Monday, May 4, 2015

It Takes Time

  "Confederate heritage deserves better …"  Brooks D. Simpson

Like he cares about Confederate heritage and what it deserves.

Also from Simpson: 

"But what has happened at the Confederate War Memorial Chapel … and what has not happened … testifies to the ineffectiveness of Confederate heritage groups and their failure to take meaningful action to protect what they claim to prize so dearly."
Actually, what it testifies to is the existence of the war on Confederate heritage being waged by an assortment of rich, left-leaning politicians, by business and industry, public and private societal groups (like the VMFA, NAACP, ) and those who control and manipulate the populace with the enormously powerful weapon of popular culture (film, TV, books, music, etc.) 

By contrast, heritage folks are volunteers and their activism is funded by donations from people who, for the most part, are far from rich.

It's a one-sided battle right now, and heritage is taking a lot of hits. The battle is relatively recent -- begun after, and, to some extent, because of -- the civil rights movement and the rise of political correctness in the latter half of the 20th century. But fighting back is a long, arduous undertaking; the tide will not turn and results will not be seen for a long time.

Generally speaking, heritage folks are political and cultural conservatives. Demonstrations, protests, sit ins, (and, as we've recently seen, riots) are left-liberal activities. Conservatives basically did not publicly demonstrate until the rise of the Tea Party (less than a decade ago). Political conservatives and heritage folks are both having to learn how to protest, and what to augment it with behind the scenes. We're way behind the leftists in this area, and one reason left-libs are so outraged at the Tea Party AND the Flaggers is because they have dared to appropriate a method that was once the prerogative of the left.

But there's another reason why members of the left-leaning world of academia and their allies are so viscerally infuriated with the Virginia Flaggers. The Flaggers are re-awakening a trait in the South that has gone underground since the mid-20th century -- a trait liberals and leftists can't stand.

Southern pride.

A huge component of Southern pride is Confederate heritage.

That is why leftists hate, lie about, denigrate, harass and persecute the Virginia Flaggers, who are doing so much to restore that pride. The last thing leftists want to see is the reappearance and rise of Southern pride -- of Southerners proudly honoring their Confederate ancestors and the legacy they left us.

Too bad what leftists want. The resurgence of Southern pride grows bigger and stronger with each passing week, month, year...


  1. It is amusing how much consternation is caused to folks such as Mr. Simpson from Southerners taking pride in their history and their heritage. That everlasting stool of repentance continues to become less crowded.

  2. You cleared the fence with that one Connie,
    I guess that's what is called "Heavy Hitting"
    Hittin em with the TRUTH !

  3. Corey, what do you imagine to be the VaFlaggers' "stated goals" that they have failed at? You said "every" as if there are multiple goals. Please identify said goals and identify (preferably link to) where they are stated.

    Oh, and give us your concept of "failed." has seven definitions for "failure." Which one(s) are you talking about re: the VaFlaggers.

    Also, where on earth did you get your concept of extortion? Again, says:

    1. an act or instance of extorting.
    2. Law. the crime of obtaining money or some other thing of value by the abuse of one's office or authority.
    3. oppressive or illegal exaction, as of excessive price or interest:
    the extortions of usurers.
    4. anything extorted.

    And "extorting" is:
    1. (law) to wrest or wring (money, information, etc.) from a person by violence, intimidation, or abuse of authority; obtain by force, torture, threat, or the like.... to take illegally by reason of one's office.
    2. to compel (something) of a person or thing

    Please identify how any of the interstate flags amount to extortion. Send it in a comment and I'll let it through. I'll more than likely rip it to pieces, but I'll let it through.

    Also, please explain the ridiculous, crazy idea that putting up the interstate flags is the equivalent of bullying school children. If you can, which I doubt. It's just to bizarre.

  4. I knew I could get you to quote from a dictionary...LOL

    I would answer your questions but since you don't post my comments why bother.

    1. Translation: "How dare you go to an objective source for the denotative meaning of words which I use as I see fit? . . . LOL. I have no logical answers to the points you made, so I will try to turn it back on you by posting a comment which points to my lack of rhetorical answers while seeking to make you look bad."

    2. Poor corey... still doesn't have a life... you found a woman yet corey?

    3. Cory you are still a dumbass. And I am still in Mississippi waiting.

    4. Corey. Exactly why you are banned at Cold Southern Steel.

  5. Nailed 'em again Connie! Losers like Simpson, Meyers, and their ilk are just about making noise and truth scares them to deat! Keep standing for truth!

  6. Ok, fair enough...

    I claim the VF's have failed because they have not succeeded in anything they have attempted from the VMFA to Lexington to Charlottesville.

    Have they been successful in erecting 4-5 big flags...yes, but those are reactionary.

    VMFA- Failed to get the flag put back on the Chapel
    Lexington- Failed to get the city to fly Confederate flags from street light poles
    Lexington/W&L University-Failed to get the flags back on the Lee statue in the Lee Chapel
    Charlottesville- Failed to change the mind of the city council to save Lee-Jackson holiday.
    MOC-Appomattox- Failed to get the museum to fly a Confederate flag outside...despite the preserved real ones inside.

    Where did the big flags go...right near the places of the VF's failures as a reaction to each failure.

    As for extortion, it is not the textbook definition but the idea is that if the flaggers don't get their way they will put up a big ass rebel flag nearby to remind you that you failed to agree with the flaggers. And as time goes by and more issues arrive, the flagger will inject their two cents with the understanding that if it...whatever it is...does not go the flaggers way...a big ass rebel flag will be erected.

    1. Corey-
      "I claim the VF's have failed because they have not succeeded in anything they have attempted from the VMFA to Lexington to Charlottesville."

      I don't follow everything they do but they had a victory at Danville and at least an assist with the situation in Pensacola.

      "Have they been successful in erecting 4-5 big flags...yes, but those are reactionary."

      When the enemy moves you have to make a counterstroke.

      But being proactive is good. Are there any SCV groups in Indiana or Illinois who want to donate land for a Confederate flag? Arizona? Massachusetts?
      Yeepin' yiminy!

  7. Corey, you show extreme ignorance of bringing about political or social change in a rigid and hostile environment. Did you read the title of this post? IT TAKES TIME.

    Just for comparison, on the other side -- Kay Patterson introduced legislation to remove the flag from the South Carolina capitol dome EVERY SECESSION for TWENTY YEARS before he garnered enough support to finally get it taken down. Would you suggest he failed after the third year of his effort and should have given up at that point?

    The flags go up to commemorate the Confederate soldiers dishonored -- by the removal of their flags and by other hostile actions.

    So you don't like flags going up because the Flaggers "didn't get their way"? What would you suggest? Heritage folks go on a riot rampage, looting and burning, smashing store and car windows, looting everything from flat-screens to toilet paper? No? Raising flags looks pretty peaceful and positive by comparison, doesn't it?

    In any case, your hostile attitude keeps you from seeing that the reason the flags go up when and where they go up is to honor Confederate soldiers whose memory has been purposely tarnished, trashed, stomped on, and lied about by removal of flags or monuments and other hostile activities.

  8. So just to clarify, the Confederate Flags were removed from the VMFA, Lexington, C-ville and other places for the sole purpose of denigrating the Confederate soldier? Can you provide evidence to that affect?

    Could it be your clouded vision and mindset that does not allow you to see that in many cases those flags are removed not to dishonor confederate soldiers but to make places more inclusive to more a museum or town. And...none of those places that have removed flags has made it illegal for people to wave them or fly the on their own accord.

    If those flags were put up to honor the confederate soldier, why are they only placed in places where the Virginia Flaggers have failed or after they have failed?

    1. Not the sole purpose. The larger reason is to denigrate the Confederacy itself, and -- most especially -- people today who honor those soldiers.

      The flags are not removed to make places "more inclusive." The flags do not excluded anyone. Never have. If someone refuses to visit, say, a museum because they don't like the flag, that is THEIR conscious choice. They have chosen to exclude themselves.

      Besides, it has less to do with visitors feeling excluded and more to do with arrogant, left-leaning administrators of organizations like the VMFA being embarrassed by or hostile to those who honor Confederate heritage, and wanting to stick it to them by denigrating and removing symbols they honor and respect.

      The Virginia Flaggers haven't failed, as I pointed out. Since you seem to be having difficulty grasping what I've already told you, I'll tell you again. They are volunteers, financed by themselves or by small donations, up against deeply entrenched, widely influential and very rich political agencies and private groups. And they've barely started. If they haven't made a difference 20 or 30 years from now, then we might start talking about the possibility of failure.

      The Interstate flags have gone up near places where these rich, arrogant entities have removed previously displayed flags. It is not a sign of failure (because the fight is not over in these places). It is simply a way to replace the flags that have been heavy-handedly removed, and continue the honor and commemoration of the Confederate soldier.

    2. To use your tactics Connie, I will ask if you have talked to the VMFA, to Lexington, to C-ville etc and know for a fact that the flags were removed to denigrate the confederacy and those who honor those soldiers. Could it be that those cities no longer want to be strictly identified with the cause of slavery that the flag represents?

      Or, do they no longer want to be defined by only 4 years of southern history?

      You know one of the big arguments against the south fighting for slavery is that the south which only lasted for 4 years did not have one confederate flag flying over a slave ship, and the confederate flag only flew over slavery for 4 years compared to the 80 years under the US flag.

      So why do cities and institutions have to fly a flag that only represents 4 years of 400+ years of southern history?

      As for your last 2 paragraphs...this is not a fight of rich vs. poor? Really? And we need to wait 20-30 years for results...really? LOL...nice deflection of the utter failure of the VF's...this is a trend that is moving across the distance yourself from the slaveholding confederacy.

      That does not mean that the war or the confederacy is forgotten...but it means the lost cause myth is retreating and the true understanding of what the confederacy fought for is coming to light. But I am sure you will disagree...LOL

    3. I didn't have to talk to them, Corey. It is implicit in public statements made and the manner of the actions they took.

      No cities were ever "strictly identified" with the cause of slavery because of the Confederate battle flag. However, being identified with slavery isn't the negative you seem to think, since the Virginia Sesquicentennial's focus was on slavery, slavery, slavery.

      Two battle flags at the Chapel, or several flags representing Lee and Jackson on a few light poles one weekend a year in Lex, or four regimental flags in the alcove at Lee Chapel do not define whole cities, or even whole schools, by only 4 years of history. Where do you come up with such cockamamie substitutes for logic?

      Since you're evidently too prejudiced to figure it out yourself, the battle flag should fly in the cities of Southern states because it represents the only soldiers who ever fought for their states. The time frame doesn't matter.

      So you're saying the people who wanted to remove the flag from the South Carolina capital dome were utter failures for 20 years?

      It's not a trend, Corey. It is the inevitable result of the growing leftist influence that has taken over since WWII. It is the result of a purposeful campaign waged by the leftist press, the NAACP/SPLC and like organizations, "progressive" academia, and the extreme leftist/socialist popular culture, which is a very powerful weapon.

      The "lost cause myth" is itself a myth. The history of the war has never been hidden, documentation never locked away... It has always been there.

      What's coming to light is how gross our national life has become, how filthy our popular culture, how corrupt our legal system and law enforcement, and how odious our national government. There is a desperate need for making this degenerate nation look positive, righteous and noble; and so the Confederacy is trotted out for comparison. But the Confederacy is so much better than what the USA is now, only its worst negatives can be acknowledged and displayed. And that is the basis of the war on heritage.

    4. You didn't talk to's implicit in their public statements? Really? Or is it that you just don't like their decisions because they go against what you think you know about the history of the Civil War?

      The Confederate Battle Flag does not just represent the was incorporated into the 2nd and 3rd National flags of the it represents what the nation represented and we all know what was don't we! However that would be acknowledging history AND heritage and we both know you cannot no.

      There is a myth of the lost cause Connie....but you are right...nothing has been hidden or locked up...the south has just ignored that which it did not like. It has claimed that slavery was not the cause after the war despite the record from before the war. For about a century the nation bought into the southern version...the Lost Cause...and then when the Civil Rights movement brought about a need to re-assess the history the lost cause lost!

      But you just keep on living in this Liberal Conspiracy world and enjoy!

    5. Re-assess the history?...

      "...these lenders of blood money had, for a long series of years previous to the war, been the willing accomplices of the slave-holders in perverting the government from the purposes of liberty and justice, to the greatest of crimes. They had been such accomplices for a purely pecuniary consideration, to wit, a control of the markets in the South; in other words, the privilege of holding the slave-holders themselves in industrial and commercial subjection to the manufacturers and merchants of the North (who afterwards furnished the money for the war). And these Northern merchants and manufacturers, these lenders of blood-money, were willing to continue to be the accomplices of the slave-holders in the future, for the same pecuniary considerations. But the slave-holders, either doubting the fidelity of their Northern allies, or feeling themselves strong enough to keep their slaves in subjection without Northern assistance, would no longer pay the price which these Northern men demanded. And it was to enforce this price in the future – that is, to monopolize the Southern markets, to maintain their industrial and commercial control over the South – that these Northern manufacturers and merchants lent some of the profits of their former monopolies for the war, in order to secure to themselves the same, or greater, monopolies in the future. These – and not any love of liberty or justice – were the motives on which the money for the war was lent by the North. In short, the North said to the slave-holders: If you will not pay us our price (give us control of your markets) for our assistance against your slaves, we will secure the same price (keep control of your markets) by helping your slaves against you, and using them as our tools for maintaining dominion over you; for the control of your markets we will have, whether the tools we use for that purpose be black or white, and be the cost, in blood and money, what it may."

      -Lysander Spooner, Northern Abolitionist, 1870

    6. Along the same line...

      "The history of the political connection between the North and the South exhibits a steady effort on the part of the former section to obtain pecuniary aggrandizement and political power, and on the part of the latter to preserve independence and equality. And, although most persons in the South are surprised at the course pursued by the North towards us since the disruption of the Union, it is really part and parcel of the old sectional policy. It has been the settled purpose of that section to use the South for their advantage. They blundered into the disruption of the Union, out of sheer lust of power, coupled with fanatical intermeddling, and from ignorance of the tone, temper and capacity of our people. The war is but a further development of the same unscrupulous aggression for the sake of gain which has always marked their carreer toward us. They have been led to entertain the belief that they might conquer the people of the South and render them again subservient to their interests and dominion. This has been the object of the struggle, utterly regardless of the principle of republican government and justice."

      Charleston Mercury, October 22, 1862

    7. Cotton Mills...
      ...represented 27% of the capital investment in the New England states and employed 21% of its workforce (Source: 1860 US Census).

      No wonder Gov. Andrew (MA) was urging Lincoln to "get the cotton out" of the Southern states.

  9. NOTE -- Sentence about Kay Patterson in my comment above should read: "Kay Patterson introduced legislation to remove the flag from the South Carolina capitol dome EVERY SESSION for TWENTY YEARS before he garnered enough support to finally get it taken down."

  10. kindredbloodiiMay 6, 2015 at 6:37 AM

    'the true understanding of what the confederacy fought for is coming to light"

    No Corey what it means is there are more people ignorant of the true cause of what the Confederacy fought for. Take you for example, you believe the Cornerstone and the Secession docs. are proof positive the war was about slavery even though there is overwhelming proof it was not.

  11. So George, how do you explain away the secession commissioners?

  12. Easy .they were there to work on secession not war.

  13. it is easy, they were dealing with secession not war.

  14. Levin:
    "During the civil rights [era] white Americans utilized [the Confederate flag] to resist civil rights. You can’t examine a civil rights march or other protest without seeing whites waving the flag."

    Correction- You can't see a movie or documentary "re-enacting" a civil rights event without seeing whites waving the flag.

    1. I do not know if Levin is dishonest or ignorant, or both Better put up those stars and stripes --

      one of my favorites, from Boston --

  15. Post not allowed at Levin's flog.

    "the author graciously offered to address our student body about Southern heritage during a Roundtable trip through New England in November 2015. It’s safe to say that this is not going to happen."

    Why not?
    Wouldn't it be part in fulfilling the Gann Academy mission?

    "Our diversity, pluralism and atmosphere of mutual respect are our strengths."

  16. I can well imagine that Levin would opposed to anyone exposing the truth to those Levin is indoctrinating. The darkness Levin spreads cannot withstand light.


Comments are welcome, but monitored.