Civil War Interactive Discussion Board Home
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register


The Confederacy? - General Civil War Talk - Civil War Talk - Civil War Interactive Discussion Board
 Moderated by: javal1 Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next Page Last Page  
 New Topic   Reply   Printer Friendly 
 Rate Topic 
AuthorPost
 Posted: Thu Apr 23rd, 2009 03:14 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
61st Post
susansweet3
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 11th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 312
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Many African American heroes served with the south.

 

Can you cite some references that name these heros ?



 Posted: Thu Apr 23rd, 2009 01:40 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
62nd Post
borderuffian
Member


Joined: Fri Mar 13th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 105
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

susansweet3 wrote: Many African American heroes served with the south.

 

Can you cite some references that name these heros ?



A few off the top of my head...

*Moses Dallas, Pilot, CSN, was killed in expedition to capture the USS Water Witch.

I believe the ship was piloted back to port by a slave.

*Charleston, SC, was under almost constant bombardment during the war.  Several companies of free black firemen did heroic duty in putting out fires caused by that bombardment.

*The assistance of free blacks and slaves at the Battle of Petersburg, VA (June 1864) would qualify as heroic.

There are several accounts.  I believe it would make a long list.



 Posted: Sat Apr 25th, 2009 11:58 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
63rd Post
ddov
Member
 

Joined: Sat Apr 25th, 2009
Location: Hot Springs
Posts: 1
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

It is amazing how this board is as divided as the north and south were,on this very issue .Perhaps there is far more to the cause of this horrible war than we understand. Perhaps it was manipulated by outside  forces that had a far greater interst than most people realize.Far more than any particular stated cause that has been listed. This war as so many wars was created to bring about a certain end which was to make someone even more wealthy and powerful.Using the differences of North and South to create this war for there own goals thusly making the North and South pawns in the world of big old money playing  both sides agansit each other for there own ends.The debate is not the differences over slavery ,culture, interpretions of the constitution, as much as who and what was the agenda of these power brokers who manipulated this war in the first place.



 Posted: Mon Apr 27th, 2009 04:08 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
64th Post
The Iron Duke
Member


Joined: Tue Jul 29th, 2008
Location: Georgia USA
Posts: 333
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

ddov,

I can't help but quote Archer from Blood Diamond, "We thought we were fighting communism but then we realized that it was just over who was gonna control what" or something along those lines. 

Last edited on Mon Apr 27th, 2009 04:13 am by The Iron Duke



____________________
"Cleburne is here!" meant that all was well. -Daniel Harvey Hill


 Posted: Mon Apr 27th, 2009 03:29 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
65th Post
HankC
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 517
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

borderuffian wrote: susansweet3 wrote: Many African American heroes served with the south.

 

Can you cite some references that name these heros ?



A few off the top of my head...

*Moses Dallas, Pilot, CSN, was killed in expedition to capture the USS Water Witch.

I believe the ship was piloted back to port by a slave.

*Charleston, SC, was under almost constant bombardment during the war.  Several companies of free black firemen did heroic duty in putting out fires caused by that bombardment.

*The assistance of free blacks and slaves at the Battle of Petersburg, VA (June 1864) would qualify as heroic.

There are several accounts.  I believe it would make a long list.



That 'hero' list goes from pretty specific to totally general, in 3 steps.
 
IIRC, the Charleston firemen put out fires caused by the CSA destroying the navy yard in early 1865. They go where the fires are; regardless of cause...
 
 
HankC



 Posted: Mon Apr 27th, 2009 03:48 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
66th Post
borderuffian
Member


Joined: Fri Mar 13th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 105
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

HankC wrote: borderuffian wrote: susansweet3 wrote: Many African American heroes served with the south.

 

Can you cite some references that name these heros ?



A few off the top of my head...

*Moses Dallas, Pilot, CSN, was killed in expedition to capture the USS Water Witch.

I believe the ship was piloted back to port by a slave.

*Charleston, SC, was under almost constant bombardment during the war.  Several companies of free black firemen did heroic duty in putting out fires caused by that bombardment.

*The assistance of free blacks and slaves at the Battle of Petersburg, VA (June 1864) would qualify as heroic.

There are several accounts.  I believe it would make a long list.



That 'hero' list goes from pretty specific to totally general, in 3 steps...
 
 
HankC



So? 


===

Some people don't like the fact that I was able to answer that question.

Hey, that's tough.



 Posted: Mon Apr 27th, 2009 06:25 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
67th Post
Johan Steele
Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352


Joined: Sat Dec 2nd, 2006
Location: South Of The North 40, Minnesota USA
Posts: 1065
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Actually; it's tough that some are still waiting for an honest answer. One name is given then it gets so generic as to be almost comical; in just three lines. Proof by vagueness... wouldn't fly in any university or real historical environment. Some believe just three lines the beginning of a long list... belief is neither fact or history.

And no matter how vague some get in translating three into many; it rings false. And certainly when asked to provide or cite references... silence answers it rings even more contrived.

 

Just 2 pence from a man who is quite jaded over the "Black Confederate soldier" issue... who still cannot understrand how someone can honestly believe anyone was ever willing to fight to keep themselve in bondage.

Last edited on Mon Apr 27th, 2009 07:45 pm by Johan Steele



 Posted: Mon Apr 27th, 2009 08:29 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
68th Post
borderuffian
Member


Joined: Fri Mar 13th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 105
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Johan Steele wrote: Actually; it's tough that some are still waiting for an honest answer....it rings false...


I gave an honest answer. 

What evidence do you have to disprove what I wrote?  "Rings" does not qualify.



 Posted: Mon Apr 27th, 2009 08:49 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
69th Post
ole
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 2027
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

What evidence do you have to disprove what I wrote?  "Rings" does not qualify.

It isn't required to disprove what you wrote because you didn't really answer the question about black heroes of the Confederacy. Put up a real list. Ten might make the claim more credible.

Ole



 Posted: Mon Apr 27th, 2009 10:37 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
70th Post
barrydancer
Member


Joined: Wed Apr 23rd, 2008
Location: Norwalk, Connecticut USA
Posts: 135
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Johan Steele wrote: Just 2 pence from a man who is quite jaded over the "Black Confederate soldier" issue... who still cannot understrand how someone can honestly believe anyone was ever willing to fight to keep themselve in bondage.


Well said, and I think it is why some try so hard to prove there was such a thing.  If you can prove that black people fought willingly for the Confederacy, and in the numbers that advocates of black confederates like to claim, then the Confederacy was surely not fighting to protect slavery because, as you said, who would "fight to keep themselves in bondage."

From a posting you made in the other thred about slaves as southern soldiers:

"They also bristle at what they see as the disingenuous twist on political correctness fueling the black Confederate fad. 'It's a search for a multicultural Confederacy, a desperate desire to feel better about your ancestors,' says Leslie Rowland, a University of Maryland historian. 'If you suggest that some blacks supported the South, then you can deny that the Confederacy was about slavery and white supremacy.'


I have the strange feeling, though, that this thread is rapidly going the way of the "Slaves as Southern Soldiers" thred, or it at least has that potential. 



 Posted: Tue Apr 28th, 2009 11:33 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
71st Post
borderuffian
Member


Joined: Fri Mar 13th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 105
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

barrydancer wrote:
Well said, and I think it is why some try so hard to prove there was such a thing.  If you can prove that black people fought willingly for the Confederacy, and in the numbers that advocates of black confederates like to claim, then the Confederacy was surely not fighting to protect slavery because, as you said, who would "fight to keep themselves in bondage."
Since blacks did fight for the Confederacy is this what you are claiming?


From a posting you made in the other thred about slaves as southern soldiers:

"They also bristle at what they see as the disingenuous twist on political correctness fueling the black Confederate fad. 'It's a search for a multicultural Confederacy, a desperate desire to feel better about your ancestors,' says Leslie Rowland, a University of Maryland historian. 'If you suggest that some blacks supported the South, then you can deny that the Confederacy was about slavery and white supremacy.'



Now that's strange- "...the Confederacy was about...white supremacy..." as if it were unique.

I believe every predominantly white country promoted the idea of white supremacy...the North being no exception.

Or are you going to claim the North was fighting for "racial equality?" That's going to be a hard one to sell.

"...Leslie Rowland, a University of Maryland historian."

Another one of those "unbiased" left-leaning academics?

Last edited on Tue Apr 28th, 2009 11:49 am by borderuffian



 Posted: Tue Apr 28th, 2009 06:44 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
72nd Post
barrydancer
Member


Joined: Wed Apr 23rd, 2008
Location: Norwalk, Connecticut USA
Posts: 135
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

"Another one of those "unbiased" left-leaning academics?"

Sorry, I forgot. No one can be critical of the South without being "biased" and "left-leaning," and therefore circumspect in their conclusions. I suppose I could reference "historians" who paint the South as a land of milk and honey, filled with beautiful belles, and dashing cavaliers, strolling fields of roses tended by happy, smiling darkies. I prefer, however, not to deal in fantasy.

"I believe every predominantly white country promoted the idea of white supremacy...the North being no exception."

Perhaps, but the North didn't create their own government to prove the point, now did they?

I point you again to Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederacy, who ought to know a little something about what was going on at the time. The Confederacy's "foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth."

Sounds a bit like the point Rowland was making. Would you classify Stephens as a biased leftist, then?

Were there free black people who willingly piked up a rifle and fought for the Confederacy? Not slaves commandeered to drive a wagon or pilot a boat or body servants who held their master's weapons? I'd be willing to say yes. Unless they left something behind, though, we'll never know what their motives were. I don't think there is a conspiracy to ignore them, they are simply an isolated phenomenon and didn't exist in the tens of thousands as some like to claim. If it were such a common occurrence would Cleburne have been ostracized for suggesting that the Confederacy arm its slaves? Or the Confederate congress have had such heated debates on the issue, excerpts of which Johan Steele has posted on another thread? I think not.

I've said my piece, and I'm bowing out of this thread before it does degenerate into personal attacks and conspiracy theories.  I apologize for my own contributions in sending this thread downhill.

Last edited on Tue Apr 28th, 2009 07:05 pm by barrydancer



 Posted: Tue Apr 28th, 2009 07:19 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
73rd Post
javal1
Grumpy Geezer


Joined: Thu Sep 1st, 2005
Location: Tennessee USA
Posts: 1503
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

"I've said my piece, and I'm bowing out of this thread before it does degenerate into personal attacks and conspiracy theories."

Actually the sagest advice I could give. I've studied this war for over 30 years; belonged to hundreds of forums in that time as well as dozens of other "discussions" over subjects that will never be decided. I find it sad in a way. What I see are self-taught "scholars" who believe they know the unknowable. Usually what they're dong is relying on family lore as fact or attempting to justify the unjustifiable. I have strong beliefs on this subject, as well as others every bit as decisive (causation being another one). You will find I usually keep them to myself.

But what I never have is complete confidence that my belief is THE correct belief. Back in the stone ages when I was in college I had a mentor who drilled one thing into me : "when you are convinced you have the correct answer, you have forsaken research, because any reading and study you do from that point on will simply be processed in your mind as fodder for your conviction. Any contradictory facts will be discarded".

 I would advise those who wish to argue with those who hold these "scholarly" convictions to do the following: lower you head and run full speed into a brick wall. The result is the same, and it's much quicker and less frustrating.



 Posted: Tue Apr 28th, 2009 07:45 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
74th Post
borderuffian
Member


Joined: Fri Mar 13th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 105
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

barrydancer wrote: "I believe every predominantly white country promoted the idea of white supremacy...the North being no exception."

Perhaps, but the North didn't create their own government to prove the point, now did they?

I point you again to Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederacy, who ought to know a little something about what was going on at the time. The Confederacy's "foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth."



It appears the only difference between Lincoln and Stevens on the issue of race was status- one promoting slavery, the other a permanent and inferior underclass:

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races....and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on equal terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race..."



 Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 01:07 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
75th Post
ole
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 2027
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Send in the clowns; don't bother, they're here.

Ole



 Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 06:32 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
76th Post
Johan Steele
Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352


Joined: Sat Dec 2nd, 2006
Location: South Of The North 40, Minnesota USA
Posts: 1065
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top


A Few More Thoughts About Confederate Slaves
by Kevin Levin on Confederate Slaves, Lost Cause, Memory, Slavery, Southern History


Peter Carmichael was kind enough to take the time to add a few thoughts to a post of his that I recently republished.  His comment is fair and balanced in its critique of the way various groups have approached this complex topic, which is why I decided to feature it in a new post.

In all the debate that the Confederate slave subject generates on this blog and elsewhere, I am still mystified by the failure of some to appreciate a fundamental fact that applies to every African American who existed in a Southern army—he was a slave and thus denied the ability to have free will in exercising his political loyalty. All the acts of bravery and fidelity on the part of slaves in battle and camp cannot overturn this basic and defining fact. Once we recognize this hard reality we will be better prepared to subdue our emotion and begin to consider the complicated ways in which slaves and whites coexisted in the army. To suggest that a slave who purchased a gray uniform was somehow committed to the Southern cause or loyal to his master overlooks the fact that there wasn’t a blue one at the Sutler’s store for him to purchase. Even if he was able to secure one, he sure as hell wouldn’t have been allowed to wear it in the Confederate ranks. What choices and political options were available to slaves is what we should be focusing on in this debate, for we cannot consider any act of “devotion” without also considering at the same time what punishments awaited a black man who failed to do his “duty” to the master class.

For those who are emphatic that Confederate slaves were both brave and loyal in their service to the Southern cause I would like for them to explain the implications of this argument. When I am in a charitable mood, I would like to believe that those who cherish the idea of the loyal Confederate slave do so as a way to protect their ancestors from being demonized by Americans who see history as a morality play. I understand their insecurities, but if they really want Americans to take their Southern ancestors on the historical terms of the antebellum South then they will have to abandon the notion that they are a minority group that is under siege from the political left–in doing so they will take the first step to seeing the past as a search for complexities and not for universal truths that can be used to assail PC radicals. Too many Americans have the insatiable need to see themselves as a minority group under attack. This perspective fosters a strange way of seeing the world in which the “persecuted” feel that they are the true owners of truth because the rest of the world has conspired against them. This position is intellectually debilitating and it is a paranoia that pervades both political extremes, not just the right. Those of us who are baffled by the folks who go to sleep every night believing that Confederate armies were composed of slaves who wanted to die for their masters and the Southern cause deserve our serious engagement, not our ridicule. We cannot make fun of their ceremonies, even if we think they are doing injustice to the complexities of the past. We have to find a way to create a dialogue.

I have no doubt that some slaves felt a strong sense of attachment to their masters and maybe even to the outfits that they served, but this “attachment” was forged as part of a slave system that was based, at the most fundamental level, on coercion. Let’s stop getting so misty-eyed over those slaves who served with white soldiers as a band of brothers and let’s also stop denouncing anyone who sincerely wants to understand the intimate relationship that existed between slaves and their masters. We are missing the complexities of this relationship in the army and its broader impact on soldier relations, the home front, and the political ideology of the Confederacy.

 

http://cwmemory.com/2009/04/20/a-few-more-thoughts-about-confederate-slaves/#comments



 Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 01:42 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
77th Post
19bama46
Member
 

Joined: Thu Mar 23rd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 146
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

"I understand their insecurities, but if they really want Americans to take their Southern ancestors on the historical terms of the antebellum South then they will have to abandon the notion that they are a minority group that is under siege from the political left–in doing so they will take the first step to seeing the past as a search for complexities and not for universal truths that can be used to assail PC radicals. Too many Americans have the insatiable need to see themselves as a minority group under attack."

Until I read this sentence, I was agreeing with the author, however I think it could be fairly said that the confederate symbols are indeed under attack by PC leftists. It appears that their aim is to make certain that all vestiges of the confederate experience has been erased from the American scene.

To Wit:

-The VA in a reversal of previous policy now states that small confederate type flags cannot be placed in front of confederate graves in national cemeteries. Even for a few hours on Memorial day

-The Auburn incident of the destruction of private property at a cemetery.

-The hue and cry about the CBF being displayed over I65 south of MOntgomery and in Florida...even tho it is displayed on Private property.

-The practice of the NPS of granting hate groups such as the KKK the right to hold demonstrations on NPS property (Antietam Battlefield) on the basis of first ammendment rights, while the VA denies the SCV the right to fly a battleflag as part of a colorguard during the dedication of a monument to confederate POW's who died during captivity at a National Cemetery.

And countless other acts to change street names, school names etc because they are named after men like Lee, Davis, Forrest, Jackson and other Confederate figures.

 

-

 



 Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 02:16 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
78th Post
borderuffian
Member


Joined: Fri Mar 13th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 105
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

19bama46 wrote: "I understand their insecurities, but if they really want Americans to take their Southern ancestors on the historical terms of the antebellum South then they will have to abandon the notion that they are a minority group that is under siege from the political left–in doing so they will take the first step to seeing the past as a search for complexities and not for universal truths that can be used to assail PC radicals. Too many Americans have the insatiable need to see themselves as a minority group under attack."

Until I read this sentence, I was agreeing with the author, however I think it could be fairly said that the confederate symbols are indeed under attack by PC leftists. It appears that their aim is to make certain that all vestiges of the confederate experience has been erased from the American scene.

To Wit:

-The VA in a reversal of previous policy now states that small confederate type flags cannot be placed in front of confederate graves in national cemeteries. Even for a few hours on Memorial day

-The Auburn incident of the destruction of private property at a cemetery.

-The hue and cry about the CBF being displayed over I65 south of MOntgomery and in Florida...even tho it is displayed on Private property.

-The practice of the NPS of granting hate groups such as the KKK the right to hold demonstrations on NPS property (Antietam Battlefield) on the basis of first ammendment rights, while the VA denies the SCV the right to fly a battleflag as part of a colorguard during the dedication of a monument to confederate POW's who died during captivity at a National Cemetery.



I would add to that the boycott of South Carolina by the combined efforts of the NAACP and NCAA over the Confederate flag being on statehouse grounds.

In recent years the NCAA has become a very politically correct/left-leaning organization. 

Where in NCAA bylaws does it authorize them to be involved in political issues?

It doesn't.  In fact they are breaking their own rules.



 Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 02:23 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
79th Post
borderuffian
Member


Joined: Fri Mar 13th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 105
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Johan Steele wrote: Peter Carmichael was kind enough to take the time to add a few thoughts to a post of his that I recently republished.  His comment is fair and balanced in its critique of the way various groups have approached this complex topic, which is why I decided to feature it in a new post.

In all the debate that the Confederate slave subject generates on this blog and elsewhere, I am still mystified by the failure of some to appreciate a fundamental fact that applies to every African American who existed in a Southern army—he was a slave and thus denied the ability to have free will in exercising his political loyalty.

This is false.

There were many free blacks in the Confederate army.  Even slaves had ample opportunity to exercise their "political loyalty" by simply walking away from camp or while on the march.



 Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 03:34 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
80th Post
susansweet3
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 11th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 312
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

This is false.

There were many free blacks in the Confederate army.  Even slaves had ample opportunity to exercise their "political loyalty" by simply walking away from camp or while on the march.

Source? 

 



 Current time is 02:08 amPage:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next Page Last Page  
Top




UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.4627 seconds (10% database + 90% PHP). 36 queries executed.