I'm surprised Rs don't erect monuments -- not "memorials', but 'monuments' - to other important figures in history we need to know about: the Rosenbergs, say. Or, more to their liking: Stalin, Hitler, Marx, Tojo. All people who had profound effects on Americans. And honestly - more in line with their policy views.
Stephen, your excellent piece is loaded with so much food for thought. As a born and bred Louisianian, early on I was indoctrinated about the nobility of the Confederacy's Lost Cause. I was told (not by my parents, mind you) that the Civil War was fought to preserve states rights not slavery. It was not too many years later that I figured out that was all BS and that the whole point of the war was to maintain the cruel enslavement of human beings to the enrichment of the upper class plantation owners (oligarchs). Quite some time ago, I came to the same conclusion that you did: erecting monuments to the Confederate insurrectionists and traitors of the USA is like Germany erecting monuments to glorify the murderous Nazi regime. On the parish courthouse grounds where I live, there was once a monument to honor the Confederates who died in the insurrection/rebellion but as providence would have it, it was blown off its pedestal during hurricane Laura in 2020 and it hasn't been replaced. Ah, poetic justice. Growing up, I frequently heard the chilling words that "The South shall rise again." With the help of the vapid Secretary of Defense and Cheeto-face, the epitaph is coming true before our very eyes.
Steven, you might find my comments below helpful (about how the Confederate Constitution and oath of allegiance prove all Confederates fought to support and defend slavery and the laws that supported slavery).
Exactly right! And I’ve now run out of ‘OMG’ exclamations after reading Trump’s disgusting Squawk Box quote! How is that not the lead story everywhere?
Stephen, thank you for these insightful lessons about our past and about our present. Hegseth's decision to resurrect statues and memorials that irrefutably glorify the people who supported the Confederacy belie Hegseth's absurd pretense that re-naming the bases after that very kind of person wasn't the true purpose behind his decision to revert back to base names that honored people who supported the Confederacy.
You also highlighted a crucial point that should be at least as important to all Americans. In multiple respects, Hegseth and Trump have chosen to honor people who committed treason. They are honoring people who swore to support our Constitution and then committed thoroughly premeditated violations of their oaths to viciously and very dangerously attack and undermine our Constitution.
You highlighted that Pike was "charged with insubordination and treason, but successfully appealed to President Andrew Johnson for a pardon in 1865." Accepting a pardon is legally and essentially the same as admitting guilt or confessing to the crime. See, e.g., https://amuseonx.substack.com/p/the-confession-clause-accepting-a. In other words, by Pike's own admission (as well as in the eyes of President Johnson) Pike committed treason.
Hegseth and Trump are deliberately and publicly honoring people who committed treason and violated their oaths of office. Such conduct plainly violates Hegseth's and Trump's own oaths. The oaths at issue are crucial to seeing the depth of the violations of their oaths by Hegseth and Trump.
As Article II, requires, twice Trump has sworn that everything he does will be done exclusively to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution" to "the best of" his "Ability." Article VI requires all legislators and "all executive and judicial Officers" (state and federal) to swear that everything they do will be done exclusively to "support this Constitution." So federal law (5 U.S.C. Section 3331) required Hegseth to swear (and he did swear) to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic" and to "bear true faith and allegiance" to the Constitution. By honoring people who committed treason, violated their own oaths of office and attacked and undermined our Constitution, Trump and Hegseth are publicly and deliberately violating their oaths of office (and honoring people who previously did the same).
Ah, Pete Hegseth—womanizer, booze hound, Christian Nationalist! Let’s not forget that the Klan’s Mission Statement was loud in its Christianity, too. (No bold tattoos, though, I don’t think.)
Stephen, many SCOTUS justices have included an apt aphorism in their opinions that started with Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in New York Trust Co. v. Eisner, 256 U. S. 345 (1921): “a page of history is worth a volume of logic.” That was repeated as recently as Jones v. Hendrix, 599 U.S. (2023).
You highlighted a point that proves the truth of Justice Holmes’s aphorism. You highlighted that some people like to contend or pretend that “the Confederacy’s motivation and goals were noble, heroic, and not at all centered on keeping human beings in bondage.” They say many Confederate soldiers “never fought for slavery, but for states' rights and for free trade.” I’ll give them that much. They certainly did fight for certain states’ so-called right to treat people as property and they fought for free trade in people as property.
The truth about why they ALL fought can be found in a few pages of history. But first consider the truth about why all U.S. servicemembers have fought every time they did or do fight.
Article VI of our Constitution requires all legislators and "all executive and judicial Officers" (state and federal) to swear that everything they do will be done exclusively to "support this Constitution." So federal law (5 U.S.C. Section 3331) requires every “individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services” to promise to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic" and to "bear true faith and allegiance" to the Constitution.
Article VI and federal statutes prescribing the oath of office for every person wearing the uniform of U.S. Armed Forces proved the primary reason that every member of our Armed Forces now fights or ever did fight. As a matter of fact and as a matter of law, every member of the U.S. Armed Forces did and does fight to support and defend our Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
The foregoing sheds light on the cause for which Confederates actually did fight (as a matter of fact and as a matter of law). They swore to “bear true faith and yield obedience to the Confederate States of America.” See, e.g., https://teva.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p15138coll9/id/21/. So Confederates necessarily swore to fight to support and defend the Constitution of the Confederate States.
Before southerners committed treason by physically attacking the U.S. and U.S. installations, they committed treason by writing the Constitution of the Confederate States dated March 11, 1861 (https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_csa.asp) and requiring oaths to support the Confederacy and its president. Thanks to these pages of history, we can see for ourselves the causes for which Confederate fighters fought.
The word “slave” or a variation of it is mentioned 10 times in the Confederate Constitution.
Article I (governing the legislature) emphasizes the following:
“No [ ] law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.”
Article IV (governing all states and territories under Confederate control) emphasized the following:
“The Confederate States may acquire new territory” and “[i]n all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government; and [ALL] the inhabitants of [ALL] Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.”
“The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.”
“No slave [ ] held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs,. or to whom such service or labor may be due.”
So whether anyone now does or previously did like to admit it or not, everyone who fought for the Confederacy de facto and de jure fought to support and defend slavery. They necessarily fought to support and defend the constitution and laws that purported to empower some people to enslave other people.
Guys, I love Public Notice, but I cringe when I see sentences like this: "...Black Lives Matter mural was painted over as Trump threatens to seize “take over” the predominately Black city." Likewise, it's the Mason-Dixon Line, not "Mason-Dixie."
Definitely a well-researched piece, raising lots of important points about the assault on history that the current administration is waging. Just my small niggles... sorry.
Less than a year into this hellscape of MAGA weirdness (and wondering why it's so important to them to reinstate Confederate monuments), I'm already telling myself that the MAGA popularity is so low that most of them will be voted out in 2026, after which Trump will die and Vance will be voted out by a Democratic landslide in 2028. I need to believe this.
I'm surprised Rs don't erect monuments -- not "memorials', but 'monuments' - to other important figures in history we need to know about: the Rosenbergs, say. Or, more to their liking: Stalin, Hitler, Marx, Tojo. All people who had profound effects on Americans. And honestly - more in line with their policy views.
And let’s not forget brave Pol Pot atop a rearing stallion!
George Wallace in his wheelchair comes to mind.
Stephen, your excellent piece is loaded with so much food for thought. As a born and bred Louisianian, early on I was indoctrinated about the nobility of the Confederacy's Lost Cause. I was told (not by my parents, mind you) that the Civil War was fought to preserve states rights not slavery. It was not too many years later that I figured out that was all BS and that the whole point of the war was to maintain the cruel enslavement of human beings to the enrichment of the upper class plantation owners (oligarchs). Quite some time ago, I came to the same conclusion that you did: erecting monuments to the Confederate insurrectionists and traitors of the USA is like Germany erecting monuments to glorify the murderous Nazi regime. On the parish courthouse grounds where I live, there was once a monument to honor the Confederates who died in the insurrection/rebellion but as providence would have it, it was blown off its pedestal during hurricane Laura in 2020 and it hasn't been replaced. Ah, poetic justice. Growing up, I frequently heard the chilling words that "The South shall rise again." With the help of the vapid Secretary of Defense and Cheeto-face, the epitaph is coming true before our very eyes.
With the DoE handing back “education” to the states, you’ll very see a return to this sort of specialized (specious?) “history”.
Steven, you might find my comments below helpful (about how the Confederate Constitution and oath of allegiance prove all Confederates fought to support and defend slavery and the laws that supported slavery).
Thank you!
Thanks, friend.
As soon as Trump finds out that Pike was for free trade, the statue is coming back down.
The media should be describing this man not as just a Confederate General but as a major leader in the white supremacist KKK terrorist organization.
Exactly right! And I’ve now run out of ‘OMG’ exclamations after reading Trump’s disgusting Squawk Box quote! How is that not the lead story everywhere?
Stephen, thank you for these insightful lessons about our past and about our present. Hegseth's decision to resurrect statues and memorials that irrefutably glorify the people who supported the Confederacy belie Hegseth's absurd pretense that re-naming the bases after that very kind of person wasn't the true purpose behind his decision to revert back to base names that honored people who supported the Confederacy.
You also highlighted a crucial point that should be at least as important to all Americans. In multiple respects, Hegseth and Trump have chosen to honor people who committed treason. They are honoring people who swore to support our Constitution and then committed thoroughly premeditated violations of their oaths to viciously and very dangerously attack and undermine our Constitution.
You highlighted that Pike was "charged with insubordination and treason, but successfully appealed to President Andrew Johnson for a pardon in 1865." Accepting a pardon is legally and essentially the same as admitting guilt or confessing to the crime. See, e.g., https://amuseonx.substack.com/p/the-confession-clause-accepting-a. In other words, by Pike's own admission (as well as in the eyes of President Johnson) Pike committed treason.
Hegseth and Trump are deliberately and publicly honoring people who committed treason and violated their oaths of office. Such conduct plainly violates Hegseth's and Trump's own oaths. The oaths at issue are crucial to seeing the depth of the violations of their oaths by Hegseth and Trump.
As Article II, requires, twice Trump has sworn that everything he does will be done exclusively to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution" to "the best of" his "Ability." Article VI requires all legislators and "all executive and judicial Officers" (state and federal) to swear that everything they do will be done exclusively to "support this Constitution." So federal law (5 U.S.C. Section 3331) required Hegseth to swear (and he did swear) to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic" and to "bear true faith and allegiance" to the Constitution. By honoring people who committed treason, violated their own oaths of office and attacked and undermined our Constitution, Trump and Hegseth are publicly and deliberately violating their oaths of office (and honoring people who previously did the same).
Ah, Pete Hegseth—womanizer, booze hound, Christian Nationalist! Let’s not forget that the Klan’s Mission Statement was loud in its Christianity, too. (No bold tattoos, though, I don’t think.)
Stephen, many SCOTUS justices have included an apt aphorism in their opinions that started with Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in New York Trust Co. v. Eisner, 256 U. S. 345 (1921): “a page of history is worth a volume of logic.” That was repeated as recently as Jones v. Hendrix, 599 U.S. (2023).
You highlighted a point that proves the truth of Justice Holmes’s aphorism. You highlighted that some people like to contend or pretend that “the Confederacy’s motivation and goals were noble, heroic, and not at all centered on keeping human beings in bondage.” They say many Confederate soldiers “never fought for slavery, but for states' rights and for free trade.” I’ll give them that much. They certainly did fight for certain states’ so-called right to treat people as property and they fought for free trade in people as property.
The truth about why they ALL fought can be found in a few pages of history. But first consider the truth about why all U.S. servicemembers have fought every time they did or do fight.
Article VI of our Constitution requires all legislators and "all executive and judicial Officers" (state and federal) to swear that everything they do will be done exclusively to "support this Constitution." So federal law (5 U.S.C. Section 3331) requires every “individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services” to promise to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic" and to "bear true faith and allegiance" to the Constitution.
The reason the foregoing requirements are relevant is that they were in place (but the federal statute was different) for about 100 years before southerners started the Civil War. See, e.g. https://oaths.us/us-military-oath-of-enlistment-and-oaths-of-office/
General George Washington's oath (https://www.archives.gov/dc/highlights/washington-oath)
Article VI and federal statutes prescribing the oath of office for every person wearing the uniform of U.S. Armed Forces proved the primary reason that every member of our Armed Forces now fights or ever did fight. As a matter of fact and as a matter of law, every member of the U.S. Armed Forces did and does fight to support and defend our Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
The foregoing sheds light on the cause for which Confederates actually did fight (as a matter of fact and as a matter of law). They swore to “bear true faith and yield obedience to the Confederate States of America.” See, e.g., https://teva.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p15138coll9/id/21/. So Confederates necessarily swore to fight to support and defend the Constitution of the Confederate States.
Before southerners committed treason by physically attacking the U.S. and U.S. installations, they committed treason by writing the Constitution of the Confederate States dated March 11, 1861 (https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_csa.asp) and requiring oaths to support the Confederacy and its president. Thanks to these pages of history, we can see for ourselves the causes for which Confederate fighters fought.
The word “slave” or a variation of it is mentioned 10 times in the Confederate Constitution.
Article I (governing the legislature) emphasizes the following:
“No [ ] law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.”
Article IV (governing all states and territories under Confederate control) emphasized the following:
“The Confederate States may acquire new territory” and “[i]n all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government; and [ALL] the inhabitants of [ALL] Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.”
“The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.”
“No slave [ ] held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs,. or to whom such service or labor may be due.”
So whether anyone now does or previously did like to admit it or not, everyone who fought for the Confederacy de facto and de jure fought to support and defend slavery. They necessarily fought to support and defend the constitution and laws that purported to empower some people to enslave other people.
Guys, I love Public Notice, but I cringe when I see sentences like this: "...Black Lives Matter mural was painted over as Trump threatens to seize “take over” the predominately Black city." Likewise, it's the Mason-Dixon Line, not "Mason-Dixie."
Definitely a well-researched piece, raising lots of important points about the assault on history that the current administration is waging. Just my small niggles... sorry.
Niggles are important, too.
Less than a year into this hellscape of MAGA weirdness (and wondering why it's so important to them to reinstate Confederate monuments), I'm already telling myself that the MAGA popularity is so low that most of them will be voted out in 2026, after which Trump will die and Vance will be voted out by a Democratic landslide in 2028. I need to believe this.
Bear in mind that while doing this, Trump is probably pandering to southerners for their votes.