Extremist attacks on the Confederate flag harms minority rights. Here are reasons.
1. It trivializes major gains in minority rights by making a fuss over a non-important dead symbol of a by-gone era.
2. It draws focus to a very minor skirmish when important battles could be won elsewhere.
3. It attracts political opportunists like honey draws flies.
4. It unnecessarily opens all the old wounds that festered during the Civil Rights movement and prevents consolidation of gains and enjoyment of benefits that have already been earned.
5. It attracts the crazed, odd, insane and unbalanced elements of our society and inflames them to do harm--much like the idiot in Charleston who murdered innocent people simply because he was crazy or evil, or both.
6. It plays into the hands of a few idiots who call for a "race war." Nobody wins a war like that. Everyone loses. Let's stop pouring gasoline on the flames. (Can you see any similarity between hatred for the Confederate flag and hatred for law enforcement officers? At least a lot of the rhetoric is the same--and many of the political opportunists are the same; we see their faces on TV every night--pouring gas on the fires). See points 3 and 5 again.
6. It has no object, no purpose, no definitive end. How do we know when victory is to be declared? It's like commitment to a war with an unknown objective.
7. It destroys credibility. Do you mean you have no concerns greater than someone flying a Confederate flag? If that is the only battle left, you have no battle.
Sunday, October 25, 2015
Tuesday, October 6, 2015
FINAL SALUTE TO THE WALKING DEAD
The final salute to General Lee's Army of Northern Virginia came from a most surprising source--Brigadier Lt. General Joshua Chamberlain. Chamberlain was a Union hero of the Battle of Gettysburg who was also placed in charge of accepting the arms surrendered by Lee's army at Appomattox on April 10, 1865, the day following Lee's formal meeting with Grant.
As the surrendering Confederate regiments were passing in review before the assembled Union troops, Gen. Chamberlain ordered Federal troops to present arms as a token of respect for the defeated Confederates. Chamberlain's writing records the reaction of Confederate General John Gordon and the rest of the Confederate army:
"Instructions had been given; and when the head of each division column comes opposite our group, our bugle sounds the signal and instantly our whole line from right to left, regiment by regiment in succession, gives the soldier's salutation, from the "order arms" to the old "carry"—the marching salute. Gordon at the head of the column, riding with heavy spirit and downcast face, catches the sound of shifting arms, looks up, and, taking the meaning, wheels superbly, making with himself and his horse one uplifted figure, with profound salutation as he drops the point of his sword to the boot toe; then facing to his own command, gives word for his successive brigades to pass us with the same position of the manual,—honor answering honor. On our part not a sound of trumpet more, nor roll of drum; not a cheer, nor word nor whisper of vain-glorying, nor motion of man standing again at the order, but an awed stillness rather, and breath-holding, as if it were the passing of the dead!:
Then Lt. Col. Chamberlain of Maine, had been instrumental in turning back Lee's attack on Little Round Top in the Battle of Gettysburg on July 2, 1865. He had been severely wounded in action at Gettysburg and was high decorated. There is probably no Union officer who personally saw more action against his Confederate enemy than Chamberlain. He had engaged in practically hand-to-hand combat on Little Round Top and had led the bayonet charge that repealed the final Confederate advance on the Union's left flank on July 2. In spite of that, or perhaps because of it, Chamberlain recognized the valor and bravery of his former Confederate adversaries and honored them once they had been defeated.
I am disheartened, 150 years later, that the political Left (and some on the Right) wish to denigrate all who wore the Confederate gray--something that Chamberlain and other Union soldiers and officers had no stomach for at the immediate end of the war. However, as time passes, those who never had the honor of facing brave men on the battlefields feel free to assassinate the character of Southern soldiers simply because it is politically permissible to do so. Chamberlain certainly never sympathized with Confederate politics and he made that very clear. He did, however, recognize their honor and bravery and he had a magnanimous character which seems to have been lost on our present political generation altogether. In a modern PC culture, someone would have grabbed Lt. Gen. Chamberlain by the coattails and said, "Look, General, these people supported slavery and few the Confederate battle flag. You must not be seen as doing anything which might fail to condemn them." If anyone had done this, I suspect Chamberlain would have punched them in the face. He was quite a brave and honorable gentleman.
As the surrendering Confederate regiments were passing in review before the assembled Union troops, Gen. Chamberlain ordered Federal troops to present arms as a token of respect for the defeated Confederates. Chamberlain's writing records the reaction of Confederate General John Gordon and the rest of the Confederate army:
"Instructions had been given; and when the head of each division column comes opposite our group, our bugle sounds the signal and instantly our whole line from right to left, regiment by regiment in succession, gives the soldier's salutation, from the "order arms" to the old "carry"—the marching salute. Gordon at the head of the column, riding with heavy spirit and downcast face, catches the sound of shifting arms, looks up, and, taking the meaning, wheels superbly, making with himself and his horse one uplifted figure, with profound salutation as he drops the point of his sword to the boot toe; then facing to his own command, gives word for his successive brigades to pass us with the same position of the manual,—honor answering honor. On our part not a sound of trumpet more, nor roll of drum; not a cheer, nor word nor whisper of vain-glorying, nor motion of man standing again at the order, but an awed stillness rather, and breath-holding, as if it were the passing of the dead!:
— Joshua L. Chamberlain, The Passing of the Armies, pp. 260-61
_____________Then Lt. Col. Chamberlain of Maine, had been instrumental in turning back Lee's attack on Little Round Top in the Battle of Gettysburg on July 2, 1865. He had been severely wounded in action at Gettysburg and was high decorated. There is probably no Union officer who personally saw more action against his Confederate enemy than Chamberlain. He had engaged in practically hand-to-hand combat on Little Round Top and had led the bayonet charge that repealed the final Confederate advance on the Union's left flank on July 2. In spite of that, or perhaps because of it, Chamberlain recognized the valor and bravery of his former Confederate adversaries and honored them once they had been defeated.
Politicians today have no such honor.
I am disheartened, 150 years later, that the political Left (and some on the Right) wish to denigrate all who wore the Confederate gray--something that Chamberlain and other Union soldiers and officers had no stomach for at the immediate end of the war. However, as time passes, those who never had the honor of facing brave men on the battlefields feel free to assassinate the character of Southern soldiers simply because it is politically permissible to do so. Chamberlain certainly never sympathized with Confederate politics and he made that very clear. He did, however, recognize their honor and bravery and he had a magnanimous character which seems to have been lost on our present political generation altogether. In a modern PC culture, someone would have grabbed Lt. Gen. Chamberlain by the coattails and said, "Look, General, these people supported slavery and few the Confederate battle flag. You must not be seen as doing anything which might fail to condemn them." If anyone had done this, I suspect Chamberlain would have punched them in the face. He was quite a brave and honorable gentleman.
CIVIL WAR HISTORY IS MOST COMPELLING OF ALL
I recently re-read The Killer Angels by author Michael Shaara, easily one of the best historical novels of recent times. It is non-partisan in that it is told from the viewpoint of the people who participate in the Battle of Gettysburg and favors neither North or South. The novel is breathtaking for its action, its character development and for telling of the horrors of war, suffered by both sides. In my view, the book is better than the movie ("Gettysburg") - simply because the essence of Shaara's prose cannot be captured entirely on film. The first book in the trilogy, Gods and Generals, was also quite good.
Shaara's son, Jeff, authored The Last Full Measure, the epic about the final two years of the War Between the States. Again, moving and historically realistic without favoring South or North.
Reading Civil War history should be required, not discouraged. If the works explored are truthful, colorful and accurate, as Shaara's books are, the readers will be truly educated about America's past and will gain much needed insight into the present. Unfortunately, I don't think high school students spend much time, perhaps almost no time, on real American history, let alone the Civil War. It seems to me, and I was one a history teacher, that curriculum now days major in the minors.
The average American high school student cannot tell you in which century the Civil War was fought. Many cannot discuss the reasons for the war beyond the patent answer, "Slavery." If you asked students, even in college, to state 5 results of the Civil War, my guess is that they would be hard pressed.
It can only be hoped, probably in vain, that the richness and depth of experience that comes from reading Civil War history will be fostered by our educational system. I don't want us to become a society of technicians who fail to appreciate who we are, where we came from and where we are headed. On second thought, when I look at our mathematics and science scores, I don't think I have to be concerned about technicians, either.
Shaara's son, Jeff, authored The Last Full Measure, the epic about the final two years of the War Between the States. Again, moving and historically realistic without favoring South or North.
Reading Civil War history should be required, not discouraged. If the works explored are truthful, colorful and accurate, as Shaara's books are, the readers will be truly educated about America's past and will gain much needed insight into the present. Unfortunately, I don't think high school students spend much time, perhaps almost no time, on real American history, let alone the Civil War. It seems to me, and I was one a history teacher, that curriculum now days major in the minors.
The average American high school student cannot tell you in which century the Civil War was fought. Many cannot discuss the reasons for the war beyond the patent answer, "Slavery." If you asked students, even in college, to state 5 results of the Civil War, my guess is that they would be hard pressed.
It can only be hoped, probably in vain, that the richness and depth of experience that comes from reading Civil War history will be fostered by our educational system. I don't want us to become a society of technicians who fail to appreciate who we are, where we came from and where we are headed. On second thought, when I look at our mathematics and science scores, I don't think I have to be concerned about technicians, either.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)