Tag: Confederate States of America

bookmark_border“The flag of traitors and losers”

Posted on by Marissa

“The flag of traitors.”

Yes, the flag of people who thought for themselves, and resisted authority, as opposed to practicing obedience, compliance, and mindless conformity.

I’m not sure why you consider that to be a bad thing.

“The flag of losers.”

Yes, the flag of people that you oppressed and harmed. That flag of people that you actively inflicted pain on, using your power, strength, and wealth. The flag of people whose land you invaded. The flag of people whose rights you violated. The flag of people that you forced to remain part of the same country against their will.

I’m not sure how that makes those people and their flag bad, and you somehow good.

The fact that you would call the Confederates “traitors” and “losers,” as if these things are insults, means that you are a bully, a bigot, a conformist, and an authoritarian.

The fact that the Confederates “lost” does not reflect badly on them. It reflects badly on you.

bookmark_border“Are we the only country the places monuments to TRAITORS???”

Posted on by Marissa

So said an idiotic comment that I saw on Facebook the other day.

In other words…

Are we the only country that places monuments to PEOPLE WHO THINK FOR THEMSELVES???

Are we the only country that places monuments to PEOPLE WHO STAND UP TO AUTHORITY???

Are we the only country that places monuments to PEOPLE WHO ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE MAJORITY IN ANY WAY???

Oh no, not that!!!

God forbid that a country put up monuments to people who are at all unique, distinctive, or remarkable.

God forbid that a country put up monuments to people who are, you know, actually worthy of being honored with monuments.

God forbid that a country put up monuments honoring anything other than compliance, obedience, and mindless conformity.

In reality, the people that this idiot considers “traitors” are not only abundantly worthy of being honored with monuments; they are the only people who are.

bookmark_border“Is it ever morally acceptable to visit a Confederate historical site?”

Posted on by Marissa

“Is it ever morally acceptable to visit a Confederate historical site?”

Such is the question that was asked in a recent New York Times ethics column.

It sickens and disgusts me that someone would even ask this question.

The Confederacy is my special interest.

It is everything that makes my life worth living.

It is beauty, it is joy, it is happiness, it is freedom.

The fact that I would even need to defend the moral acceptability of the thing that makes my life worth living is appalling and abhorrent, and makes me feel sick to my stomach.

But this very attitude – that the Confederacy is somehow immoral – is not new.

This is the first time that I have seen the question explicitly asked, the first time that I have seen the words “morally acceptable” printed in the same sentence as the words “Confederate historical site.” But the attitude that the Confederacy is somehow immoral is precisely the reason for the pain and trauma that I have experienced over the past three years. This attitude is exactly what motivates the countless atrocities that have been carried out against Confederate statues, monuments, and historical makers of all sorts all over the country and even the world. The atrocities that have been carried out against me.

And the attitude underlying these actions is precisely why they have been so painful and traumatizing, and why I characterize them as atrocities. It is not simply the loss of the statues and monuments – collectively the thing that makes my life worth living – that has inflicted such trauma and pain. It is the fact that their removal is a moral condemnation of the statues themselves, the ideas that they stand for, and the people who like them.

The removal of Confederate statues is a moral condemnation of me.

If statues had been destroyed accidentally – say by an earthquake or a tornado – it would be sad, and I would grieve their loss. But the destruction of the statues is not accidental. It is intentional, systematic, and pervasive. What has made the past three years so bad is that in addition to my grief – layered on top of an already agonizing experience – are the shame, anger, and rage of being almost unanimously rejected, repudiated, and morally condemned by our society.

This intentional destruction is a way of saying: who I am is immoral. Who I am is morally unacceptable.

That is why the removal of Confederate statues hurts so much. Because it is a moral condemnation of me. For being autistic. For being different. For being a rebel. For supporting the losing side. For liking something that most people do not like.

In a society where things that used to be considered immoral – abortion, homosexuality, having a baby out of wedlock – have become almost unanimously accepted, it hurts that the very essence of who I am is morally condemned.

It hurts that someone would even ask the question of whether the very essence of who I am is ever morally acceptable, let alone that someone would answer in the negative, or even think about answering in the negative. (I did not read the column itself, because I know that doing so would be too painful for me to be able to tolerate, but my guess is that the ethicist at the Times did not provide a positive answer.)

It hurts that the question would even be framed in this way.

I am a good person. Many people would likely disagree, but I genuinely believe that. I haven’t done anything wrong by being autistic, by being different, by being a rebel, by supporting the losing side, by liking something that most people do not like. I haven’t done anything to deserve moral condemnation.

So I affirm: not only is visiting a Confederate historical site perfectly morally acceptable; it is morally good. Always. All the time. In fact, it is the most morally good thing imaginable. There is nothing more morally good than Confederate history, the sites, artifacts, and public art associated with it, and the decision to support it by visiting those sites.

The real question that should be asked: is a world without Confederate historical sites morally acceptable?

The answer is no. Obviously not. I feel more strongly about that answer than I do anything else in the world.

bookmark_borderAutism Acceptance Month and Confederate History Month

Posted on by Marissa

April is celebrated as both Autism Acceptance Month and Confederate History Month. These things might seem completely unrelated… but for me they are not.

I am on the autism spectrum. I have always experienced the world differently from other people, seen things differently, and thought differently from those around me. Until I was an adult, I never knew that there was a word for the way my mind works. I just thought I was “weird” and “mixed up” and “wrong” for not liking the things other people liked, and for having such difficulty with things like riding a bike, tying my shoes, playing sports, participating in conversations, and making friends, which seemed to come so easily to other people. I didn’t feel that I had much in common with other kids or adults at school, or even my own family members.

I did, however, feel a sense of identity with people from history. My favorite thing to do was to read about them, look at pictures of them, and imagine what their lives were like. I gravitated towards the historical figures who were under-appreciated, misunderstood, and looked down upon, probably because I considered myself to have these characteristics as well. This included historical figures from the Confederacy. Although I am not descended from anyone who fought for the Confederacy, I have always felt a sense of kinship with them because they were underdogs and rebels. They were portrayed in history class as the “bad guys,” but as I read more about them, I realized that they had their own viewpoints, perspectives, and stories, which are too frequently ignored. As someone on the autism spectrum, this was something that I could relate to.

It is difficult to put into words how much happiness historical figures have given me, and how important they are to me. Historical figures made me feel understood, and like I wasn’t alone. Therefore, it is difficult to put into words how heartbreaking and infuriating it has been to witness the horrible things that have happened to Confederate statues over the past few years. These events have made me feel like I am being morally condemned and like I am having my greatest source of joy and meaning taken away from me. As an autistic person who has spent my life trying my best to get through the demands of each day, and to be a good student, a good friend, a good employee, and a good person, I truly don’t believe I deserve this. With so much emphasis being placed on diversity and inclusion, why do I not get to feel accepted or included? Why are people like me no longer represented in art, monuments, memorials, or media? Why does society not acknowledge my perspective, my feelings, my story, or my experiences?

Because of my own personal experiences, both autism and Confederate heritage are integral parts of my identity. Both of these things have helped to shape the person that I am and the perspective through which I see the world, a perspective that deserves to be honored and recognized just as much as anyone else’s. In honor of two important and meaningful parts of my life, I will be celebrating the month of April as both Autism Acceptance Month and Confederate History Month.

Marissa and Stonewall

bookmark_borderPositive things for once

Posted on by Marissa

Due to the horrible things that have happened in the world, the content of this blog is so often negative. So here is some positive news for a change. Below are a few things I’ve seen around the internet lately that made me smile:

1.Candlelight service at Stonewall Jackson’s gravesite. This weekend marks Lee-Jackson Day for those of us who value Confederate history. In Lexington, Virginia, celebrations took place to honor the two legendary generals, Robert E. Lee and Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson. Photographer Judy Smith captured this beautiful image. You can see more of Judy’s work on her Facebook page and Instagram page.

 
 
 
 
 
View this post on Instagram
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A post shared by Judy Smith (@judysmithphotography)

2. Lemon for Stonewall. Continuing with the theme of Lee-Jackson Day, the Virginia Museum of the Civil War at New Market Battlefield shared that their Stonewall Jackson statue received the gift of a lemon! There is debate about whether lemons were actually Stonewall’s favorite fruit, or whether it was actually peaches or some other fruit, but regardless, I found it touching that an anonymous visitor left this token for the general.

3. R.I.P. Ashli Babbitt. A Facebook friend shared this image. With all the self-righteous pontificating about “our democracy,” our society has completely lost sight of the fact that a young woman was killed by the Capitol police for participating in a protest. The image below encapsulates how January 6th should truly be remembered.

4. Happy January 6th. Also on the topic of the Capitol protest, radio host and social media personality Blake Kresses hit the nail on the head with this post. 

 
 
 
 
 
View this post on Instagram
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A post shared by Blake Kresses (@blakekresses)

5. Who are the real traitors? Possibly the most infuriating thing on earth is when people make the argument that people who fought for the Confederacy were “traitors.” This Instagram post debunks this argument better than I ever could.

 
 
 
 
 
View this post on Instagram
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A post shared by Unreconstructed Rebel (@unreconstructed1896)

 

bookmark_borderPatrick Lindsay is a pathetic little bitch

Posted on by Marissa

If it weren’t bad enough that the city of Richmond decided to desecrate the grave of General A.P. Hill, the contractor who carried out the hideous work decided to make things even worse with a series of flippant and sometimes profane Facebook posts insulting and ridiculing General Hill.

Patrick Lindsay, the Director of Operations of the contracting company in question, made an extensive series of posts showing the once magnificent monument being hideously dismantled and the grave site being turned into a pathetic pile of rubble. Lindsay brags about his role in the despicable act of desecration and proudly poses for a selfie in front of his horrific handiwork.

“AP Hill caved like a pathetic little bitch,” Lindsay wrote in one caption.

In another post, he wrote: “As far as I can tell the inventory was a few buttons, the brass hardware from the oaken box, two femurs, a skull, some assorted ribs, and a pelvis… No partridges. No pear trees.”

Seeing the photos of this vicious and intentional destruction makes me feel as if my soul is being crushed, and as if a knife is being twisted in my heart. Yet again, everything that makes my life worth living, dismantled piece by excruciating piece, deliberately reduced to a pitiful pile of rocks. The fact that anyone could witness (let alone participate in) such a thing and post about it in such a casual, flippant, and joking manner… is incomprehensible. Disgusting. Appalling. Abhorrent. No words are quite sufficient to express the pain that these actions have caused me.

So I’d like to correct Mr. Lindsay.

In reality, A.P. Hill was a brave and skilled general who fought for what he believed in.

And in reality, Patrick Lindsay is a pathetic little bitch.

Patrick Lindsay has never in his life demonstrated even a shred of courage, integrity, or moral character. In fact, he chose to do the most cowardly thing a human being could ever do. He chose to attack, insult, and ridicule someone who is completely helpless, someone who cannot do anything whatsoever to defend himself. Someone who is dead.

Hopefully Patrick Lindsay dies painfully one day, like A.P. Hill did, and hopefully, years later, someone desecrates his grave, digs up his remains, and profanely insults and ridicules him. Then maybe his soul (if it even exists, which is doubtful, now that I think about it) will look upon what is happening and gain a tiny shred of understanding of what A.P. Hill has gone through.

Far too many people have lost sight of the fact that every historical figure was a human being. And no human being deserves to be treated the way A.P. Hill has been treated.

A.P. Hill didn’t deserve to be murdered by an invading army that was waging a war to force people to remain part of the United States against their will. (That was what the Union side in the Civil War was doing.)

A.P. Hill didn’t deserve to be murdered again, over 150 years after his physical death, by having his statue obliterated and his remains desecrated.

A.P. Hill didn’t deserve to be insulted and ridiculed by a coward who has never suffered any hardships, never taken a stand for any principles, and never contributed anything positive to the world.

I stand with A.P. Hill.

Pardon my French, but…

Fuck Patrick Lindsay, and fuck every miserable excuse for a person who thinks that murdering historical figures is even remotely acceptable.

bookmark_borderRemembering A.P. Hill

Posted on by Marissa

Today the city of Richmond, Virginia removed the statue of General A.P. Hill, as well as his headstone / grave marker atop which the statue stood. Tomorrow the city plans to physically dig up Hill’s remains from the ground. The city plans to give the statue and headstone to an African-American history museum.

A. P. Hill - Brady-Handy

To say that this is disgraceful and immoral is an understatement. This is just the latest in a series of disgraceful and immoral actions – which I collectively call the Statue Genocide – committed by bigots and bullies who purport to be advancing the values of diversity, inclusion, and tolerance but who are actually accomplishing the exact opposite of this.

The purpose of this post is to remind everyone that A. P. Hill was a real human being. A human being with thoughts, feelings, personality, and opinions. A human being with his own viewpoint, perspective, and story. 

Ambrose Powell Hill was born on November 9, 1825 in Culpeper, Virginia. He went by his middle name, Powell, and was nicknamed “Little Powell.” He had 6 older brothers and sisters. He served honorably in the Mexican-American War, Seminole War, and Civil War. During the Seven Days Battles, he was one of Stonewall Jackson’s bravest and most capable subordinates, although the two didn’t get along particularly well. Hill reached the rank of Lieutenant General in the Confederate army. He was known for being friendly and affectionate towards his soldiers and for wearing his famous red hunting shirt during every battle. On April 2, 1865, he was killed in the Battle of Petersburg. He had said that he didn’t wish to live to see the defeat of the Confederacy, and he got his wish.

Levar Stoney, the mayor of Richmond, doesn’t care about any of that. He doesn’t care about A.P. Hill, or any of the remarkable historical figures whose souls he murdered. He doesn’t care about their lives or their stories. He doesn’t care about other people’s thoughts, feelings, viewpoints, or perspectives. Levar Stoney only cares about people who look and think like him.

This makes him far more bigoted than anyone who fought for the Confederacy, and without even a fraction of their courage. He uses his power to beat up on those who are already hurting, to stomp on those who are already marginalized, and to cruelly insult those who are already unpopular. All while claiming, preposterously, that people like him are oppressed and disadvantaged. To Levar Stoney, the only feelings and the only perspectives that matter are his own. 

bookmark_borderRebutting a bully

Posted on by Marissa

“Today I looked Robert E. Lee in the eye and said, ‘You have no power over me.’ Now the healing can begin.”

This is what someone wrote in a social media post after Richmond, Virginia’s statue of Robert E. Lee was wrongly and disgracefully removed.

These words could not be more wrong. In this person’s warped version of reality, the losing side of a war that took place over 150 years ago is somehow the side that has always held power, and rubbing salt in the wounds of those who are already suffering somehow constitutes healing.

What I would say to the person who wrote this is, Robert E. Lee has never had any power over you. The Confederacy lost the Civil War in 1865. The Confederacy is the losing side of the war, while the Union is the winning side. Why are you so eager to inflict a new level of defeat upon people who were brutally and mercilessly defeated more than 100 years before you were born? You, and people like you, are the ones who hold power in our society, while the people who share the ideals of the Confederacy (liberty, individual rights, and resistance to authority) are the ones who hold no power.

Dear person who wrote this: Robert E. Lee and the Confederacy were rebels who fought back against authority, while you represent authority and the establishment. Robert E. Lee represents thinking for oneself and daring to be different, while you represent mindless conformity. Robert E. Lee represents the oppressed, while you are the oppressor. Robert E. Lee and the Confederacy were the underdogs, while you are a bully. 

In other words, people like you are the powerful. People like Robert E. Lee are the powerless. It really is that simple. Monuments to Robert E. Lee and the Confederacy by their very nature represent rebellion and resistance to authority. For reasons that I will never fully comprehend, it is these ideals that you and so many other people demonstrate such a vicious, sadistic, and mindless eagerness to tear down and stomp on, both literally and figuratively.

In no way, shape, or form does it make sense for a bully to gloat that their victim – a person who has never hurt them in any way and who died over 150 years ago – does not hold power over them.

Dear person who wrote this: You, not Robert E. Lee, are the one who holds power and who always has. 

How dare you – a person who has always been part of the winning side, the majority, the mainstream, the establishment – gloat about inflicting further pain on an unpopular and powerless minority? You have no right to paint yourself as the victim. That distinction belongs to Robert E. Lee and the Confederacy.

Dear person who wrote this: You write about healing being able to begin, when you have nothing to heal from, because you are the one inflicting the pain, not the one enduring it. What has taken place over the past few years with regards to Confederate statues is an example of the winning side rubbing salt in the wounds of the losing side, of the advantaged stomping on the already disadvantaged. What you characterize as “healing” is actually the infliction of horrific pain on innocent people who have done nothing to deserve it and who have already suffered unimaginable losses. How dare you use the word “healing” to describe something that is its polar opposite?

Dear person who wrote this: You have things completely backwards. You are the authority, you are the majority, you are the mainstream, you are the establishment, you are the winning side of the Civil War, and you are the bully. It is disgraceful that you would gloat about inflicting further pain on those who are already suffering, and then call it healing.

bookmark_borderState Senator’s preposterous statement on Confederate flag

Posted on by Marissa

At a Memorial Day ceremony in Natick, Massachusetts, one brave member of the public decided to hold up a Confederate flag. Presumably, he was motivated by an entirely understandable and noble desire to honor the Confederate soldiers who lost their lives fighting for independence, and perhaps also an equally understandable and noble desire to make a statement against our society’s vicious, full-scale assault on everything related to the Confederacy. Infuriatingly but unsurprisingly given said vicious assault, a frenzy of intolerant, hurtful, and idiotic comments ensued.

For example: State Senator Becca Rausch and Natick Select Board chair Karen Adelman-Foster made the following statement:

This statement is deeply wrong for numerous reasons:

  1. I don’t understand how someone could be shocked, dismayed, or horrified by the fact that a person held up a Confederate flag. A Confederate flag is a beautiful thing, and it is heartening, wonderful, and awesome that someone in Massachusetts had the thoughtfulness and courage to honor the brave Confederate veterans who died fighting for freedom. It is Rausch’s and Adelman-Foster’s statement that is truly shocking, dismaying, and horrifying. 
  2. Displaying a Confederate flag does not “desecrate” anything. This is an utterly preposterous statement, and also a completely hypocritical one given that (as far as I know) neither Rausch nor Adelman-Foster has ever condemned any of the hundreds of brutal and heartless acts of actual desecration that have been committed against statues and monuments over the past year. Displaying a Confederate flag honors the Confederate veterans who gave their lives fighting for freedom, which is exactly what Memorial Day is supposed to be about. Plus, the cause for which they fought – the right to form an independent country – is actually more honorable than the cause of the Union soldiers who are commemorated by the Grand Army monument in Natick. If anyone is desecrating something in this situation, it is Rausch and Adelman-Foster for using Memorial Day as an excuse to cruelly and mindlessly attack an unpopular minority.
  3. Displaying a Confederate flag certainly does not desecrate the memory of people who have fallen in defense of equality and freedom, as the Confederate soldiers were the people who were actually fighting for equality and freedom. It is Rausch and Adelman-Foster who are desecrating the memory of people who have fallen in defense of equality and freedom, because they are using Memorial Day as an excuse to attack these exact values. 
  4. People who display and support the Confederate flag are the people who are actually fighting for diversity and inclusion.
  5. I don’t understand how someone could be hurt or harmed by the fact that a person held up a Confederate flag. In addition to being beautiful, the Confederate flag stands for equality, freedom, diversity, and inclusion. Anyone who is hurt or harmed by the display of this flag is a bully, an authoritarian, and a bigot.
  6. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to condemn the display of a Confederate flag, for the reasons mentioned above. Anyone who condemns the Confederate flag is a bully, an authoritarian, and a bigot. 
  7. Rausch and Adelman-Foster obviously do not have a steadfast commitment, or any commitment for that matter, to justice, equity, or freedom. In fact, their bigoted and intolerant statement demonstrates that they are actively advocating against these ideas.

In conclusion, it is difficult to imagine a public statement more hypocritical or illogical than the one put forth by Rausch and Adelman-Foster. They are literally condemning a flag that stands for freedom at the same time as they claim to be steadfastly committed to freedom. They are condemning an unpopular minority’s flag at the same time as they claim to support the ideas of diversity and inclusion. And they are claiming that the display of a flag that stands for freedom desecrates the memory of people who have fallen in defense of freedom. 

It is this statement, as well as the intolerant, mean-spirited attitudes that motivate it, that is truly hurtful and harmful, and it is this statement that deserves to be condemned. Instead of apologizing for the fact that a Confederate flag was displayed, Rausch and Adelman-Foster should apologize to the brave Confederate veterans whom they insulted, as well as to all the people who have been hurt and harmed by their heartless, mindless, and thoughtless words.

bookmark_borderSilent Sam: UNC Chapel Hill’s destroyed Confederate statue

Posted on by Marissa

The amount of destruction of historic statues that has taken place over the past months and years has been absolutely overwhelming. As a result, I admittedly haven’t been able to read and absorb all of the news as it’s been happening. As painful as it is, I’ve been spending the past couple of weeks catching up on old news stories about various incidents of statue vandalism and removal. One article that I came across is about Silent Sam, a Confederate statue that called University of North Carolina Chapel Hill home until August 20, 2018, when he was destroyed by protesters. As with all acts of destruction committed against statues, I condemn this despicable action in the strongest possible terms.

In the article, history professor Anne Bailey describes Silent Sam as a “powerful symbol of white supremacy” and “a divisive symbol of white supremacy” who “was meant to pay tribute to those who wanted to maintain slavery.” She also writes that “Confederate statues, therefore, represent a step backwards – a symbol of what the United States once was – not what it is now.”

In my opinion, Confederate statues are not symbols of white supremacy; they are simply symbols of the Confederacy, a short-lived nation that, like all nations, had various attributes, some admirable and some less so. And representing a step backwards is not necessarily a bad thing; there’s no reason why the way the country used to be is necessarily inferior to the way the country is today. (The pervasiveness and widespread acceptance of attacks on statues such as Silent Sam weighs heavily in favor of the argument that the U.S. was a better place in the past than it is now.)

As for the claim about being divisive, those who use this term seem to be assuming that it’s a bad thing to display any kind of symbol that is liked by some people and not others; in other words that only universally liked symbols should be displayed. But this is a recipe for a uniform, bland, sterile, conformist society containing nothing interesting or distinctive and no diversity. Not every monument or memorial, not every piece of public art is going to be liked by everyone, and there’s nothing wrong with that. That’s why tearing down statues is so wrong. Perpetrators claim to be carrying out this destruction in the name of diversity and inclusion, but what they are doing is contrary to these ideals. Destroying works of art because you do not like them violates the rights of those who do and demonstrates a complete disregard for their preferences and viewpoints.

Bailey also writes:

Today, the nation is experiencing what some call a civil war over statues. The only way to avert this new civil war – in some ways a symbolic one over the outcome of the original Civil War – is to have dialogue. And after dialogue, actions must follow. It could be that protesters who toppled Silent Sam acted out of a sense that dialogue had reached a standstill after years of debate. Communities may decide to take the statues down or replace them with monuments that honor abolitionists like Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglass, William H. Seward or Thaddeus Stephens. They may also choose to keep the Confederate statues intact with a plaque that gives a more balanced view of the causes of the war.

While dialogue is always a good thing, Bailey seems to be assuming that the only options to be discussed are getting rid of Confederate statues or adding plaques that profess a negative view towards the Confederacy (Bailey’s idea of a more balanced view of the causes of the war isn’t necessarily everyone’s). The option of leaving the statues completely as they are isn’t mentioned, let alone the option of adding more Confederate statues in places that do not currently have them. In this way, Bailey is presuming the truth of what she is trying to prove, namely that Confederate statues are bad. The idea that someone might consider the statues just fine as they are, or even want new ones to be built, isn’t even acknowledged as a possibility.