The ethic of Wall Street is the ethic of celebrity. It is fused into one bizarre, perverted belief system and it has banished the possibility of the country returning to a reality-based world or avoiding internal collapse. A society that cannot distinguish reality from illusion dies.
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.
FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.
ead more here: http://civilwar150.kansascity.com/articles/divided/#storylink=cpy
Read more here: http://civilwar150.kansascity.com/articles/divided/#storylink=cpy
At his inauguration, the eloquent but embattled president from
Illinois spoke hopefully of the “mystic chords of memory” keeping
Americans united.
Those chords now keep the Civil War echoing, 150 years after he, Abe Lincoln, watched it erupt.
Beginning with the Tuesday sesquicentennial of Southern cannons
firing on Fort Sumter, S.C., a nation divided by some of the same
arguments — about federal reach versus states’ rights, about old economy
versus new, about race and religion — embarks on a four-year observance
of a war that rewrote most everything.
The real flashpoint predates Fort Sumter by several years, however.
And it burst in a place neither North nor South, but here — where slavery’s western trajectory hit a dead end.
On the Missouri-Kansas line.
Placards hype the “Border War” that rages still, metaphorically, at
sporting events between the universities of Missouri and Kansas. But
history is less cute. Nowhere else were the war’s hostilities more
tightly coiled and personal.
“East Coast historians tell you the war started in Fort Sumter and
ended at Appomattox,” said Terry McConnell of Independence as a recent
meeting of the Civil War Round Table of Western Missouri came to
a close.
“Uh-uh. It started right here in 1855, and it hasn’t ended.”
The state line pitted neighbor against neighbor — in savage ways back then and destructive ways even now.
The bad blood only started with the question of slaveholding, which
had been legal across Missouri since its statehood in 1821. Ultimately
the violence would be fueled less by ideals of equality (some
“free-soilers” in Kansas, in fact, argued for keeping black people out)
than by vengeance and vicious one-upmanship.
Long before the U.S. wars of the 2000s,
boyish-looking irregulars, bushwhackers and Red Legs — today we call
them terrorists or death squads — lurked outside Kansas City.
Missourians, whether hostile or not to the Union that governed them,
endured federal occupation and fiery pre-emptive strikes. At the John
Brown Museum in Osawatomie, Kan., curator Grady Atwater described that
landscape in the most contemporary of ways:
“This was the Iraq or Afghanistan of its day.”
Loss of a generation
Each major anniversary of the Civil War sparks a new conversation about our direction as a nation.
Each observance forms its own narrative about memory, reconciliation
and the reasons for which 620,000 citizens would die. Proportional to
the size of the maturing country, the body count would approach 6
million Americans today, or the entire population of
modern-day Missouri.
About as many American troops would be killed in all other wars combined.
“Given the loss of a whole generation, the amazing thing is that 150
years later the country is together at all,” said cultural historian
Robert Thompson at Syracuse University.
“Maybe not happily, but together.”
Much and little has changed. This sesquicentennial arrives with an
African-American in the Oval Office. His election came earlier than
anyone would have guessed during the civil-rights push of the 1960s.
In that decade, you may have observed the war’s 100th anniversary.
Some planning events were held at segregated hotels, making it difficult
for African-Americans to attend.
Fifty years later: On issues well beyond racial equality — health
care, illegal immigration, globalization, labor unions, federal spending
— America sees a cleaving of opinions as deep as at any time since
the 1960s.
“Those were the days when politicians from both parties supported the
struggle for civil rights. Now they struggle to be civil,” said
activist Julian Bond, the grandson of a slave.
These days Mike Huckabee, who is considering another GOP
run at the presidency, equates the furor over slavery to the abortion
debate, both involving “the sanctity of human life” and strained
constitutional interpretations.
Democrats and Republicans argue endlessly over federal income taxes — first devised by Congress to fund the Civil War.
Others bristle at globalization and unbridled change. Just as the
South in the 1860s sensed an encroachment of new industries and
political power from the North, many today argue that America’s glory
years are behind us.
Today, said University of Central Missouri historian Delia Gillis,
students have heard so much about “states’ rights” in their lifetimes,
even the young adults of color argue the war had more to do with
sovereignty than slavery.
“Narratives of what this war was about all take on a certain bias,”
Gillis said. “The South has been very successful having their
version represented.”
Especially in the South, observances of the last few months have called attention to a house yet divided:
•In December, a “secession ball” in Charleston, S.C., attracted
partiers in antebellum garb to celebrate the 150th anniversary of that
state’s withdrawal from the Union. Outside the dance, more than 100
protested what they interpreted as “a celebration of slavery” and a
backward-looking “confederacy of the mind.”
•Last month, a group calling itself the Texas Nationalist Movement
rallied at the state Capitol to push a resolution that would allow
Texans to vote this November on separating from the United States.
Though Republican Gov. Rick Perry uttered the word “secession” soon
after President Barack Obama’s election, he said he only advocated
states being allowed to break from Social Security and other
federal mandates.
•Mississippians are arguing over commemorative license plates —
including a design for 2014 honoring a Confederate general who later
served as grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.
“In many ways, the Civil War still lingers,” said U.S.
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Kansas City Democrat. “Most of the states in
the Confederacy are what we call the red states. They’re the most
conservative states in the Union. …
“What was done with guns and bayonets is done today with tongues. The
red-hot rhetoric in Washington, according to the old-timers here, is
worse than it’s ever been.”
That’s saying quite a bit. In maybe the most famous congressional
outburst ever — ruder, even, than a representative shouting “You lie”
during a presidential address — an earlier South Carolinian, Rep.
Preston Brooks, used a cane to bludgeon Sen. Charles Sumner, a
Massachusetts abolitionist, on the Senate floor.
That was in 1856, as emigrants from both Northern and Southern states streamed into the Kansas territory to swing its destiny.
Within five years, the Civil War was on.
The slavery question
It got complicated, this war on the border. But a lot boiled down to divisions we recognize today.
One side claims to be righteous, the other gets its back up. One plays dirty, the other gets dirtier.
The Missourians were here first, by 40 years. Many came from Southern states and brought their slaves along.
After Congress in 1854 allowed the slavery question in the Kansas
territory to be decided by its voters, many abolitionists swooped in to
claim land and impose their will on the West.
Similarly, Missourians, cast as “border ruffians” and “pukes” by the
newcomers from the East, poured across the border to stuff ballot boxes
with pro-slavery votes and to intimidate Kansans.
Kansas abolitionist Charles B. Stearns wrote: “When I deal with men
made in God’s image, I will never shoot them; but these pro-slavery
Missourians are demons from the bottomless pit and may be shot
with impunity.”
None was more willing to do that than old John Brown — a white
evangelical from New York who arrived in Kansas territory girding to die
for the cause.
In May 1856, Brown and several others, including his sons, dragged
five pro-slavery men — though none actually owned slaves — out of their
homes near a Kansas creek called Pottawatomie. They used sabers to hack
at their victims. Then the elder Brown deposited a bullet in the head of
each. God’s work, he believed.
Missourians along the border sent 250 men into the abolitionist
stronghold of Osawatomie to burn the town down. In the fight, they
killed one of Brown’s sons.
So what started as an ideological split turned personal, with looting and killings back and forth.
In time the pillagers from “Bleeding Kansas” would adopt the name
Jayhawkers — derived, some believe, from a fictional bird as nasty as a
blue jay and hungry as a hawk.
During the coming remembrances, local politicians had best be careful what they say.
At a performance last summer by the Kansas City Symphony in the Flint
Hills, the then-governor of Kansas, Mark Parkinson, riled Missourians
in the crowd with his quips about William Quantrill’s 1863 sacking
of Lawrence.
A letter writer to The Kansas City Star demanded an apology: “Isn’t
unity along our borders, today and tomorrow, what we’re all striving
to achieve?”
It’s more of a striving never to forget, judging by attractions that dot the region.
On the Kansas side, middle-school kids in KU
Jayhawk jackets sit in on lectures in Lecompton, where in 1855,
pro-slavery forces penned the territory’s first constitution before
anti-slavery arrivals drafted their own. The historical society
distributes to schools game cards to play “Bleeding Kansas Bingo,”
featuring images of Brown and fierce U.S. Sen. James Lane.
In Missouri, the birthplace of the bushwhacker James boys is a
Kearney draw. Puppets in Independence dramatize the Border War,
Harrisonville recently erected a monument to the “Burnt District,” and
rebel flags flap from graves in Osceola, a town wiped out by Lane and
the Kansans.
“There still are people who are diehards either way,” said Janet
Weaver of the Gen. Sterling Price Museum in Keytesville, Mo., dedicated
to the memory of the ex-governor and rebel officer who tried more than
once to release the Union’s tenuous grip on Missouri.
Some are offended that re-enactors in blue and gray would even wish
to clash again in Missouri this year for the Battle of Lexington and the
Battle of Wilson’s Creek. (During that first year of the war, 40
percent of casualties nationwide and 40 percent of the battles happened
in Missouri.)
But to ignore the war — “the fiery crucible,” in historian William
Hesseltine’s words, “in which the old nation was melted down and out of
which modern America was poured” — is to forget how our fiercest
differences can bring our nation to annihilation’s brink.
“If we haven’t learned from the Civil War yet,” said Terry Ramsey,
curator of the popular Bushwhacker Museum in Nevada, Mo., “it’s time
we do.”
Union Gen. John B. Sanborn recalled in 1886: “If there is anything of
value to a future age to be learned … it is that there exists in the
breasts of the people of educated and Christian communities wild and
ferocious passions.”
He learned it serving near the Missouri-Kansas border.
“I think the bitterness on the border had to do with people not
playing by rules,” said Gary Nodler, an ex-legislator in southwest
Missouri. “The scar tissue is deeper than what’s left after a
conventional war.”
General Order No. 11
Tom Rafiner’s obsession is typical.
Retired from the insurance line, Rafiner, of Parkville, wanted to
devote some time to genealogy. He learned that a couple of ancestors
lived in Cass County when the war began, but the records seemed to have
vanished, 1,700 households erased from memory.
So began Rafiner’s six-year fixation on an episode he never learned
in history class: General Order No. 11, issued in 1863 by Union Gen.
Thomas Ewing in Kansas City, reduced to ash the homes and livelihoods of
thousands of residents of Cass and three other counties on Missouri’s
western edge.
The eradication happened in response to Quantrill’s raid, in which
perhaps 200 Lawrence men and boys were slaughtered — by far the
bloodiest act of domestic terrorism until Timothy McVeigh bombed an
Oklahoma City federal building in 1995.
Rural Missourians along the western border, suspected of feeding and
sheltering the guerrillas, were given 15 days to gather up belongings
and scram. Much of their livestock was stolen and several of their towns
were torched by Kansas marauders. Order No. 11 just finished off what
was left.
The devastation was immortalized in a painting by Missouri artist George Caleb Bingham, whose hatred of Ewing was intense.
The hostility lingers for many longtime families of Cass, rural Jackson, Bates and part of Vernon counties.
“I spoke with a man in Lone Jack who said he knew which family
assassinated his great-grandfather,” said Rafiner, whose research led to
a book about Cass County’s loss, “Caught Between Three Fires.”
“He tells me, ‘And I know where they live.’ Not lived, but where they still live. …
“I heard another man say he doesn’t even drive into Kansas,” Rafiner said. “Jeesh, it’s been 150 years!”
Writers and homegrown historians sense a different vibe when giving Civil War lectures in the Sunflower State.
“In Lawrence, they know all about Quantrill, but they really don’t
know about Order 11,” said Judy Billings of the city’s tourism bureau.
“Yes, Kansans bled. But so did Missourians.”
In Jackson County, Union troops pillaged the home of Solomon and
Harriet Louisa Young, grandparents to Harry Truman. In 1906, his
grandmother won a $3,800 settlement from the U.S. government to cover property looted or destroyed.
She never forgot. Recalling how he proudly wore his new Missouri
National Guard uniform into her home, Truman later wrote: “She said,
‘Harry, this is the first time since 1863 that a blue uniform has been
in this house. Don’t bring it here again.’
“I didn’t.”
A national heritage area
Twelve years ago, Billings, of Lawrence, and about a dozen other
Kansans — plus a lone Missourian from the Bushwhacker Museum — gathered
to brainstorm ways to promote the 150th anniversary of the 1854
establishment of the Kansas territory.
Their focus was Bleeding Kansas — the name they’d propose to Congress
in seeking a special designation as a national heritage area.
Then-congressman Jim Talent wanted 12 Missouri counties thrown into
the heritage area. Ike Skelton, the former congressman to the state’s
4th District, would approve the measure only if the name “Bleeding
Kansas” was dropped.
Back in Lawrence, heated meetings drove some Kansans off the planning committee.
Finally, organizers agreed on the boundaries and mission of “Freedom’s Frontier.”
The heritage area encompasses 41 counties. Its management plan is to
establish the region as “a testing ground for debates concerning rights,
freedom and their meaning in the American democracy.”
Billings: “Interconnectedness is definitely our goal.”
As Civil War observances roll out, the question remains whether
visitors care much about “interconnectedness.” Many would rather stick
to their own points of view about who, in all the bloodletting, was good
and who was bad, said Atwater at the John Brown Museum.
“People from Europe who visit us pretty much consider Brown a hero,” Atwater said.
Americans, he said, tend to have their minds set when they walk in
the door, and many will argue that Brown was an 1850s version of Osama
bin Laden, a bloodthirsty villain driven by religious extremism.
“Both sides,” the curator said, “were equally monstrous.”
Round table-go-round
Any year, sesquicentennial or otherwise, dozens of shows and
discussions are open to Civil War buffs on either side of the border.
“I will not stand for this nation to be torn asunder!” cried a
Johnson County, Mo., computer programmer-turned-actor before crumpling
from gunshot wounds beneath the wooden chandeliers of the old courthouse
in Warrensburg.
There, a cast of about 20 recently performed “Murder in the
Courthouse” on the anniversary of a politically charged killing during a
February 1861 election.
In the audience sat Jim Beckner of Raymore.
A longtime buff with a white beard and gentle manner, Beckner will
attest to being “very unusual” in that he happily crisscrosses the state
line to absorb varying ideologies.
Three nights after watching the play in central Missouri — where a
secessionist on stage declared, “Every Kansan that walks on two legs can
go to the devil” — Beckner was dining with the enemy, mostly Kansans in
Prairie Village, for a meeting of the Civil War Round Table of
Kansas City.
Founded in 1958, it was the area’s premier round table before some
members seceded a generation ago to form a Missouri-based group.
The breakaway Round Table of Western Missouri now meets in eastern
Independence. President Mike Calvert said he was inclined to “side more
with the Confederate story,” at least as it treats the border war.
Social considerations, too, factored into the split. Missourians grew
weary of the trip to a Kansas suburb to spend $25 for a
country-club meal.
By contrast, a recent meeting of Calvert’s group had members tossing
their coats on a billiards table and munching on home-baked brownies for
an episode of Ken Burns’ PBS series of the Civil War.
Yet another splinter group convenes monthly on Independence Square.
And 20 miles due south, the Cass County Civil War Round Table has been
meeting for about a decade.
Beckner involves himself in all. For more than 30 years he also has been a re-enactor at mock battles.
“We’ve always had trouble in Missouri getting people to wear the
blue. They’re all rebel-minded,” he said. “We’d have 40 to 45
Confederate cavalry men versus 10 or 12 on the Union side. It
was ridiculous.”
For his part, Beckner has a closet stuffed with uniforms both gray
and blue. The Missouri Humanities Council, which last year honored him
for community achievement, called Beckner “the go-to guy for all things
Civil War.”
Acknowledging that the Mo-Kan divide still exists, Billings of
Freedom’s Frontier said: “We shouldn’t be talking just two perspectives,
but every perspective you can think of.”
African-American, Native American, rural and urban, all of the family
histories, “basically, the development of a nation,” she said. “It’s
about respecting them all.”
Toward that aim, give credit to Bates County, Mo. A few years ago its
citizens — 97 percent white, a third older than 50 — unveiled a
memorial outside the county courthouse in Butler, once burned by
the Yankees.
Look at the uniform — it’s of an unidentified Union soldier, from Kansas.
Look closer. He’s black.
The statue recognizes a little-known watershed of our nation’s
history. Outside of town at a place known as Island Mound, America’s
first black uniformed infantrymen fought for their country. And won.
Modern-day border war
When the nation observed the 50th anniversary of the Battle of
Gettysburg in 1913, Confederate and Union veterans shook hands on
hallowed ground.
Similar gestures of reconciliation took place here.
“I’m proud to say that now my warmest friends are those who wore the
blue, some of whom I met on the battlefield,” wrote Columbus C.
Blankenbecker, who fought with Price at Wilson’s Creek.
The two states did not waste time finding something on which to agree: Making money beat fighting.
In Kansas City, business and political leaders of Southern and
Northern persuasion buried their differences to court railroad
interests. The city rebounded mightily after the Hannibal Bridge became
the first permanent span of the Missouri River.
Southern folk, however, gravitated to neighborhoods east of Main, on
streets named for trees. Northerners preferred Quality Hill.
A Protestant populism bonded rural reaches straddling the border, and
Carrie Nation — reared in a slaveholding family in Belton — teamed with
Kansas women to smash saloons.
Kansas, for decades, would be a dry state. But Missouri would be wet.
Kansas would be Republican. Missouri, for decades, would be Democrat.
Kansas regarded itself a land of freedom, as thousands of black
“Exodusters”
answered the call of “Ho for Kansas!” The state’s high
schools and public universities — unlike Missouri’s — were racially
integrated, allowing the aspiring botanist George Washington Carver,
born to slavery in Missouri, to earn a diploma in Minneapolis, Kan.
Though blacks never exceeded 8 percent of the Kansas population, the
state wielded a “symbolic power” well into the 20th century as a
“testing ground” for equal rights, wrote University of Kansas historian
Kim Warren in her 2010 book, “Quest for Citizenship: African and Native
American Education in Kansas.”
Before that testing ground would extend to fights over abortion and
evolution, Kansas would be ground zero in the schooling of
black children.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 1954 ruling in
Brown v. Topeka Board of Education found that separation itself violated
the rights of minority children.
What followed? In Kansas City, the Missouri-Kansas border erupted
again. White families east of it crossed over in droves to attend white
schools. And deeds in many of the new Kansas subdivisions for years kept
people of color out.
You know the rest. The once-rural outback of Johnson County, Kan. — largely developed by J.C.
Nichols, an Olathe native and University of Kansas graduate — bleeds
the Missouri side of families, business and tax dollars to this day.
Last month, Missourians and Kansans converged where a Union jail
collapsed in 1863, killing five Missouri women of bushwhacker families.
Now the place is the Sprint Center; the occasion the Big 12
basketball tourney. Black-clad Mizzou fans swarming a restaurant knew
the talking points in their rivalry with the Jayhawks.
“They seem to think they’re superior,” said Justin Scheidt of Lee’s Summit.
Where Kansas fans gathered to the north, a financial planner scoffed:
“In basketball, we’ve got a pretty good history, don’t we?”
Civil enough. But also a bit spooky, since his name was John Brown.
Read more here: http://civilwar150.kansascity.com/articles/divided/#storylink=cpy
No comments:
Post a Comment