It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Political Correctness, Identity, and the South

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 02:40 AM

In late 2009, shortly after the current Chancellor took office, the anthem of the University of Mississippi - "From Dixie With Love" - was banned from being played at the university. It mixes Dixie with the Battle Hymn of the Republic, and at the climax of the song, the crowd would shout 'The South Shall Rise Again'.

Wikipedia has this to say:

During Ole Miss's winning streak of 2003, students and fans alike began chanting "The South will rise again" in place of "His truth is marching on" at the end of the song. The chant remained a staple for the next several years. In 2009, with Ole Miss in the national spotlight for football success, political pressure mounted to do away with the chant. The Student Body Government even proposed to call for the chant to be changed to "To Hell with LSU". When, unsurprisingly, that idea failed to get traction, the University asked the band to quit playing the song.

The University's mascot, 'Colonel Reb', a character based upon a blind black gentleman by the name of Blind Jim Ivy, had been removed in 2003 in a similar move.

There was incredible anger about this action, and there has been significant backlash against this, to the point where the dean of the university was forced to allow 'Dixie' to be played at the university once again. However, this has brought some stipulations; it has to be mixed in a format that is either short or prevents the crowd from reacting to it.

The reason I placed this in the social issues forum is because I wanted to get some peoples' opinions about the videos. Listen to the song, the way the crowd reacts with it, and the furor with which the band plays the song (as these were the last times it was allowed, and they were aware of that). The entire crowd stood for the playing of Dixie with no prompting (as is usually required for the national anthem)

Also note that on the field it was played before even the National Anthem - and that the warmth of the crowd is completely different when the U.S. National Anthem is being played. A notable undercurrent of emotion can be heard from some parts of the crowd - but is it support or anger?

I find these things significant. I'll leave it to you to judge.
edit on 27-2-2012 by zanysami because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 03:26 AM
Yeah because this has anything to do with being politically correct

Lets SEE HERE! Mississippi's Deceleration of Independence from the North..Oh yes, the whole thing is whining about how the north wants to end slavery and its so unfair to them. And *GASP* Negro equality...THE HORROR!~!@~

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.

It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.

It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists. It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.

Utter subjugation awaits us in the Union, if we should consent longer to remain in it. It is not a matter of choice, but of necessity. We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers, to secure this as well as every other species of property. For far less cause than this, our fathers separated from the Crown of England.

Who doesn't like working for free while being held against their will~! Talk about the good ol' days...

I wonder how many of those students ever READ the reason Mississippi seceded? I'm gonna guess probably close to none?

I'm from the north..I don't get the whole southern rise again garbage, its 2012...move on.

edit on 27-2-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-2-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-2-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-2-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 04:22 AM

Whatever the reasons Mississippi's government and rich, ruling class - or any of the others in states that seceded may have been - the reason most of the people fought was for their independence. You'll note that in songs of the time, none of the southern ones mentioned race - they espouse liberty, freedom, independence - But almost all the northern ones were about destruction, conquest, and racism. Also, EVERYONE HAD SLAVES until the civil war - it wasn't anything exclusively about the South. The only reason the North used that as the primary excuse for the war is because it's the one the citizenry was most receptive to. If it had been 'because the South blew up two buildings in our city even though we bomb them constantly already anyway', would it still have been right? I mean, look at current events and parallel them with those at the time, and you'll see the truth for what it is.

Just replace the words 'corporation' with 'plantation' and you've found the 1% of their day. Is DEBT slavery right? You're a Ron Paul supporter, right? you should know all about how that works. How free are any of us, really? How free are the people in foreign countries we work and starve to death merely to fill our landfills with plastic garbage?

A thread that's basically about a regional, strong libertarian sentiment and trend that I'm seeing develop, and .. a Ron Paul supporter attacks and derails it? This wasn't really about slavery, or why Mississippi seceded, it's about the wider social and psychological implications of how high the students at this university (which should be reflective of the rest of the area, theoretically) hold 'Dixie' in regard, and by proxy, the ideals the song espouses - independence.

The NAACP locally here in Tennessee attacked Bo Bice recently, too, for singing 'the Bonnie Blue Flag' -

"We are a band of brothers, and native to the soil - fighting for our liberty, with treasure, blood, and toil. And when our rights were threatened, the cry rose near and far - hurrah for the Bonnie Blue Flag that bears as single star. [..] Like patriots of old we'll fight, our heritage to save. And rather than submit to shame, to die we would prefer.."

But of course, you'd rather have a northern tune, like 'While We Were Marching Through Georgia'.. which is basically about how they were 'making the south free'.. by pillaging, raping, and burning our cities down. (See: Afghanistan/Iraq "liberation" parallel)

"Hurrah, hurrah, we bring the jubilee! Hurrah, hurrah, the flag that makes you free! So we sang the chorus from Atlanta to the sea, while we were marching through Georgia! How the darkies shouted when they heard the joyful sound!"


"Yes, and there were union men who wept with joyful tears, when they saw the honored flag they had not seen for years."

I'm pretty sure there weren't many union supporters in the south, and those probably weren't joyful tears, considering when they saw the flag coming it meant death, destruction and horror.

So.. yeah. Songs like Dixie, the Bonnie Blue Flag, etc. are DEFINITELY evil and racist, and the northern ones about invading, occupying, pillaging and destroying other nations are okay.

All I - the people with the 'whole southern rise again garbage' - are trying to say, is that there seems to be a resurgence of the idea that we should be independent, free, and have our liberties back, and we like that! No one wants slaves, for gods' sake. After all, it's 2012.

And anyway, I'm transgender, and a Ron Paul supporter just as you are, so to assume I'm a bigot is ridiculous.. it's also ridiculous to make assumptions based on what you're taught in history class, especially when you know history is written by the victor, literally.

Also, the slavery issue was just one used to divide us. Still is, today. The northern troops and southern troops both fought for freedom. Literally. It's just that the motivations of the leaders and the rich of both sides were not pure. That doesn't matter though, because it's the people that mattered then, and it's the people that matter today!
edit on 27-2-2012 by zanysami because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 06:26 AM
reply to post by zanysami

No, I didn't say you were racist or the people in the video singing the song. I know no one wants slaves anymore except Walmart and such.
I just think if all the kids read their states reason for secession they would think twice about being pseudo- nostalgic about it.

I understand the whole states rights issues that were part of the war. The 10th amendment is vague and can be argued that to either sides favor. I get that the south wanted to opt out of the federal governments intrusion. But slavery was a HUGE factor in it. To deny that it didn't play a part in it is revisionist history.

The secession of the states were started due to fears of Abolitionists. The constitutional conflict was directly argued because the union wanted to ban slaves, infringing on their states rights to say no to it. Of course the 1% were the one people that owned slaves, they were the only ones that were going to lose out on abolishing it. The powerful start wars, not the average person. I'm more inclined to think that the 1% propagandized the 99% into fighting their war for them. All of the states secession decelerations I have read are all about how awful the union is for trying to make them abolish slavery leading to vast monetary loss. And to grant black people some rights.

My whole point was

Before war = slavery was legal

After war = slavery was illegal

ITS 2012, the south is no more but a concept now. I just think people should be focusing on uniting everyone against our current slave holders.

Singing songs about "the south rising again" is tacky due to the whole slavery issue. Most people equate the Civil War with ONLY slavery and not a deeper states rights issue.

And the Northern states are NOT caught up on the civil war at all like the south seems to be. No one has Union flags, and "The north will defeat the south" motto's. It's pointless at this day and age.

edit on 27-2-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 07:15 AM
reply to post by zanysami

Political Correctness, Identity, and the South

Having been born, raised and living in the south my entire life, I have seen first hand the changes in both culture and beliefs that have taken hold. The difference between what exists today in those states most often identified as 'Dixie' from what they once were, is absolutely astounding.

Unfortunately, there is still a lot of old beliefs that hold firm... and most of them are, surprisingly, not found in the south.

I have traveled to nearly every state east of the Mississippi and I find that some of the worst cases of racial bigotry are located in the midwest, in states like Wisconsin and Ohio. Not only that, misperceptions and regional prejudices against the south, based on views a century old, still thrive all across the northeast.

Oh yes, we all still marry our sisters and have a moonshine still in the shed out back, lol.


I could go into detail and paint a picture of modern reality here in the 21st century, but my experience is that we will not change hearts and minds with words alone. So, I will merely say that... the south is in the middle of redefining itself, incorporating its vast sum of people, diversity and culture to create a place that even today, in no way, resembles what once was.

posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 07:58 AM
reply to post by RealSpoke

Actually, everyone has union flags..

The reason the northern states aren't "caught up on" the civil war is because they weren't the rebels.

The South is still a country. It's a country within a country. Just as Texas sees itself as a country within a country.. within a country. Inception.

But in all seriousness, you have no idea how strong the national identity in the South is. You have three groups of people, really. The patriots to their states (like myself) .. the fake patriots that like to wave American flags and put yellow ribbons on their cars without knowing what that means, and the people that are either ignorant or don't care either way. So you tell that crowd they're racist, some of them will go "Huh? What does football have to do with racism, lol?" because they're clueless. 90% will understand, and not one person in that group will say "slavery". It IS a states' rights thing to us. At least now. And it's not history revisionism if it's always been that way to the PEOPLE.. I don't care what the 1% at the time wanted.

Scotland is still a country, right? Wales? Ireland?.. And they're still proud of their history, of the fact that they fought for their freedom even though they lost to an empire and were forced to live under them for the rest of eternity?

And you know, to be honest with you, yes it's probably true that the 1% of the time used propaganda to get the 99% to fight for them. But it was pretty damn good propaganda, wouldn't you say? I mean, don't you agree with the concept of independence, individualism, states' rights, noninterference? Why's that bad? That's what the identity of the south represents for its' people today. There aren't any of those 1%ers left alive, since.. it is 2012. But the ideas they created, no matter what their motivations, persist.

Oh, and you should also look into the monetary reasons the South was so concerned about a Lincoln victory in the election.. we would have been subdued by enormous taxes on exports. Ironically, foreigners weren't pleased with this and that's the reason they were poised to assist the South.

Such is the same with Tenessee, Florida, Texas.. there's an independent streak the northern states just don't have, and thus cannot understand. If you ask a Texan what he is, he'd tell you just that.. a Texan first, THEN an American. The northerners don't have any patriotism to their states. They're just imaginary lines.

For us in the south, our states aren't imaginary lines. They are our history, our ancestry, our families, our culture and our very essence. You wouldn't really ever hear someone from Michigan say that.

To say that that is pointless is to say that we should forget our past and allow our culture to dissolve into a footnote in a history book no one will care to read. You say that "Most people equate the Civil War with ONLY slavery and not a deeper states rights issue."

.. To which I reply.. I'm pretty sure that's where you live, because it certainly isn't that way here. And I'm pretty sure we're still about half the country. So..

People that forget their past are doomed to repeat it. People that never knew about the past to begin with are even worse off. That's the sad truth. And when people like the chancellor of the university of Mississippi do this, they're erasing our past and our culture, slowly but surely.

And we can't have that.

And hey, you should listen to Ron Paul's stance on this!..

edit on 27-2-2012 by zanysami because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-2-2012 by zanysami because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:58 AM
reply to post by redoubt

I have traveled to nearly every state east of the Mississippi and I find that some of the worst cases of racial bigotry are located in the midwest, in states like Wisconsin and Ohio.

I live in Southern Ohio. May be different in the North, but down here, we have many mixed race couples, and many Stars and Bars Flags hanging. I have lived here for almost 8 years, and have not heard even one racist remark.

posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 09:12 AM

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by redoubt

I have traveled to nearly every state east of the Mississippi and I find that some of the worst cases of racial bigotry are located in the midwest, in states like Wisconsin and Ohio.

I live in Southern Ohio. May be different in the North, but down here, we have many mixed race couples, and many Stars and Bars Flags hanging. I have lived here for almost 8 years, and have not heard even one racist remark.

My wife is from NE Ohio. Spent time in the area...

Mixed race couples are found everywhere. In fact, this seems to have transcended the subject of racism... which is a little odd but certainly good.

My experience in the blue-collar area of Youngstown, Akron/Canton was one of a very defined, but rarely spoken segregation system. The color boundaries of neighborhoods was very strict.

You didn't cross those lines, ever.

I was a little surprised because I had always assumed a more culturally liberal society but... that was not the case.

new topics

top topics


log in