Certainly, much of the foundation of the Confederate States cause has been proven wrong in today's view. To me, the prime example is the fact that we did need a strong central government that would, if nothing else, prevent individual states from charting their own courses in spite of a national need. A classic example here is demonstrated in the Governor of GA refusing to allow state troops to continue on into SC when opposing Sherman late in the war. Another misconception was that the negro was intellectially inferior to the white man. But that was the widely held view - passed down through several generations and, at the time of the civil war, as yet disproven. That honest but mistaken belief provided the primary justification for keeping that race in bondage. Also, slavery was not, in fact, totally essential to the southern economy. Slavery was actually an expensive and most inefficient system of labor. With some exceptions, it worked well only in the most mindless and labor intensive situations. Slaveholers had to provide for not only their productive workers but also the very young and very old as well. They also had to keep them healthy and reasonably happy. It is most untrue that mistreatment of slaves was a common practice. Then and now, a contented worker produces far better than a malcontent. And, with a prime field hand being worth as much as perhaps a hundred cattle, what fool was going to mistreat an asset of that importance? I derive this monetary comparison from the will of my own 3rd great grandfather who left slaves valued at up to $1200 for a prime field hand and horses and cattle ranging in value from $10 to $20.

But as an offset to all the above, the north dominated the south in terms of finance and industralization in the years leading up to the war. The south feared even more domination in the form of additional punitive tarriffs and perhaps, with more free states, even a constitutional amendment could lead to the total abolition of the institution of slavery by the federal government.

While secession was considered to be completly legal by many of the states, it was non-the-less a very rash act that was resorted to far too quickly. What a shame the theory was never tested in court. If so perhaps we could have, as President Buchannan suggested, gone in peace. We would have been much better off to understand the Abe Lincoln was in no way an abolitionist but, instead, we did the one thing that he could not tolerate by disrupting the federal union following his election. The bottom line result was that a bunch of hotheads led us into a tragic and totally needless war.

Getting back to the subject of honoring our confederate heroes, up until the middle of the 20th century, General Lee was by far the most revered man in the south. But his star has fallen significantly since then - not so much due to the passage of time as to completly inapplicable modern day interrputations of the times in which he lived and a completely unfounded desire to be politically correct at all costs. For my part I say that, once the die was cast, Lee, Jackson, and company actually had little choice. They could be loyal Virginians or they could turn their backs on their families and homes. There is no doubt that we should ever pay the highest honor to those who fought and sometimes gave their all in defense of such a noble cause. My wife and I have dozens of direct ancestors, uncles, cousins, and in-laws who were killed in battle, maimed for life, died from disease in camp or in prison, and suffered many lesser deprivations - not for political or monetary gain but simply in defense of their homes. Sure, based on what we know today, the reasoning of their political leaders wasn't always well founded but we need to remember that we have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight while they did not.

So Virginia, if you ever get to thinking we have one too many government holidays, don't axe Lee-Jackson Day. It is simply one of the most appropriate that we have.