Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Don't spin the Civil War
Washington Post ^ | 12.27.10 | E.J. DIONNE jR.

Posted on 12/27/2010 10:31:54 AM PST by trumandogz

The Civil War is about to loom very large in the popular memory. We would do well to be candid about its causes and not allow the distortions of contemporary politics or long-standing myths to cloud our understanding of why the nation fell apart.

The coming year will mark the 150th anniversary of the onset of the conflict, which is usually dated to April 12, 1861, when Confederate batteries opened fire at 4:30 a.m. on federal troops occupying Fort Sumter. Union forces surrendered the next day, after 34 hours of shelling.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: 150; anniversary; antiamerican; butthurtrebels; civil; civilwar; confederacy; dixie; imtougherthanyou; itsaboutslaverydummy; keyboardwarriors; kukluxklan; partyofsecession; partyofslavery; proslaveryfreepers; punkrrliberal; rebelfiction; secession; southcarolina; statesrights; treason; wannabethread; war; warnorthernaggressn; whitehoodscaucus; whitesupremacists; yankeerevisionism; yankspammingkeywords
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420421-440441-460 ... 1,381-1,389 next last
To: r9etb

Amen.


421 posted on 12/28/2010 1:40:58 PM PST by NucSubs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: Othniel
Just my 2 cents. My GGGrandfather fought in the Iowa Regulars and was very active in Veterans' Affairs after the war, and I've only set foot in the south twice, so I guess I'm a Yankee.

I was born in Illinois, completed high school and attended university in Indiana, where I've been employed most of my life and am located at present, visiting the grandkids for over the Christmas holiday season.

But I do not consider myself a *Yankee* [though I do not consider it a particularly serious insult] and those with whom I've shared my life and living surroundings in Texas, the Atlanta area [Brunswick NAS] and Memphis for more than a decade did not consider me such, or at least did not say so to my face- and I've run across more men and women of honour in those last three places that anywhere else in this country, save some corners of the American West.

I had ancestors on both sides during the 1861-1865 War of the Americans. For the most part, they enlisted in the units in which their friends, neighbors, relatives and fellow congregants did, or were conscripted- or fled to the other side to avoid conscription. One became a Confederate seaman to avoid Union conscription, and had I been around in those times, that might well have been the path I would personally have taken.

Perhaps we'll find out. Mr. Mark Twain told us that history does not in fact exactly repeat itself- but that it echoes.

Say, what's that sound I hear off in the distance of 2011 or perhaps 2012....

422 posted on 12/28/2010 1:41:59 PM PST by archy (I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Drennan Whyte; lentulusgracchus
Without any sort of official sanction at either the state or the national level then did it really exist? A group of free blacks may have organized themselves and called themselves a regiment, but the state refused their service and do did Richmond. That sounds more like wishful thinking than an actual army unit.

Somewhere among my thousands of old newspaper articles is one where the Louisiana governor accepted the service of the Native Guards, which were intended to be home guards. It would take me a while to find it. A quick search of the web turned up this link which said the New Orleans mayor and the governor accepted them. See Link. Page 21 of the link mentions their acceptance by the mayor and governor. That page also says some 3,000 free blacks ultimately joined the Confederate Native Guards.

There was also a company of the First Louisiana Zouaves that was composed of French and Creoles (free mixed race) that fought in Virginia and may be responsible for some Federal reports of black Confederate soldiers.

423 posted on 12/28/2010 1:44:51 PM PST by rustbucket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 368 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
Well I sure hope you can do better than an unsourced wikipedia entry to support your claim partner. The Louisiana Native Guard issue has become a textbook example of how confederate revisionists "manufacture" evidence to support their claims.

Forget the photos and revisionism. I am not familiar with the photos, and I do not support revisionism. My purpose was to inject historical accuracy into the debate where I found it lacking. That is it. You made an incorrect statement, and I corrected it (to wit, posts # 238 and 241). You effectively admitted you were wrong in post # 294. Are you now retracting that admission? What is your real issue: historical accuracy or a dislike of being corrected?

424 posted on 12/28/2010 1:48:57 PM PST by matt1234 (0bama's bunker phase: Nov. 2010 - Jan. 2013)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 410 | View Replies]

To: Thumper1960
You’re still Americans, living under the United States Constitution, duty bound to pledge allegiance to the Stars and Stripes. Any time you wish to change that, go ahead....

Best post of the thread so far. I sure hope none of these unreconstructed, "choke on their own blood" Neo-confeds fly an American flag on their porch.

425 posted on 12/28/2010 1:50:13 PM PST by NucSubs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: Ditto
James Madison also authored the following which is pretty darned clear on the subject.

Virginia Resolution of 1798

RESOLVED, That the General Assembly of Virginia, doth unequivocably express a firm resolution to maintain and defend the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of this State, against every aggression either foreign or domestic, and that they will support the government of the United States in all measures warranted by the former.

That this assembly most solemnly declares a warm attachment to the Union of the States, to maintain which it pledges all its powers; and that for this end, it is their duty to watch over and oppose every infraction of those principles which constitute the only basis of that Union, because a faithful observance of them, can alone secure it's existence and the public happiness.

That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.

That the General Assembly doth also express its deep regret, that a spirit has in sundry instances, been manifested by the federal government, to enlarge its powers by forced constructions of the constitutional charter which defines them; and that implications have appeared of a design to expound certain general phrases (which having been copied from the very limited grant of power, in the former articles of confederation were the less liable to be misconstrued) so as to destroy the meaning and effect, of the particular enumeration which necessarily explains and limits the general phrases; and so as to consolidate the states by degrees, into one sovereignty, the obvious tendency and inevitable consequence of which would be, to transform the present republican system of the United States, into an absolute, or at best a mixed monarchy.

That the General Assembly doth particularly protest against the palpable and alarming infractions of the Constitution, in the two late cases of the "Alien and Sedition Acts" passed at the last session of Congress; the first of which exercises a power no where delegated to the federal government, and which by uniting legislative and judicial powers to those of executive, subverts the general principles of free government; as well as the particular organization, and positive provisions of the federal constitution; and the other of which acts, exercises in like manner, a power not delegated by the constitution, but on the contrary, expressly and positively forbidden by one of the amendments thereto; a power, which more than any other, ought to produce universal alarm, because it is levelled against that right of freely examining public characters and measures, and of free communication among the people thereon, which has ever been justly deemed, the only effectual guardian of every other right.

That this state having by its Convention, which ratified the federal Constitution, expressly declared, that among other essential rights, "the Liberty of Conscience and of the Press cannot be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified by any authority of the United States," and from its extreme anxiety to guard these rights from every possible attack of sophistry or ambition, having with other states, recommended an amendment for that purpose, which amendment was, in due time, annexed to the Constitution; it would mark a reproachable inconsistency, and criminal degeneracy, if an indifference were now shewn, to the most palpable violation of one of the Rights, thus declared and secured; and to the establishment of a precedent which may be fatal to the other.

That the good people of this commonwealth, having ever felt, and continuing to feel, the most sincere affection for their brethren of the other states; the truest anxiety for establishing and perpetuating the union of all; and the most scrupulous fidelity to that constitution, which is the pledge of mutual friendship, and the instrument of mutual happiness; the General Assembly doth solemnly appeal to the like dispositions of the other states, in confidence that they will concur with this commonwealth in declaring, as it does hereby declare, that the acts aforesaid, are unconstitutional; and that the necessary and proper measures will be taken by each, for co-operating with this state, in maintaining the Authorities, Rights, and Liberties, referred to the States respectively, or to the people.

That the Governor be desired, to transmit a copy of the foregoing Resolutions to the executive authority of each of the other states, with a request that the same may be communicated to the Legislature thereof; and that a copy be furnished to each of the Senators and Representatives representing this state in the Congress of the United States.

Agreed to by the Senate, December 24, 1798.

Please note his use of the word "Compact" in the above.

426 posted on 12/28/2010 1:58:11 PM PST by Bigun ("It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 408 | View Replies]

To: NucSubs

The truly unfortunate misfortune of some of these WBTS threads is that a few of the more extreme rhetoricians scatter-shot all of their adversaries in an effort to make some sort of defensive point. Catch-all and blanket statements more often miss their mark than hit it. Even more disappointing than someone ruining a good debate are the ones whose utterances are so extreme as to make the entire site look bad.

I have no doubt that most (but not all) posters here, regardless of whence they hail, are proud Americans who love their country and their community.


427 posted on 12/28/2010 2:01:55 PM PST by rockrr ("I said that I was scared of you!" - pokie the pretend cowboy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 425 | View Replies]

To: Ditto
Beyond that, who did the King of England make piece with via the Treaty of Paris?

Was it the united states which then existed as a PERPETUAL union or was it thirteen SOVEREIGN states?

428 posted on 12/28/2010 2:03:05 PM PST by Bigun ("It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 408 | View Replies]

To: matt1234; mac_truck; swmobuffalo

Yeah, and the native guard were so reviled and rejected by their “countrymen” that they jumped at the chance to join the USA forces after the Union occupation of New Orleans.


429 posted on 12/28/2010 2:03:42 PM PST by NucSubs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: rustbucket
Southern newspapers did not see it your way. They believed they had the right to secede under the Constitution and that Lincoln had no right after they seceded . . .

Yeah, that explains why some southern state legislatures had to ramrod secession through with little or no public input the way ObaMao, Pelosi and Reid ramrodded ObaMao Care. Then there were the good folks in east Tennessee, West Virginia and other areas of the Appalachians who were conscripted into supporting the new government at gunpoint . . .

430 posted on 12/28/2010 2:04:15 PM PST by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | View Replies]

To: Bigun

piece = peace


431 posted on 12/28/2010 2:05:10 PM PST by Bigun ("It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 428 | View Replies]

To: rustbucket
REBEL NEGRO PICKETS. So much has been said about the wickedness of using the negroes on our side in the present war, that we have thought it. worth while to reproduce on this page a sketch sent us from Fredericksburg by our artist, Mr. Theodore R. Davis, which is a faithful representation of what was seen by one of our officers through his field-glass, while on outpost duty at that place. As the picture shows, it represents two full-blooded. negroes, fully armed, and serving as pickets in the rebel army. It has long been known to military men that the insurgents affect no scruples about the employment of their slaves in any capacity in which they may be found useful. Yet there are people here at the North who affect to be horrified at the enrollment of negroes into regiments. Let us hope that the President will not be deterred by any squeamish scruples of the kind from garrisoning the Southern forts with fighting men of any color that can be obtained." Harpers 10 Jan 1863 Photobucket
432 posted on 12/28/2010 2:09:46 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 423 | View Replies]

To: rockrr
Even more disappointing than someone ruining a good debate are the ones whose utterances are so extreme as to make the entire site look bad.

That's your job, especially when your side calls our side a bunch of Klansman.

433 posted on 12/28/2010 2:24:38 PM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

EVERY ordinance of secession was passed by referendum, overwhelmingly.


434 posted on 12/28/2010 2:26:43 PM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 430 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe
I've no reason to discuss the matter with Jim. Anyone who has read this peculiar exchange thus far should be able to grasp that, your attempt to twist the discussion aside.

An interesting exercise would be to create a flypaper zot thread for all the POE pretenders, many of whom infiltrated FR during the course of the '08 election, riding in on the birth certificate thing. You guys called me an "O-Bot" troll then, and tried to get me banned for concentrating on the obvious Constitutional issue of eligibility instead of some nebulous piece of paper being paraded around a la Rathergate, that was not necessary to prove anything.

It was a deliberate campaign of confusion and misdirection. Now, it's common knowledge that having a foreign father makes one questionable at a minimum as far as being natural born.

At the time, there was a huge peanut gallery shouting down anyone who disagreed with the massive, orchestrated game of Where's Waldo concerning a so-called "COLB" that didn't matter. You were right in the thick of it and in my opinion, *you* are a type of troll.

So, there you have it. It certainly would be rich if an FR CW thread turned into POE zot flypaper. Maybe we could then be rid of all these fey little leftists pretending to be foaming-at-the-mouth-"Repugnicants" and then bragging about it on certain leftist sites.

435 posted on 12/28/2010 2:39:23 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

POE?


436 posted on 12/28/2010 2:44:04 PM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 435 | View Replies]

To: matt1234

I stand by my remarks. You haven’t proven anything, unless it’s how gullible you are.


437 posted on 12/28/2010 2:48:04 PM PST by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 424 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus
I would say again, comparative advantage. In New England, agriculture did not lend itself to large plantation type operations. A family farm could be a decent lifestyle, but it was not something that would draw large investment. The return wasn't there. The capital looking for investment in New England saw opportunity in ship building and establishing a commercial/merchant shipping industry in everything from whaling to international trade to yes, the Atlantic slave trade. The New England ship building industry became very good at what it did. They arguably built the best ships in the world, (see the Yankee Clippers) had an abundant supply of skilled labor and probably the finest sailors in the world as well.

In the South, capital was drawn to agriculture, specifically the large plantation which consisted of thousands of acres. These were really industrial scale operations and the lion's share of that capital went to purchase slaves to work those plantations. Like shipping, the return on investment could be very good. Yes, it had it's risks -- a bad harvest could cause a loss. But unlike shipping, where you could lose your entire capital investment to Davy Jones locker, one bad harvest still left you with your land and slaves to try again the next season.

In the South, the smart money went into plantations, not into a more risky venture like shipping. It was a geographic thing. Money went to where it could best return a profit.

Rhett specifically charges undercutting, but he doesn't give details. I've seen another early-20th-century source that accused New England of capturing the cotton trade after the Civil War.

Well before the war, the cotton trade primarily passed through New York. The cotton was sold to "Factors" who were financed primarily by New York or British banks. The cotton mostly went by coastal trade ships to New York where buyers would purchase it. Before the war, more than 80% of the buyers represented English French and other European mills. New England mills used less than 20% of the cotton grown in the South. There was a world price for cotton -- they all paid the same at the New York warehouses.

After the war the South began building cotton mills itself -- something some southerners argued they should have done years before. Within 20 or 30 years, North and South Carolina were the center of the textile industry in the US, and remained so for nearly 100 years until 'cheep" Asia and Central American labor killed them.

I really don't know what Rhett meant by New England monopolizing the cotton trade. After the Civil War, textiles were a much smaller component of New England's economy which had moved on to higher value added products such as tools and machinery ... including the looms and sewing machines used in those Southern cotton mills.

438 posted on 12/28/2010 2:52:11 PM PST by Ditto (Nov 2, 2010 -- Partial cleaning accomplished. More trash to remove in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 349 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
Yeah, that explains why some southern state legislatures had to ramrod secession through with little or no public input the way ObaMao, Pelosi and Reid ramrodded ObaMao Care. Then there were the good folks in east Tennessee, West Virginia and other areas of the Appalachians who were conscripted into supporting the new government at gunpoint . . .

The vote in Georgia was disputed and I'm not sure Arkansas offered a change for the people to have their say.

Then again, Lincoln arrested members of a state legislature (Maryland) to prevent them from voting for secession and troops from neighboring Northern states (Illinois and Iowa) invaded another state (Missouri) that had already voted down secession. Parts of Kentucky were invaded by the Federal army as well. The "state" of West Virginia included counties that had voted strongly for secession inside its borders, so East Tennessee had its counterpart in the North.

439 posted on 12/28/2010 2:52:59 PM PST by rustbucket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 430 | View Replies]

To: rockrr
So why don’t you trip the hammer?

Perfect. I knew you'd dodge the issue.

I'll try again: Where are you really from and do you support the homosexual agenda?

Look, punk, we all know that you're a liberal troll in the same vein as your recently departed hero, NS. It's just a matter of time now before ZOT!

440 posted on 12/28/2010 2:54:26 PM PST by cowboyway (Molon labe : Deo Vindice : "Rebellion is always an option!!"--Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 322 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420421-440441-460 ... 1,381-1,389 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

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