The most recent 20 comments posted to Electrolite by Jack Womack:

Will, at no point did I say, hint, or imply that the author, Donald Livingstone, was a liar.

I did say, hint, and imply that his interpretation of the facts differs considerably from that of the mainstream of US history; that in this instance Livingstone's application of the facts to fit his thesis demonstrates an unexpected, and active willingness to view and present the Confederacy in a light far, far more positive than would seem necessary to support an argument for secession.

I thought I should point that out.

Will, after your second referral to that article I went to the site, downloaded and read.

The author, Donald W. Livingstone (a philosophy professor at Emory), brings to the field of antebellum US history the same intellectual rigor that Velikovsky brought to the field of astronomy.

I imagine most US historians would be in the minority, were they to concur with arguments that propose African-Americans were freer in the South than in the North; that over time, down there, "slavery was developing into an apprenticeship system;" that the Confederacy had more right to secede from the North than the colonies had to pull away from Britain; that the Confederacy was a far more worthy bearer of moral principle than was the Union; that in fact there were more abolitionists in the South than there were in the North; that old Honest Abe was not only a worse racist than Jeff Davis (well, we all knew that) but was, indeed, a war criminal (we won't even go into Sherman)....

I most recently encountered this particular spin on this key part of US history in a book entitled "The South Was Right!" (Pelican, 1994, still available on Amazon I see...) Being meant for a general audience, that particular book had no footnotes, but I imagine the authors shared more than some of the same source material.

Graydon:
>>I can accept your judgement that simply killing the slaveholding class wouldn't work; I don't understand American cultural myths, and I certainly don't like the idea as an idea.

American cultural myths? You mean such as steering clear of liquidating the kulaks?

>>The actions of the United States as the occupying power in Japan after the Second World War provide something close to an historical precedent of trials on that scale, btw.

A quick google and we find: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/peopleevents/pandeAMEX101.html

Which gives a quick rundown on the postwar Tokyo trials. I note, from the piece in question:

>>Twenty-eight high-ranking political and military leaders were indicted on 55 counts of "crimes against peace, conventional war crimes, and crimes against humanity."

Fair enough. Further:

>>On November 4, 1948, Webb announced that all of the defendants had been found guilty. Seven were sentenced to death, sixteen to life terms, two to lesser terms, two had died during the trials and one had been found insane.

Seven in number, to be executed. Somewhat less than the entire Japanese officer corps, not to mention their civilian supporters, financiers, and attendant politicians (in this instance Jefferson Davis -- my fault, Hirohito -- again got away).

>>On December 23, 1948, General Tojo and six others were hung at Sugamo prison. MacArthur, afraid of embarrassing and antagonizing the Japanese people, defied the wishes of President Truman and barred photography of any kind, instead bringing in four members of the Allied Council to act as official witnesses.


My only remaining question regarding the aptness of this comparison is, then, did Japan secede from the Union prior to or following Pearl Harbor?

Apropos of this thread, who do I see peddling his own alternate-history novel GETTYSBURG when I turn on the TV this morning but our old friend Newt Gingrich?

Unsurprisingly, Publishers Weekly notes that the text "betray[s] a certain bias (the Confederate men are noble and wise, the Union leaders hot-tempered and vindictive)."

No doubt young Newt heard many tales of the War of Northern Aggro, growing up. And we can see in his actions since how well he took their lessons to heart.

That said, I doubt that introducing policies at the conclusion of the war that would have punished, in whatever way, all those who supported the CSA, in whichever way, "until the last Confederate veteran was dead" would have sufficed (in a world of alternate history, of course) to render Newt and his (in this instance, specifically, Southern) brethren any more reasonable, or even bearable, than they are, considering that the last Confederate veteran died in 1959.

Timothy, DeGenova wrote a letter last week to the Columbia Spectator:

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/03/31/3e881bf8297f2

In which he attempts to elaborate and qualify.

Nixon's misdeeds, well let's see what I can remember off the top:

1)accessory after the fact (let's be generous)to political burglary i.e. the Watergate break-in;
2) conspiracy, re: the aforementioned;
3) obstruction of justice, re: the aforementioned;
4) destruction of evidence re: the aforementioned;
5) illegal use of the CIA re: the aforementioned;
6) illegal use of the FBI, re: the aforementioned;
7) illegal use of the IRS re: certain of those on the administration's famed enemies list.

And let's not forget

8) tax fraud, personal

That covers, well, some part of the domestic, mostly-Watergate-related offenses. Misdeeds relating to Cambodia et. al. -- well, you get the idea.

Simon, two questions:

1) So if Lieberman is nominated, and runs as the Democratic candidate against Bush, we should be no worse off were we to stick with the presently-office-holding evil with whom we are graced?

2)"(I hope this is not because Lieberman is Jewish. I did vote for him for VP, when I did not know so much about him, but I did know he was Jewish. I hope I'm voting against him because his positions and his attitude repel me.)"

But you don't know for sure?

Several years ago Morley Safer did a segment on Nauru on 60 Minutes, specifically regarding the investment of a certain amount of national capital by island honchos toward the production of what appeared to be a positively dreadful French musical based on the life of Michaelangelo.

Among other things, in this show ("Agony! Ecstasy! Guano!" -- actually I have no idea of what the title actually was)Mike was given, as we would all hope, a female love interest.

Needless to say the show never made it from Paris to Broadway. The issue of money laundering was, ahem, raised.

"That's right baby, when you got it, flaunt it, flaunt it!"

Comment statistics for Jack Womack on the Electrolite blog

Total: 18 comments. View all these comments on a single page.