Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
American History Meets an Agenda: Ban Re-enactments
Isn’t it frustrating that some progressives insist on denigrating white Americans with the dark history of slavery (systemic racism), but refuse to acknowledge how far we’ve come in overcoming the past? That attitude—that there is only one acceptable way to illustrate American history—has become part of progressive propaganda, and in particular, according to black progressives. They want to teach their incomplete version of black history, including their own depictions of the Civil War and other controversial conflicts.
In recent years, the Left is working to ban re-enactments in particular, with excuses that simply aren’t credible or honest. Slowly but surely, more excuses are used ranging from the rejection of violence, firing weapons, felonious use of weapons, the importance of gun control, the evils of the Confederacy, white supremacy, the use of Confederate symbols, and rejection of Civil War monuments. That these events and symbols depict our history is meaningless to the Left.
Here is a brief list of some of the re-enactments that have been affected:
In September, several groups canceled re-enactments in New York after the state banned weapons, including rifles that fire black powder, from public parks and other areas. Last May, dozens of people in Maine protested Civil War re-enactors carrying Confederate flags in a Memorial Day parade. . .
And there’s this additional explanation about the New York ban:
The new firearms law passed by the State of New York and effective September 1st changed more than the handgun permit requirements. Also added are prohibitions against possession of many types of firearms in ‘sensitive locations’ which include streets, sidewalks, parks and most public locations,” the event organizers posted on Facebook on Sept. 4.
The Bushy Run battle re-enactment outside Pittsburgh is the centerpiece of the multiday event, which is also the local historical society’s biggest fundraiser, said Mr. Malley, the board member. About 1,500 spectators typically watch as a total of 100 people portraying British soldiers and members of tribes, such as the Shawnee and Delaware, square off, he said.
Mr. Malley said the state commission had separately asked the historical society to stop the Bushy Run re-enactment last August because nontribal members portrayed Indians. The group refused the request, he said, because it came shortly before the planned event. He said his group is willing to consult with tribes as required by the commission.
Howard Pollman, a spokesman for the state commission, said it is working on guidelines that would require members of federally recognized tribes to portray tribal figures in re-enactments at its historic sites. A draft he provided says that appropriate roles for nontribal people include captives or adopted people, traders or ‘someone who is specifically married to an American Indian person in the 18th century.’
And in New York, this re-enactment was stopped:
As it has done each July for decades, Genesee Country Village and Museum will plunge into Civil War history this weekend.
There will be cannon fire, and there will be muzzle flashes on the Great Meadow as part of artillery demonstrations (using blanks, of course).
But for the first time since the early 1980s, the living-history institution’s Civil War weekend will not host battle re-enactments in which hobbyists dressed as Union and Confederate soldiers clash on museum grounds, and the event won’t include Confederate iconography, such as the “Stars and Bars” flag. . .
In the absence of the battle re-enactments, Civil War weekend will not have a physical Confederate presence. About 100 re-enactors will portray Union soldiers, Wehle said. Guests, the museum’s website explains, will be able to visit their encampment and listen to the stories of combatants, including ‘colored troops and women who disguised themselves to join the war.’
But no re-enactors will play Confederate troops, and no Confederate symbols will be displayed.
Other explanations have been given for eliminating re-enactments. At one location, a couple of people were injured. At another, capacity limitations and other restrictions from COVID are still in place. Some people think a Civil War re-enactment glorifies white supremacy or slavery. Other locations state that attendance has decreased.
But those dedicated to portraying American history in a dramatic and moving way believe that continuing re-enactments without politically motivated restrictions is important.
Tanya Haessly, in Janney Furnace, AL, shared her own viewpoint:
She told ABC News her job is to make sure history is told, and she wants her children to learn about what happened during the Civil War — especially when it comes to the Confederacy.
‘Some people think that we’re racist for doing this,’ she said. ‘I had people on the northern side. My mom was from Maine, my father was from the South. And so I had people on the northern side that died. I had people on the southern side that died.
‘We’re just trying to portray history, and we have people of all races that fight for both sides because they did. So for me, this is history. I homeschool my children and this is a history lesson for them.’
These banning efforts are just another way to weaken the first and second amendments and damage the reputation of the United States. They deprive participants and audiences with a lively experience of our history, engage everyone in our young history with stories of bravery and tragedy of all people.
I hope these groups are successful in continuing and re-instating their efforts to keep our history alive.
I haven’t attended a re-enactment, but I have been to several historic sights and read their stories. In some cases, people dressed in costume and it was educational. Yet I can understand how powerful our U.S. story would be for those who participate in a re-enactment or who watch events unfold. I hate the idea of losing these opportunities that allow Americans to better understand the American story. Having read some of their descriptions, it’s clear that they put much time and effort into preparing, practicing, and learning the stories of these brave men and women. They love participating in these events, to have the chance to identify with our ancestors, to imagine how demanding and difficult it must have been to fight on either side for the future of the country.
I can’t believe that there are people who demand that these activities must be stopped.
Have you visited historic sites, especially those that have re-enactments?
Could you share your experience?
Published in History
I was a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans for many years. Every February, we did a reenactment of The Battle of Aiken, which I believe was the last victory for the Confederacy. On Friday, the battle was free to school children from all over. The students enjoyed it – even the black kids. (Saturdays and Sundays, it’s open to the public for an admission fee.)
But it’s more than just a battle. There are period crafts, demonstrations (the field hospital is known for people fainting at a period “amputation”), and of course, plenty of stuff to buy. There’s also lots of food, including some of the best BBQ ever . . .
Suppression of speech is what the bad guys do.
They should spend their time removing CRT, Joel, where the real damage is done!
Yes, but the only historic battle site with a reenactment was one that featured a revolutionary era reenactment. I’ve been to a couple of civil war reenactments, but not at civil war sites.
I don’t care a lot for reenactments. A little goes a long way for me. Last one was probably 20 years ago.
I am wary of the political implications lurking behind confederate reenactors from the north, but am more understanding of those who have a family or regional connection.
But that wariness is nothing compared to my wariness of people who like to ban things, which activity amounts to a Nazi reenactment.
The key for them is to drain all the color out of history. Once that is done it can be repurposed for their project of unmaking America. We should be very careful about allowing them to do this. It is a slow poison being introduced into America that will make it easier for our enemies to defeat us.
Post-modernism, of which progressivism is a part, seeks to diminish, erase, and re-write history through a “contemporary” lens. It must do that because if history is not treated in this manner it reveals the poverty of progressive thought and the truth about the pursuit of secular utopian societies — the race to the bottom and the destruction.
This approach makes sense to me–being thoughtful about the activities you attend and your reasons for going. You’ve probably seen more historic places than anyone on Ricochet!
Their efforts to stop them seem mostly low key: don’t raise too much ire, just make it happen–or not happen, as the case may be.
I am afraid a great many people in this country now agree with them. I think they may have won the argument that America is not an exceptional place in the world and may even be a force for evil in the world. People seem uniquely willing to blame America for her misdemeanors and let other countries like Iran and China off the hook for capital offenses. It seems like Russia alone is allowed to be blamed more than we are.
I hope you’re wrong. They are certainly noisier than the average American. We must find the heroes within the group and give the attention they deserve.
I attended (as an audience member, not as a re-enactor) many of the Genesee Country Village re-enactments. It was a big re-enactment. When I went in the 200s and 2010s (I have since moved away from the area) there were several hundred re-enactors who participated. The museum also sometimes had re-enactments of the Revolutionary War and of the War of 1812, though the Civil War re-enactment was the largest. [Separately, I have attended at a different museum small re-enactments of World War II (European theater) with demonstrations of American, Soviet, and German forces.]
I learned a lot at those re-enactments. Without “both sides” much of the learning opportunities will be lost, and a new generation will see only a stilted version of history. Just on the military tactics front (not my cup of tea, but important to many), the audience will miss how the armies approach each other. The re-enactment at Genesee Country Village was particularly useful for demonstrations, as the re-enactors demonstrated how they move through an inhabited village, showing some of the impact of the battles on the residents of towns and villages. I was more interested in the traveling support systems that came with the armies. The audience could learn quite a bit about medical care, food supplies and preservation, cooking techniques, clothing, burial customs, etc. At a re-enactment, one can talk to participants about what they were doing, and why. But if no one is there to represent one entire side of the battle, the audience will not learn the full story, and will not be in a position to recognize or debate future threats as they arise. If you completely refuse to engage with why people who supported the Confederacy did so, you will be unable to deal with the next internal threat to the United States.
Without demonstrations of firearms, the audience be less interested in learning about the development of the manufacturing and industrial technologies that went with improving the firearms.
Mrs. Tabby and I are big fans of “living history museums” because they bring history to life in a way that supplements reading the written word, and is more visceral than just a video. Military re-enactments are a version of “living history.” Banishing parts of history from “living history” miseducates people, leaving the public ignorant and with diminished capacity to engage the world around them.
Excellent comment, FST! Thank you for giving us a sense of the “flavor” of it.
That’s a good explanation of their value.
Like I said, a little of it goes a long way for me. But a little is better than none.
Oh, you are so right. It’s everywhere. The message is always that America is not worthy of your love, not worth fighting for, nothing to be proud of. It’s the only way to really defeat us, and it’s terrifying how much progress they have made.
I raised my family in northern Virginia, near Manassas, and a lot of folks down there are re-enactors. Our favorite gun store is full of antique and replica firearms. They have an open-air range behind the store. Occasionally my son Brian and I would be there with a NRA Basic Pistol class that we were teaching, or just having fun. There would be a “boomf” from the rifle end of the range and a cloud of black powder smoke would drift by. Everyone would stop what they were doing and go see the flintlock. Owning one of those was a ticket to instant celebrity.
Those firearms were magnificent. All were made one at a time, even if to a common design or from one of the larger gunsmiths. Many were beautifully engraved. Brian repaired a few while he was gunsmithing, and he was capable of reproducing the engraving most of the time; talented kid. I was hoping he would land in the gun industry somewhere, but he is happy in the coffee business, so I’m happy too.
Along with re-enactors, there are lots of folks involved with SASS, the Single Action Shooting Society. Think cowboy cosplay. They set up elaborate contest ranges, make period clothes, dream up funny names for themselves, and have a grand old time.
There is an aesthetic side of the world of firearms that is often overlooked. Many of us appreciate them as the works of art they often are (except Glocks…sorry, couldn’t help myself). Like a well-designed airplane or automobile, they are incomplete when they are at rest; their true beauty comes when they are functioning as designed. I love Berettas, as you know; there is just something Italian about producing a firearm that not only functions flawlessly but looks so very good doing it.
This is one of the many things that stirs my ichor when I encounter the “guns! ick!” attitude.
Beautiful, Doug. All the research couldn’t duplicate the words of your own experience. Thanks!
One of the little tidbits I learned from watching the “Confederate” medical area at the Civil War re-enactments was that the Confederate doctors learned that horsehair sutures that had been boiled in water to soften them produced fewer infections than did the silk threads the Union doctors used. This was before the “germ theory of disease transmission” was developed. Confederate doctors had to use horsehair because they couldn’t get many of the “high quality” supplies that Union doctors could get. But the stiff horsehair had to be softened before use, which was done by boiling it in water. They observed the lower infection rate, but didn’t know why. We now know that the boiling killed germs. But since doctors observed the lower infection rates, even if they didn’t know why, the Confederate medical innovation of using boiled animal hair in sutures spread beyond the battlefield. If the Confederate medicine is not shown, the audience will miss learning how development occurred, unless the hosts further alter history by importing into the Union re-enactors history that really belongs to the Confederates.
I don’t think that slavery in America was necessarily “systemic racism.” There were free blacks, correct?
I think that it was generally true that whites could not be held as slaves. I’m not sure about Indians, though my impression is that few, if any, Indians were held as slaves in the US. (I think that Indians were enslaved elsewhere in the Americas.)
Whites were “indentured servants,” which was pretty darn close to slavery. Indians bought and sold colored and white slaves, as well as Indian slaves captured in wars. All of this was pretty small potatoes compared to the importation of African slaves into the South, but it existed. The real market for slaves was Brazil, which had ten times as many as the entire US.
The reenactments are wonderful theater. That’s all.
There is something terribly wrong with the people who are trying to end these outdoor performances.
What will be next? No more Shakespeare in the Park? No more cannons during the 1812 Overture? No more Plimoth Museums because we know how evil the Pilgrims were.
I hope the reenactments survive this attempt to end them. The power to ban these performances is a terrible bullying force to hand over to a small group of maniacs. These are super destructive people with a great many willing accomplices.
We need to say no just so they get used to hearing it.
Suppression of speech is what the Apostles of Jesus did.
They were quite harsh about false teachers. Paul, and Peter, and John, and Jude.
The basic instruction was not debate. It was to exclude false teachers from the assembly, to not listen to them, to not even associate with them. “Cancellation,” basically.
I think that we’ve been taught something that is a lie, and it comes out of the so-called Enlightenment. It is the idea that “rational” debate in the “free marketplace” of ideas will lead to the truth.
Has it? The obvious answer is “no,” empirically. It’s been getting worse and worse, I think, over the past century or so.
I’m not sure I could explain “systematic racism” very well, but I don’t think the existence of free blacks invalidates the notion, as they see it. Racism wasn’t just about slavery and vice versa, nor is it now.
It has done a far better job of making the truth known than governmental suppression of speech has done. Note, though, that I said “making the truth known” whereas you said “lead to the truth.”
There’s a difference between what the U.S. government should do–that is, protect the right of a religion to exist–versus what the leaders of a particular religion should do–that is, protect the religion.
The side that suppresses speech can’t win the argument, and they know it.
When I was at AIT at Ft. Lee, VA it was right next to the Petersburg Battlefield Park. In those days we were allowed to run in the park if we wanted to for PT. I would often run to the Union encampment and see them showing how the soldiers lived.
I eventually made it down to the crater and nearby they had a Confederate cannot from Hood’s Regiment that would ride up at full speed, unlimber their cannon, and fire two shots in rapid sequence. It was an amazing spectacle.
Just a few years ago we stopped in Vicksburg and watched their firing of a cannon as part of their normal battlefield program. It was amazing to watch.
I thought NY’s new ban just applied to public land? Re-enactments can go on, just on private land as is the case in most other states
Ive enjoyed civil war re-enactments in PA, MD, and VA. I’ve enjoyed revolutionary war re-enactments in VA, VT, and MA. But these were all on private land.
so far as I know, federal parks still allow live fire demonstrations with black powder by reenactors in period garb. At Gettysburg, they don’t want re-enactments on the actual field because thousands of reenactors can tear up what are presently beautiful fields.
I have visited several reenactments and my brother-in-law was a participant including as an extra in the movie Gettysburg. I fired his musket several times – to my regret, since I shoot left-eyed, putting the flash pan next to my face.
My worry is that as @raxxalan says, they are taking the color out of our history. We are being left with what I guess you could call a “black and white” version of history – with no nuance at all.
We live in an area of Northern Virginia where the Civil war was really a family affair. There were many anti-slavery Quakers in the immediate area and West Virginia – across the mountain – seceded from Virginia to stay with the Union.
I have written before about John Mosby – the Gray Ghost – who was a feared raider of the Union troops in this area. After the war, he became a lawyer in Leesburg and a friend of President Grant who both pardoned him and appointed him as Consul to Hong Kong and to the Justice Department. Our current leaders are trying to replace his name everywhere they find it.
I am afraid the next generation of leaders will have no idea of the complications and sometimes small events which lead to war and conflict.
Mockery is a great way to push back. Have the reenactment but arm everyone with supersoakers..