Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: RFEngineer; Bubba Ho-Tep; rockrr; Hulka
RFEngineer: "You do not understand Lee.
He had no choice but to support Virginia."

FRiend, you have it all wrong -- it's you who do not understand your own history.

The facts are that for every five Virginians who served the Confederacy (about 120,000 total), two served the Union Army (50,000 total).
Virginia's Union general officers included not only George Thomas, but Admiral Farragut and General Winfield Scott -- over a dozen in total.

So any suggestion that all Virginians automatically chose their state over their nation is just cockamamie nonsense.
Yes, it's true: more Virginians chose the Confederacy over the Union, and those 30% who did chose the Union came heavily from low slave-holding areas of the state, such as Western Virginia.
But George Thomas himself came from Southern Virginia, doubtless high slave area, and yet still chose his country over his state, despite his family's disapproval.

So Lee and other famous Virginia officers -- i.e., Jackson, Stuart, Johnson, Hill, Ewell, Early, Pickett, etc. -- all made their choice, all could have chosen differently (as did 40% of all Virginia pre-war officers), and had they chosen differently, the results would surely have been a far shorter war, with far fewer than the 33,000 Virginia soldiers killed.

Lee's choice, along with other Virginia officers, was the worst possible for Virginians themselves, FRiend.

RFEngineer: "The modern version of the United States did not exist then."

Oh, sorry FRiend, but it certainly did.
That's why 30% of Virginia's soldiers and 40% of it's pre-war officers served the Union.

RFEngineer: "In fact, the 10th Amendment’s unconstitutional decline was expressly part of the resolution of the Civil War - and his has been degraded ever since then."

All blame -- 100% of it -- for all Civil War related "degradation" goes squarely on the shoulders of those who started the war, and number one in line is: Jefferson Davis.

RFEngineer: "In Lee’s time, loyalty to ones state was not unusual.
You do not seem to understand that - and that’s the same mistake others make when they make outrageous claims about Lee."

Again, it's you are utterly confused & disoriented.
You look facts straight in the face, and still deny them, because they don't fit what you believe.
The fact is that many Virginians considered the nation a higher value than their slave-owning state's secession.
Lee himself abhorred secession, and was willing to sacrifice slavery itself to save the Union, if that could be done peacefully.
Now we don't know what all conversations went on, but one is highly tempted to think that had those been more skillfully negotiated, perhaps a deal could be worked out, and Civil War, if not averted, shortened & minimized.

Again I say: Lee chose poorly, and Virginians suffered the most.

136 posted on 06/25/2014 10:35:23 AM PDT by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies ]


To: BroJoeK; RFEngineer

“RFEngineer: “In Lee’s time, loyalty to ones state was not unusual. “

You: “Again, it’s you are utterly confused & disoriented.
You look facts straight in the face, and still deny them, because they don’t fit what you believe. The fact is that many Virginians considered the nation a higher value than their slave-owning state’s secession.”

Perhaps ‘many’ did but many more did not.

The federal government well after the Civil War understood and respected states and their right to be sovereign and this was reflected in the People and their loyalties. . .hence the ‘states rights’ argument as justification for the war.

Post 70 is from the 22 Jan 1897, Congressional Directory, 2nd Session, 54th Congress (the oldest directory I have in hand).

This directory states clearly and in plain language that the president would not directly communicate with state’s governors but instead would use the Sec State. . .just like he would when communicating with foreign governments.

Even after the Civil War the state and People were respected by the federal government, as the federal government kept its distance from them.

The federal government played a very central role to the states and how they related to each other (no doubt), but the federal government recognized its limits and respected the people as citizens of the US, but also sovereign citizens of their state.

Ergo, state loyalty was strong, much stronger that we can appreciate today when most people can’t explain why we have state governments in the first place and always default to the federal government to solve issues and problems.

States as sovereign affects greatly the question of loyalty to the federal government over your own state.

Some chose their state over the federal government, some did not. Regardless, it was NOT an easy decision at the time.

Men respected each other for their decision they made, federal vs state, and identified with them for having to make such a difficult (and deadly) choice.


137 posted on 06/25/2014 3:20:21 PM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson