Recently – people on the radical left, in their never ending war on American culture and our historical relevance, have resorted to calling Confederate soldiers “terrorists” and anarchists to justify the removal of Confederate monuments. This is beyond insulting, it is also dangerous.
Before we go any further, as many of you can tell by my name, I am not a 100% White Anglo Saxon Protestant. To the contrary, I am ½ Afghan, and most of the other ½ is Scots Irish. There aren’t too many ½ Afghan ½ Scots Irishmen in the Valley. Growing up in Northern Virginia (Arlington/McLean), I experienced and saw racism in a way which no person should ever have to experience or witness. Also for the record, my ancestors fought for the North (24th Iowa and 32nd Ohio). One of them, Pfc Cameron, 32nd Ohio A Company, was killed at the Siege of Harpers Ferry September 1862.
While everyone can and likely does agree that slavery was a horrible evil, the fact remains that it was the concept of ‘states rights’ and the Morrill Tariff, which caused the Civil War. And at the time, there was no legal precedent as to whether secession was legal or illegal. It wasn’t until after the Civil War that the US Supreme Court decided that secession was illegal under the constitution. The 1869 decision of Texas vs. White determined once and for all that secession was illegal.
The men who fought for the Confederacy were for the most part, not slave owners, but were small farmers or laborers who viewed their individual state as their own country. And saw the USA as a loose group of individual countries united under a single flag and ruling body, but with the right to exit if they chose. Slavery was a “hot button issue” but the real issue was whether or not the federal government could interfere in what a member state could do. An argument we are still having to this day when it comes to abortion, marriage, gun ownership rights, and so many other issues.
The Morrill Tariff of 1860 was opposed by pretty much all the Southern states, as they knew protectionism would harm their economy. The Northern Republicans and Northern Democrats supported the tariff because it would help their industry, and would force the plantation owners to have to sell directly to them, and less to Europe. The British were fighting mad over the tariff, and that was why the British were sympathetic to the Confederate cause. And the Morrill Tariff was the main reason the Democratic party split in 1860, with the Northern Democrats nominating Stephen Douglas and Southern Democrats nominating John Breckinridge. All but giving the election of 1860 to Abraham Lincoln.
So to call these people who were fighting for their homelands traitors and terrorists is factually inaccurate. One must also remind our “friends” on the left that California is currently gathering petitions to secede from the USA. Does that make the supporters of a United Republic of California traitors and terrorists also?
The Confederate soldiers, who the radical left calls traitors and terrorists, were our fathers, our uncles, our cousins. One of them, probably an artilleryman, shot and killed my great great great grandfather at Maryland Heights Harpers Ferry. I am sorry that my ancestor was killed. The letters among my ancestors about his death are quite touching. But the soldier who killed my ancestor was not a terrorist, he was a man, probably just as scared as my ancestor, who was trying to protect his homeland from what they would have seen as a foreign invasion force. Trying to kill another soldier before that soldier killed him first. Something soldiers are supposed to do. I cannot over emphasize enough the idea that up to 1865, very few thought of themselves as Americans. They thought of themselves as New Yorkers, Virginians, North/South Carolinians, etc. And while yes the Civil Was fought primarily to save the Union, the fact is that Union regiments were raised by the individual states. And no Northern Governor would have allowed Ohio soldiers to be mixed in with New Hampshire soldiers to form a regiment. Each Governor was proud to have commissioned each regiment. Same with the Confederacy.
In the name of Political Correctness, these people on the “tolerant left” will never stop. Activists are already trying to remove the name of Thomas Jefferson from the University he founded, The University of Virginia. Activists are trying to remove Robert E. Lee’s name from the school he saved after the Civil War, Washington Lee University. They also tried and failed last year to remove the name Woodrow Wilson from Princeton University, a school he was once President of – due to his racism. Now for reasons too long to list on here, I believe Woodrow Wilson was one of the worst Presidents in US History. But having once been President of Princeton, Woodrow Wilson’s name belongs at Princeton. We can debate Wilson’s racist legacy, the creation of the Federal Reserve, multiple foreign policy mistakes, and the Depression he caused in the end of his Presidency, but don’t remove the good he did while head of Princeton because he was an avowed racist as President. Same goes with J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI. We can all be horrified by his targeting Martin Luther King, but at the same time we must acknowledge that without Hoover, there would be no FBI. The list goes on and on.
Many of the people who support the removal of the Confederate monuments in the name of tolerance are the same people who support Sharia in the name of tolerance, or who state that anyone who uses the hashtag #alllivesmatter is inherently racist. So this is not about racism, it’s about making themselves feel good or look good to their narrow minded elitist buddies at cocktail parties. Does racism still exist? Of course it does. And we should fight racism – but we should not and must not sanitize our history.
Condoleezza Rice stated earlier this month that “sanitizing your history to make you feel better, it’s a bad thing”. Given that Ms. Rice’s ancestors were slaves, and that she marched with patriots to be sure she and her race had equal rights as Americans, we should take her words very seriously. And for those whose ancestors fought for the Confederacy, I salute you in honoring your patriot ancestor. I hope that you will honor my ancestors in the same way. I support you 100% in flying the Stars and Bars. And to you who think that the Confederate soldiers were terrorists, please go to University of California, Berkeley, and tell the radicals trying to leave the USA that they are terrorists, and see what they do to you.
31 comments
Thanks for a reflective article, Mr. Massoud – yes, many Virginians today have a varied heritage, and we are not out at rallies promoted by dubious characters. We are home with our families. But we still do not want to see symbols of our state’s identity and history torn down because they do not meet with approval from a left-oriented group. We grew up with this and want our children to understand and learn from the past.
Americans – by and large – are notoriously blind or confused about history, and confabulate anachronistic facts into a melting pot of ‘history’, ‘heritage’, ‘the good ol’ days’, etc. Nostalgia is a grand meme of American culture: in so many of our movies, in much of portraiture and landscape art, in almost every lyric of country music, etc. But as anyone – who actually is thinking, and reading, and talking with others in the community – should know, the ‘good ol’ days’ were seldom that, and never that for everyone. So, surely we should not call Confederate Flaggers, and the like, ‘terrorists’ – because they (or mostly, they) are not that – but we can call them – in great likelihood ‘nostalgists’. How can nostalgia be offensive? Well, if somewhere were to come up to you and say ‘I liked you 25 years ago’ …. you might not like that … or if someone told called your local political group ‘quaintly backward looking’ … you might consider re-branding your group. But with regard to many people arguing to preserve the historical art of the ‘Lost Cause’ era let us be clear, that, HISTORICALLY, all those statues are NOT from the Civil War Era but from many many and even very many decades later! So, the Flaggers, the Sons of, etc who want to preserve the statues, and parks, and architecture just as it is ARE NOT preserving Civil War history, but, RATHER, ‘Lost Cause’ iconography, from the ‘Jim Crow’ era. We must be honest about that. Because that honestly is required to understand the energy opposing the presence of the artifacts where they are in the contexts that they are. So, Sir, your article is interesting but also ignorant – or at least silent – and such silence is both an intellectual and a moral failure. Please re-write your piece to grasp THESE TRUE FACTS.
This is a distortion. I don’t think people right after the war were financially or emotionally able to immediately start erecting statues, many in the South were just trying to survive. With all things, there needs to be a reflective period. Did WWII memorials in DC go up right after the bombing stopped? I think some of the monument building was also brought on by a Southern need to honor the actors in the conflict once the politics and finger-pointing for the defeat had passed to a new generation. Look how long it took our nation to recognize Vietnam vets for their sacrifice.
Since you cite that this lag time is usual therefore my notes are certainly not ‘distortion’, but rather, appropriate illumination. Another illuminating point: war memorials come in many forms. Rather than elevated statues of generals why not statues of the regular troops returning from war? Isn’t the Iwo Jima monument of the regular troop raising the flag in the Pacific Theater during WW2 the most wonderful remembrance. Isn’t the abstract buried sign of the Vietnam War memorial the more wonderful remembrance of that war. Both of these motifs were available to Southern ‘Lost Cause’ ‘Jim Crow’ moneyed cultural and political funders of the grandiose elevated generals. The ‘Lost Cause’ arguments arose in the ‘Jim Crow’ era for political purposes. And therefore the monuments are political statements.
There are statues of regular Confederate soldiers, such as the one in Alexandria. There are others at various courthouses and other public places throughout the south that were not the leaders, but just ordinary guys.
Indeed. That proves my point. SOME memorials represent the common patriots who fought and suffered, SOME memorials are magnified (hyper life size and highly elevated) nostalgia for the ‘Lost Cause’ impinged with ‘Jim Crow’ era ideology of White Supremacy.
To call us all “Confederate Sympathizers” sounds so 1861. I am a modern Southerner who really didn’t think that much about this until the radical Democratic Party, such as the City Council of C’ville (google Wes Bellamy tweets), decided to use this as issue for their own political purposes, declaring everyone opposed to removing the Lee statue a racist reprobate. Lee is Virginia.
For many of us who grew up with a sense of Southern identity, scenes like this are disgusting, and in themselves, Race Bating, but of course we can’t say anything.
Report: Removed Confederate monuments found in maintenance yard:http://www.wbrz.com/news/report-removed-confederate-monuments-found-in-maintenance-yard/
Our history is being trashed.
Good article. I actually learned a few things. As a footnote, J. Edgar Hoover targeted MLK and other civil rights activists because in the early days of WW2, FBI wiretaps indicated that SOME black leaders in the NAACP were actually rooting for the non-white Japanese to beat the predominantly white American Navy. I read that back in the 1960s when I had to do a book report on the life of Hoover. Of course, the PC, cultural-Marxist mind benders would totally remove such references from the historical record today.
show us these widespread statements calling these idiot terrorist – are you making up an issue that does not exist or do you have proof that this is a common thing, not simply hyperbole to instigate discussion
A better title for the article would be to stop calling them “Racists”.
I specifically used the term terrorists because its the latest term being used by the radical left in Shenandoah County to describe anyone who supports either the Confederate flag or keeping Confederate statues.
http://www.nvdaily.com/opinion/2017/05/letter-to-the-editor-statues-removed-for-good-reason/
We have a local “history expert” in Winchester that believes you’re a “neo-confederate” or a “lost cause sympathizer” if you argue that the “Civil” War was about anything but ending slavery. The truth is Lincoln was willing to tolerate slavery (see his first Inaugural Address) and there was an amendment being passed at the time (Corwin Amendment) which would have codified slave ownership into the Federal Constitution had it been passed. He (and the Northern states) was obsessed with keeping the union together, nothing more.
Thank you for posting this. Let me google the Corwin amendment now.
Oh, I was unaware that beautiful Shenandoah County had became infiltrated with leftists. Sounds as bad as FFX Co.
Commies are still the minority in the Valley. But they are quite loud and boisterous. There is no real organized Democratic party in Shenandoah County. So you have 2 factions. One is conservatives, the other is the alternative to conservatives, which is the GOP. Sad but true. Which is why on my bio it says – HEAD OF THE FREEDOM CAUCUS OF THE SHENANDOAH COUNTY GOP. Aka the Tea Party contingent who wants to see real change here.
This is typical of the discussion in Shenandoah.
http://www.nvdaily.com/opinion/2017/05/letter-to-the-editor-statues-removed-for-good-reason/
Sounds like someone needs to read an actual history book. Lincoln struck first with his attack on Ft. Sumter, HE started the war because he didn’t want the states to secede.
sounds like someone still thinks blacks should be slaves
Sounds like someone is trying to hidetheir ignorance of history.
you blame the civil war on Lincoln alone – sounds like you are confused and at ready to defend the southern arguments of the time. Makes one think that you wish you lived back then, back in a time when you could own others.
There is nothing in the Federal Constitution saying a state can’t leave, but it’s intent, as outlined in the Preamble was to “form a more perfect union”. That means the ultimate desire was to create a Federal govt that would work for ALL member states and not put one group against the other.
What was the purpose of the Fugitive Slave laws if the North was so intent on freeing the slaves? Why did 20,000 black men, women, and children die at Devil’s Punchbowl? It’s not as obvious as you’re making it out to be.
https://blackmainstreet.net/never-forget-devils-punchbowl-20000-freed-slaves-died-forced-post-slavery-concentration-camp/
You’re argument is that since Lincoln started the war because he wanted power does not stand up to reality. The only reason you are even trying this argument is to support confederate statues??? The only reason you want these statues is that you believe they represent your personal past and you are proud of what they represent y today. Despite knowing full well that they present a defense of slavery and perpetual racism?!! Sound like you wish the south had won
You need to read his First Inaugural Address. He was fine with slavery as long as the union was preserved. Reality is not your friend.
I have not said one word about defending slavery, but of course anyone who thinks the War between the States was all about slavery would foolishly believe that.
You defend keeping statues that remind us of slavery. That means you are defending slavery.
Statues remind you of slavery? Maybe in your mind, but they remind me that thousands of people were killed for the actions of someone obsessed with keeping the union together at any cost. Maybe you should look into why Lincoln wanted to repatriate all the slaves back to Africa or somewhere south of the border and you still have no answer for what happened to the 20,000 “freed” slaves that were allowed to die at Devil’s Punchbowl.
and there is the problem – you refuse to acknowledge what these monuments represent today and you refuse to accept that whities like you had slaves and STILL believe blacks are inferior – if you would only admit, at least to yourself, that this is true, you could live an honest life
Whities like me? Where did I say that believed the nonsense you accuse me of? Slavery is an abomination, but it was nonetheless permitted and tolerated by all states up (and during up to a point) until the war. Again, you ignore the factual history I laid before you with Lincoln’s address and the atrocities the union army committed against black slaves, so I suppose you excuse that because the end always justifies the means for ignorant and moral cowards like yourself. I guess the Japanese are being persecuted by monuments to WW2, because we put them in interment camps, right SD? Your argument lacks any sort of logical consistency.
Nonetheless? You are justifying institutional racism, slavery etc all because it was widespread? Wow! Just wow!
Less than 5% of the population at any time owned slaves. You are completely ridiculous.
How much of the remaining 95% were the actual slaves? JK. But now you are saying that since it was only the top 5% makes it ok? Like saying that the banking collapse was OK since the 1% these days did all the harm. No. The statues have to go and your twisted take on history does. It excuse behavior then or Now