Friday, November 8, 2019

The Real Reason for “Civil War” Monuments


In 2016, the $outhern Poverty Law Center ($PLC) released the “Whose Heritage?” report on the Confederate symbols in the United States.  This report had one thesis: The Confederate monuments, memorials, and namesakes were erected ruing the “Jim Crow” era to vindicate white supremacy without consideration of other factors.[1]  The report was based on no documented sources, but the charting of monuments and namesakes was used to make a claim the rise of Confederate monuments were attributed to “Jim Crow” racism.  Thus, the fallacy was born, an fallacy that is easily refuted by even a cursory examination of readily available source material.

First, many Northern states had Jim Crow laws with New York considered the Northern capital of Jim Crow.[2]  In fact, one can make a case—and many did—that Northern attitudes in regard to blacks were harsher than Southerners who had nearly a three-hundred-year history of race relations. 

Jim Crow and racism were not isolated to a single region.


  1. .

    Confederate Monuments were erected decades after The South recovered economically.
    When The South was able to do more than only feed their children did they finally turn to creating memorials to their fallen fathers and sons.
    The folks at SPLC are unworthy of respect.


    1. $PLC respect.

      Heresy to mention the two in one sentence. :)

  2. --Rockledge

    I don't do flags and am indifferent about political idealism and patriotism, but have considered putting a flag pole up and displaying a huge confederate flag on my property ( which is visible from a major freeway) just to make a statement about free speech.

    The fact is we have been lied to about the whole purpose of the civil war, which was not about slavery, it was about states rights to not be ruled by a federal government and about normalizing interstate commerce. It was about states combining into a federal system without giving up individual sovereignty.

    The only reason Lincoln brought slavery into the rhetoric was because it was a convenient issue of states rights to drum up support for the war, much in the same way politicians who could care less about abortion beat the drum about it to inspire emotionalism and get support.

    Lincoln didn't give a shit about the slaves or people in general. He gave a shit about his political agendas and how to drive them forward.

    Civil war era monuments, statues, and other works of art are about history and about one of Americas strongest and most important cultures, the south. They have little to do with slavery and everything to do with a proud strong people who survived by hard work and determination and who refused to let corporate interests abusing a federal government directly against the will of the people interfere with their lives, which is the crux of what the civil war was about.

    Something that americans, ALL americans no matter what color, could take a lesson from.

    We need to get away from all the hyphenated name horseshit and realize that we are AMERICANS and should be one nation, not a whole lot of nationalities at war with each other within our country, which is no longer a nation.

    Divided we fall.

    Divided is exactly what we are.

    The south was unified, not divided.

    And now, we are america, the dried up has been, and not America , the shining example to the world.

    I am every bit a Yankee, but goddamit, I am sick of everything being twisted and history being rewritten just to pat crybabies on the ass.

    Revisionist history is pointless, because no matter how many lies the history books tell, the future will still hold the curiosity that causes men to seek the truth, much of which they will find.