In the last few days, several Confederate heritage sites have been passing around a post from our good friend George Purvis, the head of his one man band known as Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education … SHAPE, in other words. Here’s what Mr. Purvis has found: Continue reading
Here’s an example of how not knowing how to read (and not knowing how to quote) results in intellectual confusion. The example comes from a noteworthy Confederate heritage FB site.
Could it be that this is what Earl Hess wrote?
Recently a poster declared:
Secession had many causes, but none of them led to the war. Your proof positive is the Secession documents, which are nothing more than a list of grievances. So that being case, show proof using these documents that the war was fought over slavery. When you have done this I will show proof the issue was not slavery
The only event that leads to the war was Anderson moving from Moultrie to Sumter. Without that event there would have been no war.
Over at the gift that keeps on giving, the members place a great deal of emphasis on accurate history. That’s quite commendable. So what should one say when the following post appears?
It is one thing for someone seeking information to get something so confused that we understand why that person is requesting help. After all, the Dred Scott decision did nothing of the sort as described above. It opened the territories to slavery; it had nothing to do with the population of the North, preserving northern power in Congress (indeed, the implications pointed in precisely the other direction) or maintaining protective tariffs (I must admit I’ve never heard that one before). Republicans attacked the decision. In short, everything about this summary is wrong. However, one can say that the poster is seeking clarification or correction.
Seems that there’s none to be had among all the active participants of the group. Apparently not a single one of them knows better.