[[[  I'm Southern born and Southern bred and when I die I will be Southern
dead.  ]]

December 20, 2013

*Erasing Southern History: The Bonfire of the Portraits*

*By* *Fay Voshell* <http://www.americanthinker.com/fay_voshell/>

When traveling recently to Virginia Beach, I couldn't help but notice that
I was no longer in Yankee land.  I was in an entirely different world, one
still significantly defined by the Civil War.

I passed street after street named after famous southern generals --
General Jackson Drive, General Lee Drive, General Beauregard Drive, and
General Hill Drive.  Though he was a "general" of a different sort, even
General Booth, founder of the Salvation Army, has a boulevard named after
him.

It was clear to me that Southerners revere their generals.

And for good reason.

The South's generals have long been a part of the proud history of the
region.  Robert E. Lee's and Stonewall Jackson's military strategies are
considered some of the most brilliant in the history of warfare, and this
is to say nothing of their exemplary characters.  They are honored to this
day for their bravery and brilliance.  That is why their portraits are on
the walls of the U.S. Army War College, which is dedicated to the training
of future generals, some of whom may one day show that they, too, have
absorbed a code of honor and chivalry.

But according to the *Washington Times
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/17/robert-e-lee-and-stonewall-jackson-tributes-face-a/#disqus_thread>*,
revisionists are mulling over a decision to remove Lee's and Jackson's
portraits from the walls of the War College, lest that august institution
be sullied by the memory of generals who fought on the wrong side.

The article reports that the College's spokeswoman, Carol Kerr, stated
there was someone who complained about the portraits.  "This person was
struck by the fact we have quite a few Confederate images," she said,
adding that the portraits were re-hung on a third-floor hallway.
"[Lee<http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/robert-e-lee/>]
was certainly not good for the nation. This is the guy we faced on the
battlefield whose entire purpose in life was to destroy the nation as it
was then conceived[.] ... This is all part of an informed discussion."

How "informed" the discussion will be is anyone's guess.  Historians of the
Civil War will be mightily interested in the outcome of "Portrait-gate," as
expunging of the South's greatest generals from the historical narrative
might change the overall story a smidgen.

The portraits may or may not be in the third-floor hallway now.  They will
probably progress to the basement later, and then at the last be thrown
into a bonfire.

I am reminded of the actions of Thutmose III and Akhnaten of Egypt, both of
whom assiduously devoted themselves to having Queen Hatshepsut's images
chiseled off monuments dedicated to her so no one would remember her.  The
pharaohs are a reminder that historical revisionism is nothing
new.  Certainly, if similar "off the wall" action is applied to the
Southern generals, it will appear to future cadets that the only worthy
military heroes of the Civil War have been from the victorious Northern
States.  Other "losers" like Hannibal, Hector, Napoleon, Rommel, and Von
Manstein -- all of whom fought well but ultimately lost -- may also be
nixed from the list of study-worthy generals, their place consigned to the
dustbin of history.

While the fate of the portraits is still under discussion, one can draw a
few conclusions and hazard some predictions should the offending visages be
permanently obliterated from the walls of the War College and other
military institutions such as West Point.

First, the left's smoldering animus toward the South will once again be
revealed.  For many progressives, the South is still a bastion of
racism.  The institution of slavery and the guilt associated with it never
have been and never will be expunged as far as progressives are
concerned.  Attaching the guilt of slavery to the South still provides a
handy and frequently used political tool.  Progressives are loath to have
that tool taken out of their hands, as it reinforces their punitive
attitude toward the region and conservatives in general.  Removal of the
portraits doubtless is seen as just retribution for the sins of the past.

Second, progressives love divisiveness and conflict, as it splinters the
opposition and provides political capital.  Stoking the fires of the old
Civil War and lighting a match to a new civil war probably is seen as a
positive development.  After all, turning Americans against one another
provides a chance for progressives to divide and conquer, as well as to
effect "fundamental transformation."

Third, the question of just what happens to the history of the Civil War if
a revisionist trend becomes established protocol for writing history must
be asked.  Are we soon to see Matthew Brady's and other great Civil War
photographers<http://listverse.com/2008/11/18/top-20-great-us-civil-war-photographs/>'
work PhotoShopped, the faces of the offending Southern generals
erased?  Will revisionist history take on the flavor of the Stalinist
regime, which forbade any portraits or photos other than those of the
victorious?  Will Southern history go down a memory hole?

God forbid.

But perhaps there is a bright side to Portrait-gate.  Poking the South in
the eye may backfire.  The insult to the South's military leaders may be
one of many ways to stimulate a Southern stampede to the right.

Many Southerners are sick to death of the left's condescending
stereotypes.  They are tired of being despised for their devotion to
religion; tired of contemptuous dismissal of their view of the history of
the Confederacy; tired of being categorized as still being in the
backwoods, both culturally and socially; tired of being thought of as
ignorant rednecks descended from regressive stock.

The seemingly insignificant but hubristic takedown of Lee's and Jackson's
portraits may be a symbolic indication that Democrats in Virginia could
themselves be in danger of a takedown.

Certainly it would be pleasant to think of the prospect that Virginia,
which has been slowly turning purple due to strangulation by progressives,
might once again become bright red with rage.

The conservative South may yet rise again.

*Fay Voshell is a frequent contributor to **American Thinker.  She may be
reached at [email protected] <[email protected]>.*


*Page Printed from:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2013/12/erasing_southern_history_the_bonfire_of_the_portraits.html
<http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2013/12/erasing_southern_history_the_bonfire_of_the_portraits.html>*at
December 20, 2013 - 09:43:32 AM CST


__._,_.___





__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to