A Yankee-Born Confederate Examines the "Lost Cause"
 
 by Greg Loren Durand
 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 I was born, raised, and "educated" in Southern California. In the California
 public school system I was sustained on a steady diet of anti-South
 propaganda and revisionist history. I was taught that the Republicans, with
 "Ole Honest Abe" Lincoln at the helm, were responsible for "saving the
 Union" from those who sought to destroy it in order to perpetuate and extend
 Southern slavery. As do millions of patriotic American schoolchildren every
 year, I memorized the Gettysburg Address, listened with rapt attention to
 stories of the Underground Railroad, and thrilled to read of the military
 exploits of such Northern Generals as Ulysses S. Grant and William T.
 Sherman.
 
 Influenced by a steady barrage of sixty second sound-bites on the evening
 news and the elaborate, yet fanciful, "reality" concocted by the
 movie-moguls in Hollywood, a Southern drawl would invoke instant images in
 my mind of sheet-clad imbeciles dancing around a burning cross, or some
 beer-bellied, tobacco-spitting "redneck" hurling racial slurs at those "of
 color." The "Mason-Dixon Line" was to me an unscalable wall of separation
 between the socially sophisticated and open-minded North and the morally
 degenerate and bigoted South; it was a line I never wanted to cross.
 
 However, about three years ago, I had a "great awakening." Everything that I
 had been taught about the South and the so-called "Civil War" of
 1861-1865 -- more accurately known as the War for Southern Independence --
 started to crumble as I began to read what the Southerners themselves had to
 say. All my life I had been told one side of the story -- that of the
 victor. But don't the "losers" have a story to tell as well? Was the War
 really fought over the issue of slavery, as we have been told, or was it
 fought for other reasons?
 
 It is estimated that only about six percent of Southerners at the outbreak
 of the war owned any slaves at all, and an even smaller number were wealthy
 enough to afford the hundreds of laborers which are often associated with
 Southern agrarianism. It simply was not possible for the average Southern
 planter to pay $1,500 in cash (that was in gold, not inflated paper "money")
 per slave; even those who could were frequently to be found picking cotton
 alongside their slaves. Despite the accounts of Northern Abolitionists of
 merciless whips and welted backs, of cruel masters and oppressed servants,
 such were in fact a rarity in the predominantly Christian South. In the late
 1930s, the Works Project Administration of the Federal Government collected
 the testimonies of former slaves throughout the occupied South which are
 preserved in The Slave Narratives in the National Archives of Washington,
 D.C. The vast majority of those interviewed had fond memories of their
 masters and mistresses on Southern plantations. For example, Mary Rice, a
 former slave of Alabama, stated, "Slavery times wuz sho good times. We wuz
 fed an' clothed an' had nothin' to worry about." Tom Douglas, also from
 Alabama, reflecting on the "emancipation" brought about by the North, said,
 "I was happy all de time in slavery days, but dere ain't much to git happy
 over now." Gus Brown of Richmond, Virginia remembered his former master with
 these words: "I cannot forget old massa. He was good and kind.... I knows I
 will see him in heaven...."
 
 Let us not forget that, whether it was right or wrong, slavery was protected
 by the "supreme law of the land" -- the Constitution for the United States
 of America -- and as such, all those who held public office in Washington
 D.C. were bound by oath to ensure its continued protection. Only a
 constitutional amendment, proposed by a two-thirds vote in Congress and
 ratified by three-fourths of the states could bring about a lawful change in
 that document. Abraham Lincoln knew this to be true, and said so in his
 first inaugural speech on the steps of the Capital:
 
 have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution
 of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right
 to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.
 
 In his speech at Peoria, Illinois on 16 October 1854, he revealed his true
 feelings toward the Black man by declaring:
 
 Free [the slaves] and make them politically and socially our equals? My own
 feelings will not admit of this.... We cannot make them equals.
 
 In his reply to Stephen Douglas on 18 September 1858, scarcely five years
 before he issued his celebrated Emancipation Proclamation and altered the
 course of the war to an attack on Southern slavery as a calculated "war
 measure" to cripple the "enemy," Lincoln stated:
 
 I will say... that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about,
 in any way, a social and political equality of the White and Black races,
 that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of
 Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with White
 people.
 
 [T]here is a physical difference between the White and Black races which I
 believe will forever forbid the two races living together in terms of social
 and political equality. And in so much as they cannot so live, while they do
 remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I,
 as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position
 assigned to the white race.
 
 No White supremists in our own day have stated their racist views with any
 more clarity, and yet such a man now sits enthroned in Washington D.C. as
 the very incarnation of the "American spirit" of freedom and equality and
 the hallowed patron saint of the Civil Rights movement.
 
 It is not widely known that the Southern state of Virginia was the very
 first political body in the entire world to enact legislation to end the
 slave trade. On 5 October 1778, the General Assembly passed "An act for
 preventing the further importation of slaves," in which "any slave brought
 into the state contrary to the law would be then and forevermore free." In
 keeping with such opposition to the wickedness of the slave trade, the
 Constitution of the Confederate States of 1861 permanently abolished the
 practice in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1. Confederate President Jefferson
 Davis made clear his plans for the infant country when he stated, "The slave
 must be made fit for his freedom by education and discipline and thus be
 made unfit for slavery."
 
 It was Davis' prediction that slavery "will eventually be lost"; it had
 outlived its usefulness and would inevitably die a natural death. Although
 there were indeed some who believed that the natural condition of the Black
 man was servitude, the prevailing opinion in the South was that of gradual
 emancipation. Some Southern leaders, such as General Robert Edward Lee, were
 wholly opposed to African slavery.
 
 Let the Reader contrast such sentiments with the actions of the invading
 Northern forces. In a letter to General Grant, General John A. Logan
 reported that his men were "capturing negroes, with or with out their
 consent.... They are being conscripted." In 1864, General Innis N. Palmer
 wrote to General Butler, "The negroes will not go voluntarily, so I am
 obliged to force them." And at the same time Black men were being taken
 against their will into "service" to the United States, Yankee soldiers were
 "committing rapes on the negroes" and were "in the negro huts for weeks,
 debauching the females." A war to free the slaves? Only a deluded mind would
 believe such nonsense.
 
 What then would inspire a vast majority of non-slaveholding Confederates,
 many of whom were as young as fourteen years of age, to shoulder their
 muskets and charge with resolve into the very face of death? What gave these
 men the mental fortitude and courage to stand firm in their defiance of the
 mightiest war machine the world had seen up to that time? I firmly believe
 that the rag-tag "Rebels" were motivated by their love for their homeland,
 their families, and for their Christian roots. These men deserve to be
 honored for withstanding tremendous odds in an attempt to secure for future
 generations of Southerners the eternal "blessings of liberty." In the words
 of one Confederate soldier:
 
 I was a soldier in Virginia in the campaigns of Lee and Jackson, and I
 declare I never met a Southern soldier who had drawn his sword to perpetuate
 slavery.... What he had chiefly at heart was the preservation of the supreme
 and sacred right of self-government.
 
 Even the editors of the London Times acknowledged this to be true when they
 stated on 7 November 1861:
 
 The contest is really for empire on the side of the North and for
 independence on that of the South....
 
 This "supreme and sacred right of self-government" is not based on the color
 of a man's skin, but on the readiness of his soul to accept such a lofty
 responsibility. As such, self-government most assuredly would have been
 eventually enjoyed by the slaves of Dixie had the fanaticism and hatred of
 nineteenth-century Abolitionists not prevented her from implementing
 measures for a gradual emancipation which would honor both the property
 rights of Southern planters as well as humanly prepare the slaves for the
 duties which accompany freedom. Such a task did not require the shed blood
 of over half a million men and the anguish of countless grieving widows and
 mothers. Even the most noble ends do not justify violent and revolutionary
 means.
 
 That is why, upon moving to my adopted and now-beloved Southern homeland not
 long ago, I promptly and proudly hoisted a Confederate Battle Flag above my
 home. I am no racist; I do not have a sheet and hood tucked away in the
 closet; I don't even chew tobacco. And yet, this Yankee-born convert to the
 "Lost Cause" (it ain't lost, by the way) feels his heart swell with pride
 and love for the Old South when he sees the Battle Flag floating
 majestically in the Mississippi breeze and sometimes even gets a lump in the
 throat when he hears the sweet strains of "Dixie." My own ancestors "wore
 the blue," but I now make my stand with the "boys in grey" and wait for the
 day when native Southerners will no longer be ashamed of their rich heritage
 and will join with those who are turning their backs on the siren song of
 modernity in order to return to the cherished principles of the past. Deo
 Vindice!
 
 
 Recommended Materials
 
 George Edmonds, Facts and Falsehoods Concerning the War on the South
 1861-1865 (Wiggins, Mississippi: Crown Rights Book Company, [1904] 1997).
 
 Mildred Lewis Rutherford, A True Estimate of Abraham Lincoln and Vindication
 of the South (Wiggins, Mississippi: Crown Rights Book Company, [1923] 1997).
 
 Greg Loren Durand, essay: "The War Powers of Abraham Lincoln: How the
 Sixteenth President of the United States Suspended the Constitution And Why
 It Has Never Been Restored to the American People."
 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 Copyright Notice
 
 The above Document is copyrighted under The Christian common Law in the Year
 of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus, The Christ, Nineteen Hundred and Ninety-Seven
 and is the intellectual Possession of the Author solely by the Grace of God.
 Permission to reproduce this Document either electronically or by print-out
 is hereby granted on the condition that this last section is left attached
 and intact. Pursuant to the Eighth Commandment, distribution of this
 Document for a price or pirating of the information contained herein without
 the express and written Permission of the Author is hereby prohibited.
 
 For more information, please contact us at the following electronic
 addresses:
 
 The Patrick Henry Foundation for Common Law Studies
 crwnrts@datasync.com
 http://members.aol.com/crwnrts/anti-fed
 
 Please direct Postal Matter to the following location:
 
 Greg Loren Durand.
 general delivery.
 Perkinston Post Office.
 Perkinston, Mississippi.
 
 Please note: All Postal Matter must be "addressed" exactly as requested
 above. Please do not write the name of this Ministry anywhere on the
 envelope, do not abbreviate any of the information, do not use all capitals,
 and do not include a zip code. All Postal Matter which does not comply with
 these instructions will be returned to the sender.
 
 The Patrick Henry Foundation for Common Law Studies is foreign to the
 corporate UNITED STATES or any of its political subdivisions. Pursuant to
 Philippians 3:20 and 1 Peter 2:9, the Stewards of this Ministry do hereby
 retain their Rights, Privileges, and Immunities in Jesus, The Christ under
 The Law of God and The Christian common Law of the Land wherein they
 sojourn. Interest republicae quod Probi et Legales Christianes Homines
 conserventur. All Patrons of this Ministry shall be presumed to be in
 agreement with these terms.
 
 This Ministry exists for educational purposes only. We do not take
 responsibility for the actions of Our Readers, nor are We to be understood
 as offering professional legal counsel. We in no way advocate evasion of
 legitimate or constitutional taxes, or nonpayment of any Lawfully owed debt.
 
 This Ministry is not registered as a non-profit corporation under Title 26,
 United States Code, Section 501(c)(3); contributions to this Ministry are
 not tax-deductible.