Don’t ignore slavery
On Election Day 2008, when Barack Obama became the first African American President, what really stood out to me were the whispers of America entering a “post-racial” era, a time where racism and race-related issues would push themselves to the fringe of American culture until they ceased to exist. The controversial implementation of “Confederate History Month” in Virginia by newly elected Republican Governor Bob McDonnell is a sobering reminder that we as a nation still face important racial issues.
Last week, McDonnell issued a seven-paragraph proclamation designating the month of April Confederate History Month for the state of Virginia. More controversially, McDonnell included no acknowledgment, let alone denouncement, of slavery. After receiving a great deal of criticism, McDonnell issued an apology for “omitting” any mention of slavery and issued another proclamation including a sharp criticism of slavery.
This issue has three essential components: that having Confederate History Month is noteworthy, whether the omission of slavery is acceptable and if having a Confederate History Month even with that acknowledgment is permissible.
Some media groups and political leaders have issued statements suggesting that Virginia’s implementation of a Confederate History Month is not really noteworthy. To suggest or believe that this story is unimportant is absurd. Any type of glorification — and yes, I do believe McDonnell’s intentions were to glorify — of the Confederacy is pertinent news for the media and should be reported both statewide and nationally. McDonnell crossed both racial and political lines, and regardless of personal opinions regarding his decision, the proclamation should be reported to the nation.
The next critical aspect is whether the omission of slavery from the proclamation is acceptable. In an interview aired on CNN’s State of the Union, Republican Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi responded to concerns that McDonnell’s omission of any mention of slavery was insensitive by saying “To me, it’s a sort of feeling that it’s a nit. That it is not significant, that it’s… trying to make a big deal out of something doesn’t amount to diddly.”
Besides the fact that Barbour’s statement is stupefying on a level that competes only with comments made by former Governor Sarah Palin, Barbour could not be more wrong. The omission of slavery from the proclamation is absolutely significant. Slavery was a central component of the Confederacy and was a primary reason for the South seceeding from the North. To not include any mention of slavery when discussing the Confederacy is an absolute abomination to those that were kept in bondage for centuries, those that fought and died to keep the Union together, and to those that have fought for civil rights since emancipation. With no better comparison to make, could you imagine if Germany decided to implement a Nazi History Month and didn’t include any mention of the Holocaust?
Finally, the question arises if a Confederate History Month is even appropriate. My answer is not at all. The history of the South and the United States — including slavery, the Confederacy and the Civil War — should be taught as significant. McDonnell, however, took a step further, from teaching history to glorifying it. We as Americans have a lot of history of which we can be proud. This is not one of those historical moments. Any attempt to interpret it as anything but humiliating requires either prejudiced opinions or gross manipulations of the facts. There is no defense for a Confederate History Month.
Jack Melamed is a sophomore in Newcomb-Tulane College. He can be reached for comment at jmelamed@tulane.edu.