RSS Feed MenuFor all this talk about Bob McDonnell, I’m surprised that there is so little autopsying for the real motive for what he just did, aside from playing the race card and snubbing Obama (and there is more than just that). Does anybody think that his commemoration of states performing the ultimate “nullification” coming just one month after the individual mandate and on the one-year anniversary of the bailouts is an accident? Well before the current furor, many were saying that his state’s plan to defy the mandate was little more than a rewind to 1860. (As much as I dislike the mandate, I said in an earlier blogpost that Virginia’s strategy came all too close.) Add in their lingering resentments — not just over race, but Roe vs. Wade, Lawrence vs. Texas, ”bitter voters clinging to guns ‘n religion”, and motion pictures, TV, and mainstream publishing that comes exclusively from the blue state coasts – and it seems almost predictable McDonnell would pull this stunt.
Yes, Virginia — the Civil War was about slavery. And just as with the Holocaust, nothing can or should dilute the horror of an era where human beings were lynched, legally raped, burned alive, sold as private property, and legally forbidden to practice their religions of choice, vote, or even read and write. Slavery is, was, and always will and should be the definitive issue of the ”war between the States”.
But, as my liberal, Jewish, college history professor recalled, it was ALSO about two separate and mutually exclusive economies, political systems, and lifestyles (one of which was based upon slavery) — and by the mid-late 19th century, as they used to say in the westerns, “There ain’t room fer the both of us, pardner.“ No accident that the 1860s were just when the Industrial Revolution and railways were starting to gain steam (pun intended). If the U.S. was to be anything more than a backwater runaway home for Britons and Germans, it needed to have a strong, central ‘brand’ and voice in its affairs. Continuing to exist with economic split-personality syndrome would not have been tenable. (Surprise, surprise: the next round of intense federal intervention happened from Franklin Roosevelt to LBJ and Nixon, as the economy transitioned from a farm-based, every-man-for-himself, entrepreneurial Little House on the Prairie/ Waltons era to the suburbanization and The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit corporatism of WWII, the Cold War, and the 1940s-1970s postwar era.)
McDonnell was issuing a coded appeal — but not just on race alone: He was commemorating, with what Herb Caen used to call “the desperate strength of the moribund”, a time and era when states and the lifestyles that defined them were largely left alone by the “big bad” Feds. An era that inconvenient truths and necessities from the bailout to the War on Terror to Katrina to gay marriage (all of which require nothing less than muscle-bound federal intervention) have ensured is now Gone With the Wind.
Telly Davidson // Apr 8, 2010 at 4:15 pm
Dana King notes: “Are Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck having difficulty in finding broadcast outlets? Do Ann Coulter and Bill O’Reilly have to print their books at their own expense, on presses they run in their basements? Repeated whining about how conservatives are denied access to mass media only dilutes any legitimate message the bearer may have.”
No, they’re not, and that would be useful if all anyone watched or read was FoxNews (and maybe Trinity Broadcasting or the 700 Club.) If one is a strictly economic/political conservative, then the current media scene has much to please them. But if you’re a religious/culture-war conservative — which many of Virginia’s Republicans (and certainly Mr. McDonnell) is, never mind Palin, Bachmann, Huckabee, et al — let’s take a looksie. From the graphic ultraviolence and R-rated sexuality of “Criminal Minds”, “Nip/Tuck”, “SVU”, to the Fox network and F/X itself — “House”, “Damages”, “Rescue Me”, “Dollhouse” anyone? First-rate dramas many of these shows are, and vastly more preferable to me as a youngish man than a rerun of “Mayberry RFD” — but “wholesome family entertainment” they ain’t. And do we even need to discuss “Hostel”, “Inglorious Basterds”, and fart-joke comedies, etc, on the big screen? Jerry Springer? “Big Brother”?
Religious/cultural right-wingers do have access to nonfiction publishing (and even Omega Code/”Left Behind” works of fiction), and cable/radio chat shows to preach to their choirs. But in the larger culture, they have indeed been “left behind”, and a lot of them are pretty p*ssed about it.
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 4:50 pm
Oskar // Apr 8, 2010 at 3:24 pm
“Ottovbvs, please provide evidence of the establishment media romanticizing the Old Confederacy. Perhaps in 1915 but hardly today.”
…..Gone with the wind…..that endless soap saga they keep playing on cable called North and South…….didn’t I just watch something called Killer Angels a few weeks ago with it’s preposterous portrayal of the faithful “darkies”…..much of the John Ford canon…..or take a wander along the bookshelves at your local borders for endless Southern bodice rippers of the sub Scarlett genre…….you don’t see many Stalin bodice rippers though
Telly Davidson // Apr 8, 2010 at 5:00 pm
BTW — as to Otto and Oskar’s posts — there was a furore that arose in upstate NY just two weeks ago over a screening of DW Griffith’s 1915 epic “Birth of a Nation” (its historical impact on film and media cannot be ignored; it is widely regarded as the first truly narrative, full-subject silent film). The NAACP blew the whistle, though, saying that its (admittedly) odious portrayals of bug-eyed African Americans attempting to rape and assault white virgins, etc, outweighed any of the film’s “merits” — especially in light of the Tea Parties and Birthers. (One man wrote to the newspaper saying, “For them to show a film like this at this particular time, it’s inflammatory, it’s unsettling, it’s just wrong.”) Let’s just hope the Rome, NY film society’s next panel isn’t a tribute to Leni Reifenstahl….
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 5:10 pm
Telly Davidson // Apr 8, 2010 at 5:00 pm
……I’m familiar with D. W. Griffith’s Birth of a Nation which lauded the KKK……and I have no problem with its screening, just as I have no problem with screening The Triumph of the Will or Alexander Nevsky (just for you Oscar) …..they are all historical curiosities/works of art depending on your viewpoint but there’s no doubt in my mind that the thrust of US popular culture for as long as I can remember has glamorized the ante bellum south……I used to enjoy reading the sexy bits of Frank Yerby when I was about ten!!
Oskar // Apr 8, 2010 at 5:25 pm
Ottovbvs, Of the films you named only Killer Angels (AKA Gettysburg) was made in the last quarter century and Gone With The Wind was filmed 71 years ago! John Ford made one Civil War film, The Horse Soldiers, in 1959. It starred John Wayne and William Holden as Union officers. As my tastes run to F. Scott Fitzgerald, Sinclair Lewis and Dashiell Hammett (a Stalinist dupe but a helluva writer) I am not conversant with bodice rippers-Confederate or otherwise. Oh and by the way, my dvd collection includes Battleship Potemkin and The Three Penny Opera but not Gone With The Wind.
S.L. Toddard // Apr 8, 2010 at 5:33 pm
“Basically that’s right because if they are not revived the GOP is doomed to marginalisation as a southern rump party”
So what? Why should conservatives give a damn if the GOP is not marginalized if it becomes liberal?
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 5:48 pm
Oskar // Apr 8, 2010 at 5:25 pm
“Of the films you named only Killer Angels (AKA Gettysburg)”
…..I’m referring to the movie about principally Stonewall Jackson and the first couple of years of the war!!!….not Gettysbug……..you also said 1915…….Gone with the Wind is constantly reissued as are many of the Ford films with a Southern subtext and are part of our cultural infrastructure…..all the three classic cavalry movies have it as do many others…..you ignore the North South Swazy farrago that was produced about 20 years ago…..Southern bodice rippers aren’t my style but there’s no shortage of them you should open your eyes …..and I remember the Horse Soldiers very well…..I saw not much of it from the back row with a rather attractive blonde
Telly Davidson // Apr 8, 2010 at 5:56 pm
We do, and especially in mid-20th-century, we did glamorize the antebellum south (not to mention all the MGM and CBS movies and shows that presented Edenic small-town life, courtesy of iron-fisted Hollywood mogul LB Mayer and the cosmopolitan Jewish Episcopal pillar of NY high society, William Paley.) In the same way, we glamorize both outlaws (Butch & Sundance, Bonnie & Clyde, or even my personal guilty fave, Big Bad Mama) and the frontier west — John Wayne, “Gunsmoke”, “Deadwood”. The US was founded on individualism and an individualist ethic, as a sort of anti-aristocracy, which I think is why these things endure. I agree they’re not all “code” for racism, and an indelible part of our history. Considering we’ve been living in an “ER” episode for the past two years — Paulson/Bernanke, healthcare, climate disasters, the War on Terror’s downwind — no wonder people are pining for what they *perceive* was a “kinder, gentler” society (esp if you were white.)
(I think it was James Baldwin said, “The American white man is trapped by his own history — he doesn’t know what to do about it.”)
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 6:19 pm
Oskar // Apr 8, 2010 at 5:25 pm
…..senior moment…..the movie I’m referring to was Gods and Generals a sequel to Killer Angels by Jeff Shaara son of the author….Gods was made in 2003……the point is glamorization of ante bellum life is deeply embedded in US culture
rbottoms // Apr 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
The equivalence argument laid bare.
Leaving aside a critique of this list, let’s cut to the core argument–that there is a liberal and conservative fringe, and that it’s as wrong to lump fair-minded conservatives in with crackpots who flirt secession, as it is to lump fair-minded liberals in with truthers. The “Both Sides” critique is standard operating procedure in Washington journalism, and usually leads to laughable comparisons, like this one.
In this specific case, the trouble is that the right’s quackery is not merely peddled by it’s fringe, but by some of its most prominent members. During the 2000 campaign, George W. Bush didn’t dispatch a couple of junior functionaries to Bob Jones University, where interracial dating was literally banned at the time, he dispatched himself. In 2002, it was not a small time junior congressmen who asserted that things would have been better under segregation, it was the highest ranking Republican in the Senate.
In 2005, it was not merely a fringe group of party activists who called for interference in the Terri Schiavo case, it was the Republican president of United States. It was—yet again–the highest ranking Republican in the Senate dispensing a neurological diagnosis on a woman in Florida, from his office in Washington.
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 6:32 pm
Telly Davidson // Apr 8, 2010 at 5:56 pm
“We do, and especially in mid-20th-century,”
…..Way past mid century…..and in any case these mid century movies are constantly viewed……. who the heck hasn’t heard of Rhett and Scarlett……and with due respect the Frank Capra small town comedies/Warner Bros gangster movies/Westerns generally are not glamorizing the enslavement of roughly 4 million people to sustain a rather glamorous way of life epitomized by pillared mansions, crinolines and crooning mammies(which was enjoyed by only a small elite anyway) …..spare us the smoke and mirrors Telly……no one admires and respects the courage and bravery of those southern farm boys in bare feet going up against Grant and Sherman more than me, and I know these things become part of the national myth, but at bottom these guys were fighting to perpetuate a monstrous evil……Perhaps my cynicism is engendered by the fact my great great grandaddy fought in the war, one of his brother was killed at Antietam and another in some minor skirmish…..it was the most costly war in US history provoked by a bunch of people who were prepared to wreck the country rather than turn loose 4 million people they owned.
Oskar // Apr 8, 2010 at 6:53 pm
Ottovbvs, you are right about Gods And Generals-one solitary film since the new millenium hardly an overwhelming cultural trend. As to bodice rippers, again I am far from an expert, but they are possibly more popular because of their ripping rather than for their ante-bellum settings. Please allow me to explain my position in re the McDonnell controversy. I voted for Barack Obama-both in the Alabama primary and in the general election. Further, I am pro choice, pro gray rights, a socialist and I despise the religious right. However, I am also a lifelong Alabamian and while I view rednecks, Jim Crow and all the rest in utter contempt I also recognize that there is a blatant double standards toward white southerners especially in the media, academia and Hollywood. Just hark back to the Duke Lacrosse Case where the faculty cultural marxists and the trained seals in the media damn near convicted persons who were in fact innocent. Actions such as this give ammunition to the knuckledragging bigots.
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 7:24 pm
Oskar // Apr 8, 2010 at 6:53 pm
“Ottovbvs, you are right about Gods And Generals-one solitary film since the new millenium hardly an overwhelming cultural trend.”
…..you’ve never heard of Rhett and Scarlett then…..still ignore the North South nonsense from about 20 years ago…even Davidson admits glamorization of the ante bellum south is deeply embedded in our culture….of course it is…. as much is the lone rider in a western landscape…it’s one of our national myths…..although I’m from the North I had a house near Savannah for years (damned nuisance) and still know a lot of people down there and am in fact going to stay with some in early May so I have some familiarity with Southern culture…..there are some double standards about southerners but are you telling me there aren’t double standards about a lot of other stuff ……none of us is lily white(no pun intended)…..being a tremendous military history buff no one admires the grit of those southern boys and the sheer magnificence of Lee and Stonewall more than me but these guys were fighting for a monstrosity and people need to be able to separate the two……Also being a total cynic means I have no tolerance for bs
Oskar // Apr 8, 2010 at 7:43 pm
Far from having no tolerance for bs, your insistance that in a country where the Duke Lacrosse injustice occurred and the Tawana Brawley fiasco occurred and where people glorify butchering swine (Mumia Abu Jamal, Che Guevera and O.J. Simpson) the ante-bellum South is revered is complete BS. Could the media get away with saying about Jews or Blacks what is routinely said about Southerners? Believe me having seen the full power of establishment fury unleashed on one simply for being a white Southerner (albeit a leftist one) has made me cynical as hell. In a world dominate by the Frankfurt School on one side and the Trotskyite neocons on the other the true nonconformist has no choice but utter cynicism.
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 7:55 pm
Oskar // Apr 8, 2010 at 7:43 pm
“Far from having no tolerance for bs, your insistance that in a country where the Duke Lacrosse injustice occurred and the Tawana Brawley fiasco occurred and where people glorify butchering swine (Mumia Abu Jamal, Che Guevera and O.J. Simpson) the ante-bellum South is revered is complete BS.”
……Revered wasn’t the word I used which was glamorized, although as ever I can rely on you to distort, but that said it’s probably the appropriate word for a third of country namely the old south…….but I can see you’re reverting to deep, and I’m bound to say apparently rather disturbed , victimology mode again with all this ranting about OJ etc so I think we’ll leave it at that
JonF // Apr 8, 2010 at 7:56 pm
Re: who the heck hasn’t heard of Rhett and Scarlett
Something to note about the book at least: it was pro-Southern (of course) but anti-Confederacy and anti-war (with regard to the Civil War). Both Rhett and Scarlett, for very different reasons, regarded secession and war as colossal mistakes.
ottovbvs // Apr 8, 2010 at 8:09 pm
JonF // Apr 8, 2010 at 7:56 pm
“Something to note about the book at least:”
…..To be honest I’ve never read the book but like just about everyone else in America I’ve seen the movie …….several times…..which is why culturally it’s still as powerful today as it was in 1939…….the nuance you describe may well exist in the book but it doesn’t really transfer to screen where the old south is deeply glamorized……and of course the war was a huge mistake so you have to ask yourself why were seven states, ultimately eleven, quite prepared to destroy the the territorial integrity of our country over this issue…..it was insane…..but for racial and economic reasons they were quite prepared to do it…..and we still have buffoons defending it or claiming to be victims
anniemargret // Apr 8, 2010 at 10:24 pm
I am a northerner living in the south for the past 25 years. I understand the southerners, or as much as I can, not being born here. I know they have a rich cultural history and I admire so much of it. There is a wonderful graciousness here that we miss in the big eastern cities and a network of comraderie that does stem from when the south was The South.
I understand too the pain many families here must sustain who have direct ties to the Civil War. Their soldiers are like the soldiers of today. That time was a different time and place, an era where a culture was firmly entrenched, and I’m sure those soldiers that fought for their land was as honorable to their minds as our soldiers fighting in the Middle East now.
That said, of course, slavery was an abomination. There should be a distinction but it is very difficult to separate the two. It is why I am favor of letting this time in history be a moment to remember, to learn from, and then let it rest in peace.
There is too much angst and anger that arises from dredging it up…to rephrase again and again, to re-try it again and again. When I hear southerners admit that slavery was an abomination to God and man it is enough for me-I am heartened by it.
Our country is already divided, terribly so to our detriment.
We don’t need another Civil War in the year 2010! We don’t need to rehash this again and again.
But if racism or prejudice in any form or shape rears it head, we must speak out against it- now and always.
Let’s live for now. Let’s make it better. And put the Civil War of 1865 back in the history books where it belongs.
ottovbvs // Apr 9, 2010 at 9:31 am
anniemargret // Apr 8, 2010 at 10:24 pm
“It is why I am favor of letting this time in history be a moment to remember, to learn from, and then let it rest in peace.”
…….The problem is all the dredging up gets done in the south doesn’t it…..you don’t see Northern governors initiating “Victory over the Confederacy Weeks” or “Uncle Billy Sherman Celebrations”……it’s basically as remote as Rome to everyone outside of the south …..usually it’s pretty harmless in the south with people dressing up like the Confederate widows in Savannah…..but equally often the intent is more nefarious as it was with McDonnell’s stupid proclamation which was aimed firmly at consolidating his Republican base (it was the Democratic base in 1861)……at bottom these people set these hares running and then when they are called on it start bleating about being victimized
Oomingmuk-Alaska // Apr 9, 2010 at 1:10 pm
Telly,
You missed the real point….the civil war was about the deaths of over a million Southerners who fought for States rights. Actually any soldier that has “been in the trenches” knows that he fights for the guys on either side of him, because no one else can save his ass. No Mom, no apple pie…just buds.
States rights is what was/is the driving force behind the Civil War and behind the tea party….get your big government off my ass!!! If it includes slavery, well is that not the probity of the State? If it includes medical care neither needed nor wanted…? Either issue is a death that may not be accepted by all, but this was /is still about the majority rules.
rbottoms // Apr 9, 2010 at 8:08 pm
You missed the real point….the civil war was about the deaths of over a million Southerners who fought for States rights.
You missed the real point….the civil war was about the deaths of over a million Southerners who fought for States rights. who died so a system that kept blacks chained like dogs might endure. Fortunately they lost.
Fixed.