By Walter Birdwell,
To: Editor, Brownsville Herald
Editor:
The Reconstruction period after the Civil War ended in 1877, and this was far too soon. It should have lasted at least until 1900 and possibly to 1932.
Instead of antebellum plantations making a rapid comeback and keeping control of their property and dominating social and political conventions, they would have been kept from having any political influence. The effects would have been felt throughout the old South, including Texas.
The first thing that should have been done was break up the plantations by carving out tracts of “40 acres and a mule” to all freed former slaves and any others who fought against the Confederacy. Anybody who owned one of these tracts should have had the right to work the land first and owe no labor at all to the old plantations. This probably would have forced the antebellum owners into bankruptcy and forced them to sell their land.
The only other option would be for the owners to pay a prevailing wage to work whatever remained of the old plantation if it were economically viable. Most of them probably would have changed hands.
The greatest change would have been the total elimination of the Ku Klux Klan. Militias could have hunted them down and killed all they could find. Once they learned what their fate would be, the Klan would disappear.
The Confederate battle flag could have been made illegal to display, just like the swastika was banned in Germany and countries that were allied with the Nazis after World War II.
It is still illegal to display the swastika, so European white supremacist groups use the Confederate battle flag instead. They would not be able to do so if it had disappeared more than 100 years ago.
The Plessey v. Ferguson Supreme Court decision that established “separate but equal” might not have happened. Even if it had, the time frame is within the new Reconstruction era and it could have been treated like the Dred Scott decision. Whenever enough people decide they will not obey a bad law, it becomes unenforceable. The grandfather clauses, literacy tests and poll taxes never would have seen the light of day.
Whoever fought for the Confederacy in Texas would have had all the above provisions applied to them, and many would have lost their property.
Most but not all of the swindlers in the South Texas area were former Confederates, with some carpetbaggers thrown in. They were responsible for the various schemes that caused massive land theft from Latino landowners. These schemes included poll taxes, posting notices behind doors so they would be invisible when opened, and no legal documents in Spanish.
The Texas Rangers enforced these land grabs with various oppressive tactics, including murder. They could and should have been hunted down by militias and killed.
All of these provisions should have been enough to eliminate the building of monuments to the Confederacy and the rise of the Klan in the early 20th century.
Editor:
The Reconstruction period after the Civil War ended in 1877, and this was far too soon. It should have lasted at least until 1900 and possibly to 1932.
Instead of antebellum plantations making a rapid comeback and keeping control of their property and dominating social and political conventions, they would have been kept from having any political influence. The effects would have been felt throughout the old South, including Texas.
The first thing that should have been done was break up the plantations by carving out tracts of “40 acres and a mule” to all freed former slaves and any others who fought against the Confederacy. Anybody who owned one of these tracts should have had the right to work the land first and owe no labor at all to the old plantations. This probably would have forced the antebellum owners into bankruptcy and forced them to sell their land.
The only other option would be for the owners to pay a prevailing wage to work whatever remained of the old plantation if it were economically viable. Most of them probably would have changed hands.
The greatest change would have been the total elimination of the Ku Klux Klan. Militias could have hunted them down and killed all they could find. Once they learned what their fate would be, the Klan would disappear.
The Confederate battle flag could have been made illegal to display, just like the swastika was banned in Germany and countries that were allied with the Nazis after World War II.
It is still illegal to display the swastika, so European white supremacist groups use the Confederate battle flag instead. They would not be able to do so if it had disappeared more than 100 years ago.
The Plessey v. Ferguson Supreme Court decision that established “separate but equal” might not have happened. Even if it had, the time frame is within the new Reconstruction era and it could have been treated like the Dred Scott decision. Whenever enough people decide they will not obey a bad law, it becomes unenforceable. The grandfather clauses, literacy tests and poll taxes never would have seen the light of day.
Whoever fought for the Confederacy in Texas would have had all the above provisions applied to them, and many would have lost their property.
Most but not all of the swindlers in the South Texas area were former Confederates, with some carpetbaggers thrown in. They were responsible for the various schemes that caused massive land theft from Latino landowners. These schemes included poll taxes, posting notices behind doors so they would be invisible when opened, and no legal documents in Spanish.
The Texas Rangers enforced these land grabs with various oppressive tactics, including murder. They could and should have been hunted down by militias and killed.
All of these provisions should have been enough to eliminate the building of monuments to the Confederacy and the rise of the Klan in the early 20th century.
To read rest of letter, click on link: http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/article_47adc162-2db2-11e7-8982-5f70c0fb4d5f.html
6 comments:
Good Lord, such hate! This sicko wanted the punitive military occupation of the South to continue to generations. Sad there is so much hate in just one man. May God cleanse his heart from this venom.
Did Erasmo Castro win ? I hope so cause if he didn't he will probably run for Port Commisoner if he looses there he probably run for water district if he looses there he probably run from the law just to sa he ran for something . What a joke.
Is Erasmo Castro DA BLIMP's son? Both are ugly as sin! ha ha ha
Great picture of the Democrats of the day. Democrats today cover their faces in black....yesterdays white, is today's black for INTIFA, Snowflakes, Democrats, liberals, libatards.......
I wonder if Erasmo Castro is still going to donate for baseball uniform's or something like that ?
Could have should have tough shit now
Post a Comment