SHAPE Pres. Mark Raines/SHAPE has received a response from the Dept of Interior (National Parks Service) regarding his letter about the gettysburg Battlefield Visitors Center. Mark asked me to open it, which I did, and found it to be just a canned 3 page response. Depending on what Mark says I will post all or part of the letter to this website.
Here is the letter. There are a few points in this letter I will be responding to. I will also send scans of the letter to anyone who wants a copy for themselves. Let me know.
(1) Slavery was the Root cause of the war.
(2) Only using portions of the Mississippi (or other) secession document(s)
(3) with biase towards none
(4) I'll also be sure to mention a few Lincoln quotes.
GP ***************************************************
United States Department of interior National Park Service
Gettysburg National Museum Park Eisenhower National Historic Site Gettysburg, Pa. 17325 Gettysburg, Pa. 17325
K18
October 10, 2008
Mr. Mark Raines Southern Heritage Advancement Preservation and Education (Address not displayed) Gulfport, Ms. 39507
Dear Mr. Raines,
Your email of September 16, 2008, entitled “NPS Military History Versus Political Correctness [sic] and Social Agendas “has been forwarded to this office for response. I am pleased to offer the following information, both as background and in response to your specific points.
In 1990, the Congress of the United States directed Gettysburg national Military Park to:
Take such action as is necessary sand appropriate to interpret, for the benefit of visitors to the park and the general public, The Battle of Gettysburg in the larger context of the Civil War and American History, including the causes and consequences of the Civil War and including the effects of the war on the American people. (italics added)
In 1998, the National Park Service (NPS) came to the decision that our traditional interpretation at Civil War battlefields, which emphasized battles and tactics almost exclusively, was ignoring the overwhelming question of what the armies were fighting about, and what it means today. Accordingly the NPS adopted the following guiding principal for interpretation at our Civil War sites.
Battlefield interpretation must establish the sites’s particular place in the continuum of war; illuminate the social, economic, and cultural issues that caused or were affected by the war, illustrate the breadth of human experience during the period and establish the relevance of the war to people today. (italics added)
In 1999 another congressional report concluded that:
The Service does an outstanding job of documenting and describing the particular battle at any given site…. It does not always do a similarly good job of documenting and describing the historical social, economic, legal cultural and political forces and events that originally led to the larger war which eventually led manifested themselves in specific battles. In particular the Civil War battlefields are often weak or missing vital information about the role that the institution of slavery played in causing the American Civil War. (italics added)
(Page 2)
Consequently, Congress directed the secretary of the Interior to:
Encourage Civil war battle sites to recognize and include in all of their public displays and multi-media educational presentations the unique role that the institution played in causing the Civil War and its role if any, at the individual sites. (italics added)
At Gettysburg NMP the NPS is enhancing (not changing) the stories we tell of the Civil war Battles and leaders , by providing our visitors with the basic understanding of what they were fighting about (causes) and why it is important (consequences). Our intent is not to downplay the military history, but to make it more meaningful to our visitors by introducing the social, political and economic influences which produced those soldiers and armies in which they fought.
We feel we have not detracted from the sacrifice and bravery of the soldiers who fought there by telling the expanded story. Rather, we think we can build a better understanding, a new appreciation and a new respect those and what they believed in. In our new exhibits at Gettysburg NMP, we carefully use the words of the participants themselves to outline the events that lead to the outbreak of the Civil War. Thus, if visitors at Gettysburg NMP, come to the conclusion that slavery was the root cause of the Civil war, it is not because of anything the NPS said or done, but because they have read the words of the participants themselves. For example visitors who wonder what caused South Carolina to secede from the Union may read the South Carolina Declaration Of secession, which stated that:
A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of The United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery.
Or, they may study the Mississippi Declaration which stated that:
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery – the greatest material interest in the world…. Utter subjection 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 dollars of money, or we must secede from the union framed by our fathers….
Or they may read the Texas declaration of Secession which stated that; “We hold these truths as undeniable truths that the government of the various states … were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity that the African race …. Rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race. And in that condition only could their existence in this country be beneficial or tolerable … that servitude of the African race as existing in these states, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations…….
Or they may hear the words of Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the confederate States of America who famously declared that the Confederacy
Is founded upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. This, our new government is first and in the history of the world, based on this great physical, philosophical and moral truth.
Page 3
You correctly note that the Crittenden-Johnson Resolution of 1861 reflected the original objective of the Lincoln administration, which was to deny the legitimacy of secession and to restore the Union. One of the new galleries at the new Gettysburg museum goes on to outline how that War for Union evolved into a war for Union and Freedom with the release of the Emancipation Proclamation in early 1863. A final gallery emphasizes that two principal consequences of the war were to settle, once and for all, the legitimacy of secession and the question of slavery. A third consequence was to raise the question of the meaning and definition of citizenship, a question which is still debated today.
The NPS agrees with Congress that it is important for our visitors to understand the causes and consequences of the American Civil War as it is to understand the flow of the battle at our Civil war sites. As Abraham Lincoln once said “If we could first know where we are, and wither we are tending, we could then better judge what to do, and how to do it.” Therein lays the relevancy of history. If we can better understand the issues, the trails, the sacrifices, and the struggles that past generations endured, to bring us where we are today, we can better “ judge what to do and how to do it” today and in the future.
We are doing our best at Gettysburg NMP to provide that kind of understanding. And we are doing with the words of the participants themselves, without bias or prejudiced toward any man north or south, black or white, dead or alive.
Your email indicates that you have not yet had the opportunity to visit the Gettysburg NMP, I would like to cordially invite you to do so as soon as may be convenient, so you may judge for yourself.
I hope this information helps address your concerns. Thank you for your interest in the National Park Service.
"Any people, anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable and most sacred right - a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so many of the territory as they inhabit." Abraham Lincoln January 12, 1848.
Latshar, in the spirit of objectivity, should, also be required to post Lincoln's words and should, in addition, be required to post the truth-----that all other civilized portions of the world ending slavery had done so, peacefully, by refunding the money of the purchasers. The New England slave salesmen should have been forced to do the refunding. Why was this not done? --
And, also, if slavery was the true cause of the war, why did Lincoln offer to make slavery a forever thing if the South would simply pay his horrendously high taxes? That information should, also, in the name of objectivity, be posted. There is a record of that information available.
That is exactly some of the points I wat to make to Dr. Latschar. I also want to point will send him the Lincoln quote "My primary objective" and I will remind him that West Virginia came into the Union as a slave state.
This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it. I cannot be ignorant of the fact that many worthy and patriotic citizens are desirous of having the national Constitution amended. While I make no recommendation of amendments, I fully recognize the rightful authority of the people over the whole subject to be exercised in either of the modes prescribed in the instrument itself; and I should, under existing circumstances, favor rather than oppose a fair opportunity being afforded the people to act upon it.
I expected to hear nothing any different than what we received from NPS, thats why they, as with many Americans, are so out of touch with history. Distort the truth to appease the few.
Ladies and Gentlemen: I suggest that we forget about Gettysburg except to condemn it utterly as a site of Yankee atrocity. Supposedly - at least if you read all the self-righteous pap spewed from Yankee pens and newspapers before, during and after the War, the Union represented the best, most honorable most CHRISTIAN of ideals and men. Of course, the most superficial study of the war puts the lie to any of those claims, but let us just consider Gettysburg in the light of a claim to being "God's swift sword of righteousness" against the godless and brutal South:
To begin with, no one in the Union failed to note that most Southerners - slavers or not - were Christians. Whether or not one took issue with the "Southern Christian" view of the institution of slavery, the fact still remained that Southerners, for the most part, were in fact, "fellow Christians". This doesn't even take into consideration the claim by the Yankees that all they wanted was a restoration of a union with their "estranged brothers".
Well, if any of these claims had merit, then please explain to me why the Confederate dead were given no more decent a burial than was accorded dead horses and mules in order to prevent them from contaminating the air and causing disease? Can anyone imagine a Confederate commander refusing to give decent burial to the federal dead if it were at all possible to provide it? I can't and I daresay even most Yankees would have to admit - then and now - that no Confederate would have treated his dead enemies as their dead were treated at Gettysburg. It wasn't until 1872 that a magnanimous Yankee government permitted the South to go to the area and disinter - if you could use that word for men treated like garbage - what bodies could be found for burial in Hollywood Cemetery in Richmond.
No, folks. I wouldn't give Gettysburg the time of day - much less any money. It is a YANKEE shrine; always has been, always will be - and to me, it is an abomination. I am only sorry that at in the end there were former Confederate soldiers who had fought at Gettysburg and at a "reunion" now embraced their "former enemies" at that place. I guess that they forgot the fate of their dead and captured brothers at the hands of those "former enemies". For myself, the word "former" would never have entered into the matter.
Couple of things that really bother me about the Gettysburg issue.
1) These letters state the war was all about slavery. They determine this by picking and choosing different parts of the Secession Causes and several speeches.
2.) It is also my tax money that helps fund the spreading of this lie.
3.) These changes are slated for NPS sites that deal with The War For Southern Independence, Gettysburg, Shiloh, Corinth, and even Vicksburg. I understand a monument has been placed there for the USCT where none served. That is why I think we should protest these lies and misinformation at the beginning.
My apologies to everyone for forgetting to mention that Mark Raines/SHAPE has received another letter, the exact same as the one posted above (ain't that strange?) from a Mr. Dennis Reidenbach, Regional Director Northeast Region of the NPS. I will do likewise and send them both the same reply except this time it will from me not Mark. However Mark will approve the letter as required by our bylaws. I intend to make them squirm when I send them some facts about Lincoln.
Below is the approved letter to be sent to the NPS as noted. I will also be sending a copy of this letter to Dr. John Latschar, Superintendent of Gettysburg Battlefield. They don't post quite as well in the format in which they are wriiten but I think you get the idea.
GP ************************************************* Director Dennis R. Reidenbach National Park Service Northeast Region United States Custom House 200 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 19106
Dear Mr. Reidenbach,
Your response dated Nov. 7, 2008 to Mr. Mark Raines, President of S.H.A.P.E. has been received. We very much appreciate your civil response to our inquiry; however we are somewhat disappointed it is the exact same response that we received from Dr. John A. Latschar, Superintendent of Gettysburg Battlefield. It is true that neither I nor Mr. Raines has visited Gettysburg Battlefield. It is also true that from what we read within these duplicate letters, we have no desire to visit the Welcome Center or view the exhibits there. It is also true that we plan to inform as many people as we can as to the outright misinformed biased and non factual historical presentations your personnel and Center offer to the guests that come from all over the world to visit. Please note an attached letter which I received in an email that gives a visitors impression of the Gettysburg Battlefield Visitors Center. Regardless of these combined letters and statements, I am sure both Mr. Raines and myself would still walk on the hollowed ground where so many men gave the last full measure.
It is the position of SHAPE that history should be told in full and complete details with no bias toward either side. We also agree that people should know the whole truth and not just selected bits and pieces that are chosen to cast the blame on one side or the other. It is also SHAPE’s position that this is a battlefield and should not be a stage to promote someone’s social theories or agendas. That being said let’s get on with the historical facts.
As you stated the Crittenden – Johnson resolution reflects Lincoln’s original intention of fighting the war, to preserve the Union that is as it should be. However secession was NOT illegal (read our Constitution) and the use of force by Lincoln was ILLEGAL. The war did not evolve into a war for freedom, Lincoln did not have the power to free any slaves. The Emancipation Proclamation in reality freed not a single slave only those in the rebelling states and not those who remained loyal to the Union. It was a war measure to free more whites to die in the trenches, it helped stop Britain from recognizing the Confederate States as a legitimate country, thus hurting the Southern War effort in terms of supplies and money. Does your gallery reflect that?
It is absolutely accurate to say the war was disconnected with the issue of slavery. The declarations of secession are just that nothing more nothing less. They deal with the act of secession not war. These declarations were made by four states, one third of the Confederate states. In truth the “Civil War” was fought over ownership of Federal property, specifically Fort Sumter since that is where the first shot was fired. Consider these facts: 1. The Crittenden –Johnson resolution says the war was not over slavery. 2. Abe Lincoln says his paramount objective is to save the Union. 3. West Virginia is admitted to the Union as a slave state June 20,, 1863. 4. Lincoln's signed 13th Amendment, “No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State." 5. Slaves were not freed until the passage of the 13th amendment, in 1865. 6. The United States House of representatives refused to include this language in the proposed Slavery apology “Whereas slavery was not officially abolished until the passage of the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution in 1865 after the end of the Civil War, which was fought over the slavery issue;” (2008)
As stated before you only pick and choose the portions of documents and speeches that support your agenda. I have also read and studied the causes of secession. In the case of South Carolina why not use this portion?
By this Constitution, certain duties were imposed upon the several States, and the exercise of certain of their powers was restrained, which necessarily implied their continued existence as sovereign States. But to remove all doubt, an amendment was added, which declared that the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people. On the 23d May , 1788, South Carolina, by a Convention of her People, passed an Ordinance assenting to this Constitution, and afterwards altered her own Constitution, to conform herself to the obligations she had undertaken.
Or in the case of Mississippi this could have been used --- It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.
Texas states -- The Federal Government, while but partially under the control of these our unnatural and sectional enemies, has for years almost entirely failed to protect the lives and property of the people of Texas against the Indian savages on our border, and more recently against the murderous forays of banditti from the neighboring territory of Mexico; and when our State government has expended large amounts for such purpose, the Federal Government has refuse reimbursement therefor, thus rendering our condition more insecure and harassing than it was during the existence of the Republic of Texas.
Georgia went on to say this --- Even the owners of fishing smacks sought and obtained bounties for pursuing their own business (which yet continue), and $500,000 is now paid them annually out of the Treasury. The navigating interests begged for protection against foreign shipbuilders and against competition in the coasting trade. Congress granted both requests, and by prohibitory acts gave an absolute monopoly of this business to each of their interests, which they enjoy without diminution to this day. Not content with these great and unjust advantages, they have sought to throw the legitimate burden of their business as much as possible upon the public; they have succeeded in throwing the cost of light-houses, buoys, and the maintenance of their seamen upon the Treasury, and the Government now pays above $2,000,000 annually for the support of these objects. Theses interests, in connection with the commercial and manufacturing classes, have also succeeded, by means of subventions to mail steamers and the reduction in postage, in relieving their business from the payment of about $7,000,000 annually, throwing it upon the public Treasury under the name of postal deficiency. The manufacturing interests entered into the same struggle early, and has clamored steadily for Government bounties and special favors.
It is a well known fact that Alexander Stephens Cornerstone, has been disputed by Stephens himself and that no original copies have been found. Does the NPS at Gettysburg let the visitors hear these words of Stephens? As for my Savanna speech, about which so much has been said and in regrd to which I am represented as setting forth "slavery" as the "corner-stone" of the Confederacy, it is proper for me to state that that speech was extemporaneous, the reporter's notes, which were very imperfect, were hastily corrected by me; and were published without further revision and with several glaring errors. The substance of what I said on slavery was, that on the points under the old Constitution out of which so much discussion, agitation, and strife between the States had arisen, no future contention could arise, as these had been put to rest by clear language. I did not say, nor do I think the reporter represented me as saying, that there was the slightest change in the new Constitution from the old regarding the status of the African race amongst us. (Slavery was without doubt the occasion of secession; out of it rose the breach of compact, for instance, on the part of several Northern States in refusing to comply with Constitutional obligations as to rendition of fugitives from service, a course betraying total disregard for all constitutional barriers and guarantees.)
Does your office let visitors hear these words of Abe Lincoln?
I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races. I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. ... And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. Fourth Lincoln-Douglas Debate (18 September 1858 I have never had the least apprehension that I or my friends would marry negroes if there was no law to keep them from it, but as Judge Douglas and his friends seem to be in great apprehension that they might, if there were no law to keep them from it, I give him the most solemn pledge that I will to the very last stand by the law of this State, which forbids the marrying of white people with negroes. Fourth Lincoln-Douglas Debate (18 September 1858). I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. First debate with Stephen Douglas in the campaign for the United States Senate at Ottawa, Illinois on August 21st of 1858.n to do so. Even if Stephens’s statement is true he made it one time in his Cornerstone Speech, Lincoln had the same view but he repeated his views on several different occasions. Do visitors get to hear this? I do believe we at SHAPE have a reasonable idea who is behind the changes at Gettysburg and other NPS sites. While they may have directed you to make changes and expand the displays, it is my belief they did not direct you to be biased one side view in your presentation of the facts. While you honor the bravery of the soldiers, you give a very untrue version of why the Soldier was fighting. In a nutshell most of these men were fighting to repel an invader into his homeland. This fight against the hordes is justified by the actions of General “Beast” Butler and General Sherman making comments such as “I will make Georgia howl” Do visitors get to hear these men’s words? I think not, and I stand on my impression your displays are biased.in the presentation of information. Out of curiosity can you tell me how many Southern Historians helped plan these displays? If there are none, S.H.A.P.E will be more than happy to help the NPS present accurate and complete information to its visitors. Sincerely, George Purvis S.H.A.P.E Vice President
Well folks I have received another letter from the National Park service. It seems to me that SHAPE now has them back on their heels. The NPS no longer wants to hits us with their onesided,biased facts, but now tell us we are entitled to our own opinion. That basicaly means you are rightand we cannot dispute the facts you present. I have some ideas as to how to respond to theletter below, but will be consulting with both Mark and Carolyn about a response to this letter. I fully intend to push this as far as I can.
GP **************************************************
Dear Mr. Purvis:
I received your December 4, 2008, reply to our November 7, 2008, response about the new movie and exhibits at Gettysburg National Military Park.
I regret that you do not personally approve of the movie or the exhibits at the new Gettysburg Visitor center. While I respect your feelings and appreciate your feedback about the movie and the exhibits, I am confident that they provide the context and background to help visitors understand and appreciate the events and participants surrounding the Battle of Gettysburg.
You might ask them if the Center makes any mention of the atrocious and barbaric treatment of the Confederate dead (not to mention the atrocious and barbaric treatment accorded to Confederate prisoners taken at Gettysburg). I think that you will find this matter is nicely glossed over if it is treated at all.
I tell you, honoring and glorifying Gettysburg is not much - if at all different from glorifying Sherman's "battlefields" or places like "Helmira", Camps Douglas, Morten, Chase et al. and Point Lookout. In the matter of simple human decency, Gettysburg is as deserving of "honor" as Bergen Belsen and the gulags of Siberia. I, frankly, would not spend one minute or one dime there!
It just eats me up the “slavery was the cause and the South’s fault” message they are presenting to the general public. If you noticed in their response to me and Mark, they cherry picked what facts they wanted to present. I took the time to address each of their points one by one and now they want to tell me “they regret I do not approve.” It is not that OI don’t approve but it is selected history and therefore biased, prejudiced and a lie. The bad thing about the whole situation is, I also understand this is going to be the model for all NPS sites and they are doing it with our tax money. Just gripes me to no end.
Rest assured Mark, Carolyn and I will be addressing this issue more in the future.
Don't know much about all of the prisions or gettysburg for that manner, but I do know a biased explanation when I read one.
Yesterday I sent an email (approved by Mark) to Sen. Thad Cochran, requesting he look and a group of historians into the biased one-sided view presented at the Gettysburg Battlefield Park. At this time I am waiting on a response.
