Why they Hate the Confederate Flag
By
James Scott Trimm
I want to reveal to you the real
reason that there is such an effort to ban the Confederate battle flag, destroy
or remove confederate monuments, and generally demonize the Old South.
The War of Norther Aggression (which
some call the Civil War) was not about slavery (See my previous blog on this). In the
popular movie The Matrix, Neo was offered two pills, take the red pill, and
have reality revealed, or take the blue pill and remain in blissful
ignorance. I offer you the same choice. Stop reading now, and remain in ignorant
bliss, or continue reading the documented facts, and be awakened to what the Confederacy
actually stood for, what was lost, and how our nation’s troubles today can be
tied to that loss.
Last Chance, think carefully
before you continue….
OK to begin with, to understand the
cause of this horrible war, we must understand what divided the two sides. The reality is that this war grew out of fundamental
differences between the two major parties, which had grown more and more
divergent.
This was, in essence, a war
between the underlying philosophies of the Democratic Party of the time, and
the fledgling Republican party, which was the new successor to the Whig Party. We must not confuse these two parties of the
mid 19th century, with the parties that bear their names today. Because
while there is a line of succession, these parties today bear no resemblance to
their predecessors. This is why Ronald Reagan
said, he didn’t leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left him.
To understand what motivated these
two sides, we are going to look at their 1856 and 1860 party platforms, and at
the Constitution of the Confederate States of America. We are going back to the 1856 platforms,
because in their 1860 platform, the Democrats said:
That we, the Democracy of the
Union in Convention assembled, hereby declare our affirmance of the resolutions
unanimously adopted and declared as a platform of principles by the Democratic
Convention at Cincinnati, in the year 1856, believing that Democratic
principles are unchangeable in their nature, when applied to the same subject
matters;
IN 1860 they added only a few additional
resolutions. The 1856 Platform, the Democrats
of the time, articulated what they called “the distinctive feature” of their “political
creed” as follows:
Resolved, That we regard this
as a distinctive feature of our political creed, which we are proud to maintain
before the world, as the great moral element in a form of government springing
from and upheld by the popular will; and we contrast it with the creed and
practice of Federalism, under whatever name or form, which seeks to palsy
the will of the constituent, and which conceives no imposture too monstrous for
the popular credulity.
Here these Antebellum Democrats, define
themselves as anti-Federalists, and their Republican opposition as “Federalists”. (some misuse the term “federalist” today, see my blog Civil War Monuments and The War of Northern Aggression.)
These Proto-Confederate Democrats
expressed their concern with rising federal tyranny saying:
That the Federal Government is
one of limited power, derived solely from the Constitution; and the grants of
power made therein ought to be strictly construed by all the departments and
agents of the government; and that it is inexpedient and dangerous to exercise
doubtful constitutional powers.
Federal Spending
Federal tyranny was becoming a serious
problem. The Norther states were more populous
than the Southern states, and while the Southern states were primarily agricultural,
the Northern states were industrializing, building factories and manufacturing
products. The Northern states had an
advantage in Congress, and now that their needs were differing from the South,
they were learning a new trick. Create
taxes that largely impacted the South, but spend the money to make infrastructure
improvements in the north. (Between
1824 and 1828 alone, two and a third million dollars
had been voted by Congress for this purpose.)
This was a redistribution of
wealth from the Southern States to the Norther States. In effect, the Southern States were paying
tribute to the Northern States. It was
also crony capitalism and corporate welfare, in that the Federal Government was
favoring one type of industry (manufacturing) over another (agriculture),
picking the winners and losers, and supplying the needs of one, at the detriment
to the other.
The Republican platform of 1860
supported this Federal spending, saying (with almost identical words to their
1856 platform):
That appropriations by Congress
for river and harbor improvements of a national character, required for the
accommodation and security of an existing commerce, are authorized by the
Constitution, and justified by the obligation of Government to protect the
lives and property of its citizens.
This is exactly what was being
addressed by the 1856/1860 Democratic Party Platform:
2. That the Constitution does
not confer upon the General Government the power to commence and carry on a
general system of internal improvements.
3. That the Constitution does
not confer authority upon the Federal Government, directly or indirectly, to
assume the debts of the several States, contracted for local and internal
improvements, or other State purposes; nor would such assumption be just or
expedient.
4. That justice and sound
policy forbid the Federal Government to foster one branch of industry to the
detriment of any other, or to cherish the interests of one portion to the
injury of another portion of our common country; that every citizen and every
section of the country has a right to demand and insist upon an equality of
rights and privileges, and to complete and ample protection of persons and
property from domestic violence or foreign aggression.
And describing itself later as:
…as the party of the Union, to
uphold and maintain the rights of every State, and thereby the Union of the
States; and to sustain and advance among us constitutional liberty, by
continuing to resist all monopolies and exclusive legislation for the benefit
of the few, at the expense of the many, and by a vigilant and constant
adherence to those principles and compromises of the Constitution,…
This was codified in the
Constitution of the Confederate States of America as follows (Article 1, section
8, item 3:
To regulate commerce with
foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes; but
neither this, nor any other clause contained in the Constitution, shall ever be
construed to delegate the power to Congress to appropriate money for any
internal improvement intended to facilitate commerce; except for the purpose of
furnishing lights, beacons, and buoys, and other aids to navigation upon the
coasts, and the improvement of harbors and the removing of obstructions in
river navigation; in all which cases such duties shall be laid on the
navigation facilitated thereby as may be necessary to pay the costs and
expenses thereof.
A Lean, Balanced Federal Budget
In fact, the Democrats wanted a
lean, balanced Federal budget, as their platform went on to say:
5. That it is the duty of every
branch of the Government to enforce and practice the most rigid economy in
conducting our public affairs, and that no more revenue ought to be raised than
is required to defray the necessary expenses of the Government, and for the
gradual but certain extinction of the public debt.
6. That the proceeds of the
public lands ought to be sacredly applied to the national objects specified in
the Constitution; and that we are opposed to any law for the distribution of
such proceeds among the States, as alike inexpedient in policy and repugnant to
the Constitution.
In fact, the Confederate
Constitution (Art. 1, Sec. 9, items 9-10) would restrict Federal spending:
(9) Congress shall appropriate
no money from the Treasury except by a vote of two-thirds of both Houses, taken
by yeas and nays, unless it be asked and estimated for by some one of the heads
of departments and submitted to Congress by the President; or for the purpose
of paying its own expenses and contingencies; or for the payment of claims
against the Confederate States, the justice of which shall have been judicially
declared by a tribunal for the investigation of claims against the Government,
which it is hereby made the duty of Congress to establish.
(10) All bills appropriating
money shall specify in Federal currency the exact amount of each appropriation
and the purposes for which it is made; and Congress shall grant no extra
compensation to any public contractor, officer, agent, or servant, after such
contract shall have been made or such service rendered.
Free Trade
As the Norther States were
industrializing, they wanted to force the Southern States to buy Northern goods. However, the South had a long standing system
of trade with Europe. Ships from the
South would leave loaded with cotton and tobacco, and return filled with
manufactured products from Europe. This
system worked well for the South because it meant that the ships would be
filled on both coming and going trips, rather than returning empty (doubling
the expenses), and it was cheaper to move things over water than to move goods
over land. Having the advantage in
Congress, the North passed heavy tariffs on imports from Europe (Lincoln even
raised them to 50%!). In an effort to force Southerners to buy more expensive Northern
products.
The Republican Platform of 1860
supported these heavy tariffs:
That, while providing revenue
for the support of the general government by duties upon imports, sound policy requires
such an adjustment of these imports as to encourage the development of the
industrial interests of the whole country; and we commend that policy of
national exchanges, which secures to the workingmen liberal wages, to
agriculture remunerative prices, to mechanics and manufacturers an adequate
reward for their skill, labor, and enterprise, and to the nation commercial
prosperity and independence.
While the 1856/1860 Democratic
platform called for free trade:
Resolved, That there are
questions connected with the foreign policy of this country, which are inferior
to no domestic question whatever. The time has come for the people of the
United States to declare themselves in favor of free seas and progressive free
trade throughout the world, and, by solemn manifestations, to place their moral
influence at the side of their successful example.
Federal Judicial Activism
The Confederates also saw the
coming danger of lifetime Federal judges as judicial activists, perpetuating
Federal tyranny. They wrote into the
Constitution of the Confederate States of America (Article 1 section 5):
The House of Representatives
shall choose their Speaker and other officers; and shall have the sole power of
impeachment; except that any judicial or other Federal officer, resident and
acting solely within the limits of any State, may be impeached by a vote of
two-thirds of both branches of the Legislature thereof.
Allowing states to impeach bad
Federal judges.
Line Item Veto
In order to restrain Congress, the
Confederate States of America, gave their president a line item veto power
(Article 1 Sec. 7, item 2):
(2) Every bill which shall have
passed both Houses, shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the
President of the Confederate States; if he approve, he shall sign it; but if
not, he shall return it, with his objections, to that House in which it shall have
originated, who shall enter the objections at large on their journal, and
proceed to reconsider it. If, after such reconsideration, two-thirds of that
House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the
objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and
if approved by two-thirds of that House, it shall become a law. But in all such
cases, the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the
names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the
journal of each House respective}y. If any bill shall not be returned by the
President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented
to him, the same shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless
the Congress, by their adjournment, prevent its return; in which case it shall
not be a law. The President may approve any appropriation and disapprove any
other appropriation in the same bill. In such case he shall, in signing the
bill, designate the appropriations disapproved; and shall return a copy of such
appropriations, with his objections, to the House in which the bill shall have
originated; and the same proceedings shall then be had as in case of other
bills disapproved by the President.
No Piggy Back Legislation:
The Confederate Constitution also
prohibited so-called “piggy back” legislation, where riders are attached to unrelated
bills, often used to slip “pork” into important bills that need to be passed. The Confederate Constitution read (Art. 1,
Sec 9, Item 20):
(20) Every law, or resolution
having the force of law, shall relate to but one subject, and that shall be
expressed in the title.
General Welfare
The Confederates also saw the
dangerous Federal abuses of the “general welfare” clause in the US Constitution,
which reads:
The Congress shall have Power
To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and
provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;
but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States
They removed this phrase from the parallel
portion of the Confederate States Constitution (Article 1 Section 8; item 1):
(I) To lay and collect taxes,
duties, imposts, and excises for revenue, necessary to pay the debts, provide
for the common defense, and carry on the Government of the Confederate States;
but no bounties shall be granted from the Treasury; nor shall any duties or
taxes on importations from foreign nations be laid to promote or foster any
branch of industry; and all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform
throughout the Confederate States.
Resistance to a Federal Reserve
System
The Democrats also opposed the
Federalist dream of restoring Federalist Alexander Hamilton’s dream of a “national
bank” chartered by the Federal Government:
7. That Congress has no power
to charter a national bank; that we believe such an institution one of deadly
hostility to the best interests of the country, dangerous to our republican
institutions and the liberties of the people, and calculated to place the
business of the country within the control of a concentrated money power, and
above the laws and the will of the people; and that the results of Democratic
legislation in this and all other financial measures upon which issues have
been made between the two political parties of the country, have demonstrated
to candid and practical men of all parties, their soundness, safety, and
utility, in all business pursuits.
8. That the separation of the
moneys of the Government from banking institutions is indispensable for the
safety of the funds of the Government and the rights of the people.
9. That we are decidedly
opposed to taking from the President the qualified veto power, by which he is
enabled, under restrictions and responsibilities amply sufficient to guard the
public interests, to suspend the passage of a bill whose merits cannot secure
the approval of two-thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, until
the judgment of the people can be obtained thereon, and which has saved the
American people from the corrupt and tyrannical domination of the Bank of the
United States, and from a corrupting system of general internal improvements.
A popular meme that has circulated
accrediting Lincoln with opposing the Federal Reserve, is false. In fact the Lincolnites supported the idea,
and their opponents, the 1856/1860 Democrats, were the ones who opposed creating
such a bank.
Amendments Only From States
The constitution of the
Confederate States of America stripped the Federal Government (congress) of the
power to originate amendments to the Constitution, instead, amendments could
only originate from an Article V Convention of the States (which only three states
were needed to call) )Article 5, Section 1, Item 1):
Section I. (I) Upon the demand
of any three States, legally assembled in their several conventions, the
Congress shall summon a convention of all the States, to take into
consideration such amendments to the Constitution as the said States shall concur
in suggesting at the time when the said demand is made; and should any of the
proposed amendments to the Constitution be agreed on by the said convention,
voting by States, and the same be ratified by the Legislatures of two- thirds
of the several States, or by conventions in two-thirds thereof, as the one or
the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the general convention, they
shall thenceforward form a part of this Constitution. But no State shall,
without its consent, be deprived of its equal representation in the Senate.
How to End Slavery
Finally I must address the slavery
question. By the mid 19th Century,
slavery had become an anachronism. The
real question at the time, for the vast majority, was not if slavery should
end, but how it should end. The
abolitionists wanted to free the slaves instantly. The incrementalists said that while that
sounded nice, it was problematic and unfair to the slaves themselves, to simply
kick them to the curb with no education, and with no property, short of the
shirt on their backs. In the south,
nearly 25% of the population, were slaves.
Suddenly creating a massive homeless population with no education, would
have been an economic disaster, especially for the freed slaves. Several plans were being discussed in the state
legislatures of the slave states, on a viable exit strategy. Many of these proposals involved educating
the slaves, teaching them trades and granting them lands, either at state
taxpayer expense, or at their owner’s expense.
The concern of Southern states, was that rather than the states resolving
this anachronism on their own, the Federal government, steered by the
abolitionists, would simply kick them to the curb, with no responsibility from
their owners, creating a massive homeless population, government dependency,
and crime from wandering marauders with no other means to survive.
In fact the Confederate
Constitution (Article 1, Section 9, Item 1) prohibited the import of new slaves
while the problem was resolved by the states:
(I) The importation of negroes
of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States
or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and
Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same.
What was Lost
In his book The Story of the
Confederacy, Robert Selph Henry put it well when he wrote:
With its failure the United
States of America that we know was born. The South, the Northern Republicans
said, rebelled. To crush the “rebellion”
the North wrought a revolution. The old
union of states federated together for specific and limited purposes died, to
be succeeded by a new nation in which the states, North and South alike, have
contentedly sunk from the sovereignty they so jealously maintained in 1787 to
become little more than convenient administrative subdivisions of government.
(The Story of the Confederacy;
Robert Selph Henry 1931; p. 11)
The Confederates were not fighting
to preserve slavery. They were fighting for
State’s rights. They were fighting
against Federal tyranny. They were fighting
against unfair and unrestrained federal spending, against crony capitalism,
against corporate welfare. They were
fighting for free trade. They were
fighting against judicial activism. They
were fighting for a balanced budget provision, a line item veto and against
piggy back legislation. They were
fighting against federal abuse of the general welfare clause and they were
fighting against a Federal Reserve System.
They lost.
As a result of their loss, we now
have an out of control Federal government, unrestrained spending, no balanced budget,
crony capitalism, corporate welfare, no free trade, judicial activism by life
term dictators in black robes, piggy back legislation packed into unrelated
bills, federal abuse of the welfare clause and, though it took a few years,
even a Federal Reserve Banking system!
This is why I am a Reagan
Republican, not a Lincoln Republican.
This is why we should have Reagan Dinners not Lincoln Dinners.
This is why the South was
demonized after the War no Northern Aggression, while Lincoln was virtually deified.
Most importantly, this is why there
is an effort, now more than ever, to demonize the Old South, the ban the
Confederate battle flag and destroy monuments erected to the brave men who
fought for the South in the War of Northern Aggression.
Of course the Confederate Battle
Flag does not represent racism. Now you
know what it does represent, and why “they” must defame an ban it!
Now you know why I say that the
Confederate Battle flag represents, not only Southern Heritage, but freedom
from Federal tyranny!
See also my blog Civil War Monuments and The War of Northern Aggression
