Wednesday, July 31, 2013

SCV Press Release on Plan by Museum of the Confederacy to Break-Up Historic Collection

Museum of the Confederacy's future threatened
by de-consolidation plans
The Museum of the Confederacy in Richmond holds the world's finest collection of Confederate art and artifacts; it's future is in serious doubt. If rumored changes come to pass the MOC's collection as well as the historic White House of the Confederacy which it owns and manages, may simply cease to exist.  
Right now, some in the MOC leadership have cooked up a plan to distribute the MOC's incredible collection among several different Richmond-area groups. Included in that list are the Virginia Historical Society and the historic site at Tredegar Iron Works. Neither of these can be considered Confederate-friendly.  
The Museum of the Confederacy holds an important trust as the repository of the world's finest collection of Confederate memorabilia. Recent reports from well-informed sources indicate that the museum's leadership is rapidly moving forward with a plan which, in addition to dispersing the collection, will also sell its building in downtown Richmond.  
Once the collection is relocated and the building sold, the now-nearby White House of the Confederacy will be isolated in an urban canyon surrounded by the Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine and virtually lost to tourist traffic. To think that it will be bale to sustain itself financially in that condition is difficult to imagine.  
I'm writing to you because we need to act quickly.  
The SCV strongly opposes this plan and is actively urging the Museum of the Confederacy board to reconsider. While no doubt well-intentioned, this course of action will seriously jeopardize the integrity of this collection which is so important to our Southern heritage.  
Generations of Southerners, including many of the veterans themselves, contributed a king's ransom to the Museum of the Confederacy in the form of priceless antiques, family heirlooms, and relics of the Confederate cause of incalculable value. They made these contributions with the express intent that these antiquities would be carefully preserved and honorably displayed. That's how the Museum of the Confederacy's collection grew to be the trustee of the single largest collection of the treasures of the late Confederacy. To scatter these precious treasures across several venues and organizations will permanently diminish its importance.  
The Museum of the Confederacy is technically owned by the Confederate Memorial & Literary Society and is a private organization. They are under no obligation to listen to the SCV or to take advice from anyone. But, we believe they are reasonable people who by and large want to do the best they can under the circumstances .
I have been calling everyone connected with the MOC but I would like for them to hear from you as well.
Please contact these folks today and POLITELY let them know how important it is that the Museum of the Confederacy's collection remain intact as a permanent tribute to those proud soldiers.  
Please urge your Compatriots and anyone who shares our view of this important issue to let their voices be heard so that the Museum of the Confederacy can return to being the home of the Confederacy's most important artifacts.
Michael Givens
Commander in Chief
Contact: [contact info]
Mr. Matthew G. Thompson, Jr. (Chairman)
Mr. Carlton P. Moffatt, Jr.
The Hon. Daniel T. Balfour

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

Lincoln More Like Hitler

Those who compare Confederate soldiers to Hitler should look at Lincoln

Abraham Hitler

by Jack Hunter

When President Barack Obama continued the presidential tradition of visiting the Confederate monument at Arlington Cemetery on Memorial Day, South Carolina NAACP president Lonnie Randolph likened Obama's honoring of Confederate soldiers to paying tribute to Adolf Hitler.

Randolph says he is disappointed that Obama would pay tribute to men who died trying to keep men like the president out of the White House.

Randy Burbage of the S.C. Sons of Confederate Veterans called the comparison "outrageous." Burbage is right. But I would also add that Randolph's comparison is ludicrous, laughable, and downright stupid — because it is so demonstrably inaccurate.

While it would be morally and historically absurd to suggest that Southern men who took up arms against President Lincoln's armies did so purely to oppress black people, it is true that virtually all white men in the 19th century, North or South, could not imagine a black president. Some simply wanted to get rid of blacks altogether, or as Lincoln told a delegation of black leaders he invited to the White House in 1862, "You and we are different races ... We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races ... This physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both ... It is better for us both, therefore, to be separated."

Lincoln constantly complained about "the troublesome presence of free negroes" and worked diligently with Congress on a plan to send American blacks to the African nation of Liberia. Lincoln also proposed a 13th amendment to the Constitution forever protecting the institution of slavery in order to pacify Southern secessionists. Needless to say, it didn't work.

Dissuading the South from seceding by promising to protect slavery didn't work, because the issue was secondary to the primary issue of constitutional government and states' rights. Southerners clung to the Founding Fathers' vision of a decentralized republic in which central planning, federal dictates, and permanent standing armies would have been impossible because the Constitution did not allow for a national government powerful enough to implement such measures.

In declaring secession illegal, and the U.S. a consolidated state, Lincoln enacted the first income tax and the first draft, and supported internal improvements and nationalizing banks. Such centralizing, socialistic, and militaristic restructuring of America was certainly more comparable to the fascism that defined Hitler's Germany than the agrarian-based economies and loose-knit state militias that defined the Confederate States of America.

Today, it is quite popular to make comparisons between Southern secessionists and the Nazis. But Hitler himself wrote in Mein Kampf of the Old South: "[T]he individual states of the American Union ... could not have possessed any state sovereignty of their own. For it was not these states that formed the Union; on the contrary it was the Union which formed a great part of such so-called states." This was also Lincoln's argument, and Hitler was an admirer of the 16th president for all the obvious reasons.

Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and imprisoned thousands upon thousands of newspaper editors, judges, politicians, and any other citizens, public or private, who dared to get in his way. Conducting the first "total war" of the modern era — in which Lincoln's armies intentionally targeted innocent women, children, and old men in the South — was nothing less than an act of "genocide" against Southerners. There is nothing even remotely comparable in the actions of Confederate President Jefferson Davis or even Southern leaders like Robert E. Lee to the fascist tactics of Lincoln.

In his book Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln's White Dream, author Lerone Bennett Jr., the former editor of Ebony magazine, wrote the following of Lincoln's plan to repatriate American blacks to Africa: "deportation ... was the only racial solution he ever had ... Racial cleansing became, 72 years before the Third Reich, 133 years before Bosnia, the official policy of the United States." Obviously Bennett is comparing Lincoln to Hitler, based purely on the president's intentions for black Americans.

Hitler himself wrote, "National Socialism as a matter of principle, must lay claim to the right to force its principles on the whole German nation without consideration of previous federated state boundaries." Hitler's language and actions were similar to Lincoln's, who believed that state sovereignty was foolish compared to "saving the union."

My purpose here is not to say that Lincoln was on par with Hitler, but that if someone insists on making the comparison, the 16th president had far more in common with the Nazi dictator than the Southern soldiers who died fighting for their country's independence.

I don't expect Lonnie Randolph or his organization to understand such an important and drastic distinction. But then again, I never expect too much from the NAACP to begin with.

SCV Reunion: Fight for States' Rights Continues

A Belle's Eye View


Fight to re-assert states' rights continues

Published: Monday, July 22, 2013 12:12 PM CDT

Historically, Vicksburg, Miss., has not been a good place to be in July.

I’m happy to report that things have changed. Last week was the Sons of Confederate Veterans’ 118th annual Reunion, and it was grand.

Vicksburg itself is a lovely town, full of history, good food and the very nicest folks. Mississippi, alas, does seem to have a problem with its roads, and I have never been tailgated so much in my life.

Mind you, I drive the speed limit or 5 miles per hour over it. I stay in the right-hand land unless passing, and still I had people trying to attach themselves to my bumper.

The Military Park is sobering, and not just because of the amount of headstones in the cemetery. It does give one pause to see the elaborate monuments of Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Ohio and Michigan — and realize all those young men died attacking a people defending themselves against the invader.

You cannot swing a dead cat in the park without hitting a Union monument. Finally — finally — when touring the park and the seeming interminable Yankee lines, you come to the far more modest Southern monuments. Given the economic ruin of the region, it is actually more impressive to me that those states, even in the midst of the stranglehold of Reconstruction, honored those who fought in defense of their homes.

The reunion itself — actually more of a convention — was typical. Meetings and events started late, but there was a lack of political intrigue and shenanigans, which was refreshing. A good time was had by all at the ball, and Paris, Tenn.’s own Jason Wade played with the 52nd Infantry String Band.

But perhaps most importantly, those in attendance recommitted themselves to the important works of preserving our Southern heritage and recognizing all those who fought for the CSA.

There has been a special interest in making sure those soldiers of color are recognized and their existence acknowledged. There are those for whom it is politically expedient to pretend they didn’t fight, or if they did, that it was under duress.

But thanks to the dogged efforts of their descendants, they are taking their rightful place in history, recognized with their own monuments, and their descendants welcomed with open arms.

There are also important battles looming, from keeping those who would sweep the history of the CSA under the rug, or perhaps even worse, change and pervert it, to the free-speech issues which may eventually lead to a Supreme Court case.

The fight is ongoing, and — despite the enemy’s belief that surely, surely, 150 years later the South will forget — continues to draw adherents to it. Over the past year, 18 new camps were chartered, and there are several more in the offing.

Were the Cause the disreputable cause of slavery, the enemy would be right. There would be no continuing fight, there would be no righteous indignation at having our ancestors portrayed as the very incarnation of evil itself.

No, as you look around the current political climate in our country it is very obvious that those who were willing to live in caves and endure the siege of Vicksburg, who sacrificed their lives, their property, their very way of life, were correct.

An empowered federal government which is willing to suspend the constitutional rights of its people and seeks only to enlarge its power is the antithesis of what the founding fathers envisioned for our country.

The fight to re-assert states’ rights as enumerated in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution continues. It is a battle worth winning, and I am confident one the SCV will continue.

CHRISTINE BARR is an award-winning professor of English, mother of four and descendent of Watauga settlers who now resides in Katy, Texas. Her email address is

Monday, July 22, 2013



CSS Neuse
CSS Neuse
Almost 150 years after taking part in the Civil War, a Confederate warship settled into a new home Thursday with the opening of a Kinston museum in its honor.

The CSS Neuse Civil War Interpretive Center will allow people to view the ironclad for free every Tuesday through Saturday. Some parts of the exhibit remain under construction, however, so the whole museum won't open until next summer.

"This is a dream come true for a lot of people here in Kinston, and they've been waiting for this for a long time," said Andrew Duppstadt, assistant curator of education for the North Carolina Division of State Historic Sites.

The Neuse was built late in the war and participated in one skirmish in 1865. It was later scuttled and spent about a century at the bottom of the Neuse River. "When my dad was a little boy, this boat was still in the Neuse River, and when the river would get really down low, he and his friends would go actually play on it. They'd swim around it and play on it," said Nancy Parks, a Lenoir County resident.

The ship was brought to the surface in the 1960s, and it spent the past few decades on display at an outdoor location in Kinston. The museum will allow better preservation of the artifact. "We're just glad now that it's found a good home where it can be safe," Parks said.

State officials also dedicated a highway marker to the CSS Neuse in front of the Lenoir County Courthouse, about a block from the museum. "It's real exciting to be able to have it in here finally," Duppstadt said.


Sunday, July 7, 2013

New Intolerance

The New Intolerance

Friday - April 9, 2010 at 12:09 am by Patrick J. Buchanan

“This was a recognition of American terrorists.”

That is CNN’s Roland Martin’s summary judgment of the 258,000 men and boys who fell fighting for the Confederacy in a war that cost as many American lives as World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam and Iraq combined.

Martin reflects the hysteria that seized Obamaville on hearing that Gov. Bob McDonnell had declared Confederate History Month in the Old Dominion. Virginia leads the nation in Civil War battlefields.

So loud was the howling that in 24 hours McDonnell had backpedaled and issued an apology that he had not mentioned slavery.

Unfortunately, the governor missed a teaching moment�at the outset of the 150th anniversary of America’s bloodiest war.

Slavery was indeed evil, but it existed in the Americas a century before the oldest of our founding fathers was even born. Five of our first seven presidents were slaveholders.

But Virginia did not secede in defense of slavery. Indeed, when Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated, March 4, 1861, Virginia was still in the Union. Only South Carolina, Georgia and the five Gulf states had seceded and created the Confederate States of America.

At the firing on Fort Sumter, April 12-13, 1861, the first shots of the Civil War, Virginia was still inside the Union. Indeed, there were more slave states in the Union than in the Confederacy. But, on April 15, Lincoln issued a call for 75,000 volunteers from the state militias to march south and crush the new Confederacy.

Two days later, April 17, Virginia seceded rather than provide soldiers or militia to participate in a war on their brethren. North Carolina, Tennessee and Arkansas followed Virginia out over the same issue. They would not be a party to a war on their kinfolk.

Slavery was not the cause of this war. Secession was�that and Lincoln’s determination to drown the nation in blood if necessary to make the Union whole again.

Nor did Lincoln ever deny it.

In his first inaugural, Lincoln sought to appease the states that had seceded by endorsing a constitutional amendment to make slavery permanent in the 15 states where it then existed. He even offered to help the Southern states run down fugitive slaves.

In 1862, Lincoln wrote Horace Greeley that if he could restore the Union without freeing one slave he would do it. The Emancipation Proclamation of Jan. 1, 1863, freed only those slaves Lincoln had no power to free�those still under Confederate rule. As for slaves in the Union states of Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri, they remained the property of their owners.

As for “terrorists,” no army fought more honorably than Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia. Few deny that.

The great terrorist in that war was William Tecumseh Sherman, who violated all the known rules of war by looting, burning and pillaging on his infamous March to the Sea from Atlanta to Savannah. Sherman would later be given command of the war against the Plains Indians and advocate extermination of the Sioux.

“The only good Indian is a dead Indian” is attributed both to Sherman and Gen. Phil Sheridan, who burned the Shenandoah and carried out Sherman’s ruthless policy against the Indians. Both have statues and circles named for them in Washington, D.C.

If Martin thinks Sherman a hero, he might study what happened to the slave women of Columbia, S.C., when “Uncle Billy’s” boys in blue arrived to burn the city.

What of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, at whose request McDonnell issued his proclamation? What racist deeds have they perpetrated of late?

They tend the graves of Confederate dead and place flags on Memorial Day. They contributed to the restoration of the home of Jefferson Davis, damaged by Hurricane Katrina. They publish the Confederate Veteran, a magazine that relates stories of the ancestors they love to remember. They join environmentalists in fighting to preserve Civil War battlefields. They do re-enactments of Civil War battles with men and boys whose ancestors fought for the Union. And they defend the monuments to their ancestors and the flag under which they fought.

Why are they vilified?

Because they are Southern white Christian men�none of whom defends slavery, but all of whom are defiantly proud of the South, its ancient faith and their forefathers who fell in the Lost Cause.

Undeniably, the Civil War ended in the abolition of slavery and restoration of the Union. But the Southern states believed they had the same right to rid themselves of a government to which they no longer felt allegiance as did Washington, Jefferson and Madison, all slave-owners, who could no longer give loyalty to the king of England.

Consider closely this latest skirmish in a culture war that may yet make an end to any idea of nationhood, and you will see whence the real hate is coming. It is not from Gov. McDonnell or the Sons of Confederate Veterans.