This was a response to my post on nathan bedford forrest…See 2/10/2011..
“I’m sorry to hear that your perspective on history is tainted by that which is taught in the public schools of this nation. Evidently, you really have not done much research beyond those spurious publications that only coincide with your own already tainted beliefs. Here’s a clue: read the actual transcripts of the accounts of Ft. Pillow and Forrest’s own testimony. You might be surprised.”
First question: Tainted? How is calling a man out who orchestrated a massacre against American troops, sold Black people away from their family members, and created a terrorist fraternity that led to the murder of 5,000 African Americans and their allies, tained?
Ok….we have a problem here. Why do I need or want to believe anything this terrorist, this horrible person ever wrote or said? Would knowing Eichmann or Goebbels kissed a puppy change the fact that they ordered the deaths of the disabled, the Jews, the gays, the communists, the J.W.’s, the Roma, the Poles, the Russians and freethinkers? Nope.
If you read my post you will see that it is more than sympathetic to those who do Confederate reenactment and argue for the re-vision of perspectives on Confederate Southern history. A lot of these folks are my colleagues, and I myself am the descendant of at least one Confederate veteran (white). However, I will not concede for one minute that nathan bedford forrest was a hero, an honorable man, a good human being or a nice guy.
People have a right to their opinions. Too bad those opinions are “tainted.”
This history stuff is very serious business.
0 comments on “A response to the post on nathan bedford forrest”