User:Malik Shabazz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Don't Give HBO's Confederate the Benefit of the Doubt
HBO's prospective series Confederate will offer an alternative history of post-Civil War America. It will ask the question, according to co-creator David Benioff, "What would the world have looked like ... if the South had won?" A swirl of virtual protests and op-eds have greeted this proposed premise. In response, HBO has expressed "great respect" for its critics but also said it hopes that they will "reserve judgment until there is something to see." ...

HBO's motives aside, the plea to wait supposes that a problem of conception can be fixed in execution. We do not need to wait to observe that this supposition is, at best, dicey. For over a century, Hollywood has churned out well-executed, slickly produced epics which advanced the Lost Cause myth of the Civil War. These are true "alternative histories," built on "alternative facts," assembled to depict the Confederacy as a wonderland of virtuous damsels and gallant knights, instead of the sprawling kleptocratic police state it actually was. From last century's The Birth of a Nation to this century's Gods and Generals, Hollywood has likely done more than any other American institution to obstruct a truthful apprehension of the Civil War, and thus modern America's very origins. So one need not wait to observe that any foray by HBO into the Civil War must be met with a spirit of pointed inquiry and a withholding of all benefit of the doubt.

Skepticism must be the order of the day. So that when Benioff asks "what would the world have looked like ... if the South had won," we should not hesitate to ask what Benioff means by "the South." He obviously does not mean the minority of white Southern unionists, who did win. And he does not mean those four million enslaved blacks, whom the Civil War ultimately emancipated, yet whose victory was tainted. Comprising 40 percent of the Confederacy's population, this was the South's indispensable laboring class, its chief resource, its chief source of wealth, and the sole reason why a Confederacy existed in the first place. But they are not the subject of Benioff's inquiry, because he is not so much asking about "the South" winning, so much as he is asking about "the white South" winning.

The distinction matters. For while the Confederacy, as a political entity, was certainly defeated, and chattel slavery outlawed, the racist hierarchy which Lee and Davis sought to erect, lives on. It had to. The terms of the white South's defeat were gentle. Having inaugurated a war which killed more Americans than all other American wars combined, the Confederacy's leaders were back in the country's political leadership within a decade. Within two, they had effectively retaken control of the South.

Knowing this, we do not have to wait to point out that comparisons between Confederate and The Man in the High Castle are fatuous. Nazi Germany was also defeated. But while its surviving leadership was put on trial before the world, not one author of the Confederacy was convicted of treason. Nazi Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop was hanged at Nuremberg. Confederate General John B. Gordon became a senator. Germany has spent the decades since World War II in national penance for Nazi crimes. America spent the decades after the Civil War transforming Confederate crimes into virtues. It is illegal to fly the Nazi flag in Germany. The Confederate flag is enmeshed in the state flag of Mississippi.

The symbols point to something Confederate's creators don't seem to understand—the war is over for them, not for us. At this very hour, black people all across the South are still fighting the battle which they joined during Reconstruction—securing equal access to the ballot—and resisting a president whose resemblance to Andrew Johnson is uncanny. Confederate is the kind of provocative thought experiment that can be engaged in when someone else's lived reality really is fantasy to you, when your grandmother is not in danger of losing her vote, when the terrorist attack on Charleston evokes honest sympathy, but inspires no direct fear. And so we need not wait to note that Confederate's interest in Civil War history is biased, that it is premised on a simplistic view of white Southern defeat, instead of the more complicated morass we have all around us. ...

The problem of Confederate can't be redeemed by production values, crisp writing, or even complicated characters. That is not because its conceivers are personally racist, or seek to create a show that endorses slavery. Far from it, I suspect. Indeed, the creators have said that their hope is to use science fiction to "show us how this history is still with us in a way no strictly realistic drama ever could." And that really is the problem. African Americans do not need science-fiction, or really any fiction, to tell them that that "history is still with us." It's right outside our door. It's in our politics. It's on our networks. And Confederate is not immune. The show's very operating premise, the fact that it roots itself in a long white tradition of imagining away emancipation, leaves one wondering how "lost" the Lost Cause really was. ...
Ta-Nehisi Coates, "The Lost Cause Rides Again", The Atlantic
External images
A Man Was Lynched by Police Yesterday, flag, 2016, by Dread Scott)

A Man Was Lynched Yesterday, flag, 1920s and 1930s NAACP

Angelica Rogers, "Does This Flag Make You Flinch?", The New York Times
1856 or 2016?
they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect
User page Talk page Contributions Articles Shiny things WikiProjects

Welcome. السلام عليكم. שלום עליכם.

Noia 64 apps karm.svg This user has been on Wikipedia for 10 years, 8 months, and 10 days.
Wikipedia-logo.png Between his two accounts, this user has made more than 103,000 edits on Wikipedia.
System-users.svg This user has an alternative account named MShabazz.
Not Admin.svg This user is a former administrator who served for 5 years, 9 months, and 20 days (verify).

I chose my Username after El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz, better known as Malcolm X, whose life and words inspire me. I'm not related to or associated with Malik Zulu Shabazz of the so-called New Black Panther Party, except that we both chose our names in honor of El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz. On the other hand, if you've come across Malik Shabazz on an internet forum, that's probably me.

Despite my social and political views, some of which are expressed in my Userboxes, I am committed to maintaining a neutral point of view in the articles I edit. If you think my editing is biased, please let me know.

Note: Everything on this page is for information purposes only. It isn't intended to establish any particular credentials or expertise. The philosophy of Wikipedia is that it is an encyclopedia that anybody can edit.