Last week in South Carolina, several African-Americans were shot down while praying in a famous church. The midweek massacre has been called a tragedy, But, that description tends to underplay causes and explanations. It was a horrific event, but it was calculated, and in that sense is unlike our more commonly experienced natural disasters. This blog seldom talks about current events, focusing on those of a historical nature. Yet, to me, there is a strong connection between the nation's past and the history of the past several days. This is further seen in the call to remove the flag of the Confederate States of America from its flying over the South Carolina State Capitol. South Carolina was the first state to secede from the Union, doing so on 20 December 1860, a little more than a month after Abraham Lincoln had been elected, and about three months before he would assume office in March 1861.
We are all aware that the war with the states in rebellion was a difficult war, with more American casualties coming from that four year war than from all other conflicts combined. It was a war where fighting methods had not caught up with the implications of newer technologies. Time has altered our collective view of this massive encounter, and it has occurred over generations. A Harris poll conducted in 2011, for the 150th anniversary of the start of the war with the states in rebellion, aka Civil War, noted that 2/3 of white Americans thought the main reason for the war was state rights and not slavery. Most of us who know history will recognize that the war was about slavery. The rights of states argument is a euphemism used to justify slavery. Why would 2/3 of Americans feel that way? Well, it has to do with the collective amnesia, and formulations created following the Civil War. It was led by persons of the south, but involved both north and south. It involved people in politics, academics and the arts. Together they would put forth a new thesis that would, apparently, come to form much of the national conscience. The north may have won the war, but the south won the favor of the nation. As historian James McPherson has said of the Civil War, "Everything stemmed from slavery." Failure to recognize this point is a great disservice to those who served (albeit not all served to end slavery) and to those enslaved.
For 150 years much of the nation has apparently gravitated to the "Lost Cause" interpretation of the Civil War. While little was written about the war from 1865 until the 1880's, the Lost Cause idea first arose in about 1865. This idea was based on the proud, heroic men and leadership of the south having done so well against a foe with much more in assets, whether it be financial, men or material. The confederate cause, the argument goes was noble and chivalrous. This type of terminology plays on glory and honor and a tie to the medieval past of Europe. It has been aided by groups such as the Sons of the Confederacy, and the Confederate Literary Society, the former being a strong proponent of the Confederate flag. Of course, it reached its zenith in the early part of the 1900's. First, was the 1915 film "Birth of a Nation," which glorified the confederacy and played into stereo-types of happy black plantation workers. The KKK was seen, in this movie, as a noble tradition of the south. The first southern to be elected president since 1850 was Woodrow Wilson. An historian, Wilson played to the southern sympathies that were culturally rampant in the nation. His book A History of the American People reads like a hermetic for the heroic southern lost cause idea. Speaking at the 50th anniversary of Gettysburg, Wilson said not a word about slavery. It is also reported that Wilson saw the formation of the KKK as southern men intent on self preservation.
Further playing into the noble nature of the south was the blockbuster movie "Gone with the Wind." Like other works, this movie glorified plantation life, It set a standard for how this nation would come to view the south. Slavery was not the issue, according this line of thinking, rather it was a group facing bullies from the north. They like to say it is a story of gallant generals, men fighting for their honor, and to protect their home. As long ago as "Gone with the Wind" was, this line of thought continues today with the more recent movie ""Gods and Generals." Confederate General Lee has been given a version of southern sainthood, and General Grant, often vilified. In the "Dukes of Hazzard" southern sympathies were at play and the Duke boys' car was named after the southern general, replete with the Confederate flag on top. The southern cause has become identified with more of religious theme and fervor. This all built off works by academics, such as a Lincoln scholar who was at the University of Illinois who thought northern abolitionists were at fault and what has been called their reforming zeal. Another historian who provided aide to the "Lost Cause", as reported by David Von Drehle, was William Dunning of Columbia University, a self-proclaimed southern scholar, who believed and perpetuated the "belief that blacks were incapable of equality and that Reconstruction was a disastrous injustice."
This line of thinking, by politicians, artists and academics, came about as a way to assuage national guilt. The whole nation was implicit to some degree in slavery. Perhaps the thought was it was better to reinvent and re-purpose the war, if not to forget. At the time this was viewed as a more noble way of thinking. Yet it was a false invention. While his memories are famous, U.S. Grant did little to note why there was a call to war, and even his discussion on Appomattox was in line with the noble terms of surrender offered. Jefferson Davis, the former president of the Confederacy, would be the one to begin to reform the meaning and purpose. Obviously a man with significant self-interest in his legacy. The move to creating memories for self-interest had begun.
Reconstruction was difficult, and the nation was not yet ready for the reforms the Republicans wished to implement. These would come over time--up to 100 years later. Of course, our founding fathers knew the problems they were creating, and between then and the Civil War many attempts at compromise and appeasement were made, but nothing pleased the south. James Madison, during the Constitutional Convention noted that real "difference of interests lies not between the large and small but between the Northern and Southern states. The institution of slavery and its consequences form the line." That line was present in the 1780's and is present in 2015. How the actions of history permeate to this day.
Perhaps the north was too gracious in the terms it gave to the south. The nation was certainly too forgetful and forgiving of the cause of the Civil War. Our national conscience has been formed through time to give a false description to the Civil War. Only now, following the senseless shooting in South Carolina, is action starting to take hold that the symbol of the south's rebellion perhaps should no longer be flown over their State Capitol. For too long sympathy has laid with the south. Several years ago I had a coworker who had the Confederate Flag posted in his cubicle, but underneath were the words "You lost, get over it." If we as a nation believe that the stars and stripes represent the values of his nation, we cannot say that the bars and stars do not represent the values of a slave holding past. Perhaps it could be argued that today the Confederate flag is more representative of a rebellious streak, than slavery, but that too works to play into the "Lost Cause" theme. This gets me back to David Von Drehle who, writing in "Time" magazine four years ago noted "the path to healing and mercy goes by way of honesty and humility." Honesty requires the nation to recognize the true purpose of the Civil War. In my way of thinking, humility is not shown by a display of the Confederate flag over the birthplace of the secessionists.
No comments:
Post a Comment