Tag Archives: states’ rights


Because a picture was shown of the murderer of nine innocent church goers in Charleston, S.C., with a confederate flag, coupled with the undeniable fact that he was a racist, liberals and conservatives have started a new war of words. Liberals are saying that anyone who defends the confederate flag is a racist and won’t accept the concept that someone just might still honor the confederate flag because they are proud of their heritage. Conservatives, for the most part, know that some who honor the flag are racists, but do accept that some who honor the flag might just be doing it because they are proud of their heritage. Conservatives are giving people the benefit of the doubt and liberals are not. “The tolerant left strikes again.”

In addition to arguing about the confederate flag, now liberals and conservatives are arguing about why the Civil War was fought. Liberals say it was about slavery only and conservatives say that it was a combination of things, including states’ rights.

This is what I remember being taught. Keep in mind that it was a long time ago. I don’t remember much about what I was taught regarding the root cause of the war. Slavery was certainly a factor, but I honestly don’t remember much else.

In addition to the war itself, reconstruction was given a lot of emphasis. My eighth grade history teacher made the comment that while being a Southerner, she knew the south didn’t have a chance to win the war, but reading and studying re-construction made her blood boil. My reading and studying of re-construction affirmed that the people of the south were treated deplorably.

I also remember my Alabama history teacher commenting to the class that while there was certainly incidents of slavery abuse, it really made no sense to abuse a slave. The slave-owner purchased these slaves. In other words they were an investment. Why would you abuse someone who was earning you money? Thus, I remember being taught that the virulent abuse allegations were exaggerations.

It is documented that slaves were being freed in the South as well as in the North prior to the Civil War, and that Confederate General Robert E. Lee hated the institution of slavery and had freed his slaves. In fact he was offered the position to lead the Union forces, but turned the offer down because he just couldn’t fight against him home state of Virginia.

The above is about all that I can remember.

While I found my studies of the Civil War interesting, I am far from being a “Civil War buff.” I hope I never have to live anywhere else. I’m also probably tied to my home state of Alabama more than I’m tied to the South, in general.

I’m seeing some stuff, mostly on social media, that indicate a war on all things Southern might be starting up. Liberal rag, Mother Jones, ran a short article condemning anyone who felt that the Civil War was not exclusively about slavery. I read the numerous comments and those comments did belittle the South.

There is certainly a plethora of documentation available that will bolster both sides of that argument. Once again, though, liberals aren’t going to recognize differences of opinion and attack anyone who doesn’t agree with them. Am I going to do any research on the subject? If so, very little. I have other “fish to fry.”

I’d really like for all of this to go away. We have major, major problems in this country that certainly need to be addressed. But the current president, from the moment he was inaugurated, has sought to divide us in many ways. Under him racial tensions and class warfare have certainly increased. Will he now take this opportunity to further divide us, based on geography? I wouldn’t put it past him one bit.