Ever hear of "The Sons of Confederate Soldiers"?

[Horse with no Name]

I had never heard of them...until today.
I had to drive up north of Dallas and here in Texas, we have those highway signs with "This highway adopted by....".
Anyway, saw one today with "This highway adopted by Sons of Confederate Soldiers".
I have heard of the Daughters of the American Revolution, but that was a new one on me, so when I got home, I looked it up.
:wow:
A full fledged racist organization--I'm surprised the KKK doesn't adopt a highway.

Here is their website:
http://www.scv.org/

But look at this forum in particular:
http://pub19.bravenet.com/forum/1560065017/show/574610

Re: NAACP at it again!

I bet my ole granpappy could have got 400 lbs. of cotton a day out of Andy. Or he would-a killed the SOB tryin'.

or

Re: NAACP at it again!

the naacp are nothing but a nazi party in my opinion.why do we spend our money on nascar,coke,why waste time listening to mtv,spike tv,and all the other groups who hate us.the way to attack them is their pocketbook and washington to.it's up to us and in our power.evil triumphs when good people do nothing. MOTHER DIXIE AWAKE

Help us all...

[bluerum]

1. So the state of texas encourages this crap?

[Skittles]

27. you would not believe the crap Texas encourages

i live here and it never ceases to amaze me, the sheer ignorance I encounter on a daily basis

[MadMaddie]

2. Actually the KKK has attempted to adopt highways and many

states decided to do away with their program than to allow the KKK to participate....

The same should be done with this group.....if enough people know about them and the news media gets involved something will change.....

[northzax]

40. I thought Missouri's response was the best

The state sued to keep the KKK off the 'adopt a highway' program, and when the Klan won (as they should in this case) the state gave them a section of highway.

in a completely coincidental move, a bill passed the legislature to name that section of highway after Rosa Parks.

the Klan quit.

[Phredicles]

3. I have heard of a KKK chapter adopting a highway in like Missouri

a number of years ago. The state even went to court to try to stop it, if I remember, but the judge said they had to let them.

I'm not sure there's an alternative to avoiding such a highway if y7ou want to make a stement against the group. I won't drive on the "Ronald Reagan Freeway" in LA, although I really don't live anywhere near it.

[Horse with no Name]

5. Actually, SCOTUS upheld the rights of the KKK to adopt one

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/03/05/scotus.kkk.02/

The case began in May 1994 when Michael Cuffley, the top official in the Missouri organization of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, filed an application to participate in the Adopt-A-Highway program by cleaning up a half-mile segment of Interstate 55.

The stretch of highway is one of the routes used to bus black students to county schools as part of court-ordered desegregation efforts in the St. Louis area, a program the Klan opposes.

The state denied the Klan's application. Missouri said nine other states have rejected similar Klan requests: West Virginia, Texas, Ohio, Maryland, Kansas, Georgia, California, Arkansas and Alabama.

Missouri cited the Klan's membership, which is limited to "Aryans." The Klan excludes anyone who is Jewish, black, Hispanic or Asian.


:puke:

[Phredicles]

6. Thanks - I'd rather be wrong about something like this...

[northzax]

41. don't worry

the Klan quit the program after Missouri named that stretch of highway after Rosa Parks.

[jus_the_facts]

4. O'course...they marched on my town hall to have the confed. flag....

...put BACK UP in front of the court house...after the first black mayor was elected no less. :puke: :evilfrown:

[bluestateguy]

7. I've got another one for you:

The fraternity Kappa Alpha has an "Old South" ball every year at southern universities. The frat boys all dress up in Confederate uniforms and pick up their sorority girl dates, who wear old hoop dresses.





Could there be a better way of sending a not so subtle message that blacks are not welcome in these organizations?

The traditions of the Old South were rooted around racism and class hierarchy, and not worhty of contemporary celebration or tribute.

More pictures:

http://www2.selu.edu/orgs/ka/oldsouth2005.htm

http://www.msstate.edu/org/ka/pictures.html

[Selatius]

15. I go to Mississippi State, btw. There are some ultra-rightwing nutjobs.

It's perhaps one of the most conservative campuses in America. In 2004 the College Democrats had their homecoming parade float torched KKK-style right in front of the home they had gathered to party in. I was there. It was the night of one of the presidential debates between Kerry and Bush.

[mitchum]

17. Yep, KAs look forward to the day they will take over the ancestral...

Ford dealership.
Having spent most of my life in southern college towns, I am very familiar with the chinless wonders. Here in Athens, I call them "Sons of Dunwoody" and "Marietta's Finest"

[saigon68]

26. taking over the ancestral Ford dealership.

Sounds about right

The photos above say it all (the only thing missing is a few guys, like Colon Bowel with trays of mint julips)

ASSCLOWNS

[bluerum]

37. yes - what lovely collections of pretty white people

[DemFromMem]

8. A different view

I used to be an associate at a law firm in a southern city and the partner I worked for was active in the Sons of Confederate Veterans. I only know about the organization through him and I honestly don't believe the man is racist. He was a direct descendent of several Confederate soldiers, some of whom died and I think he was genuinely interested in honoring their memory. By the way, his ancestors, according to him, were not slave holders and probably went to war mainly out of love of their state as opposed to feeling strongly about the various issues that lead to the war. My boss was a voracious reader - he would read a 4 to 6 books a week and probably was one of the most informed people on the Civil War you could meet. I did have conversations with him about his views on slavery and how people feel about the Confederate flag. He didn't try and pretend that slavery was not the driving cause of the war nor did he try and say that the north was wrong. As for the flag, he and I had to agree to disagree. His view was that the flag image was usurped by racist groups and that he viewed the flag more as an important part of southern history much like Texans view the flag of the Republic of Texas. My view was that it really matters more how people see the image today. The swastika didn't have a negative connotation before the last century...

My point is that I think these guys aren't always raving racists. Some probably have those views, but I don't equate them to the KKK.

[Solo_in_MD]

9. Concur

SCV is not the KKK and should not be treated as such. Yes there are a few knucleheads in it, but that could be said of any number of organizations, including the NAACP, and even DU.

Kappa Alpha, which is a Southern Order, not a frat (just ask them) is mostly amusing. That said, I am a sucker for lady in a hoop skirt who knows how to use a her fan.

[RagingInMiami]

10. I agree

Most are just proud of their Southern heritage.

[RumpusCat]

12. A super book on this topic

Confederates In the Attic by Tony Horwitz. It's a highly entertaining book about the modern South and the attitudes toward the Civil War. I know it sounds like it would be a lecture but it's actually written like a travelogue across the South. Horwitz treats his subjects, often folks like the SoCV and Daughters of Confederate Soldiers, with respect but doesn't sugar-coat them. :hi:

[RoyGBiv]

19. That is an excellent book ...

I met Tony shortly after it was published and had some extended e-mail conversations with him about it. (Got an autographed 1st Edition, which is one of my treasures.)

The book isn't really "about" the SCV specifically, although there are certainly stories about it in there, and of course I realize you didn't say it was. Just clarifying it is more about certain elements in the South as a whole, some of which have little to do with each other. I also met one of his subjects. He's as big a fruitcake as he is portrayed.

Horwitz popularized one of my favorite terms, something I myself have experienced to an extent : Civilwargasm. Drove from Oklahoma to Virginia, via Ohio, and toured three battlefields in two states in a 48 hour period without sleep. Got about four hours of sleep, then toured a dozen more battlefields, small and large, in the next 24 hours.

After that, I started *seeing* the soldiers and decided I needed some real sleep. :-)

[Jamastiene]

21. Your partner is being misled by them

and apparently so are you. I would highly suggest that you read this article to understand more. Your partner would be the exception to the rule, according to this article.

Here is a link to some recent history about SCV and information as to why they are considered racist:

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=614

[tenshi816]

44. Was he in the Sons of Confederate Veterans or

the Sons of the Confederacy? They're two separate and distinct organizations. My dad, a keen amateur Civil War historian, is in the Sons of the Confederacy and he's definitely not a racist. Mostly they do re-enactments with similar groups from the Union side. Grown men playing dress-up and pretending to have battles.

[DemFromMem]

49. I think the latter

I was not aware that there were two organizations, but I know that he was into the reenactments as well as the scholarly pursuit of the subject (which apparently was the case for several of the organization's members).

[Lars39]

11. Going on memory here...

There was a big dust-up a few years ago, with the organization being taken over by the KKK types.
It may have differed from group to group, but I've had the impression the organization at one point had been comprised more of the "let's go re-enact Gettysburg geeky-types".

[Jamastiene]

22. Here is an article about the KKK-type leaders:

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=1027

[Lars39]

43. Thanks for posting that article.

I hadn't read anything about the group's takeover since the initial 'Tennessean' piece.

[lisainmilo]

13. these are my neighbors

and OMG i am an implant orginally from San Francisco! http://www.rickross.com/reference/israel/israel8.html

[noahmijo]

14. Southern heritage my ass-this is America's largest group of traitors

And for what? so they could continue to depend on slavery for their economy to keep from bursting?

Okay do this just imagine the country today if the Southern Confederates won?

Give me ONE goddamn redeemable quality this country would have if slavery was legal and the slave traders ran Wall Street. Mind you I am speaking of proud CONFEDERATE apologist Southerners not Southerners in general.

Make this distinction before you answer my question.

[Spider Jerusalem]

34. Not technically treason.

Not at the time, anyway; the leading Constitutional scholars of the era held that withdrawal from the Union was one of the rights reserved to the states under the Tenth Amendment (this view was actually taught in Constitutional law classes at West Point). This is one of the reasons that Jefferson Davis was never tried for treason (although he was indicted); Andrew Johnson's government feared the repercussions should he be found not guilty on the basis of the aforementioned Constitutional argument--and Salmon Chase, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court at the time, supposedly said 'Lincoln wanted Jefferson Davis to escape, and he was right. His capture was a mistake. His trial will be a greater one. We cannot convict him of treason. Secession is settled. Let it stay settled.'

[JHB]

35. Always remember to bring up the fugitive slave acts when they try...

...to foist that lie that the Confederates were just against having other states impose their will and tell them what to do: they didn't have any qualms about imposing their laws on other states when it was what they wanted. (Not to mention that secession started before Lincoln took office, so he hadn't actually done anything that might legitimately be seen as grounds for secession: they did it soully on the basis of listening too much to their politicians' hot-air speeches, not any basis in fact.

(and just to avoid misunderstandings, the use of "they" above refers either to actual 1860's Confederates or their modern-day apologists, not Southerners in general)

[Yupster]

46. Are you assuming slavery would still be legal

had the Confederacy gained its independance?

That's a pretty big assumption in my opinion. Even Brazil eventually gave up the institution. My guess and of course it's just a guess is that a plan of gradual manumission would have started in the 1880's based around the Jamaica model.

[noahmijo]

50. I think it's a pretty safe assumption considering they still haven't

evolved all that much.

Living proof is right here on this very thread (see photos)

[mitchum]

16. If every cracker who claims that his family owned a vast plantation...

with slaves were telling the truth, the confederacy would have extended all the way to the Pacific Nortwest.
That is a favorite and oddly comforting delusion of many who are only a few generations removed from sharecropping or the mill village.

[Jamastiene]

23. In truth most of them claim their ancestors did not own slaves.

As a matter of fact, it would be the opposite if what the vast majority of them claimed. Slavery would not have even existed if you believe their version of histroy, because hardly any of them own up to the fact that their ancestors owned slaves.

[Breeze54]

24. You all might want to read this!

http://www.mountainx.com/news/2004/0818scv.php

Aug 18, 2004 / vol 11 iss 3

Between heritage and hate
The Sons of Confederate Veterans' internal battle rages on
by Jon Elliston

"The removal of Hilderman by force,
when all he's asking for is for hate
groups to be thrown out of the SCV,
is quite disturbing."

– Heidi Beirich, Southern Poverty Law Center

(For background on the SCV power struggle,
see "The War Between the Sons," Feb. 5, 2003.)
http://www.mountainx.com/news/2003/0205sons.php

snip-->
And along the way, Wilson's critics charge, his faction built ties to neo-Confederates
in the League of the South and other hard-right groups that speak nostalgically of the
days of slavery and still hold out hope for an independent Southern nation.

These critics, including the members of Save the SCV, a loosely knit dissident faction,
fear the SCV is on its way to becoming a thinly disguised front for white supremacists. <--snip

snip-->
Another outspoken SCV member didn't fare so well at the conference, however.
Former Charlotte police officer Walt Hilderman III, a leader of Save the SCV,
is one of about 350 SCV members from North Carolina who were suspended from
the SCV last year for allying themselves with the anti-racist dissidents.
Nonetheless, Hilderman decided to run for commander in chief, and he hoped
to make his case to conference delegates that extremists are sullying the
SCV's reputation. But two lawyers for the group, backed up by three security
guards, met Hilderman at the door to the conference center and told him he
was prohibited from participating in business sessions, including the elections.
And Denne Sweeney of Texas was elected to the commander's post on a platform
that supported continuing the purge of Save the SCV members. <--snip

snip-->
The Southern Poverty Law Center, a nonprofit watchdog group that focuses on
the racist right, says the events in Dalton are a further sign that the SCV
is at risk of being taken over by radicals.

A recent article in the publication quoted a March 2004 e-mail from Lyons in
which he argued that "mere Klan membership should not be sufficient to remove
a member" from the SCV. (Back in 1992, the SCV passed a resolution to "renounce
the KKK and all others who promote hate.")
"The fact that they gave Kirk Lyons $20,000, right after he said Klan members
should be in the SCV, is not encouraging at all," notes Beirich. <--snip

[Jamastiene]

25. Yeah, I linked the actual Intelligence Report from the

Southern Poverty Law Center in an earlier post about someone's partner being misled by them. It has more details as well.

[Spider Jerusalem]

29. That's actually believable.

Most Southerners DIDN'T own slaves (just looked it up; slave-owners were only 26% of the Southern population in 1860). And most of the soldiers who fought for the Confederacy were poor farmers, not slaveowners.

[Jamastiene]

30. A link would be helpful.

Thanks.

[Spider Jerusalem]

31. All right...

Here's one: http://members.aol.com/jfepperson/stat.html

And the relevant statistics on slave ownership by percentage of the population in slave states in 1860, from the same page:

In the Lower South (SC, GA, AL, MS, LA, TX, FL -- those states that seceded first), about 36.7% of the white families owned slaves. In the Middle South (VA, NC, TN, AR -- those states that seceded only after Fort Sumter was fired on) the percentage is around 25.3%, and the total for the two combined regions -- which is what most folks think of as the Confederacy -- is 30.8%. In the Border States (DE, MD, KY, MO -- those slave states that did not secede) the percentage of slave-ownership was 15.9%, and the total throughout the slave states was almost exactly 26%.

[Jamastiene]

32. Thanks.

I have never met anyone who will own up to their ancestors actually owning slaves, but then again I don't actively try to find them either.

[Spider Jerusalem]

36. Well, it's not exactly something to be proud of.

So shame probably plays some part in the lack of admission.

And a lot of people are probably ignorant of whether or not their ancestors DID own slaves, given that there's been an intervening period of 140 years or more. A few years ago, I didn't know too much about my own ancestry past my great-grandparents, and I started doing genealogical research as a hobby; I was rather shocked to find my 5th great-grandfather listed on the 1790 census for Maryland as a slaveowner. Not one or two, either, but fifty. That's something I personally find rather horrifying; both the bare fact of it, and the fact that at the time some people didn't see it as any different than owning horses, or oxen. It's certainly not something I can reconcile with any part of my personal value system, and it's definitely not something I go around telling people. (Only reason I'm doing so now is because you say you've never met anyone who'd admit their ancestors owned slaves...well, now you have. And I'm most certainly not proud of it.)

[Jamastiene]

38. That makes sense to me.

I would imagine people would not be very proud of something like that.

My mother was doing some geneology on our family, but we have mostly Tuscarora in our blood line. She found out that some of our ancestors were slaves.

She's only following it on the female lineage, because apparently that is how the tribe does it, maternal DNA only. I don't completely understand that. Can you shed some light on why they would use maternal DNA only for geneology? I mean, do you know? Or is that for Native American heritage only?

[Spider Jerusalem]

39. I know that several tribes trace through the female line...

including the tribes of the Iroquois confederacy; the clan/kinship system that's the basis of tribal society is traditionally matrilineal, so I suppose it makes some sense that if she's doing genealogy-related DNA testing (is that what you're talking about?) they'd test the mitochondrial DNA (which is inherited from one's mother, and so is passed along female lines).

And a system of matrilineal descent is eminently sensible in some respects, anyway, because there's never any question of who a child's mother is...paternity isn't always so certain.

[Jamastiene]

42. Yeah, the mitochondrial DNA

testing is what she is doing. The whole family in this area is tracing it back starting with my mother's DNA. There is a dispute about whether or not we really are part of the Iroquois 5 Nations, because apparently the Tuscaroras was the last to join (and sixth) or something to that effect. So, they are trying to prove it.

[Thirtieschild]

45. You just met one who will admit slave-owning ancestors

but not very many ancestors and not very many slaves. None of the ancestors were plantation owners but upland farmers who scratched out a living and owned no slaves. Quite a few of them were PWT (poor white trash). At least one group were outspoken abolitionists (in South Carolina and Georgia no less) who named a son born ca 1864 Ulysses Grant Sloan. The one who died in the war didn't own slaves, nor did any of his family, and the Presbyterian minister who wrote about "the dastardly Yankee" was married to a woman from Maine. The one born in Pennsylvania was traumatized when his "regiment was cut to pieces" and he was chased by the Rebels.

One of the saddest stories I found (in my pursuit of genealogy) is one of my husband's ancestors in South Carolina. He willed that four slaves (he named them but I can't remember the names right now) would be given their freedom when his wife died, and he even willed them land and farming equipment. Among the estate expenses was finding and bringing back the four runaway slaves.

I came across the will of a man who left everything he had to has black wife and their mulatto children. So - it did happen.

[Yupster]

47. Cracker?

Odd to see that term here on DU.

[mitchum]

48. Not when it's used by a southern born white male who came from...

the working class.
And that would be me.

[RoyGBiv]

18. Sons of Confederate Veterans ...

Well, may as well throw on my flame suit and step into the fire. Since you'd never heard of the organization before today, obviously you don't know much of its history or its purported purpose. That's okay, but I think the generalizations, particularly the implied association with the KKK, was a bit much.

As has been noted, it's not "Sons of Confederate Soliders," rather Sons of Confederate Veterans, an off-shoot of and the legacy of the organization called Confederate Veterans, which of course can no longer exist since they're all dead. There is also a United Daughters of the Confederacy, which is a similarly themed, but somewhat different group.

I was once a member of the SCV and Military Order of the Stars and Bars, the latter being a different organization for descendants of Confederate officers. Neither is a racist organization in and of itself, but of course does have some violently racist members. The SCV has (unofficially) split into factions, however, with some elements determined to be political, and that faction does, at the very least, trend toward rather racist attitudes, but even this faction has its own factions. An internal war has been boiling over for going over a decade now as this political arm has essentially taken control, then lost it, then got it back again. Big mess. What you found at those links is a partial cause and result of that mess. And this is the main reason I am no longer a member, FWIW. Go to the Southern Poverty Law Center site for more detail on this. There's a lot in there about it all somewhere, focused specifically on the radical, racist arm of the SCV.

In any case, when I was a member, what I did as a part of my SCV activities was research various topics relevant to Southern history, particularly directed toward the history of Confederate veterans before, during, and after the Civil War. This was the one and only purpose of my individual camp. (The organization is divided into state level divisions and further sub-divided into local camps, which can have as much or as little to do with the national organization as they desire.) I also donated time and money to historical restoration and interpretive work, including giving presentations on historical topics. I even went to a school once with a fellow brother of the Sons of Union Veterans and an occasional reenactor with, IIRC, 8th US Colored Infantry where we gave a presentation meant to be interesting to junior high kids. And I spent several years developing a website dealing with the history of a rather famous Confederate general, which is hosted on a server owned by an SCV member who uses that server for this purpose. And, for a couple years, I was a coordinator for Internet based fund raising and information dispersal directed to building a monument to that same soldier. (Got a certificate of thanks around here somewhere from the North Carolina Division commander, who was later essentially thrown out of his position because of his opposition to the radical, racist wing of his organization.) I am proud of that association at that moment in time for reasons I will go into if you're truly interested.

[REP]

20. It's the SCV and Yes

As RBG points out above, they're not all crazy shitheads. There are quite a few that are interested in history and genealogy, and quite a few members have been very helpful in my search for information about my great-great grandfather, a Confederate soldier who was killed in late 1863/early 1864. Like many families, mine was divided by the Civil War, and my great-grandfather was born afer his father's death and abandoned by his Confederate-sympathizing mother to be raised by Union sympathizers after she remarried.

[bluedawg12]

28. Some angry white folk down there

mixed in with born agains, isn't this the mind set that also crowed about WACO, Ruby Ridge, spawned Okla. City and T. McViegh, Militia's--sort of libertarian bent, anti-federal government under Clinton, less so now, this is now some of shrubs far, far,far right base.

[aikoaiko]

33. As a general rule, suppressing groups is a bad idea - full exposure better

As a northern who moved to the deep south about 7 years ago, I've realized that the Southerners relationship with the confederacy is complicated as hell -- even with black southerners.

Full exposure of hate groups seems to do wonders to get reasonable people to disdain them and avoid them.