Arguments Against Confederate
Symbols - And Why They Fail
Argument:
"Confederate symbols should not be tolerated because they represent
a government that fought a war to keep blacks in bondage and to preserve
the institution of slavery."
This
is one of the most commonly used arguments against Confederate symbolism
and on of the easiest to prove false. Everyone knows that the South
(and the North) had slavery until 1865. The north had slavery at least
until 1866, due to some holdouts like Union General Ulysses S. Grant
who refused to give up his slaves until the passage of the 13th Amendment.
Prior to 1866, slavery was completely legal. The Supreme Court had ruled
favorably on the legality and constitutionality of slavery. Presidents
Buchanan and Lincoln both promised many times, that they would not interfere
with the practice of slavery. New laws were recently put on the books
protecting slave owners from loss of slave property due to theft or
runaways. Add to that, the fact that the Confederate states constituted
the fifth wealthiest region in the world. The slave owning states had
all of these things and more. So why on earth would Southern states
secede from the United States? Surely, no one believes that the South
would have left the security of the Union and gone to fight a war for
something they already had! Countries do not fight wars for the things
they have, they fight wars to obtain the things they do not have.
To emphasize how safe the institution of slavery was, let's look at
what it would have taken to eliminate it. Since slavery was enshrined
in the U.S. Constitution, it would require a constitutional amendment
and that is very difficult to achieve. Two-thirds of the House and Senate
must agree to the amendment and then three-fourths of all the states
must vote to ratify the amendment before it can become part of the U.S.
Constitution. This simply would never have happened as long as the Southern
states stayed in the Union! That's right, with the South in the Union,
the northern and Southern slave states would have voted down any attempt
to amend the Constitution, thereby guaranteeing that the institution
of slavery could continue almost indefinitely. So you see, it is quite
easy to prove that the South did not secede and fight a war to maintain
slavery, an institution they already possessed.
What the South did not have was financial freedom. Southerners were
slaves to the industrial demands of the north, just as blacks were slaves
to the agricultural demands of the South. Growth potential was severely
limited in the South, so long as the north continued to levy heavy tariffs
on things that Southerners needed to purchase and heavy taxes on those
things that Southerners produced. In the words of South Carolina senator
John C. Calhoun in 1850, "The north has adopted a system of revenue
and disbursements, in which an undue proportion of the burden of taxation
has been imposed on the South, and an undue proportion of its proceeds
appropriated to the north ... The South as the great exporting portion
of the Union has, in reality, paid vastly more than her due proportion
of the revenue,"(76). Unfair taxation drove Americans to war with
Britain in 1775 and against each other in 1861.
History is
quite clear on this point.
Bibliography:
76.
John C. Calhoun, "Speech on the Slavery Question," March 4,
1850 in Edwin Rozweus., The Causes of the Civil War (Boston 1961), p.
4