Rededication of Confederate Circle in Selma, Alabama

Pat Godwin, March 2, 2015

We Won! We have the deed to Confederate Memorial Circle!

It’s time to Celebrate, Commemorate & Re-Dedicate!

The Friends of Forrest and Selma Chapter 53, UDC, cordially invite you to attend and share the celebration of our historical and monumental victory!

Saturday, May 23, 2015, 1:00 pm

Confederate Memorial Circle, Historic Live Oak Cemetery, Selma, Alabama

A guided tour of Live Oak Cemetery, 9:30 am

Reception to follow program at the Smitherman Building Museum (The Original Site of the NB Forrest Monument), 109 Union Street

Confederate Memorial Circle was originally dedicated 137 years ago on April 26, 1878. It’s time to celebrate, commemorate & re-dedicate Confederate Memorial Circle where we will re-dedicate the Nathan Bedford Forrest Monument by unveiling the replacement bronze bust of Lt. General Nathan Bedford Forrest.

We will also re-dedicate the Confederate Soldiers’ Memorial and also the new Battle of Selma Memorial.

Even though we are having the dedication on May 23, this project is not quite finished. We still have to erect 19 bronze historical interpretive markers throughout the Circle. These historical markers will cost approximately $1500 each. We are also still selling the ancestor pavers (4×8–3 lines, 18 characters–$50; 8×8–6 lines, 18 characters, $65). if you would like your paver laid by dedication day please place your order now.

However, we will continue to sell the pavers until we have all 4 quads filled with engraved pavers. This entire project is TAXDOLLAR FREE–only private donations have funded this project! Contact me at 334-875-1690 for order form & information. If you would like to contribute to this historical, monumental project, please make check payable to and mark for: CONFEDERATE MEMORIAL CIRCLE:

NBF Monument Fund/Selma Chapter 53, UDC
c/o Patricia S. Godwin
Fort Dixie
10800 Co. Rd. 30
Selma, Alabama  36701

Topics: , , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • TomIron361

    I hope they invite Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore to say some words.

  • Katherine McChesney

    Hopefully the South will rise again!

    • Steve_in_Vermont

      The South did rise again, but this time as a part of Congress and the entire nation. We’ve become one of the most prosperous countries in the world, thanks to people from both the north and south. I’ve often wondered what we would look like today had we become two nations.

      • dd121

        I wouldn’t know because I wouldn’t have set foot outside the South.

      • Randall Ward

        The South would look much better, because it didn’t recover fully from Lincolns war until about 1972. The average southern man was worth twice as much as the average yankee before lincolns war; after the war the South was in ruins and was under military rule for twelve years.
        Even today there is a hatred of the South by yankees, just look at the movies that put Southern people down. The culture of the South is head and shoulders above the yankee culture today.

        • Cid Campeador

          I wonder if the descendants of all those Union Soldiers who gave their lives for ” The Cause” realize what their ancestors unknowingly wrought upon this country.
          Union Troops unleashed the slaves to perpetrated atrocities against the White population in the South and today the descendants of those slaves are perpetrating the same atrocities against the ENTIRE US White population while our DOJ looks the other way.

          • Epiminondas

            Most of them were idealistic and thought they were fighting for national unity. They had no idea how their emotions were being manipulated to further the agenda of the industrialists and bankers. Sad stuff, similar to the way today’s gullible patriots are jerked around by the neo-con/plutocrat agenda of “invade-the-world/invite-the-world.”

        • Steve_in_Vermont

          Randall, I don’t see the difference between north and south as being one above the other. We simply have our differences but that makes for variety. The media is full of drama and specializes in stereotyping people for entertainment. I would never judge any culture by what the media portrays. We are all Americans and should spend our time finding common ground, rather than dwelling in the past and finding faults that have long passed.

          • Randall Ward

            It is the growing power of the USG that is hated in the South. The USG that is dominated by the same liberal states that fought against the South. The South is different from the North, but the godless North has imposed it will on the South, through the USG. The South is a minority, whose way of life is trampled on by the USG. We are not all one people. I have worked in the North and the people are the most harsh and uncaring people I have ever been around. I have never been in Vermont.

          • Randall Ward

            It isn’t the past, it is the now. People in Texas do not by a large margin war to be connected to a state as communist as Vermont. Vermont is in the process of passing a law that when you die your organs belong to the state of Vermont, unless you have provided proof ahead of time that you don’t want them stolen by the state.
            This is a huge step in the direction of Red China. Your state controls the death of humans and the harvesting of the crop of human organs. See any conflict?

          • Steve_in_Vermont

            Randall, I have no idea what you’re talking about and I’ve lived here for over 50 years. If you can provide me with a state statute I’d like to see it, otherwise I’ll put this with all the other conspiracy theories that have no basis in fact. And by the way, in the free State of Texas you need a (state government) permit to carry a concealed handgun. In Vermont ANY ADULT (even visitors from Texas) can carry such w/o a permit, as long as your not a felon. Imagine, the most liberal gun laws in the country, in a communist state. Go figure.

          • Randall Ward

            A bill has been filed in Vermont for presumed consent to organ donation, and it would grant an explicit ownership interest in the organs of all dead Vermonters to the organ transplant system. From, H 57:

            All Vermont residents 18 years of age or older shall be presumed to consent to making an anatomical gift of some or all of their organs, eyes, tissues, or a combination thereof upon their death for the purpose of transplantation, therapy, research, or education.

            If someone doesn’t want to be an organ “donor”–they have to take affirmative action to say no, rather than–as is the law now in every U.S. state–opt in by saying yes:

            (a) A Vermont resident may refuse to make an anatomical gift of the 10 individual’s body part or parts by: (1) including a specific refusal in an advance directive…

            (2) creating a written record indicating that the individual is unwilling to 15 make an anatomical gift…(3) including a specific provision in the individual’s will..

            (4) completion of an anatomical gift refusal form…or, (5) any form of communication made by the individual during the 4 individual’s terminal illness or injury addressed to at least two adults, at least 5 one of whom is a disinterested witness. .

            That isn’t “donation.” It is conscription.

          • Steve_in_Vermont

            Randall, I’ve researched this and you are correct, it has been proposed. What I found is this was brought by a democratic house member from Burlington, a liberal bastion that also tried (this session) to pass a law regulating guns and mandatory background checks. The (proposed) gun restrictions went down in flames, as will H 57. According to one source it received a “frosty” reception and I predict this is going no-where. Each year our liberal legislators submit dozens of bills that never see the light of day. And the Dems are a majority. Fortunately my reps are Republicans. Thanks for pointing this out to me. It’s one of the tactics of our liberals in Vermont to submit bills as quietly as possible, knowing if it’s put to a public debate it’s dead in it’s tracks.

          • Randall Ward

            The people in Vermont are a lot like the people that fought the Mexicans and won Texas independence. Independent and wanting to live their own way of life. But our states are attached to places like NYC, Mass., Calif, and NJ.
            If the States still had the power to be independent of the USG, it would be different.

          • Steve_in_Vermont

            We have liberals moving into Vermont who get elected to our legislature to write laws that seldom get beyond hearings. They call it legislating. I call it social engineering. They can’t sell their proposals so they try and implement them through legislation. “You won’t listen to my proposals? I’ll write a law and make you comply”. Now I know how they felt at the Alamo, only we fight year after year.

        • Ringo Lennon

          Abraham Lincoln, the only man in the North that could’ve defeated the Confederacy. Tip of the hat to the Chief.

          • Randall Ward

            What defeated the South was a north with three times the population and five times the industrial output. Lincoln screwed up the first two years of the war by pulling a LBJ hands on policy on the Union military. He finally decided to just destroy the civilians in the South and that worked. He is a war criminal that got his just reward at Fords theater.

          • AndrewInterrupted

            I wished he had followed his instincts repatriating the Africans. Imagine how much better America would be today had we not lugged the African anchor all these centuries?

          • Randall Ward

            It would have been better for the US if the New Yorkers had not brought the blacks to the colonies, and better if the colonists had not bought the blacks. We are doing the same thing now with the Mexican illegals. Mexans hate whites but smile while they hate, and gulible whites think they are great. That fake smile goes away when the numbers favor the Mexicans. I know from years of experience with them.
            From the blacks point of view, it was a wonderful day for them when they were brought from Africa to the colonies.

          • AndrewInterrupted

            Yes, what John Derbyshire called “…the most inept genocide in history: from 400,000 (Africans in America) to 40 million.”

          • Thank you for posting truth about this stain on American history.

      • Sanchodiablo

        Maybe the difference wouldn’t be detrimental. Even if you didn’t like the result it’s hard to justify the cost of destroying the south into submission.

        You would be hard pressed to find a single country who lost as high a percentage of their men as the Confederacy.

      • Weisheit77

        My guess is that the American love of war would have been nipped in the bud which would have probably meant no foreign adventures in 1917, which gave us WWII, which gave us the cold war, which gave us the current climate. The average American would have been better off, me thinks. Don’t forget that a lot of the trouble in the middle east comes from WWI, too.

        And as a southerner who has moved away, the South is not rising, unless you count the population of Mexicans, blacks, and other foreigners.

        • Jeff

          This is an interesting proposition, however I doubt that it can ever be known with certainty. On the other side of the coin, you have to take into account that slavery was well on its way to the dustbin of history. I often wonder why brighter minds in the south didn’t take this into account before allowing hostilities to commence. Industrialization by then should have certainly made it apparent that machinery was going to end, or at least curtail human labor in agriculture. What if the south had stalled the north long enough to negotiate peace ans succession. Within 40 years, machinery would have displaced slavery as a matter of economics.

          You can be sure that the northern states would not have allowed black migration to the north. Most of the black population during that time was located in the south. There is no way northerners would have allowed them to divest themselves of their black population at their expense. So fast forward to today and you have an almost entirely white north. Because they were more industrialized, its almost certain that westward expansion would have remained a primarily northern endeavor.

          The end result would be a southern confederacy in its same geograohical configuration with a sizeable black population. The north would have been almost entirely white.

          • Cid Campeador

            We should have repatriated them to Africa and not on a voluntary basis.

          • evilsandmich

            I often wonder why brighter minds in the south didn’t take this into account before allowing hostilities to commence.

            That is a tricky one.

            One theory I see floated is that if the North allowed the South to secede is that slavery would have died on it’s own within a few decades; but it was hard to know in the mid 1800s how far the industrial revolution would carry you.

          • Jeff

            It had to be obvious to all but the most obtuse. A similar situation exists today concerning computers and technology. Does anyone seriously believe that there will be manufacturing jobs in the near future? Robotics and computers all but assure us that humans will no longer be directly involved in repetitive manufacturing.

            The slave trade itself was abolished in the 1830’s. The worldwide trend was for total elimination of the practice. Surely the southern intellectuals knew beyond doubt that it was a doomed institution. Why fight a war to preserve an anachronistic practice?

          • TheMaskedUnit

            Not quite worldwide. The only opposition to slavery is a sufficient amount of white Christian people. Everyplace else still has some form it today.

            The British empire was responsible for slavery’s near extinction. That’s is a big reason they are universally detested colonizers. It is returning to England with the fall of white civilization and the encroaching blessings of diversity.

          • evilsandmich

            What people don’t get is that in a given place and time that there is a set price for labor and one usually gets what one pays for; but if what one needs is a low watt job to be done (such as picking seeds from Cotten) then they might not mind low watt labor; and if someplace has birthed low(low) skilled labor in such quantities that their work can be purchased for the price to keep them alive? Well as you said, you see the result even to this day.

          • evilsandmich

            Slavery perhaps; but antebellum Southern society? The two basically went hand in hand. As well I know in the excellent book Battle Cry of Freedom McPhearson points out that as far as societies went at the time, the North was the odd man out as most of the planet, including a healthy portion of Europe, relied on feudalism which is basically what the antebellum South was. Such a radical change in society has rarely come about without horrific bloodshed unfortunately.

            As far as manufacturing goes it will be interesting to see. In my line of work I see huge batches of mass produced cogs made by few people and many machines; as well as one-off components which are essentially handmade by craftsmen. I’m of a mind that we won’t see any big push down the manufacturing chain without some transformational technological advance such as the long dreamed of quantum computers, etc. Even the smartest computers today are just too stupid and a healthy portion of automated manufacturing equipment will happily destroy itself if given botched instructions.

          • Sanchodiablo

            Perhaps they would have eventually resettled them to Lincolnia. The war put an end to that idea.

      • Randall Ward

        According to Lincolns speech at his swearing in as president, the states that seceeded were still part of the Union. He went both ways, as the circumstances changed. Once he started a war, he was a war criminal, by his own definition.

        • hiernonymous

          Point of fact: it was the rebels, not the government, that initiated hostilities.

    • AndrewInterrupted

      I hope they do, too. And I live in New England!

  • connorhus

    Huzzah Ladies!!!

  • Samuel Hathaway

    Congratulations to the dignified, cultured ladies of the United Daughters of the Confederacy.

  • dd121

    The UDC and SCV are my proxies for the continuation of American Civilization. Love and best wishes to all.

  • A Freespeechzone

    Watch the negro in the WH and the one at the DOJ try to stop them–I’d almost bet on that.

    Let them try. . .

  • Randall Ward

    Great!! Despite the yankee propoganda to try to make Southerners ashamed of their past and present, the wonderful South survives today, intact and whole. God Bless NBF; never a braver man existed.

  • John Smith

    A Confederate memorial in Selma is like putting a bust of Cromwell in Dublin – don’t expect it to remain undisturbed for very long.

  • Epiminondas

    Yes! Right in the belly of the beast!