There is a fight for space because there really isn't overhead space.

** So by the time the plane takes off and reaches its cruising altitude it can easy take 1.5 to 2.5 hours. You could have driven from your house, gotten on the highway and be 70 to 150 miles along the way.

9. I don't check my luggage and always bring aboard my laptop because I don't want my stuff stolen. I believe others feel this way also.. I had a co-worker who had something disappear and he spent months going through channels trying to get compensated. Then there is the rough handling of your stuff.

10. When in flight you can purchase a tiny snack for a lot of money.

11. Hope the person in front of you doesn't lower their seat into your face. The small seats will allow very little personal space. Hopefully everyone practices good hygiene. The overworked employees are often surly. Services are slow. I flew first class on an airline and my tray would not come down and fit the space and I had to hold the tray with one hand and eat with the other. Major airline.

12. When you arrive you will have delays as your plane waits for a gate or moves across the airport, then the slow process of unloading. You will have to walk to the sidewalk, get on a bus to the car rental place, wait in line for a car, walk to the car, fill out paper work, and then figure out how to drive out of the airport and to your destination. Later you will return the car via the same process. There are cases where people are trapped on board a plane for 12 hours or more because the airline can't get a gate.

13. The airline systems have very little capacity for disruption, so if there is a snowstorm a thousand miles away, or thunderstorm  somewhere and your plane doesn't arrive, If you are on a return flight you face camping out in the airport for hours. Then there are the occasions where the computer systems go down and the airline can't board passengers.

14. Finally there are idiot things. I was on an international flight and the surly flight attendants left a strap hanging out when they closed the doors. So fuel had to be dumped at a high altitude so we could land in Atlanta. When we arrived in London hours and hours late, we didn't get any help from the airlines to our destination to Scotland. Yes, if anything goes wrong, the airlines just don't care.

15. Connecting flights: Are you insane! You have a connecting flight and you aren't driving. You really need to consider driving unless it is a really long distance. I remember being trapped in Houston on plane that landed but had to wait for thunderstorms to clear to take off.

If it is another plane, you will get your exercise traveling to another terminal maybe, to get your flight, unless it has taken off and didn't wait for you.

*** It is easily faster to drive someplace if it is 400 miles or less than fly with no risks of some airline inanity holding you up or trapping in a plane with overflowing toilets.. People who take planes from Dallas to Houston or Dallas to Austin are idiots. 400 miles is simply a break point in terms of time traveled. I will explain why I have a 600 mile break point.

ADVANTAGES OF DRIVING

A. You don't have to rent a car and are spared the expense, you don't have to go through the whole process of renting a car and returning it. And you have your car which you are familiar with. You won't be paying extra charges on gas. You won't be quickly looking for a gas station to fill up a tank before you return your car.

B. On the way if you are hungry you can stop and get what you want easily and the price won't be extortionate. The service usually is friendly. It will be something reasonably palatable or maybe delicious, or something new that you are first discovering. You can have your favorite places along the way.

C. McDonald's restrooms don't induce claustrophobia and usually are clean.

D. You can take as much luggage as you want to fit in your car. You can take what you need for your trip not constrained by fear of stuff being stolen from your luggage, rejected by the TSA, or baggage charges.

F. No lugging around your stuff everywhere. You arrive at your fiends and just carry the luggage in or at the hotel put on a push cart and in a short distance you are at the elevator and then to your room.

G. No taking off your shoes, belt, putting valuables into a bin and worrying about them being stolen. No X-ray of your stuff. No IDS. It doesn't matter if your state's driver's license is TSA approved or not. No waiting and waiting for long lines to be processed by unhappy employees. No strip searches, no patting down.Your bags won't be searched. You won't have to show TSA employees your cellphone or laptop contents. You simply won't have to see their faces.

H. You will have time to reflect and think and when you arrive you will might be a little tired from the long drive, but not as worn out as you might be from flying. You won't be wasting mental energy trying to figure out which airline might be better than the horrible one you just experienced. You will likely be in a good frame of mind and not need time to recuperate from air travel.

I. Along the way you can stop and stretch when you stop to get gas, stop at a rest stop, stop at a restaurant, or just stop to stretch.  You will not be trapped in a really small chair for hours.

J. You can have real bottles of shampoo, body wash, cologne, lotions, etc. and not over priced small bottled liquids manufactured for air travel.

K. You can pack fingernail clippers or what ever you need for your trip. You won't have to check up what the latest TSA regulation and will avoid throwing a valuable into a bin.

L. If you see something interesting along the way you can stop and check it out.

I put the break point at 600 miles to drive instead of flying in the case where you need to be there within a time window. Like you are going there tonight for activities the next day.

For when I have time to travel and don't have to be there right away I might take two days driving.

LONG DISTANCE DRIVING:

I can drive 10 to 13 hours a day. These are the tricks.

1. Good posture. Your posterior needs to be in the base of the chair. Sit up straight. Don't slouch. Otherwise you will feel aches and pains.

2. Don't be fiddling with the radio and stuff. Your back is bend over and it will hurt eventually.

3. Cruise control if you got it, or your leg in a comfortable position on the gas pedal.

4. Put your wallet someplace safe and not in a back or side pocket.

5. Stop every hour and stretch. Don't skip to make time. Also, when you stop often you will find that you did indeed need to use the rest facilities.

6. Use major highways when possible, avoid short cuts. Highway driving is comfortable.

7. Pack a bottle of aspirin, just  in case.

SO  DRIVE ACROSS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and enjoy seeing the nation and interesting things and have a pleasant trip and fight secession.

Columbia University Press does blog posting on Univ. of Texas Press blog posing

Columbia Univ. Press blog picks up book blog posting from the University of Texas Blog post.

Just search down and you will see it was given a mention.

From the blog:

"Important posts on history, public policy, and environmentalism also featured heavily this week. At the University of Texas Press blog, scholars Euan Hague and Edward H. Sebesta took a fresh and urgent look at the influence of American ‘neo-confederacy’ in the age of Donald Trump."

http://www.cupblog.org/?p=21093

I think people are picking up on our  message about the neo-Confederate movement.

New Orleans gets better! Sons of Confederate Veterans has declared a boycott of New Orleans.

http://www.scv.org/new/new-orleans-louisana-boycott/

New Orleans has gotten even better. The Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) has declared a boycott if New Orleans. 

I don't think the SCV members contribute much to the New Orleans economy. But I do think that their boycotting it makes New Orleans a more desirable city since because if neo-Confederates are boycotting New Orleans they are not visiting it. 

The only losers in this situations are the racist historical societies which tried to defend the Confederate monuments and they might have a drop off in visitors and they need to lose as much revenue and support as possible. 

This is a new incentive for a city to get rid of Confederate monuments, change names, etc. You might be able to get the Sons of Confederate Veterans to declare a boycott and reduce the number of neo-Confederates in your city. It is a twofer. 

The SCV doesn't realize that most major large cities don't earn a significant, or even much at all of their income from pandering to neo-Confederates. New Orleans isn't Gettysburg. 

I think other cities would be delighted to be boycotted by the SCV. Many states would be delighted to be boycotted by members of the SCV. 

Trevor Noah rips neo-Confederacy to shreds

Trevor Noah rips neo-Confederacy, that is the silly "Heritage Not Hate," nonsense to shreds.

I found this video via Kevin Levin's blog. He has a lot of interesting information on it. You can learn from someone you disagree with.  Levin is probably thinking that this video endorses his "fearless girl" concept. Well dream on Levin.

This is the link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUrZOZRnbME

This really eviscerates the various arguments given by neo-Confederates for their activities.

For those who give excuses to keep these statues all the while talking about how they voted for Obama or aren't racist, etc. I think this ridicule will at least let them know that a great many people will find their excuses ridiculous.

CLICK on the video to see it all.  I think neo-Confederacy is going down.

University of Texas re-launches our book, "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction."

http://utpressnews.blogspot.com/2017/04/making-america-confederate-again.html#sthash.FFzQ5bmG.dpbs

Yesterday the University of Texas Press did a blog posting about our book, "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction."

The title of the blog posting is, "Making America Confederate Again," a title adopted with reference to what is happening with recent events.

The blog posting also has a link to this article.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/17/politics/kfile-corey-stewart-richard-hines/


The concluding paragraphs of the blog posting.

An Active Legacy

In 1972, Dr. M.E. Bradford, a University of Dallas professor of English, paleo-conservative herald of neo-Confederacy and, at the time, a local chairman of “Democrats for Wallace,” wrote an essay in the conservative magazine Triumph. In it he outlined his belief in an imminent populist “counter-revolution,” one that could carry not only the US South, but Florida, Michigan, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Pennsylvania, as people reacted against a belief that “Someone ‘out there’ – federal bureaucrat, corporation executive, clergyman, television pundit, Congressman, or judge—was determined to manage their lives and thus deprive them of the distinctions which make for self.” The result would be a “revolt of the backlands” that could upend both the Republican and Democratic Parties and echo Confederate sentiments from the nineteenth century. “It is an omen,” Bradford concluded, “when crowds of men whose fathers and grandfathers came after 1865 to these shores rise in Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, and Pontiac to shout out a chorus of ‘Dixie’: an omen which we should ponder.” Prolific until his death in 1993, and, as we outline in Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction, a regular contributor to neo-Confederate venues including Southern Partisan and Chronicles, Bradford’s work, and that of his colleagues, “constructed a worldview centered upon a historical reinterpretation of the Confederate States, the U.S. Civil War, Reconstruction and their legacies. This comprehensive vision was used to articulate and legitimate a reactionary history of the United States and the world. More than merely Lost Cause enthusiasm,” we argue, “neo-Confederacy underpins a historical narrative on which an anti-modernist, anti-egalitarian belief system is built.”

Neo-Confederacy is not a historical footnote. Its advocates have brought this backward-looking conservative ideology into ever more mainstream venues. Neo-Confederate authors are best-selling contributors to the Regnery Publishing series of “Politically Incorrect Guides” that offer interpretations of a host of topics from the US Constitution to climate change, the 1960s, Jihad, and the Civil War. Advocates of neo-Confederacy operate South Carolina’s Abbeville Institute which is republishing Southern Partisan essays of the 1980s, and Chronicles continues to offer a bimonthly platform for neo-Confederate perspectives. The lineaments of Trumpism can be found in neo-Confederac - See more at: http://utpressnews.blogspot.com/2017/04/making-america-confederate-again.html#.dpuf

They have white nationalism in the bag.

This was one of the shopping bags from the store at the Gettysburg National Military Park center.

Notice the gray and blue and how it is made to be exactly equal and equivalent. The bag colors represent America and the Confederacy. Then there is the statement, "Our Common Ground."

I have a statement to make to the Gettysburg National Military Park, the National Park Service, and the Gettysburg Foundation. I don't have any common ground with the Confederacy or its principles.

I don't have a common ground with slave holders. Evidently the Park and the Foundation do think that they have a common ground.

If they think it means something about national unity, we have national unity among Americans. The South and the Confederacy is not equivalent. To even assert that it is or imply it is an erasure of African Americans in the South.

This is banal white nationalism, so every day that it hides in plain sight.

The National Park Service talks about a "high ground" but it clearly is just a lot of self-flattering rubbish. https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/rthg/intro.htm

When one prominent monument is removed it becomes not just an example for others, but a rebuke to political leadership that is unable to remove monuments

This is an excellent article about the removal of the Liberty Place monument.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/04/26/in-new-orleans-monument-to-white-terrorism-finally-falls.html

Besides inspiring people in other cities to get rid of Confederate monuments and think of demanding that they be removed, there is another important effect of this monument removal and the removal of the next three monuments.

The success in New Orleans is a rebuke to African American leadership elsewhere that fails to get a Confederate monument removed. Such as Baltimore where the African American members on a committee voted to retain some Confederate monuments and a city leadership that has gone nowhere in getting any Confederate monuments removed.

Pressing on the issue of Confederate holidays, monuments, symbols reveals who is really who in American society. This includes African American leadership which pretends to be advocates of the concerns of the African American community, but are in fact the faithful servants of white interest groups, in particular white interest groups which favor the Confederacy.

After New Orleans gets rid of its Confederate monuments, every town which has Confederate monuments which aren't going anywhere, will have the pretenses of its African American leadership exposed as being just that, pretenses. Those African Americans who have accommodated themselves to the Confederacy will be reveals as having done so.

This will hopefully result in that leadership being replaced with a leadership which isn't accommodated to the Confederacy.

Pledge not to provide services for plantation weddings and not to use the services of those who do

I will be writing a pledge for business to not provide services for a plantation wedding.

Also, the pledge to not attend a plantation wedding will include also a pledge not to use the services of those businesses that do provide services for plantation weddings.

This campaign will be somewhat like the campaign against blood diamonds.

It just isn't plantation weddings that can be picketed. The businesses that support plantation weddings can be picketed and they can be picketed when they  provide services at other weddings.

New Orleans Confederate Monuments begin to come down, showing the way for other removals

Despite threats of violence the Confederate monuments are coming down.

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/04/monuments_removed_new_orleans.html


The Liberty Place obelisk came down last night.  Only a concrete base remains.

They didn't think about putting some counter monument. They didn't install an African American fearless girl. They  didn't put up a contextualizing plaque. They didn't chatter that the monuments could offer a teachable moment. They removed them.

This sets an example for all the other cities. Anything less than removal and the leadership of their cities and towns will be judged as falling short.

Also, since it is happening, it can be imagined happening elsewhere, in Baltimore, in Dallas, anywhere where there is a Confederate monument.

Sarah Palin is wrong. Kid Rock and Ted Nugent are not "all American"

https://www.wired.com/2017/04/internet-week-116/

Sarah Palin brought Kid Rock and Ted Nugent to the White House .

Palin stated, "So, yes, I invited my buddies Kid Rock and Ted Nugent, some bold, courageous, all-American dudes who I knew would have good conversation with the president and get to express a lot of good, middle-class, work ethic-type issues and policy proposals that they could all relate to, and that's exactly what happened at the dinner."

Both Kid Rock and Ted Nugent are well known for Confederate flag flying. They are not "all-American" at all, unless your idea of American nationalism is white nationalism.

National Civil War Museum, teach your child a neo-Confederate view of history

One of the books I purchased at the National Civil War Museum is, "Who Was Robert E. Lee?" It is by Bonnie Bader with a cover illustration by Nancy Harrison. The interior illustrations are by John O'Brian. The book is published by Grossett & Dunlap, an imprint of Penguin Books and it meant to children.

Slavery is mentioned. There is a section on Robert E. Lee's views on slavery. We learn that:

"Some historians say that Robert E. Lee was against slavery." And we are told that, "... other historians say that Robert E. Lee did not object to slavery."

The section concludes with, "Robert thought that the only one to decide to free the slaves should be god." An interesting spin on this letter by Lee.

Of course Lee made it abundantly clear that he thought slavery was best for African Americans. In an 1865 letter by Lee to Andrew Hunter Lee writes:

“Considering the relation of master and slave, controlled by humane laws and influenced by Christianity and an enlightened public sentiment, as the best that can exist between the white and black races while intermingled as at present in this country, I would depreciate any sudden disturbance of that relation unless it be necessary to avert a greater calamity to both.”

There was a slave hunt where African Americans in Pennsylvania were rounded up and taken as slaves.

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/state/2013/06/30/Confederates-slave-hunt-in-North-a-military-disgrace/stories/201306300221?pgpageversion=pgevoke

Finally the book discusses Lee being a university president after the Civil War but not his hostility to African Americans as documented by Robert E. Lee Jr., testimony to the congressional committee on Reconstruction, and Lee's infamous White Sulphur Manifesto.

This book is the equivalent of Holocaust denial.

For information about what Robert E. Lee said and believed you can go to this website and use the search term "Robert." http://www.confederatepastpresent.org

This museum in promoting this book commits an outrage against the humanity of African Americans. It is no wonder that it proves to be a challenge in America to have people recognize truly that Black lives matter.


http://www.nytimes.com/1991/07/07/books/lee-without-tears.html