This Christmas, remember to decorate your favorite tree with ornaments celebrating the South Carolina Red Shirts, who were a paramilitary white supremacist terrorist group during Reconstruction who claimed credit for the “redemption” of the state under Wade Hampton in 1877.
And you might want to visit this museum as well. Enjoy this slideshow.
After all, we’ve seen this sort of White Christmas spirit before …
Or this in Texas … or in Mississippi …
And, of course, in Florida:
Oh .. so this is why the Hathaway “red shirt” observations?
Read this … then you tell me …
I’m a little slow on the up start, thank you for this! 🙂
I think I’ll just stick with my little (2″ x 2″) red drum. Made of metal, it’s not very fancy at all. Bought it at a gift shop in Fredericksburg about twenty years ago. I hang it on the tree every year as a reminder of the mettle that my ancestors showed back then to preserve the Union — Conrad Meinert, 46th Illinois; Frederick Raelly, 17th Indiana Light Artillery; William Herald, 48th Wisconsin. RIP you guys. You done good.
They suredid, I’d like to add my great-great-great grandfather, 1SG Noble W. Johnson of the 23RD Kentucky (US) to that list of men who proved themselves against a bunch of rebels to help save this Union.
And Isaac N. Foskett, Co. C/D of the U.S. Engineers who, according to his diary, spent Christmas Day, 1862 building himself and his mates a log structure at Falmouth, Virginia, only two weeks after laying pontoons under fire at Fredericksburg. To all of them we owe a great debt.
I’m simply speechless.
Here’s so something for the heritage crowd.
One can still pay homage to their ancestors without twisting history, insulting African-Americans, or being an ass. You just have to accept historical fact and realize your heritage may not be your neighbor’s heritage. Give respect to get respect.
Pretty good summary in four minutes. I have but two quibbles: 1. It kind of gave the wrong impression about the three-fifths provision, the purpose of which was to reduce the influence of the southern states by not counting slaves as whole people since they couldn’t vote. Many northerners thought they shouldn’t be counted at all, while many southerners wanted them counted as whole people to inflate their representation in the House of Representatives. The three-fifths provision was a compromise. 2. Referring to Lincoln as a “liberal Republican” is taking him totally out of historical context. Lincoln was an ex-Whig, and retained many aspects of the Whig Party’s philosophy — rapid economic expansion, a market-oriented economy, high tariffs, internal improvements, strong public schools that taught moral principles, limited liability for corporations, temperance, restrictions on capital punishment, etc. Contemporaries referred to him as a “black Republican,” but he wasn’t even one of the “radicals.” If one was to use a more modern term to try to describe Lincoln, it might be as a “Tory reformer,” since he was basically conservative in his philosophy but believed in changing the status quo when necessity or morality demanded it. Perhaps, Lincoln, the politician, was best summarized by Frederick Douglass: “Viewed from the genuine abolition ground, Mr. Lincoln seemed tardy, cold, dull and indifferent; but measuring him by the sentiment of his country, a sentiment he was bound as a statesman to consult, he was swift, zealous, radical, and determined. Though Mr. Lincoln shared the prejudices of his white fellow-countrymen against the negro, it is hardly necessary to say that in his heart of hearts he loathed and hated slavery.”
I’m curious if there might any connection in a sardonic way between these “red shirts” and the pro-Union southern group Heroes of America, also known as the “red strings.” As I understand it, they would have stray red strings on their clothing, near buttons often, to help identify themselves to fellow members. In other words, did the Red Shirts adopt the color as a way to mock the Unionists? Or, more likely, I would expect it was just an ironic coincidence.