Thursday, July 31, 2014

Promenading Progressive Liberal Saviors of the Oppressed


One of the great liberals of the past, Senator William E. Borah, responded to the so-called "anti-lynching bill," with "[T]his is a sectional measure. It is an attempt upon the part of the States free from the race problem to sit in harsh judgment upon their sister States where the problem is always heavy and sometimes acute." During the postWW2 Second Reconstruction those truly interested in resolving race issues saw "the patient process of education and uplifting power of religion" as the most productive methodology.  Bernhard Thuersam

Promenading Progressive Liberal Saviors of the Oppressed

"One of the most telling analyses of damaging [modern-day abolitionist] self-delusion came more than a half-century ago from the late Professor Edward Augustus Freeman, an English historian of note. Writing of "Race and Language," [he] said:

" . . . . nothing can be more shallow, nothing more foolish, nothing more purely sentimental, than the talk of those who think that they can simply laugh down or shriek down any doctrine or sentiment which they themselves do not understand . . . [and] think that all wisdom is confined to themselves and their own clique . . . The most highly educated man in the most highly educated society cannot sneer them out of being."

[There] is little inclination on the part of the self-professed saviors of the Negro to understand the ramifications of a problem which they only know at a distance. Nor is there any manifest desire to see that problem as anything other than a moral mission worthy of a Twentieth Century Crusade – spearheaded by the federal government.

{What] do the Southerners of today get? From BOTH national political parties, from all three branches of the central government, and from self-appointed preceptors in other areas of government, the South gets constant pressure, and incessant vituperation, to yield the few remaining vestiges of State sovereignty, and to submit to the omniscience of a federal authority which grows by feeding on its own parts, all under the spurious label of progressive liberalism.

Indeed, in this age of phony liberalism, and those bellicose "do-gooders" who masquerade under the name of "liberals" are nothing more than dictatorial martinets whose tolerance extends only to those who think as they do.

Loud in their protestations against suppression of speech in their favor, they are just as articulate in their own efforts to deny or denounce the exercise of that same right by those who may be on the other side.

Their concern lies not so much in establishing a climate of free expression, but in exploiting a situation in which they can promenade as saviors of the oppressed.  Significantly, they frequently seem relatively unconcerned over working out a passable solution to a pressing problem, apparently preferring to aggravate the situation so that they can continue to play their self-created messianic roles to the hilt. [Son of a Northern soldier, Richard] Lloyd Jones, publisher of the Tulsa Tribune, had this to say:

"The South makes no move to direct the conduct of the North. Our regional problems are best solved in the regions where they are born. Leave the South alone."

(The Case For the South, William D. Workman, Jr., Devin-Adair, 1960, pp. 131-134)

A Northern Voice

Representative Darby has proven to be very different from many who ride these cultural hobby-horses. I have had a series of e-mails to and from him, and he seems amenable to being approached objectively and rationally. Of course, he equates our movement with the klan and skinheads etc., but who can blame him when the facts are so blatantly censored. I hope that perhaps I have made some inroads into his viewpoint on this and am hoping to get H.K. Edgerton to pick up where I have left off. Below are the e-mails of which I spoke.
E-mail Exchange: Valerie Protopapas – Henry Darby

You say that have received "hateful" communications with regard to your demand for the removal of historic flags from The Citadel.

Of course, no decent, objective person would send any message that could be rationally considered "hateful," but I have also found after many years of debating the issues surrounding the effort of the Southern States to leave a union that had become hostile to their citizens that "hateful" is often another way of identifying cogent, intelligent opinions that differ from one's own point of view. And usually, the more cogent and intelligent, the more eager the recipient is to play the well known "race card." If I disagree with you, goes the game, I am a racist. Now, I do not know if you hold to that unfortunate point of view, but I wish to declare "up front," as they say, that nothing I write to you can possibly be considered "hateful" unless, of course, you hold the above point of view.

Sadly, you and so many others are victims of a "history" that never existed. Often this historical narrative flies in the face not of Southern accounts, but of Northern ones as well. The flags which you find offensive never flew over any ship transporting slaves from Africa where black captives of interminable tribal wars were sold to Europeans by their own people. "Roots" is a total fiction! Indeed, the flag that flew from the mastheads of slave ships is the same flag (minus a number of stars) that presently flies over the Capitols in both Washington and Columbia!

But more to the point, since debating history is not permitted in these "politically correct" days (lest the truth be revealed!), it is time to recognize the fact that other people have opinions too. As well, "being offended" is not found in the Constitution! Quite the opposite, in fact! The First Amendment protects not profanity or obscenity, but unpopular political speech and thus, under that Amendment you are free to call for the censorship of the flag of the Confederate States of America - a constitutionally formed government on the North American continent - but you have no right to demand that censorship, not as a citizen and certainly not as a "public servant."

If you cannot bring yourself to permit your fellow South Carolinians to have those freedoms which you and those who want what you demand, then I would suggest that you put the matter up for the vote and let the people of South Carolina decide. And once they have spoken in referendum, I would further suggest that, if the matter goes against you, you accept their decision and let the flags fly.

Valerie Protopapas,
Huntington Station, New York
Ms. Protopapas, with folk like you who are reasonable one could sit down and have an objective discussion. I regret that good-will persons such as yourself have allowed the clansmen, skinheads, nazis, etc. attached the flag to their cause(s). If the outpouring of them were as the outpouring of the flag to remain within public places, there would not be a problem. However, I wish there could be a referendum - then all could be settled. Thanks for your kind response...
Mr. Darby,
You cannot reasonably connect the groups you mention below to any flag of the Confederate States of America. To do so is not only incorrect, it is unjust. As for the Klan, the largest numbers of klansmen in the last century were located in the Middle West not the South and if you "google" the huge march in Washington held by the Klan in the 1940s, you will see that they carried the AMERICAN flag and not any flag belonging to the CSA.
Even more important, however, is the fact that there is no way to prevent the misuse of any symbol whether it is the Confederate battle flag or the Christian Cross or even the swastika, a Hindu religious symbol. The object being thus misused is neither responsible for that misuse nor should its true meaning be polluted by its misuse. God knows there are groups of wicked people of every race and ethnicity who foul the public discourse by their actions, but we don't close the public square for that reason. By all means, castigate those who misuse Confederate symbols, but not the symbols themselves.
I would suggest that your rational opinion via a referendum should be acted upon. No one can consider your intention to be contrary to the will of the people if you yourself call for such a referendum! It shows that you are being reasonable in your position and open to the voice of the people in the situation extant. This would also give an opportunity for folks such as myself who support these honorable symbols to make it known that we do not support their misuse by groups espousing hatred no matter on which side they appear. True supporters of Southern history are even more offended by such groups than are those whom they appear to target for the very reason that they befoul our symbols! There is no place for hatred in rational discourse among intelligent people.
I thank you for your prompt and courteous response. As long as there is room for reasonable discourse, men of good will (and women too, of course!) will be able to maintain a civilized and enlightened society.
May God bless you.
Valerie Protopapas
Thanks, Ms. Protopapas!  I had asked for a referendum several years ago but to no (a)vail. Perhaps, I will try again. I appreciate your logic...
Mr. Darby
Perhaps it went "nowhere" because it was seen as a condemnation of historical symbols. You might have better luck if it were seen as an opportunity for all South Carolinians to express themselves about the issue and to arrive at a consensus that everyone finds acceptable.
Of course, I would not be in favor of censoring the flags or any part of Southern heritage or history. I have studied this issue and I believe, despite the institution of slavery that also existed in the North at the time, that there was in the South, prior to "reconstruction" (which was exactly the opposite of any such effort!) a much more congenial and amicable relationship between the races than existed in the profoundly "racist" North! Indeed, Charles Francis Adams Jr., a colonel in the federal army during the Civil War and the grandson and great-grandson of Presidents John Adams and John Quincy Adams, later wrote about that war and the institution of slavery: "Had the South been allowed to manage this question unfettered, the slaves would have been, 'ere this, fully emancipated, and that without bloodshed or race relations ruined." So you can see that there is so much more about this matter than is revealed by todays politically correct "historians" and their friends in academia.
The ideal would be to see history properly presented - "warts and all," as Oliver Cromwell once stated - and especially without making judgments about people who lived in the past according to the mores and customs of the present. People of good will and with an interest in the truth can usually come to some accord in keeping with everyone's best interests and especially that of the truth. Alas, far too many people have an "agenda" which seldom represents a desire to do not what is right but rather what is desired.
Valerie Protopapas

Lincoln's Auspicious Opportunity for Peace


Until December of 1860 President James Buchanan seemed in accord with a State sovereignty view of the fraternal Union, his message to Congress then was that he condemned the exercise of secession, "but denied emphatically the right of coercion" on the part of the federal agent.  But when Major Anderson seized an empty Fort Sumter, Buchanan refused to order him back to Fort Moultrie and lit the slow fuse for war that Lincoln would accelerate.  Read more at:

Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman

North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission

"Unsurpassed Valor, Courage and Devotion to Liberty"

"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"

Lincoln's Auspicious Opportunity for Peace

"President [Jefferson] Davis was at all times solicitous for peace, and adopted every expedient of negotiation that could promote that end. Heartily responding to the wishes of the Congress and people of the Confederacy, he appointed, in February, an embassy to the Government at Washington.  The resolution of the Congress, asking that the embassy should be sent, explains its object to be the "negotiating friendly relations between that Government and the Confederate States of America, and for the settlement of all questions of disagreement between the two governments upon principles of right, justice, equity and good faith."

Two of these commissioners, Messrs. Crawford and Forsyth, arrived in Washington on the 5th of March [1861] . . . [and] waited to the 12th of March before making an official presentation of their mission [to Secretary of State] Seward . . .

Here begins a record of perfidy, the parallel of which is not to be found in the history of the world.  Mr. Seward, while declining to recognize the Confederate commissioners officially, yet frequently held confidential communication with them, by which the faith of the two Governments was fully pledged to a line of policy, by what should certainly be the strongest form of assurance – the personal honor of their representatives.

In verbal interviews, the commissioners were frequently assured of a pacific policy by the Federal Government, that Fort Sumter would be evacuated, that the status at Fort Pickens should not be changed, and that no departure from these pacific intentions would be made without due notice to the Confederate Government.

It was alleged that formal negotiations with [the Confederate commissioners], in an official capacity, would seriously jeopardize the success of Mr. Lincoln's manipulation of public sentiment at the North, which, it was further confidentially alleged, he was sedulously educating to concurrence with his own friendly purposes toward the Confederates.

By this cunning device and the unscrupulous employment of deception and falsehood in his interviews with the commissioners, Mr. Seward accomplished the double purpose of successful imposition upon the credulity of the commissioners and evasion of official recognition  of the Confederate embassy.

In the meantime . . . the Lincoln administration was secretly preparing hostile measures, and, as was clearly demonstrated by subsequent revelations, had never seriously entertained any of the propositions submitted by the Confederate Government.  Resolved not to evacuate Fort Sumter, the Federal Government, while amusing the Confederate commissioners with cunning dalliance, had for weeks been meditating the feasibility of reinforcing it.

Never had a Government so auspicious an opportunity to save the needless effusion of blood, and to avert indefinitely, if not finally, the calamity of war."

(The Life of Jefferson Davis, Frank H. Alfriend, National Publishing Company, 1868, pp. 259-261)

Wednesday, July 30, 2014

A Confederate message

Dear Chuck;
When people, including the media, try to pigeon hole or force us into their tiny box as Confederates, we need to bark as we well do. They try to force a false narrative about guilt for sins they are guilty of.  Our guilt is not from action or words, it is from perceptions. Some perceptions are made when an act of intolerable action, or ignorance, is allowed to be accepted as the norm. A classic case in point is the NAACP's declaration of war against all things Confederate in 1991. That ignorance is well on display today at places like the Lee Chapel at Washington and Lee University, or in Lee County Florida, where they tried to strike General Lee's likeness from a portrait at the courthouse.  It is also on display at the Citadel, where the Confederate Navel Jack is honored where those people tried to have our battle flags removed, and the count go on and on.
To understand the issue we need to delve deeper. It seems hard to understand why anyone would like the monetary mess America finds itself in after now just over 100 years of Fed banking. The private bank has determined that policy for so long, and with its creative name, has about 99% of America hoodwinked. They are convinced of the necessity of a "Central bank" who controls theirs lives. How? By owning nearly all of the mortgage back securities through their underlings at Freddy and Fannie Mae, also Corporations that have no accountability to the people- but have the backing of those tax paying people. In fact, the generous American people are so good; they guarantee all of the risk and get none of the reward. We have to do that because they say we are guilty of things like racism and bigotry and never gave anyone other than ourselves a chance, or so they would have you believe.
These events all have a common denominator in the truth of American history believe it or not. In 1861, there were probably not a thousand people who would go to battle to protect slavery in America, yet by 1865, nearly a half a million Southern people had been exterminated. To find the truth you need to be prepared to be shocked and to seek the grace of our Lord. That is the only way to deal with these truths.
When our Confederate nation was snatched away from us, most understood it was necessary to comply with the central authority and we still do this. We never forgot our Country; a State centered government, whereas the local populace had control. We remember it as "consent of the governed". Is there any debate that this is what power hungry politicians and their lobby army has provided? Don't ask us to count the ways where they failed that test and the root was in 1865 when our Armies had no choice but to surrender, we never did.
The 3-legged stool, so often discussed within our community, MUST be taught to our children one and all. The deconstruction of the South, the creation of the banksters state (with the outsourcing of monetary policy), and finally the Marxist cultural revolution of the 1960's,  which allowed the Federal Government to spawn its agencies like a spider making eggs. Please note the Federal Reserve has as much "Federal" in it as Joe's Federal coffee shop.
The children need to understand the heroic action of people like Generals Lee and Jackson, to understand the sacrifice of Cleburne in his death charge, what it means to feel Confederate. That "feeling" also invites our new brothers and sisters into a cause that had no direct lineage to their struggle but wish to be Confederate because after all, Confederate is where your heart is at, not where your lineage was at. It is Southern by nature but bestowed with a grace of God. Many God fearing folk are now rushing into Confederate values once again and have no idea about the history. That is where we educate. We welcome the masses as they too have become victims of a centralized government gone out of control.
A people who longs for God will be protected. The 12 tribes of Israel, when God created them, were in fact a Confederacy of tribes. Why is God's plan so revoked by man?
Deo Vindice
Kevin Carroll
The Confederate Society

About Your Robert E. Lee Article


Dear Daily Beast,

Would you not fight with every ounce of your being to defend your home and family from an illegal invasion?

Lincoln's war was responsible for the rape of Southern women, black and white, the murder of many thousands of innocent civilians, the burning of homes, crops, and barns, and the killing and stealing of farm animals. And what about New Manchester, GA where the Yankees kidnapped the entire town and sent old men, women, and children up North by train and forced them to work in the factories there?  Is that not slavery?  It seems strange for someone who is reported by rewritten history to have fought to" free the slaves" to actually enslave people themselves.  Also, did you know that Lincoln hired 300,000 European socialists to fight in his illegal war and without them would have probably lost?  The Forty-Eighters, as they were known, had been defeated in the socialist revolution of 1848 in Europe, but saw the opportunity to win in the US what they lost in Europe.  General Lee did exactly what he should have done and was fighting on the right side of history.  Lincoln's war was about money as he stated in his inaugural address that he would collect the revenues (from the seceded states) by force if necessary. The South was paying 85% of the federal revenues which was lining the pockets of northern bankers and industrialists.  Too many people have swallowed the lies of rewritten history that is shoved down the throats of school children and displayed in movies depicting the South as evil and the North as "grand saviors".  You need to educate yourself with true history instead of swallowing the indoctrination of our communist school system.  The very issues we face today; politically, socially, morally, and economically, can be traced right back to our first socialist president, Lincoln, and his socialist minions. It boggles my little mind how people who are supposed to be "journalists" and have much more formal education than I have, can be so historically stupid and not do any research about our history, but just take it at face value what is taught in the government schools. How about doing a little research on the "Corwin Amendment" and what it would have done.  And how about the US Resolution that stated the war was NOT about slavery. Never heard of that?  Why not?  Do some real research and learn the truth instead of defending the North and vilifying the South, armed only with lies and propaganda.

Jeff Paulk
Tulsa, OK

The Great Whiskey Steal


After inception in 1854, it took the Republican party only 6 years to destroy sectional harmony in the Union, and 7 years to plunge the country into a war that would end the Founders' experiment of 1787.  By 1865, the South was devastated, subjugated, without a voice in its own government, and ruled by a Northern Republican political-military junta engulfed in a saturnalia of vice, corruption and outright fraud within the US government.  The corruption of the Gilded Age followed.

Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman

North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission

"Unsurpassed Valor, Courage and Devotion to Liberty"

"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"

The Great Whiskey Steal

"A shoddy episode in the moral history of whiskey became a matter of public knowledge in the mid-1870s.  In this affair the United States Treasury was raided by its own high officers as well as minor functionaries who got their pinch, too, as a result of a cozy arrangement with large distillers in various urban centers who turned out "crooked" whiskey.

The federal excise tax on liquor had no more than gone into effect than a suspicion arose that distillers and rectifiers were cheating on their payments [and] Chicago, Peoria, Milwaukee, Cincinnati, Indianapolis and New Orleans were mentioned as centers of fraud.  St. Louis, after General Grant's inauguration in 1869, was especially under suspicion as the headquarters of a network of bribery, coercion and defiance of the law.

The whiskey frauds are a reminder that the North, as well as the South, had reconstruction problems.  The rapid progress of industrialization, the new economic power exercised by financial freebooters, the scramble for wealth by speculation, the philosophy prevailing among many politicians that public office existed for private gain, all signaled a general lowering of civic and business ethical standards.

This was the era of Boss Tweed in New York City, of the Gold Corner and Black Friday, of high-level public servants trading favors for a share in railroad construction contracts.  The veterans of the victorious armies, it seemed, having but recently saved the Union, were now to enjoy the privilege of looting it.

Once installed, [Grant's old Army comrades] acted in several capacities, as government officials, as party satraps and as adventurers preying upon the public purse. A notable personality in this concourse was a . . . brevet general [and Grant's personal secretary] named Orville E. Babcock.  With his flowing mustache and imperial . . . his dash and daring, his quick intellect, General Babcock was no ordinary operator, but a man of capacity who almost made it as one of the really great rogues of history.

It was through Babcock that the Whiskey Ring was able to operate a systematic fraud that riddled the revenue service and reached into the White House. The Treasury men out in the field and the distillers believed, not unnaturally, with Babcock so deeply involved, that the President was at least aware of the game if not an actual participant . . . and privy to the arrangements.  Some portion of the money did go to shore up Republican positions in closely contested elections.  But increasingly, since greed feeds upon greed, the graft was simply whacked up a personal plunder.

There is no evidence that Grant ever knew of these shenanigans . . . [though] Grant appointees purchased lavish homes, rented luxurious suites in the best hotels, enjoyed discreet suppers with ladies of the evening.  [Grant's White House table] was furnished with gifts of choice game, fruits and other delicacies . . . [a] team [of horses] and the handsome and ornamental buggy [with] gold breastplates [for the horses] engraved with the President's name.

In June, 1874, the Secretaryship of the Treasury was filled by the appointment of Benjamin Bristow, a tall, lean, honest Kentuckian with a passionate conviction that others in the public service should be honest . . . and set into motion a plan designed to trap the St. Louis racketeers.

President Grant at first gave vigorous support to the attack upon the whiskey conspiracy. Later he became increasingly reluctant to face unpleasant disclosures about his appointees.

"Well, Mr. Bristow," the President remarked to [Bristow], "there is at least one honest man in St. Louis on whom we can rely – [General] John MacDonald.  I know that as he is an intimate acquaintance and confidential friend of Babcock's."

"Mr. President," replied Bristow, tight-lipped, "McDonald is the head and center of all the frauds."

The strategy of those implicated was to drag the scandal to the White House door as their best chance of getting off . . . The hot pursuit of his dapper secretary convinced Grant that there was a plot against him [but he] accepted Babcock's explanation and clung to him only more stubbornly as the chase closed in.

The full weight of the presidential office thrown into the scales on his side, and since none of the whiskey thieves had peached on him, [Babcock] was acquitted . . . With the Republican palace guard under heavy obligation  to the members of the Ring for their silence, none of those who went to prison served his full term."

(The Social History of Bourbon, An Unhurried Account of Our Star-Spangled American Drink, Gerald Carson, University Press of Kentucky, 1963, excerpts pp. 114-126)

Tuesday, July 29, 2014

Desecration of Gen. Lee`s Tomb

To All...
If our Southern organizations that purport to represent us as Southerners cannot or will not sue W&L University over the desecration of Gen. Lee`s Tomb then they should press charges under the U.N`s section on Genocide. It clear states that the desecration or destruction of monuments, cemeteries, historical buildings, etc. ARE considered a part of genocide.
As much as I disapprove of much of what the U.N. does we would be foolish not to pursue this world recognized protection as Southerners are their own distinct culture & minority in the United States of America. These statistics are a fact.
Billy Price
From: Valerie Protopapas

Whether or not we could get "help" - and being mostly white, one supposes not - such an appeal to the UN will do one thing: it will establish the concept of cultural genocide with regard to the South! This is very important. Right now, most folks simply view this as a "civil rights" issue with the other side being the only ones with "civil rights."
When those among us who are scared or who are from the shallow end of the gene pool & are only in our groups for the ice cream socials get through laughing, sneering & jeering over my suggest that we approach the U.N. over genocidal practices against Southerners by the United States of America, consider this.
How many decades & centuries have we Southerners been treated differently by the U.S. government while at the same time they tell us out of the other side of their mouth we are all equally Americans? How many of our monuments, cemeteries or historical buildings have they protected? How long has it been O.K. for Southerners to be the butts of national jokes then are told we shouldn`t be offended but, don`t do the same things to other groups?
This list of offenses is endless & never ceasing. The facts are we are a distinct cultural minority within the borders of the United States & should demand we be treated the same as other cultural groups. Instead the U.S. government has spent all this time encouraging the historical cleansing of Southern history, heritage, culture & symbols. In short, they are erasing us as a people piece by piece, year after year. So laugh & yuck it up while you & yours disappear from planet earth.
The U.S. has done nothing but encourage this so, why not go on the worldwide record at the U.N. proclaiming the genocide committed against us? If our own government refuses to recognize or help us then this is about the last place to turn to if our Southern groups can stop fighting their turf wars & get over their ego trips long enough to do what they are supposed to be doing which, is represent the South & Southerners as a whole.
If you have any ideas that are more effective & will save such places as Gen. Lee`s Tomb at Washington & Lee University then by all means let's hear them. If not then lead, follow or get out of the way.
Billy E. Price
Ashville Alabama
From: Joan Hough

Marvelous! Marvelous!

Let's make the world learn the truth that the first modern Holocaust was right here in America.  Let's expose the lies propagandized about Andersonville as what they were—lies!  Let's make Americans aware that the reason that Camp Douglas was erased in Chicago was because its truth made Andersonville look like kindergarten.   Let's get that horrible Ugly Rock by fake Southerners removed from in front of the Memorial for "some" of the Confederates murdered at Camp Douglas.

Let's get the truth out about the Marxist hailed redistribution of Southern property—-which Sherman did first and the military government did big time later during Reconstruction!

I'm nigh on to 84—- I'll go to the United Nations with any group…even if it is my last effort in the name of truth!

I do so despise the United Nations—-but am more than willing to use its name to make a much, much, much needed statement.

Now we have people insisting that the U.N. send watchers into our polls/precincts—- and nobody is complaining….so what do we have to lose?

I think your idea, a terrific one!


Tampa Flag Site

To all,

In our ongoing commitment to providing historical flags and improving Confederate Memorial Park I wish to make the following offer to everyone.

The Early Camp installed 3 new 20 foot flag poles which display a variety of Confederate flags. Currently the First National , Hardee and Bonnie Blue were the first choices by sponsorship. These flags stimulate questions and interest in our constant mission to educate the public and folks who support us but may not be aware of a particular flags origin. The Cherokee Braves was recently sponsored by member Jerry Little and will be flying in a few weeks. Other sponsors include Jack Bolen, Hardee and Johnny Strickland, Bonnie Blue and First National.

Supporters are now offered the opportunity to sponsor a flag of their choice to fly at the park on one of the 3 poles. These flags are sewn 2 ply 600D nylon fabric which withstand the Florida weather for many months of wear. If you would like to participate in this benevolent project contact me when time permits and I will take care of the ordering process. The flags are 3' X 5' in size and we prefer you select a flag which is different from the normal flags we display.

A few suggestions include;

11 Star First National
13 Star First National
Kentucky Orphan Brigade
Army of the Trans Mississippi
Polk Battle
South Carolina Sovereignty
Van Dorn
Forrest Battle
Hood's Texas Brigade
RE Lee Headquarters
Choctaw Braves
Maxey's Regimental
2nd National

If you would like to sponsor a flag contact me and I will place the order. Cost is 38.00 per flag.

Forward the Colours

Mike Herring
Gen. Jubal A. Early Camp 556
813 681 6922

Monday, July 28, 2014

Removal of Flags from Gen. Lee's Tomb




Mr. Kenneth Ruscio

Washington and Lee University

204 West Washington Street

Lexington, Virginia 24450

Mr. Ruscio,

It was with great sadness that I read of your cowardly decision to bow to the demands of a few malcontented, liberal agitators and agree to their demand of removing the Confederate Battle Flags from the tomb of General Robert E. Lee.  Why must we Southerners give in to this cultural genocide?  We should NOT EVER give in to the demands of those who are brainwashed with revisionist history and who wish to wipe all symbols of our culture and proud heritage from the face of the earth. These "agitators" have the right to not like these flags.  They also have the right to attend a university where these flags are not displayed.  One should not expect to attend a university in the South, especially where a famous Confederate general is entombed, and not expect to see symbols of the culture and people he fought for. Why are these agitators not demonstrating against the flag that flew high above the New England slave trading ships which transported their ancestors from one set of slave owners in Africa to their new owners here in America?  That flag is Old Glory.

 It is absolutely disgusting to see people in authoritative positions, such as yours, who have the power to thwart such baseless attacks on our heritage just lay down, roll over, and give in to the demands of a very few.  The vast majority of people who approve of and desire the flag's display have no vote in this situation.  The only thing that seems to matter, in your mind, is that these few liberal Confederate-haters be appeased. If you cannot be man enough to stand up to this paltry attack on our heritage, then you certainly do not deserve to hold the same office as did our beloved General Robert E. Lee. You are a coward and a huge disgrace to the memory of all who wore the Confederate uniform and fought to repel the illegal invasion of the Yankee tyrant. My heart and mind grow weary with the continual attacks and genocide committed upon our culture and heritage, but my faith is in God and I will continue to fight this battle in honor of my ancestors to my dying day. History must be corrected, and if we cannot count upon people in high positions like yours to pull their weight in this matter, then such persons need to be removed from those positions.


Jeff Paulk
Tulsa, OK
SCV member of McIntosh Camp #1378

Desecration of Lee Chapel - Take Two


I have read with concern about the removal of the flags from the memorial for one of your school's namesake's, Robert E. Lee.  It amazes me that an educational institution would succumb to the political correctness of a few students known as "The Committee".  A person of average intelligence would understand that a school named after a person (or persons in this case) would be celebrating the life and accomplishments of that person.  Were the members of "The Committee" able to pass the college entrance exam or were they accepted based up on their race?  Most grade school children know that Robert E. Lee represented the Confederate States of America.

I would request that the flags and memorabilia be placed back into their original positions.

It is an affront to educated people to try and ELIMINATE AMERICAN HISTORY just because a few people are offended.  There are a lot of things in our American history that "offend" me like, "black history" and "Union history" but I tolerate it because it is HISTORY.  Personally I don't understand why Martin Luther King, Jr. is celebrated.  He was a Socialist and an adulterer.  That flies in the face of the democratic ideals of this country and offends me morally.  BUT, it is history and whoever wants to celebrate it, go ahead.  I'm not asking that "their" history be eliminated.  I'm asking that MY history not be eliminated. We should learn about the entirety of our country's history, be it good or evil.  It is part of what makes the United States of America a great country.  I have cousins that fought and died for the Confederacy and my GG Grandfather lost his right foot in a battle in Virginia.  I have a personal interest in someone trying to eliminate my history.

An alternative view might be considered.  Since names and history seem to offend certain people, and to be politically correct, change the college name to Law University in Virginia Number One.  Remove all of the names of the buildings and streets and give them numbers.  Close ALL of the museums, since there would be no need to know or celebrate any history since that has now been deemed offensive.  Libraries would probably be extinct as well so close them too. Return ALL of the memorabilia to the descendants of the named buildings and streets.  There will be no need to know any history because we won't repeat the same mistakes or learn anything.  Don't get me started on "ethnic" names.

Let's just go with a generic Socialist society.

Joan Miller Cooper
Jacksonville, Florida
PROUD graduate of Jefferson Davis Middle School and Nathan Bedford Forrest High School

Washington and Lee University

It was recently announced that Washington and Lee University in Lexington, Virginia has agreed to remove replicas of Confederate flags several months after 12 black law students demanded their removal from campus.  The flags were displayed behind a statue of Robert E. Lee on the stage of Lee Chapel. Original Confederate flags, on loan from the American Civil War Museum, will now be displayed on the bottom floor of the chapel, which houses the Lee Chapel Museum.  Students soon must creep downstairs to find their offense.
"I'm excited about the progress we were able to create on campus," said Brandon Hicks, a member of the 12-student group called the Committee.
Hicks "is excited" that he is destroying my heritage to promote his. Is that what they mean by equality and civil rights?
Among other demands, the students asked the school to apologize for its role in slavery and to condemn General Robert E. Lee, but President Kenneth P. Ruscio would not.
Aren't you civil rights advocates proud?  Don't you feel noble when you look in the mirror?  You blatant hypocrites, you are the oppressor - you are committing worse offenses than you allege! Why use the truth when a pack of lies will work just as well? I may not live to see it but one day, in this world, or one to come, a Southern people, who just wanted to be left alone, will have their Cause and heritage vindicated. 
John Wayne Dobson

Sunday, July 27, 2014

Heritage Preservation Award

Thanks Billy Bearden for nominating me. What an honor and surprise.
Chuck Demastus

Congratulations on your being awarded the National SCV Distinguished Service Award/Medal. Much deserved and long overdue. *SALUTE*
Anyway, the back story is I had no idea you were SCV, so I nominated you for a 'Heritage Preservation Award' which covers SCV and Non SCV folks.
When the awards booklet was released, your name wasn't in the HPA section, but in the Distinguished Service Award section, which is the 3rd highest award to an SCV member. I had assumed that someone in the awards committee took my nomination, and upgraded it with their own knowledge of your efforts and saw you were SCV and viola.

Nominated for Heritage Preservation Award
We Confederate Heritage Activist old timers are well acquainted with Chuck Demastus, for it was in the days before Facebook, before Twitter, before smart phones that thru his famous emailed "Demastus List" which is more commonly known as "Southern Heritage News and Views" ( the heritage alerts, heritage violations, and assorted news important to the fighters would turn to learn where to aim our guns. He began his list in 1999, and he maintains it even today with the same vigor and publishing style. Chuck has launched a companion Facebook page, thus joining with modern social media. SHN&V is very important for learning about upcoming Confederate events, as well as newspaper articles needing attention – both positive and negative, and letters that people write to counter/praise editorials/articles. Information provided by historians like Bernard Thuersam is also a staple of his email newsletters. Chuck Demastus resides in Mississippi, and is most deserving and long overdue for recognition by an award such as this.
(I would request this come from the CiC)
Billy Bearden

Saturday, July 26, 2014

Grant's Whole Phantasmagoria of Insolent Fraud


Without the honest and conservative stability of Southern elected leaders, the US Congress after 1861 descended into a morass of corruption, free-spending and alliances with corporate interests which fleeced the taxpayers. With Radical Republicans in absolute control of the government, and an unwary political neophyte elected president with manipulated and fraudulent votes in 1868, the Gilded Age of unrestrained finance capitalism and public officials for sale was a foregone conclusion.
Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman

North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission

"Unsurpassed Valor, Courage and Devotion to Liberty"

"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"

Grant's Whole Phantasmagoria of Insolent Fraud:

"All the cost of the Civil War can, in fact, not be learned from Grant, and though he presided over the country in the White House for eight years after the war (1869-1877), the consequences of Northern victory, with its unleashing of the money-grabbing interests, were quite beyond his grasp. Grant's Memoirs, like the writings of Lincoln, are after all, a literary creation, and intellectual construction with words.  They are a part of that vision of the Civil War that Lincoln imposed on the nation, and we accept them as firsthand evidence of the actualization of that vision.

[F]ormer Vice-President Andrew Johnson . . . was opposed by the Radical Republicans, who even tried to remove him as President and who, in the period of "Reconstruction," humiliated and exploited the South.  This period would certainly have been difficult for Lincoln. He was dead and safely out of it, but Grant was still alive and only forty-three.

Simple-minded beyond the experience of Wall Street or State Street, he resorted, like most men of the same intellectual caliber, to commonplaces when at a loss for expression: "Let us have peace" . . . The progress of evolution from President Washington to President Grant, was alone enough to upset Darwin.

He had the idea, for example, that it might be an excellent thing to send some of the freed Negroes to Haiti, and he had taken advantage of a situation created by two rival governments there to draw up with one of its Presidents a treaty for the annexation of the whole island of Santo Domingo.

His appointments to his cabinet were often fantastic: he had no judgment about people in civil life, and he appointed as Secretary of the Treasury the proprietor of a large New York dry-goods store, unaware that anyone in foreign trade was debarred from holding this office; for Minister to France he selected a half-illiterate Illinois Congressman.

Under Grant's two administrations, there flapped through the national capital a whole phantasmagoria of insolent fraud, while a swarm of predatory adventurers was let loose on the helpless South. There was the Credit Mobilier affair, in which the promoters of the Union Pacific Railroad, who had obtained an immense government loan and twelve millions acres of government land, made a contract with themselves under another name and paid themselves three times more than the cost of building the railroad, in the meantime bribing the congressmen with shares in the imaginary company.

There was the gold conspiracy of [Big] Jim Fisk and Jay Gould, in which Grant was persuaded by these two financiers, without in the least understanding their aims, to assist them in cornering the gold market by causing the United States Treasury to shut off the circulation of gold.  There was the Whiskey Ring, a group of distillers who evade the internal revenue tax by bribing Treasury agents – a scandal that landed at the President's door when his secretary, a General Babcock who was with him at Appomattox, was shown to have been taking the distillers' money and to have used it in financing Grant's campaign.

One can hardly even say that Grant was President except in the sense that he presided at the White House, where the business men and financiers were extremely happy to have him, since he never knew what they were up to. It was the age of the audacious confidence man, and Grant was the incurable sucker."

(Patriotic Gore, Studies in Literature of the American Civil War, Edmund Wilson, Oxford University Press, 1962, pp. 159-167)

New Chief of Heritage Operations

   Sons of Confederate                                                Veterans


In light of the issues at Washington Lee University, I feel it is important to let the membership know who I appointed to the position of Chief of Heritage Operations. Mr. Ben Jones, currently from Virginia, was a former US Congressman from the state of Georgia. His expertise in dealing with high profile situations is one of the many reasons he was chosen. His diplomatic skills will prove to be invaluable in this position.

On many occasions he has proven that he loves his Southern heritage by the fights he has already participated in. One of the most recent that many may remember is when he took on Warner Brothers after they announced they would remove the Confederate Battle Flag off the
General Lee, a car he repaired in the Dukes of Hazard. Yes, Mr. Jones is none other than "Cooter" in the hit TV series that still captivates audiences through out the world. He won that battle, as he has many, and brought awareness to the history of the flag, as well as the Southern people. I hope you will join with him as he guides us through the future heritage issues.

Deo Vindice!

Charles Kelly Barrow
Sons of Confederate Veterans 

British and French Mediation Considered


Rarely mentioned as a decisive deterrent to Anglo-French recognition of Southern independence was the presence of Russian fleets in San Francisco and New York from September 1863 through March 1864.  Both the Czar and Lincoln freed serfs and slaves while crushing independence movements in Poland and the American South.

Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman

North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission

"Unsurpassed Valor, Courage and Devotion to Liberty"

"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"

British and French Mediation Considered

"Ultimately the South's hopes for independence marched with its armies, and indeed when the Army of Northern Virginia invaded Maryland in the fall of 1862, [British Lords] Palmerston and [John] Russell became convinced of the depth and potential of Southern separation. 

On September 14, Palmerston wrote to Russell about Anglo-French mediation and "an arrangement upon the basis of separation."  Russell responded, "I agree with you that the time has come for offering mediation to the United States Government, with a view of the recognition of the Independence of the Confederates – I agree further that in case of failure, we ought ourselves to recognize the Southern States, as an independent State."

In accord with these convictions, Russell informally approached his counterpart in Paris, Antoine Edouard Trouvenel, and discussed with Palmerston a date for a meeting of the cabinet to approve the mediation scheme.  Russell was still firm in this policy on October 4, when he wrote Palmerston, "I think unless some miracle takes place this will be the very time for offering Mediation."

And on October 7, Chancellor of the Exchequer William Gladstone let the cat out of the bag.  Speaking at Newcastle, Gladstone affirmed, that, "Jefferson Davis and other leaders of the South have made an army; they are making, it appears, a navy; and they have made what is more than either, they have made a nation."

Then, just a quickly as the mediation enthusiasm had developed in England, it evaporated. [Though as important as the Sharpsburg battle and Lincoln's abolition proclamation] were, other considerations contributed to England's return to nonintervention. Mediation was attractive to free-traders who resented the Federal blockade, to liberals who supported self-determination, to conservatives who felt a kinship with landed aristocrats in the South, and to some varieties of nationalists who looked with favor upon the dissolution of the United States.

But these attractions were essentially abstract.  In the end British statesmen had to face the hard reality of what might follow an unsuccessful offer of mediation and subsequent recognition of the Confederacy: they had to ponder the consequences of a North American war.  And if the British should be drawn into an American war, they wanted to support the winning side.  In this regard, [Sharpsburg] and abolition] were indecisive; neither event broke the American impasse to reveal a victor." 

(The Confederate Nation, 1861-1865, Emory M. Thomas, Henry Steele Commager & Richard B. Morris, editors, Harper & Row, 1979, pp. 179-180)  

New Executive Director

   Sons of Confederate                                                Veterans

The Sons of Confederate Veterans has been blessed to have Ben Swell as Executive Director for 12 years. Under his leadership, the SCV has prospered and flourished with his expertise. When Mr. Sewell announced that he would retire, it was known that it would be difficult to find someone of the same caliber.

In Charleston, at the National Reunion, it was announced that Lt. Col Mike Landree, USMC, will follow Mr. Sewell as Executive Director. It is an exciting new chapter for the SCV, and I feel like Lt. Col Landree will continue to lead the SCV into the future. Lt. Col Landree will begin in his new position on December 1, 2014.

So at this time I would like to say welcome aboard to Lt. Col Landree and God Speed to Mr. Sewell.

Deo Vindice!
Charles Kelly Barrow
Sons of Confederate Veterans 

Washington & Lee Rally

   Sons of Confederate                                                Veterans


On Saturday, July 26th, there will be a rally in Lexington Virginia at 12 noon in protest of the decision by Washington and Lee University to tamper with the grave site of General Robert E. Lee. The rally will be held at Hopkins Green, which is at the intersection of Jefferson and Nelson Streets in downtown Lexington.

It has become even more important that every compatriot who can possibly attend this rally do so. A press release from Washington and Lee has basically accused the SCV of being potential thugs and vandals. W&L has closed the Lee Chapel from Friday afternoon through Sunday July 27th. According to the University, "This unscheduled closing is based on concerns for the safety of the facility and its staff on the day that the Sons of Confederate Veterans have scheduled a rally in Lexington. We must take this unfortunate precaution because of the inflammatory and threatening letters, emails and phone calls the University has received in response to the removal of reproduction battle flags from the statue chamber in Lee Chapel..."

In other words, they are suggesting that SCV members would desecrate the Lee Chapel or injure its staffers because of the disingenuous actions of President Ruscio. No group honors the Lee Chapel and wishes it to be protected more than the Sons of Confederate Veterans. This closure is a gratuitous insult to one of America's finest and oldest heritage groups.

It is imperative that our members attend the rally if possible, and it is important that we gather as Southern gentlemen in the manner of General Lee himself and with the dignity that his memory deserves. We must show the University that the continuing attempt to demonize the tens of millions of descendants of the Confederacy should stop and be replaced with genuine understanding and communication.

Ben Jones
Chief of Heritage Operations


Canny White House Theorist Versus Outlawed Rebels


Author Francis Butler Simkins observed that the South's leaders "had committed a crime against the dominant patriotism of the nineteenth century" by "preaching national disintegration." Lincoln the nationalist responded with  "You have no oath registered in heaven to destroy the government, while I shall have the most solemn one to "preserve, protect and defend it." Lincoln would not recognize the right of Americans in the South to create a more perfect union.

Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman

North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission

"Unsurpassed Valor, Courage and Devotion to Liberty"

"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"

Canny White House Theorist Versus Outlawed Rebels

"Southerners were convinced that what they lacked in military and naval equipment would be outweighed by their superior intelligence, bravery and hardihood.  Had not the American colonies, who were weaker than the South, defeated England, a nation stronger than the North? The Confederacy need only stand on the defensive, win a few victories, and the un-heroic Yankees would quickly withdraw from the hornets' nest.  Jefferson Davis and other thoughtful leaders, however, did not share such popular fallacies; they believed there would be a long war against a merciless foe.

It was true that in Abraham Lincoln the Confederacy had an implacable enemy. Behind the white face and black beard of a St. John the Baptist was the statesmen willing to use the methods by which great leaders of modern times have built or maintained empires.  This meant nothing less than imposing forcibly the will of the strong upon the weak. With Lincoln the word was "charity to all men," the reality "blood and iron."

The President's objective was clear: the complete destruction of the Confederate government, and the restoration of its constituent States to the Union. In his opinion the contest was not a war, but an attempt to put down domestic insurrection which had become too formidable for ordinary officers of the law.

The withdrawal of the Southern States and their subsequent organization into a new nation was declared illegal.  To come to terms with the new Confederacy necessitated a great war, but the canny theorist in the White House called it an endeavor to re-establish constitutional authority.  Accordingly the President mobilized armies and inaugurated a military struggle without asking Congress for a declaration of war.

He launched an invasion against powerful armies without extending to them the formal belligerent rights customary among civilized war-makers.  The Confederacy was blockaded to deprive it of basic necessities.  The Federal armies moved forward not to come to terms with a legal enemy, but to possess militarily and politically the territory of outlawed rebels. When the policies of blockade and invasion were not immediately successful, novel methods of warfare were employed.

The Emancipation Proclamation, issued after Lee's advance into the North had been stopped at [Sharpsburg], at least by implication, was designed to demoralize Southern Society and to give the war the character of a crusade in which righteousness was buttressed by vengeance.  Provinces were devastated to break their will to resist.

When victory and the cessation of hostilities came, there was no armistice or peace treaty with [a] humbled foe, but surrender by an adversary who had been cut to pieces. The Confederacy was dissolved and its constituent parts re-incorporated into the United States."

(The South Old and New, A History, 1820–1947, Francis Butler Simkins, Albert A. Knopf, 1947, pp. 140-141)

The North's Deliberate and Inexorable Policy of Non-Exchange


With only Northern reporters sending postwar observations and stories to their readers in the North, and all possessing biased views of the South shaped in wartime, the result was predictable as they emphasized any unfavorable aspects of Southern civilization.  It was Edwin Stanton who deliberately buried Northern dead on Lee's Arlington property, and who deliberately had Jefferson Davis placed in chains at Fortress Monroe. 

Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman

North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission

"Unsurpassed Valor, Courage and Devotion to Liberty"

"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"

The North's Deliberate and Inexorable Policy of Non-Exchange

"[The] years from 1865 to 1880 were dreary years in which there was no peace.  The war had only ended on the battlefield.  In the minds of men it still persisted.  Memories of the past and issues living in the present combined to perpetuate and perhaps enlarge the antagonism that victory and defeat created.  One observer made the comment that "it was useless to preach forgiveness and good will to men still burning with the memory of their wrongs."

Deeply [engraved] on the Northern heart was the conviction that the Confederacy had deliberately mistreated the prisoners of war captured by its armies.  The Southern prisons . . . were at best what one Confederate surgeon described as a "gigantic mass of human misery."

A war-crazed [Northern] public could not dissociate this suffering from deliberate intent of the enemy.  Rather it fitted the purposes of propaganda to attribute the barest motives to the Confederates [that] "there was a fixed determination on the part of the rebels to kill the Union soldiers who fell into their hands."  The great non-governmental agencies of relief and propaganda [such as the Union League] contributed to the spread of similar impressions.

Northern opinion was thus rigidly shaped in the belief that "tens of thousands of national soldiers . . . were deliberately shot to death, as at Fort Pillow, or frozen to death as at Belle Island, or starved to death as at Andersonville, or sickened to death by swamp malaria, as in South Carolina."  Horror passed into fury and fury into a demand for revenge.  And the arch-fiend of iniquity, for so the North regarded him, Major Henry Wirz, was hanged as a murderer [in November 1865] . . . he was the scapegoat upon whom centered the full force of Northern wrath.

Meanwhile the South had no effective way of meeting these charges of brutality [though] it is not difficult to find, however, material in these years that the South received the Northern charge with sullen hatred.  Typical is an article contributed to the Southern Review in January 1867:

"The impartial times to come will hardly understand how a nation, which not only permitted but encouraged its government to declare medicines and surgical instruments contraband of war, and to destroy by fire and sword the habitations and food of noncombatants, as well as the fruits of the earth and the implements of tillage, should afterwards have clamored for the blood of captive enemies, because they did not feed their prisoners out of their own starvation and heal them in their succorless hospitals.

And when a final and accurate development shall have been made of the facts connected with the exchange of prisoners between the belligerents, and it shall have been demonstrated . . . that all the nameless horrors [of both sides] were the result of a deliberate and inexorable policy of non-exchange on the part of the United States, founded on an equally deliberate calculation of their ability to furnish a greater mass of humanity than the Confederacy could afford for starvation and the shambles, men will wonder how it was that a people, passing for civilized and Christian, should have consigned Jefferson Davis to a cell, while they tolerated Edwin M. Stanton as a cabinet minister."

(The Road to Reunion, 1865-1900, Paul H. Buck, Little, Brown and Company, 1937, pp. 45-48)

Friday, July 25, 2014

Texas Heritage Violation-Flag Pole Cut & Flag Stolen

The Bellmead Confederate Flag Pole Story 2014-07-15
Commander Charles Oliver of the General Felix H Robertson SCV Camp #129 in Waco, Texas related this Information. The title was transferred to the SCV (national) a couple of years ago for insurance purposes. It will be a topic of discussion at the national reunion this week. It is a heavy duty 40 foot Flag Pole located between two hotels an in full view of everyone traveling south on IH 35. It was cut down using what appears to have been a pipe grinder & the Flag was stolen Friday night, 07-11-2014, by vandals. The Pole was left on site. This is the 4th time this has happened. The Insurance Company has always pays for it to be re-installed. The Waco News Paper customarily prints a story. Each time this has happened, the the Waco Camp has gained several new members.
The flag went up Mar 05, 2011, the dedication was meant to coincide with the 150th anniversary of Texas joining the Confederacy.
Waco, Texas - CSA Memorial
The CSA Army of Tennessee Battle flag/Naval Jack flag flying on the flagpole and monument are located on the west-side frontage road along I-35 between exits 338 and 339 in Waco, McLennan County, Texas. The Motel 6 sign in the background is also visible as a point of reference
Reverse of Waco, McLennan County, Texas CSA Monument
This monument was placed by the efforts of the General Felix H Robertson Camp #129 Sons of Confederate Veterans in Waco, Texas. Quite an accomplishment.
The text of the reverse:
"The following regiments had at least one company form in Waco from men of McLennan Co.
Approximately 2000 men
4th Texas Infantry
7th Texas Infantry
15th Texas Infantry
5th Texas Cavalry
8th Texas Cavalry
13th Texas Cavalry
Readers should note the strict sense of the wording. These are regiments in which at least one company was formed in Waco. The list of all the regiments with men from Waco who served would be too extensive for the monument, let alone all the men from the county.
William H. Parsons who formed and was first colonel of the 12th Texas Cavalry Regt was a newspaper editor in Waco when the war started.
The 8th Texas Cavalry Regiment was also known as "Terry's Texas Rangers"

Bearing Their Afflictions with Philosophy and Christian Fortitude


The postwar South endured a swarm of curious Northerners: some journalists, many exploitive speculators, and often offensive bigots "who gave advice, condemned customs, asked obtrusive questions, and published tactless statements." Despite New England's large part in the African slave trade and perpetuation of slavery with its ravenous cotton mills, the North was determined that the South alone would be punished for the supposed sins of slavery.

Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman

North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission

"Unsurpassed Valor, Courage and Devotion to Liberty"

"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"

Bearing Their Afflictions with Philosophy and Christian Fortitude

"The defeated Southerners were expected to make the sacrifices necessary for reforms favoring the Negro. They were willing to recognize the defeat of the Confederate armies, the freeing of the slaves, and the restoration of the   Union.  A considerable number with the fear of summary punishment before them were willing to repudiate the Confederacy with unseemly haste.  A few – the first scalawags – were prepared to adopt the beliefs of the conquerors.

For the great majority, however, the tragic outcome of the war increased their hatred of Northerners, made Southern doctrines more precious, and invested the war leaders with an aura of heroism. Only the minimum demands of the victor were to be accepted. As soon as it became clear that the North would not be as vindictive as some imagined every reform suggested from the outside was contested bitterly.

Those among the conquerors who imagined that military defeat had reduced the white Southerners to impotence were to be unpleasantly surprised. Although defeated, these people were not without material resources.  Despite   threats of confiscation, the land remained mostly in their hands and agricultural possibilities partially compensated for decline in land values. All tools were not destroyed and many cities were unscathed or only partially wrecked.

The whites faced their difficulties with superb courage. "While clouds were dark and threatening," wrote a Northern newspaper reporter, "I do not believe there was ever in the world's history a people who bear their afflictions with more philosophy and Christian fortitude than these unfortunate people."  Women cheerfully returned to the kitchen and men turned to manual labor. A philosophy of hard work and close economy was preached, and every expedient which might lead out of the impasse of poverty and social stagnation was advanced.

The war had accustomed men to hardships, and the women had learned to manage plantations, maintain slave discipline, and endure privations. Certainly there was no ground for the belief, fostered by the romantics, that Southerners were a lazy and improvident lot who were helpless unless ministered to by faithful blacks. Actually, they were ready to assume duties previously exercised by Negroes, at the same time resisting Northern assaults on their inherited privileges.

They were backed in their policies by an assertive country folk who were accustomed to dwell on lands of their own, and who had a profound contempt for Northerners . . . had proved their stamina while serving in the Confederate army . . . [and] were ready to terrorize Yankees and Negroes alike if members of either group attempted to upset the traditional social order."

(The South Old and New, A History, 1820-1947, Francis Butler Simkins, Alfred A. Knopf, 1947, pp. 171-172)