IS THE GOAL UNITY OR DIVISION?

During the 150 years following the Civil War, there has been much unity and reconciliation achieved.  I have long been encouraged by the degree of unity between the North and South, whites and blacks, even Democrats and Republicans.

I have felt that the goal of all Americans after the Civil War was unity. 

Even with the outrageously wicked murder of 9 African Americans in Charleston, South Carolina this year, I saw a city united in support of the victims.  Then, a whole nation was united to denounce this atrocity and show love and support for the victims.

Then, there appeared persons who do not want unity because unity denies them their place of importance and their political power. They create controversy, even where there is none.  Those who need disunity instead of unity began to wave the bloody shirt of the Civil War.  All it took was a moment for unity to vanish and strife to raise its ugly head all over again--even as South Carolina quickly was working to give Al Sharpton everything he asked for.  As Sharpton criticized the "confederate flag" flying over the capitol at Charleston, the governor was working to remove the flag as quickly as possible, which happened in a matter of just a few days.  Pretty darned quick for any American political process.

Unity appears to be a negative outcome for race-baiters who need discord, strife and conflict to maintain their position of influence.  What would happen to groups like Mr. Sharpton's if true one hundred percent racial unity could be achieved, just theoretically?  His group would have no purpose, no function, no mission in the absence of conflict and it would disappear.  So unity does not serve his goals.

The 150 years since the end of the Civil War has seen great examples of the attempt at reunification, reconciliation and goodwill.  Just after Appomattox Lincoln called for the playing of Dixie to show the confederates that "with us, it can be played again."  By contrast, 150 years later, the race baiters would not permit the playing of Dixie even in  video games or motion pictures if they could censor it.  Nothing is safe with them.

Magnanimous in their victory, the US Army named some streets and other sites after former Confederate foes, men they knew to have been honorable and courageous, even if they had fought on the opposite side.  Today, the race baiters are calling for places like Robert E. Lee Avenue, Lee Circle, Fort Hood and Fort Bragg to be renamed.  To its credit, the US Army has stated that these places were named, not for the confederacy or its ideals, but for soldiers.  They were named out of a magnanimous sense of reconciliation and healing of the nation's wounds.  So far, the military has stood firm and said that it will not be drawn into the crazy anti-confederate hysteria that has recently swept the nation.

The next time you see one of the race baiting politicians on TV yelling for extreme measures to purge all things that they deem "confederate," ask yourself the question:  Why will these people never accept any degree of unity among Americans, even when they are given everything they have asked for?  Whose interest does that serve?  Not the interest of the American people and certainly not the interest of American minorities.