« Previous Story | Front Page | Next Story »

Southern Myths and Our Modern Republic

By Vickie Stangl
Review | December 26, 2010

WICHITA, Kan. - If Kansans want to understand their own local politics a bit better they might want to read Joan Waugh's biography: U. S. Grant: American Hero, American Myth. Waugh sets out to try and explain why so many Americans today believe Grant was a corrupt politician who drank his way to victory during the Civil War with callous disregard for his troops by sending them to their slaughter. She adeptly explains that this version of Grant was constructed by southern historians who did not think too highly of the common farmer who bested the elegant and aristocratic Virginian, Robert E. Lee.

Surprisingly we learn that Grant was a very gentle man, whose father made him attend West Point and whose skills in horsemanship had few equals but many admirers. Grant understood precisely why war was being waged. The South tied itself to an evil institution. To hold onto slavery meant maintaining power in Washington, D.C.

As the nation grew and population surged in the northern cities, the South found its representation diminished in the House of Representatives. The Senate was the one body remaining as the center of power for the South. Keeping the Senate balanced between free and slave states was becoming untenable. If more states were to enter free, the delicate balance of power the south held in the senate would come to an end. More menacing, the South was losing its public relations war as more and more citizens found slavery to be an odious custom clashing against the democratic principles of American liberty.

Southerners tried to convince themselves that the real issue was the preservation of their culture against northern aggression. When the South could no longer sell their lie to the nation, they opted to become traitors and secede from the Union. Grant made it clear he knew exactly why the North was fighting; to preserve the Union, and punish those who rebelled against the United States. This was not a noble cause. It was treason pure and simple all because the south had lost its political majority in congress.

The South may have been defeated on the battlefield but it knew the U.S. government could not possibly occupy their land forever, nor magically wipe clean a culture intrinsically wedded to the idea that whites were superior to blacks. After the war, Congress passed various acts and measures to protect the newly freed slaves but, once Reconstruction was over and federal troops withdrew, the South would be able to revert back to life as it was before the war. The formal institution of slavery might be vanquished, but not the prejudices that bred unusual ideas about humanity and politics.

The South argued the war was fought over state's rights against an aggressive federal government. Instead of acknowledging their culpability for the war, Southerners concocted the romantic "lost cause" narrative that was cemented into mythical lore thanks to Margaret Mitchell's, Gone with the Wind. The defeated south has in essence defined the political landscape of America since before the war and we are crippled by their myths and dead ideas that are resurrected in every political cycle. These odd and disconcerting political views from a tragic past continue to seep into our own modern day political discourse. Do you think I exaggerate?

Recently members of congress were debating the bill to continue the Bush tax cuts and extend unemployment benefits to people still out of work. It was at this juncture that our illustrious leaders showed their fangs. One Senator noted that if money were given to the unemployed, that they would just buy drugs instead of looking for work. It's rare to hear this kind of prejudice stated so clearly on the evening news. The idea that the poor are poor because they are morally deficient didn't begin with southern culture but, it certainly was an idea embraced by southern politicians; slaves were inherently deficient on so many levels that no amount of money or help could change their condition.

And the idea that the poor deserve to be poor is still rampant within the Republican/conservative mantra of self-sufficiency and rugged individualism lore. This charming fable with the idea that any American can make it if they work really hard is just bull. Yes, there are great opportunities in America for people to succeed. However, we must not let a story that may be true for some to become the basis for politicians to craft defective public policy around the myth that ALL Americans have the same opportunities and chance to succeed. The notion that if a person loses their job and has no healthcare means they are morally bankrupt or didn't try hard enough is just cruel. Myths can be inspiring, but dangerous if fueled by prejudices and then turned into law.

The beauty of a myth is that future generations can lay claim to the story and build upon the myth. The southern myth set into motion future political misfits. Politicians troll the landscape from Kansas to every corner of America burdening our democracy with a set of disturbing political conclusions born of southern defeat: the federal government is evil, the poor are lazy and deserve to be poor; minorities need to shut up and respect their betters; and the only citizens who count in America are God fearing Christians.

The myth is no longer just the Southerner's myth. It belongs to Republicans, conservatives, and the Religious Right because it fits their agenda of power for the "right sorts of people". Southern Democrats have realigned since the war and today the South and states on the Great Plains are solidly Republican, but their mantra is still the old myths from yore. In Kansas, the Republican and conservative politicians have built their careers on trash talking D.C., harassing women who seek legal abortions since this conflicts with their narrow beliefs, and insisting government must help business but not lift a finger for the people if it can be helped. And the myths just roll along. My personal favorites are: conservatives are the noble people upholding the founders intent, and the great protectors of the Constitution. What about upholding that same Constitution back in 1865?

The real tragedy of the American Civil War is how its dangerous and pigheaded ideas live on in public discourse. How long are we going to allow the lies from over a hundred years ago to dictate our politics?

While history is often complicated and open to different interpretations, Grant deserves to be defined by the facts and not Southern prejudices. The same could be said for our political future as well. We need serious discussions about what we as a country want to embrace as a people, and what beliefs are dishonest political myths that must be exposed and rejected in order to define our American Republic for a modern age.


An excellant post, Vickie. Politics has a way of changing partisan alignments and standards. The Republican and Democrat parties have done an almost 180% turn in their political platforms Abe Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt are held in high regards by modern Republicans. But, the truth is, their social and political agendas aligned more closely with the Democratic party of today, rather than the Republican..

It is interesting what you write about Ulysses S. Grant. I don't remember all the details, but back, over 1/2 century ago, my history book said Grant's nickname was Useless S. Grant. I don't remember it attributing that to the Southern opinions.

Thank you Ken. My mother was a southerner and I remember her talking about the textbooks she used as a child with statements that were outrageous about other races as if it were fact. I had almost forgotten that swipe at Grant's name which is a clever word association but also a very bias view of the man. And I totally agree about the realignment of parties and how we have to be careful when discussing party labels. FOX news was making a point one evening about how the Democratic Party was the party of slavery and how it was the republicans who saved the Union etc.of course, never mentioning that the Democratic Party of today, or beginning with FDR is far different than the party of slavery FOX-News was referring to. FOX-NEWS never mentioned how this same Democratic Party in the south split off into the Dixiecrats under Strom Thurmond outraged over segregation and by the time of Richard Nixon,southern democrats began supporting republicans and voting republican. State's rights, and the party of secession are today's republican/conservative politicians. There were Anti-slavery democrats before the Civil War except to note that some merged with the Whigs and free-soilers to become the Republican Party in 1854 but there were Anti-slavery democrats in northern states as well.

It's true that bigotry dies hard. You have to look no further than the 2008 election. Questions that Barack Obama was a Muslim, or not a U.S. citizen were all veiled attacks that a black man couldn't be President. The Tea Party movement is no different. While they claim to not be racist (and I'm sure not all of them are) the fact is their desire to "take America back" means take it back from liberals and immigrants. It's a xenophobic movement to put it nicely. The Ground Zero Mosque debate was really no different. Muslims have been worshiping there for long before the 2010 election but as election time rolled around Republicans drummed up the issue. They played on the bigotry underneath what Americans talk about in public. Bigotry dies hard.

OTOH look at how democrats treat blacks. Do they really treat them as equals? Look at 2004 and the democratic presidential primaries. They allowed Al Sharpton and Carol Mosely Braun to share the democratic challenger stage equally with people like John Kerry, John Edwards, Dick Gephardt, Joe Lieberman, Bob Graham, and Howard Dean even though they didn't have a snowball chance in hell of winning. The only thing they had going for them was the dem leadership wanted to project an image of diversity.

And let's be honest in 2008 John Edwards and Hillary Clinton were way more qualified than Obama but they gave him the party nod because, well, Obama was black and they were afraid having him lose would make them appear racist. Do you think they would have given the party nod to a one term senator, former community organizer, who had no real track record of leadership or legislative initiative if he had been white?

So let's be honest. Few of us are perfect with no racial, gender, religious, or college sports prejudices. Oh, I've met a few people I can honestly say dont have a racist bone in their body and live a life that proves it but the rest of us do the best we can.

Go Jayhawks!

Post your own comment here

Do you want to read more? You've only just scratched the surface at the Kansas Free Press. We have so much more to read! Nearly all of the pieces published here are timeless and relevant, regardless of when the articles were first published. To discover more, please take a look at our Table of Contents or go back to our Front Page.

Our sponsors help us stay online to serve you. Thank you for doing your part! By using the specific links below (clicking through from our site) to start any of your online shopping, you are making a tremendous difference. By using the shopping links provided on a Kansas Free Press page, you are directly helping to support the Kansas Free Press:

About This Page

This page contains just one story published on December 26, 2010. The one written previous to this is titled "Wyandotte County: The Big-D Democratic Powerhouse" and the story published right after this one is "Here They Come"

Our most current stories are always updated on our Front Page.

Other Archives

Interested in other topics? You may wish to poke around in our Table of Contents to find other sections and archives.

Do you want to explore pieces written by specific authors? You can find archives for KFP writers by reviewing our complete Directory of Authors and Writers here.

Recently Featured Stories

My Response As a Kansan to Jessica Valenti

Jessica Valenti has come on board The Nation magazine to fill in for Katha Pollitt as the feminist columnist while Pollitt is on leave to write a book. I've found reading Valenti's columns thought-provoking and insightful. She often takes …
Of Angels and God's Dogs

There might be a whole group of us out there--people who value our relationships with animals on a par with our ties to people. "Get over it--it was just a dog" does not resonate with us. Our society places …
Of Angels and God's Dogs

There might be a whole group of us out there--people who value our relationships with animals on a par with our ties to people. "Get over it--it was just a dog" does not resonate with us. Our society places …
Roots of the n-word

While N-word dialogue has slackened following Saline County Commissioner Gile's use of it recently, the word still has great power. So, let's look inward at the N-word. To reach a much deeper path to understanding, simply go to Ad …
Corporate Tax Reform

Basehor, Kans.--For an interesting twist on the corporate tax debate, look at Alan Sloan's opinion in the April 29 issue of Fortune Magazine. In all of the froth about corporate taxation, neither proponents of tax reduction, nor corporate critics, …

News and Opinion

Get Connected

See our FB page!
Subscribe for free!
[Feeds & Readers...]
Follow Kansas Free Press on Twitter, too!
Make Kansas Free Press your home page!

Journalists, sign in.

We're reader supported!

Whenever you use the specific links below to begin any of your online shopping, a portion of your sale goes directly towards the support of this site.

Tech Depot - An Office Depot Co.

Our sponsors help us stay online to serve you. Thank you for doing your part! By using the specific links above (clicking through from our site) to start any of your online shopping, you are making a tremendous difference. By using the shopping links provided on a Kansas Free Press page, you are directly helping to support the Kansas Free Press.

Thank you for your help!

Notices & Policies

All of our Kansas Free Press journalists are delighted that you are here. We all hope that you come here often, sign in and leave us comments, and become an active part of our community. Welcome!

Our writers are credentialed after referral to, and approval by, the editor/publisher of KansasFreePress.com. If you are interested in writing with us, please feel free to let us know here. We are always looking for Kansans who want to write about Kansas!

All authors here retain their own copyrights for their original written works, original photographs and art works. They welcome others to copy, reference or quote from the content of their stories, provided that the reprints include obvious author and website attribution and links to the original page, in accordance with this publication's Creative Commons License.

Our editor primarily reviews stories for spelling, grammar, punctuation and formatting and is not liable or responsible for the opinions expressed by individual authors. The opinions and accuracy of information in the individual stories on this site are the sole responsibility of each of the individual authors. For complete site policies, including privacy, see our Frequently Asked Questions. This site is designed, maintained, and owned by its publisher, Everyday Citizen Media. The Kansas Free Press, KansasFreePress.com, and Kansas Free Press are trademarked names.

© Copyright, 2008-2012, all rights reserved, unless otherwise specified, first by the respective author, and then by KFP's publisher and owner for any otherwise unreserved and all other content.