Tagging Republicans as secessionists, PPP and the Georgia Poll

This article has come out in the media here and there including the Atlanta Journal Constitution, you can read it at this link:

http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2012/12/07/ppp-survey-42-of-ga-republicans-would-secede-nathan-deal-job-approval-at-37/?cxntfid=blogs_political_insider_jim_galloway

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/georgia-miscellany.html

The response to one of the PPP poll questions had the result that 42% of Georgian Republicans would support secession and 42% are opposed and that leaves 16% undecided.

The League of the South is all excited about this additional poll, they think it is the 2nd coming of the Confederacy, that their time has come. Check their blog on this.

http://www.lsrebellion.blogspot.com/2012/12/half-of-georgia-republicans-want-to.html

However, the PPP pollster has this to say:

Finally we asked Georgians if they want to secede from the country because of Barack Obama's reelection and Republicans are evenly divided on the matter- 42% say they would like to secede and 42% are opposed to the concept. I doubt that many Republicans would really secede if they had the choice- not that many people are signing the secession petitions- but their willingness to say they would is a measure of how unhappy they are over the President's reelection.

The secessionist's millennium probably hasn't come. People are just venting.

I did some research on the Internet and reputable new sources identify PPP as a Democratic group. I see this polling as a possible effort to tag Republicans as having many secessionists among their members and hence not very patriotic.

So it appears that the Democrats might be consciously working to get Republicans identified with secession.

As I pointed out the Republican party's stock in trade from the 60s at least, if not since after World War II, has been to portray themselves as more patriotic than the Democrats. If the Republicans can be identified with secession then this tactic of the Republicans is eliminated. Instead their could be a reversal and the Democrats portray themselves as more patriotic.

I think perhaps some Democrats have figured this out. It will be interesting to see what other polling is done and by whom on the topic of secession. I wonder if Obama's response to these petitions will be calculated to get the Republicans identified with secession.

No one is taking this poll result too seriously including PPP seeing it as merely Republicans venting. However, this again diminishes reluctance to merely say you think secession is a good idea. A person now realizes that there are as many willing to say they are for it as against it, so they don't feel isolated expressing the same opinion, they feel a strength in numbers even if their intention is only to vent frustration.

This change in perspective won't only apply to Georgia, Republicans elsewhere might imagine there are at least substantial fractions of fellow Republicans where they live who share their sentiment to declare for secession as a means to vent.

This will make secession proposals less fringe and more mainstream. There is a point where people will not feel somewhat silly thinking about it, but transition to thinking it is impractical or not feasible, but not in itself silly to imagine.

In cultural geography nations are imagined. We don't know everyone who makes up our nation, we imagine that we all have an over arching commonality of being the same nationals. Once people no longer imagine themselves as members of a nation, the nation may persist for a while but it won't last. The Soviet Union evaporated, Czechoslovakia split, because they didn't imagine themselves as being all members of one nation. They imagined themselves as members of other nations. In an opposite example, people imagine an Israel and even though it hadn't existed as any type of polity for over 2,000 years, it comes into being, because first it was imagined.

Secession hasn't entered the mainstream of politics, even within the Republican party, but it has begun entering the imagination, and that is where nations are created and destroyed.

Dixie State College in Utah removes Confederate statue.

Dixie State College in Utah has removed a Confederate statue from their campus.

There are a couple articles online about it:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55417642-78/dixie-statue-anderson-college.html.csp

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2012/12/06/confederate-statue-removed/1752095/

It is interesting to note the college administration's justification. Quoting from the Salt Lake Tribune newspaper article, 12/6/2012:

As a staging area for recent anti-racism rallies, it has become vulnerable, and putting it in storage is the best way to protect it for now, according to Dixie State President Stephen Nadauld. 

"The statue has become a lighting rod. We feel bad about that," Nadauld said. "It’s a beautiful piece of art. We are nervous something might happen to the statue. It might be vandalized."

Actually the reason for the statues removal is that the college is slated to become a university and many are concerned about what the image of the university will be. The concern isn't just the statue, but also the term "Dixie" in the colleges name. From the Tribune article:

A growing chorus — which includes student body president Brody Mikesell, a senior from Henefer, and former trustee chairman Shan Gubler — is lobbying to drop or downplay the Dixie name, arguing that its associations with the Confederacy will alienate the larger audience the college aspires to reach as a university.

The university president isn't willing to say the Confederacy was wrong. Nor it seems that Mikesell or Gubler are willing to say the Confederacy is wrong. The reason given is that it will alienate others who for some reason not given don't like the Confederacy.

Quoting from the USA Today article:

The discussion to remove the statue began once administrators became aware of the "people with issues with it being on our campus," Johnson said.

What issues might those be? The articles leave it as a mystery. It is something to do with feelings, reducing it to an emotional issue and not a critical or rational assessment of the Confederacy. From the USA Today article.

"I think it's a big day in Dixie's history. It's a positive sign that we're moving forward," mass communications student Ryan Mayfield said. "I think if we're going to be a university we need to cater to everyone's feelings, not just the community."

So the statue is going down, but it seems from the article, no one in the administration or those leading the effort are willing to criticize the Confederacy though they obviously don't want to be associated with the Confederacy. So there are all these reasons to remove the statue, to protect the statue, the feelings of others. Though whose feelings they are concerned about isn't mentioned, I think it is obviously they are concerned about minority members, and this argument reduces minorities' opposition to the Confederacy from a rational opposition to "feelings."

It seems that people more and more realize that the Confederacy was a bad thing and don't want to be associated with it, but they also don't want to get neo-Confederates riled up and those who buy into the Lost Cause mythology of history riled up. So everyone working to remove it, is giving other reasons, so they can minimize being a target of Lost Cause anger. The president removes the statue to protect it, which shows a president that gives in to intimidation when protecting free speech. His reason is really quite reprehensible if people thought about it. However, he can't say the Confederacy was a bad thing and their is no way we want to celebrate it without bring down the wrath of Lost Cause supporters everywhere.

However, in the end, the statue is packed away and not on public land where it valorized the Confederacy. Dixie State College will likely lose the word "Dixie" and Confederate memorialization will be further contained in the former slave states.

"National Review" trying to keep conservative movement from being associated with secession

I think one of the key themes of the conservative movement going back into the 1950s is that the Democrats were some how soft on communism or not as patriotic as the conservatives or infiltrated with un-American elements etc. etc.

Being an advocate of secession isn't just being insufficiently patriotic or being lax about national defense it is by definition anti-American and threatening to the nation. If the conservative movement is identified with secession, it loses a big cudgel it has used to swing at the Democrats for decades, generations, and which I suppose the Democrats will pick up to swing at the conservatives.

The conservative magazine National Review realizes this and there has been posted a blog entry at their website, the theme of which is, that some Democrats have mentioned secession or going to Canada in the past. I suppose some Democrats have. I don't think though it has been more than a couple percent of Democrats, not 25% for Republicans as mentioned in a recent poll, or nearly a million signers for petitions to secede.

This is the link to the blog entry at National Review's website.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/334768/threats-secession-bipartisan-game-charles-c-w-cooke

Human Rights Campaign alerts public to League of the South speaker at Maryland Marriage Alliance

The story is here at Towleroad.

http://www.towleroad.com/2012/12/hrc-to-anti-gay-maryland-group-return-white-supremacist-sympathizers-money-video.html

This will let a whole new group of people know about the pernicious neo-Confederate movement and that it is actively hostile to them.

25% of Republicans say their state should secede from the Union according to PPP Poll

According to PPP conduct poll 25% of Republicans say their state should secede form the Union, 19% aren't sure, and just 56% say they want to stay in the Union.

The announcement of the poll results are here:

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/republicans-not-handling-election-results-well.html

The PPP explains one factor contributing to the 25% figure of pro-secessionists among Republicans:

"One reason that such a high percentage of Republicans are holding what could be seen as extreme views is that their numbers are declining. Our final poll before the election, which hit the final outcome almost on the head, found 39% of voters identifying themselves as Democrats and 37% as Republicans. Since the election we've seen a 5 point increase in Democratic identification to 44%, and a 5 point decrease in Republican identification to 32%."

How ironic the party of Lincoln only has 56% of its members opposed to secession. Of course this is one poll. Also, it might be that a lot of people who got these automatic phone calls had a sense of humor.

Reminds me of this T-shirt sold by Southern Partisan.

Front side

Backside

All kidding aside, this is not a good development. It may be joking, but it is normalizing secession.

Secession doesn't seem to be catching on.

So far there has been one article by Pat Buchanan which you can read at Human Events at this link http://www.humanevents.com/2012/11/30/pat-buchanan-americans-are-already-seceding-from-one-another/  He isn't endorsing directly secession or the secession petitions, but instead arguing that it is already happening essentially by other means. I think that is the closest he feels he can get to the issue.

Otherwise media coverage has died down except for a trickle of articles making fun of the petitions. It will be interesting to see Obama's response, but I think it will be all over and largely forgotten by Christmas.

How will Obama respond to these secession petitions, Update

Obama is not stupid, he is very smart and  has a sharp analytic mind. You may not agree with what he says, but I think it would only be blind partisanship not to recognize that he is smart.

So it occurs to me what will Obama's response be to these secession petitions? I initially thought it would be some reply with legal reasoning that would not get much public interest. Or perhaps Obama might just publish the Gettysburg Address and say "ditto" in a humorous response.

However, I see that these secession petitions give Obama a political opportunity. An opportunity to get his opposition into conflict and trouble with themselves and discredit themselves with the general public.

When Obama first got elected he made a statement that the Republicans shouldn't let Rush Limbaugh be their leader. Obama wasn't being helpful to the Republicans. He wanted Rush Limbaugh to be the face of the Republican party and further show that the Republican party wouldn't reject Limbaugh further giving credibility that Limbaugh was representative of the Republican party. Limbaugh not caring for anyone or anything except himself leaped at the opportunity to promote himself surely knowing he was enabling Obama's strategy. Obama's gambit worked wonderfully helping him to win re-election.

Understanding what Obama did, and that he is a strategic thinker taking advantage of these types of opportunities I think might give us insight as to what he will do. The petitions did get a lot of attention and his response will get a lot of attention. In responding Obama has the opportunity to discredit his opponents or put them in a difficult position with their supporters.

Surely Obama has noticed the response of Rick Perry advocating staying in the Union, but not condemning the secessionists and expressing sympathy to them. Obama surely has concluded secession is a difficult issue for some Republicans.

So Obama in his response to these secession petitions has opportunities. Even though the public is laughing at them, it is the type of thing that entertains the public and there will be curiosity over exactly what Obama's response will be. If Obama does a legalistic response, there will be some commentary about it and the topic will fade out to oblivion. If Obama hands out the Gettysburg Address or some brief historical reference, it will get some response, and fade to oblivion. The conservative movement will further resist secession entering their mainstream but not criticizing Obama so they can avoid being identified with secession.

But Obama might respond in a way that will bait his opposition to respond. Since much of his opposition is  hysterical or at least very excitable or reactive without reflection this isn't so difficult.

I think Obama's response might have many patriotic references and use the "mystic chords of memory" and his defense of the Union will refer to the blessings of the American government from a Democratic party viewpoint. Maybe not in an obvious way. He might refer to the American historical narrative and reference the increasing egalitarian spirit of American life and how opportunity is made available to all. He could refer to the great national enterprises like NASA and the national parks and federal lands. The later might provoke the Sagebrush rebellion types. There might be a reference to immigration, the Statue of Liberty and how America is seen as a desirable place to immigrate to and how immigration is part of the national story.

The response can't be seen as baiting the opposition, so it has to be done just right to provoke, but not at an obvious level.

I think though Obama will simply choose to make his response a general patriotic defense of the nation. But still these petitions give Obama a possible opportunity to create all sorts of trouble for his opposition and surely he must be thinking of them.

I am very curious as to what Obama's response will be.

Update 11/27/12: I think Obama merely has to have the same response to the secession petitions as Lincoln did regarding secession. Obama has to reject secession on the same basis as it was rejected during the Civil War. Without mentioning Robert E. Lee or Jefferson Davis or the Confederacy it will be clear that Obama rejects the basic arguments of the Lost Cause mythology justifying secession and hence reject the Lost Cause mythology.

Without mentioning the Confederacy by name he can reject it, and given the current geographic location of the Republican party base, this might get a response of those defending the Confederacy. It would put the Republicans in a difficult position not wanting to be identified with the Confederacy, but not wanting to alienate and lose their base in the deep South.

Mainstreaming secession, not so much.

It isn't happening that much. National Review is ridiculing it.

But it seems it is getting a little traction. WND, has an article where one of there writers interviews Michael Hill, president of the League of the South. The link is here:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/spanish-vote-endorses-secession-parties/

It could be argued that having WND pick up your cause doesn't represent mainstreaming very much, but rather your fringe status.

Town hall had another neo-Confederate, Bill Murchison, former writer for Southern Partisan, give his take on secession. You can read the article here:

http://townhall.com/columnists/billmurchison/2012/11/27/thoughts_on_secession/page/full/

There is this article at the Human Events web page which argues for a political program to avoid the threat of secession. http://www.humanevents.com/2012/11/26/the-spanish-secession/. The author isn't advocating secession but finds it a useful threat.

I am not seeing the radical right pick up much on secession so far. email me links if you know of sources I over looks.

I think at this point not much will happen until Obama responds.

Spain a "megastate"? The League of the South fantasies

In the following League of the South (LOS) blog post Spain is referenced as a "megastate."

http://www.lsrebellion.blogspot.com/2012/11/spain-fears-break-up-as-catalonia-votes.html

In this blog about Catalan efforts at secession the LOS blog claims:

What's the bottom line of all these stories about secession? Simple: The 20th-century megastate is dead. Good riddance.

Really? Spain is a megastate? I could see perhaps a very large nation called a megastate, like the former Soviet Union or perhaps another large country like the United States or China and India. Of course what exactly is a megastate as opposed to a superstate as a opposed to a plain every day state I don't think is well defined. Perhaps "megastate" just sounds more impressive than saying "superstate" or "state."

Again what the LOS fails to perceive with these European efforts at secession is that Catalonia is planning, if it becomes a nation, to join the European Union. That is to join this supranational organization. The European Union has a common currency, national borders no longer count for much, and it is a common trade zone. The reason these European secession movements are possible is that the European Union is superseding the nation state and taking over its functions in many cases and eliminating national borders as boundaries.

The European Union makes the nation state less important. I haven't thought through much other modern trends such as transnational organizations, in particular regarding trade, the global integrated economy and how they might lessen the forces that drove the creation of the modern state of the 19th and 20th centuries. I suspect they make the nation state less needed as the world is integrated into larger structures than the nation state.

The trend has been the integration of European nations into the European Union and not secession. Sure the European Union has some problems, but they can print the Euro and I am sure they will work out something.  There may be some rough spots, but the historical forces of economics is what has driven this European integration from after World War II from the Benelux union to early pre-EU organizations for trade.

The League of the South does legitimately in discussion point out that secession isn't entirely out of the realm of possibility, after all the Soviet Union broke up as well as Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. However, they totally ignore the local and specific historical backgrounds of these break ups in interpreting these events as foreshadowing secession in the United States which is rather odd for an organization which rejects universal values. (Word search "universal" on the LOS blog.)

The large state provides tremendous opportunities in funding research, providing a large labor market with abundant opportunities, large scale industries with their opportunities, great national enterprises such as NASA, research institutes, high energy physics, and all sorts of scientific and technological endeavors, a huge pool of people with all sorts of possibilities for creative interactions.

Small states, when they aren't in a matrix of a larger supranational organization often have many challenges, lesser opportunities, and often depend on larger allies.

It is in the LOS's interests to tout secession as the coming thing to boost the morale of their supporters and gain new adherents. However, others need to critically review their claims to see that they are far less than they seem.

Secession petitions and Confederate symbols

One question that hasn't been discussed is how people might perceive Confederate symbols, statues, flags, etc. with these secession petitions.  Jon Stewart makes reference to them in his comical take on the secession petitions. One can't but notice that the petitions achieving 25,000 signatures and thus promised a reply are from former Confederate states. The following is  a link to Stewart's commentary.

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/11/jon-stewart-secession-obama.php

The tolerance of glorifying the Confederacy has been based on the idea that the Confederacy and secession were safely dead. That was the basis of the politics overthrowing Reconstruction, Southern leaders constantly emphasizing that secession was not an option and how patriotic they were. This is the basis of their later politics, especially with the Spanish American war.

With the Confederacy safely dead, the Lost Cause is romantic to some as long as it stays "Lost." People watch Vivien Leigh and Clark Gable in "Gone With the Wind."

If the Lost Cause isn't so lost, such as with 800,000 plus signatures on secession petitions at whitehouse.gov,  then it isn't so romantic. I can't help but think that a lot of people will look at the Confederacy, and its remembrances and symbols with some distaste. They will think secession is very unlikely, but they will not be comfortable with glorifying secession or remembering it. They know that the unlikely can unexpectedly, surprisingly become likely.

Enthusiasm for the Confederacy and secession will no longer be thought as an amusing eccentricity or fantasy, it will be at some level be seen with a little bit of apprehension. People continuing to indulge Lost Cause enthusiasts themselves will not be appreciated.

I plan to make reference to these petitions in our 2013 letter to Obama asking him not to send a wreath to the Arlington Confederate monument.

Further thoughts on the secession petitions

Saturday morning, Nov. 17, 2012,  I went to Whitehouse.gov and printed out the list of petitions and totaled all the signatures for a state to secede. I got a little under 850,000 signatures. I doubt that this means there were 850,000 signers, probably some people signed more than one petition. Also it has been reported a large fraction of those signing some of the secession petitions were not from the state where a resident was petitioning to secede.

There have been numerous articles about these petitions, mostly in a humorous or mocking manner. The articles have become less and less frequent in the news. The next news cycle will be when the Obama administration responds. A great many people would oppose any position of Obama reflexively so there is likely to be some response to Obama's response. If Obama said the sky was blue it would get opposition in some quarters.

Interestingly enough the right media hasn't taken secession up much as an issue. I suppose there is one minor figure here or their that might have taken up secession as an issue, but the right wing media figures largely have not taken secession up. I think they realize that they can hardly portray themselves are more patriotic than thou and still be supporting secession. Also, the great majority of Americans love their country and are against secession. Conservatives know that if they pick up secession or if secession is identified with them the public would develop a real antipathy against conservatism.

So is this movement largely over for the present? I would say yes. There will be some articles when Obama responds, the right wing media will be glad to see the subject pass, and there will be only a residual of signers still interested in further pursing the topic.

The petitions themselves only got traction since they could be posted at the White House website and further if over 25,000 they were promised a reply. If the petitions had been on a website without any guarantee of a White House response they wouldn't have gotten as many signatures and certainly not any media attention.

I suspect that many of those who signed did so only as a way of expressing rejection of Obama without really wanting to secede. Also, they could do it without making public their full names.

However, the longer term impact may be more important. A great many right wing individuals signed their first secession petition for whatever reason. Having signed one secession petition, there isn't a barrier to signing a second one or give secession a consideration. Additionally though a great majority or nearly most of the signers might give it little further consideration, there will be some signers which will develop an interest in the topic and the small movement of secessionists will find a large influx of new supporters relative to their current numbers. Also, the issue of secession is now being discussed. What might seem initially seem wild or crazy becomes familiar and less shocking with ongoing discussion. Secession is becoming normalized.

The signers that didn't have serious consideration of seceding will find themselves open to thinking about it from time to time. They did sign the petition for secession for whatever the reason, and they are now signers of a secession petition for whatever reason. It can't but help affect their identity and their view of secession in subtle ways. We define ourselves individually and as groups symbolically and they have taken a symbolic action which will define themselves. In the future course of events, they will be more open to support secession again and potentially become seriously interested.

For purposes of argument I am going to assume that of the petition signers there was at least 500,000 different signers. I am just making a wild guestimate. I know there must be duplicate signers, how many it is anyone's guess.

In a nation of 300 million, 500,000 is a very small percentage, but a small fraction of those signers would be enough to sustain a small movement interested in secession. A fraction of 5% of 500,000 signers would be 25,000 which would be a very big expansion of the current movement, and many times larger than the Abbeville Institute. http://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/

Nations often have ups and downs and stresses and strains. A movement like this can be like a small fracture in a wind shield, which, with the right stressful conditions, the crack can end up propagating the entire length of glass. The future is full of unexpected events. Though seemingly laughable now, this movement could potentially in the future be a cause for concern.

How big was the initial group of people who thought the Soviet Union should be broken up? The secessionist Scottish National Party used to poll single digits in elections in Scotland, now they dominate the Scottish parliament and secession of Scotland is a real possibility. Every new idea starts with a minority of precisely one as Thomas Carlyle said.

However, I don't want to be advocating that we should be alarmed either. It could be that in 20 or 30 years this whole secession petition effort will be seen as a footnote in history, an odd ball curiosity for amusement in a nation continuing to progress. But it could be the seed, the small fracture that grows, in a nation facing an unexpected stresses. The future is opaque.

I think one key thing to observe is whether a right wing media figure turns to embrace secession to promote his own ratings. He probably won't really support secession, but will advocate it to boost ratings and make him stand out in a crowded and very competitive field of right wing broadcast professional commentators. A field where one gets ahead by being more outrageous than the others.

If he or she succeeds then imitators will follow. So far though even WND isn't that sympathetic to secesssion. You are really out there on the fringe when WND.com thinks that you are out there. These are the people who embraced Birtherism.

I think also this movement will be aided or retarded by how the future is perceived. Right now many see the Democrats as having locked up the future. There is a lot to be said for this. The economy is terrible and Obama has managed to be re-elected despite this. One can only imagine how the Democrats will do in 2016 if the economy has a turn around. However, these projections of long term dominance of one party or another often prove wrong. After the defeat of Goldwater in 1964, there was a fear there wasn't going to be a real two party system anymore.

But if it does appear that there is no future for a certain politics where some people are privileged over others there will be, I think, some support for secession. Some will imagine that they could have their privileged position in some enclave or state. These perceptions would support a politics of states rights for a sort of internal secession or a politics of outright secession.

So at this point, I conclude the door has been open to the topic of secession in national politics. This is a critical and important step in the development of an ongoing political discourse about secession. However, whether it leads anywhere is very much open to question, I think at this point it isn't, unless there are unforeseen developments.

It should not be a cause for alarm but it should be cause for thoughtful concern.

Loads of Laughs: Secession petitions at Whitehouse.gov

Go to Google News and do a search with key words "secede" or "secession" and you will find articles about the secession petitions at whitehouse.gov. It is all over mainstream media. According to reports if you get 25,000 signatures in 30 days the Obama administration promises to make an official reply, with some various caveats. So far a petition asking for Texas to be allowed to secede has gotten 70,000 signatures and other petitions are gaining signatures quickly.

It gives a whole new meaning to the slogan, "America: Love it or Leave It."

This has gotten neo-Confederates excited. For an example go to this link. They think their time has come. It hasn't.

The impact of these petitions will be as follows;

1. It will provide an opportunity for humor. Check this posting.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/13/why-you-really-want-to-secede-from-the-united-states_n_2123181.html

If you don't think this example is funny remember I said "opportunity" for humor.

2. It will make the opponents of Obama seem silly or crazy.

3. It will result in making some elected Republicans in the South look questionable. For example Rick Perry's response to the Texas secession petition: Rick Perry's comments in "USA Today."  Where Rick Perry states:

"Gov. Perry believes in the greatness of our Union and nothing should be done to change it," Frazier's statement says. "But he also shares the frustrations many Americans have with our federal government. Now more than ever our country needs strong leadership from states like Texas."

Perry wants to oppose secession with out alienating these secession petitioners which it seems he sees as part of his voter base. Perry doesn't want to criticize these petitioners, but sympathize with them.

4. It makes the opponents of Obama seem unpatriotic. After all advocating secession from America is a fairly forthright rejection of America.

5. Runs the risk of further identifying conservatism with the Confederacy. More than a few have observed the electoral map of states for Romney looked like a Confederacy. Now there are secession petitions.

I think it also poses a risk for the conservative media in this country. The temptation is to be the most outrageous voice in the conservative media to boost ratings, but giving into this movement risks running conservatism as a viable movement in this country off a cliff.  Though WND is headlining this secession movement. http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/now-many-states-want-to-secede-from-u-s/

I think in about a month this will be mostly over. The Obama administration will point out that states can't secede and additionally there would least have to be some vote on it by the citizens of a state to see if even a bare majority wanted to secede, and you would think for a serious change like this it would have to be 2/3'rds or a higher fraction of the voters wanting this type of change.

Of course if Obama says he is against something, some people will reflexively be for it.

I do think though that this effort is perhaps a manifestation of a larger phenomenon. I think a lot of people that were opposed to Obama thought that in four years he would be defeated at the polls and he would be gone. Indeed they thought it right up to the end, despite polls showing otherwise. Some of the opposition was hysterical in nature such as the birther movement.  Additionally it seems that with this election that the likely direction of the United States will be towards a different America than what the anti-Obama movement wants.

I think this is a reality that some anti-Obama opponents can't accept. I think the secession petitions are just blowing off steam and few are serious about them, but I do think that the more hysterical opponents of Obama will look for some serious method of opposing the post-election future and that these methods might be cause for concern.

Also, if you do sign an official secession petition, even if your full name isn't given, and you do it as a joke, you still have done it, and psychologically this action changes to some degree your self-identification. It is a symbolic gesture, and we often create our identity with symbols. You will now be a person who did sign a secession petition.

I think the future bears watching.

"Secession" in the European Union

There has been a fair amount of excitement amongst neo-Confederates recently about proposed secessions from states that are members of the European Union. This is an example from the League of the South blog, "Rebellion."  http://www.lsrebellion.blogspot.com/2012/10/secession-fever-sweeping-europe.html.

The fact is that many of these "secession" movements, such as Scotland, propose that their newly independent nations will become members of the European Union. It would be really secession if Scotland proposed to be a separate nation outside of the European Union. With a European Union providing a free trade zone and a common currency it may be that the nation state is being obsoleted by a larger state, the European Union, and in which case secession from the superseded nation state is possible.

Also, whether there is really a secession movement going needs to be questioned. In some cases there really is a sizable movement, but in other cases it is just a few people living Ruritanian fantasies. For example in Vermont the secession movement is just a few cranks that have no real following.

Also, it isn't considered by Vermont secessionists that Vermont has it fairly good in the U.S.A. As a small state with a very small population Vermont gets two U.S. Senators with its 600,000 some inhabitants. Given that the average state has 6.4 million people (320 million divided by 50) this is significant over representation in both the U.S. Senate and the Electoral College for the election of the president by a factor of 10. This has some very real benefits.

This is one: http://www.sanders.senate.gov/legislation/issue/?id=90c28ee4-5607-4eaf-90b4-1e400d5458d3

As an independent nation Vermont wouldn't have two U.S. Senators pushing for higher milk prices for the rest of the nation.  In fact they would have a lot of milk and no price supports. I am sure there are probably other instances where Vermont finds it very advantageous to have this 10X over representation.

In fact, Vermont should be careful not to discuss secession too much. Has anyone looked at the Constitution in regards to state being expelled? What if the American consumers realized that milk would be cheaper if Vermont was an independent nation?

For those enamoured of having their very own small toy nation, I suggest they look at the fate of the peoples in the Unted States of Central America who opted for being independent nations of Central America. Like many small states they ended up as victims of more powerful forces, in this case companies raising bananas, acquiring the nickname banana republics as term of contempt.

Some small nations do get along reasonably well. They have special circumstances remote like Iceland or they are in mountaineous regions like Switzerland and do not present great prizes for conquest or otherwise interest powerful nations. However, a great many other small nations find themselves dealing with adverse circumstances. They are dependent on more powerful states for support or find themselves dominated in various ways by more powerful neighbors when they are not actually invaded.

Is there really secession movement to form a new small nation state that wouldn't be a part of a larger state or framework of states in the Western world? No.

Creepy Plus - The Sons of Confederate Veterans and the Great Hanging in Gainesville.

The Sons of Confederate Veterans are just creepy in this story.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/10/07/4318432/after-150-years-a-dark-chapter.html

More Mildred Rutherford

I have added more Mildred Rutherford speeches at www.confederatepastpresent.org. Her racism and historial reasoning are just delusional. The neo-Confederates don't think so and republish her works as being instructive, but then again the delusional would find reasonable the delusional.

Just use the search function for Mildred or Rutherford and they will all show up.

This will tell you what Confederate "heritage" is all about.

"War Between the States" expression used in "Scientific American"

I was reading a Special Issue  of Scientific American with the theme "Beyond the Limits of Science" which is really about going beyond the limits of current science. It is the Sept. 2012 Vol. 307 No. 3 issue.

I was reading an article, "Mind in Motion," (pages 58-63)  by Miguel A. L. Ncolelis, which is about the developments in Prosthetics and a goal of ultimately being able to create prosthetics such that the paralyzed could run or do other things just by thinking it. This by the way is not far fetched. The one thing that has amazed me about science is how it is speeding up faster and faster over the decades.

On page 61 there is a side bar for the article about the history of prosthetics, such as the first historical record of an artificial limb, other items such as the invention of gun powder which resulted in a greatly increased need for prosthetics. Under the title Civil War the entry states with the following sentence:

"The War Between the States resulted in many amputations."

Increasing the representation of under represented minorities in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) progressions is a major effort by all the professional societies and we have a leading science publication publish something like this. The term Civil War is the generally accepted term by history professionals and all those who aren't neo-Confederate cranks.

Did Nicolelis think that there was some neo-Confederate readership he had to placate by making sure he used both terms. He is a professor at Duke University, and maybe there in North Carolina that type of pandering might be necessary, but certainly not for the global educated audience of Scientific American.

I am going to write the editors.

The meaning of "Neo" in words.

The Neo-Confederates are currently complaining (whining) about the term Neo-Confederate. This is an ongoing complaint with the Neo-Confederates. A typical example of what passes for reasoned commentary is at this blog.

http://www.lsrebellion.blogspot.com/2012/07/are-we-neo-confederates.html

The claim that the term "Neo-Confederate" is an accusation.  "Neo" merely means new. The term was first used in Southern Partisan magazine by its editor Richard Quinn. (Vol. 8 No. 1 Spring 1988).

There are terms such as neo-classical and neo-baroque for either architects or musical composers working in the style of the Classical and Baroque eras. Politically there are neo-liberals and neo-conservatives and they are simply terms. Calling something neo-Baroque isn't derogatory.

The use of "neo" would be to differentiate a new group separate or distinct from the prior group from which the new group is derived or revived.

You know with the adjective neo-classical that the building or piece of music isn't from the classical period, but is a later building or piece of music done in a style or form derived from the classical period in some later period distinct and separate from the original period. When a period is long but continuous we might say early, middle or late to further differentiate the period.

The Confederacy ceased to exist some time ago. The new movement for secession of course intently studies the Confederacy and interprets its meaning and asserts an ideological belief that they hold to be derived from the Confederacy, but they are not of the period of the Confederacy. They are a later revival. They are neo-Confederate.

Michael Hill, president of the League of the South explicit racism

When I first started tracking the League of the South there were people who really didn't want to acknowledge that they were racists and came up with all sorts of rationalizations to deny it. I think however, this essay by Michael Hill will settle this question once and for all:

http://dixienet.org/rights/our_survival_as_a_people.php

Hill's essay both makes it clear and explains at length his racist ideas. He believes that the races, as popularly thought of, come from the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japeth, from his interpretation of the bible. White people are held to be the sons of Japeth. Hill believes that God favors white people.

After his biblical arguments for racial separation he has a fairly elaborate exposition of his racist views. The following is a sample quote:

"Our white European-American ancestors had no trouble enunciating the obvious truth that Western Christian civilization was superior to all others. Moreover, they had no hesitation about defending it, as their God-given patrimony, against those who would denigrate or destroy it. Just a century ago, our civilization was still distinguished by a robustness and self-confidence born out of a realization of the natural superiority of the West and its ways. None but the most crack-brained utopians believed in social, political, economic, and cultural equality, nor did they believe in the equality of the races in intellect and accomplishment. Unfortunately, the present century has witnessed the old order turned upon its head."

Advertising the article exposing the Museum of the Confederacy at Black Commenator on the History News Network

I placed a small ad on the History News Network, www.hnn.us, to let people know about the expose' of the Museum of the Confederacy at www.blackcommentator.com. For those interested in the article the free links to all four installments are at: http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2011/11/moc.html.

The ad is up, they are adding the link from the ad to the web page this evening.

I am been very busy, but I thought it was time to let a wider audience know about this article.

2012 Letter to Obama about the Arlington Confederate monument

http://arlingtonconfederatemonument.blogspot.com/2012/05/2012-letter-to-obama.html

The letter can be found through the above link.

"Anderson Independent Mail" runs major article on Ron Wilson, former Commander-in-Chief of the SCV

The Anderson Independent Mail has published a major article on Ron Wilson, former Commander-in-Chief of the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) about his past history. For those who haven't seen my earlier post on this topic, Ron Wilson has been charged with running a Ponzi scheme which has cost unwary investors tens of millions of dollars.

The major article is online at:

http://www.independentmail.com/news/2012/may/19/the-tarnishing-of-ron-wilson/

There is additionally another short article about his writing in the Citizen Informer, the official publication of the Council of Conservative Citizens (www.cofcc.org).


http://www.independentmail.com/news/2012/may/19/proto-tea-partier-ron-wilson-wrote-about-debt-20/

I am mentioned in both articles and helped supply a lot of documentation for the articles.

Maintaining and indexing archives of neo-Confederate materials takes a lot of time, but it is all worthwhile when I can help out reporters and others and get the information to those who need it.

Sons of Confederate Veteans promotes Anglo-Saxon superiority over European white immigrants, Asian Americans and African Americans

I came across a pamphlet published by the Sons of Confederate Veterans in 1914. It was first a speech at the Convention of the United Confederate Veterans and the Sons of Confederate Veterans, then they asked for it to be published in a national publication and it was, and then they had it printed up as a pamphlet for distribution. I managed to acquire one of them.

It is revealing in that they don't consider some European immigrants white enough, and they seek alliances with those who have antipathy to Asian immigrants in the West, and of course there is that old standby in Confederate heritage, white supremacy over African Americans.

To show what Confederate heritage is really about I have put the entire text online at my web site and you can read it at this link.

http://www.confederatepastpresent.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=188:anglo-saxon-supremacy-over-other-european-whites-asian-americans-and-african-americans-promoted-by-the-sons-of-confederate-veterans&catid=37:the-nadir-of-race-relations

When the book "Politics and the History Curriculum: The Struggle over Standards in Texas and the Nation," comes out there will in my biographical note will be a reference to www.confederatepastpresent.org and thousands of students and educators will have access to this website and the resources in it and including the above referenced document.

Additionally there is the website www.citizenscouncils.com which is also referenced in the biographical note. I am going to have www.confederatepastpresent.org reference it.

www.confederatepastpresent.org loaded with primary documents

After a long time, I have finally gotten around to working on my website www.confederatepastpresent.org. I want to have it done by the time the book on the Texas teaching standards comes out and have it serve as a reference source for teachers in Texas and elsewhere. I have added about 150 documents to it. They go from 1783 to the 1950s.

My biographical note in the book both mentions my other books, and the websites www.confederatepastpresent.org and www.citizenscouncils.com. So I needed to make sure that the website was done before the book came out.

I have a tremendous amount of documents to put on the website www.confederatepastpresent.org. I have only done the initial set.

The original manuscript for the book was nearly 900 pages of single spaced type. Jim Loewen pointed out that would be a reference book that would sit on the shelf, and so we cut the manuscript down to a book that could be used in the class. The understanding was that the material not used would go on a website.

As time has gone on since then I have run across a lot of material which should go on the website. Such as a pamphlet published by the Sons of Confederate Veterans seeking to deny African Americans' civil rights and interesting enough seeing allies in those on the West Coast of the United States who would deny civil rights to Asian Americans.

Did you know that counties in Georgia and Virginia passed resolutions for secession and the causes given were to preserve slavery? I am going to put them online.

I have a ten volume set of books of the speeches and writings of Jefferson Davis. There are many documents which show Davis's broad racism and pro-slavery ideology and in particular his attitudes towards Latin Americans.

I have accumulated a great deal of material over the years and I want to share it as a primary document resource for students, teachers, and others.

Once I get done with this, I am going back to finishing up a couple books which are nearly finished.

Cinco de Mayo and the Civil War in the news, Update More articles

The press is reporting on the Civil War origins of the holiday Cinco de Mayo and its anti-Confederate origins. The following are some links which I will add to.

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_20517077/marcela-davison-aviles-link-between-cinco-de-mayo

http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2012/04/18/2313672/author-explains-cinco-de-mayo.html

http://latinola.com/story.php?story=10645

The coverage of Dr. Hayes-Bautista's new book has been tremendous.

Associated Press

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jiNynw9VAxhp03X5ZLByq3iUEyXQ?docId=393b41297baf4cd48bbee011364c805e

Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/cinco-de-mayo-_-not-mexican-independence-day-_-holiday-with-us-civil-war-civil-rights-roots/2012/05/02/gIQAgJXpwT_story.html


This is from the LA Weekly:

http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2012/05/cinco_de_mayo_history_california.php

This is from CNN

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-05-05/us/us_cinco-de-mayo-origins_1_mexican-army-french-army-california-and-oregon?_s=PM:US

This is from UPI

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2012/05/05/Historian-Cinco-de-Mayo-has-roots-in-US/UPI-35091336228138/?spt=hs&or=on

From Tuscon

http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/arts/report/050512_cinco_de_mayo/the-facts-cinco-de-mayo/

From the New York Times, Hayes-Bautista is mentioned as a source for this article.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/04/remember-remember-the-fifth-of-may/

From the Wall Street Journal,

http://online.wsj.com/article/AP393b41297baf4cd48bbee011364c805e.html

It was on numerous other media and their have been bloggers commenting on it. 

It is making the Spanish language press also.
http://www.hoylosangeles.com/news/2012/may/04/cinco-de-mayo-tradicion-americana/

"Civil War Monitor" reviews favorably "Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader."

The glowingly positive review is online at this link:

http://civilwarmonitor.com/book-shelf/loewen-sebesta-eds-the-confederate-and-neo-confederate-reader-2010

To quote from the review:

"For those of us that study and teach issues of Civil War memory, one of our great frustrations has been the lack of easily attainable primary source material to thoroughly discredit and dismantle the mythological claims of Confederate and neo-Confederate revisionists. Loewen and Sebesta’s exceptional new text The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader is the first collection of primary sources focused exclusively on such documents, as the authors note, that have somehow remained hidden “in plain sight” since the end of the Civil War. The book provides teachers and researchers alike with an invaluable archive of speeches, images, political papers, and memoirs that graphically reveal what the Confederacy and its post-war nostalgists actually believed about slavery, secession, race relations, and the whitewashing of the southern past."

Finished Reading Dr. Hayes-Bautista's "Cinco de Mayo"

I just finished reading "El Cinco de Mayo: An American Tradition," by Dr. Hayes-Bautista of UCLA. It is a good read. It provides some background of the history of Latinos in California as context for the development of Cinco de Mayo as a holiday in California.

Cinco de Mayo was developed in California, though over time it has been picked up by other regions.

Its origins come from the Civil War where Latinos saw fighting the Confederacy and the French invaders of Mexico as part of one common struggle for democracy and against slavery, for the republican form of government and against aristocracy and oligarchy and racism.

In the original Cinco de Mayo celebrations in the 19th century pictures of Lincoln and Juarez were carried in processions. The American flag and Mexican flag were always paraded together as symbolic of the struggle for freedom in both countries.

Hayes-Bautista also explains how the meaning of Cinco de Mayo was lost as subsequent immigrant groups adopted it as a popular holiday but weren't connected to its past tradition in the past when there wasn't a developed body of Latino intellectuals as today.

The concluding paragraph of the book is very interesting as Hayes-Bautista speculates what a future Cinco de Mayo might be like. I quote as follows:

"It is interesting to speculate about what form future celebrations of the holiday might take, should its true origins and heritage become better understood. Naturally, the blatantly commercial aspects will not disappear; by now, virtually no American holiday has escaped some degree of commercialization. But future celebrations might also include California mission-era songs, dances, and costumes; uniformed Civil War reenactments featuring the Native California Cavalry and the unofficial Latino militias; images of Abraham Lincoln, Benito Juarez, and Ignacio Zaragoza; and of course liberal displays of American and Mexican flags side by side. Likewise, there might be uniformed reenactors of the French Intervention, including the Californios and Latino immigrants who traveled to fight for freedom and democracy in Mexico. In addition to the "Battle Hymn of the Republic," one might hear Mexican soldiers' songs of the 1860s, such as "Adios, Mama Carlota" or "Batalla del Cinco de Mayo.' It might be fitting as well to remember the Latinos who, in the same spirit, fought for the United States in the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, and the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and subsequent conflicts. As in the nineteenth century, there might be speeches and pageants recalling these historical events, reminding listeners of the motivating values they share, showing the continuing relevance of those events to modern-day issues."

Such a Cinco de Mayo would have revolutionary impact in Texas. Also, would the Jefferson Davis highway be able to persist in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas with such a historical consciousness amongst the Latinos in those states?

Article about Otto Scott titled "Fool as Biographer"

A blog about John Brown has published an essay about Otto Scott titled, "Fool as Biographer," referring to Otto Scott. It is online at:

http://abolitionist-john-brown.blogspot.com/2012/04/essay-fool-as-biographer-john-hendrix.html

I supplied them with the Otto Scott neo-Confederate articles.

"Politics and the History Curriculum" is now available for advance sales

The Palgrave Macmilian website has this listing which isn't very informative:

http://us.macmillan.com/politicsandthehistorycurriculum/KeithAErekson

Amazon has this listing which tells a little bit more:

http://www.amazon.com/Politics-History-Curriculum-Struggle-Standards/dp/1137008938/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1332812307&sr=1-1

And this is the link at Barnes & Nobles:

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/politics-and-the-history-curriculum-keith-a-erekson/1107885815

However, Keith Erekson's page is the most informative I have found so far:

http://www.keitherekson.com/books/politics-and-the-history-curriculum/

There is also this flyer for the book which describes the contents.

http://www.keitherekson.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/PHC_Flyer.pdf

You will notice in the flyer that yours truly is the author of the chapter on the teaching of the Civil War and Reconstruction.

The following are the book blurbs by distinguished scholars:

"What's the matter with Texas? Outsiders too often dismiss it as an overgrown and ignorant child, shrouded in right-wing politics and fundamentalist religion. But that view is itself a gross caricature, as this close study of history and myth-making in Texas demonstrates. Rooting their story firmly in the social and political history of the Lone Star State, Keith A. Erekson and his colleagues bust a few big myths themselves. Read this book if you want to understand why Texans continue to contest their shared past, and why the rest of us should stop condescending to them." --Jonathan Zimmerman, professor of Education and History, New York University

"In these behind-the-scene essays, history educators and all citizens interested in history education will find chilling accounts of how the conservative Christian right played power politics to ensure that young Texans learn a largely white-washed U.S. history while remaining uneducated about world history. The essays in this important book give voice to teachers and history professors who were steamrollered by the Texas Board of Education."--Gary Nash, Professor Emeritus, Department of History, UCLA; Director, National Center for History in the Schools

"Politics and the History Curriculum offers the most comprehensive, thought-provoking, and timely examination yet of the ongoing controversy over history standards in Texas and across the nation. As an historian and textbook author, I especially appreciate the range and analytical quality of the essays collected here. This book is a must-read for any teacher, administrator, or citizen engaged with these issues." --Daniel Czitrom, co-author, Out of Many: A History of the American People

The book is to be released June 2012.

Former Sons of Confederate Veterans Commander-in-Chief accused of defrauding investors, Updated

Ron Wilson, one time columnist for the Council of Conservative Citizens and former Commander-in-Chief of the Sons of Confederate Veterans is accused of defrauding investors according to two news articles at the Independent Mail of Anderson, SC in an article titled, "Attorney general: Ron Wilson defrauded silver customers."

The articles are online at:

http://www.independentmail.com/news/2012/mar/14/attorney-general-ron-wilson-defrauded-silver-custo/

And another is online at:

http://www.independentmail.com/news/2012/mar/15/confederate-history-buffs-shocked-silver-fraud-all/

Quoting from the first article:

Former Anderson County Council member Ron Wilson told securities investigators he had at least $16.9 million of his customers’ silver in a Delaware depository, according to a complaint from the state attorney general.

But the complaint says the depository had no records of Wilson, his company or the silver.

The complaint says that Wilson and his company, Atlantic Bullion & Coin, collected millions of dollars from customers who thought they were buying silver but when customers wanted to cash out there was no silver in their accounts or the accounts had been altered.

A Complaint has been filed by the Attorney General's office. According to the article:

Five violations of the state’s security laws are alleged in the complaint, including making false claims under oath and the fraudulent sale of securities.

And

State Senior Assistant Attorney General Tracy Meyers requested Monday that prosecutors or a state grand jury take up a case against Wilson, according to a criminal referral request provided by the state attorney general’s office.

Evidently this isn't a new problem with Ron Wilson, the article reports:

Wilson kept selling the investments in South Carolina, and 24 other states, after agreeing in writing in 1996 to stop selling securities or similar investments because he was not a licensed broker or agent, according to state documents he signed.

The 1996 consent order signed by Wilson says he and any successors or representatives “are prohibited from making or causing to be made to any person or entity in South Carolina any offers or sales of securities by means of any false or fraudulent sales practices.”

In the second article one of the United Daughters of the Confederacy officer quips, "There is no silver lining in this." I always love a good humorist. Good for her.

Wilson used to run full page ads for his firm "Atlantic Bullion and Coin" in neo-Confederate publications.

It will be interesting what Wilson will say to his defrauded customers. Will he claim that an evil cabal of DC empire builders stole it, or it was a frame up by Obama and his minions?

The interesting thing about people in these right wing organizations is that they seem to be the targets of people selling investments. When they aren't being sold something as an investment to evade the New World Order or some imagined nemesis, they are being sold various quack health remedies. Some conspiracy is suppressing some health remedy and the persons advocating the conspiracy advocate some thing or food that you can purchase to cure what ails you. (Update: One website I am monitoring is selling a machine which generates electricity without inputs, essentially a perpetual motion machine, and also offering to sell gold wholesale.)

One thing that has to be asked is why it took 16 years for the South Carolina Attorney General's office to realize that Ron Wilson was violated an agreement to desist from selling securities. Lots of people suffering heavy losses.

Update:

I will update this as information becomes available.

More on this scandal:


http://www2.wspa.com/news/2012/mar/15/16/anderson-co-councilman-accused-running-scam-25-sta-ar-3411539/

http://www.wyff4.com/news/30676173/detail.html

Secret Service hauling off boxes of records.
http://www2.wspa.com/news/2012/mar/16/20/anderson-co-councilman-accused-running-scam-25-sta-ar-3411539/

Another article on the scamming.

http://thewilliamstonjournal.com/2012/03/15/sc-attorney-general-files-complaing-against-wilson-atlantic-bullion/#more-3122

Legislature decides to close barn door after horses have left department.

http://www.independentmail.com/news/2012/mar/17/anderson-legislators-react-investigation-ron-wilso/

Class-action suit: Lawyer conned by Wilson thinking of class action suit.

http://www.independentmail.com/news/2012/mar/16/class-action-lawsuit-proposed-against-ron-wilson/

4th and Final Installment on the article on the Museum of (for) the Confederacy published on Black Commentator

The 4th and final installment of of a series of articles on the Museum of(for) the Confederacy (MOC) is now online at:

http://www.blackcommentator.com/462/462_museum_confederacy_4_sebesta_guest_share.html

This article revisits critically the exhibit Before Freedom Came and the book associated with it. It recounts a visit by a distinguished person with museum expertise to the MOC. It examines how trivia and artifacts are used to obscure the story of the Confederacy. It examines how the MOC has co-opted the history profession.

This last installment also asks that the history profession in the future not accept awards from the MOC and those who have received repudiate them. Whether many or even a few historians in the future repudiate or refuse an award from the MOC isn't so important as the fact from now on when a historian accepts or retains an award from the MOC this historian is taking a stand and revealing their identity.

All the previous installments can be seen at:

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2011/11/moc.html

The Museum of the Confederacy as a shrine and creator of Confederate identity

The third installment of my 4-part article on the Museum of the Confederacy has been published.

The URL for the guest copy which is free is:

http://www.blackcommentator.com/461/461_museum_confederacy_3_sebesta_guest_share.html

The 1st installment covered the take over of the MOC by pro-Confederates and how the MOC works with neo-Confederate organizations. The 2nd installment covers how the MOC glorifies Confederate leaders. The 3rd installment covers how the MOC creates Confederate identification amongst its supporters, visitors, and others by being a shrine and reliquary.

The links to the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd installments are in this blog posting:

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2011/11/moc.html

In the above blog posting I will have links to all four installments after they all come out. I expect the 4th installment to be published fairly soon. The installment is with the publisher.

The 4th installment discusses the exhibit and book "Before Freedom Came" and shows how the book and show is deeply flawed and how it avoids connecting slavery to the Confederacy. It shows how the MOC represents itself differently to different audiences acting professional before professional audiences and being neo-Confederate acting towards other audiences.

It discusses how the MOC tries to co-opt the history profession and is rather successful in doing so, and ends with a call for previous winners of the MOC awards to repudiate them and for historians in the future to reject them.

Frum Forum understands what neo-Confederacy is all about.

Very interesting article at:

http://www.frumforum.com/its-hamilton-vs-jefferson-all-over-again

More and more people are beginning to grasp what a neo-Confederate historical consciousness is about. The following is from the article:

Now we have fielded a Republican Congress which is determined to burn down the Hamiltonian Republic that has emerged since the war and return to a “simpler” time. Along the way they would damage (or even destroy) the benefits we’ve gained from our reluctant capitalism. If you want to know what a Neo-Confederate political model looks like in a modern country, try to find a good public school for your kids in Mexico.

We may not think that’s what we voted for. No one can say out loud that they are fighting for the Confederate way of life, and some who embrace it may not even recognize it. You can get some hints at what’s going on if you probe Ron Paul’s fans for their thoughts on Lincoln. The weird AM radio and Tea Party rhetoric of fighting “socialism” sounds absurd, but only if you take it literally. We want to relive a fleeting moment of Jeffersonian simplicity.

The rebellion against the Neo-Confederate Revolution must start inside the Republican Party. If we fail to manage the complexity of our age, there are horrors that await. Jefferson’s world is gone, but we can still have a banana republic if we so insist.

Related post.

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2011/08/michael-lind-on-tea-party-caucus-in.html

A Mexican Immigrant's Badge of Honor

Great story at the New York Times at this link.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/a-mexican-immigrants-act-of-honor/

It is about a Mexican immigrant to the then Arizona territory who was a successful business person and was loyal to the United States of America even though the Confederate sympathizers confiscated all his property when he refused to pledge loyalty to the Confederacy.

I think it will be a great story for Cinco de Mayo.

See my earlier blog on Cinco de Mayo here:

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2012/02/cinco-de-mayo-as-anti-confederate.html

The hysterical stupidity of the Council of Conservative Citizens

I use the term "hysterical stupidity" to mean those who might otherwise have intelligence, are stupid because some hysteria they have over some topic. The hysterical are not thinking.

This comes to mind with a posting on the Council of Conservative Citizens website at http://cofcc.org/2012/02/black-history-month-myth-of-the-day-ice-cream/

They are upset that it is asserted that Augustus Jackson was the inventor of ice cream as part of African American history month.

I am focusing on this posting since as an engineer and a person who reads about the history of technological innovation I am better qualified to comment on it.

Most importantly, I am focusing on this, since it is simple and straightforward and clearly shows the credibility of http://www.cofcc.org/ postings in general. I am sure that most of the other postings are of the same nature as this posting.

Before I go forward, for those unfamiliar with the history of science and technology, I would like to explain that many technological innovations are not discrete events, but often the accumulation of many incremental changes leading to a working technology. Often the "inventor" is the person who contributes the critical development which led to the technology either being much more affordable or effective or available. Edison made many lightbulbs, but it wasn't until he figured to use a tungsten filament in an inert atmosphere that they really were practical. This was nice, but until someone figured out how to mass produce the delicate glass envelops blowing them from molten glass and systems to handle them without them breaking would light bulbs be practical.

Many people besides the Wright brothers were making flying machines while they were working on theirs. Did the Wright brothers invent the airplane or were they the first ones to figure out that you needed a gasoline engine to supply the power without excessive weight? Many hands go into technological development and there are many inventors.

So back to the stupidity of the post about ice cream.

First as an argument the CofCC says, "The practice of eating chilled desserts containing flavored ice dates back thousands of years to Mesopotamia royalty." Well that is true, I know Roman emperors had flavored ice. However, flavored ice isn't ice cream any more than oil or pitch is gasoline or polyethylene plastic.

Then further is the argument, "A reference book on the English in 1744 states “it is a chilled dessert made from cream, milk, and fruit.” Matching the modern definition of ice cream." Well modern ice cream is a frozen dessert so it doesn't match. Many things are chilled, but that is very different than frozen.

However, doing some research I found that cream and fruit was being frozen back in the 18th century, I didn't find much about the texture or form of this frozen cream.

Further ice cream isn't merely a frozen block of cream. It isn't a popsicle you make in your freezer. It has a very specific texture with air blended in and the components with small crystals. It has added ingredients to ensure it has this texture.

For ice cream to be commonly consumed it would have to have a practical method of manufacture.

It seems that Augustus Jackson was an innovator in the manufacturing process of ice cream.

It turns out that there is no myth that Jackson invented ice cream, it is understood that he developed a critical improvement in its manufacture. So the Council of Conservative Citizens is debunking a myth they made up. Or they searched the Internet to find some confused website which misrepresented Jackson's accomplishment and seized upon it to be aggrieved.

I found that this is the information you generally find on the Internet.

http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/IceCream/IceCreamHistory.htm

1832 - African-American, Augustus Jackson, is credited for the modern method of manufacturing, (not discovering) ice cream, and the multiple ice cream recipes he developed around 1832. He uniquely used ice mixed with salt to lower and control the temperature of his special mix of ingredients. Unfortunately he never applied for a patent. He left his position as a cook/chef at the White House, moved to Philadelphia and created several popular ice cream flavors and methods of manufacturing ice cream. He distributed it in tin cans to Philadelphia’s many ice cream parlors. Today Jackson is called the "father of ice cream."

Jackson made the manufacture of ice cream practical and isn't called the inventor but the "father of ice cream."

However, the complexity of technological development isn't of interest to the members of the Council of Conservative Citizens, but instead they are hysterical over the idea that their could be any historical claim that would contradict their racism.

Also, revealing the true facts of the history of ice cream wouldn't be of interest, it would just be a reason to look for and seize upon other rationalizations for their hysterical racism.

I had this blog posting when the Council of Conservative Citizens were calling the Carthaginians Greeks in some pompous historical exposition. They edited the posting after my posting.

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2009/03/council-of-illiterate-conservative.html

Cinco de Mayo as an anti-Confederate holiday.

The following video on YouTube is a fascinating lecture by Dr. David Hayes-Bautista of the University of California - Los Angeles about Cinco de Mayo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hyJMiu07NY

Dr. David Hayes-Bautista is the author of "Cinco de Mayo: An American Holiday." As Dr. Hayes-Bautista has explained in journal articles, Cinco de Mayo was started in California during the Civil War as a pro-Union and pro-Mexican Republic holiday. His book is part of a growing transnational view of the Civil War.

The book is going to be released May 2012 and can be pre-ordered online at online book dealers.

Starting this year Cinco de Mayo is going to be redefined as a anti-Confederate holiday.

Dr. Hayes-Bautista is very prominent and influential individual.

Letter from former slave to former master, hilarious must read.

You absolutely must read this letter from a former slave to a former master. The link is here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9057501/Letter-from-a-Civil-War-slave-to-his-master-150-years-on.html

This is another link with additional information about the Jourdan family.

http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/01/to-my-old-master.html

The original source of the letter.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/38479/38479-h/38479-h.htm#Page_265

This is from a book, "The Freedman's Book," edited by L. Marcia Child and published by Ticknor and Fields, Boston, 1865.

The former master Colonel Anderson is asking for his former slave to come back and work for him saying that he would treat him better than anyone.

Though the reply by the former slave, Jourdan, is written in the most respectful way in a 19th century which had more formalities than we do today, it is a rather stinging criticism of how the former master treated the former slave. The letter is both a very informative description of the issues of slavery and emancipation, yet the writer has a subtle wit and it is riotous fun to read and yet also sad upon reflection.

Some excerpts:


Sir: I got your letter, and was glad to find that you had not forgotten Jourdon, and that you wanted me to come back and live with you again, promising to do better for me than anybody else can. I have often felt uneasy about you. I thought the Yankees would have hung you long before this, for harboring Rebs they found at your house. I suppose they never heard about your going to Colonel Martin’s to kill the Union soldier that was left by his company in their stable.

Although you shot at me twice before I left you, I did not want to hear of your being hurt, and am glad you are still living. It would do me good to go back to the dear old home again, and see Miss Mary and Miss Martha and Allen, Esther, Green, and Lee. Give my love to them all, and tell them I hope we will meet in the better world, if not in this. I would have gone back to see you all when I was working in the Nashville Hospital, but one of the neighbors told me that Henry intended to shoot me if he ever got a chance.

Jourdan describes how they are well treated and have a good situation and are respected. The current situation is contrasted to the former situation. He also asks for wages for the many years him and his wife worked for the former slave master. He certainly must have known that he wasn't going to be paid any money for his former exploitation.

Then the letter turns to the rape of former slaves at the Anderson's.

In answering this letter, please state if there would be any safety for my Milly and Jane, who are now grown up, and both good-looking girls. You know how it was with poor Matilda and Catherine. I would rather stay here and starve and die, if it come to that than have my girls brought to shame by the violence and wickedness of their young masters.

Finally it ends with this last sentence.

Say howdy to George Carter, and thank him for taking the pistol from you when you were shooting at me.

Sons of Confederate Veterans rewrite the Great Hanging in Gainesville

It really is an example of the appalling things that the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) does.

The link to the story in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram is here:

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/02/02/3708484/mobs-dont-lynch-people-tensions.html

Crack pottery and www.lewrockwell.com

I was somewhat startled recently to see that www.lewrockwell.com is promoting Immanuel Velikovsky. For those of you who are unfamiliar with crackpot astronomy, Immanual Velikovsky wrote books in the middle of the 20th century in which planets moved to different orbits and the events in the ancient world were supposed to be driven by these astrophysical events.

I do remember vaguely in commentary that Velikovsky was unfairly treated in his time. However, his ideas are just lunacy. I am not going to waste time refuting them by giving a lengthy explanation.

I think it is interesting is how this article and others on www.lewrockwell.com show what type of person the www.lewrockwell.com reader is.

Any regular reader of www.lewrockwell.com will also notice the various health articles of dubious merit. Such as this one. http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north373.html

In this article the reader is told that there is this miracle box that can cure arthritis, cancer, etc. but was suppressed by the FDA.

What these articles, Velikovsky and the medical articles, have in common is an anti-authoritarianism unhinged from reason. The elites, experts, those in charge are supposed to be covering up the truth or somehow wrong headed for fun and profit. It is an appeal to vanity since it supposes that the reader and the author are members of the select few who know the truth and are smarter than the elites, experts, and those in charge.

It is true that the scientific community and medical community have made mistakes in the past and I am sure will make mistakes in the future. Theories have been erroneously rejected in the past due to opinion rather than reason. Science is a human enterprise. However, because continental drift as a theory was rejected initially doesn't mean someone elses' theory that the earth is hollow is right. (Yes there is such a theory.)

However, if you believed the earth was hollow and most of your article was about claiming that the government paid astronomers and NASA were persecuting you, I think you would have a fairly good chance of getting published on www.lewrockwell.com.

Contributing chapter to a book to be published by Palgrave Macmillan

I contributed a chapter on the new and notorious Texas teaching standards for the Civil War and Reconstruction content in those standards for a book to be published by Palgrave Macmillan. The title is, "Politics and the History Curriculum: The Struggle over Standards in Texas and the Nation."

You can read about the book at this web page:

http://www.keitherekson.com/books/politics-and-the-history-curriculum/

The book is being released June 19, 2012. It can be ordered in advance at Amazon and Barnes & Nobles.

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/politics-and-the-history-curriculum-keith-a-erekson/1107885815?ean=9781137008930&itm=8&usri=erekson

http://www.amazon.com/Politics-History-Curriculum-Struggle-Standards/dp/1137008938/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1323817458&sr=1-3

My chapter is titled, "Neo-Confederate Ideology in the Texas History Standards."

You can download a flyer at this link:

http://www.keitherekson.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/PHC_Flyer.pdf

With this chapter I hope to raise the issue of how the Civil War and Reconstruction is taught in our history classes in the schools and further influence on how these two topics are taught. It will also allow me to reach out to a new audience of the teachers of America.

One of the more interesting suggestions I made in the chapter is to teach the history of Cinco de Mayo as part of the history of the Civil War. As David Bautista-Hayes has shown in his academic articles and in his forthcoming book about Cinco de Mayo, it is an American holiday invented in California and an anti-Confederate holiday. Its history is interwoven as part of the history of the Civil War when the Civil War is viewed from a transnational perspective.

The book is titled, "Cinco de Mayo: An American Tradition," and can be pre-ordered at:

http://www.amazon.com/El-Cinco-Mayo-American-Tradition/dp/0520272137/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1325966969&sr=1-2