Pretty straightforward question. I’m fairly strongly in the camp of option 1, option 2 if I’m feeling particularly generous. But as with any other time when I feel strongly about something, I suppose there’s something I’m not considering. So as usual, I admit up front to the likelihood of being generally ignorant about one thing or another and invite those with different opinions to give me some perspective.
No. The Confederacy was (or wanted to be) at best a specifically non-USA entity, and at worst was the embodiment of treason as defined in the constitution.
No. The Confederate soldiers, for the most part, would not have defined themselves as citizens of the USA.
No. Some other reason.
Yes. The US Civil War was more about a struggle to retain state-level liberties under a fairly loose federation, and resistance against moving toward a dominating republic. As such, it was a (ultimately unsuccessful) struggle to define the future of the USA as opposed to actually create a separate country.
Yes. Although their aim was secession, the effort ultimately failed and thus they were USA citizens acting in the capacity of soldiers.
Yes. Some other reason.
I like Skald’s polls better because he serves treats as an alternative, there is nothing else here but sawdust and linseed oil
It’s possible to have supported the Confederacy but then changed your mind afterwards, been reconciled. If a person died as a US citizen there is no reason not to have a US flag on their grave.
There’s a Confederate veteran in the small country cemetery where I will be buried. He’s even a "shirt-tail " relation, as his daughter married my maternal grandmother’s brother, and became my great aunt.I don’t think he father reconciled though, as he named his son R. E. Lee Surname. The young man died at the age of sixteen. Anyway, a US flag gets placed on his grave by some veteran’s group, even though he has a Confederate marker for the grave. One year I did put a CSA flag on the grave, but someone removed. I’m still not sure if the US flag is appropriate for the grave though.
After winning the war, I’m sure it was tempting to want to rub the faces of Southerners in the dirt. Lincoln, wisely, chose to do otherwise. Best to reconcile graciously for the sake of bringing the country back to together rather than to get stuck on petty desire for revenge.
Mostly because the vast majority of them were conscripts who were more or less compelled to serve on behalf of the Confederacy, and probably didn’t really know what it was all about. So #6, with a dose of #5 thrown in. Plus, they were never considered anything other than Americans by the Federal government. (I guess that’s a bit of #4 as well).
“Confederate” soldiers were American (US) soldiers. They remained so, and would have until the USA recognized the CSA as an independent sovereign state.
That never happened, so they were never soldiers of any other nation than the USA.
As to 7, I prefer real-bean vanilla ice cream with my sawdust-and-linseed-oil pie. Thanks.
Though my opinion’s a bit more complicated now that I’ve lived 12 years in Virginia. When I lived in Indiana, where I grew up, I definitely would have said “they were treasonous bastards”. Now, I can kinda see both sides. “People blame the military for the wars they are asked to fight.”
There is no reason to have any flag on any grave, except in recognition of a specific national service (military or otherwise). If a flag is to be placed, it should correspond to the nation so served.
At the National Battlefield and nearby cemetery near where I grew up, the recent tradition has been to place flags in honor of the fallen of both sides. Specifically, they use the flags that were official to the two countries on the date of the battle, the 34-star round-pattern Union flag, and the Second National Confederate flag.
They were American soldiers, but not US soldiers. They fought US soldiers–though the USA they fought, it’s true, was not our country. Our country comprises the legacy of both sides.
I’m also disappointed that the federal and various state governments granted veterans’ benefits to Confederate soldiers. The surrenders that ended the war saved them from trial and further punishment, but there was certainly no reason to reward the traitors in any way whatsoever instead.
The Federal government didn’t grant veterans’ benefits to Confederate soldiers. Most southern states did, starting in the 1890s-turn of the century, but they were means tested, and served as much as an anti-poverty program as anything else. (Well, Virginia did subsidise artificial limbs for veterans starting in the 1870s, but come on…)
No, they were not American soldiers. They were, according to the legal view of the United States government, still American citizens. But being an American citizen doesn’t make you an American soldier; you have to serve in the American armed forces to do that. Confederate soldiers, depending on your legal view, were either serving in a foreign army or were a bunch of guys who happened to be hanging out together while wearing the same colored clothing - but they were definitely not part of the United States military.
If they have CSA or other Confederate notation on their tombstones, they lived and died as Confederates.
They would be appalled by being treated as US soldiers.
Not that I much care for the fine sensitivities of CSA supporters.
I like the idea of one of the three CSA national flags. The first is what is properly called “Stars and Bars” - the blue canton with white stars for each state, but Red/White/Red bars instead of stripes.
It was easily confused with the Stars and Stripes on the battlefield, leading wounded soldiers too seek comfort at the wrong place.
That problem led to the creation of the more common Battle Flag.
The second one, with a plain white field replacing the bars, was easily mistaken for a flag of truce/surrender. More problems.
If you were a poor, illiterate bumpkin from Georgia or Tennessee who was conscripted into fighting for wealthy men you might not have been thinking too deeply about grand philosophical issues. You were just trying to survive. Acting as if any nation or state is a homogenous hive mind is a bit naive.
After the war it helped to work towards strengthening the idea of nationalism in order to supplant the idea of regionalism.
The whole business of putting little flags on graves is a distinctively American thing. I don’t think they do it in many (if any?) other countries.
I’m not an American, so please correct me if I’m wrong, but my impression is that flags are generally only put on the graves of people who died serving in the armed forces (or possibly of people who served in the armed forces regardless of the circumstances of death?). It therefore marks a particular kind of service to the republic.
If that’s the rationale, it seems to me to make no sense at all to mark the graves of Confederate servicemen with US flags. The US was the republic against which they were rebelling, and from which they sought to separate. You might as well mark the graves of Irish Republicans with the Union Jack. For that matter, you might as well mark the graves of those who fell in the American revolutionary war with the Union Jack.
Obviously, I’m missing something, since this thread wouldn’t exist unless there were people who felt it was appropriate to put the stars and stripes on rebel graves. Am I wrong in thinking that the practice generally signifies death in the service of the republic, or at least that it signifies service to the republic? Or is there a school of thought which holds that, in taking up arms against the republic and in the cause of separation from it, the rebels were somehow serving the republic?
I don’t think your thinking is wrong (at least that’s certainly where it started), I think it’s just a lot more thought than most people actually put in to the matter. It’s like when foreign exchange students come to the US and get funny looks for not saying the pledge of allegiance.
