by Al Benson Jr.
Here in the South, where you would think folks would know better, we have seen some efforts going forward to the "grand arsonist" of Georgia, William Tecumseh Sherman, into some sort of benefactor of humanity. I can understand this sort of activity in the North, but here in the South, the country he invaded and helped mightily to destroy, it somehow seems incomprehensible that there are people that seek to honor him. I can only assume that this is one more frightening testimony to the strenuous efforts of federal education bureaucrats to rewrite our history, sanitizing the Yankee war criminals and besmirching the reputations of honourable Southerners so generations to come will never know the truth. One recent example comes to mind.
A legislator here in Louisiana recently introduced into the legislature a non-binding resolution encouraging Louisiana State University to either name a building after Sherman or to do something special to in some way honor him. Sherman had served as the first president and helped to get the school going, although at that point it was some sort of military academy and, no doubt, turned out some graduates that opposed Sherman and his bummers in the "late unpleasantness." I don't attribute any evil motives to this legislator--he probably just does not understand the true character of the man he seeks to have honoured.
Naturally there has been opposition to this proposal, some of it from out of state, but much of it, and rightly so, from the Sons of Confederate Veterans here in Louisiana. Letters have appeared in the Monroe, Louisiana newspaper both for and against this proposal, I wrote one myself opposing it. Many of the writers would not exactly be identified as members of "Uncle Billy's" fan club. However, as the opposition mounted, along came political correctness to the rescue, in the form of the managing editor of the Monroe, Louisiana News-Star.
The managing editor, a Mr. Stickney, wrote a rather glowing account of Sherman the great educator, talking about how Sherman "...was a gentler soul when he served as superintendent of Louisiana's fledgling state military college." "Gentler soul?" Really?
Mr. Stickney didn't bother telling his readers that Sherman took the job basically because he was broke and he needed the money. Michael Fellman, in his book Citizen Sherman, has told us: "But Sherman was broke and desperate for a steady income and a respectable position, such as this college presidency and its $3,500 salary offered...Although he did have a history of contempt for the South...his reservations about the South did not stem from any personal antipathy to slavery...Nor did he disagree with the racism that rationalized the institution." So Sherman had a contempt for the South and its people, but he took this job in Louisiana because he was broke and needed both the cash and the prestige. It would seem that Sherman had been pretty much of a failure at most everything he tried, except for being a Yankee war criminal. His career in that field he seems to have managed quite well, as his Southern contemporaries in Mississippi, Georgia, and South Carolina could easily attest to.
The legislator in Louisiana that sought to honour Sherman noted that "One hundred and fifty years is not enough." His meaning being that in that period of time the South should have forgotten what Sherman did and thus be ready to recognize him among the national greats. Again, I don't think that this man really understood Sherman.
I find it interesting that, in regard to what Adolf Hitler did as far as atrocities we have all been admonished to "never forget." Yet this same rationale is not applied to Sherman and his rape (literally) of the South.
Awhile back I remember a Southern pastor remarking that people from the North had told him that "the war is over and you lost, so get used to it." To these people the pastor gracefully replied "If it had only been a war we had lost it wouldn't be that big a deal, but the North didn't just defeat us militarily, they tried to destroy our culture as well and that's what we can't forget." He was right. The North did indeed try to destroy Southern culture, although they never quite made it--but not to worry, with ongoing national "reconstruction" and their government schools they are still trying!
So we are never supposed to forget what Hitler did, but now Uncle Billy Sherman is supposed to get a free pass. The legislator was right in one sense--one hundred and fifty years is not enough--three hundred years shouldn't be enough! War criminals are still war criminals, even when the memory dims. The Almighty has a record of what Sherman did in the South and of the unnecessary suffering and misery he and his bummers caused the civilian population down here. They should have been fighting the Confederate army in front of them, but it was much easier to go after the civilians and rob, kill and rape, all of which his men did with impunity. And the attempted and on-going destruction of Southern culture is something we should tell the politically correct carpetbaggers and scalawags of our day that we will "never forget."
