My understanding of the symbolism of Lee and the ante-bellum south was
shaped by Gaines Foster's Ghosts of the Confederacy: Defeat, the Lost
Cause, and the Emergence of the New South, 1865-1913, a book I strongly
for those interested in learning about the south.
IIRC Foster distinguishes between those ex-rebels who opposed
reconciliation with the Yankees, and those who favored it. You could
tell who was who by their attitude toward join encampments with
US vets. Reconcilers were for this. Irreconcilables, against.
Along with favoring reconciliation came a special way of portraying the
Old South and the rebel undertaking--as the lost cause, something long
ago and far away, to be venerated but not to be restored. This special
way of putting the Old South in never-never-land was the project of
those who wanted thd south to modernize, to reconcile, and to imitate
Northern success in the economic domain, to do in other words what Lee
recommended in his public statements recommended, work out a way to seek
happines and prosperity in the US, while leaving behind the project of
an separate nation.
Foster judged that the CSA-Old-South exponents were not any more racist
than others in that era, and that the intensified racism of the early
20th century was not their special project.
I don't venerate Confederate leaders, but I have spent some time trying to
understand those who do. Most of them think that attacks on Lee are
instances of the larger project of south-bashing. So they adopt a
"consider the source" attitude toward pieces like the one cited
I don't venerate Union leaders either. To me they are objects of
historical study, like Flora MacDonald, Garibaldi, Bismarck, etc. But I
won't try to discourage Lincoln veneration, which is a vastly larger
enterprise than Lee veneration. If thinking about honest Abe makes
you all soft and gooey inside, that's your concern.
Why do people complain about people who complain about Lee
venerators? It probably means he/she is expressing an opinion.
As I said in another post, many of those who complain about people who
complain about Lee venerators do it because they think it's another
instance of south-bashing, and they don't like that.
one of the things I noticed in the op-ed piece was a
Nazi comparisons are the Gold Standard of demonization.
Probably because "Lee venerators" are white supremacists who refuse to
admit that the South took up arms and engaged in terrorism in order to
defend slavery. That's why.
Nazi comparison? Not really. A comparison of generals yes, albeit
Rommel did fight for Germany.
What good does the complaining do? The white supremacists are unlikely
to be influenced by by the complaining.
Any Lee-venerators who are not white supremacists will be annoyed by
having been called white supremacists.
So, what is the purpose of the complaining?
Here's the sentence slotrot:
"Lee is an American Rommel, the German general who fought brilliantly,
but for Hitler."
Hitler-supporter comparisons (aka Nazi comparisons) are the Gold
Standard of Demonization.
Grownups don't expect that such comparisons will influence Lee
venerators. So who is the target audience of such statements? And what
is the purpose of making them?
Sorry, I still don't see the Nazi comparison. Rommel was a good
general, perhaps Lee was as well, but the comparison is between the
two men, not their ideology. Was Rommel a Nazi? I don't believe he
was but he was a German soldier.
Did he attempt to kill Hitler?
> Good response.
I understand Slotrot that you are just tossing out this op-ed for
discussion. It's the tradition in this group to do this.
There's nothing wrong with that.
And of course, I am just discussing.
> Sorry, I still don't see the Nazi comparison.
Well, that's your problem, not mine.
I don't think it's a problem. Your opinion is yours, mine is mine.
I don't interpret the article in the same sense you do. I don't see
Nazis around every corner.
> I don't interpret the article in the same sense you do.
So you do. But it's not my job to fix up your thinking.
Unless forced by crisis, I don't try to correct the incorrigible.
I'm satisfied to state my viewpoint, and see if there is competent
"Fix up my thinking"??? Isn't that rather arrogant of you? Just
how would you "force" me to think differently? Now, if there ever was
a "comparison", I could probably make on now. No??
I guess competent criticism is like beauty, it's in the eye of the
> On Apr 28, 12:28 pm, Hugh Lawson <hu.law...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> slotrot <rtaub...@rogers.com> writes:
>> > I don't interpret the article in the same sense you do.
>> So you do. But it's not my job to fix up your thinking.
>> Unless forced by crisis, I don't try to correct the incorrigible.
>> I'm satisfied to state my viewpoint, and see if there is competent
> "Fix up my thinking"??? Isn't that rather arrogant of you?
I think you are wrong on the point; I think your thinking
needs revision. What's arrogant about that?
> how would you "force" me to think differently?
I can't, and I'm not going to try. I judge you've already made up your
[ snip of seeming rhetorical question]
> I guess competent criticism is like beauty, it's in the eye of the
For awcusa, this statement is correct.
Well, your argument, or lack of supporting information, leaves me to
believe you don't have anything to offer that would change my opinion.
You have simply stated your opinion. Because there is mention of
Rommel, Germany, and Hitler, you have immediately jumped to the Nazi
I believe you are wrong because the comparison was between two
generals, not to their ideology. Rommel was not a Nazi, he was a
Judge not lest ye be judged.
so you don't think enslaving people is wrong, interesting Hugh.
> so you don't think enslaving people is wrong, interesting Hugh.
> Judge not lest ye be judged.
Judge away. And so shall I.
Lee's "leadership" at Gettysburg on Day 3 should have sealed his fate
forever as a poor general.
To shut you up along with all the other unreconstructed White Boys!
Lawson: Condemn Jim Crow or Shut The Fuck Up!
And condemn your felow White Southerners for doing NOTHING about Civil
You were silent in the 60s as your friends, neighbours and family
members SPAT on Blacks trying to go to school.
I don't see the necessity for the "F" bomb. You are about a month
late responding, so what's the point of such vitriol after such and
> I don't see the necessity for the "F" bomb. You are about a month
> late responding, so what's the point of such vitriol after such and
> long pause?
Although the majority of white southerners surely opposed
desegregation, it is false to say that all of them did.
See David Chappell's _Inside Agitators_, for an account of white
southerners who supported the civil rights movement.
You can read about the book here: