Dear Fellow List Members, I wasn't going to comment any more on the Confederate Battle Flag controversy, but based on some post I think some clarification is needed. Based on my reading and undergraduate degree (BA American Military History) the War Between the States was not a rebellion, it was a succession. The Confederate States had no desire to overthrow the Federal Government of the United States, they wanted to withdraw from it. This was a continuation of the very hot debate over the Constitution adopted in the 1780's. The Constitution installed a much stronger federal system over the states than existed under the Articles of Confederation, even though the Constitution specifically states that all powers not specifically granted to the federal government resided in the states. This war was about states rights. Now, I am not so naive as to deny that one of those states' rights was slavery. One of my gggrandfathers fought in the Confederate Army from Missouri and another from SC. My wife's ancestors fought from NC. I have never found any records that indicate any of her or my ancestors owned slaves. Truth be known, they were too poor. I find it incomprehensible that the average Confederate soldier ever thought much that he was fighting to preserve slavery. He was fighting to defend his home from an invader. NC is a good example. I have lived here for 28 years now and my wife's family goes back to colonial days. NC did not want to succeed and did so reluctantly only after SC and VA had done so. Yet NC provided more soldiers to the Confederate Army than any other state. Where these poor NC farmers fighting to preserve slavery, I find that hard to believe. They were fighting to protect their home state. Even the venerable Robert E. Lee resigned from the US Army only after VA succeed and he felt his first allegiance was to VA. You must remember that men like Lee had direct information from the American Revolution. Lee's father Light Horse Harry Lee had been a hero. So it's not real hard to imagine that Lee grew up hearing all the stories about why the Revolution occurred. In closing we must remember that in 1860 the attitudes both political and practical were that your state came first and the federal system came second. There was still strong debate and feeling that a state could withdraw from the federal system just as the colonies had withdraw from British colonial rule. The succession of the Confederate states had similar results in that it provoked a war, this time the folks who wanted to leave the system lost. It is unfortunate that people who don't understand history and who still find it necessary to demean other fellow human beings have co-opted the Confederate Battle Flag (Actually it was a Confederate Naval Jack before it became a battle flag). If you interested get a book on Abraham Lincoln and read what he said about slavery in the context of stopping the succession of the Confederate States. In their memory, Bob Meek Colonel USAR(RET) BA American Military History, Wofford College, Spartanburg, SC

Not to be a pain - but "succession" is in a monarchy where one king "succeeds" another. "Secession" is what happened in the South when the states chose to "secede" from the Union. I'm not particularly enjoying the current discourse, but thought I'd make sure we're at least all talking the same English language while we debate our heritage. (I'm a Yank descended from a Missouri CW vet who supposedly also served the Union as a spy in the Southern rebel camps - married to a devout Rebel who still insists the South will rise again - with nothing to do with slavery issues, but strictly a territorial thing.)