I will have to read Damsky's paper in its entirety, but in this summary something very important and very relevant is missing. There is no reference to Alexander H. Stephen's "Cornerstone Speech", also known as the "Cornerstone Address". Why is that speech relevant? The speech was delivered in 1861 by Alexander H. Stephens, who was Vice President of the Confederate States of America. The aim of the speech was to explain why the Constitution of the United States written by the Founding Fathers was an outdated document based on utopian ideals. Stephens referred to it as the "old Constitution" . In contrast, the "new Constitution" of the Confederacy was based "upon the great truth" of racial inequality. The gist of Stephens' critique of the American Constitution was that the Founding Fathers had assumed that the black slaves could gradually be civilized BECAUSE of their belief in racial equality as the goal of society. Therefore, the American Constitution was in no sense a document that represented white Europeans. Thus, the Constitution drawn up by the Confederate States on the eve of the Civil War was a white nationalist document. If it had been common knowledge that the American Constitution was a document written for white Europeans only and never meant to be inclusive then or in the future, Stephens' critique would have been superfluous. As a matter of fact, Stephens' stated in his speech that the new Confederate Constitution was the first "in the history of the world" to have a racial understanding as its foundation. The fact that the Confederate States didn't merely stick with the American Constitution and Roger Taney's Dred Scott decision is the ultimate proof that Damsky's interpretation is based upon his projection of white nationalist idealism back onto a late 18th century document. The Confederates realized that Taney's theory about what the Constitution meant was too shaky a foundation for white nationalism, which is why they had to develop a new one.
I will have to read Damsky's paper in its entirety, but in this summary something very important and very relevant is missing. There is no reference to Alexander H. Stephen's "Cornerstone Speech", also known as the "Cornerstone Address". Why is that speech relevant? The speech was delivered in 1861 by Alexander H. Stephens, who was Vice President of the Confederate States of America. The aim of the speech was to explain why the Constitution of the United States written by the Founding Fathers was an outdated document based on utopian ideals. Stephens referred to it as the "old Constitution" . In contrast, the "new Constitution" of the Confederacy was based "upon the great truth" of racial inequality. The gist of Stephens' critique of the American Constitution was that the Founding Fathers had assumed that the black slaves could gradually be civilized BECAUSE of their belief in racial equality as the goal of society. Therefore, the American Constitution was in no sense a document that represented white Europeans. Thus, the Constitution drawn up by the Confederate States on the eve of the Civil War was a white nationalist document. If it had been common knowledge that the American Constitution was a document written for white Europeans only and never meant to be inclusive then or in the future, Stephens' critique would have been superfluous. As a matter of fact, Stephens' stated in his speech that the new Confederate Constitution was the first "in the history of the world" to have a racial understanding as its foundation. The fact that the Confederate States didn't merely stick with the American Constitution and Roger Taney's Dred Scott decision is the ultimate proof that Damsky's interpretation is based upon his projection of white nationalist idealism back onto a late 18th century document. The Confederates realized that Taney's theory about what the Constitution meant was too shaky a foundation for white nationalism, which is why they had to develop a new one.
Does he have a givesendgo set up?