Dead Confederates, A Civil War Era Blog

The Self-Appointed Defenders of Southern Heritage

Posted in Memory by Andy Hall on August 3, 2011

On Wednesday, Kevin Levin put up a post about the Southern Heritage Preservation Group (SHPG) on Facebook. I would encourage you to read it, because it makes excellent, well-considered points. I appended a long comment at the end, saying that “there’s lots of name-calling, taunting and insults — and that can get pretty ugly, make no mistake — but when you strip all that away, and look past the epithets, it’s just sort of free-floating vitriol wrapped up verbiage about ‘heritage’ and ‘values’ and black Confederate ‘deniers.’ ”

Sometimes the name-calling is so over-the-top it’s funny, but in others cases there’s nothing funny about it at all. In case anyone doubted the ugliness and vitriol with which some of these folks go after those who challenge their preferred historical narrative, consider this posting — unedited and in its entirety, and reposted here with Kevin’s permission —  made on July 3 by Carl W. Roden, one of the designated officers of the SHPG. It begins with an historical newspaper citation, but Roden gets to the point in the third full graf:

 From The New Orleans Daily Crescent, Dec. 6, 1861:

“It would be impossible to give an account of all the acts of personal valor which took place in the fight; but I cannot omit to mention that Levin Graham, a free colored man, who was employed as a fifer, and attended to Capt. [J. Welby] Armstrong [Co. G., 2nd Tennessee], refused to stay in camp them the regiment moved, and obtaining a musket and cartridges, went across the river with us.

“He fought manfully, and it is known that he killed four of the Yankees, from one of which he took a Colt’s revolver. He fought through the whole battle, and not a single man in our whole army fought better.”

I showed this story to a pair of Deniers (not Levin or Hall but a pair of their supporters who often frequent their sites–I won’t give names, though I would love to) both of whom were not impressed.

One insisted that the story was pure revisionist propaganda, that the Confederates would never have allowed a black man to fight and was not really a soldier just for picking up a gun and killing “loyal Americans.” When I pointed out his inconsistencies–that first he denied the truth then tried to justify what was written–he really turned nasty and in typical PC fashion attacked me with personal insults and stereotypes.

The other started out nasty, when told of this story he flat out told me (his words not mine!): “There’s no way they let a n***er fight with them! Keep that lying bulls**t out of this! You f***ing SCV grannies just want to kiss those n***ers asses while you meet, eat and retreat! F*** You and your black Confederate s***! 88!” (For the record, the man in question has posted much of Andy Hall’s research on at least one white supremacist site for American Neo-Nazis–the part at the end “88” is a code used by Neo Fascists to identify one another also as a signature, the letter H being the 8th letter of the English alphabet and two being HH = Heil Hitler…of course on Kevin’s page when he shows up, he is a bit more cordial needless to say.)

Its funny how the Deniers (in all shapes and sizes) choose to deny what is obvious and what is clearly written.

One more fact: back then in the South the idea of arming slaves or any other black man was not a good one at the time (no denying that) so why would a Southern newspaper post an account of a black freedman taking up arms and fighting…even for propaganda purposes?

Food for thought.

Ten group members “liked” this post, including two SHPG officers (Roden “liked” his own post) and group president Gary Adams. The SHPG leadership not only condoned this ugly allegation, they endorsed it.

Roden has done this before. On May 20, he posted:

Once again the Deniers continue their intellectual and academic lynching of Black Confederates and their service….the Ku Klux Klan would be proud of them (and are from what I understand!).


I feel a need to clarify the statement that I made upon posting the latest tirade of Southern hatred disguised as “academia” on the part of Andy “Dead Confederates” Hall and posted at Kevin Levin’s “Civil War Amnesia” blog.

I do not say that either Mr. Levin or Mr. Hall are collectively active supporters of the Neo-Fascist Movement or the Ku Klux Klan with my statements, but I know for a fact that their actions serve the obscene causes of those groups respectively.

It is a well know fact–one reported to me by several sympathizers of our struggle to preserve and honor our Southern heritage who keep tabs on Klan and Neo-Nazi sites (forgive the use of the N-word again)–that at least seven known individuals to date (and who knows how many others) who follow the actions of Mr. Levin, Mr Hall and our old pal, Corey Meyer frequently are individuals who likewise actively participate in white supremacist blogs and websites.

Those individuals spout the most obscene things regarding Black and Jewish Southerners…things that I will not dignify by either listing said sites, or in repeating those disgusting words.

The “research” of Mr Hall at his site: [sic.] concerning Black Confederates is currently in use by members of those groups mentioned to further the current onslaught against our heritage and its true meaning with the ultimate goal of discrediting all preservation efforts so that the practitioners of white supremacist false doctrines may lay full uncontested claim to our symbols and our ancestors good names….a goal with does not include respect for Black Confederates or Jewish Confederates (or any other minority who supported the South’s struggle for independence at all).

Now then from what I have observed of and know of both Mr. Hall and Mr. Levin, I do not believe that either are either white supremacists themselves or in sympathy with the goals of such groups….both are merely PC ideology who follow the Leftist views of our heritage with an almost fanatical obsession. They, like the leadership of the NAACP and other such groups currently attacking out heritage, merely fall into the category of “useful idiots” as far as the white supremacists go, but are no less dangerous than the latter enemies.

Ultimately the success of men like Mr Hall and Mr Levin and other such Deniers known and unknown benefit the cause of white supremacist racism more than it ever will whatever political or social goal that they themselves seek….a fact well known to us, but would never be acknowledged by such men.

No such men are dangerous, but not because of their actions so much as their ignorance. Such is always the danger of those who hide their hatred behind a cloak or “reicheousness”….or in their case: education.

Roden demurely declines to identify the “seven known individuals to date (and who knows how many others) who follow the actions of Mr. Levin, [and] Mr Hall,” and “likewise actively participate in white supremacist blogs and websites.” He conceals the identity of one person who, he says, has “posted much of Andy Hall’s research on at least one white supremacist site for American Neo-Nazis.” He also declines to identify the purported websites to which material has been posted, or what research of mine, specifically, is supposedly of such great interest to neo-Nazis and white supremacists. Roden has made a similar accusation on at least one other occasion, never identifying any of the supposed “real” white supremacists, but claiming that Kevin and I are serving as “useful idiots” who unwittingly enable their vile ideology.

So I really gotta ask — why is Roden protecting the identities of these alleged neo-Nazi, white supremacist “supporters” of Kevin’s and my blogs? The ones he “knows for a fact” are using our work to “serve the obscene causes of those groups”?

Or does he not identify them because they don’t actually exist, and he made up the whole, rancid thing?

Food for thought, indeed.

So, an open and public challenge to Carl Roden: I don’t believe you.

By declining to provide the evidence to support your allegation, you are protecting the identity of the “at least seven known individuals” who you “know for a fact” are frequenting white supremacist and neo-Nazi websites, and reposting information from my blog there. People like that should be called out and exposed, publicly. Post their names and online handles in comments section below. Identify the two “supporters” of mine you “showed” your news article to. Identify the website(s) or forums that are reposting this material, and provide links that show that.

Expose these people right here, today.

Prove that what you say is true. Stop protecting those who need to be exposed for who and what they are.

You have a choice, Mr. Roden: either provide the full and complete evidence of your allegations, in full, or leave it to others to reach their own conclusions on why you don’t. Or can’t.

Update, August 5: Mr. Roden has replied with a long, self-congratulatory post about patriotism and his commitment to “calling out anyone who directly or indirectly deals with, or helps to advance the continued disgrace against the Southern and American people with their so-called ‘research’.”

Calling out the actual white supremacists or neo-Nazis and their websites still appears to be something he’s not committed to, because again he refuses to provide the evidence to support any of his allegations.


Southern Heritage Preservation Group: Straight-Up Plagiarism

Posted in Leadership, Media by Andy Hall on March 20, 2011

Corey Meyer has a new and lengthy post up at his place, taken from the Southern Heritage Preservation Group on Facebook. A member The president of that group, Gary Adams, posted a long-ish piece that argues that the prevalence of slaveholding was much more common in Southern households than the low single-digit percentages usually cited for Confederate soldiers. It sounded familiar, and it should — most of it is lifted verbatim from a comment I posted ten months ago (under a different user name) at Kevin’s blog. Indeed, it seems Mr. Adams was posting it on Facebook, without attribution, almost as soon as it went online at Kevin’s. I later expanded this material into a guest post at The Atlantic.

I appreciate that Mr. Adams found my writing on the subject valuable — valuable enough to appropriate and distribute as his own, in fact — but his actions cause one to question what else he’s putting out there under his own name. Adams notes that, when he presented similar arguments on other pro-Confederate Facebook groups, his hosts found his arguments offensive and removed his membership. I wonder whether this case of straight-up plagiarism will result in a similar action on the part of the Southern Heritage Preservation Group.

Update: I realize now that it’s unlikely that the Southern Heritage Preservation Group will take any censure or sanction against Mr. Adams, considering he’s that group’s president.