Celebrating Secession
Printer-friendly version
by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
Frederick Douglass and other abolitionists welcomed the Civil War, and John Brown gave his life attempting to kindle the armed conflict as the only route to freedom for the slave. Rather than denounce the very idea of celebrating the 150th anniversary of arguably the only “good” war the United States ever fought, African Americans should be planning their own festivities. “It was not just Lincoln’s determination to preserve the Union that defeated the South, but the determination of black Americans to bring about their own liberation.”
Celebrating Secession
by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
“If there had been no secession, no civil war, and no confederate defeat, there would have been no end of slavery in 1865.”
On December 20, 1860, South Carolina became the first of the southern states to secede from the United States. While no shots were fired until April 1861, again by South Carolina, the Civil War began when that first state left the union. This seminal event in the history of the United States will be endlessly studied and debated as sesquicentennial events are commemorated, and there is no better time for black America to begin discussing how to participate in a meaningful way.
Predictably, white southerners are celebrating the anniversary of the war, despite the fact that their beloved ancestors were soundly defeated. In South Carolina, the Sons of Confederate Veterans will hold a secession ball on December 20th in honor of “states rights” and “southern heritage.” The claim that chattel slavery, the very foundation of the southern political and economic system, played no role in secession is quite bizarre. South Carolina’s declaration of secession makes it clear that upholding the rights of the slave-holding states was the primary motivation in forming the Confederacy.
While white Americans debate the role of slavery in the march towards the Civil War, black Americans are largely silent. Our voices are only heard in reaction to the Sons of the Confederate Veterans and their ilk. The South Carolina NAACP has rightly spoken out in protest of the anniversary celebration but protest alone doesn’t offer a means for black Americans to communicate in a way that makes sense of the past or its influence on the present.
“Free and enslaved black Americans themselves took actions which hastened the end of the peculiar institution, and they must be seen as active, not passive players in these events.”
The secession so vigorously celebrated by neo-Confederates ought to be celebrated by black Americans more than anyone else. Slavery in this country ended precisely because the slave holding powers were decisively defeated on the battlefield. Not only is that true, but free and enslaved black Americans themselves took actions which hastened the end of the peculiar institution, and they must be seen as active, not passive players in these events.
For more than one hundred years, black people thought of Abraham Lincoln as the Great Emancipator, the president who hated slavery and loved the slave. His death at the hands of a pro-Confederate assassin sealed his image as a martyr, and the mythology of the saintly president was commonly accepted.
It is all to the good that this tall tale was revealed to be just that. Lincoln’s openly expressed racism and plans to colonize the black population to some distant shore ought to be more widely known. Lincoln held this view even after two years of war, and he was aptly labeled a “first rate, second rate man” by one of his detractors.
The inability of the North to quickly defeat the South and the refusal of white northerners to accept that they were fighting an anti-slavery war forced Lincoln’s hand. Every enslaved person who escaped to Union lines put another nail in the Confederacy’s coffin. The Emancipation Proclamation was an act of necessity and expediency, not love and nobility. Lincoln signed the Proclamation and permitted black soldiers to fight because the actions of black people made these the only viable solutions. It was not just Lincoln’s determination to preserve the Union that defeated the South, but the determination of black Americans to bring about their own liberation.
“The Emancipation Proclamation was an act of necessity and expediency, not love and nobility.”
The ability to balance the knowledge of Lincoln’s reluctance to make the Civil War a war against slavery and the outcome of the war bringing about liberation, is apparently still difficult for many to master. As a result, only the white supremacists have given themselves a voice in recalling this history.
Black Americans should be actively and forcefully proclaiming their own celebrations this year. If there had been no secession, no civil war, and no confederate defeat, there would have been no end of slavery in 1865. Absent war, slavery in America may have lasted until the 20th century.
Black America must claim its own history and not leave the telling of it to unrepentant neo-Confederates. There is still great reluctance to acknowledge that a four-year-long and very bloody war was the only way to end a two hundred year horror. Yet if there ever was a good war fought by Americans, the Civil War fits the bill and black Americans should be the first to say so.
Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well as at http://freedomrider.blogspot.com. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgandaReport.com.
- Margaret Kimberley's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Email this page- Printer-friendly version
Comments
Abraham Lincoln
Sorry for the double posts below. I disagree about Abraham Lincoln. While Lincoln was not a saint, he was a great man who played an important role in preserving the union and helping to abolish slaveyr. Lincoln did hate slavery and said so on several different occasions before and during his presidency, but he thought that the constitution did not allow the government to interfere with it except as part of the Presidents war powers during the Civil War.
While Lincoln made racist statements at various points in time, his views evolved. He was friends with Frederick Douglass and Douglass said that he was impressed with Lincolns lack of color prejudice. Near the end of Lincolns life, he made statements of support for black citizenship and voting rights. Lincoln mainly delayed emancipation because he didn't want to lose the support of the the border states and the many Norther Whites who opposed abolisionism. The Emancipation Proclamation was both an act of political necessity and an act of nobility.
James Loewen has some good information on Lincoln and the evolution of his views on race in his books Lies My Teacher Told Me and Lies Across America.
Celebrate Secession
The Civil War was fought between the manufacturing, pro-tariff protectionist North and the free trader, anti-tariff agrarian South.
Popular culture portrays it as a war over slavery. Read Lincoln's Inaugural Address of 1861. The fight against the failure of the South to enforce protectionist tariffs is the only fight promised by Lincoln.
Lincoln's resolution of the slavery issue only came into play when his heavy handed efforts to enforce central government expansion in violation of state sovereignty were not yet decisive. Lerone Bennett makes this argument convincingly.
Thanks to the strong central government and the conversion of the United States from a voluntary association to a coercive association, states such as California are restricted in how clean they can keep their air by federal regulations; all states are restricted in their attempts to enact single payer health care by ERISA, another federal regulation.
To those who celebrate the power of the central government and credit it with civil rights legislation, remember it was the Supreme Court that decided, and the central government that enforced the Dred Scott decision and it was Chief Justice Taney that declared a black man had no rights a white man was bound to honor. What the law gives, the law can take away. Individual rights will always depend upon individual struggle.
The indivisibility of the Union has been sold as moral war on slavery, while making the individual states slaves to the central government's bankrupting wars for empire.
The 14th Amendment, again sold under the moral cover of equality for citizens, especially the new black citizens of that era, has given us corporations as "persons".
Is the Federal government capable of committing a moral act for that act's own sake, without covertly seeking a further devious exploitative advantage?
14th Amendment
In his First Inaugural Address Lincoln also, mentions holding federal forts and other properties in the seceded states, continue the mails and perpetuate the union. Lincoln also said in his address that the only major dispute between the sections was over slavery and that one section thought that slavery was right and should be extended and the other thought that slavery was wrong and should not be extended.
Individual and collective struggles forced the creation of civil rights legislation and the environmental legislation such as the clean air requirements in California. The fact that the Fourteenth Amendment was later perverted does not make it any less of a Progressive victory, and an advance for the freed slaves. Civil Rights for blacks was the goal of the framers of the 14th amendment not a “cover.” It was framed by Abolitionists and proponents of civil rights for blacks and opposed by former Confederates.
14th Amendment
In his First Inaugural Address Lincoln also, mentions holding federal forts and other properties in the seceded states, continue the mails and perpetuate the union. Lincoln also said in his address that the only major dispute between the sections was over slavery and that one section thought that slavery was right and should be extended and the other thought that slavery was wrong and should not be extended.
Individual and collective struggles forced the creation of civil rights legislation and the environmental legislation such as the clean air requirements in California. The fact that the Fourteenth Amendment was later perverted does not make it any less of a Progressive victory, and an advance for the freed slaves. Civil Rights for blacks was the goal of the framers of the 14th amendment not a “cover.” It was framed by Abolitionists and proponents of civil rights for blacks and opposed by former Confederates.
I posted similar thoughts on another post . ..
http://blackagendareport.com/?q=content/freedom-rider-slavery-denial-old-virginny#comment-15543
Slavery was not the primary,
Slavery was not the primary, or even secondary, cause of the Civil War. It played the part that it did in it only after the War was already well underway and Lincoln needed an edge.
While at the time of the start of the war there was an emancipation movement, it was not that strong but was gaining steam. However, there were no communities in the North that wants the freed Blacks in their area.
Even General Grant has stated that, if he thought for one second that the war was over slavery, he'd have resigned his post and gone to the South.
While the South used slaves for labor, it was the Northern states who were the active slave traders and they did not want to see their business go "belly up" either.
Let's face it, right or wrong, racism is a human trait. It's NOT just a White trait as I know as many Blacks who are racist towards Whites as I do White racist towards Blacks. As long as there will be humans in this universe, there will be racism - period. Humans are an aggressive animal and LOVE to segment everything in their lives. Black, White, Yellow, Brown, Short, Tall, Christian, Muslim, Jew, Rich, Poor - you name it. Anytime you get classified as being one group or the other, there will be prejudice. It may be a sad fact, but it's a fact nonetheless.
What happened 200 years ago is over, done with, let it go. I'm half Cherokee, my grandmother was full blooded. Europeans (Whites) almost caused a complete genocide of American Indians when they came here......That was a LONG time ago, and it's over. Until you shed the past, you can NEVER look to the future.
You have GOT to be KIDDING me!!!
Thank you Ms. Kimberly for this article.
To the respondent who is Cherokee telling people to just get over it. Why don't you explain to everyone how the Five Civilized Tribes, which the Cherokee are part of, enslaved and traded in Africans and how they treat them even today?? Since we are talking about Slavery and the Civil War. . .why don't you explain some of THAT racist history.
SHAMEFUL!
You say: "Let's face it, right or wrong, racism is a human trait. It's NOT just a White trait as I know as many Blacks who are racist towards Whites as I do White racist towards Blacks. As long as there will be humans in this universe, there will be racism - period."
This is absolutely not true! The concept of race was developed by the settler who defined themselves as white and as a counter distinction from everyone else in the world. This distinction was used as an excuse and basis for colonialism, slavery and genocide, it is NOT human nature and therefore not a trait of any human being (whites included). It's a political concept used to solidify power and dominance and the characteristic of choice is color (remember, Dr. Seuss exemplified this concept with a star vs. non star, maybe your too young to remember this...)
Furthermore, white racism is the basis of settler society, and whatever ideas white people have in their mind can manifest themselves negatively in the lives of colonized people (remember Rosewood? too young still...?). Black, Brown, Red, and Yellow sentiments of legitimate contempt is only talk that will never have a material affect on the livelihood of the colonizer.
Then you say: "Anytime you get classified as being one group or the other, there will be prejudice. It may be a sad fact, but it's a fact nonetheless."
And again I say: Who developed these classifications, it's definately not the colonized masses who lack the power to define! The settler who maintains the power structure gives us these arbiturary colors and identities to facilitate a divide and conquer strategy. And people with a limited understanding of the world such as yourself declare these artificial classifications as "fact".
And finally you say: "What happened 200 years ago is over, done with, let it go. I'm half Cherokee, my grandmother was full blooded. Europeans (Whites) almost caused a complete genocide of American Indians when they came here......That was a LONG time ago, and it's over. Until you shed the past, you can NEVER look to the future."
How on earth can you forget about the past and even know where your going in the future. If you don't know history (as you clearly don't, which is why your confused), you won't understand your current condition, and can NEVER have the proper analysis, tools, and know-how to build a better future. If you are half Cherokee, it seems to me your politics lean more on the side of your settler blood. Because only when the colonized ignore their CONTINUED oppression, can you be allowed to further bury your head in the sand and disclaim any responsibility for your CONTINUED privilege. If you are half Cherokee, you need to listen more to your elder Ward Churchill, I'm sure he'd be real proud to know that you believe genocide is a little matter (pun intended).
The people in power have the ability to determine what IS human nature and people who have no imagination, such as yourself, continue to express such ignorant sentiments.
How dare you say that the genocide of indigenous people happened long time ago and should be forgotten! We will never forget lest it will happen again! Indigenious people and Africans (living in America) still suffer from years of degradation. Our livelihoods and resources were stolen to benefit the settler, who still benefits to this day. Only an idiot could believe that you can move on when the injustices of the past have not been corrected. Would you tell a battered woman to forget about her experiences in the past, not deal with the mental and physical pain, and to ignore the lessons she's learned so that she can have a better future? No you won't, and this is no different.
You should never tell anyone that you are half Cherokee if your going to follow that statement with the reactionary comments you've posted here. Not to mention that you totally missed the whole point of this article. Margaret is trying to convey that dialectically it was white people's desire to maintain chattel slavery that brought about the civil war, and African people's desire to be free that brought about the outcome. I'm sure she knows that settler society had their own motives, she's mainly putting forth a dialectical view point of the war. But based on your comment, I'm sure you don't know what it means to use dialectics (look it up!)You are shameful!