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
