But the names of some personalities obviously need to go—such as Nathan B. Forrest
By Steve Otto
Some arguments just don't die easy. One of those is the fact that many things in the South are named after confederates. They maybe generals or some kind of confederate politicians. But those names still persist. For me personally, I believe trying to remove every singe person, who served in the confederacy from names and statues may be a hopeless project. Some famous southerners may have spent some time in the military and then went on to do other things. Being a confederate soldier may have been a small part of their life.
According to Yahoo News:
"In the debate over
so-called cancel culture, conservatives like Fox News host Tucker Carlson warn
that if monuments to Confederate soldiers are taken down, or schools named
after those historical figures who participated in the institution of slavery
are given new ones, the entire history of the country will be subject to
erasure."
He may have some actual points here. I hate to agree with him at all, but rewriting the history of the south may not be the best thing for us to do. However, there are some Southern historical figures whose names do not belong anywhere and that includes any high schools.
As the Yahoo News story continues:
"While many
Americans agree with that slippery slope argument, and school boards in cities
like
And just who is Nathan B. Forrest? Here is a short bit of biography of his:
"Nathan B. Forrest
was a prominent Confederate Army general during
the US Civil War and the first Grand Wizard of the Ku
Klux Klan from 1867 to 1869. Before the
war, Forrest amassed substantial wealth as a cotton plantation owner, horse and
cattle trader, real estate broker and slave trader. If there is one man
who should never have his name on any building in the
So I agree with those who believe Forrest was an abomination of a human being and belongs on no monuments and his name belongs in no place of honor. He is no more honorable than Adolf Hitler.
On the other hand, there were the common foot soldiers of the confederacy and they are a different story.
I
think a lot of progressive people over look a few things about the confederacy.
Almost none of the non-officers of the confederacy owned any slaves. There was
a law that stated that anyone who owned more than 3 slaves was exempt from
military service. That law was designed to make sure slave owners could stay
home and make sure that their slaves didn't escape. So who did fight? The army
was made largely of poor working class people who could not avoid being
drafted.[1]
So not only were these people not slave owners, some didn't want to fight in
the first place. Also, very few slave owners had fewer than 3 slaves. Some
wealthy people had a crew of five slaves to run their house. They needed a
cook, a maid and a butler to clean up. If they had children, the needed a slave
or two to take care of the kids. They almost never had fewer than 3 slaves.
As Malcolm X once explained: "You had the
house slaves" and worse off than that were the plantation slaves. There
were a lot of those slaves and they had to be beaten and tortured to be kept in
place. That's were a lot of slave owners had to be home to keep these people
from running away.
Malcolm
X described the difference between the "house Negro" and the
"field Negro:"
From
Transcribed text from audio excerpt. [read entire speech]
So you have two types of Negro. The
old type and the new type. Most of you know the old type. When you read about
him in history during slavery he was called "Uncle Tom." He was the
house Negro. And during slavery you had two Negroes. You had the house Negro
and the field Negro.
The house Negro usually lived close
to his master. He dressed like his master. He wore his master's second-hand
clothes. He ate food that his master left on the table. And he lived in his master's
house--probably in the basement or the attic--but he still lived in the
master's house.
So whenever that house Negro
identified himself, he always identified himself in the same sense that his
master identified himself. When his master said, "We have good food,"
the house Negro would say, "Yes, we have plenty of good food."
"We" have plenty of good food. When the master said that "we
have a fine home here," the house Negro said, "Yes, we have a fine
home here." When the master would be sick, the house Negro identified
himself so much with his master he'd say, "What's the matter boss, we
sick?" His master's pain was his pain. And it hurt him more for his master
to be sick than for him to be sick himself. When the house started burning down, that type of
Negro would fight harder to put the master's house out than the master himself
would.
But then you had another Negro out
in the field. The house Negro was in the minority. The masses--the field
Negroes were the masses. They were in the majority. When the master got sick,
they prayed that he'd die. [Laughter] If his house caught on fire, they'd pray
for a wind to come along and fan the breeze.
If someone came to the house Negro
and said, "Let's go, let's separate," naturally that Uncle Tom would
say, "Go where? What could I do without boss? Where would I live? How
would I dress? Who would look out for me?" That's the house Negro. But if
you went to the field Negro and said, "Let's go, let's separate," he
wouldn't even ask you where or how. He'd say, "Yes, let's go." And
that one ended right there.
So now you have a
twentieth-century-type of house Negro. A twentieth-century Uncle Tom. He's just
as much an Uncle Tom today as Uncle Tom was 100 and 200 years ago. Only he's a
modern Uncle Tom. That Uncle Tom wore a handkerchief around his head. This
Uncle Tom wears a top hat. He's sharp. He dresses just like you do. He speaks
the same phraseology, the same language. He tries to speak it better than you
do. He speaks with the same accents, same diction. And when you say, "your
army," he says, "our army." He hasn't got anybody to defend him,
but anytime you say "we" he says "we." "Our president,"
"our government," "our Senate," "our congressmen,"
"our this and our that." And he hasn't even got a seat in that
"our" even at the end of the line. So this is the twentieth-century
Negro. Whenever you say "you," the personal pronoun in the singular
or in the plural, he uses it right along with you. When you say you're in
trouble, he says, "Yes, we're in trouble."
So when it comes to monuments that commemorate the
foot soldiers who gave their lives for the rotten system they were forced to
defend, in the old South, I personally have nothing against most of those
soldiers. As far as I am concerned they were not the architects of the South as
we knew it. Despite their cause, I don't have anything against those soldiers.
To me it is no worse than the soldiers today who have taken over the sovereign
countries of
Joan Baez - The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down
[1] The Confederate
Conscription Acts, 1862 to 1864, were a series of measures taken
by the Confederate government to produce the manpower to fight the American
Civil War.
The First Conscription
Act, passed April 26, 1862, made any white male between 18 to 35 years old
liable to three years of military service. On September 27, 1862, the Second
extended the age limit to 45 years; the Third, passed February 17, 1864,
changed this to 17 to 50 years old, for service of an unlimited period.
No comments:
Post a Comment