Confederate Marksmanship

Over at the gift that keeps on giving, one of the usual suspects posted as follows:

gift

 

Recently the Virginia Flaggers visited yet another testament to Confederate marksmanship.  It’s located at Lexington, Virginia.

I’ll let you guess what it is.

About these ads

72 thoughts on “Confederate Marksmanship

    • Yep, that’s a testament to Confederate marksmanship, too–and A.S. Johnston’s grave. This offering from the SHPG really shows a lot of class, doesn’t it? What it has to do with preserving Southern heritage, I’m sure I don’t know. I’d like to commission a painting of George Pickett gorging himself on bourbon and shad while his division is being butchered at Five Forks…for a second time.

    • And, because everything is connected, there’s a connection to an earlier Brooks post regarding the guy who occupies that site. Had the flank attack been executed more efficiently, he might not have been riding around in the dark, alerting every skittish North Carolina “marksman”.

  1. What a fool. I guess every U. S. grave at Normandy is a testament to German marksmanship by using this sort of bonehead approach. I’m always amazed how U. S. soldiers can do no wrong with the Tatums of the world unless they are U. S. soldiers from 1861-65; those men, on the other hand, can do no right.

    • Imagine someone posting a picture of McGavock Confederate Cemetery and jeering the dead there. Then we’d hear all about heritage and how Yankees dishonor it. Remember, not only did David Tatum make that remark … others “liked” it, including the group’s “chaplain,” and no one thought it was tasteless.

      That’s all you need to know about the SHPG.

      • Well well seems I done gone big time, after all I made it on Crossroad’s blog.
        Yep I posted the wrong picture ! (so much for Google search)
        But like I have always said
        “ The only guy who don’t make a mistake is the guy who ain’t doing nothing”
        Thanks To Corey for telling me I messed up, When it comes to Dead Yankees I shall try to be more careful in the future.
        Hey that sounds like a good name for a Blog – “Dead Yankees”
        Yall have a good day !

        • In other words, Mr. Tatum now says he simply used the wrong picture, but he stands by what he says, and doesn’t quite understand why people might be offended by his actions. That in the process he continues to mock the final resting place of United States soldiers says a great deal about who he is.

          Can’t wait to see the people who defend Mr. Tatum’s actions.

        • What a crass little pissant you are, Mr. Tatum. What’s the matter, didn’t Mommy and Daddy show you enough attention when you were a child?

  2. I am a hospice nurse who once lived in a city with many German WW II veterans. In hospice we become quite intimate with our patients and I discussed their service to Nazi Germany with many of them. I see parallels with the misguided flaggers. In general I observed the following:

    1. They were not ashamed of their service in the German military. They felt they did what they had to do for their country. Some expressed they had no choice, much as I suppose unionists in the South had no choice but to serve in the Confederate military.

    2. All of them were ashamed of what the Nazi party became, and the catastrophe it wreaked on Germany and Europe. I saw no blame placed on the Allies for the war, nor any sentimental feelings for the Nazi government. None. Most were nostalgic about the Germany of their youth, and proud of their culture.

    3. All had become American citizens, and were patriotic. I saw no Nazi flags or other paraphanalia in their homes.

    My guess is that it would have horrified them if their sons and grandsons, who actually knew and loved them, had displayed swastikas to honor their service. I also suspect that they would think the display of swastikas by 7 or 8 generations in the future to be ridiculous and pathetic. Good men who suffered terribly furled these flags and laid them down. Doesn’t it trivialize them to pick them back up and wave them around like toys?

    • That certainly brings up the way that two nations dealt with such a horrifying war. In the US the myth of the Lost Cause sprang up which gave an out for all the veterans or at least the leadership, but in the process created a false perception of this idiotic war.

      In Germany they don’t allow a myth built around Nazism to develop. They go after it and those they want to idolize the Nazis hard and fast. They want their future generations to know the truth, not some propaganda myth and then see history repeat itself.

      • I wouldn’t be too quick on that comparison, Jimmy. The appropriate comparable is not in German, specifically West German, response to WW II but in the response of the still unified German nation to defeat in WW I. The western Allies learned their lessons in the aftermath of WW II from many mistakes made in the aftermath of WW I. The post WW-I corollary to the the Lost Cause is the Stab in the Back myth that took root in post-WW I Germany. While Stab in the Back myth is often is associated with Hitler and the Nazis, that’s a mistake. They didn’t create it; they were just particularly skilled at exploiting it and focusing on the already present Antisemitism in it.

        In both cases, you have a culture that in the years leading up to its war, highly prized and valued militarism and considered itself to be the social and cultural superior as well to its wartime opponent on the field of battle. Going into war, the martial proponents of each culture couldn’t conceive of a scenario in which its opponent had the will to seriously resist, much less prevail. After the war, they were faced with the unthinkable prospect of coming to terms with defeat. The factual explanation, that the enemy WON; that the militaristic culture was BEATEN, produced unendurable cognitive dissonance. The explanation that took root to resolve and attempt to eliminate that dissonance was that defeat was not due to the enemy without, but the enemy within.

    • Notwithstanding the crushing material defeat of the Confederate armed forces in 1865, it is impossible to conclude that the cultural essence of the Confederacy was repudiated in any meaningful way during the post-bellum period. History indicates that the supposedly vanquished South never really came anywhere close to rejecting the aims of the “Lost Cause”, especially when one considers this situation in comparison to the near total evaporation of the Nazis as a political force in Germany during the post-1945 period. I suppose some cynics might argue that this was nothing more than a show by the Germans to convince Allied authorities of their anti-Hitler bonafides and, in fact, the real source of their antipathy towards the Nazis was merely for losing the war. However, I think it is recognized that subsequent generations of Germans are by and large completely sincere in their anti-Nazism. In the decades following Appomattox, however, the myth of the “Lost Cause” first manifested itself into covert and sometimes overt resistance which became the catalyst for a century of Jim Crow. Today, the American nation is still divided along the lines of numerous issues including race that have continued to develop and evolve since 1865. Post-racial America? Hardly. One only has to look at the Electoral College map arising from the 2012 Presidential Election to see evidence of this division.

      • This is exactly what I’m referring to. The Lost Cause mythology flourishes today. God help us if the government actually stepped into the debate (probably a really bad idea for numerous reasons) and outlawed the Confederate flags or flagging (First Amendment etc. not withstanding). The screams of outrage would be deafening, but then the fact that the screamers would be erroneous in their assessment on the issue concerning history would be ignored.
        I guess the only real way to defeat this insidious mythistory is by teaching the truth using factual based lessons.

        • That was the motivating force behind the Lost Cause vendetta to destroy James Longstreet and others who refused to join in the Lost Cause. He accepted that the South had lost and he accepted Reconstruction. The Lost Causers could not afford to have someone of Longstreet’s stature getting away with doing it, especially after he led primarily Black forces against the White League attackers in New Orleans. It also served another objective, the identification of a scapegoat for defeat to take any onus away from the Lost Cause’s deity, Robert E. Lee. Longstreet filled the bill to a T. In addition to his political views, he was high enough in rank to be a plausible scapegoat and he wasn’t a Virginian.

          There actually is a favorable reference to his ancestor in W.E.B. DuBois’s Black Reconstruction. Longstreet was no saint. He also did not turn into the post-Confederate version of William Lloyd Garrison. What he was was a former Confederate who was willing to accept a vision of the South’s future as accepting a new order, including the political involvement of Blacks. He definitely saw whites as remaining in charge and manipulating the Black vote. However, I am sure that the Boston Brahmins and New York elites that used the Irish and Italians as ward heelers, etc. never believed the day would come that those minorities would holding the reins of power but it was that entry point that enabled those immigrants and their descendants to start climbing the political ladder.

          Ultimately, it makes me sad. The success of the Lost Cause meant a huge squandering of human assets not only in what the members of the Southern people who were Black could have accomplished without having to fight to get over so many barriers but also in what the white population could have accomplished if so much time and energy had not been devoted to oppressing the Blacks. With the rest of the country turning its back on what was happening in the South and, in many areas, severely discriminating against Blacks as well, that tragedy became the nation’s loss as well.

  3. Aren’t those more recent graves since they have “stand up stones”. Aren’t Union burials marked with ground level markers in Gettysburg? That seems to be what I remembe seeing during my visit there in 1998.

    • You are correct. Given the wall in the background, I’d wager that these headstones are of United States military personnel that ring the Gettysburg burials west of the circular path.

      In other words, David Tatum is mocking the gravesites of United States military personnel. Now watch the usual suspects defend that.. They certainly won’t condemn it.

      • Well Tatum has now posted on the ol’ SHPG wall that he was “informed” that the graves are “not at Gettysburg but at the National cemetery…” Huh?? I guess he’s trying to cover his tail, and even in that effort proceeds to make himself look like the same fool as before.

        • One would then simply remove the post.

          Mr. Tatum is an officer of the SHPG. So is the so-called “chaplain” who “liked” the post. So these are not a few stray individuals, but members of the group’s leadership.

      • This is indeed one of the post-World War II burial sections in the Soldiers’ National Cemetery at Gettysburg, where former US Army officers and thier spouses are buried. There are no Civil War burials in this section.

  4. I think you could go to many places in the South and point to Confederate graves and say, “That’s where black men expressed their displeasure with the institution of slavery.”

  5. Bummer gets a kick out of examining the stylized print of the Southern Marksman, in their winter garb, smiling and conversing, in the snow, anticipating the carnage to come. The thrill of future battle is comical in this rendering. Suppose the SH folks believe this is how it really was. Amazing!

    Bummer

  6. In addition to the offensive odor generated by this’ insuilt to American soldiers, these cretins also apparently are too stupid or ill-informed to understand Civil War infantry tactics and the meaning of the term “marksmanship”. Or would they agree that the 6,500 casualties in Pickett’s Charge were a product of Yankee “marksmanship”?

  7. What an incredible comment. I imagine even many fallen Confederate soldiers would turn in their graves at such a statement. One wonders what many Civil War veterans on both sides would have made of such a viewpoint 150 years on. Interestingly having recently read Sears account of Gettysburg he notes that there are undoubtedly a significant number of Confederates buried alongside Union troops there, a symptom of the decomposed and unidentifiable state that many of the men were in at the time of their burial. The mind boggles at how any individual can denigrate the horrors of war in such a fashion, reducing death to an opportunity for an ill-considered joke.

  8. Confederate “marksmen” had an unfortunate habit of bumping off their own: About a year after Jackson’s demise, an almost identical friendly fire incident at the Battle of the Wilderness,only a few miles from the Chancellorsville battlefield, not only seriously wounded Lt. Gen. James Longstreet, putting him out of commission for the remainder of the critical 1864 campaign, but killed Brig. Gen,.Micah Jenkins who was riding along with Longstreet (it indirectly ultimately killed Longstreet; when the elderly Longstreet was battling pneumonia, the weakened tissue in his throat, caused by a bullet wound from that shooting, burst, causing a hemorrhage).

  9. The ignorance, stupidity, vulgarity and thoughtlessness of this posting is unfathomable.

    I wonder if the poster is aware that the photograph shown is one of the graves of veterans of possibly the Spanish-American War, World Wars I & II and Korea.

    Ignorant morons that don’t deserve the attention given to them.

    They are un-American jackasses.

  10. Corey is correct. The Union grave markers at GB are flat. Re: Longstreet. He still managed to live forty years after his wounding in the Wilderness, quite a feat when life expectency was in the high 50s/low 60s. Jenkins, considered one of the “boy generals” of he CW, was an up-and-coming brigadier and his death, unfortunately, gets little press today (most goes to Longstreet’s wounding). Question: What’s the SHPG? Assume it’s a Yahoo group. ??? Finally, I would like to point out that Pete Taylor and I spent a week in the Shenandoah Valley last fall. One of our stops was at the Confederate Cemetery in Winchester (Turner Ashby is buried there). We were quiet and respectful. I would never even THINK about posting such a message. Kinda sad when you think about it.

    • The Southern Heritage Preservation Group uses its Facebook page to demonstrate its commitment to preserving Confederate heritage … as its members define it. Unfortunately, comments such as the one highlighted here are not that unusual over there. Neither is a rather astonishing ignorance of history.

  11. Pingback: Why Are Neoconfederates Akin to Al Qaeda? « Student of the American Civil War

  12. FWIW, I have a number of Southern friends on several Yahoo CW groups. I have talked with them on the phone and by email a number of times and consider them friends. Good friends. I cannot imagine any of them, their pro-Southern/pro-Confederate sympathies notwithstanding, who would support or endorse Mr. Tatum’s off-the-wall rantings. Not one.

    • According to Ms. Chastain, one cannot use historical facts in an attempt to draw any meaningful comparisons between the experiences of defeated nations and causes when any differences are found to exist between said nations and causes.

      Furthermore, she goes on to say that,

      “ … attempts to analogize the Third Reich and the Confederacy are a no-go because the differences that existed between the CSA and Nazi Germany far outweight the similarites.

      Some examples:

      There were nine million Jews in Europe before the Third Reich — three million afterward. By contrast, the black population in the United States, before the war, during it, and afterward — both during slavery and after emancipation — grew at basically the same rate as the USA’s white population … Laws in various states mandated that slaveowners support aged slaves who were no longer able to work and that pregnant slaves be given lighter duties. By contrast, inmates in Nazi death camps were worked to death and/or given rations scientifically calculated to starve them in three months. Compare that with American slaves, who ate much the same thing white people ate — at least, in the South. What they ate is called “soul food” today and it’s viewed very positively — tasty and nutritious, if rather high in starch.

      There were no concentration camps that slaves were herded into in the Confederate states. …”

      Thus, according to Ms. Chastain, any comparison between the postwar experiences of defeat between the CSA and Nazi Germany are invalid because the Nazis murdered the Jews under it’s control and worked its slaves to death, whereas the CSA kept the black population constant and did not work it’s slaves to death.

      However, there are other significant differences Ms. Chastain could have pointed to that would have had just as must weight in supporting the logic of her argument as the ones outlined in her article, including:

      1. Unlike Adolf Hitler, Jefferson Davis was not born in Braunau am Imm, Austria-Hungary.

      2. The Confederacy did not develop, manufacture and deploy Me-262 jet fighters in the latter stages of the conflict, and certainly not in time to support Gordon’s last ditch assault against Grant’s forces in March, 1865 at Fort Stedman.

      3. General Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson was absolutely never referred to as the “Desert Fox”.

      4. Unlike the German high command prior to D-Day, Robert E. Lee never made the mistake of keeping his reserves too far from the front and thus, unlike the Germans, he prevented them from being exposed to the risk of enemy air attacks had the Union actually possessed aircraft at the time.

      5. As far as we know, no Confederate forces ever invaded Russia, and even if they did, we are certain that they never reached the outskirts of Moscow.

      6. Historians have concluded after painstaking research that at no time did Jefferson Davis ever sport a mustache similar to the one worn by Charlie Chaplin.

      • She did what she always does. She took something and turned into something else that was totally different from what was said. She dodged the entire point of the post. I’m not surprised. I also don’t want to argue with her or the other loons of her stripe because it is a pointless exercise in futility. She and they ignore factual evidence in favor of fictional fantasy. You can’t argue with the inmates of an insane asylum because they are not capable of rational thought. Let’s see how she twists this one.

    • Cool beans! I have been called a “slobbering cyber-war dog”! And to think a few short weeks ago, before discovering your wonderful blog, I was a middle-aged, mild-mannered hospice nurse; the most vicious epithet hurled my way was “dork,” most often by my children because of my interest in the Civil War. Woof woof baby!

    • All right, I admit my weakness – I clicked on the link.

      That’s quite a Annie Wilkes you have following you around, ain’t it?

      The fact her surname is “Chastain” is just a little too perfect…

    • I love how she totally missed the point of what I said about Nazi Germany and the Lost Cause. Only an idiot would come up with what she said OR more likely she wanted to shift the argument into something totally ridiculous to make her seem intelligent.
      The point is that the Lost Cause is a myth and to adhere to it today is to adhere to an obvious lie. Chastain just wants to idolize her ancestors and like most of the Lost Causers seeks to create a fictional version of the South to do so.
      Fortunately Americans are asking questions about the Civil War and the Lost Cause fails to hold up to scrutiny. The Lost Causers want the primary sources to speak for themselves…they do and what they say is the exact oppostie of what the Lost Causers say.

      • Same with what I said. “Stab in the Back” wasn’t created by the Nazis. The Nazis simply exploited the mentality that could not accept that the other side won honestly and required a scapegoat.

  13. And that may well be, Brooks. I’m an associate member of the S.C.V. Do I agree with all the rhetoric? Not a chance! But I do enjoy the magazine, which helps me understand the mindset of neo-Confederates (jeez, I really don’t like that word but can’t think of a better one). My success in negotiating contracts with the M.E.A. as an assistant super or superintendent came about because I knew exactly what they were going to ask for before they even came into the first negotiations session. I used to negotiate contracts for their side. Same with my teaching at Central Michigan University. I wanted my student teachers to understand what it was like to teach in a crappy, inner-city district with no money for supplies, a leaky roof and students who didn’t give a crap. You and I have discussed this before on “Study.” We didn’t agree then and I doubt we will now.

    • I’m not sure what you are talking about when you say that we disagreed on the issues you described, perhaps because I don’t recall discussing them. I certainly don’t hold SCV membership against anyone who happens to be a member, and I would not taint the entire organization with these people. But when it comes to the SHPG, we’re talking about no dissent, including from your friend from your Yahoo group. I simply pointed out that not a single person protested the post on the SHPG. If that’s fine with you, so be it.

      • I’m surprised you don’t remember. We had quite a heated discussion of it on “Study,” for which I have apologized several times, and for which I left the group for about a year and a half As for someone disagreeing with the post on SHPG, I am a bit chagrined that nobody challeged it.

        • Sorry, Bob, I don’t ever recall saying anything critical about your interest in the SCV or about your approach to negotiating. I’m sure a check of the archives for that newsgroup would confirm that.

          • No, it’s not “fine with me.” I would think that some, even on that group, would have said, “Whoah, wait a minute.” As for our disagreement, I remember it quite clearly. As a result, I left “Study” for about a year-and-a-half. I have felt bad about those exchanges ever since. I was rude and discourteous, just the kind of thing I decry on other CW groups. I probably had one too many manhattans when I replied to you. Speaking of manhattans, my friend Pete Taylor demonstrated last fall when we toured the Shenandoah Vally that Evan Williams bourbon is a much better “base” for manhattans than Canadian Club, Segram’s 7 or V.O.

            • Since you have entered my area of expertise, I’ll jump in here !! I prefer just a little bite in my manhattans. Jack Daniels if you please !!

            • Well, it appears that none of the usual suspects on cwh2 said “Whoa, wait a minute.” As for your memory of what happened on Study, a check of the archives and a chat with a few members leads me to suggest that you may need to refresh your memory concerning your departure.

              • Actually, no, my memory of it is just fine. I got into a disagreement with you about tyring to understand the Southern perspective. How when I was a teacher at Central Michigan University I wanted my students to understand what it was like to teach in an inner-city school with a leaky roof and no supplies. IIRC, I called you “narrowminded” and some other equally uncomplimentary adjectives. Realizing that I had made an ass of myself, I left. That’s just what happened.

    • That’s the question we all ask. She’s a self-appointed defender of Confederate heritage fresh from her other causes, where she also often finds herself in hot water. She’s also a struggling self-published e-book author.

      • Ah, but she’s not just your generic “self-published e-book author”. She’s the self-described author of “Southern Romance and Fiction”, including such best-selling and award-winning novellas as Love at Lake Lucy. Somehow this is tied in with her self-proclaimed role as a defender of “Southern Heritage”, the content of which tends to be amorphous, ambiguous, and flexible.

  14. Pingback: “This is Outrages [sic]“ « Student of the American Civil War

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s