Almost four years ago I wrote an article regarding Tucker Carlson. The article was posted in “The Abbeville Institute” and described his attitude, as he had stated, regarding the South and its history with the Confederate States of America. My opinion was that Carlson (and I still have this opinion) is an intelligent conservative but misguided regarding the South’s Cause.
I have similar thoughts about Donald Trump’s attitude and knowledge about the South. And, I do believe both of these men are willing students of history– though there may still be hills to climb. After all, one is from California (Carlson) and the other from New York (Trump). Each of these two abstract Yankee-hills is less elevated than Marye’s Heights but as much, perhaps, as Little Round Top.
I am an old man now, but hope some Southerner, if not me, will press forward with this consonant climb.
I have no such positive attitude about such ilk as Mark Levin, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity or a host (babbling failed conservative wannabees) of talk show “artists” and many of the cable news gobblers and their preening Republicans, who understand the Constitution and its particularly cognizant Southern history about as much as most college academicians do (most of whom should still be in Jr, High School along with their “teachers”). The sort of dogma from this crowd attempts to club into submission the seeded conservative model of the South that was the original Union’s political soil.
Born of the Grand old lady of Virginia, the South not only has provided the Union’s political earthen gifted soil but a predominance of writers, musicians, farmers, explorers, soldiers and blood—blood that has been shed for some magnificent defenses. And even some not so magnificent from the politically barren and toxic land of “My country right or wrong…”
Every time I hear a comment (usually voiced by a lawyer) regarding a “constitutional lawyer” I want to gag. I wonder, what is a “nonconstitutional lawyer”? And what did lawyers (most Founders weren’t practicing lawyers) have do with the Constitution apart from the ones who presented it to the folks who were to ratify it. As historian (a real one) Clyde Wilson, Professor Emeritus, University of South Carolina has said, “The Constitution is not a legal document, it is a political document.” And the Founders did NOT give it to us to use, but to ratify or NOT.
It is from the political grift of constitutional lawyers that twaddle like the 14th Amendment is on board with a no longer federal constitution but in fact a “national” constitution. Both Forrest McDonald and David Lawrence (U.S. News and World Report) wrote carefully researched essays on the lack of authority of the 14th Amendment. But with today’s politically mediocre scholars—forget it!!
Supreme Law Library : Authors : David Lawrence : no14th
Was the Fourteenth Amendment Constitutionally Adopted? – Abbeville Institute
But I am drifting a bit.
Four years ago, Carlson made an erroneous comment (this sparked my doing the article for A.I.). He said that no reasonable person could or would, support the Southern confederacy– and “only a few” do. Tucker and the Confederacy – Abbeville Institute
That statement on its face is wrong within the bounds of various polls both North and South. And as a longtime member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans I can assure him that it AIN’T just a “few”!
During a recent discussion (approx. hour long) between Tucker Carlson and Ken Paxton (Texas, Attorney General) the following exchange regarding illegal aliens and their friendlies, sanctuary cities, was part of the discussion: Ken Paxton: How Soros Protects Drug Cartels, Being Blacklisted by Fox News, and the Laken Riley Act – YouTube
From Tucker Carlson:
“Can states just say we are just going to ignore federal law? We had a Civil War over that, didn’t we?”
Paxton did not pause but immediately said:
“No! As long as federal law is constitutional, and it doesn’t infringe on state rights…”
“Right.” Carlson
“Not every federal law is correct…” Paxton.
With no attempt (read their lips) to take out of context the point is clear: Federal law overrides state law only if such federal law is constitutional under the Federal Constitution. Furthermore, Carlson seemed to not only have no disagreement with Paxton but seemed to agree (Carlson replied, “Right”).
“Not every federal law is correct.” Paxton continued.
No disagreement from Carlson.
Federal law (nor are its court[s], supreme, or lesser appellate) is not the law of the land. It is the law of the federal land. Only those laws which are agreed upon within the ratified federation agreement (The Federal Constitution) are law.
But naturally early in the interview, Paxton said, and Carlson naturally agreed, that slavery was bad. Paxton even stated that “we screwed up.”
It seems that if any conservative view of the Founders and/or their documents on government is brought up that first the issue of slavery must be brought up so that everyone can twist themselves into political knots decrying slavery. But more importantly in today’s political world, the supposedly evilness regarding the American South must be the live hand grenade in the room.
“We screwed up.”? Who the hell is “we”? Well-schooled blacks from Frederick Douglass to Booker T. Washington to Walter Williams are turning in their graves, I expect. No slave ship ever sailed from the American South. All American slave ships were of Northern registration. The North was the navigation society, the South, the agrarian.
Slavery is always presented only in the conception of the American South (although the South brought no slaves to these shores). And only 5% of African slaves ended up in the American South. Most were unloaded into South America (by Yankee and European slaver-traders) or the Caribbean island-states.
Ken Paxton is a well-read and more than capable attorney (among millions who are not) but still his conservative leanings are fraught with fear of criticism if he does not mention the EVILS of slavery. A system that is condemned by the Bible as “man-stealing” (enslaving) when it is initiated but admonishes the master that once he has slaves in his charge to treat them with well being even as you would your children.
But in any event, this was a 3000 year or more system that the South neither initiated nor participated in apart from the servanthood posture that was defined by the Apostles themselves.
The idea of conservatives really understanding conservatism, much less federalism will always be lost as long as they do not understand that they cannot blame the South for something parroted as evil, while at the same time accepting sodomy, trans-surgery, same sex marriages, etc. as NOT evil, but libertarian personal choice.
But it probably will never matter when old guys, like me, are among the few remaining who were taught (in public Southern schools) the difference between “federal” and “national.”
Perhaps when we are gone, maybe those “conservatives” left behind can figure out and work with folks like Dan Crenshaw or AOC.
Good luck.
Superb column, Paul. My compliments. Take heart though. I am old also, in my eighth decade. I have three Millennial children – got a late start there – and planted un-Reconstructed Confederate seeds all along the way as they grew up. They understand ‘federal’ vs ‘national’ and almost regularly surprise me with their knowledge and political astuteness. From meeting their friends and associates it is clear my three are not the only ones, and I feel certain their generation will carry the torch for the |South and federalism in the future.
Best wishes,
Jim
Thank you.
I have one son. His heart has never left the South nor its worth.