Davis Teaching Alabama School Children About Jeff Davis at First Confederate White House

From the article:

In response to such criticism, representatives of the museum ask why they should have to tell students about the evils of slavery.

“They just know it,” said Gibbs Davis, a member of the nonprofit group that solicits donations and maintains the privately-owned but partially state-funded house.

The Confederate White House is only one stop on the trip to Montgomery that Alabama fourth-graders traditionally take as part of their history education and is not the sole lesson they receive about the state’s past. Some groups choose to spend more time at civil rights sites such as Martin Luther King Jr.’s Dexter Avenue Baptist Church or the Rosa Parks Museum.


I agree. Everyone is beaten over the head with SLAVERY!!! every time the Confederacy or Davis are mentioned. Places that tell other aspects of the story get browbeaten for daring to go off of the approved message, but they shouldn't be. It's not as if all the facts aren't out there, easily found by anyone who's looking.

Why wouldn't slavery come up? It was a significant and integral part to planter culture, life, and Southern economy (as well as American economy as a whole). Would you give an overview of Jefferson Davis and not mention the Confederacy? About Lincoln and not mention he was a President. Slavery was as much (and can possibly be argued more) important to the story of so many individuals and American cultures that unless you are purposely focusing just a on a specific piece then it needs to often be included, like any other integral topic.

We wouldn't talk about the American Revolution without taxation without representation why would we not talk about slavery with the Confederacy (or much of American history). Slaves made up 40% of the entire Confederate nation, certainly even that alone would warrant the scale at which it is fully relevant (and then of course all the economic and state rights arguments over aspects of slavery, etc).

Why should slavery be treated differently than any other topic or aspect so critical a part to economy, culture, and history and be avoided. There's nothing wrong with telling all the other important aspects, but if you talk about all those other aspects (many less significant in many ways) especially things like cotton production, the importance of cotton economy, etc, and you don't heard about the slaves and both their contributions and hardships (except how much they loved Davis) then that's literally whitewashing.

Sure if you are looking at a farm that had no slaves, maybe at a Southern manufacturing location, or something else that doesn't bridge on topics where slavery was a key aspect... then sure. Though when you are literally dancing around all the things where slavery is immensely relevant and you mostly avoid it and any negatives of it, well that's something completely different.

Slavery is also a part of the story of other regions of the Nation, but in most cases it's a smaller part of the story than in the South. That's just the reality.

To me it's no different than say talking about US pioneers into land acquired and being sure to include the key aspect of Native Americans and how that land was acquired (and hopefully some of the specifics that are relevant)... this applies to everywhere in the US including the North.

We shouldn't be afraid to talk about slavery, it is a historical fact and a significant part of much of US history, we need to own that and in a lot of ways that can help free us from the stigmas applied to it. Theres nothing wrong with being descended from slave holders, or being part of a Nation that fully embraced slavery, or from a region that expanded it greatly... it is wrong to avoid and deny those aspects that were immensely critical. We are not responsible for how those came before us handled such topics but we are responsible for how we face those topics now.
 
Quote Dedej
" I guess you can't see how you are OK with someone else doing the same thing. Meaning, the talking about Confederacy and a one-sided view being shoved and presented history in many faces - some being children. But, totally ignore slavery and racism."

Im not a slavery denier. In fact i just said this -

"When the subject is slavery lets talk about it, when slavery is not the subject we dont need it shoved in our faces constantly."
 
My point is that it should be possible to discuss people and topics during the Civil War era without someone demanding that slavery be included in every single last discussion. If a museum wants to specialize in a narrowly focused way, there's nothing wrong with that.



And if the truth about slavery wasn't available in many other venues, I'd agree with you. But it is easily found in many other museums and libraries, so I have a hard time accepting that anyone is being shortchanged here. But I appreciate your thoughtful response and your perspective.

There would not be a confederacy, a first white house of the confederacy, and a Jefferson Davis president of the confederacy if it weren't for slavery. There's no more appropriate place to discuss slavery.
 
My point is that it should be possible to discuss people and topics during the Civil War era without someone demanding that slavery be included in every single last discussion. If a museum wants to specialize in a narrowly focused way, there's nothing wrong with that.



And if the truth about slavery wasn't available in many other venues, I'd agree with you. But it is easily found in many other museums and libraries, so I have a hard time accepting that anyone is being shortchanged here. But I appreciate your thoughtful response and your perspective.

Thanks for responding! :smile:

I understand your point - I really do! But, what if slavery is included in his story? I know you may not want to hear about it - but it is very much included. I don't think you can take it out and tell the whole story.

I hope you understand - just as much as you don't wanna hear about slavery - it's many Black Americans that feel the same way. So much, they are ashamed to talk about it. And this is the cause of many issues in my community - they are actually ashamed of their ancestors being enslaved. As if it was their fault - or something to be ashamed of. I am proud of each and every one - because I wouldn't be here - if they weren't. Do the children of color who take the tour not deserve to at-least hear the slaves's part in the story? Especially, when THEY make mention of them and how much they loved Davis and how good he was to them. Telling the accurate story - and making sure you include those who were apart of the story - only aides in someone learning about history and for some - their personal history.

So, that means one can't be talked about without the other. They are pretty mutually exclusive.

On other venues - so is the Civil War and it's "heroes" - so much they have monuments and more.

For me, its not about trying to shortchange those you admire - and if Davis and the like are your heroes - I totally respect that. But, you can't just talk one - without talking about the other. No one is asking for a full Slavery in America speech - but do not ignore or leave them out - as if they didn't exist or wasn't a major issue or part of the story. That is all I'm saying. :smile:

Thanks again!
 
Last edited:
If you go tour a former working plantation then slavery would be part of how the farm operated and you should hear about how it was there.

You go to the presidents house, you might learn about what was happening there in meetings and the important people who came and went.

When the subject is slavery lets talk about it, when slavery is not the subject we dont need it shoved in our faces constantly.

So what place are you talking about... This place talked about things with direct slavery relevance, apparently they express Jefferson Davis was "held by his Negroes in genuine affection as well as highest esteem." Additionally apparently the importance of cotton and the production of cotton is a topic

----
The pupils heard about the importance of the South’s cotton economy and learned how to spin raw clumps of the stuff onto wooden spools but were told little about the slaves whose forced labor drove the textile industry.
----

The museum seems to focus (and suggests the same on their website) on Jefferson Davis and his history as well. Certainly him being a slave owner and slavery was an important part of his story and the planter culture he was part of.

So yeah, all topics where slavery was relevant.

Additionally 40% of the Confederate population were slaves and slavery was a distinct and important part of the Confederate's secession and their own communication and establishment of it. All even more reasons why slavery was important.
 
My point is that it should be possible to discuss people and topics during the Civil War era without someone demanding that slavery be included in every single last discussion.

Just my two cents, I agree. When I first found out one of my ancestor was a Confederate soldier, I could not wait to learn all I could about the Civil War. What a huge undertaking, right? Lol! All everyone else wanted to talk about was "Did your grand daddy own slaves?" In my experiences, it's even worse now! As I was driving to my UDC meeting my daughter's friend called me and when I told her where I was headed she laughed and said if she had heard that from anyone else she would have called me a racist! What the heck??? I told her, "Oh yeah, I was going to meet with all those little old white ladies and over lunch we were going to figure out a way to turn the clock back 150 years!" :cannon: I want to talk about the individuals both black and white and hear their stories. Yes, that involves slavery but it is not exclusive. I do tend to lean more towards the political and social aspects of the war - the battles are hard for me to grasp and visualize- but there is so much more to talk about! The hardships, food, clothing, sewing, families, animals, medical issues, education - so many other wonderful discussions to be had and so many on this very site!
 
Last edited:
I totally agree. But, in this case - it's the President of the Confederacy not the President of U.S. And you can't talk about the Confederacy without talking about slavery and the South.

I guess you can't see how you are OK with someone else doing the same thing. Meaning, the Confederacy/Davis and a one-sided view being shoved + presented as accurate history in many faces - some being children. But, totally ignore slavery and racism. IMO, that's a way to silence and narrate what one may think is important - but not what IS important.

What was his job?
Jefferson Finis Davis[1] (June 3, 1808 – December 6, 1889) was an American politician who was a Democratic U.S. Representative and Senator from Mississippi, the 23rd U.S. Secretary of War, and the President of the Confederate States of America during the American Civil War. He took personal charge of the Confederate war plans but was unable to find a strategy to defeat the more populous and industrialized Union. His diplomatic efforts failed to gain recognition from any foreign country, and at home, the collapsing Confederate economy forced his government to print more and more paper money to cover the war's expenses, leading to runaway inflation and devaluation of the Confederate dollar.

What did issues did the Confederacy fight for?
One BIG and MAIN thing was --- Slavery. And yeah - "states rights."

Unfortunately, you can't just talk about what he did, his home decor and what meetings took place there. You have to talk about what those meetings were about, and what were the key goals and benchmarks in those war plans and strategies. What his beliefs were? And any other historically accurate information about him and The Confederacy - good or bad.
Well said!
Many who claim the war was about "state's rights" not slavery might tell us specifically, what "state's rights"?
It was not a quarrel over who sets the speed limit on the highways, or who decides whether to allow the sale of medical marijuana: it was an argument for the "state's rights' to buy, sell and enslave an entire race for the economic advantage of another race....
 
Quote Dedej
" I guess you can't see how you are OK with someone else doing the same thing. Meaning, the talking about Confederacy and a one-sided view being shoved and presented history in many faces - some being children. But, totally ignore slavery and racism."

Im not a slavery denier. In fact i just said this -

"When the subject is slavery lets talk about it, when slavery is not the subject we dont need it shoved in our faces constantly."

I didn't mean to make you think I alleged you were. If you think I did - I apologize. :smile:

But, Jefferson Davis, his beloved "White House" and The Confederacy all go hand in hand with the institution of slavery. So, both sides are being shoved something they could care less to taste.
 
Quote Dedej-
"I understand your point - I really do! But, what if slavery is included in his story? I know you may not want to hear about it - but it is very much included. I don't think you can take it out and tell the whole story."


Correct, if you are going to tell the 'whole story' you include slavery. But every little mention of the CSA does not rate the 'whole story'.

A building where the president worked for 3 months, is a tiny fraction not the whole story.
 
Quote Dedej-
"I understand your point - I really do! But, what if slavery is included in his story? I know you may not want to hear about it - but it is very much included. I don't think you can take it out and tell the whole story."


Correct, if you are going to tell the 'whole story' you include slavery. But every little mention of the CSA does not rate the 'whole story'.

A building where the president worked for 3 months, is a tiny fraction not the whole story.
I hope all these comments are about more than "a building". I, for one, want more taught about our ancestors and the way they thought, the trials they faced and their reaction- good and bad- to them.
Preserve the building. Let it be a small slice of our history, a window into life in the mid 19th century. Discuss it, and the persons who lived in it, honestly as the people they were, not those we wish they were.
All of us are flawed. If students and tourists gain nothing more than understanding that, the building has more than justified its existence, upkeep and maintenance....
 
Quote Dedej-
"I understand your point - I really do! But, what if slavery is included in his story? I know you may not want to hear about it - but it is very much included. I don't think you can take it out and tell the whole story."


Correct, if you are going to tell the 'whole story' you include slavery. But every little mention of the CSA does not rate the 'whole story'.

A building where the president worked for 3 months, is a tiny fraction not the whole story.

You can't tell the story of that building without telling the story of the enslaved people who were forced to work there, and you can't tell their story without telling the story of slavery. What did they have in common with and in what ways were they different from other enslaved laborers?
 
Lowell also dispells the myth that the "Mill Girls" were farmer's daughters looking for independance. After the first decade or so, most were immigrants and their conditions were generally bad before they unionized in the early 20th Century. I went to the Tenement Museum several times and was told the histories of the families who lived their, including children who died because farmers sold their mothers spoiled milk and workers who were locked out by bosses. No need for rose colored glasses if you are looking for history instead of myth.
Yes, I know. I've been to both. That's why I brought it up.
 
Quote Dedej-
"I understand your point - I really do! But, what if slavery is included in his story? I know you may not want to hear about it - but it is very much included. I don't think you can take it out and tell the whole story."


Correct, if you are going to tell the 'whole story' you include slavery. But every little mention of the CSA does not rate the 'whole story'.

A building where the president worked for 3 months, is a tiny fraction not the whole story.

Understandable. :smile: But, if I am not mistaken - Jefferson Davis and it being the White House of The Confederacy is why tourist and educators/pupils come to visit. It is why they are funded by tax payers money. So, that would include discussing slavery.

And to be fair, what other story is there to learn about the "White House of Confederacy?" I didn't think it had any major importance thereafter. I would love to learn any other history it has attached to it.

But, I get what you are saying though - I have been on Plantation Tours where I am forced to PAY to hear about the "Masters," their beloved Confederate ancestors and the Mistresses's China collection. And told about 1-3 sentences about those who were enslaved there + why 98.9% of the touring group is there in the first place.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure they're comparable but you can believe as you will. As I recall, Arnold acted for personal aggrandizement. I'm not sure Davis can be said to have done the same.

I don't think the reasons for such turn arounds excuses later actions that tend to cancel out the good they each did before they decided on their future courses of action.
 
I'm not sure they're comparable but you can believe as you will. As I recall, Arnold acted for personal aggrandizement. I'm not sure Davis can be said to have done the same.
Can you and @unionblue agree that both men- Arnold and Davis- performed with distinction at one point in their lives?
 
I'm not sure they're comparable but you can believe as you will. As I recall, Arnold acted for personal aggrandizement. I'm not sure Davis can be said to have done the same.
There was more to it than just that. Some of it was personal, including the treatment of his wife by other military wives. He should have just resigned but he did what he did. What I don't get is why anyone would be mad or upset or offended or whatever feelings they are having over something that happened before their granddaddy was born.
 
Back
Top