Wounded Knee

Yes, the Buffalo Soldiers, in conjunction with their Yankee counterparts, massacred our American Indians of all ages and sexes, using the expertise they perfected during the WBTS against Southern women, children, and men of all colors.

General Stan Watie

Via T

Lincoln's Emancipation Freed The Slaves!

"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government."
--Edward Abbey
Quote via The Bonnie Blue Blog
========

Must be true as the New York Times says it, you know like "Virginia, If you see it in the Sun, it's so." When someone continually lies, the Vietnamese say "His tongue has no bones" and that would certainly apply here.

".......when the Emancipation Proclamation became law—the president could use the map to follow Union troops as they liberated slaves........"

Fail. Go to the corner and put on the dunce cap. The exceptions are the areas that were then under Union control

The Great Emancipator
"Whereas on the 22nd day of September, A.D. 1862, a proclamation was issued by the President of the United States, containing, among other things, the following, to wit:

"That on the 1st day of January, A.D. 1863, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free...

Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana (except the parishes of St. Bernard, Palquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James, Ascension, Assumption, Terrebone, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the city of New Orleans), Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia (except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkeley, Accomac, Northhampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess Anne, and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth), and which excepted parts are for the present left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued."

NOTE - Slavery was NOT abolished in one Confederate (Tennessee) and four Union states (Maryland, Delaware. Kentucky, West Virginia, and Missouri)."

Pesky, pesky facts ........

Visualizing Slavery

Via Ann, Belle Grove

President Jefferson Davis, Died 6 December 1889

Jefferson Davis Funeral Richmond, Virginia - May 31, 1893
Richmonders lined the streets to watch the procession and over twenty thousand gathered at Hollywood Cemetery to witness the burial
=========
“The lamp of life waned low as the hour of midnight arrived; nor did it flicker into the brightness of consciousness at any time. Eagerly, yet tenderly, the watchers gazed at the face of the dying chieftain. His face, always calm and pale, gained additional pallor, and at a quarter to 1 o’clock of the morning of the 6^th day of December death came to the venerable leader.

There was nothing remarkable about the death-bed scene. The departure of the spirit was gentle and utterly painless. There were no dry eyes in the little assembly about the bed, and every heart bled with the anguish which found vent in Mrs. Davis’s sobs and cries.”

The Times-Democrat gave the following account of the closing scene: At 12:45 o’clock this morning Hon. Jefferson Davis, ex-President of the Confederate States, passed away at the residence of Associate Justice Charles E. Fenner. Only once did he waver in his belief that his case showed no improvement, and that was at an early hour yesterday morning, when he playfully remarked to Mr. Payne: “I am afraid that I shall be compelled to agree with the doctors for once, and admit that I am a little better.” At 7 o’clock Mrs. Davis administered some medicine, but the ex-President declined to receive the whole dose. She urged upon his the necessity of taking the remainder, but putting it aside, with the gentlest of gestures whispered,

“Pray, excuse me.” These were his last words.”

The Daily States said in its editorial:

“Throughout all the South there are lamentations and tears; in every country on the globe where there are lovers of liberty there is mourning; wherever there are men who admire heroic patriotism, dauntless resolution, fortitude, or intellectual power and supremacy, there is sincere sorrowing. The beloved of our land, the unfaltering upholder of constitutional liberty…is no more…” “Jefferson Davis is dead; but the principles for which he struggled, for the vindication of which he devoted his life, for which he suffered defeat, and unto which he clung unto death, still live. The fanatical howlings of the abolitionists, the tumult and thunders of civil war, the fierce mouthings of the organizers of reconstruction, and reconstruction itself, that black and foul disgrace of humanity, are all departed, sunk into silence like a tavern brawl, but the constitutional principles upon which the Confederacy was founded and for which Jefferson Davis spoke and struggled, for which he gave life and fortune, still survive in all their living power; and when they shall have been, if ever, really destroyed, this Republic will be transformed into one of the most oppressive and offensive oligarchies that has ever arisen amongst the civilized nations of the earth.”

The Times-Democrat of the 10^th had this editorial:

“If there was ever the shadow of doubt in the minds of the people of the United States of the hold of Jefferson Davis upon the hearts of the Southern people that doubt has been removed. From city and country, from every nook and hamlet, have come expressions of profoundest sorrow over his death; of grief at the passing away of the great Confederate chieftain. They turned to him as the Mussulman to his Mecca---the shrine at which all true Southern-born should worship. There has never been any division of sentiment as to the greatness of Jefferson Davis. He has always been the hero of his people---their best beloved. From the day that Lee laid down his arms at Appomattox to the hour of Jefferson Davis’s death the Southern people look upon the ex-President of the Confederacy as the embodiment of all that was grand and glorious in the Lost Cause. Standing alone as a citizen without the power to exercise his citizenship, the last surviving victim of sectional hate and malevolence, he was an exile while on the soil of his native land and in the midst of his own people. Jefferson Davis will go to the grave bathed in a people’s tears.”

(The Memorial Volume of Jefferson Davis, J.W. Jones, 1889, pp.473-509)

Via Bernhard

One Day The Totalitarian Thought-Police May Come For You

“Duty then is the sublimest word in the English language. You should do your duty in all things. You can never do more, you should never wish to do less.”
– Robert E. Lee

The Five A’s In ‘Raaaaacism’

"........events inspired a sense among many political theorists that the permanence of large nation-states was now, or at least should be, an open question. Perhaps smaller would be better, and decentralization of power — up to and including the division of large nations into smaller ones — was seen as a favorable trend by these theorists.

This, then, was the general inspiration of the League of the South and, much like the Lega Nord — which employed the symbolism of the medieval Lombard League as part of its appeal to the historic past of regional independence – the LoS quite naturally invoked the history of the Confederacy."

Via Rebellion

CONFEDERATE TRUTH

Yes, Ma-am.
For over a century, the truth about our South has been, deliberately, kept from the public. Along with generations of other Americans, we, our children and grandchildren have been literally brainwashed with the victors’ lies—and I do not use the word “brainwashed” carelessly, I use that word deliberately.

Trace Adkins: The Last Shot’s Not Been Fired In States’ Rights Fight

“I’ve had a lot of people over the years ask me, ‘Why’s your hair so long?,’” said Adkins. “The answer to that question is, towards the end of the war when the outcome was obvious to everybody, there were a group of incredibly dedicated Confederate soldiers who said, ‘For me this issue is not settled, and until the issue is settled, I’m not going to cut my hair.’ Neither will I.”

Via T

You Ain't Justa Whistlin' Dixie

You Ain't Justa Whistlin' Dixie

Wirz Memorial Set For Sunday, November 7th

How many Talk Show hosts or politicians speak about the men and women who helped make America the “Land of the Free and Home of the Brave?” Glenn Beck, of the Fox News channel, often speaks about the Constitution, Bill of Rights and those who stood for America’s Independence.

Is anyone talking about the upcoming War Between the States Sesquicentennial? The 150th Anniversary of the War for Southern Independence will be commemorated by such groups as the Georgia Division Sons of Confederate Veterans. See more information at: http://www.150wbts.org/

Do young people know the truth about Henry Wirz?

The 35th annual Captain Henry Wirz Memorial Service (a tradition started by the Alexander H. Stephens Camp 78 Sons of Confederate Veterans and Americus Chapter United Daughters of the Confederacy in 1976) will take place on Sunday afternoon, November 7th at 3 PM in the town of Andersonville, Georgia.

The guest speaker for the event will be Dr. Richard Rhone from Tuscaloosa, Alabama who is the Lieutenant Commander General of the Military Order of Stars and Bars. John Carroll will lead those assembled in the singing of “Dixie” and Andersonville Mayor Marvin Buagh will bring welcome.

For more information about the event contact James Gaston by email at: gaston7460@bellsouth.net
Captain Henry Wirz was born, Hartman Heinrich Wirz in November 1823, in Zurich, Switzerland where his father, Abraham Wirz was highly respected.

At the outbreak of the War Between the States, Wirz enlisted in the Fourth Louisiana infantry on June 16, 1861. He was promoted to sergeant a year later and was wounded at the Battle of Seven Pines. He never recovered from the injury to his left wrist and it caused him great pain for the rest of his life.

Wirz was promoted to Captain on June 12, 1862 and was first detailed to General John Winder where he was given command of a Confederate military prison in Richmond, Virginia.

After serving a year as special emissary to President Jefferson Davis in Paris and Berlin, on March 27, 1864, he was installed as commandant of Andersonville Prison at Fort Sumter in Georgia. Wirz did the best he could do with many Union prisoners and very little food and medicine. It is written that the guards got the same food and medicine as the prisoners.

The Confederacy sent a distress message to Union President Abraham Lincoln and Union General Ulysses S. Grant. The South pleaded for an exchange of Confederate and Union prisoners. Lincoln and Grant, however, refused believing the Union prisoners might go home but the Confederate prisoners might go back to fight another day.

Captain Henry Wirz was unfairly charged of war crimes and even though witnesses for the defense could testify, his fate was already decided. Among those who knew of Wirz’s innocence was a Union soldier who was a prisoner at Andersonville.

Wirz was executed in Washington, D.C. on November 10, 1865.

The Confederate Reenactors and Honor Guard of the Sons of Confederate Veterans Camp 78 (Muckalee Guards) will perform the closing ceremony at the monument to Wirz in Andersonville placed there by the United Daughters of the Confederacy (Georgia Division).

Calvin E. Johnson, Jr.

Dear Mr. Combs,

"I read your question for HK on Southern Heritage News & Views. While I expect that HK is fully capable of giving you an answer, I thought I would give you one of my own as well. The slavery question, as you are no doubt aware, is a prickly one. We as Southerners can't escape it, and we must admit that our ancestors were guilty in this respect. This does not mean we need to fall down on our knees, as most of humanity, including much of Africa, to this day is guilty of practicing slavery. We simply need to recognize our faults without getting overly worked up about them.

So many get so worked up about slavery, and apply modern ways of thinking about the issue, that they can't see the bigger picture. It is important to remember everything that was going on and the context of events. It is also important to note a distinction in secessionist documents. There are two sets of documents. First are the actual Ordinances of Secession and second are the so called Declarations of Secession. The Ordinances are the actual legal secession legislation passed by each state, these are often very limited in their language on causes. The Declarations of Secession were written after the states had already seceded by a relatively few individuals, and only four states adopted them, all of them in the Deep South.

Firstly, just as slavery was an issue during the Revolutionary War, slavery was an issue during Lincoln's War. Compromises were made during the Revolution on the slavery issue, and they continued to be made through the drafting and ratification of the Constitution. The American Revolutionaries could not afford to quibble extensively on the issue of slavery if they wished to win the bigger cause. Even the Declaration of Independence from England lists slavery as a cause of the Americans. In spite of this we recognize today that slavery was nowhere close to being the principle issue. The Declaration reads in part “He (the king) has excited domestic insurrections amongst us (freed our slaves and armed them against us), and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.” Items in parentheses added by myself. The English passed their own Emancipation Proclamation and had the Brits won the Revolution, American slavery may well have ended close to that time.

The South needed to make sure that slave owners supported the government. If slave interests were not appeased, then slave owners might not support secession. It can't be forgotten that that Lincoln and many others were promising to protect slavery in the states where it existed if states remained in the Union. From the perspective of rich slave holders, their personal interests might be better served in the Union rather than risking war and punishment. The bigger the slave holder, the more reason they had to oppose secession unless their interests appeared secure in the immediate future.

It's always difficult to fully describe the mindset of a people in time, because just as today, there is no fixed mindset amongst everyone. Even among members of each political party there are factions today. Not everyone who is a Democrat or Republican today agrees with everything other members of their party is doing, nor do they all share the exact same views about their opposition party.

However, if I'm going to simplify the mindset of people back then as much as I can, I would suggest that the conflict was born close to the time of the Revolution. The history of the United States is nothing but one long fight between the Federalist faction and the Anti-Federalist faction; between Hamiltonians and Jeffersonians. While the Hamiltonians were originally somewhat aligned with classical monarchical conservatism, they became the nucleus of modern liberalism in America and quickly adopted a socialist mindset. The Jeffersonians are the ancestors of modern conservatism and libertarian thought. Examine the Northern Puritans who wished to bring light to the world. If one takes away their religion and replace it with human transcendentalists with a socialist/collectivist desire to bring their vision of light to the world, one has a mess.

The feud between the Jeffersonians and Federalists seemed to be over after Jefferson won the Presidency in 1800 and the Federalists continued to self destruct over the next decade. However, the Federalists did not go away, they just started reinventing themselves and giving themselves new names. The Whig Party was a reincarnation of the Federalists, and eventually the original Republicans were too. This is what is being referred to in the Georgia Declaration of Secession where it says, “The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. While it attracts to itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political heresies, of condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in the administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose.” Those “exploded political heresies” etc., are the policies and beliefs of Federalism which the Jeffersonians had repeatedly defeated.

The Hamiltonians were always looking for ways to get back in power in Washington and restore their big government ideals. The Northern faction figured out they could gain traction by using slavery as an issue against the limited government Southern faction. It's exactly the same thing that is going on all the way up today. If you oppose the big government today, they accuse you of racism. The history of the United States is one continuous fight between the exact same factions.

Slavery became a key issue because the Southern elite were guilty of being tied to it. By ending the extension of slavery they would limit the number of influential Southerns who would move to a new territory or state. If Southern influence was limited, then the Northern faction would take control by having more people moving there. If the Northern fraction was in control of a new state, then they would get the votes and gain full control over Washington.

This is why the real issue of the Missouri Compromise, and everything else, was always really about the balance of power not slavery itself. It was about control of territory for votes in Washington. In the Missouri Compromise the concern in the North was that the South was going to get control over more territory if Missouri entered as a slave state, so the South compromised and allowed them to let Maine split off from Massachusetts and join as a free state, sending more Senators to DC. Not a single slave was freed, not a single slave was advantaged, and slavery expanded. However, the North did manage to maintain the balance of power. Slavery was obviously not the principle concern of the Northern political faction. At no time was there ever a debate about forcing the Southern states to abolish slavery. The debate was always about extending slavery into the territories, and thus future control of Washington.

This manipulation of the slavery issue for political purposes had disastrous consequences. Rather than simply debating the moral issues of slavery, it became inseparably tied to larger political interests. Attacks galvanized Southerners behind slavery as a political issue necessary to make sure Southern interests and Jeffersonian policies were maintained. If slavery did not expand into the territories, then the Hamiltonians would gain power. In other words, centralized abolitionism was literally in the minds of some Southerners equal to big government Hamiltonianism, and Slave interests were equal to small government Jeffersonianism. In other words, by the time of the war a Southerner could write about the evils of abolitionism and actually be talking about the evils of big government.

To some extent one has to put themselves in the shoes of the people back then. It's difficult to find anything contemporary to compare to the expansion of slavery into new territories, but a somewhat imperfect example would be the oil industry. Oil obviously does not have exactly the same moral implications of slavery, as a business is not inherently good or bad, but to some extent we can see some similarities. Liberals like to manipulate the oil issue as a weapon in their arsenal against free enterprise and Jeffersonian principles. While these attacks are slimy manipulative and often completely wrong, sometimes one sees conservatives go too far in defending oil companies because the issue has become overly politicized. For liberals, big oil is a image they have created to attach to conservatives, while some conservatives feel the need to defend almost every action of every oil company because they have mentally attached the oil companies to the cause at large.

So, we can say that the South was guilty of slavery, and we would even be right to recognize that they were wrong t to adopt the mindset about the need for slavery, but we must understand things from their perspective as well. I can't imagine the difficulty in separating the political from the moral issue at the time. We must also recognize that slavery itself was not the principle issue in the fight even if it became attached.

I'm convinced that had the South been successful in gaining independence that slavery would have ended within it's borders. Without the politicization of the slavery issue by Northerners, and without the need to extend slavery for votes in the government, rationality would have prevailed as it did in every other westernized country. Not only was slavery increasingly viewed as immoral in the west, it was also becoming more and more economically unstable. Slaves were becoming more and more expensive. This was partially because of the inability to purchase new cheap slaves from Africa. The Confederate Constitution forbid the importation of slaves except from the United States, so all slaves had to be born in the Confederacy or the United States Most likely slavery would have ended through gradual emancipation enacted by each individual state in the Confederacy, just as it had been accomplished in the North. This would also have come with the benefit of a lack of racial animosity which was stirred up by Northern victory and Reconstruction Southern segregation, for example, is largely a postwar institution.

Ask yourself the following questions.

Q. Was the elections of the Republicans an immediate threat to slavery in the South?

A. No, it was only an immediate threat to the extension of slavery in the territories.

Q. If the South thought expansion into the territories by slavery was necessary, why would they secede and give up on the expansion of slavery into the territories?

A. Because the expansion of slavery was only necessary to fight against Federalist power in DC. The expansion of slavery was not necessary if the states were no longer in the Union. The issue of slavery for both the North and the South was a means, not an ends."

Sincerely,

Ryan McKenzie
the29thtn@yahoo.com

The Last Year Of The War In North Carolina

The revolution of 1861 occurred in the North as a new radical interpretation of the Constitution gave impetus to an invasion of the American South to prevent its independence. As explained below, this new interpretation marginalized Jefferson’s words and founding intent, and erected a new centralized government that drew its authority from military force, not the republican States which created it. For more on Alfred Moore Waddell, see www.cfhi.net. “Historical Essays.” Bernhard Thuersam, Director Cape Fear Historical Institute Jefferson’s Vague Phrases: “No man volunteered to fight for the Confederacy who was not prompted to do so by the most natural and the most powerful incentives that can influence human conduct. Each and every one of them felt that, whether personally responsible for bringing on the dreadful issue or not, in shouldering his gun to meet it, he was defending not only his heritage of liberty, but his home and property from the lawless hand of an invader, who sought to subjugate them to his will – that he was obeying the first law of nature, and was therefore justified in the sight of God and man. We are now a great consolidated nation more or less loving brethren, moving on one path to a common destiny, and the statesmanship of the present day is teaching us new lessons in the science of government. Only last month we heard from a great Senator from the breezy West, that Thomas Jefferson “borrowed his ideas of the social contract from Rousseau and the French philosophers,” that “his dreamy imagination was captivated by their vague phrases and imperfect generalizations,” that “he had no conception of the moral forces which give a nation strength, duration and grandeur,” and that “he failed to comprehend the supreme obligation of law as the bond which united society.” This same great Senator, to be sure, had already apotheosized John Brown, whose soul, they say, is marching somewhere, but any embarrassment which that fact might suggest to his present argument could only arise in a disloyal mind, and is, therefore, unworthy of consideration. The Jeffersonian maxim that just government derive their powers from the consent of the governed is, in the eyes of this great Senator from the West, one of those vague phrases and imperfect generalizations by which the “dreamy imagination” of the father of modern Democracy was captivated; whereas the truth, according to the same authority, is that all governments rest “not upon consent, but upon force.” The South, he says, tried the theory that governments rest on consent and was logical in doing so, but Grant’s guns “refuted their fatal syllogism.” “The rule of the majority is still the rule of the strongest,” exultingly exclaims this great man. Alas! what answer can be made to this argument of numbers…Verily we should rejoice that we have lived to see the true character of our government thus explained and accepted, and the whole duty of citizenship, as well as the aim of successful statesmanship, resolved into the simple process of “going with the crowd.” May the crowd go right, henceforth, is at once the prayer and only hope of the patriot.” (An Address Before the Association of the Army of Northern Virginia, Hon. Alfred Moore Waddell, The Last Year of the War in North Carolina, W. Ellis Jones, Book and Job Printer, 1888, pp. 6-7)

Cornwall Furnace, Rome Georgia

Manufacturers of cannon, caissons and other war material for the Confederacy.

Via T

American South Bookstore

Excellent.

The Reason

SHNV

In this article Karen Gardner remarked “African Americans may have fought for the Confederacy to protect their families from invading Yankees.”

That is the reason that EVERY Confederate fought!

Clifton Palmer McLendon

John Ainsworth: On The Ultimate Goal Of The Civil War (SIC)

At the Restore The Constitution Rally, Greensboro National Park, NC. The Most Controversial Speaker and Civil War Historian. See his speech in two parts HERE.

North Carolina’s Ordinance Of Secession---May 20th 1861

An Ordinance to dissolve the union between the State of North Carolina and the other States united with her, under the compact of government entitled "The Constitution of the United States."
READ MORE HERE.