The Rising Tide of Southern Nationalism

[MORTARDUDE]

http://www.sierratimes.com/03/05/06/albenson.htm


The Rising Tide of Southern Nationalism

By Al Benson Jr.

Most of us have noticed, in recent years, how the attempted ethnic cleansing of the South seems to have been stepped up. It's almost as if the politically correct feel their window of opportunity is closing and they better get it done quickly. But, then, maybe ethnic cleansing is too gentle a term for what they are trying to do--cultural genocide might well be a more fitting term--as the politically correct cultural marxists attempt to completely erase any memory of the Old South and what it stood for (which wasn't just slavery).
Although the cultural Marxists have won many battles, all has not gone smoothly for them. Where they have triumphed, in many cases, it has been with the help of cowardly politicians and big business, all of whom hurriedly assure us that Southern heritage is "bad for business." Interesting that it hasn't hurt it up to this point! However, more recently they have been getting some opposition. Many Southern folks have just grown tired of hearing about how bad their ancestors and culture is and are beginning to speak up in defense of their heritage.

In his book "The Southern Nation--The New Rise of the Old South" author Rob Thornton has stated: "Southern nationalism is a drive to preserve the social, religious, political, and cultural traditions of the Southern people. True Southerners denounce the secular humanist tendencies that have guided the empire since Appomattox. These Northern intellectual fantasies value nature above man and man above God. Meanwhile they place commercial greed and materialism above all."

The Kennedy Brothers, in their book "The South was Right" have dealt with emerging Southern nationalism. In discussing Southern folks who have gotten tired of being treated as second-class citizens they have written: "Their activities are usually limited to the local level, but even in these areas it is possible to detect a resurgence of pride in the South. The resurgence of Southern pride is greatly feared by the Northern liberal and his Southern scalawag counterpart because national pride strikes at the heart of liberal philosophy--guilt. Modern liberals are driven by a sense of guilt."

And Franklin Sanders, in an article in "Southern Events" magazine probably said it as well as anyone could have when he wrote: "We are the sons and daughters of the people who made a covenant with God and crossed that ocean and climbed the Blue Ridge and watered the land with their sweat and blood and fed it with the bones and bodies of wives, husbands, and children. We are the children of people who fought Indians and Frenchmen and British and Yankees and Reconstruction and poverty and boll weevils and pellagra and hook worm and everything else hell and the Yankees could throw at us--and survived it all by the grace of God. We are the people whom Providence has hammered into this land like a mighty iron stake, and we cannot be pulled out. We are the children who say 'My people have been here 400 years, and nobody is running me out'."

It is worth noting that this is the attitude that the Yankees tried to suppress with their government school system, which was one of the most integral parts of their "reconstruction" program. Yet, 140 years later, for all of their vaunted successes and financing, they have not fully erased it. With all their money and brainwashing, they have not been able to fully overcome those Southerners who are willing to think for themselves, praise God.

The heritage of the Old South is a Christian heritage, and I submit that this is the main reason the cultural Marxists seek to destroy it and erase its memory. Some Christians, at some point, will stand up and speak the truth, and if enough people listen to them, the lies of the cultural Marxists and their friends will be in jeopardy. Better to try to make a people ashamed of their heritage so they never attempt to seek the truth about it, thus you keep them in cultural bondage to your whims. However, in God's providence, it will not work. As sure as God is the author of all truth, that truth cannot be forever suppressed and will, at some point, be revealed.

Perhaps the quickest way to promote the rise of Southern nationalism is not to promote pride, but rather to promote a sense of thankfulness to God and a sense of our needing His divine guidance in what we do in the future. Let us not seek to foster arrogant pride in heritage, but rather an attitude of humility toward and thankfulness to God for what He has been pleased to give us, that, with His help, we might be about reclaiming our heritage, that our children and grandchildren might be able to enjoy it, and pass the truths of it along to their children.

[philly]

Although I do not foster Southern mentality of pre Civil War era, I do, however, believe it is a part of our nation's history. Any history has a right to be told/known. The folks celebrating their heritage, shouldn't be all in "your face"either. It's a delicate subject and one that should be done with respect and dignity to Blacks. For example, the rebel flags should not be flown in town squares, but left hanging in museums or festivals. I think many Blacks look at the rebel flag as symbolic of slavery. Although, it's not completely representative of slavery, we should not open old wounds.

[Jerry D]

So, in all fairness Philly then it would be ok for the banning of all controversial flags then ? The Mexican Flag may be offensive to Texans but, you will find a Mexico Flag in front of many a Mexican Resteraunt. The Union Jack may be offensive to Irish Americans, The Spanish flag may be offensive to Cuban-Americans the US flag may be offensive to Vietnamese or Native Americans .Then there is the ANC flag that was used by Black Power groups. Every year you have the GBLT group who wave their Pride flag in your face when they march in parades. Any flag can be offensive to a small segment of the population. Everyone keeps saying we live in a Democracy and that majority rules in a democracy. But in these PC times a few / minority of even 1 persons rights seems to be more important then the majority of the citizens rights. so If lets say someone is allergic to peanut butter we should take all peanut products off the shelf so they won't accidentally ingest any . Thats the same argument it seems people are using when it comes to the Confederate Battle Flag in the US today. until The NAACP took it apon themselves to use this symbol of the south as a money raiser and a PAC tool nobody cared about the Flag issue.
In Vanderbilt College in Tennessee they want to take the name Confederate off the name of a residential Hall paid for by the United Daughters of the Confederacy. If this case is allowed to happen it won't just affect the UDC it will set a precedent that any Chair / Building on a State College Campus may be re-named at the whim of the board of regents. So how would you like it if your ancestor donated a lot of money to your alma mater and then later decided to rename the Building after someone else would that be fair?? How about the Soldier who died under his battle flag being denied the flag he chose in life to fly over him in death. in Higginsville ,Mo they have taken down the Flag over their Confederate cemetery. At Point Lookout ,MD they took down the Confederate Flag from the mass grave site of over 5000 buried southerners. What if down here in Ga. we took down the US flag over Andersonville POW camp graveyard where over 5000 Union troops are buried. would their descendants be offended ? I know I would if my ancestor was treated that way. If you ever come down to Dixie you will find out all the Yankee fables told about Southerners and the way blacks were treated were that fables. Yes there were separate schools, and areas to sit in busses and water fountains and restrooms . But by now all that would have been changed do to economics. look at Florida. they have a constitutional Amendment on class size now.
I am sorry if any of this offends anyone but I am tired of people telling me when I can include God in my life and what the South means to me . My GrGrGrampa Hut fought in the WAR Between the States because the Federal government imposed martial law on Missouri and disbanded the duly elected Government because they voted to secede from the Union. The right of the Individual State before the WBTS were larger then, than after the war ended. then the right of the states got reduced and all states after the war lost the legal right to secede from the union.
Prop.#13 a few years back reduced the taxes of millions of people living in Calif. now what if the President of the US decided that Prop#13 was illegal and that the reduced tax revenue that the PEOPLE of Calif. are keeping from the state was needed to fix the debt of the country not just Calif. would the people of Calif. appreciate having to pay more then their share to pay off the Federal debt ? I don't think so and thats the way many of my Ancestors thought when Lincoln imposed high tariffs on the South for all forign imports and exports . Today that would be like if the President imposed a 35% tarrif on Sony and Honda. so insted of paying 10000$ for something from Japan you would be paying $13500 and that $3500 dollars would go to Washington City.
Last but not least what is the definition of a Rebel Flag? if you take the Literal definition from Webster's then the US "Old Glory" Flag is a Rebel flag to the British! so are you telling US to take down all the Old Glory 50 star flags from the town squares ? And Yes The US "Old Glory flag flew over Slaves and imported slaves from Africa for at least 91 years . And because of 130 years of reconstruction in the South after the war.These old wounds will never heal.
"E Pluribus Unum" "Deo Vindice" amen

[MORTARDUDE]

Excellent post, Jerry !! Thanks !!

Larry

[BLUEHAWK]

We're americans now, and we were then too.
I confess... I cringe whenever I hear anyone say:
"It all went south", as if to say it all went badly.
or
"That was handled in a very cavalier manner", as if to say it was handled carelessly.

Dunno, I don't let 'em bother me much anymore. If it's lasted this long then there ain't much danger of it being forgotten. I know what I know, and I try real hard to be reasonably studious so it can be gotten correctly.

Our greatest contest, yet to be resolved, is constitutional, to this day. I see that "Civil War" as merely the violent manifestation of what was not settled at the Constitutional Convention... and what is still plaguing every american alive (except, of course, those who benefit from it remaining the same).

I know, and everyone who knows me knows, which flag will be coveriing my casket.

[philly]

Jerry,

I respect your views on this subject and do not wish to offend anyone. However, it seems to me we should be working on eliminating separation in our nation. Flying a flag that means two different things to two different races should be considered heavily. During your dating years, you may have frequented a restaurant with your girl. Let's say she cheated on you and you broke up with her. Every time you passed that restaurant your stomach churned and you were reminded of her betrayal. Now, consider for a moment the rebel flag may have a similar affect on the Blacks. Is it more important to fly your rebel flag or is it more important to help a people get passed slavery?

[Jerry D]

Well Philly;That restaurant situation may have a bad feeling to me but for my grandchild's it won't have the same meanin' .And the St.Andrews' Cross Flag is only a rebel flag because the South didn't remain separate from the Union after the War ended . To our British Cousins' the Betsy Ross Flag is a Rebel Flag so I guess on the 4th of July it would be insensitive to celebrate with the Betsy Ross Flag flying free on the Town Square. Where a British Tourist may drive by and see it and become offended? :cd:
Lincoln and Company freed all the slaves in the South over 130 years ago in 1863 during the Civil War when the southern states didn't have a say one way or another. Then the good folks in the North Freed all the rest of the Slaves in Missouri and Kentucky and other states with the 13th amendment after the war was over ! If Slavery was an Issue to fight the Civil War over why? didn't the North when they had the say in Congress and Lincoln supposedly was for freeing the Slaves, do so at the same time? The reason why was they needed the Border Slave States in the Union and if Lincoln would have freed all the Slaves in 1863.The Border States would have Left the Union also. That would have ended the war in 1863 and the Confederacy would have still been a country today. In 1860's people in the Northern Cities didn't want 2 million or more newly freed blacks coming north to take away their jobs. Thats why the underground railroad ended in Canada not Illinois. Even during the Civil War runaway slaves that didn't join the Union Army as laborers were sent back to their Masters until the Emancipation Act stopped that. But,only the Slaves in the 12 Recognized by the Federal government as being in the Confederacy . Kentucky and Missouri states that both had representatives in both the Union and Confederate Government could still have Slaves and wern't included under the Emancipation Proclamation.:By the President of the United States of America:
A PROCLAMATION

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; and the executive
government of the United States, including the military and naval
authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such
persons and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any
of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom.

"That the executive will on the 1st day of January aforesaid,
by proclamation, designate the States and parts of States, if any,
in which the people thereof, respectively, shall then be in
rebellion against the United States; and the fact that any State
or the people thereof shall on that day be in good faith
represented in the Congress of the United States by members
chosen thereto at elections wherein a majority of the qualified
voters of such States shall have participated shall, in the
absence of strong countervailing testimony, be deemed conclusive
evidence that such State and the people thereof are not then
in rebellion against the United States."

Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United
States, by virtue of the power in me vested as Commander-In-Chief
of the Army and Navy of the United States in time of actual armed
rebellion against the authority and government of the United States,
and as a fit and necessary war measure for suppressing said
rebellion, do, on this 1st day of January, A.D. 1863, and in
accordance with my purpose so to do, publicly proclaimed for the
full period of one hundred days from the first day above mentioned,
order and designate as the States and parts of States wherein the
people thereof, respectively, are this day in rebellion against
the United States the following, to wit:

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, Morthhampton, 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.

And by virtue of the power and for the purpose aforesaid, I do
order and declare that all persons held as slaves within said
designated States and parts of States are, and henceforward shall
be, free; and that the Executive Government of the United States,
including the military and naval authorities thereof, will
recognize and maintain the freedom of said persons.

And I hereby enjoin upon the people so declared to be free to
abstain from all violence, unless in necessary self-defence; and
I recommend to them that, in all case when allowed, they labor
faithfully for reasonable wages.

And I further declare and make known that such persons of
suitable condition will be received into the armed service of
the United States to garrison forts, positions, stations, and
other places, and to man vessels of all sorts in said service.

And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice,
warranted by the Constitution upon military necessity, I invoke
the considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor
of Almighty God.

-------------------------------------

On Jan. 1, 1863, U.S. President Abraham Lincoln declared free
all slaves residing in territory in rebellion against the federal
government. This Emancipation Proclamation actually freed few
people. It did not apply to slaves in border states fighting on
the Union side; nor did it affect slaves in southern areas already
under Union control. Naturally, the states in rebellion did not
act on Lincoln's order. But the proclamation did show Americans--
and the world--that the civil war was now being fought to end slavery.

Lincoln had been reluctant to come to this position. A believer
in white supremacy, he initially viewed the war only in terms of
preserving the Union. As pressure for abolition mounted in
Congress and the country, however, Lincoln became more sympathetic
to the idea. On Sept. 22, 1862, he issued a preliminary proclamation
announcing that emancipation would become effective on Jan. 1, 1863,
in those states still in rebellion. Although the Emancipation
Proclamation did not end slavery in America--this was achieved
by the passage of the 13TH Amendment to the Constitution on Dec.
18, 1865--it did make that accomplishment a basic war goal and
a virtual certainty.

DOUGLAS T. MILLER

It was not till 1865 the rest of the United States ratified the 13th. Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Proposal and Ratification

The thirteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States was proposed to the legislatures of the several States by the Thirty-eighth Congress, on the 31st day of January, 1865, and was declared, in a proclamation of the Secretary of State, dated the 18th of December, 1865, to have been ratified by the legislatures of twenty-seven of the thirty-six States. The dates of ratification were: Illinois, February 1, 1865; Rhode Island, February 2, 1865; Michigan, February 2, 1865; Maryland, February 3, 1865; New York, February 3, 1865; Pennsylvania, February 3, 1865; West Virginia, February 3, 1865; Missouri, February 6, 1865; Maine, February 7, 1865; Kansas, February 7, 1865; Massachusetts, February 7, 1865; Virginia, February 9, 1865; Ohio, February 10, 1865; Indiana, February 13, 1865; Nevada, February 16, 1865; Louisiana, February 17, 1865; Minnesota, February 23, 1865; Wisconsin, February 24, 1865; Vermont, March 9, 1865; Tennessee, April 7, 1865; Arkansas, April 14, 1865; Connecticut, May 4, 1865; New Hampshire, July 1, 1865; South Carolina, November 13, 1865; Alabama, December 2, 1865; North Carolina, December 4, 1865; Georgia, December 6, 1865.

Ratification was completed on December 6, 1865.

The amendment was subsequently ratified by Oregon, December 8, 1865; California, December 19, 1865; Florida, December 28, 1865 (Florida again ratified on June 9, 1868, upon its adoption of a new constitution); Iowa, January 15, 1866; New Jersey, January 23, 1866 (after having rejected the amendment on March 16, 1865); Texas, February 18, 1870; Delaware, February 12, 1901 (after having rejected the amendment on February 8, 1865); Kentucky, March 18, 1976 (after having rejected it on February 24, 1865).

The amendment was rejected (and not subsequently ratified) by Mississippi, December 4, 1865.

So Why was freedom for Slaves good for Confederate Blacks but not till two years later for all the rest of the Blacks in the United States after the War? I believe all Slavery weather with Blacks owning blacks ,whites owning whites , Whites owning blacks, are Arabs owning Whites, are any race owning any other race of humans is wrong. But until 1830 for the British and 1865 for the US Slavery was legal (maybe not right ,but legal) So we can look at the Past with our ideas but always remember the Past is the Past, we learn from the past to not make the same errors again in the future.
"Deo Vindice" " E Pluribus Unum"

[BLUEHAWK]

A lot of good heartfelt posts here on this one..

We need also recall, honestly with conscience, the many many horrible things that have been done under the banner of our Stars and Stripes since 1776.

There are citizens of our own country, and others, still today who justifiably regard the current american flag with horror. No use denying it.

What most americans are trying to do is make sure none of that ever happens again so our States and people can remain united and free, decent and honorable to ourselves and all others, permanently. So our flag may not again be sullied and desecrated by ideas.

This requires vigilance more than it does violence, in my opinion.

[1CAVCCO15MED]

My ancestors were slave owners. They also fought for the Union. On my grandmother's side they didn't own slaves and fought for the Confederacy. It was more complicated than slavery. One thing though, I would be much more supportive of the Confederate Flag being flown if those that value it for the right reasons would show up at all these Klan and Nazi rallies and defend the Confederate Flag from these crazies. To my knowlege, that has NEVER happened and therefore the legitmate supporters of the flag have allowed the memory and symbolism represented by that flag to be changed and allowed it to be used as a symbol of hate. To me this is the same as allowing a flag to be burned, actually it is worse. The Confederate has to be taken back from those that use it as a symbol of hate. To me this is a much more pressing problem than it being taken down in public places. I will make an exception for Confederate cemetaries and graves. Oh, by the way, my grandfather was in the Klan.

[BLUEHAWK]

1cav -

Excellent suggestion, I'm old and rickety enough now to risk being maimed or murdered without much caring about the personal consequences (my daughters would take exception though), if to protest in person at KKK and Nazi rallies would go any distance in getting them to stop abusing an honorable american flag... your analysis is absolutely accurate, and has not been done so far as I'm aware either.

Complex problem, how to best accomplish that mission... I ain't on their mailing lists, wouldn't mind being though, if they'd limit their trash talk to announcing location and time of forthcoming public expressions of free speech.