Why the Cherokee Nation Allied Themselves With the Confederate States of America in 1861

Lew Rockwell.com ^ | January 7, 2004 | Leonard M. Scruggs

[carton253]

What about McPherson?

I have his book (haven't started it yet). Is he honest and objective in his writing, or does he write to villify/justify a side?

[Non-Sequitur]

Ooooh, don't get them started on McPherson!

[carton253]

Well... I don't want to be the spark that launches another war... LOL! But, what about him? Is he objective or does he have a mission. (I've read quite a few of those mission books... they are annoying to say the least)

[lentulusgracchus]

Just go ahead and read it. Remembering that he has a further agenda. It'll become manifest. The "historiopolemicist's" art isn't in disguising his purpose, but just in making history his servant in furthering it.

But go ahead and read, and form your own opinion.

[carton253]

Since I have it, I probably will.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

Geronimo and Crazy Horse were the great generals. I don't see anything comparable among the Cherokee--and see no point in trying to create one to avoid hurt feelings.

I never said the Cherokee were great generals, but they were better scholars, for lack of a better term as they were far from that. And you said they united too late. Uniting the Indians for war even very early would have been a losing proposition. Their population and technology was not in their favor. What they should have done was to unite and send people to the east to speak directly with the politicians, newspapers, and people. But of course even this could have failed, and I doubt there were enough Indians who knew just how many people they would have to overcome.

[stand watie]

YEP!

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

i don't think much of your propaganda.

i have seen NO PROOF from any ORIGIONAL SOURCE that GEN Jackson OR his wife ever owned a slave, including any source from her.

ALSO, can you explain why his/her tax records show NO slaves EVER as personal or farm property????

free dixie,sw

[Tax-chick]

Wow ... polysyllabic!

[stand watie]

IF the General did own slaves, then why are there NO TAX RECORDS of such ownership?????

PLEASE explain that to me.

free dixie,sw

[Jokelahoma]

Not at all. I make no argument as to which side was "right" in the Civil War. I merely state that this article is poorly written with regard to the fact it does nothing to support the claim that the Feds were wrong. The argument put forth, that "the Cherokee fought with the South, so the Feds MUST have been wrong" is tenuous to begin with. "All cows have hair, Bob has hair, so Bob must be a cow", if you will. If anything, the obvious omission of pertinent prior events makes the argument even weaker and therefore undermines his position somewhat. Addressing prior history and working that into his theory that the Confederacy was right would have been much better. Picking two whole sources and quoting one document that supports his position while flatly ignoring anything that doesn't support his position or may call it into question in the least smacks of Democratic candidate methodology. This guy apparently wasn't skilled enough to deal with anything that might undermine his point. I'll leave out any snarky references to lewrockwell.com.

I enjoy the debate and seeing the different opinions on the Civil War. I just wish this debate had been triggered by a better article.

[stand watie]

southrons certainly DO understand you.

we know that you, as the Damnyankee Minister of Propaganda, post every possible piece of information, whether true or false, to attempt to destroy the reputation of all the heroes of southerners.

free dixie,sw

[carton253]

I don't know why there ARE NO TAX RECORDS of such ownership...maybe the records are wrong.

His wife, who would know better than some clerk at the tax office, says he had them. Why would she lie? What would be the benefit?

Now... you can believe the Tax Office. I will believe the wife.

[stand watie]

SORRY, i'm not letting you get away with that.

certain terms in historiography have ESTABLISHED MEANINGS.

REVISIONISM & REVISIONIST HISTIOGRAPHY came out of the RADICAL SCHOOL of the most extreme, leftist (some would say COMMUNIST/SOCIALIST), southHATING, self-righteous poison-ivy league schools of the northeast in the mid-1960s.

since that time period, scholars of all sorts have agreed that REVISIONISM is a LEFTIST concept. whatever else southrons are, we are not LEFTISTS/SOCIALISTS/MARXISTS.

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

YEP!

[stand watie]

another point. i have seen NOTHING that was written by his wife, in a period source. her daily journal says ZILCH about his/her supposed slaves. NOTHING.

frankly, i couldn't care less whether he/she owned slaves, EXCEPT that there are NO origional sources period of such ownership.

can you point out any ORIGIONAL writing by her that states he/she owned slaves????

another point, GEN Jackson HAD to teach at VMI, because he was too poor to otherwise take care of his family. the farm was NOT particuliarly profitable. slaves were EXPENSIVE! poor folks couldn't afford to own any, even if they wanted to.

in other words, i think the whole "jackson owned slaves" is an intentional lie.

you, of course, are free to hold ANY opinion.

free the southland,sw

[capitan_refugio]

Jim Thorpe died in Lomita, CA, in 1953. He was possibly the greatest all-around American athlete of the 20th century. If you met him in 1964, you met his ghost.

I suggest you probably met Billy Mills. Mills, an Oglala Sioux and US Marine, had won a gold medal at the 1964 Olympic games in the 10,000 meter race. It is considered one of the great upsets by an "unknown" against the establishment.

[carton253]

I will bring you proof of Anna Jackson stating that Jackson owned slaves after lunch.

frankly, i couldn't care less whether he/she owned slaves...

Neither do I. But by saying that Jackson owned slaves is no smear on this great man's reputation. He owned slaves because he did. But, his greatness is in his character, his humanity, and finally in his fighting. I deeply admire Stonewall Jackson. He doesn't need you to defend him from me.

About your point about Jackson teaching at VMI, and he being poor. Oh, for crying out loud! Are you sure that is what you want to base your argument on!

Jackson was far from poor. He taught at VMI because it was his job. He owned farmland outside Lexington. He made investments in several businesess inside Lexington and he sat on the board of directors on several more. He may have started out as a "poor" professor when he first came to VMI... he did not remain so.

[Aurelius]

I think that you have judged her unfairly, I didn't see any logic there.

[stand watie]

sorry, but according to the curator of VMI, GEN Jackson was never well-to-do.

i am NOT an expert on Jackson-my expertise, such as it is, is in American Indian history/lore & partisan warfare in the LA/AR/MO/KS/IT/NM/TX areas, prior to & during TWBTS.

also, FYI, i am NOT a historian. my degrees are in Public Administration & Political Science. (essentally i'm a policy wonk, rather than a traditional academic, though i do teach at a local college.)

free dixie,sw