of the but the reason was the fear that the federal government under lincoln was going to abolish slavery. that s when they believed. they were worried, for example, that they would not be able to have slaves in the newly acquired territories to the west that were taken in the war after mexico. that was the sticking point. in fact, the vice presidency of the confederacy, alexander stevens, stood up and said right after lincoln was elected that all the other issues had been resolved. the trade issues, the tariff issues, the tax issues. they had all been resolved. the only remaining factor according to the vice president of the confederate government was the institution of african slavery, which, i should point out, he said was a wonderful, moral, and god-ordained system of government. for anyone to want to commemorate the confederacy when its own leaders said that that s what it stood for is an abomination. tim wise, thank you. the civil war still dividing the country 145 years afte
some old wounds by declaring april confederate history month and leaving slavery out of the occasion. we have been talking with a panel of three civil war enactors, tim and lisa knight, here in atlanta, and h.k. edgarton joins us by satellite. i m sorry, i had to take a break there. you were saying? talking to me, sir? yes. here s another thing about it, having confederate history month and leaving out slavery. the thing about it when you have confederate history month and we start talking about the kind of things that took place around here in america, you can t leave out slavery. you have to talk about the place of honor and dignity that they earned under the confederate flag. hollywood don t tell this story, that is one of the reasons why you need to have confederate history month. my question is, why are these folks afraid to have the southern side told? they don t want to tell you about these things. we talk about black history month. i don t know how you can
not a that he s trying to make a big deal out of something that doesn t amount to diddly. doesn t amount to diddly. barbour is already catching flak for those comments. the democratic national committee issued a statement saying slavery is a big deal and barbour is defending the indefensible. straight ahead, we ll hear from a whole panel of civil war reenactors to hear what they think about this controversy. well, right now we re going to run the story by cnn political editor, mark preston. mark, this is getting really political now. it s gone from a blue and gray issue to an issue about red states or, i don t understand why it s becoming political. what is political about this? what is left and right about this issue? you know, don, it really comes down to politics, right? whatever you talk about race, you have to be very careful about how you put it in the context you put it. if you listen to what governor barbour said right there, he said that, look, why should we why do w
very passion not opinions there from people who still love the stars and bars. you won t see activists in actor tim wise putting on a uniform though his roots run deep. his new book, color blind: the rise of post racial politics and the retreat from racial equality is coming out in just a few weeks. he says confederate history month is a major step backwards. he s part of a conversation here s part of a conversation i had with him yesterday. there are people writing me now who are saying, you need to go back and learn history. slavery was not a point in the civil war. it had nothing to do with it. that s absolutely preposterous. if you look at the declaration of causes that were issued by the state who is left the union, every single time that they explained their decision, they said that the reason not one of the but the reason was the fear that the federal government under lincoln was going to abolish slavery. that s what they believed. they were worried, for example, that
something that happened that was significant. for us to celebrate, no, and that s not what we do, but we do educate, we do re-live, we do pull people in and help them understand as much as we can what really happened. so here s a question. here s what i think. it should be in the history books, and it is. i learned about it in school and it s in the history books from all the way up from elementary school on up to college. you get the history of this country and you know about slavery. having a proclamation, i think, and a whole time to learn about it when you don t include slavery and denouncing slavery, are you saying that we should have had slaves? do you believe that we should have had slaves or do you believe that slavery should exist in this country? i don t believe slavery should exist anywhere in the world, it still does. but the simple fact of the matter i m not trying to state anybody who owns slaves, they were right or wrong. but for 200 years ago to 2,000 years ago sl