Replies

Perhaps you can tell me why slave-holding is only recognized as a white, southern, activity. There were free blacks and free black slaveholders, and not just in the South. Northerners owned slaves as well, but in the final reckoning, children are being taught that it was white Southerners fighting to keep slaves picking cotton who decided to opt out of the union just to keep their slaves.

Not only is the picture presented highly inaccurate, but it is not presented in light of the pre WBTS political climate, nor within the social context of the day.

Socialist teachers and their dupes are being used to further foment divisiveness in our culture by teaching our children a grossly oversimplified fable in lieu of history.

The root of the war is economic, slaves were only a part of the overall economic reasons the South chose to secede.

That Robert E. Lee, West Point educated and offered command of the Army of the Potomac, chose instead to fight for Virginia, perhaps knowing full well that his family lands would be forfeit (now Arlington National Cemetary) bespeaks the conflict of loyalties present. That he is reviled by some as a traitor only indicates which side won.

Many patriots were hanged as traitors during the Revolution, and are only well-remembered because their side ultimately prevailed.

There are very few "always" and "never" extremes in history. History records that there were a few slave-holding northerners (Delaware, New Jersey, etc, as well as the "border states"). History also shows that the vast, vast majority of slaves were held in those states that attempted secession and formed the CSA. History shows, too, that there were free blacks who held other blacks as slaves, and that the first slaves in the American colonies were white, European indentured servants.

But who was the stereotypical slaveholder? A wealthy, white, southern landholder. The portrait that it was a "white Southerner fighting to keep slaves picking cotton" is not altogether correct. Most of the soldiers in the Southern cause were not slaveholders at all. Most of the primary members of the CSA government and the movers behind secession, on the other hand, were proponents of slavery. You can read it in their speeches. You can see it in their "constitution." It is amply recorded in their letters.

I agree with you that American history is being destroyed by the socialists, liberals , and the PC crowd. I have been careful to differentiate between the real military leaders in the CSA, and the politcal leaders. They were a different crowd and had different motivations. Only a few, such as John Breckenridge, spanned the gap between the military and the political realms. In my mind, Robert E. Lee, Thomas Jackson, and others, were military men of principle, even if their motivation is seen, in retrospect, as wrong. On the other hand, the political leaders, such as Davis, Rhett, Toombs, Stephens, etc, were very much traitors.

One last point. The land which is now occupied by Arlington cemetary was the inheritance of Mrs. Lee. Robert E. Lee never owned it, as I recall.