It Is A. P. Hill FROM HARPERS FERRY

Vanity | September 17, 2020 | Nathan Bedford

[nathanbedford]

September 17, 1862, the last hour of the bloodiest day in American military history, Lee knew that his beleaguered line must at last give way to overwhelming odds and the Army of Northern Virginia verged on destruction and, with it, destruction of the Confederacy itself.

Through one of history's oddist twists Lee's orders dividing his army had been discovered by common soldier in an open field days before wrapped around three cigars. The normally slothful McClellan was for once animated by the knowledge that Lee's army could be destroyed piecemeal. Lee drew up his army along Antietam Creek near the village of Sharpsburg Maryland to defend itself while he awaited the remnants of his army to come to his aid and rebalance, at least in part, the overwhelming material and numerical advantage of the Yankees.

Shelby Foote in his first volume of Civil War narrative describes the forced march of AP Hill from Harpers Ferry to Sharpsburg:

Jacket off because of the heat, [AP Hill] rode in his bright red battle shirt alongside the panting troops, prodding laggards with the point of his saber. Beyond this, he had no dealings with stragglers, but left them winded by the roadside, depending on them to catch up in time if they could. Not many could, apparently; for he began the march with about 5000 men and ended with barely 3000.

Here was the decisive moment and Lee knew that all would soon be lost. Shelby Foote describes one of the most dramatic scenes of the war:

Observing a column moving up from the south west along the ridge line, Lee called to an artillery lieutenant on the way to the front with a section of guns: "what troops are those?" The lieutenant offered him his telescope. "Can't use it," Lee said, holding up a bandaged hand. The lieutenant trained and focus the telescope. "They are flying the United States flag," he reported. Lee pointed to the right, where another distant column was approaching from the southwest nearly perpendicular to the first and repeated the question. The lieutenant swung the glass in that direction, peered intently, and announced: "they are flying the Virginia and Confederate flags." Lee suppressed his elation, although the words refilled his one hope for deliverance from defeat. "It is AP Hill from Harpers Ferry," he said calmly.

As Shelby Foote wrote about AP Hill, "as was his custom, he struck hard." And so the Army of Northern Virginia was spared, but the North kept the field enabling Lincoln to claim victory and to issue his Emancipation Proclamation thus recasting the whole character of the war.

My great-grandfather was there 158 years ago today.

[BroJoeK]

Captain Jack Aubrey: "Virginia did not attack Fort Sumpter.
South Carolina did.
No one was killed.
So Virginia deserves invasion and was?"

It's important to remember that no Union troops crossed the border into Virginia until after Virginia formally declared secession and joined the Confederacy.

By that time (after May 6, 1861) Confederates had formally declared war against the United States, and so Virginia's joining the Confederacy was, at the same time, a declaration of war on the United States.

[jmacusa]

I said to many a “Lost Causer’’ here how odd it was that people who ostensibly call themselves conservatives come to a conservative web site venerating a bunch of treasonous Southern Democrats.

They then conflate my inquiry about this into ‘’hating Southerners!’’.

I tell them time and again I don’t hate Southerners. Heck, I have a North Carolinian sister-in-law.

I hate the Confederacy and what it stood for.

[jmacusa]

Listen stupid, The Civil War began 159 years ago and ended 155 years ago. Get your math straight and I’m not pissed about anything. Why should I be? My side won, yours lost.

It’s seems to me you’re the one whose undies are too tight.

[jmacusa]

I don’t give a damn what you think Reb. You’re the divider here, not me. Your side split the nation in two.

Mine restored it.

[nathanbedford]

First, thank you for the personal attack, it shows me the level of logic you are incapable of.

This comes in the wake of the following exchange:

wbarmy:You are correct, Lee was never convicted of treason. And OJ was never convicted of murder.

Nathan Bedford:And you were never convicted of tax evasion.

My failing here apparently to be incapable of logic. Yet, it is your evident assertion that because O.J. Simpson was not convicted of murder Robert E Lee must be guilty of treason.

Who is trespassing against logic?

You accuse me of a "personal attack" no doubt because I note that you have not been convicted of tax evasion. I, of course, have no reason to believe that you have ever evaded taxes nor did I allege that you have. Beyond illustrating your lack of logic I seek now to point out the hypocrisy of your argument that an allegation that you stand unconvicted of tax evasion is a personal attack but your equating the absence of conviction of O.J. Simpson to show guilt of Robert E Lee is somehow logical and un-offensive.

If the presumed guilt of O.J. Simpson is offered to establish the guilt of Robert E Lee why is not your innocence of tax evasion enough to establish the innocence of Robert E Lee? Is your logic only a one-way street? Who is actually trespassing against logic?

I ask you to join me in abandoning these recurring and largely unavailing arguments which not by happenstance are reincarnated now in an age of iconoclasm. A very dangerous post modern ideology seeks to reverse a century and half of attempts to reconcile the nation after a terrible Civil War. Please note I did not start any argument concerning Lee's alleged treason or his innocence but as the author of this thread I did respond to the charge especially as it was posted to me.

I ask again to abandon this pointless debate as it does in fact render aid and comfort to our enemies and resurrects an animosity that we had nearly put away. I quote from the resolution restoring the citizenship of Jefferson Davis and noting the restoration of the citizenship of Robert E Lee two years earlier in 1976:

( In 1976, Lee’s citizenship was restored by Congress, also about a century after Lee’s death after the Civil War. The restoration of Davis' citizenship soon followed.)

“In posthumously restoring the full rights of citizenship to Jefferson Davis, the Congress officially completes the long process of reconciliation that has reunited our people following the tragic conflict between the States, the resolution read on October 17, 1978.

Earlier, he was specifically exempted form resolutions restoring the rights of other officials in the Confederacy. He had served the United States long and honorably as a soldier, Member of the U.S. House and Senate, and as Secretary of War. General Robert E. Lee's citizenship was restored in 1976. It is fitting that Jefferson Davis should no longer be singled out for punishment, the resolution said.

The riots and misguided attempts to tear down the statues of Robert E Lee and others represent a regrettable regression from the more than century long spirit of reconciliation of the 1970s. It is wholly attributable to the intersectionality doctrine which has infected our body politic as the virus has leeched out of our universities. The destruction of the image of Robert E Lee is not the end game, of course, it is but a step along the path to the destruction of the country itself.

I for one will not participate nor be a fellow traveler along that path.

For anyone interested in exploring the origins and epistemology of this pernicious and potentially mortal ideology I recommend, Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity--And Why This Harms Everybody.

[Theophilus]

interior lines of communication helped Lee with reinforcements and counterattacks. Union learned nothing from sending wave after wave, piecemeal, against experienced troops in defilade.
.

[moovova]

Thank you for proving my point.

[jmacusa]

You haven’t proven anything Reb. You’re a Confederate which makes you a Democrat beneath the skin. You don’t belong here.

[moovova]

Your silly comment shows you know nothing about me. It also confirms what I’ve suspected from the beginning... you’re consumed with hate.

You poor thing...I’ll say a prayer for you.

[jmacusa]

I’m not consumed with hate. I hate only for what the Confederacy did to this country. And your asinine comment shows you know nothing about me. I don’t need or want you saying prayers for me.

[moovova]

“I don’t need or want you saying prayers for me.”

Too late hater.

[PeaRidge]

You said: “By that time (after May 6, 1861) Confederates had formally declared war against the United States...”

Most notable is that this canard is one of your favorites...you frequently use it to shift blame.

The war began on April 19, 1861 in the office of the only man with the power to do so.....Lincoln.

[BDParrish]

"Lost Causers are old-time Southern Democrats who now vote Republican, but hate, hate the whole idea of Republican Unionism. They want us to buy into their own Democrat anti-Union, anti-Republican lies, and we're just not going to do it, period."

I always enjoy your comments if I don't completely agree. Could you or one of the other federals here explain your vision for the future? Also how are we to get there without Lincoln's spirit of reconciliation? If your deep basic motivation is historical accuracy then you might ignore my query though I might be curious why you think that is so important or even possible.

My personal vision as a "Lost Causer" can be summed up in three things:
1) The tenth ammendment having actual legal force.
2) The repeal of the 17th ammendment.
3) True representation in the House of Representatives namely as Washington himself said, one representative for every 30,000 persons. The notion that this is impossible is not an idea that I will ever take seriously.

There are two presumptions I make in my position:
First that secession is now once and for all illegal. That question is decided.
Second that any view of state authority which allows for gun control is also illegal. That question is decided. In other words the Second Ammendment must be incorporated exactly as is and to the same degree as the Fourth Ammendment. A state may restrict firearms to the same extent which they may allow slavery! If they pretend that the Second is in fact incorporated, then we know that they mean to effectively destroy the entire bill of rights in the same way. Of course I can accept any number of other potentially better ways of implementing the founding principles of limited government, local control, separation of powers etc. I just do not know what that might be. Also I do not see any need to implement one of the three without the other two, as they work together. My great fear is that it is already too late and we are looking down the very barrel of the gun.

I don't belong to the Sons of Confederate Veterans or anything like that, so I don't know what it is in the Lost Causers' future vision that you find so disagreeable. As effective propaganda/persuasion I am happy with equating modern Democrats with slavers and secesh traitors though I would never believe it historically accurate or rather it is historically simplistic, kind of like thinking that Mitt Romney belongs to the "party of Lincoln".

Have you seen the anti-Trump campaign ad on YouTube, which links treason to the rebel flag, and then shows the rebel flag at Trump rallies?

Thanks for your time, and I don't want to impose, but I suspect you really enjoy this stuff. At least you don't mind answering the likes of me. No?

[CarolinaReaganFan]

Thank you for that info.
Soldiers on both sides are American Heroes.
My GG-GF fought for the Army of Northern Virginia for most of 1864 in a SC infantry regiment that was part of Kershaw’s Brigade serving under Gens Early and Longstreet and Anderson.
He was at Cold Harbor,Petersburg,2nd Deep Bottom and Shenendoah campaign. I just purchased a book that details his regiment history .It will be an interesting read. Thanks.

[wgmalabama]

I don’t understand the irrational hatred of the South by certain posters. I have live in 7 different states in my life GA, TN, AL, CA, UT, NY and VA) But I’m just a Reb so what do I know.

[moovova]

I know what you mean...lived in NC, IL, PA (Philly), NJ (3x), GA (2x), Italy. Every place I’ve ever been, I went looking for the best of the place. Folks like the “Reb haters” here...I would’ve just walked away from their all-consuming hatred in two seconds flat. Just too much good out there to enjoy...even in tough times. Happy weekend!

[BroJoeK]

wgmalabama: "I don’t understand the irrational hatred of the South by certain posters."

moovova: "Folks like the “Reb haters” here...I would’ve just walked away from their all-consuming hatred in two seconds flat."

jmacusa: "I said to many a “Lost Causer’’ here how odd it was that people who ostensibly call themselves conservatives come to a conservative web site venerating a bunch of treasonous Southern Democrats.
They then conflate my inquiry about this into ‘’hating Southerners!’’."

Sorry ladies, but you're letting your Democrat slips show -- it's the nature of Democrats to turn a disagreement over history, or politics or philosophy, etc., into personal attacks: you're a racist! You're a sexist! You may be OK with LGBT, but you hate Qs, so you're a homophobe!

That's what Democrats do, and ladies, that's what you're doing here.
So, for the record, nobody on Free Republic hates the South, nobody hates Southerners, everybody acknowledges the courage & skill of Confederate soldiers and nobody blames them for serving loyally.
Everybody has lived, worked, vacationed, retired and/or has family in the South.
We're all on that same side here.

The entire discussion is on the words & deeds of Democrat leaders, Fire Eaters & Confederate government officials.
Yes, occasionally somebody will question whether Robert E Lee truly represented the Second Coming of Christ, but most are happy to acknowledge him as a great general.

So this is not about who loves or hates the South.
It is about Lost Cause Democrat lies regarding the Civil War, and why do you people keep telling them?
I'm saying, if you wish to truly be a Republican, the first step is: stop lying.

Of course, if you're happy being an old-time Southern Democrat, then keep on keeping on: lie, lie away.
Nobody cares.

[BroJoeK]

PeaRidge: "The war began on April 19, 1861 in the office of the only man with the power to do so.....Lincoln."

Nonsense because secessionists began waging war against the United States in December 1860 -- threatening Federal officials, seizing Federal properties, then firing on Union ships.
Imagine if some group did that to us today?
The Union response to Confederate warfare was as non-threatening as possible, but as early as February 1861 President Buchanan announced that Fort Sumter would not be surrendered without a fight.
Confederates were on notice they could have open warfare whenever they attacked Fort Sumter.

And so they did.
Those are facts, not "blame shifting".

[OIFVeteran]

Good summation on how the democrats are still the democrats, no matter how much they like to claim the parties switched. I think a good way to highlight this is take the words of actual democrat and republican leaders about the great moral question of the civil war era(slavery)and show how their words would apply to the great moral question of today(abortion).

“If slavery is not wrong, then nothing is wrong.”
Abraham Lincoln

“African slavery, as it exists in the United States, is a moral, a social, and a political blessing.”
Jefferson Davis

Now here is how those quotes would look applied to today’s great moral question.

“If abortion is not wrong, then nothing is wrong.”
Abraham Lincoln

“Abortion, as it exists in the United States, is a moral, a social, and a political blessing.”
Jefferson Davis

[BroJoeK]

BDParrish: "Could you or one of the other federals here explain your vision for the future?"

At my age "the future" is not so many years away, and my vision involves meeting my Maker with hopefully enough evidence to prove that I have been guilty of practicing Christianity.

As for this life, my goal is to defend our Founders' Original Intentions -- their vision -- for their Constitution and the United States.

BDParrish: "Also how are we to get there without Lincoln's spirit of reconciliation? "

But Honest Abe Lincoln said, "let them up easy", he never said, "accept Lost Cause lies as if they were true."
"Let them up easy" means full forgiveness, but you don't ever get forgiveness for sins you refuse to confess, and that's what the Lost Cause is all about.

Remember this: the Lost Cause spread after the Civil War to let Democrats South & North reconcile again by blaming Republicans for everything evil.
Today the old-time Southern Democrats vote Republican, and they still want us to buy into their old Lost Cause lies!
It's not going to happen, give it up!

BDParrish: "If your deep basic motivation is historical accuracy then you might ignore my query though I might be curious why you think that is so important or even possible."

I'm saying: when Lost Causers stop lying, the problem begins to go away.
When y'all stop hating the truth, then the problem is gone.

BDParrish: "My personal vision as a "Lost Causer" can be summed up in three things: 1) The tenth ammendment having actual legal force."

This is an area of legality I'm no expert in, but would suppose the 10th Amendment is currently enforced in certain respects, but not in others.
So the question is which Federal activities should be added to the list as off-limits per the 10th Amendment?

I noticed in this regard that President Trump was able to delete dozens or hundreds of Federal regulations, and presume many on 10th Amendment grounds.

BDParrish: "2) The repeal of the 17th ammendment."

Agreed.

BDParrish: "3) True representation in the House of Representatives namely as Washington himself said, one representative for every 30,000 persons.
The notion that this is impossible is not an idea that I will ever take seriously."

Impractical & unnecessary, so why waste energy on it?

BDParrish: "First that secession is now once and for all illegal.
That question is decided. "

Sure, it's "settled", but possibly not as you imagine.
Our Founders intended that disunion was totally legitimate, under two but only two conditions:

1. By necessity from "usurpations or abuses of power" such as existed in 1776.

2. By mutual consent, such as existed in 1788 in "seceding" -- from the old Articles of Confederation to the new Constitution.

Neither condition existed in 1860 when Democrats declared their unilateral, unapproved secession "at pleasure" and the result was Civil War.

BDParrish: "Second that any view of state authority which allows for gun control is also illegal.
That question is decided.
In other words the Second Ammendment must be incorporated exactly as is and to the same degree as the Fourth Ammendment. "

I think state & local governments have always had ordnances regulating firearms, including even "gun free zones".
How those are affected by the 2nd Amendment, I don't know, but am certain the 2nd Amendment does provide some protection.

BDParrish: "My great fear is that it is already too late and we are looking down the very barrel of the gun."

I have never in my life voted for a Democrat, but I also never before thought modern Democrats were trying to destroy the country's basics.
I mean, even Obama only promised to roll back rising oceans, he never said he'd destroy everything Americans hold dear.

BDParrish: "I don't belong to the Sons of Confederate Veterans or anything like that, so I don't know what it is in the Lost Causers' future vision that you find so disagreeable. "

By definition the "Lost Cause" is a pack of historical lies, consider this: because anything that's actually true about the Lost Cause is thereby not "Lost Cause", but simply history.
Lost Cause lies were concocted by Confederates, some during the war but mostly after the war to help reconcile Southern & Northern Democrats, by making "Ape" Lincoln the devil and Republicans his minions.
Today old-time Southern Democrats mostly vote Republican, and they dearly wish us Republicans would buy the lies their ancestors first concocted to make us the devil!

It's not going to happen, ever.

BDParrish: "As effective propaganda/persuasion I am happy with equating modern Democrats with slavers and secesh traitors though I would never believe it historically accurate or rather it is historically simplistic, kind of like thinking that Mitt Romney belongs to the "party of Lincoln"."

Obviously Democrats of 1860 are not the same people as Democrats today, but what is exactly the same is their defense of a form of slavery (the Democrats' plantation, some compare slavery to abortion) and their rebellion against the United States and our Constitution.

Democrats were the original anti-Federalists, opposed to ratifying the Constitution, inventors of nullification, secession, rebellion & war against the United States -- that's what equates 1860 to today.

BDParrish: "Have you seen the anti-Trump campaign ad on YouTube, which links treason to the rebel flag, and then shows the rebel flag at Trump rallies? "

No, but it's typical of another Great Lie Democrats & some Republicans are hoping to foist on us: that Lincoln and his party were Democrats, while Confederates were all Republicans!

And Lost Causers play into that because, as Democrats, they love, love, love a Great Lie!