Once apon a time the Commonwealth of Virginia used to celebrate Confederate Heritage Month.  It was in April.  How long before this thread is nuked or I get kicked off ARFcom?

Oh I wish I were in the land of cotton
Old times there are not forgotten
Look away, look away, look away, Dixie Land!
Attached File

This thread won't get nuked, and you're not getting kicked off Arfcom...
(anytime soon).  

I had no problem with Confederate Heritage Month.

I'm from Yankee country, brought down here when my mom got remarried.


I loved learning about the Civil War and touring our Virginia battlefields.
It captured my imagination like nothing else (save dinosaurs ).

Virginia's Confederate History actually helped me (an unwilling Carpetbagger)
connect with my "Rebel" stepfather.

Virginia benefits a lot from Civil War tourism, but the woke mob doesn't care
about that.

Was slavery bad?  Yes - always was, always will be.

But caving to the left and allowing the purging of history is stupid,
and invites more purging of what the left doesn't like.

There once was a Lee-Jackson day up until at least the late 90’s.

why do people celebrate coming in second place?  (originally yankee here would you like to see the first place trophy?)

Attached File

95 and 81 both have northbound lanes.

How to tell people you live in NOVA without telling them you live in NOVA.

You could always return to first place land.

We're all one big, happy dysfunctional family in this forum!  

I don't take anything personally, and hope y'all, yinz, or even yous feel the same.

Out of all the materials I've reviewed concerning the war, trophies were not mentioned. I don't believe the several hundred thousand dead were expecting one either.

Oh I wish I was in the land of cotton... Edmund Ruffin would be rolling in his grave if he saw what they did do Virginia.

It's certainly a nuanced topic. I'm a history junkie and I struggled with the morality of the conflict for years. Objectively the south seceded to preserve the institution of slavery. There is no getting around it. Its in the secession documents. But the war was fought over the question of whether the states had a right to secede. Virginia has a better claim than, say, SC, as their decision to secede was a result of Lincoln's response to the states of the deep south seceding.

But even that is not cut and dry. Ultimately it wasn't "The South" who seceded. It was the elite planter class that controlled the state legislatures and the media. They used that control to convince the poor average folk who ultimately fought the war to support the effort. Even that is nuanced because there is an argument to be made that the poorest white benefitted from having a class of black slaves below them. But I've read enough primary documents to know that many truly believed they were fighting against tyrannical central government control, and not simply to preserve an institution that benefitted the rich elites. I'll not judge them for being duped. Hell I went happily to Iraq believing there were WMDs.

At the end of the day I celebrate the martial spirit of my forebears, whether they fought for the north or south (and I had a pile one both sides). I hate that the Civil War, like everything else today, has become a binary black and white partisan battle, when history shows it to be the opposite. We can't change the past, and I'll not be made to be ashamed of the actions of my ancestors.

Thanks for posting.

Wondering how poor whites benefitted from slavery? I had gotten the impression it crushed their economy and benefitted the elites.
Just the "emotional benefit" of looking down on someone?

I'm far from an expert, and my research has primarily been focused on the Valley and western counties. Initially Virginia was primarily large slave-owning plantations in the east and small independent farms to the west. The entirety of the economy to the east was dependent on slavery. Even if you didn't own slaves, your place in society was reliant on the economic system. By the time the war started the lines had blurred a bit in the country. Iron ore and wheat exports drove the economy in the Valley. Both industries did not require a large slave population working 365 days a year like cotton or tobacco. But, both industries periodically required a short-term increase in a labor force. This lead to a stable industry of slave-owners who rented slaves on a temporary basis to the Furnaces, farms, etc. There was some moral high ground claimed by folks who didn't own slaves, but they certainly relied on the institution at times. I had an ancestor who was a Brethren. I found a primary document where a member of his congregation was expelled from their church for purchasing a slave at a low price and subsequently selling him for a profit.

Once again, there was a lot of nuance and it wasn't as simple as evil slave owners to the east and small freedom loving farmers to the west. The entirety of the south's economy was dependant (either directly or indirectly) on the institution of slavery.

The emotional benefit was also significant. Even non-slave owners worried about a violent slave uprising given the recent Nat Turner Rebellion and  Haitian Revolution. Even in the north, outside of a small group of radical Abolitionists, there was no widespread support for emancipation until well into the war. Immigrants worried that emancipation would lead to competition for labor in the factories, settlers in the territories worried about competition for land and labor in the west, and just about everyone was objectively racist. This lead to nuanced historical tidbits like proponents of free-soil territories wanting to prevent blacks from moving to the territories, or a push to repatriate blacks to Liberia, etc.

A lot of folks may have abhorred slavery on a personal level, but they were in no rush to see the practice ended.

@M4rticus

What about the tax and export equation. My graduate is history course taught by a liberal New York Jewish teacher, started the civil war section of History by dropping the hammer on the war was fought to preserve the institution of slavery or to free slaves. This was 1998. One black guy got up and left class. He went on to explain the economic situation between the north and south. States had interstate taxes on goods moved from south to the north, taxes that were not applied to other states. Further banks loaned miney a different rates to southern companies. Trade and manufactured goods had to be processed through northern ports, hence taxed unfairly. This is 20 year old recollection of it. That’s what pissed people off, that’s what got people to fight. Slavery was something that was a luxury item only 2% enjoyed. The idea that 96% of some counties would vote to leave or go to enlist for the rich guy to keep his slaves seem proposterous if you really think about it.

Hey guys their going to take away Elon musks luxury yacht and planes. No screw that let’s go fight a war so he can keep his yachts and planes. The free slavery idea was a fringe thing even in the north. A kin to gay rights in 1989. It wasn’t a go to war issue for anyone.