Confederate past should not be honored

  • Follow Letters

I must respond to "We must honor our Confederate dead" (May 2) by saying that I don't agree with letter writer Lee Herron. They should not be honored.

Why? Because at the time when Abraham Lincoln was president of the United States, most of the Confederate soldiers who were fighting during the Civil War hated Lincoln and wanted him dead.

In fact, the man who assassinated Lincoln on April 14, 1865 -- John Wilkes Booth -- was a racist who was supported by other people who were in the Confederate army. Booth also was a Confederate sympathizer. Booth, Confederate sympathizers and many other people who were in the Confederate army were strongly opposed to the abolition of slavery in the United States, and Lincoln's proposal to extend voting rights to recently emancipated slaves.

Booth and a group of co-conspirators also had led a plan to kill Vice President Andrew Johnson and Secretary of State William Seward in a desperate bid to help the Confederate cause. This may have been one of the main reasons why the Ku Klux Klan supported the Confederacy and its rebel flag.

This is according to some information I saw online and in some books about the Civil War in the public library. There also are some movies and documentaries about the Civil War -- for example, The Civil War (1990), produced by Ken Burns, is a very accurate documentary about the Civil War and the assassination of Lincoln.

David Thomas

Harlem

Comments (59) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
wizzardx1
0
Points
wizzardx1 05/06/09 - 04:23 am
0
0
Once again, someone brings

Once again, someone brings racism into the picture.Mr. Thomas should read SOME facts before offering an opinion. Lincoln owned slaves that were not freed until after his death.Booth owned no slaves. Johnson and seward owned slaves.

oldvalleyhouse
0
Points
oldvalleyhouse 05/06/09 - 04:41 am
0
0
Speaking of facts, there is

Speaking of facts, there is no evidence that Lincoln owned slaves. Washington and Jefferson, yes. Lincoln, no.

bone
23
Points
bone 05/06/09 - 05:53 am
0
0
what does honoring

what does honoring confederates have to do with hating lincoln? who cares if lincoln owned slaves or not? the evidence that lincoln was willing to say / do anything to preserve federal control is obvious to anyone who does a little research into his public statements about slavery during his presidential campaign and later as chief executive.

GACopperhead
6
Points
GACopperhead 05/06/09 - 05:58 am
0
0
The Emancipation Proclamation

The Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves south of the Mason-Dixon line. If you want Lincoln's true opinions of blacks, read the Lincoln-Douglas debates. He had no high regard for them. He was opposed to the principle of slavery, but his only real motivation was preservation of the union. He was willing to do this at any cost, and used slavery as an issue only after the New York riots in favor of ending the war. Maryland was debating joining the Confederacy, and England was on the verge of recognizing it. Slavery was an important reason for the War for Southern Independence, but not the sole or most important one. States rights was and is the major issue, then and today.

GACopperhead
6
Points
GACopperhead 05/06/09 - 05:59 am
0
0
Also, the writer of the LTE

Also, the writer of the LTE uses only modern, revisionist sources for his opinions.

dhd1108
1
Points
dhd1108 05/06/09 - 06:36 am
0
0
this dead horse is starting

this dead horse is starting to stink. i think its a better use of people's time to argue over the names of crayola crayon colors.

pofwe
5
Points
pofwe 05/06/09 - 06:50 am
0
0
David Thomas, may the bird of

David Thomas, may the bird of paradise fly up your nose, may an elephant caress you with its toes. As bloody pyles pursue you. may the whole world look down upon you and your life be a total wreck may you fall through your anus and break your #*&#$* neck.

dashiel
176
Points
dashiel 05/06/09 - 07:01 am
0
0
Good suggestion, dhd1108.

Good suggestion, dhd1108. What color exactly is flesh?

dhd1108
1
Points
dhd1108 05/06/09 - 07:19 am
0
0
i was thinking more along the

i was thinking more along the lines of arguing the virtues of green-yellow vs. yellow-green

dashiel
176
Points
dashiel 05/06/09 - 07:33 am
0
0
They used to call that one

They used to call that one chartreuse. Crayola has a new color now. It's called Courage.

deeo1055@yahoo.com
0
Points
deeo1055@yahoo.com 05/06/09 - 07:45 am
0
0
Dear Mr. Thomas, Help me out

Dear Mr. Thomas, Help me out sir:
Reasons for war are always many. Please explain the reason for the fact that the US Freedman's Beaura after the War Between the States found AND DOCUMENTED that there were 300,000 MILITARY COMBANTANTS IN THE UNION ARMY THAT OWNED SLAVES, while just 200,000 combantants were in the Confederate military???
Were the 300,000 Yankess SKIZO or do you think there was some other reasons? And why would the other 400,000-800,000 men who fought for the Confederacy do so??
Thanks.

44mag
0
Points
44mag 05/06/09 - 08:04 am
0
0
"some information", "some

"some information", "some books"! Quite the historian you've become David! When are you going to publish and start a speaking tour? I look forward to seeing you on CSPAN.

patriciathomas
42
Points
patriciathomas 05/06/09 - 08:11 am
0
0
Copperhead made the most

Copperhead made the most relevant point. This letter is based on revisionist perspective, not fact.

44mag
0
Points
44mag 05/06/09 - 08:11 am
0
0
Sorry David to slight you. I

Sorry David to slight you. I guess the additional some movies and documentaries proves your point!

confederatelady319
0
Points
confederatelady319 05/06/09 - 08:46 am
0
0
mr.thomas-i really think you

mr.thomas-i really think you should read books with some research behind them.i have several books about the war and most have a couple hundred pages of research of their sources,if you disgree with them you can research them yourself.just a few facts for you lincolns wife did have slaves in the white house.union general grants wife owned slaves until after the war.general grant stated that if the war was being fought over slavery he would throw down his sword,he also became president.lincoln's plan was to colonize the slaves after the war and ship as many as he could to liberia.the u.s. flag flew over slavery and slave ships for 88 years,the battle flag stood only for 4 years over a army.please do some research before you write in and look like a moron

laking
0
Points
laking 05/06/09 - 09:00 am
0
0
This is an excerpt from a

This is an excerpt from a recent column by Leonard Pitts, columnist for the Miami Herald: "A generation of apologists for the wanabe nation symbolized by that flag has done an effective job of convincing the guillible and the willfully ignorant that neither the nation, the flag, nor the Civil War in which both were bloodily repudiated, has anything to do with slavery. It's just "heritage," they say, as though heritage were a synonym for "good." As though Nazis, white South Africans and Rwandans did not have heritage, too.
For the record: In explaining its decision to secede, South Carolina cited "an increasing hostility on the part of the nonslaveholding States to the institution of slavery. Georgia noted its grievances against the North "with reference to the subject of African slavery. "Mississippi said, "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery." To which Confederate "vice president" Alexander Stephens added: Our government is founded upon...the great truth that the Negro is not equal to the white man, that slavery is his natural and moral condition."
The notion that the Confederacy hve nothing to do with slavery is tiresome, silly and delusional.

draksig
167
Points
draksig 05/06/09 - 09:04 am
0
0
Someone who gets his history

Someone who gets his history from movies, the internet and a couple of books he found in the library. Do some research into the relationship between norhtern and southern states and you found that they were bad well before the civil war. Northerners and Southerners simply hated each other and it was not over slavery.

laking
0
Points
laking 05/06/09 - 10:07 am
0
0
Draksig, If that "someone"

Draksig, If that "someone" you're refering to is Mr. Pitts, a Pulitzer Prize winner for editorial commentary, let me ask you, where do you get your information?

Irish
0
Points
Irish 05/06/09 - 10:51 am
0
0
Mr. thomas has a one sided

Mr. thomas has a one sided view of history, the Civil War was not about slavery. It was about states rights. Read The history not the revisionary books sir. States Rights are being infringed upon today. Should we hate O'Bama for that ? Individual rights and freedoms and our ability to make our own deciscions are worth fighting for. I fought in viet nam and didn't even own a bicycle....most of the people who fought for the south were dirt farmers who barely afford a mule let alone a slave.....

hurlyburly11
0
Points
hurlyburly11 05/06/09 - 11:01 am
0
0
Mr. Thomas is an "internet

Mr. Thomas is an "internet Historian"....LOL Sir I beg of you do not write on subjects that you have absolutly no knoweledge of........now AC editors I am sure you got a hoot from this ....but it's not really nice to "out" an idiot.....I'm just saying...........

laking
0
Points
laking 05/06/09 - 11:37 am
0
0
Why do you Confederate

Why do you Confederate apologists keep posting BULL? Like Irish and Hurlyburly? There're plenty of information about what the Confederacy was all about. Why don't some of you idiots address the posts of some of us who is interested in an academic dialog about confederate history? What difference does it make where the info' comes from as long as there is autheniticy?

GACopperhead
6
Points
GACopperhead 05/06/09 - 11:54 am
0
0
Laking, have you read

Laking, have you read ANYTHING other than the one side, which IS revisionary? Have you, perchance read the Lincoln/Douglas debates, in which he iterates that Negroes should not have the vote? Look back at the Congressional disputes prior to secession. You will find myriad other valid reasons for the War for Southern Independence, including tariffs placed upon southern goods (cotton, most specifically), intended to prohibit trade with other countries in order to guarantee Northern(damned YANKEE) access to those raw goods at extremely low cost. Lincoln did not make slavery the major issue until Yankee sentiment began to turn from the war. I am neither a Southerner or a Northerner, nor do I harbor any prejudice against another race. I do enjoy the history of the Great War, and understand that it had many reasons, some of which are still a problem today.

MyTake
0
Points
MyTake 05/06/09 - 12:15 pm
0
0
It's pretty easy to reject

It's pretty easy to reject views that you do not care for as 'revisionist' - a lot easier that moving out of the comfort zone where everything has solid and final explanations, you are right, and everyone else is wrong. Real men deal with the hurly burly of the real world and try to penetrate these comforting illusions. Anyway, The War was first and last about slavery, although neither side cared to claim it as a cause, at least at first. Even the most reluctant Southerners knew they had a tiger by the tail, and even if freedom was the "right" thing to do for the slaves, the economic consequences were frightening to think about. Even those who owned no slaves opposed abolition on the grounds that they would be thrown into direct economic competition. The South acted in its economic self interest, and pushed the human side of the problem under the carpet by vilifying their subjects. This response is still alive and well, and the Confederacy cannot be openly honored until it's entirely gone.

Mr. Thackeray
911
Points
Mr. Thackeray 05/06/09 - 12:42 pm
0
0
"The Emancipation

"The Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves south of the Mason-Dixon line."

Sorry no. It freeded the states still in rebellion. MD & DE are south of the Mason-Dixon line and maintained their slaves until after the war!

Niko Mahs
83
Points
Niko Mahs 05/06/09 - 02:26 pm
0
0
Mr. Thomas, next time don't

Mr. Thomas, next time don't publish such a letter because it just brings out the two different sides and nobody wins. The Civil War is just what it is: History and nothing more! Until the south rises again there is no need to rehash this stuff. But hey the governor of Texas wants to secede, and Mark Sanford cannot be far behind. I say fire up the batteries and let's hit Sumter again. We are not just agriculture now, and most of the folks in the Rust Belt have gone to the Sun Belt. Where the hell is old Jubal Early when you need him?

laking
0
Points
laking 05/06/09 - 02:27 pm
0
0
The proof that slavery would

The proof that slavery would not have ended if the North had not won the war lies in the establishment of the Jim Crow Laws and the separate but equal doctrine by the South that lasted well into the 20th century. Why do you people continue to try to make this dishonorable chapter in American history relevant as some kind of heritage? We know now that the Confederate flag did not fly in positions of prominence until the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. All of the reasons given by bloggers like: Thackery,Copperhead, Dbs319, etc. indicates what Mr. Pitts said about the gullible and willfully ignorant unless they only have in mind to never give in to the obvious and that is to retire the flag to a museum and accept that this is no heritage to be proud of. Copperhead, who's being the revisionist here? Where does the term "War of Southern Independence" come from? And about the tariffs on cotton. How would the South continue to harvest their money crop if not with free slave labor?

Hatfield0278
1
Points
Hatfield0278 05/06/09 - 02:47 pm
0
0
This was the dumbest LTE I've

This was the dumbest LTE I've ever read.

laking
0
Points
laking 05/06/09 - 02:54 pm
0
0
Hatfield, How is this LTE

Hatfield, How is this LTE dumb? Or are you too dumb to elaborate? Don't do like the rest of these imbeciles. Say something silly then disappear.

justus4
101
Points
justus4 05/06/09 - 02:55 pm
0
0
The letter is correct. The
Unpublished

The letter is correct. The facts are clear, but many Americans are really intellectual liars who lie so often, they deny actual facts without even blinking. Remember, these people believed that Afro-Americans were sub-human (many secretly still believe) and their labor was free. What kinda individual wants OTHERS to do THEIR work? One must be extremely lazy to conjure up such a notion, and to have ancestors to lie about the truth. Wow! So lying is congential to certain folk, and "we" know who those folk are...again, good factual article and why don't these yahoos celebrate Booth Day?

SargentMidTown
8
Points
SargentMidTown 05/06/09 - 02:55 pm
0
0
I have slaves and slave

I have slaves and slave owners in my ancestral tree. We should honor them all because they are dead and buried. Today's generational welfare people would be more productive as slaves to other people than they are as slaves to the welfare lifestyle. Maybe they are the descendents of the Africans that the Chiefs sold to the slave traders: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/memphis-crime

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs