Dallas Episcopal Bishop Stanton assures me that no congregation in his Diocese will host the Sons of Confederate Veterans

I got an email today from Dallas Episcopal Bishop Stanton assuring me that no congregation in his Diocese will host the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV).

Hopefully we can get a response from other Episcopalian bishops in Richmond and South Carolina.

Andrew Napolitano attacks Lincoln on Fox News, Jon Stewart on Daily Show ridicules Napolitano

This is an article Salon had online about Andrew Napolitano attack on Abraham Lincoln on Fox News and the Jon Stewart's response on the Daily Show.

http://www.salon.com/2014/02/25/the_daily_show_destroys_fox_news_libertarian_andrew_napolitano_for_blaming_the_civil_war_on_abraham_lincoln/

This Daily Show segment is here.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-february-24-2014/denunciation-proclamation

There are two interesting things about this.

1. Fox News is having Andrew Napolitano on their network as a credible expert. It is a sign of neo-Confederacy getting mainstreamed into the conservative movement in this country.

2. The public is beginning to find out about this craziness through major media outlets like the Daily Show.

By the way, if you haven't purchased your copy of "Loathing Lincoln" by John Barr you should.

http://lsupress.org/books/detail/loathing-lincoln/

Secession as a means of segregation, California secession and elsewhere

Tim Draper talks about breaking up California into six states to make them more homogeneous. "Homogeneous" should be seen as a code word for segregated.

His proposal would contain most of California's minorities into a couple urban areas.

What states secession movements are all about, and the impact they will have and one benefit of the movements.

Did someone's favorite candidate lose a recent election and they can't accept the result of the election? The trend now if you lose an election it seems is to propose secession. That seems to be the strategy of conservatives in parts of some states, usually if not entirely where Democrats are elected to state wide office.

The secession movement is really an attack on Democracy. Frequently a winning candidate in an election will carry some parts of the election district and not others. The solution isn't to divide up the election district, whether it is a nation, state, country or a municipality, on some pretext or another. The idea of secession is an attempt to nullify the results of an election whether in 1860 or today.

The California movement to divide the state into six states has no chance of actually resulting in six states since congress would have to admit them. However, California is foolish enough to have adopted the referendum method of enacting laws and a secession measure might be on the ballot if it gets enough signatures. It will need about 8% of the population. Instead of electing a representative and holding that person accountable for their actions if you live in California you have dozens of proposals for laws on the ballot and no one is really accountable for them.

This secession movement in California will have one result though. It will discredit individuals, political factions, movements, who are seen in support of breaking up California and who there after will be perceived as anti-Californian. If the secession measure gets on the ballot politicians, organizations, and opinion leaders will have to make public stands on this. There could be some severe internal conflicts in the conservative movement in California.

Most importantly if the ballot measure becomes even somewhat close in opinion polling or at the polls secession movements in the United States will suddenly go from being objects of amusement or curiosities to being threatening. Secessionism will be perceived with greater hostility. The Confederacy will be seen more negatively as well as organizations which celebrate it. Monuments to those who sought to break up the United States by violent means will seem less tolerable.

So I think that the progress of the secession proposal in California will be great in terms of defeating the neo-Confederate movement.

Also, it will afford an opportunity to raise issues about the celebration of the Confederacy in California. Perhaps the California state government shouldn't celebrate secession if it doesn't want secession.

What will likely happen is that the measure will fail to get anywhere near the 800,000 signatures required and even if it did get on the ballot do very poorly and secession will be again amusing as the pre-occupation of cranks.

Perhaps if Obama could denounce secession it might get enough signatures through the reflexive response (knee jerk reaction) of a certain fraction of conservatives to get on the ballot. The Democrats might make statements to get a reaction from some conservatives to sign the petition to get the measure on the ballot to cause trouble for the Republicans. Suddenly Republicans would be identified with secession.

Into the vortex of madness, secession in New York

At the Daily Caller website there is an article advocating secession in New York state. The article is here:

http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/18/founders-to-new-york-you-dont-need-congresss-hall-pass-to-secede/

There has been some desire by some people in upstate New York to have their own state. Primary motivation is that they lost the election and can't get their own way.

The writer of the article at the Daily Caller, Mike Church, a professional ranter with his own show, claims that there is no impediment for secession, that Upstate New York if they want to have their own country and not have to worry about the U.S. Congress granting them admission as a state.

As for my "professional ranter" label, I think if you read Mr. Church's article you will see that it fits.

In the competition to see who can get the most attention, who can best stoke outrage, by talk show hosts the conservative movement is being led into the vortex of madness. Also, it doesn't occur to conservatives that in talking about secession they are losing their claim to be more patriotic-than-thou. I am sure Mr. Church could care less what the consequences are of proposing secession as long as he can improve or hold his ratings and take out a position among his fellow ranters.

The article doesn't review the flow of income in the state of New York. It would be interesting to see where the cash flows in New York. How many rural areas in New York are subsidized by the whole state. Whether Upstate New York largely benefits from revenue from the down state region of New York. I do know that the State of New York is spending billions for an advance semiconductor manufacturing facility in Upstate New York to make the region a focus of the semiconductor and advanced technology. Something only a big state with a big budget could do.

In the 1970s I reviewed the representation in the Senate of the population of the United States. I found that 40% of the American public had 10% of the representation in the U.S. Senate and 10% of the American public had 40% of the representation in the U.S. Senate. Representation in the U.S. Senate is fairly unequal already. I don't think that this representation needs to be made more unequal by the admission of states which have very small populations and whose desire for statehood is that they didn't get their way in the last election.

Also, there is no great principle that all political bodies have to be homogeneous in opinion. In fact is probably is a good thing when political bodies have dissenting voices.

It will be interesting how far this secessionist thinking will go into the conservative movement, whether secession thinking will consume it and discredit it.

Confirmation. Boston Avenue United Methodist Church did host the United Daughters of the Confederacy national convention in 2013

I came across this newsletter for the Maryland Division of the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) in which they mention that they had their service at the Boston Avenue United Methodist Church in Tulsa, OK.

This is the direct link to the newsletter.
http://www.mdudc.org/Newsletters/UDC_Division_Newsletter__-_Winter_2013.pdf

This is the Internet Archive link to the newsletter.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140219115149/http://www.mdudc.org/Newsletters/UDC_Division_Newsletter__-_Winter_2013.pdf

From the newsletter:

The Memorial Service on Sunday afternoon was held at the beautiful Boston Avenue United Methodist Church. The church is in downtown Tulsa, OK and has a congregation of over 8,500.

This shows how the architectural prominence off the building is used to enhance the prestige of the convention. Notice the reference to the location of the church and the size of the congregation to inform the reader that the church which allowed them this space is important.

The campaign is documented at www.templeofdemocracy.com/bostonavenue.htm.

Richardson, Texas and Richmond, Virginia pages online.

The web pages for Richardson, Texas 2016 and Richmond, Virginia 2014, 2015 are now online.

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/Richmond20142015.htm

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/RichardsonTexas2016.htm

Webpage on the Charleston 2014 campaign done

Busy adding more information online and re-organizing it. Each city will have the correspondence and information for that city and the neo-Confederate conventions involved on its own page.

The first new webpage is http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/charleston2014.htm.

From the main page of http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/churchesoftheconfederacy.htm you will be able to go to the pages of the individual cities.  Material concerning the individual city conventions is being transferred to the individual city convention web pages from the general web page.

More pages are coming.

Writing, writing Roman Catholic bishops and Archbishops

I finished writing the Roman Catholic Bishop of Richmond, the Archbishop of Baltimore, the Bishop of Dallas, and the Archbishop of San Antonio about upcoming neo-Confederate events in their dioceses and archdioceses for Richmond, Virginia and Richardson, Texas, a suburb of Dallas, TX.

I am going to have to write the United Methodist Church and the Presbyterian Church USA for Richmond and Dallas also.

Writing, writing, Episcopal Bishops

I will be mailing certified letters to the bishops of the Episcopal Diocese of Richmond and the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas Tuesday, Feb. 18, 2014. The Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) is planning on their national reunion in Richmond in 2015 and in Richmond, TX, a suburb of Dallas, in 2016.

The letters are fairly similar to the letter in this blog posting of the letters to St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Richmond, VA. The Dallas letters don't discuss the UDC.

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2014/02/letter-to-rectors-vestry-and-ministers.html

The Dallas letters don't discuss the UDC.

With the series of letters I am writing the Episcopal Church, they are going to become aware that their workings with neo-Confederate groups are acquiring visibility. They may or may not say something about the issue, but I don't think the Episcopal Church wants to be publicly identified with the Confederacy or have any controversy regarding either the Confederacy itself or neo-Confederate groups. The SCV will just find that churches aren't available from the Episcopal Church though various reasons might be given.

As always if you go to www.templeofdemocracy.com/churchesoftheconfederacy.htm you can find the documentation on the campaign or links to other pages with documentation on the issue. Sometimes there will be a lag between a blog posting and updating the web page.

I will be writing the Roman Catholic bishops next. I am going to write the major denominations which host neo-Confederate groups first for all the upcoming national conventions for the UDC and SCV. First the Episcopal Church, then the Roman Catholic Church, then the United Methodist Church and finally the Presbyterian Church.

After writing the national leadership of the Episcopal Church and the conservative Anglican group, I will be writing the Archbishop of Canterbury. At some point I will be writing Pope Francis if action is not forthcoming from the Roman Catholic in America.

Again these churches might not have anything they want to say on the issue, but I don't think they want to be involved with controversy.

This is just the beginning. There are the interfaith groups in each city. There are social justice groups in these denominations. There are African American organizations within the denominations. There are social justice groups in these cities outside the denominations. Gradually awareness of the issue will get out there.

I will be writing national leaders of each denomination or the next level up.

At some point one denomination may take a stand. If any denomination takes a stand it will focus attention on the others.

Even then there are additional actions after this. I am curious what African Methodists will think of the United Methodist Church in America hosting neo-Confederates. What will the Episcopal Churches in Africa think about the fact that the Episcopal Church in America hosts almost half of the neo-Confederate national convention services. It very well might not be of great immediate or practical importance to them, but I can't but feel that it will mean something when they reflect on it in a quite moment between the day's busy affairs. Some African nations have historic sites about the slave trade. What would they think about American churches that host neo-Confederate churches?

I really can't and won't write Africa until I have exhausted writing letters to the leadership of the denominations in America and they do nothing.

Beyond this I will be writing scholars on the issue of race and religion both in the United States and elsewhere.

Basically as denominations realize that the letters will never stop and that through one way or another this issue will get before the public, they will have to consider what will their record on the issue will have been.

Independence is, well, independence.

The Scottish independence activists are proposing an independent Scotland but keeping the British pound. The British government has said that they don't not plan to have a shared currency with an independent Scotland.

Independence is just that, independence. You are on your own.

This has led to whining that an independent Scotland won't take on any of Britain's debt. Since Scotland gets about $100 billion pounds a year from Britain more than it puts in, an independent Scotland would actually do a lot for Britain to handle its own debt. Even a quit payment of 200 billion pounds to independent Scotland would work out well financially.

The neo-Confederate movement is of course supporting the Scottish secessionists. http://www.lsrebellion.blogspot.com/2014/02/london-threatens-scotland-on-secession.html  The League of the South is calling this a threat under some definition of "threat" not known to logic. If you want to move out of the house, is it a threat that the other residents of the house don't want to pay or help pay your rent at your new residence?

The thing about being your own country is that you are your own country. It is more than pretty stamps and flags and colorful national costumes worn by dancers and buildings and pronouncements. You are on your own.

You will need to maintain a currency, investor confidence, good trade relations, etc. As a small nation you will have to negotiate with larger nations which don't particularly need you unless you are lucky enough to have something special right there in your national territory. Maybe a mineral deposit or a strategic location for a base.

If the economy of your small nation collapses because in the world system of trade your major industry goes under or your agricultural product is unneeded you have to beg for foreign aid rather than claim support for the region on the basis of fellow nationals helping out their distressed fellow citizens. Of course with earthquakes and other natural disasters it is the same, get out the tin cup.

The whole point of the various groupings of European nations over the years is that being a small nation really doesn't work well for the economy or defense. Hence various economic programs for European integration since World War II. From Benelux to the European Union and other groups. Hence there has been NATO.

The Scottish secessionists expect to be let in the European Union. They should reflect, if they are capable of such an intellectual process, on how Scottish secession is fundamentally contradictory to the whole point of the European Union. Europe has spent 70 years trying to erase national divisions and borders and is not going to want to create more national borders. The European Union is an integrationist movement not a secessionist movement. Also, if one nation originating from secession from a member state is admitted, it encourages other secessionist movements.

Nations are fundamentally imagined. Lots of history in Europe and forgotten kingdoms and boundaries that can be the basis of a lot of revived nations by imaginative individuals. Does the European Union want to be a brawl of 500 nations? Do they want to be a power vacuum?

Finally the European Union will have to consider whether an independent Scotland which found the British intolerable will be able to get along with other nations and be a good member in the European Union.

If Scottish secessionists are not happy with the British parliament where they have representation they should think how negotiations with the giant European Union will go when they apply for membership even without the opposition of the British. Or how much leverage they will have in the European Union as a small nation.

Finally, a lot of people living in Scotland will not want to give up British citizenship. They will find it difficult to sell their houses or businesses for what they are worth if they try to leave. Yet they will find themselves discriminated against. A brief review of the end of the Ottoman Empire should give an idea what might be forthcoming.

The other side of this issue is the documentation of Scottish immigrants to Britain. They would have to have some type of permit to work and live or otherwise be on tourist visas.

Independence is Independence. It isn't a romantic Saturday matinee movie. You had better have a really good reason for it.

Letter to the Rectors, Vestry, and Ministers of St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Richmond, Virginia

The following is the letter which I am sending by certified mail to the rectors, vestry, and ministers of St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Richmond, Virginia, tomorrow on Monday. The letter is address to Rev. Adams-Riley and copied to the others listed at the end. I wish the leadership to be entirely informed about this issue.

At this blog posting I have the email I sent last weekend.

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2014/02/email-to-staff-of-st-pauls-episcopal.html#.UveWjfldWSo

I don't think they will want to be know as America's leading church for hosting neo-Confederate groups.

I will be sending a copy to the Episcopal bishops also, along with a letter addressed to them.

                                                                       February 10, 2014

                                                                       Edward H. Sebesta

                                                                       esebesta@tx.rr.com

Rev. D. Wallace Adams-Riley - Rector

St. Paul’s Episcopal Church

815 E. Grace St.

Richmond, VA 23219

Dear Rev. Adams-Riley:

I am an investigative researcher of the neo-Confederate movement. I am published internationally in peer reviewed academic journals and by university presses as well as in Black Commentator. I enclose a copy of my online resume which is also available at www.templeofdemocracy.com/resume.htm.

I am writing you to request that your church stop hosting the neo-Confederate groups the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) and the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV).

The 2014 UDC national convention is scheduled to be in Richmond, Virginia. From the year 2000 St. Paul’s Episcopal Church has hosted the UDC national convention services every other year, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012. Please see the Excel table enclosed. From 1990 to 2013 St. Paul’s Episcopal Church hosted the UDC national convention services 9 times, out of the 12 times an Episcopal Church has hosted the UDC from 1990. If you look at the enclosed bar graph of denominations hosting the UDC from 1990 to 2013 you can see that St. Paul’s Episcopal Church has by itself made the Episcopal Church the most frequent UDC convention hosting denomination, more than all the other denominations combined.

The 2015 SCV national convention is scheduled to be in Richmond, Virginia. Though St. Paul’s Episcopal Church has only last hosted the SCV in 1996, Episcopal churches in general are tied with Roman Catholic churches for hosting SCV national conventions since 1990. I enclose an Excel table of the churches that hosted from 1990 to 2013 and a bar graph of hosting by denominations.

The bar graphs and Excel tables mentioned above are also online at www.templeofdemocracy.com/churchesoftheconfederacy.htm.

One concern I have developed in investigating neo-Confederate groups is how they are enabled by mainstream organizations such as corporations, churches, government bodies and others. So I have decided to ask these groups to reconsider their relations with specific neo-Confederate groups. It is all well and good that I have written on extremist Confederate Christian nationalist for the Canadian Review of American Studies (http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/ConfederateChristianNationalism.pdf), but I have realized that the enabling of a racist historical consciousness in the general public and racist neo-Confederate groups by mainstream churches is as detrimental to America as these fringe churches. The Christianity advocated by the SCV is largely similar, you can review their Chaplain’s Chronicle online at http://www.scv.org/about/chaplainsChronicle.php.

 The Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) is an extremist and racist group of which is extensively documented in a Black Commentator article which is available online at a free guest link at http://www.blackcommentator.com/526/526_confederacy_sebesta_guest_share.html.  (Link is also in my online resume.)

In the summer of 2013 I had a successful campaign getting corporations to stop supporting the SCV as reported in a Black Commentator article which is available online at a free guest link at http://www.blackcommentator2.com/527_cover_scv_donation_loss_sebesta_guest.html. (Link is also in my online resume.) It took eight days for this campaign to succeed. I regret to say that so far the temples of Mammon were much more willing to give up neo-Confederacy than the churches of Christ.

The SCV often selects a historic and architecturally impressive church to hold their national convention service. When a faith group allows the SCV to use their church there is an implied endorsement to the extent that the SCV is an acceptable group to be using their facilities which normalizes them despite their extremist and racist agenda. The use of a historic and architecturally impressive church lends the prestige of the church building to the SCV.

I ask that St. Paul’s Episcopal Church not enable the Sons of Confederate Veterans in 2014 or in any other year by allowing them the use of their facilities.

The United Daughters of the Confederacy has a lengthy history of supporting white supremacy going back to the early 20^th century shortly after they had finished organizing. You can see many primary documents regarding their racism at www.confederatepastpresent.org and use the search term “daughters.”

However, their racism is not confined to the past. This is an organization that currently runs a Red Shirt Shrine to glorify a violent white supremacist group in 19^th century South Carolina and of which they are proud of as documented in the June/July 2001 UDC Magazine article, pages 23, 24, and the cover of their magazine. In an article in the Dec. 2012 UDC Magazine, pages 11-14, is an appalling racist article in which the infamous post-Civil War Black Codes of the former Confederate states are defended, African American men are represented have been potential rapists, the 14^th Amendment to the Constitution is argued to be misguided, freed African Americans are asserted to have been incompetent to be citizens. The article asserts, “Newly liberated Negroes were not prepared for their freedom…” These are but two contemporary examples of the UDC’s racism. Documentation enclosed.

Allowing the UDC the use of a prominent historical and architectural church such as St. Paul’s Episcopal Church enables the UDC by lending the UDC the use of the building the prestige of the building as well as the prestige of the Episcopal Church.

Finally the SCV and the UDC exist to glorify the Confederacy a government created to perpetuate slavery and white supremacy.

The British academic, Michael Billig in his landmark book, “Banal Nationalism,” discusses the fact that the discussion of nationalism usually revolves around extremists to the exclusion of seeing the banal nationalism in everyday life. Billig contrasts the focus of the usual analyst of nationalism to the analyst of banal nationalism as follows:

The analyst of banal nationalism does not have the theoretical luxury of exposing the nationalism of others. The analyst cannot place exotic nationalists under the microscope as specimens, in order to stain the tissues of repressed sexuality, or turn the magnifying lens on to the unreasonable stereotypes, which ooze from the mouth of the specimen. In presenting the psychology of a Le Pen or Zhirinovsky, ‘we’ might experience a shiver of fear as ‘we’ contemplate ‘them’, the nationalists, with their violent emotions and ‘their’ crude stereotyping of the Other. And ‘we’ will recognize ‘ourselves’ among the objects of this stereotyping. Alongside the ‘foreigners’ and the ‘racial inferiors’, there ‘we’ will be – the ‘liberal degenerates’, with ‘our’ international broadmindedness. ‘We’ will be reassured to have confirmed ‘ourselves’ as the Other of ‘our’ Other.

By extending the concept of nationalism, the analyst is not safely removed from the scope of investigation. We might imagine that we possess a cosmopolitan broadness of spirit. But, if nationalism is a wider ideology, whose familiar commonplaces catch us unawares, then this is too reassuring. We will not remain unaffected. If the thesis is correct, then nationalism has seeped into the corners of our consciousness; it is present in the very words which we might try to use for analysis. It is naïve to think that a text of exposure can escape from the times and place of its formulation. It can attempt, instead, to do something more modest: it can draw attention to the powers of an ideology which is so familiar that it hardly seems noticeable. [ Billig, Michael, Banal Nationalism, Sage Publications, London, 1995.]

I extend Billig’s concept to a concept of banal white nationalism. My paper on it is online at www.templeofdemocracy.com/breaking.htm. The presentation of racist groups in sensational media reports are of largely marginal individuals who we will socially never run into, who have belligerent attitudes and behaviors, use racial slurs, have poor middle class decorum, and who perhaps wear funny clothes. Like Billig’s extremists, they reassure us that we aren’t racist since we are not like them. However, if we realize that racist attitudes and practice need not be confined to belligerent individuals shouting racial slurs or confined to physical assaults, we should not be so self-assured ourselves and have to examine a much wider range of practices and consider if we are involved. Suddenly it can be people that we know and who socially circulate in the circles we circulate or it can be us circulating in those circles.

The UDC as a well mannered genteel group is largely not perceived as racist despite their ongoing practice as mentioned earlier in this letter.

There is a great opportunity for St. Paul’s Episcopal Church to take a leadership role among American churches and set an example by stopping the hosting of neo-Confederate groups.

Again, I ask you not to host either the SCV or UDC. Additionally, I am asking for your help in my campaign against mainstream enabling of neo-Confederate groups by setting an example by not hosting either the SCV or UDC.

Regards,


Edward H. Sebesta

CC: Senior Warden & Vestry member Mark Gordon, Junior Warden & Vestry member Steve Micas, Vestry Advocate Spiritual Formation Board Christie Montgomery, Vestry Advocate Faith In Action/Outreach Board Bruce Cruser, Vestry Advocate Worship Board Brian Levy, Vestry Advocate Faith In Action/Outreach Board Michaelle Justice, Vestry Advocate Parish Life Board Dick Carlton, other Vestry members: Kia J. Bentley, Tom Smith, Barbara Davis, Chip Jones, Missy Benson, Sid Jones, Jennine Sherrill, and Cindy Wofford, Associate Rector Rev. Kate Jenkins, Downtown Missioner Rev. Melanie Mullen, Minister of Christian Formation Rev. Claudia Merritt.

Email to staff of St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Richmond, Virginia

I sent the following email to the staff of St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Richmond, Virginia. I got two replies, but not a commitment to stop hosting neo-Confederate groups.

The United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) has had their conventions at the St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Richmond, Virginia every even year since the year 2000 and they have announced that the 2014 convention is going to be in Richmond. The Sons of Confederate Veteans (SCV) is scheduled to have a convention in Richmond, Virginia in 2015.

So when I am writing churches and faith groups I am mentioning both events. The following was the email I sent to all the staff which had emails on their webpage.

Emailed 2/1/2014

Dear St. Paul’s Episcopal Church:

If you go to www.templeofdemocracy.com/churchesoftheconfederacy.htm you will see that St. Paul’s church hosts neo-Confederate national conventions more than any other church in the United States. Look at the tables on the page for the United Daughters of the Confederacy.

Also looking at the bar graphs the Episcopal church hosts almost half of the national neo-Confederate convention services.

In 2014 the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) is scheduled to have their national convention in Richmond, Virginia and in 2015 the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) is scheduled to have their national convention in Richmond, VA.

I am an investigative researcher into the neo-Confederate movement. I have been published internationally in peer reviewed academic journals, by university presses, and in “Black Commentator.”  You can see my resume online at www.templeofdemocracy.com/resume.htm.

The racism and extremism of the SCV is well documented in this “Black Commentator” article. http://www.blackcommentator.com/526/526_confederacy_sebesta_guest_share.html. I am currently writing an article about the UDC, but I can send you documentation.  In 2013 they had an article in their magazine about Reconstruction which is startling in terms of its racism.

Neo-Confederate groups usually seek out a historical and architecturally impressive church. When a church allows a neo-Confederate group to use their church they lend the prestige of their denomination and the architectural prestige of their church building to the neo-Confederate group.

I ask you to not allow the UDC or the SCV to use your facilities or church building for their upcoming national conventions.  

Please share this email with Rev. Adams-Riley.

Regards,

Edward H. Sebesta

Co-editor of “Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction,” Univ. of Texas Press, 2008 (http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exhagneo.html), and “The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader: The ‘Great Truth’ About the ‘Lost Cause’” Univ. Press of Mississippi 2010. (http://www.upress.state.ms.us/books/1338).  Author of chapter about the Civil War and Reconstruction in the notorious Texas teaching standards in Politics and the History Curriculum: The Struggle over Standards in Texas and the Nation, published by Palgrave Macmillan.  http://www.keitherekson.com/books/politics-and-the-history-curriculum/

Letters to South Carolina Christian Action Council and to the Interfaith Partners of South Carolina about the Sons of Confederate Veterans

The a very similar version of the following letter was sent to the Interfaith Partners of South Carolina also.

I don't know if either group will bring up the issue of churches hosting neo-Confederate groups before the public. However, I do know that each letter alerts a lot of churches that hosting the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) will put them in the spotlight and they will be put in a position of making a lot of excuses which no one will believe about why they hosted a neo-Confederate organization. Both letters were sent by certified mail.

                                                                      February 1, 2014

                                                                      Edward H. Sebesta

                                                                      esebesta@tx.rr.com

Rev. Brenda L. Kneece – Executive Minister

South Carolina Christian Action Council

P.O. Drawer 3248

Columbia, SC 29230

Dear Rev. Kneece:

I am an investigative researcher regarding the neo-Confederate movement who is published in peer reviewed academic journals, by university presses and in Black Commentator. My resume is online at www.templeofdemocracy.com/resume.htm. I am writing this letter per our discussion earlier by email. I emailed you this letter so you can easily use the links.

One concern I have developed in investigating neo-Confederate groups is how they are enabled by mainstream organizations such as corporations, churches, government bodies and others. So I have decided to ask these groups to reconsider their relations with specific neo-Confederate groups. I am documenting my campaign online at www.templeofdemocracy.com/churchesoftheconfederacy.htm.

The Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) is an extremist and racist group which is extensively documented in a Black Commentator article which is available online at a free guest link at http://www.blackcommentator.com/526/526_confederacy_sebesta_guest_share.html.  (Link is also in my online resume.)

In the summer of 2013 I had a successful campaign getting corporations to stop supporting the SCV as reported in a Black Commentator article which is available online at a free guest link at http://www.blackcommentator2.com/527_cover_scv_donation_loss_sebesta_guest.html. (Link is also in my online resume.)

The SCV often selects a historic and architecturally impressive church to hold their national convention service. When a faith group allows the SCV to use their church there is an implied endorsement to the extent that the SCV is an acceptable group to be using their facilities which normalizes them despite their extremist and racist agenda. The use of a historic and architecturally impressive church lends the prestige of the church building to the SCV.

The SCV is planning on holding their national convention in Charleston in July 2014. They are currently looking for a church. I am hoping that no mainstream church will let them use their church.

I fully understand that the South Carolina Christian Action Council can’t direct or order any member church or group to do anything and I am not asking that you attempt to do so.

What I am asking is that the South Carolina Christian Action Council raise the issue with their member’s churches and groups to consider whether they should lend their facilities to the SCV for the SCV’s national convention and let them know about the Black Commentator article on the SCV. If they have questions they can contact me through the Black Commentator article contact form or the above email. Given I research extremist groups I have to be cautious.

I am not even asking for the Christian Action Council to take a position against hosting the SCV. I am confident that I have both the research and reasons to convince any faith group that aiding the SCV is not a good idea. I merely ask that the issue be raised with your members.

I see that the South Carolina Christian Action Council is willing to bring up many issues before the public, and that you specifically have an agenda against racism. So I am hoping that you will assist me in my campaign against the neo-Confederate movement by raising this one issue.

                                                                                   

                                                                        Sincerely Yours,

                                                                        Edward H. Sebesta

P.S. Temple of democracy comes from a 19^th century metaphor for the American Republic.

Co-editor of “Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction,” Univ. of Texas Press, 2008 (http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exhagneo.html), and “The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader: The ‘Great Truth’ About the ‘Lost Cause’” Univ. Press of Mississippi 2010. (http://www.upress.state.ms.us/books/1338).  Author of chapter about the Civil War and Reconstruction in the notorious Texas teaching standards in Politics and the History Curriculum: The Struggle over Standards in Texas and the Nation, published by Palgrave Macmillan.  http://www.keitherekson.com/books/politics-and-the-history-curriculum/

Tenth Amendment Center rejects Neo-Confederates and claims Confederate leaders were against nullification

In this article at web site Tenth Amendment Center is a claim that the leaders of the Confederacy were against nullification and that nullification isn't neo-Confederate.

http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/01/31/what-confederates-really-thought-of-nullification/?doing_wp_cron=1391255067.0440759658813476562500#.UuzeCvldWSo

The article identifies nullification with anti-slavery efforts before the Civil War. Calhoun isn't mentioned at all in this historical article about nullification, anti-slavery, and the Confederacy which is an interesting omission. Confederate leaders are alleged to be against nullification as stated in this quote from the article:

As we can see, Davis framed nullification as a principle that was malicious. Alexander Stephens, who would become the Vice President of the Confederacy, expressed similar views when considering nullification 1858, saying that he “did not believe in the doctrine of nullification.” Stephens firmly categorized himself as “no nullifier” during a debate about South Carolina’s usage of nullification during the Andrew Jackson administration. It is clear that both individuals not only despised nullification, but also considered it unconstitutional.

I am not going to untangle these historical claims about Jefferson Davis and his legal thinking or claims about nullification in the 19th century.

What is really interesting is that the Tenth Amendment Center is wanting to make it clear that they aren't neo-Confederate and they don't want people to identify nullification with the Confederacy.