Corey's back for more

I guess he can't get enough of banging his head against a brick wall.

He's posted a challenge to me here:

http://kindredblood.wordpress.com/2011/08/08/connie-chastain-ward-responds-again/

after I took him to task for his risible “think piece” about the Southern Heritage Preservation Group on Facebook. You'd think he'd learn. Guess not.

He doesn't take me to task on every point. Just three. Therefore, I will address those three.

Corey writes, “Connie ranks as an amateur historian, whereas I and the other bloggers mentioned (minus Andy since I do not know what he does for a living) are Historians since we do history for a living. I mean really Connie, come on, Brooks D. Simpson is ASU Foundation Professor of History at Arizona State University and both Kevin and I are teachers…of history.

Connie responds:

Dictionary.com defines "historian" as:

his·to·ri·an [hi-stawr-ee-uhn, -stohr-] noun

1. an expert in history; authority on history.
2. a writer of history; chronicler.

Nothing there about "doing history for a living."

However, an interesting note about the suffix "an" follows the definition, and with regard to "historian," it says, "The suffix -an, and its variant -ian also occurs in a set of personal nouns, mainly loanwords from French, denoting one who engages in, practices, or works with the referent of the base noun ( comedian; grammarian; historian; theologian ); this usage is especially productive with nouns ending in -ic ( electrician; logician; technician ). See -ian for relative distribution with that suffix."

Still nothing that makes "doing" it "for a living" as part of the definition. So, I'm as much a historian as Corey, Levin, Hall and Simpson. I'm a writer of history; I work with history. No, I'm not employed to do that, but I nevertheless am a historian.

With the possible exception of Andy, as Corey notes, what these gentlemen do for a living is, um, work at educational institutions -- presumably teaching. What they do for a living is teach. That makes them teachers.

Being a historian, if you accept Corey's definition of "doing history for a living" is not the same thing as doing, say, plumbing for a living. As a plumber, you have to know what you're doing and do it well enough to please the people you're doing it for -- an employer and his customers -- if you're gonna get paid. (Getting paid is basically what "for a living' means.)

To be a historian at an institution of learning just means you have to show some papers that presumably verify that you've studied and learned.

Most people so credentialed get their papers from institutes of higher learning, which as we know, have changed over the last fifty or sixty years from places of free thought and inquiry -- a setting for acquiring knowledge -- to centers of indoctrination.

If you want to see just how the indoctrination works, read some cases from The Fire.org http://thefire.org/ While there, take a look at the page for Arizona State University, were Mr. Simpson teaches: http://thefire.org/spotlight/schools/46

Obviously, I'm not as impressed with Corey's concept of "historian" and what it takes to become one as he is.

Next he writes, “First of all I have never disparaged any veteran from any time period. I have no idea how the fact that some of the members of Facebook’s Southern Heritage Preservation group are Vietnam veterans plays a role in my assessment of their historical understanding of the War of the Rebellion. Furthermore, I do not understand how my military career or lack thereof plays a role in my ability to interpret the past. There really is only one answer…it does not…and Connie knows it. But in an attempt to pacify Connie’s sense of honor I will mention that my family has taken part in just about every war this country has been involved in and then some. I have had ancestors fight in wars from King Phillip’s War in the 1600?s to the French & Indian War, The American Revolution, War of the Rebellion, World War II and Vietnam. And No I have no military service, but that does not exclude me from being able to comment on things of history."

Connie responds:

My mention of the Vietnam vets is because they have experience with war -- the same as Confederate veterans, and Union ones, too. The technology may have advanced, but the horror, the dying, the loss of war -- those don't change. One doesn't get that because one has relatives who were in war. One gets it because one has experienced it personally.

Corey says, "Furthermore, I do not understand how my military career or lack thereof plays a role in my ability to interpret the past. There really is only one answer…it does not…and Connie knows it."

I completely disagree. Men who have experienced war first hand are truly war historians in a way that the inexperienced cannot be. They lived the history -- literally did it for a living. Corey's appeal to his military ancestors doesn't appease me. They don't give him the knowledge-by-experience that our SHPG Vietnam vets have.

Of course, Corey's lack of military experience doesn't exclude him from commenting on history. My lack of military experience doesn't exclude me from commenting on it, either. The difference is that I willingly acknowledge that their experience gives these vets the status of war historian in a way that Corey does not, cannot, have. I suspect Corey doesn't recognize their status as war historians-by-experience.

The last thing he complains about is my comment, “Some of the Deep South states seceded over slavery, among other things (the other things are listed in their Declarations of Causes but you have to not stop reading after you encounter the word “slavery.”) The states of the upper South seceded because D.C., in violation of the founding principles of the USA, was planning a military invasion of the South. The fighting was because an army invaded the Southern states — but that army did not invade to free slaves, so the South could not have been fighting to defend slavery.

Corey responds, "The last sentence defies logic. How can one even type such a blatantly false statement…It simply does not make any sense. Since Connie challenge me about my military service, I too challenge her to explain this last point. I seriously doubt she can."

(Loooooooooooong pause.)

Oh. My. Goodness. People, I must humbly apologize. Corey is right.

Levin, Andy Hall, Simpson, all the anti-Confederate bloggers and South-bashers ... ARE RIGHT! They've been right all along!

We Southerners, who have always maintained that the war was about more than just slavery - WE'VE BEEN WRONG!

How could we have been so wrong? How could we have been so duped?

It's all there, right there, in Abraham Lincoln's proclamation calling for 75,000 volunteers to invade the South. He called them up to march South and free the slaves! He did! He did! Here's his proclamation, word for word!

Whereas slaves are being held in the United States, and have been for some time past, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, by people too numerous to be compelled by ordinary judicial procedings or the powers vested in the marshals by law:

Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, in virtue of the power vested in me by my ego and my big-government agenda, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to free said slaves and oppress their oppressors, despite there being no law that justifies said action, and doing so violates the Constitution of the United States of America. I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, have deemed that in this situation, my decision is just and right, and transcends the Constitution.

The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department.

I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate and aid this effort to free said slaves, despite there being no law to justify it, and despite there being little love for slaves in the free states and little concern for their wellbeing.

I deem it proper to order the freeing of said slaves for the purpose of divesting Southerners and their region of their wealth, and preventing their ability to generate more wealth, and transferring said wealth and accompanying power (but not the freed slaves) to the northern states of the union, and the northern people.

Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by my gargantuan ego in combination with my limitless ambition, convene both Houses of Congress. Senators and Representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers, at twelve o'clock, on Thursday, the fourth day of July next, then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand.

Okay. Just kidding. I made that up. In Aby-baby's actual proclamation there ain't one word, not a freakin' syllable -- not even a tiny, freakin' syllable -- about freein' slaves. To say the federal army came South for the purpose of freeing slaves is like saying the USA got involved in WWII to liberate Jews from Nazi concentration camps. Yes, slaves and concentration camp inmates were freed, but that was not why the fighting started.

Lincoln called up troops to bully the seceded states back in the Union, not to liberate slaves. If that had been his purpose, he wouldn't have waited so long to issue the Emancipation Proclamation; and he would have done something that wasn't just for show, as the EP was. If the union army invaded the South to free slaves, Lincoln wouldn't have told Gen. Freemont to return to slavery the slaves he'd freed in Missouri. And on and on.

Lastly, studies of the letters of federal soldiers reveal that the reason for fighting they listed most was to preserve the union. One such study was done by James McPherson, a conventionally credentialed historian, so Corey ought to be impressed....

Like so many people, Corey-the-historian apparently can't distinguish between secession and war. This is sorta on the order of not being able to tell the difference between resigning from your club ... and getting into a brawl with the remaining members and burning down the club house.

As I stated, some of the Southern states seceded to protect slavery -- among other things. But they fought because an army was marching South to kill them and their familes and servants, and force them back into the union at the point of a bayonet.

---

Lincoln's actual proclamation:

Whereas the laws of the United States have been for some time past and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by law:

Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the a ggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed.

The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department.

I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union, and the perpetuity of popular government; and to redress wrongs already long enough endured.

I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the forces hereby called forth will probably be to repossess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union; and in every event the utmost care will be observed, consiste n

tly with the objects aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, and destruction of peaceful citizens in any part of the country.

And I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse and retire peacefully to their respective abodes within twenty days from date.

Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, convene both Houses of Congress. Senators and Representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers, at twelve o'clock, on Thursday, the fourth day of July next, then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand.