The founder of the Virginia Flaggers holds up the flag of a failed rebellion against the United States as she chats with a gentleman at a political event for prospective candidates in Wakefield, Virginia next to a poster accusing Lincoln of treason. It doesn’t get any better than this, folks.
Update: Just received a private email stating that I am “incapable of feeling anything but hate for Confederate soldiers.” As always, thanks for taking the time to comment.
This weekend I was in Petersburg, where I gave a talk to a group of educators as part of teachers conference sponsored by the Civil War Trust. I had a great time. It’s always nice to be able to catch up with my good friend, Garry Adelman, and meet new teachers. Yesterday morning I had a chance to walk the Crater battlefield, where I got to see the incredible new view shed from the Crater back toward the guns at Fort Morton and the staging area for the battle. After that, I headed on over to Blandford Cemetery for a quiet stroll.
I am a sucker for Blandford. It’s not the cemetery’s importance to the battle or the fact that I can identify many of the names on the markers or even the beautiful Tiffany Windows in the church that I find so impressive. When I walk through the arch to the Confederate section I am truly moved by what I see. It’s a bit deceptive, especially if you have already visited the Confederate section at Hollywood Cemetery in Richmond. Blandford doesn’t have the grandeur or sophistication of Hollywood and that is probably why I prefer this place. You won’t find a pyramid at Blandford. In fact, there are relatively few markers in the Confederate section, but it doesn’t take long to realize that those markers outline row upon row of unidentified Confederate soldiers buried by their respective states. This section of the cemetery is a testament to the profound sense of grief and loss experienced by the community in the years following the war. So many young men buried without any identification and far from home. The monument to the unknown Confederate is perfectly positioned at the top of the ridge overlooking these men. How can you not be touched on a deeply emotional level? [click to continue…]
I finally had a chance to watch the panel on USCTs that I moderated at Gettysburg College last month. C-SPAN aired it this weekend. I think the discussion went better than what I remembered, though I still get the sense of a subtle or perhaps no so subtle divide among the panelists between a detached scholarly interest in the subject and one that reflects a strong emotional streak. The latter comes through loud and clear in Hari Jones’s comments. I guess when it comes to black Union soldiers we still need both. It is an emotional topic for some and that is certainly understandable at this stage in the game.
One final thought: I definitely should have gotten a haircut before the conference.
Next year I will be teaching a course that explores the Holocaust and historical memory as well as how our own Civil War has been remembered. I am excited and horrified given what little I know about the Holocaust and WWII. Perhaps I would feel this way about any historical subject next to my knowledge of the American Civil War. The course comes with a whole new set of challenges that are definitely going to keep me on my toes. [click to continue…]
Has anyone else noticed that the stamps released thus far by the United States Postal Service reflect a clear bias? Perhaps it should come as no surprise that an agency of the federal government would favor the United States during the Civil War. Next month the USPS’s Forever stamp marking the 150th anniversary of the battle of Gettysburg will be released. It is based on Thure de Thulstrup’s 1887 chromolithograph and once again depicts the Union line as opposed to the more popular Confederate perspective on July 3.
Stamps marking the anniversaries of Bull Run and Antietam also features Union positions while the New Orleans stamp features Union gunboats. And let’s not forget the Emancipation commemorative stamp. I suspect that this bias is intentional and that it will continue to the end of the sesquicentennial. We may not see a Rebel until we get to Appomattox.
At this rate I am willing to wager that they release a stamp marking Sherman’s March?
First things first. Thanks to all of you who emailed yesterday to share your concerns about our safety in light of the attacks that took place here in Boston. My wife and I have lived in Boston for close to two years. After watching the response of our community to yesterday’s tragic events, I can honestly say that there is no other place I would rather live. I love this city.
Last month I traveled to Charlottesville to take part in the Virginia Festival of the Book. My panel included my good friend, Rick Britton, and new friend, Ronald Coddington. We talked about our respective books and fielded a number of excellent questions from the audience.
This coming Saturday C-SPAN will air a panel discussion about United States Colored Troops that I recently moderated at Gettysburg College. Let’s just say it was an unusual and entertaining discussion. I’ve actually thought about it a bit and will share some thoughts over the weekend.
U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks ruled earlier today that the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles did not violate the First Amendment when it denied an application by the Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans for customized plates that depicted the Confederate flag. Here are a few excerpts from the judge’s ruling.
“The issue before the court is this: does the First Amendment require a state government to place the Confederate battle flag on customized, special license plates at the request of a nonprofit organization which has otherwise complied with state rules governing issuance of such plates?” Sparks wrote. He determined that the answer is no, not because specialty license plates constitute government speech, as the board claimed, but because the plates constitute a nonpublic forum. He further found that the content of the SCV license plates drove the board’s decision, rather than the group’s viewpoint.
“The SCV repeatedly argues the fact the Buffalo Soldiers plate was approved indicates SCV was subjected to viewpoint discrimination,” Sparks wrote in the 47-page order. “SCV speculates Native Americans would be offended by the Buffalo Soldiers plate, because of the role played by African-American troops in the frontier wars of the nineteenth century. However, the record does not support this assertion: in contrast to the chorus of negative public comments raised against the SCV’s plate, there appears to have been no significant objection to the Buffalo Soldiers plate, rendering SCV’s assertion the Buffalo Soldiers plate is equally derogatory at best purely speculative.”
Sparks noted that, unlike the SCV plates, the Buffalo Soldiers plates lack an “inflammatory symbol comparable to the Confederate battle flag.” The judge also noted that the group could turn to state lawmakers to get its license plates approved. “Although suggesting a petitioner for judicial relief should look to the legislative branch for assistance is usually the practical equivalent of there being no relief available, here the Texas Legislature can and frequently has approved a variety of plates — including controversial plates, such as ‘Choose Life’ — by direct legislative action,” Sparks states.
The order concludes: “It is a sad fact the Confederate battle flag has been co-opted by odious groups as a symbol of racism and white supremacy. There is no reason to doubt the SCV and its members are entirely heartfelt in their condemnation of this misuse. It is to be hoped the passage of time, and efforts such as the SCV’s resolution, will eventually remove a blight from the flag under which feats of great heroism and fortitude were accomplished. All the traditional avenues of public discourse are open to those who would fully redeem the battle flag. Nevertheless, the state of Texas has chosen to abstain from this debate, and the First Amendment does not require it to open up state-issued license plates as an additional forum in which to contest the flag’s meaning.”
I find the judge’s thoughts re: the flag’s symbolism to be very strange. How exactly do you “remove a blight” from a flag that was used between 1861- and 1865 to establish a nation built on slavery and later in the twentieth century as a visible symbol for the maintenance of the racial status quo? The Confederate flag doesn’t need to be “redeemed” from anything. What it deserves is a proper interpretation in a place that fosters serious reflection.
Oh well, I guess the Texas SCV can at least fall back on their recent victory in Palestine. Where is Palestine, you ask?