While CNN and others challenge the idea of Virginia’s proclamation for Confederate History Month, I think it’s a fine time to point out that many in the media are doing an equal amount of injustice to history as those who want to take Confederate history down the “Moonlight and Magnolias” path. It’s really sad, but I haven’t really seen an instance in which the media has used anything other than generalizations/blanket-type stereotypes. Additionally, their arguments against Confederate History Month have been limited, focusing on slavery alone, as the reason against any recognition of the Confederate portion of the South’s history. I disagree entirely with this approach. As I said earlier last week, we should not focus on Virginia’s Confederate history alone, but we should alter the month to recognize Virginia’s Civil War history, thereby including the greater story of Virginians (including those who embraced the Confederacy) between 1861-1865. Again, and again, and again, I have stated that Virginia’s Civil War history is not defined by “Confederate” alone, BUT, it is a part of Virginia’s story that should be part of a greater month of reflection of our history.
But back to the media…
Last night, the worst came out in the media when Roland Martin made a very lame effort in comparing Confederates with Islamic jihadists AND comparing the “honoring” of Confederates with honoring Nazi soldiers for killing Jews during the Holocaust. What a completely historically ignorant statement to make. I found it just as difficult to read as I found a couple of clips, posted on Kevin’s blog recently, difficult to watch; one showing the Kennedy brothers rant about “How the South was Right” and the other being an absolutely delusional pitch made to reveal ignorance in the census by writing in “Confed Southern Am” for Southerners to re-identify nationality.
What has really happened here is that there have been multiple missed opportunities… to educate responsibly, and spread more understanding of our collective past. Instead of rushing to paste a “boogeyman” sign on the backs of people from history or placing halos over the heads of just as many, we need to get a grip on ourselves and our national history. Like it or not, it ALL has a place in understanding who we are today. In fact, I think what we are seeing is a fine example of why we should have a Civil War History Month in Virginia… not to praise and hate, but to pause, educate, and understand. The history of the war is fascinating, and the complex history of those involved is even more so (even if only in my humble opinion). I just hope that what we have seen over the last 12 days isn’t a prequel to what will happen during the Sesquicentennial.
Cenantua's Blog 
Harry Smeltzer
April 13, 2010
News outlets, like Eng-a-land, swing like a pendulum do. A famous example I can think of is that of the Scopes trial and the more recent PA school district trial. Folks forget that Scopes was all about discussing evolution as an alternate theory, and miss the point that opponents of the PA school district in question responded in precisely the same manner as the opponents of Scopes. But that’s beside the point, and I’m not going to get sucked into a debate on ID vs. cosmic accident. We live in a world of extremes – thing is, the only folks one thinks of as extreme are the ones on the other side. Because we, of course, have developed our viewpoints dispassionately and rationally, and therefore are right. Those other people are nuts, N-V-T-S nuts! My point is that, in attempting to illustrate the exteme-ness of a position with which we disagree, we often use the same approach, failing to consider that, perhaps, that’s what “the other side” is doing as well. We all need to keep our knees in check.
Harry Smeltzer
April 13, 2010
Hey, you screwed up my “History of the World” reference: “N-V-T-S nuts” refers to the Roman habit of carving “U” as “V”!
Robert Moore
April 13, 2010
Oops, sorry! I made it right again.
I really like your comment regarding the way opposing sides go to extremes to prove a point. I agree and believe that the worst part of the whole scenario is that history remains warped because of these two arguments that all too often follow down their respective paths filled with half-truths and/or remodeled “truths” (though they clearly think they are complete and whole). Of course, the worst occurs when the argument becomes heated and the opposing sides dig-in, and start blasting away with some pretty wild assumptions, though “fired” at the “enemy” as truths. It’s bad enough that this occurs, but it’s even more sad when the two sides of the argument actually play into what factions of the public REALLY believe, thereby reinforcing those beliefs and making the real truth even more difficult to get to these people. Thus… my W&M history professor’s challenge of un-teaching when they hit the undergraduate classroom.
Craig Swain
April 13, 2010
I’d posted my comments on FB regarding this earlier. I find the imagery of the ragged Confederate Trans-Mississippi battery disturbing (and I see now the image was pulled, wonder why). I believe the web-author (or Martin himself) scoured the LOC archives looking for just such an image. Seeing ruffian-like Trans-Mississippians – and if my notes are correct this was a group of Kansas militia-men and not regular CS state troops – makes an easy visual comparison to scenes of Taliban or AQ fighters in Afghanistan. Mind you, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of photos of Confederates in more formal attire. And I can think of a dozen images of Federal batteries from which I can make the same visual comparison – also looking ruff and ragged.
As I mentioned in an earlier comment, I think there are extremists on both sides of the political spectrum who have grabbed the legacy of the Confederacy, and twisted it to support their own agenda.
Have we reached a point when the word “Confederate” cannot be used in open, public conversation without offending someone? Two weekends ago, I was hassled at a fast food place. The attendant took exception to my CWPT ball cap, as it had “that racist flag” in the logo. For goodness sake, at least CWPT put the winning side on top! There’s a lot I can tolerate, but a closed, opinionated, and unenlightened mindset is not one of them.
Perhaps I am willing to let pass, while scoffing a bit, Gov. McDonnell’s statements. At least his public statements have some linkage to the historiography of the subject. Yes, our governor probably needs to brush up on the subject a bit. Maybe read some of the more recent scholarship. Then again, I doubt most supporters voted for him on the basis of his mastery of history.
But Martin, and scores of others I’ve heard on the radio or read on the blogs, are simply standing with both feet planted in thin air. I fully expect the next point made, given these leaps of logic, is that the peanut is an animal since it fits within the same food group as meats.
Robert Moore
April 13, 2010
I agree, Craig. Too much of the worst appearing imagery is being played into current agendas, whether the rather ominous looking image of Lincoln is used when some want to bash him… or the most sinister looking Confederate images used to target our personal distaste. I also agree with your other remarks. No matter the context, it seems that the word “Confederate” and the flag, are both becoming unmentionables. I think, in part, that the Confederate celebrationist crowd has attributed to that by playing-up limited portions of Confederate history, while not directly addressing many historical facts, responsibly. If this isn’t bad enough, I’ve also become privy to ignorance via my oldest grade-school child’s education. Plain and simple… South was for slavery, North was against. I couldn’t help but start to explain that it is much more complicated than that. She knows the real story, but was concerned about diverting from the prescribed course, concerned with a mark-down in grade. How wrong is that?!
Craig Swain
April 13, 2010
On Saturday I visited this marker: http://www.hmdb.org/marker.asp?marker=20389
A local resident, washing his car, had a bucket at the base of the marker. I politely asked if I could move the bucket for a photo. That lead to a cordial conversation, centering on “what happened here.” Mind you, this is a marker which has stood next to the person’s apartment for easily a couple years. He must see it nearly every day.
A turning point in the conversation occurred when I brought up, as the marker states, “In 1865, four of eight prisoners charged with conspiracy in President Lincoln’s assassination were hanged in its courtyard.” The man responded, “Get out! You mean just the other side of this wall?”
He went on to ask, “Now Lincoln was with the Confederates, right?”
I really wanted to channel Gerry Prokopowicz at that point.
Robert Moore
April 13, 2010
Lol! Oh my gosh… how far have we fallen in our basic education!?
Drew Wagenhoffer
April 13, 2010
Craig,
I seem to recall from the Martin editorial that this was the image used:
Every caption to that photo that I’ve ever seen IDs it as a “Free State Battery” during the Bleeding Kansas era.
Irony abounds.
Craig Swain
April 13, 2010
Drew you are right. I’m of course fixated on the cannon. A rare small caliber infantry gun. Oh, she is a pretty thing with those pattern 1835 lines….
Meade
April 13, 2010
Actually, whats sad is people like you who want to erase Virginia’s unique place in history as Capital of the Confederacy for nearly 5 years and our honorable sons Lee, Jackson, and Stuart, who fought so bravely to defend their homes against tyranny . People such as yourself who want to rename “Jefferson Davis ” highway in the name of “progress”. I am proud of Virginia and my ancestors who fought for their homes and if you want Virginia to become some bland, vanilla milkshake of a place, then thats fine. I think Virginians are individualists , at least I hope.
Robert Moore
April 13, 2010
First, realizing the Confederate angle you take, I find this incredible odd that you criticize me in a post where I am actually critical of the media in it’s approach to Confederate history. That said, however, if you want to be so critical of my views, I feel the need to point out that it’s apparent that you have a very limited view on what is important in the history of Virginia, even what is unique about Virginia in the Civil War, and the part Virginians played in relation to it’s time in the Confederacy. As for the “People such as yourself” remark, at no point did I say or suggest that, so don’t begin to assume you know what I think. It’s curious that you say that I am among those who make Virginia’s history bland, and yet for your limited scope, the fact is that you are the making Virginia’s history all the more bland; also interesting that you mention Virginians as individualists and yet can’t seem to appreciate the fact that Virginians had multiple views on the war at the time of the war, whether that be in gray or blue uniforms, secessionists, Unionists, or “leave-aloners”. You’ve had two opportunities to contribute to the discussion in two different posts and yet have provided nothing but an example of a limited scope approach to what is important in Virginia’s Civil War history. You’re done here…
MSimons
April 13, 2010
Thanks for your stand on the Media concerning this issue. I love the South and Southern History in all of it’s many facets. It is sad that both sides use hyperpole and smearing to try to make a point.
Robert Moore
April 13, 2010
Thank you for commenting.
Chris Evans
April 17, 2010
Thank you for your sane comments on this matter. I was appalled by the stupidity of Roland Martin’s comments and then the incomprehensible article he wrote on the subject. People can discuss these issue without flaring up in huge rage 150 years after the war.
Descendants of Northern and Southern soldiers who fought in the Civil War have died fighting for America since 1865.
These awful, slanderous remarks on the heroism of any soldiers who fought and died in the American Civil War -North or South- Black or White- have no place in the discussion.
Thanks again,
Chris
Robert Moore
April 17, 2010
Thanks, Chris. I appreciate your comment.