Quote:Here's an interesting opinion piece in today's Washington Post:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteveryt...d=pm_pop_b

 

"Perhaps most perniciously, neo-Confederates now claim that the South seceded for states’ rights. When each state left the Union, its leaders made clear that they were seceding because they were for slavery and against states’ rights. In its “Declaration Of The Causes Which Impel The State Of Texas To Secede From The Federal Union,” for example, the secession convention of Texas listed the states that had offended them: Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan and Iowa. These states had in fact exercised states’ rights by passing laws that interfered with the federal government’s attempts to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act. Some also no longer let slaveowners “transit” through their states with their slaves. “States’ rights” were what Texas was seceding <i>against</i>. Texas also made clear what it was seceding <i>for</i>: white supremacy.

 

<blockquote>
"We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable."

 

"Teaching or implying that the Confederate states seceded for states’ rights is not accurate history. It is white, Confederate-apologist history. It bends — even breaks — the facts of what happened."


</blockquote>
Errrr.

 

James Louen has made a hell of a living out of being a revisionist historian.

 

http://www.amazon.com/James-W.-Loewen/e/B000APVWNE

 

His crowning achievement is - I'm not making this up - "Lies My Teacher Told Me".  It's like trying to use Oliver Stone's nonsense book "The Untold History of the United States" as the definitive history of the Cold War.  I mean, you may have a point, but you're using a guy with an obvious agenda to make it.

---