Posted on 01/11/2014 11:16:07 AM PST by Davy Buck
However if one truly wants to make such a big deal out of what we call the armed conflict which occurred in America from 1861 to 1865 , and if its historical accuracy and honesty that one truly seeks, then I think Douglas Southall Freeman is, perhaps, the truest to historical accuracy in coining the proper term . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at oldvirginiablog.blogspot.com ...
Agree.
No. Doesn’t work. Ignores the fact that the north supported slavery and denied freedom to white Southerners.
It seems that Lee and Grant were both of two minds fighting Mr. Lincoln’s War.
What’s your point? The north denied freedom of self determination to white Southerners, you know, like slave owners.
Health Club's Membership Nearly Impossible to Cancel, Lawsuit Claims
“Why would the use of the term “War Between the States” particularly catch one’s attention when reading about that topic, also known as the Civil War?”
Loosely speaking, maybe because the States in Union created the Federal Government as their agent, not their ruler and the author of the quote:
a. Doesn’t realize this
or
b. Does realize this but also realizes that in the view of those who believe the Fed Gov should be the ruler instead of the agent, the use of the term undermines their belief as it recognizes the place of the states.
And may God bless them and their memories.
The inexorable expansion of the federal government and decline of relative importance of states followed the WBTS (though not for some decades), therefore it was caused by the WBTS.
Let us posit a world in which Africa was missing, and so no Africans had been imported to America. No slavery, no WBTS.
America would still have been settled by Europeans, and eventually probably have broken away from the mother country. Industrialization and its discontents would still have grown up during the later 19th and early 20th centuries, with resultant calls for government action to address those discontents.
In America the movement to do so was called the Progressive movement. But the exact same calls for expansion of central government power occurred in every other country that reached a similar stage in its development. Precise political issues varied by country, but the general trend is clear.
To believe that Lincoln "caused" the growth of federal power is just silly, IMO. He provided a significant precedent for such expansion, but the notion that TR, Wilson, etc. would have been unable to advance their notions without such a precedent is not logical.
Most of the federal growth during the war went away for the next few decades, not starting up again till the Progressives got going. AFAIK, they seldom cited Lincoln or the War as justification for the proposals.
Lincoln ordered the fort to be resupplied and it was about to be. The ship was coming into the harbor.
LOL! It’s the Battle of the Bulge meets TWBTS!
>>According to the author of this article, RE Lee used the term Civil War, so I fail to see why any good southerner would object to the term.
Did he use it as one would use the common terminology for anything? That does not prove his support of the term. It only proves that he was willing to accept the vernacular term.
It’s like when we call Progressives “Liberal”. There is nothing liberal about them, but that’s the term that has come into common usage.
Absent Africa there were still slaves, slaves existed long before anyone in Europe met an African.
Quite possibly the war and the experience of troubles afterwards, Reconstruction and the like made people more cautious and suspicious of federal power too, maybe why our leftists were less successful for a long time
What’s interesting about the title “War of Northern Aggression” is that the South fired first.
If that's Maryland, it had slaves. New Jersey was also a slave state. Both remained in the Union, as did of course, Maryland. Delaware was a special case, with few slaves. Lincoln had a plan to buy their slaves into freedom, and use them to colonize part of Nicaragua just to show it could be done. Got turned down.
Further South, Kentucky and Missouri remained in the Union, but held onto their slaves, past the Emancipation Proclamation, which only applied to slaves in the Confederacy.
While this is all interesting history, all of the slave-holding Union States had emancipation plans, held in abeyance until after the war.
“The framers of our Constitution never exhausted so much labor, wisdom and forebearance in its formation, and surrounded it with so many guards and securities, if it was to be broken by every member of the Confederacy at will. It was intended for ‘perpetual union’ so expressed in the preamble, and for the establishment of a government, not a compact, which can only be dissolved by revolution, or the consent of all the people in convention assembled. It is idle to talk of secession.” Robert E. Lee - January 23, 1861
It certainly did.
So therefore, that part of the world formerly known as the United States of America, shall thenceforth be known as 'British North America'. Men are to bow and women curtsey to your new Queen, Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, and now Queen of British North America. If you ever have the opportunity to address Her, you may call her, "Your Majesty" or "Your Grace".
In order to make things easier and more centralised (NOTE: 's' not 'z' which, by the way, is pronounced 'zed' not that horrid 'zee'), and to drain the swamp that Washington, DC has now become, your new Capital (no longer called a Capitol) will be d'Ottawa. Again, to make things easier, you will drop that insipid, "huh?" at the end of sentences and substitute the equally insipid, "eh?" at the end of sentences. OK, eh?
A fair warning to legislators heading to your new Capital d'Ottawa from Washington, especially those from semi-tropical regions like Florida and Hawaii. PLEASE be advised that in the winter, Washington is a tropical paradise compared to d'Ottawa. As a sign of the depth of love and respect by Her Majesty's government for Her new legislative subjects, a planeload of Stanfield's woolen longjohns will be forwarded to Washington. (Those legislators from Montana and North Dakota are exempt, as they should have their own woolies.)
Another note to assist our new legislators. PLEASE learn Franglais to properly fit in. It would be an especially wise idea to memorise various French phrases associated with the Roman Catholic faith, as such sacres assist in communicating with many Quebecois. Also, learning French words associated sex and excrement will help in communicating like a true p'tit gars. Memorising words such as, 'calisse', 'ciboire', 'criss', 'maudit', 'marde', 'osti', 'sacrament', 'tabarnack' and 'viarge' for inclusion in common dialogue will go a long way to increasing one's popularity in parts of Quebec.
One final note for all who have not yet figured this out yet. THIS IS NOT MEANT TO INSULT, MERELY TO BE somewhat HUMOUROUS. Seriously, there is one thing to note about all this. Our Prime Minister actually IS a Christian, unlike the current occupant of the White Hut!
Factually inaccurate - but you knew that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.