Saturday, September 8, 2012

Follow Up -- Observations on Andy's Double Standard

Andy sez, "When I’m critical of those organizations..." (UDC, SCV) ..."it’s usually because I see them as doing a disservice to the history they’re organized to celebrate."

More arrogance from a self-appointed Civil War Thought Cop. See, that's precisely why Billy Bearden is being critical of the UDC -- because he sees them as doing a disservice to the history they're organized to celebrate...

So when Andy sees the UDC doing that, he is being "...very crtiical (sic) of some of the things they say and do that I consider to be very bad, even dishonest history." When Billy and the flaggers do the same thing for the same reason, they are having a "temper tantrum in slow motion." They are "...stamping their feet and saying Look at me! Look at me!" They're picking fights lagrely (sic) -- in Andy's opinion -- as a way to raise their own visibility and to establish themselves as more-unreconstructed-than-thou. It’s a shame, he sez, because any legitimate arguments they have are regularly eclipsed by foolishness such as this.

Andy further sez, "The Flaggers are, first and foremost, all about promoting the Flaggers, and establishing themselves as the sole arbiters of what constitutes 'honoring' Confederate veterans. As a descendant of many, many Confederate veterans on both sides of my family, I’m not willing to let them presume to speak for me or my relatives."

But he certainly presumes the authority to speak for other people and their relatives. His blog posts and his comments on his blog and on other people's blogs establish clearly enough that he thinks he is the sole arbiter of what constitutes honoring Confederate veterans. And where Andy is coming from is the belief that Confederate veterans should NOT be honored. That's why he put "honoring" in irony quotes.

The underlying purpose of his blog -- like Levin's, Simpson's and others' -- is to portray Confederates as scum-sucking racist slavers... That's why it's a "civil war era" blog -- the "era" being a time frame Andy alone defines. That way, his "interest" in the war is a very clever cover for writing about what he's truly interested in -- pinning the racist label on white Southerners, then and now -- the "era" extending right up until this very moment, giving him an enormous time-frame in which to find scum-sucking racist slavers and their descendants and current day supporters.

Betcha didn't know you was livin' in the civil war era, didja?

Presumably, it is okay for him to practice this double standard, because he's not a scum-sucking racist (by his standards). In the current PC era, not being a scum-sucking racist gives one all sorts of privileges other people don't have.

For example, before he blocked me from commenting at his blog, he mentioned that my nickname for The Huffington Post (Huffpoo) was "childish" but he hasn't let out a peep about Betty Giragosian insulting Billy by calling him the stereotypical Southern redneck name "Billy Bob." Three times in that one comment thread.

If he wasn't too skeered to take me on, he would no doubt take me to task for assuming that I know what his motive for blogging about the "civil are era" is -- to tar white Southerners (with a few exceptions, such as himself) with the racist label. My answer to him would be -- "I know as much about this motive of yours, from your blog and comments, as you know about the motives of the flaggers from reading Facebook."

Pots and kettles, Mr. Hall. Motes and beams...


  1. I'm posting the letters written by my ancestors, The letter's speak for themselves ! Ya Don't need no professor to put his spin on em!
    Read em for yourself ! Draw yer own conclusion.

    I guess some would call it a "tunnel vision" approach, but I have other letters and writings that say pretty much the same thing.

    Most all are written by members of the Richmond Howitzers, and it's not a tunnel vision thing.
    Many of the Howitzers were well educated and wrote about the war !

  2. David,

    One set of letters does not represent all of represents what your ancestor was thinking and feeling. Sure it adds to our understanding of the war from his perspective, but it does not change what secession or the war was about.

  3. But Corey, ya know what? I'll bet Mark Grimsley summarizing the writings of one woman to represent thousands of Southerners "myth-making" about Sherman is just hunky-dory with you.


Comments are welcome, but monitored.