"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery--the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin."
--the entire second paragraph of Mississippi's declaration of secession
--------------------
We had an unreconstructed history professor--who has long since passed away from old age--who told his class every time his left foot hit the ground that the Civil War wasn't caused by slavery. Some of the students even believed him.
Of course, he quoted Dr. Such-and-Such at the college of Such-and-Such in his book published by Such-and-Such. And quoted the speech given in 1923 by another professor. It's become something of an echo chamber as these distinguished gentlemen quote each other in their books and speeches. A careful researcher could probably footnote 100 opinions about how slavery had little to do with The War. Certainly you can find the same echos among the flat-earthers. It doesn't make any of them right.
If you want to find the reason for the United States Civil War, go to the source. It's easy enough to find all the secession declarations, either at your local library or, these days, through Google. The folks who voted to leave the federal Union in early 1861 told everybody why. If you can read and comprehend the English language, the cause of the Civil War is made simple: slavery, slavery and slavery.
Texas' delegation didn't refer to the northern states and the southern states, but to slave-holding states and non-slave-holding states. From South Carolina's secession order: "[A]n increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution . . . ." Georgia was even more blunt. But nobody beat Mississippi for putting it plainly. Back then, slavery was as American as apple pie, motherhood and violence.
Certainly there were some honorable men who fought for the Confederacy. There are statues of them all over the landscape. Highways and colleges are named after them. Back when these United States was a plural noun, they fought for their country--whether that country was Virginia or Arkansas or Louisiana. And they should be remembered.
But no thinking American wants the late and unlamented Confederacy back. It was a government put together for one purpose. And that purpose wasn't disguised. Even among those who hold special regard for the Lees and Jacksons and their military prowess, does anybody think the civilians who caused the national split--the Jefferson Davises, the Alexander Stephenses, the Judah Benjamins--deserve celebration?
But it seems The War never goes away. Especially in these latitudes.
There is a bill before the General Assembly that would make a change in the law as pertains to the state flag of Arkansas. Back in 1924, when the Klan was still big in Arkansas, our grandfathers in the Ledge added a star commemorating the Confederacy. Nearly a century later, House Bill 1487 by Rep. Charles Blake would remove that commemoration, and instead categorize that particular star as representing the native tribes of Indians that held most of Arkansas at one time. NB: No new flags would have to be issued. Just a few lines in the law books would change.
There is opposition to HB 1487. As you knew there would be.
The usual suspects were trotted out at a recent hearing to talk about the War of Southern Independence and Our Shared History and their own relatives who died fighting for the South. They all but said the Ledge should just wait a cotton-pickin' minute. And warned how we'd all tumble down the slippery slope if we didn't celebrate that defensive, victorious and idiotic decision to fire upon Fort Sumter.
After the Ledge balked, which was no surprise, the governor was heard from, which was a slight surprise. Wouldn't it have been easier just to tiptoe quietly by and allow the Ledge to handle this--one way or the other? After all, they started it. Gov. Asa Hutchinson didn't ask for this minor controversy in the middle of such an important legislative session. The governor had much more important issues to deal with. And still does.
And yet.
Earlier this week Asa Hutchinson came out in favor of the bill, and of setting matters right.
Some people might call it leadership. Some people might call it statesmanship. We call it another example of Asa Hutchinson doing the right thing, damn the consequences.
What is history, if not the way the present comes to terms with its past? It's important to make our own peace with who we were as a people. Wars might inspire myths, especially among the defeated, but none is more mythical than confusing the former Confederacy with Camelot. And the more times a myth is repeated without being challenged, the more widespread it grows. Until college professors are talking nonsense, too.
Pass HB 1487. The government of the Confederacy administered Arkansas for a handful of years in the 1860s, but that's nothing to be proud of.
Editorial on 03/07/2019