"A Sea of BEAUTIFUL Confederate Flags.." Friends of Duggars

[IReallyAmHopewell]

theneelyteam.com/blog/

They write of Kendalled Konfederacy (not making that up) and write of "viewing the sea of beautiful Confederate flags" at a "Confederate Rally"...they refer to the Civil War as "the second war of independence" No joking.

[pomology]

http://theneelyteam [dot] com [slash] blog/

They write of Kendalled Konfederacy (not making that up) and write of "viewing the sea of beautiful Confederate flags" at a "Confederate Rally"...they refer to the Civil War as "the second war of independence" No joking.

Gross.

I don't expect they would actually know much about the Civil War...

[darkplumaged]

WOW.

Note that this get-together was with the Kendalls--Lise Morton's family (and noted teabaggers--I mean, tea partiers).

Note also that they "meditate[d] on all of the revivals that took place in the southern camps during the Second War for Independence." Yes, because a few people coming to Jesus TOTALLY makes up for the primary reason the war was being fought. Who cares about dumb ol' slavery? The South had JESUS on its side!

[IReallyAmHopewell]

don't expect they would actually know much about the Civil War...

Oh they know a lot--just much of it is made-up....it's so-called "Providential History" with God leading the way. Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson were both VERY Christian.

[JMarie]

Incredibly scary! Not only because everything's so rosy perfect and upbeat, but also that they like to blow things up! (scroll to the bottom)

http://theneelyteam.com/2012/01/27/if-w ... h-another/

[Rhetorica]

When I read that post today I immediately hopped over here to FJ to see if there was any commentary on it. What blew me away was that it was far more than a commemoration of history, but an all-out celebration of the Confederacy and what it stood for. And how does this square with the patriotism/nationalism for the U.S. which I'm assuming they also promote? This Yankee is scratching her head.

Maybe it is because they don't actually know much about the Civil War--that's a charitable explanation, but deplorable nonetheless.

(FWIW, school and work have kept me away from FJ for several months; it's fun to be back and enjoy the snark.)

[IReallyAmHopewell]

I've never heard of a "Confederate Rally" sounds like an Amway-style repackaging of the KKK to me..............maybe not, maybe it is just really misguided souls who see the need to worship something---even the title Kendalled Konfederacy just lacks the last K_______ (edited by me)

[Rhetorica]

I've never heard of a "Confederate Rally" sounds like an Amway-style repackaging of the KKK to me..............maybe not, maybe it is just really misguided souls who see the need to worship something---even the title Kendalled Konfederacy just lacks the last K_______ (edited by me)

*palm to forehead* I totally missed that until you pointed it out. Speechless.

[Terrie]

I've never heard of a "Confederate Rally" sounds like an Amway-style repackaging of the KKK to me..............maybe not, maybe it is just really misguided souls who see the need to worship something---even the title Kendalled Konfederacy just lacks the last K_______ (edited by me)

For the last K, I suggest "Klusterfuck."

[GeoBQn]

No good thing is without opposition. :-)

The Germans have a word, backpfeifengesicht, which means "a face badly in need of a fist." This blog is badly in need of a fist, or at least some well worded comments from people who aren't living in Konfederate La La Land.

"fought so others might go free."

REALLY?!?

[reds]

Who cares about dumb ol' slavery? The South had JESUS on its side!

Then didn't Jesus lose? Badly?

[darkplumaged]

Then didn't Jesus lose? Badly?

Only because he was PERSECUTED by teh ebil Union!!11!!!! And that's why the North is filled with godless liberals now!!1111!!!1

The Germans have a word, backpfeifengesicht, which means "a face badly in need of a fist."

That is awesome.

[debrand]

It was a perfect day for flag-flying (or hair-flying too, depending on who you are) and remembering the inspirational legacy that our Christian forefathers left behind. We praise the Lord for every minute that he gave us to cherish our southern heritage and meditate on all of the revivals that took place in the southern camps during the Second War for Independence

I've traced my maternal side of my family back to the 1600's when they arrived in PA as quakers. Later my branch migrated to NC in the 1700's. No doubt that they probably fought on the southern side. However, I see no pride in that heritage.

The southern side were the terrorists and traitors. There was nothing noble about their behavior. It doesn't matter if they were Christians or not. I supposed that this family would support another Stalin if he was the right sort of Christian.

[finleeport]

Are Confederate flags still in use in the South?

I thought the flag would be seen as racist, or is it part of the Southern Culture?

[YPestis]

I could accept some who consider the confederacy legacy part of their cultural heritage and sees the flag as symbolic of that. I cannot believe how anyone can ignore the slavery aspect of the Civil War. It wasn't just about states' rights or "a way of life". The issue of slavery was a major component of that era. There should be some acknowledgement that the war was fought, in part, so that one human being can be owned by another. There is nothing freedom inducing or capitalistic about maintaining the right to own slaves.

[darareaksmey]

I've traced my maternal side of my family back to the 1600's when they arrived in PA as quakers. Later my branch migrated to NC in the 1700's. No doubt that they probably fought on the southern side. However, I see no pride in that heritage.

The southern side were the terrorists and traitors. There was nothing noble about their behavior. It doesn't matter if they were Christians or not. I supposed that this family would support another Stalin if he was the right sort of Christian.

My maternal lineage has been in the south since the 1700s. We have looked and looked and traced and traced and there is no evidence either of my maternal grandparents' families fought with the confederacy. (Actually, the research was not that hard to do. My grandmother was born in 1885 and her husband in 1878.) Their families were poor, subsistence farmers. They lived a hand-to-mouth existence. They barely kept themselves alive and were most decidedly not slave owners. I'm just letting you know that it might be possible your family in NC did NOT fight against the Union. Just because they lived here doesn't mean they engaged with the rest, esp. if they were really super-backwoods like my family. I am prouder of them for being dumb, isolated hicks than I would ever be if they had actually fought on the side of the Confederacy.

[darareaksmey]

I could accept some who consider the confederacy legacy part of their cultural heritage and sees the flag as symbolic of that. I cannot believe how anyone can ignore the slavery aspect of the Civil War. It wasn't just about states' rights or "a way of life". The issue of slavery was a major component of that era. There should be some acknowledgement that the war was fought, in part, so that one human being can be owned by another. There is nothing freedom inducing or capitalistic about maintaining the right to own slaves.

Srsly. Yet if you talk to the Confederate apologists, they insist the war had to do with States' Rights, not slavery. They must think we're ignorant. The one States' Right that any one cared about was the rigth to permit the ownership of fellow human beings. I don't know why they don't see that argument as a classic eye-roller.

[Elle]

Incredibly scary! Not only because everything's so rosy perfect and upbeat, but also that they like to blow things up! (scroll to the bottom)

http://theneelyteam.com/2012/01/27/if-w ... h-another/

To be fair, blowing things up is a lot of fun if done safely. No one would say the Mythbusters people re fucked up for enjoying a good explosion. Of course safety is vital, and not blowing up stuff that isn't yours.

[Elle]

Srsly. Yet if you talk to the Confederate apologists, they insist the war had to do with States' Rights, not slavery. They must think we're ignorant. The one States' Right that any one cared about was the rigth to permit the ownership of fellow human beings. I don't know why they don't see that argument as a classic eye-roller.

Well, technically it was "States' RIghts." For the longest time, the decision about whether or not to allow slavery was an issue left to the states. During the war itself, states' rights had to be respected, which included sending escaped slaves back to their masters, even though the northern troops hated doing that.

Ah, but what about how slaves tried getting to northern troops so they'd be safe?

A general by the name of Benjamin Butler couldn't stomach returning some escaped slaves, terrified they'd be killed, back to their master. He defined the orders of Congress to return slaves, since at the time it was a state's rights issue and the war was partly an effort to turn that states' right into a human rights issue at the federal level, declaring them to be contraband as contraband was define to include that which may be used to fortify the enemy. Guns and ammo were contraband, and northern troops were ordered to confiscate those things. Well, since slaves could be used to fortify the lines, they were declared to be contraband, and this granted them relative freedom. That was a turning point in the war, and more slaves tried to escape, even during the battle. Northern troops weren't going to shoot slaves who ran during combat to them, white hankie waving. That severely wakened the south's forces.

Modern southern sympathizers conveniently call it a states' rights issue as a nice way of ignoring the slavery going on, while everyone else realizes it for what it was, an attempt at ignoring rights by calling it a nicer name. "They wanted our rights!" Yeah, how about not. The north wanted the black people to have the right to not be owned like a pig or cow.

Sure, plenty of people are pissed that blacks didn't have the same rights as whites right off the bat and that there was still a lot of segregation, but the unfortunate truth is too much all at once would have been bad. It was horrible enough with the KKK doing what they did because they couldn't OWN slaves. Change had to happen slowly to basically not "shock the system" too much. Last thing that was needed was another war between people pissed off that whites and blacks had the same rights. It was a major enough change for people to accept not being able to own slaves. Please don't take this as me being in favor of different rights. I'm not. I just can see human nature as flawed, and a lot of people wouldn't have stood for equal rights, at least not right away right out of coming from slaves being property.

Edit to add: Some sources say Butler didn't care about slaves and was only trying to consider his best advantage since he was an attorney. Regardless, since we'll never know (of course the north would want to make him look nice while the south would want to make him out to be a heartless bastard), what matters is he figured out how to keep them safe.

[freealljs]

Perhaps they are watching too much "Gone with the Wind" and not enough "Roots".

I live in the South. Some of my friends participate in Civil War re-enactment battles (full set uniforms and all), but I can easily say that they would never want to have slavery legalized again. These people make me very uncomfortable, because they use religion (erroneously) to promote a way of life (pre-Civil War times) that never was perfect. They probably really want life to go back to that time.

[justlurking]

I could accept some who consider the confederacy legacy part of their cultural heritage and sees the flag as symbolic of that. I cannot believe how anyone can ignore the slavery aspect of the Civil War. It wasn't just about states' rights or "a way of life". The issue of slavery was a major component of that era. There should be some acknowledgement that the war was fought, in part, so that one human being can be owned by another. There is nothing freedom inducing or capitalistic about maintaining the right to own slaves.

Yup, bout the same as someone of German descent who considers the swaztika as a symbolic part of their cultural heritage...but would we be as "accepting" of them if they choose to wave that flag or proudly display pictures of their "great leaders" of the time?

[kb2]

I actually know for sure that I have an ancestor who fought for the losing side in the Civil War. A family member has his Amnesty Oath framed and displayed.

We also have a Confederate flag that was actually constructed in the 1860s. It is in a drawer somewhere.

It's not something the family is proud of, more like an interesting historical tidbit we learned when the family genealogy was researched. Going further back, other ancestors appeared to be on the wrong side of the American Revolution as well. We treat it like Forrest Gump treated his name: to remember we can all make stupid decisions sometimes.

I don't, don't, don't understand why people distort Civil War history so badly.

[desertvixen]

I've been noticing the following bumper sticker around here a lot (Arizona, but an Army base so people from all over): "Don't blame us, we voted for Jeff Davis!".

It's usually paired with a Sons of Confederate Veterans sticker.

[FloraDoraDolly]

This Confederate nostalgia makes no sense to me. Do these people want to be Americans or not? No one in my family is from the South, so forgive me for not understanding any of this.

[pomology]

Then didn't Jesus lose? Badly?

Well, Stephen Colbert's explanation in "I Am America (And So Can You!)" is that at some point God became synonymous with America and therefore fought on both sides of the Civil War and so definitely won the war. And of course by God SC meant Jesus.