Confederate Symbology in Contemporary American Foxhunting

[SLW]

@mvp

No, ma’am, I do not advocate some kind of erasure of the Entire South. Show me the bit of writing I did here that justifies that reading and I’ll own what’s mine.

Yes, the South is indeed much more that fact years of war. Of course those five years of war were, in fact, about that longer preceding historical chapter you mention.

I don’t think that erasing history is possible, nor even an ethical option. It certainly is not useful to, among others, the black people in the South who presently are more likely to be poor than are the white people there. Had anything other than critical history corrected that situation, then you would be right about deciding what bits of history to honor being a trivial matter.

If you want to get into a deep discussion of the purposes and uses of history-writing and historiography, I’ll welcome you into those topics. I have been a professional historian and had the opportunity to learn a whole lot about them.

IMO, the American public has not done a particularly good job of handling the abhorrent parts of its own history. This is not to say that that is not possible. Germany comes to mind as a State that has had to work through this thorny, painful problem.

And yet here (on this thread and in the US), some folks would rather suggest careless, sarcastic and mean-spirited solutions that ignore the unjust legacies of the past that continue into the present. FWIW, I don’t think the critical historians are the people who should feel shame.

Thank you for expanding on your answer.

[FitzE]

@SLW

I think your stereotyping and bias is coming through loud and clear if you believe using the word “Southern” in relation to the color of fabric is wrong.

Back at you that you think it doesn’t. If you can slow down, read for comprehension, and understand that Southern grey is not a thing unless it’s a work around for Confederate grey, I think you’ll finally get the point here. As @mvp clearly and simply walk you through, there is nothing about the American South that is grey. If you use the term “Southern grey” you do so only as a work around for the term “Confederate grey”. All other uses and references to Southern are fine b/c, one more time (I don’t see how this can be any clearer but…) they aren’t substitutes for the word Confederate. That’s no Confederate Gothic, Confederate hospitality, Confederate food.

Before you spew all kinds of invective at posters, try to grasp the specifics of the discussion.

[FitzE]

@mvp

No, ma’am, I do not advocate some kind of erasure of the Entire South. Show me the bit of writing I did here that justifies that reading and I’ll own what’s mine.

Yes, the South is indeed much more that fact years of war. Of course those five years of war were, in fact, about that longer preceding historical chapter you mention.

I don’t think that erasing history is possible, nor even an ethical option. It certainly is not useful to, among others, the black people in the South who presently are more likely to be poor than are the white people there. Had anything other than critical history corrected that situation, then you would be right about deciding what bits of history to honor being a trivial matter.

If you want to get into a deep discussion of the purposes and uses of history-writing and historiography, I’ll welcome you into those topics. I have been a professional historian and had the opportunity to learn a whole lot about them.

IMO, the American public has not done a particularly good job of handling the abhorrent parts of its own history. This is not to say that that is not possible. Germany comes to mind as a State that has had to work through this thorny, painful problem.

And yet here (on this thread and in the US), some folks would rather suggest careless, sarcastic and mean-spirited solutions that ignore the unjust legacies of the past that continue into the present. FWIW, I don’t think the critical historians are the people who should feel shame.

Thanking you for sharing your expertise in this area. This is such a great post, but the bit I bolded really stands out. When I see all the mocking lists of words posters are “claiming” should be dropped from usage (in the other thread) I am astonished. That kind of mockery and belittling chills contributions from the very people who may experience real distress from certain uses. It’s so embarrassing that adults are willing to use that kind of disingenuous redirection rather than sincere engagement for meaningful change. They say “sarcastic” because that seems funny or smart somehow, but the real description, as you note above, is careless and mean-spirited.

Those posts and some of the ones here are going to age like raw chicken.

[SLW]

@FitzE

Back at you that you think it doesn’t. If you can slow down, read for comprehension, and understand that Southern grey is not a thing unless it’s a work around for Confederate grey, I think you’ll finally get the point here. As @mvp clearly and simply walk you through, there is nothing about the American South that is grey. If you use the term “Southern grey” you do so only as a work around for the term “Confederate grey”. All other uses and references to Southern are fine b/c, one more time (I don’t see how this can be any clearer but…) they aren’t substitutes for the word Confederate. That’s no Confederate Gothic, Confederate hospitality, Confederate food.

Before you spew all kinds of invective at posters, try to grasp the specifics of the discussion.

Thank you for clarifying how to use the word Southern.