The Confederacy and the Lost Cause

Подписаться 1,3 тыс.

Просмотров 36 тыс.

50% 1

Two scholars explore the origin and effects of the myth of the "Lost Cause," an effort to come to terms with the loss of the war by the South. Florida, like most southern states, is home to a host of memorials erected by the United Daughters of the Confederacy. One of a series produced by Bill Dudley for the Florida Humanities' "Teaching Florida" series.

Опубликовано:

17 сен 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 321

@hamonryechinaski180 3 года назад

It is worth adding that from British eyes the Southern army and industrial output was never going to be enough to defeat the industrial power of North with its men and material. It is a shock when you realise the difference between the two respective sides. It surely must have been apparent to those higher up the food chain that the South was always going to be in trouble if the war lasted more than a year....Underdogs who've paid a high price in their defeat will always seek to romanticise such a catastrophe and try to regain some pride in the ruins of the southern economy.

@big_guy_of_leiden5688 4 года назад

Don’t make me come back down there!

@marlon596 4 года назад

I might come back too

@marlon596 4 года назад

@@j.clementec.m.1558, I agree. I served 4 years in the corps and 16 years in the army. Retired in 2012.

@elrjames7799 4 года назад

"Don't make me": a typical phrase in a bully's repertoire: using threats to force a victim to submit to abuse.

@marlon596 4 года назад

@@elrjames7799, she made me beat her, officers

@big_guy_of_leiden5688 4 года назад

Elr James now now you’ll have nothing to worry about as long as you don’t disregard the constitution

@grindle1857 3 года назад

I don't understand the average southerner-yeoman farmer, ordinary non-slaveholder- at that time would fight for rich plantation owners' preserving slavery. Unless they aspired to be slave holders themselves.

@philmienus2382 2 года назад

Its human condition to not want to be the very bottom of the class. Thats why even poor white southeners had a chip in the table to keep slavery going. They also think there is the posibility of being a slave owner. Just like how the conservatives today think there is a chance to become a billionaire so they suck the big corporation dicks and pushes for tax cuts/ breaks ,incentives ,bailouts

@Eric-ye5yz 3 года назад

The south felt sorry for them selves ...... but not once did think about the slaves with no rights at all, not even to protect their children. One gets tired of this self pity

@rancid7182 3 года назад

Yeah that's true, but the people during the civil war had only ever seen black people as slaves. Do you think that adds some grey area?

@Eric-ye5yz 3 года назад

@@rancid7182 ... There was a very strong desire to escape slavery, that must have told the south they should not enslave people. But that required empathy, and clearly there is a grave shortage of empathy in the south. How can any thinking people see it as OK to take a small child from its mother and sell it another. But the south were a vulgar greedy people who cared only about themselves, they haven't changed much now. That's why Trump is so popular in the south, he has the same attitude.

@rancid7182 3 года назад

@@Eric-ye5yz yeah that's true, now for the majority of south being greedy slave owners, seems unrealistic. I'm gonna do more research into the percentage of southerners who were slave owners tho.

@beavisjohnson7717 3 года назад

Less than 10% of southerners owned slaves

@Eric-ye5yz 3 года назад

@@beavisjohnson7717 ..... Is that supposed to be a defense of the practice ??

@wrestlehard226america8 3 года назад

I wouldn’t say they died surrounded by strangers. Units usually became almost like one big family. They ate together. Celebrated together. Cried together. Most important of all: FOUGHT TOGETHER.

@sint0xicateme 6 лет назад

I highly recommend the documentary, 'Death and the Civil War'.

@Putaspellonyou 4 года назад

Better yet is the book the film is based on, Drew Gilpin Faust's "This Republic of Suffering."

@foronlineuseonly8405 6 лет назад

very very interesting !!

@ammoalamo6485 4 года назад

"The South" as a whole didn't adopt the Lost Cause rationalizations - it was a few, a very few writers and bitter ex-Confederates who trumped up those reasons, who spent many years of the remainder of their lives trying to re-write history that had already been written before the war even started. They spent their remaining lives and fortunes trying to convert ordinary people to their way of thinking, and it wasn't working very well. Those writers ignored the stated reason given in the official Secession Papers of each state - which was Slavery, and nothing but Slavery. The South seceded to protect and expand the white right to continue to own slaves. They made sure new laws were adopted despite the Emancipation Proclamation that would allow locals to keep black people treated as near to slaves as possible. Then the United Daughters of the Confederaccy starting around WW I started erecting monuments all over the south, supporting the myth of the noble Confederate soldier working for god and family and honor against the dastardly barbarian Northerners.

@rancid7182 3 года назад

So is this comment a recap of the video?

@philmienus2382 2 года назад

Seems to me like it worked most conservatives litteraly thinks the civil war was not mainly because of slavery.

@johnweber4577 4 года назад

The 1619 Project is like the Bizzaroworld version of the Lost Cause.

@kevingallagher3584 3 года назад

FUCK THE SOUTHERN TRAITORS!

@padillafamily5221 7 лет назад

so they re-wrote history but accused people now for this.

@vertrand8640 6 лет назад

They simply told the truth.

@R0NYFL0NY 5 лет назад

@@vertrand8640 everything they've said is categorically false.

@southerngent8162 5 лет назад

Padilla Family Who rewrote history? I think the rewriting is those who say it was all over slavery. That narrative wasn't the typical view of an American until around 50 years ago.

@southerngent8162 5 лет назад

@Wilson Nothing was rewritten. A recorded history shows the South tried to peacefully secede but the north occupied their land and then tried to reinforce their occupation. Even after the war, everything was about restoring order back in the States. You morons defend invasion and conquest and think you are some sort of pro-Americans. You morons know nothing of the separation of powers.

@southerngent8162 5 лет назад

@Wilson Lmao Lincoln said himself that he wanted to deport slaves and that the nefro could never live equally to white people So stop pushing the segregationist bullshit dumbass. The north placed laws that prohibited blacks from settling in their States. You morons need to educate yourselves. Southern segregation was copied from the Northern Black Codes idiot. And as for slavery, you are defending invading your own sister States and conquering them. That's enslavement you dumbass hypocrite!

@zsedcftglkjh 4 года назад

I say that them talking about slavery is a symptom not a cause. Only four of the Southern states said why they were leaving by issuing a Declaration of Causes. Those were MS, GA, TX, and SC. MS, GA, and TX all three declare the morality of slavery and the inferiority of black people. But SC talks about slavery in the context that the Northern states have been violating the compact between the states and when one side violated the compact then the compact is null and void. I do not deny that everyone at the time talked about slavery a lot. Everyone did. But when the North is proposing legislation to enshrine slavery as a Constitutional Amendment then why would the South still leave? Because the bigger issue was some states encroaching on the agreed upon compact between the states. And yes that compact was slavery. But the primary concern of SC was that the North was violating that compact in the first place. And other states did not secede over slavery. VA and NC and AR and TN did not do so over slavery. NC is an interesting case because they put secession to a vote before any other state did. The governor there hated Lincoln and pushed for it. But only 39 out of their 120 delegates voted for it and it was rejected by popular vote. Four months later, Lincoln calls for the 75,000 troops and the vote to leave was unanimous by the same people who had rejected it just four months earlier. So NC did not secede out of hatred of Lincoln or because they thought the North was going to end slavery. They seceded because Lincoln declared war on all of the seceded Southern states for something that SC did. When VA and TN seceded they declared that they will not get involved in any conflict except for in self defense. TN even asked MA and DE to send delegates to their states to help them secede because they wanted to do so peacefully. MA did not send any but DE did. So while that states cited slavery as a reason to secede, slavery was more of a symptom then a cause. Also, very rarely were the arguments in the North opposing slavery made for moral reasons. They were things like the 3/5 compromise gives the South an inflated representation and things like that. Sure you can find individual politicians talking about how bad slavery is morally but the arguments made in Congress were pretty much never moral ones. Like when Senator David Wilmot of PA was proposing the Wilmot Proviso in 1846 to ban slavery in any new state or territory he did not do so because he morally opposed slavery. He literally said that he was doing it because he did not want competition with "free white Pennsylvania labor" in these new states and territories. Even the Republican party platform of 1856, of which he was instrumental in crafting, says nothing about abolishing slavery in the states where it exists. A lot of this discussion about the morality of slavery has to do with what the people making the statements believed. Like when the Puritans abolished slavery they did not do so for moral reasons even thought they talked about the immorality of slavery. The Puritans called anything that was not a part of their views immoral and inferior. That is why they called themselves Puritans in the first place. They wanted to keep everything pure like them. So if you read the Puritan Charter abolishing slavery they literally say that their primary reason for doing so is because they are absolute egalitarians and if someone owned a slave then they would be unequal to someone that did not. Their secondary reason was because having slavery legal would mean having black people living among them thus having what they called a "putrid influence" on the white race. My point is that it is not just enough to say that this person supported slavery and this person did not therefore this conflict was about slavery. I mean during the war the states of IL, IN, and OR all amended their state constitutions to forbid black people from even entering their state. Why? Senator William Herndon, who Lincoln called "my man above men", said that the goal was to make the Midwest a "new white frontier" free of black people. In 1854 the OH senate threw out a free black reporter because his mere presence was "a violation of the truth of the superiority of the white race". That is in their senate records. In every single Northern state from 1790-1860 they actively drove out the black population with their Black Codes. NY even got rid of over 2/3 of their state's black population. Even MLK acknowledged that Jim Crowe started in NY not the South. It started with a vaudeville actor that would paint himself black and pretend to be a slave named Jim Crowe and he made a whole comedy routine around this character. And then under Reconstruction, the term went South as it had already been popularized in the North. To their credit, politicians in WI proposed a law that would make WI a sanctuary state for escaped slaves but, three consecutive times, it was rejected by popular vote. Senator Benjamin Wade of OH said in a speech that he hated going to D.C. because "it is too close to the South and I can smell all of those n****rs from there". He is now remembered as opposing slavery. Why? Because of his own selfish interests not because he had any moral impetus to fight for black people. My point in bringing all of that up is to say that slavery was not the reason because people up North that supported forcing the South to stay were themselves, for the most part, vicious racists who did not care one bit about slaves. To say that the war was about slavery one also has to prove that the North was willing to fight and die in the bloodiest war in America's history for slaves and that is absurd. I mean even William Lloyd Garrison and Lysander Spooner supported Southern secession. Why? Because, as Garrison said, it would nullify the Fugitive Slave Act and thus break the backbone of slavery. Spooner even called Lincoln and Sumner and Seward hypocrites and traitors for forcing the South to stay. That is also why the symbol for Garrison's paper is a secessionist symbol.

@zsedcftglkjh 4 года назад

Addendum: I'm speaking as an amateur Civil War Buff. One need only read the memoirs of the soldiers on BOTH sides of the war to know they did not fight over slavery. To point, the 1863 draft riots in New York City were partially the result of sending white citizens to die for black slaves. By and large, the North hated the Emancipation Proclamation, which contributed to Lincoln's near defeat in the 1864 election.

@williamkerr2121 4 года назад

@@zsedcftglkjh Shuuuu....quiet now, you're disturbing the SJW's New World agenda.

@sgtjohnson49 3 года назад

@@zsedcftglkjh you're speaking as a Lost Causer lol

@rancid7182 3 года назад

Hey Zachary I was interested by your comment you should make a RU-vid video about your evidence and point of view. If there is already a video similar to what you said could you link it?

@philmienus2382 2 года назад

@@zsedcftglkjh the reason for other states who later joined does not matter, they knowingly joined a bunch of terrorist who wanted to keep the slavery of black people going till the end of times

@nora22000 6 лет назад

The confederate leaders were self-serving. They continued fighting after Vicksburg and Gettysburg, when all hope to win was lost. This incurred the wrath of the North which was unleashed against the people to finally get a surrender, to make it all end, because the confederacy would not. Instead of putting the blame where it belongs, on the slaveowners and warmongers, Southerners venerated them, put up monuments to them because they still wanted to be at war, still wanted the slave-based 'way of life.' Their hero Nathan Bedford Forrest resurrected the confederate battle flag, the one used to kill people, to represent his new terrorism organization, the Ku Klux Klan. The South reinstalled as much of slavery as possible. We are still trying to dismantle the harm these people have caused. No one wants to be a slave. No one wants to be lynched. When anyone sees the flag or the monuments, it's about being sold out, whether by the confederate leaders during the war or the white supremacists afterward.

@southerngent8162 5 лет назад

Lmao. Each State was acting in it's own sovereign manner. You cant blame the entire. Onfederacy for each individual States actions. The north was the self serving side. They were the ones who invaded the Southern States in the first place you ignorant hypocrite!

@southerngent8162 5 лет назад

Also, Lee did not surrender the Confederacy you dumbass ignorant moron. He surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia. Lee only surrendered his own troops to the Army of the Potomac, not the Armybof Tennessee, or Arkansas, or Texas, or whomever. You morons are totally ignorant of history and yet you spew your ignorant hate at Americans. You are the traitors who turned on the Union.

@toddmiller5656 4 года назад

@@southerngent8162 Hoo, boy! Another neo-Confederate! Hooray for the south and all that! So was there still a Confederacy after Jefferson Davis and his cabinet were captured in Georgia on May 15 1865? Hmmmmmmmm?

@worm2576 4 года назад

Southern Gent uh huh, we’re the traitors, even tho the south were the ones who tried too leave the union and abandon the constitution

@worm2576 4 года назад

Southern Gent the south were the ones who tried too leave first

@Bob-sd8ns 9 месяцев назад

The part at minute 4:00 it’s interesting, particularly SC declaration of secession says they seceded because of slavery

@chokkan7 4 года назад

It's sad, but whenever I see a retrospective of the Civil War, the 'lessons' that we as a nation are supposed to have learned are far different from the actual lessons that were on display. It's pretty clear that the South knew that they were outclassed by the North, both militarily and in manufacturing potential, and so were for the most part quite cautious about the issue, but after almost thirty years of increasing affronts by anti-slavery factions, the trap was sprung (i.e., the South fired the opening volleys at Ft. Sumter), and so could then be viewed as having initiated hostilities. I find it amusing that in an age when all legislation was written out cursively by hand, and the deliberations leading up to any bill were long-winded and tedious (often lasting weeks), bills to seize Southern assets and otherwise penalize seceding states appeared and were passed almost overnight; it's almost as though it had been planned well in advance, just waiting for the excuse. It's also eerily apparent, if one were to compare various aspects of their respective timelines, how similar were the chains of events in both the Mexican-American War and the Civil War (separated by only 20 years). That both ended with de facto colonization of valuable territories and the seizure of assets and resources therein, with the populations of both losing sides effectively broken and disenfranchised for the better part of a century afterward, I can see why alternative reasons for the wars' prosecutions were so necessary...

@Charlie-ip9ku 3 года назад

Um, when you say "Southern assets" you mean living people, right?

@chokkan7 3 года назад

@@Charlie-ip9ku , Actually, no. The North took advantage of the absence of Southern legislatures to pass excessive taxes and other penalties upon Southerners with the intent of divesting them of their lands and fortunes upon the cessation of hostilities. This is one of the main reasons why so many large land holdings had to be sold shortly after the war: because of the tax burden. In 1861, Mississippi had the greatest concentration of wealth on the face of the planet, since 1865, it has become increasingly impoverished in many ways. Sorry that your intended smear did not pan out as you'd hoped. Envy can show its ugly face in so many ways...

@jamesclark5467 3 года назад

@@chokkan7 wrong

@GabrielUngacta 3 года назад

Its still strong.

@matthewtenney2898 6 лет назад

The Bonnie Blue Flag is played at the end. That song was written quite early in the war and talks about state's right and says nothing about slavery. Sounds like the lost cause except ten years too early.

@creedlang419 6 лет назад

Dude, don't you get it ??? States rights was the right own slaves which was the economic backbone of the whole entire SOUTH... Without those extrodinary rugged souls that toiled the earth, wet nursed those planters, doctors, lawyers kids, built homes and other buildings, in the southerners eyes, they would cease to exist.

@matthewtenney2898 6 лет назад

It is the right to make your own mistakes and to suffer the consequences. Would the US deserve to be invaded and hundreds of thousands killed because of our treatment of native Americans? Of women? for child labor? for our immoral war against Mexico? against Spain? our subjugation of the Philippines? No, the north's reaction of narcissistic rage and the subsequent fratricide was as immoral as slavery. There is no excuse for the stupid, irrational, immoral invasion of the south because they dared to fire on the flag.

@nora22000 6 лет назад

Matthew Tenney So NOTHING is sacred? Trample everything that the Union valued and make them like it? That was egotistical in the extreme--to have so much hubris as to think that self-aggrandizing fools like Jefferson Davis or Robert E. Lee could repeat the success of the 1776 Patriots or replace them as heroes while simultaneously destroying what those immensely talented men had built. Didn't it occur to them that other states might want to secede outside the confederacy if the confederate states were allowed to do so? What about Union security? Why should the Mississippi or the port of New Orleans be given away? None of the confederate leaders thought it through first. For the planters like Davis and Lee it was a toddler temper tantrum to keep slavery, but to Lincoln it was about survival and permanent war. The sympathizers still have zero respect for the US flag and the idea that it supersedes all others. There is no battle flag of the APV. It was buried and Lee carried a white flag when he surrendered to Grant. The flag people are waving is the flag of the KKK. Hoisting this flag is an affront.

@matthewtenney2898 6 лет назад

nora22000 The common man in the North went off to invade the South out of vengeful, prideful rage. In my view, that was immoral (and insane). I would characterize your approach to be consequentialism: the doctrine that the morality of an action is to be judged solely by its consequences.

@nora22000 6 лет назад

Matthew Tenney The planters in the South had interfered with Northern state's rights. They didn't want to return escaped slaves or count the slaves for population but not voting. They didn't want to compete with slave labor in the territories or new states. The big plantation owners couldn't take "no" for an answer. They used their superb military leadership and the training that they gave to poor whites to put down slave rebellions to turn on the Union and demand their own way. They bragged about being able to kill "damned Yankees" and made good on that promise. The Union was determined to put an end to the threat. The confederacy did not respect this at all; gentlemen of honor would have surrendered after Gettysburg and Vicksburg since there was no way to win. But the confederacy pressed on, incurring anger and wrath from the Union.

@jimg1991 Год назад

Although accurate in most ways, this video is a biased rendering because it dismisses the very real constitutional arguments about secession which existed and had some legal basis; a fair rendering would have included that discussion. To this day, the issue has never been decided by our constitutional system (Supreme Court), but only by force of arms.

@flintlockhomestead460 Месяц назад

Did the south fight for a noble cause? No. Much like the Vietnam Veterans who were told they were fighting to defeat communism and defend freedom and democracy for the South Vietnamese people when they were really fighting for the commercial interest of the Goodyear Rubber Co., they were really fighting for the commercial interests of the rich landed gentry. Did the southern soldiers fight bravely and valiantly? Yes, unquestionably. Therefore their monuments should remain undisturbed. For those who differ in opinion, how about building something rather than tearing something down? The only seceded states that raised no regiments that fought for the union were Virginia (excluding what became West Virginia) and Texas. How about erecting monuments to those men? Did the southerners have better leadership? Not really. A large portion of this is rooted in the ineptitude of their opposition, especially in the case of the Army of Northern Virginia. The south was not nearly as successful in the western and trans Mississippi theaters. Was the south primarily defeated by numbers and material? Yes, undoubtedly. This is unquestionably proven by the similarity of the casualty figures for each of the armies. The difference being where the northern armies kept growing, the southern kept shrinking. While the north continued to gain population 25% of the southern, white military aged population in 1861 died in the war.

@hannaford111 Год назад

Don't get used to this. You won't be able to teach this stuff in Florida schools soon.

@sveabryan9126 7 лет назад

excellent report

@martymcfly5423 4 года назад

Its full of Lies

@davidkillen2207 2 года назад

96% didn’t own slaves 4% owned slaves…

@Ben00000 Год назад

The southern politicians that protected slavery won with more than 4% of the vote though.

@vehx9316 Год назад

actually number was closer to 30%. And again you don't need to own a slave to support an institution that puts the lowest white man above the highest black american.

@marshalkrieg2664 3 года назад

The norths population in 1860 was 20 -22 million, and they had an endless stream of immigrants.....the South had 5 million plus 4 million slaves. The math on paper was indeed a 'Lost Cause'....I don't see how people can fail to see that is truly was a lost cause....

@Charlie-ip9ku 3 года назад

There's a difference between saying that the South would inevitably lose the war, which is true and what you point out, and glamorising that to the point where the Confederacy's fight was considered honorable and just, which is what the lost cause movement sought to do.

@marshalkrieg2664 3 года назад

@@Charlie-ip9ku I feel the South was right. Lincohn -ism was a betrayal of the founding principles. The South was not going to hold slaves forever- the border states would have let it go by mid 1870's due to industrialization and other factors, and from there it would have petered out in the other places soon thereafter. ( even Aten Shei films agrees). Besides, it not all about slavery, not even close, and our modern pollical calculus should not be "Well, does it make the black kids angry ?" They are not the majority in the country, its not all about them. Lincohn -ism led to the immediate decimation of the Plains Indians after the war, led to many invasions of Latin America after 1900 and can be seen acting against the middle east more recently. The South fought bravely defending what they thought was right and Confederates should be respected for that.

@sgtjohnson49 3 года назад

@@marshalkrieg2664 lol wrap them stars and bars tighter around you, the South Will Rise Again!!! Eventually...

@marshalkrieg2664 3 года назад

@1861 In Their Own Words Read Va's secession doc. If Lincohn was not intent on invasion, upper tier south would not have seceded and there would not have been a war, or only a minor brief one.

@JohahnDiechter Месяц назад

@@marshalkrieg2664you cannot invade your own country. Secession was never recognized by the Union and they proved that with blood and powder.

@floridaboy6931 5 лет назад

Industry vs. Agriculture

@jacehbrickfilms5233 4 года назад

As much as I agree that slavery is horrible. You have to realize that agrarian nations in the 19tb century pretty much required the institution of slavery or at least cheap labor

@j.lebowski3917 3 года назад

The north was just as much agricultural as the south. Growing half of the corn in the U.S. along with most of the wheat and oats.

@jimbaily734 6 лет назад

"all one has to do is read.." I Personally have read the majority of Arkansas' convention journal and much of North Carolinas. I argue that the historical record is clear that if nothing else, the conditional unionist states did not leave nor fight for slavery. I also think it is important to point out the wording they chose to use for the CSA Constitution, by calling it a "preliminary Constitution" These journals are available on the public domain. As far as newspapers are concerned, this eras press was toxic when it comes to true honest reporting. In Illinois for example, view the press headlines on the Lincoln/Douglas debate

@Putaspellonyou 4 года назад

And here we see, boys and girls, the lost cause narrative alive and well in the digital age.

@jimbaily734 4 года назад

@Kathy Mack read Virginia's and Arkansas. South Carolina is one that is kind of on the fence, clearly Georgia's, Alabama, and Mississippi were heavily influenced by the threat of limiting slavery, Texas was pissed about financial retribution owed to them, Louisiana, had more free blacks than any other state, but obviously slavery was a big deal there, but not so much in a white supremacy style. But I do not believe the constitutional unionist states left for anything other than coercion by three Federal Government. These views come from my reading of each states secession journals

@lechatleblanc Год назад

it was about states rights... about states not having the right( or having the right) to have slaves...... not sure why that would be a secret myth lmfao

@Apocraphtica 3 года назад

What is better: shoe licking or valor?

@MiloDC Год назад

Depends what you're fighting for. If your side is pro-slavery, get to lickin' them boots.

@TonyWright8121 5 лет назад

Yes these people right at what they’re saying but slavery is not the only thing of which they photo over they really were fighting over not just the states rights to own slaves but because they didn’t want to be under the sovereignty of the central government they were very Jeffersonian where is the north was very Hamiltonian yes slavery was the cause of the Civil War but I repeat it was not the only thing of which the south fork four they were fighting for a thing called sectionalism which is the loyalty and interest to your sectional region. See these people all the sudden the nurse that her saying that these people are southern their traders to the south they’re doing it because a lot of nor the nurse have taught them this way and they do it on purpose just so white people in the south will get rid of the monuments the Confederate flag this is why we can’t have the flecked day is because of these people these peoples are traitors to the south we believe in the south of having a dissolvable independent confederation of sovereign states we did not believe in indivisible nation with a national sovereign government and yes slavery was the central issue between the north and the south the north just one of the nation to be all industrial that’s what I mainly they were against slavery very few northerners were abolitionists. They mainly wanted slavery to be confined to the south because industry produced way more than agriculture they didn’t want the nation to be a nation of agriculture plus the number one reason is because slavery was so in moral it wouldn’t have one more Europeans to the nation the first thing I said about slavery that industry produce more than agriculture yet slavery was at the center of the sales agricultural economy. And the south agricultural economy is their way of life or was their way of life where is the north way of life was industry and free labor and the south not only wanted to be represented as a slave states but they wanted to be represented as independent sovereign states with the central government repressed they didn’t want to be under the Tierney of the central government they believed if they could come in to the union Fraley they could freely leave. Not only would they be destroyed if slavery was taken away but they would also be destroyed if the national government became the final authority over the nation that means the states would have to submit to the authority of the national government or sovereignty of the national government it would show that the national government is sovereign and most people were loyal to their states versus there country last where is the north was devoted to the nation as a whole a concept code nationalism. These two Southerners I think or against the confederate flag in their liberal and they want to get rid of the confederate flag they’re horrible people who do they think they are they have one hell of a nerve. So there I am looking at both sites it was not just the south that light to the myth of the lost cause because I said before that yes what these people are saying is true everything they’re saying is true but they just want to say that the south only Ford for slavery at least that’s the impression that they give off and they didn’t fight for anything else that’s a lie the South Fork for other things than just slavery I don’t care if slavery cost of war or not. so there I am looking at both sides it was not just the south that live to the myth of the lost cause because I said before that yes what these people are saying is true everything they’re saying is true but they just want to say that the south only Ford for slavery at least that’s the impression that they give off and they didn’t fight for anything else that’s a lie the South Fork for other things than just slavery I don’t care if slavery cost of war or not it was about slavery as well as have ring sovereignty in the states and not being under the Tierney of the central government and plus the Southwest loyal to their states and loyal to their interest which was slavery and being under a state sovereign nation. But the north won therefore we’re in indivisible nation and we have a national sovereign government we are no longer the states sovereign nation that we once were with this sent a government being suppressed. I think that the south should be honored and what the photo for just like the north did the north fork for what they fought for the south fought for what they fought for and OK a lot of monuments were he wrecked it during the myth of the lost cause and during the time of segregation but we’re past that we should keep them up in the flag to as symbols of. I’ve what we overcame as a nation. the end.. .

@Putaspellonyou 4 года назад

They also fought for punctuation and competent sentence structure, Tony. Clearly, they lost.

@SouthernGentleman 3 года назад

There is no lost cause, only historical facts. Were Confederates U.S veterans? Yes Were there Confederates that fought in wars after the civil war for the U.S? Yes Were there Confederates that were anti slavery? Yes Did all Confederates have slavery? No they were the minority. Did the union have slave states? Yes, 5

@SouthernGentleman 3 года назад

@1861 In Their Own Words Many were yes. “In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution, is a moral & political evil in any Country.” - Robert E Lee 1856 “While we see the Course of the final abolition of human slavery is onward, & we give it the aid of our prayers & all justifiable means in our power we must leave the progress as well as the result in his hands who Sees the end” - Robert E Lee 1856 “I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South. So fully am I satisfied of this, as regards Virginia especially, that I would cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war, and have suffered all I have suffered, to have this object attained.” - Robert E Lee 1865 “I have always been in favor of Emancipation.” - Robert E Lee “We're were not fighting for the perpetuation of slavery, but for the principles of states rights and free trade, and in defense of our homes which we were ruthlessly invaded.” -VMI Jewish Cadet Moses Jacob Ezekiel “Let us stand together. We may differ in color, but not in sentiment. Many things have been said about me which are wrong, and which white and black persons here, who stood by me through the war, can contradict.” - Nathan Bedford Forrest “African Americans should have the right to vote.” - Confederate Colonel John Salmon Ford The confederate soldier “Fought because he was provoked, intimidated, and ultimately invaded” -James Webb Born Fighting a History of the Scoth-Irish in America “I was fighting for my home, and he had no business being there” -Virginia confederate Soldier Frank Potts Mathew Maury tried to end slavery before the war. Stonewall illegally started one of the first African American churches in the south. James Longstreet was shot defending African Americans in New Orleans Joseph Wheeler led the Rough Riders and African American buffalo soldiers in Cuba

@SouthernGentleman 3 года назад

@1861 In Their Own Words Only uneducated and brainwashed people like you would think that all confederates were evil slave owners

@SouthernGentleman 3 года назад

@1861 In Their Own Words Were all unionists anti slavery? No “Slavery is their rightful place.” - Union General Sherman In an 1863 letter to his home state congressman, Elihu Washburne, Grant summed up his pre-war attitude: “I never was an Abolitionist,” he said, “not even what could be called anti-slavery.” “I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races … I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Africans, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.” - Abraham Lincoln

@SouthernGentleman 3 года назад

@1861 In Their Own Words And if they fought for the Union they would be fighting for a nation where slavery was legal and only banned as a military tactic. No home is a decent choice

@SouthernGentleman 3 года назад

First. We, the people of the State of Tennessee, waiving any expression of opinion as to the abstract doctrine of secession, but asserting the right, as a free and independent people, to alter, reform, or abolish our form of government in such manner as we think proper, do ordain and declare that all the laws and ordinances by which the State of Tennessee became a member of the Federal Union of the United States of America are hereby abrogated and annulled, and that all the rights, functions, and powers which by any of said laws and ordinances were conveyed to the Government of the United States, and to absolve ourselves from all the obligations, restraints, and duties incurred thereto; and do hereby henceforth become a free, sovereign, and independent State. Second. We furthermore declare and ordain that article 10, sections 1 and 2, of the constitution of the State of Tennessee, which requires members of the General Assembly and all officers, civil and military, to take an oath to support the Constitution of the United States be, and the same are hereby, abrogated and annulled, and all parts of the constitution of the State of Tennessee making citizenship of the United States a qualification for office and recognizing the Constitution of the United States as the supreme law of this State are in like manner abrogated and annulled. Third. We furthermore ordain and declare that all rights acquired and vested under the Constitution of the United States, or under any act of Congress passed in pursuance thereof, or under any laws of this State, and not incompatible with this ordinance, shall remain in force and have the same effect as if this ordinance had not been passed. - Tennessee We, the people of the State of North Carolina in convention assembled, do declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained, That the ordinance adopted by the State of North Carolina in the convention of 1789, whereby the Constitution of the United States was ratified and adopted, and also all acts and parts of acts of the General Assembly ratifying and adopting amendments to the said Constitution, are hereby repealed, rescinded, and abrogated. We do further declare and ordain, That the union now subsisting between the State of North Carolina and the other States, under the title of the United States of America, is hereby dissolved, and that the State of North Carolina is in full possession and exercise of all those rights of sovereignty which belong and appertain to a free and independent State. - North Carolina Whereas, in addition to the well-founded causes of complaint set forth by this convention, in resolutions adopted on the 11th of March, A.D. 1861, against the sectional party now in power in Washington City, headed by Abraham Lincoln, he has, in the face of resolutions passed by this convention pledging the State of Arkansas to resist to the last extremity any attempt on the part of such power to coerce any State that had seceded from the old Union, proclaimed to the world that war should be waged against such States until they should be compelled to submit to their rule, and large forces to accomplish this have by this same power been called out, and are now being marshaled to carry out this inhuman design; and to longer submit to such rule, or remain in the old Union of the United States, would be disgraceful and ruinous to the State of Arkansas: Therefore we, the people of the State of Arkansas, in convention assembled, do hereby declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained, That the "ordinance and acceptance of compact" passed and approved by the General Assembly of the State of Arkansas on the 18th day of October, A.D. 1836, whereby it was by said General Assembly ordained that by virtue of the authority vested in said General Assembly by the provisions of the ordinance adopted by the convention of delegates assembled at Little Rock for the purpose of forming a constitution and system of government for said State, the propositions set forth in "An act supplementary to an act entitled `An act for the admission of the State of Arkansas into the Union, and to provide for the due execution of the laws of the United States within the same, and for other purposes,'" were freely accepted, ratified, and irrevocably confirmed, articles of compact and union between the State of Arkansas and the United States, and all other laws and every other law and ordinance, whereby the State of Arkansas became a member of the Federal Union, be, and the same are hereby, in all respects and for every purpose herewith consistent, repealed, abrogated, and fully set aside; and the union now subsisting between the State of Arkansas and the other States, under the name of the United States of America, is hereby forever dissolved. And we do further hereby declare and ordain, That the State of Arkansas hereby resumes to herself all rights and powers heretofore delegated to the Government of the United States of America; that her citizens are absolved from all allegiance to said Government of the United States, and that she is in full possession and exercise of all the rights and sovereignty which appertain to a free and independent State. We do further ordain and declare, That all rights acquired and vested under the Constitution of the United States of America, or of any act or acts of Congress, or treaty, or under any law of this State, and not incompatible with this ordinance, shall remain in full force and effect, in nowise altered or impaired, and have the same effect as if this ordinance had not been passed. - Arkansas Whereas the Government of the United States, in the possession and under the control of a sectional party, has wantonly violated the compact originally made between said Government and the State of Missouri, by invading with hostile armies the soil of the State, attacking and making prisoners the militia while legally assembled under the State laws, forcibly occupying the State capitol, and attempting through the instrumentality of domestic traitors to usurp the State government, seizing and destroying private property, and murdering with fiendish malignity peaceable citizens, men, women, and children, together with other acts of atrocity, indicating a deep-settled hostility toward the people of Missouri and their institutions; and Whereas the present Administration of the Government of the United States has utterly ignored the Constitution, subverted the Government as constructed and intended by its makers, and established a despotic and arbitrary power instead thereof: Now, therefore, Be it enacted by the general assembly of the State of Missouri, That all political ties of every character new existing between the Government of the United States of America and the people and government of the State of Missouri are hereby dissolved, and the State of Missouri, resuming the sovereignty granted by compact to the said United States upon admission of said State into the Federal Union, does again take its place as a free and independent republic amongst the nations of the earth. - Missouri

@davidkillen2207 2 года назад

The war wasn’t a Lost Cause

@hamonryechinaski180 3 года назад

Interesting and thankfully not woke. History in the US is in crisis at present. Unfortunately the over politicisation/simplification of history is always a disaster but has become almost a cult by the left in the US. 'The past is a foreign country' is truest saying I know and looking at history through modern morals (and politics) is a road to perdition. The strength of primary sources and their writings, speeches whatever should always carry more weight than any modern revisiting and inserting woke politics is just a disaster. The truth is usually somewhere in the middle but things like Bury my heart at Wounded Knee can have seismic effect when victors versions of events have previously not been challenged. However the current war on Robert E Lee and all things confederate, for example, is making a mockery of US history by putting modern day morals and progressive politics over any and all historical figures that are icons in US history. Trying to rewrite or dismiss history to seemingly undermine pride and patriotism is particularly damaging, especially for USA that seems to have a loud, bullying minority attacking everything from The Constitution and historical heroes to US institutions. Madness

@philmienus2382 2 года назад

The left were not the ones who whitewashed the civil war. You conservatives are at it again with your victimhood tactics

@Ben00000 Год назад

Brother, if the word "woke" enters your brain in a conversation directly about the objective kidnapping, torture, and forced labor of men, women, and children just because they were black, you need to re-evaluate your life. There were many abolitionists in the US when the Confederacy seceded; it wasn't some divine revelation only after the war that slavery was morally wrong. If the low-hanging fruit of "the aims of the Confederacy were racist" is too much for you to grapple with, you're in the vast minority and need a reality check.

@TonyWright8121 7 лет назад

It is true that the South fought to defend slavery because the south seceded to protect slavery. But not everyone that is not every soldier that fought for the Confederacy for just and for slavery. It was rich man in the south that started the Civil War because they wanted slavery for themselves they didn't care that the poor I had slaves, although to be fair poor non-slave owners supported slavery and would fight for slavery. 33% of the upper south benefit financially from slavery they would work on plantations themselves they would own slaves or they would rent slaves the same thing with 50% of the lower south. But slavery was a social benefit to the whole south because of white supremacy. Rich people obviously owned the majority of slaves, throughout the whole south. Middle-class people would own as much as 1 to 2 or maybe even as many as 3 to 5 slaves, these men were yeoman farmers who owned slaves if they were so lucky and fortunate to do so. Other than that the common man that financially benefited from slavery would work on plantations themselves or rent slaves. However not everyone in the south went to war to fight for slavery they also fought to defend their land because right after the attacks on fort Sumter rich man would leave the cause of the war or poor people were volunteering. In 1861 it was a "rich man's war and a rich man's fight." poor people would fight for slavery. But because of the blockade which was formed when Lincoln sent 7500 troops down to the south to put down the rebellion, they formed the blockade that meant that no imports and exports could leave the south or come into the south which meant the South had a very hard time getting supplies. Although there were ships that were called blockade runners the word speed through the blockade and manage to give the self supplies if it needed. This also affected the south from getting food. The blockade was designed to start the south as well. Plus more than soldiers would conquer certain southern areas and subjugate those areas so they would come back to the union that's why the north fought the Civil War so the south would come back to the Union. Most northern soldiers did not go to war to abolish slavery. Slavery became the focal point for northerners in 1863, during Lincolns Emancipation Proclamation. Now first in 1862, The self issued their conscription act which prevented anyone who had 20 or more slaves from fighting, that's why most rich people who own 20 or more slaves abandoned the cause while poor people who owned very little slaves way less than 20, we're required to fight it was set up that way. Therefore in 1862 it became, instead of "a rich man's war and a rich man's fight," to a "rich man's war but a poor man's fight." Therefore the Poor men of the south had to do most of the fighting. In 1863 during the Emancipation Proclamation the north instituted it's conscription act which forced people of the union to fight because they were losing the war. There are four of the Civil War was about slavery as well as the south defending its land, (some in the south did not fight for slavery at all so I'm just fought to defend their land) while at the same time it was about the north preserving the union as well as abolishing slavery in order to preserve the union. That's why abolishing slavery became the focal point. Therefore the Civil War is about slavery preserving the union and southern loyalty. But slavery start of the war therefore slavery was the primary cause of the war which led into preserving the union for the north and fighting to defend the south for Southerners, not just an only for both sides of fighting for or against slavery. Therefore if it weren't for slavery there would be no Civil War, although some people say slavery is the cause of the war but why men fought on either side is a different story. The American Civil War primary cause: slavery . For the south The secondary causes of the Civil War loyalty to the south or defense of the South. The American Civil War for the north: although slavery calls the war the North fought to preserve the union abolishing slavery became became the focal point of preserving the union, so the north could win the war plus they conscripted men from their side. In the end in April 9 1865, General Lee surrendered to General Grant and the Civil War was over and it was a victory for the north the north of won, due to having more men more supplies and the industry to back them up. As far as the monuments are concerned they should have left them up and should not have taken them down in Louisiana and that goes for the rest of the south all they had to do was make corrections and say the south did indeed to fight to defend it slant but slavery start of the war in the south did fight to defend slavery that's all they had to do was make corrections if they were going to tell the truth. The north now has it Smith called the "Victor Story." First the Southline now the north lies and says that the server was all about states rights, while the north now says that the Civil War was all about slavery( although not everyone in the south lies just like not everyone in the north lies there are people both north and south that will look at both sides not just stay all one-sided like most people do today). Only today The tables have turned against the south and now the north lies or I should say a bunch of extremists lie and say that the Civil War was all just and about slavery and nothing more. It's all a control issue these people who do this or no more than the modern radical Republicans scalawags and carpetbaggers. There are no more than a bunch of extremists who want their way and say you can't have the Confederate flag you can't have the monuments because it offends us I've said my piece I'm done goodbye

@PeruvianSmore 7 лет назад

You perfectly emphasized the civil war motives in a well crafted response but I disagree with you on one thing, the statues. The statues are not being taken down and thrown away, rather, moved to museums where they can be viewed in context of the whole war. Many statue plaques paint the idea that white supremacy is good and reinstates confederate ideas. Granted; you could keep the statues up if you just put another plaque next to it that said "This is racist and untrue, this sensitive content remains due to preserving ALL of American history." However, as of now, the statues have no place in an America striving for equality.

@TonyWright8121 5 лет назад

Brian Glover Buddy why don’t you shut up I don’t want to hear your car mature of the left or your left test Marxist socialist you’re the one who wants to destroy this nation

@tomcockburn653 5 лет назад

@Joshua Chamberlain you admire him because he's a f****** liar?

@Putaspellonyou 4 года назад

True, most southern soldiers did not come from slave-owning families. That is not to say they were not fighting to preserve the institution and economic system of slavery, which many of them benefited from. Also, owning of slaves was an indicator of wealth and status. Plenty of young men hoped to one day be part of acceptable society the same way so many young men today think owning a kick-ass car will get you respect.

@jackmurphy4832 3 года назад

“The tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants from time to time.”

@elrjames7799 4 года назад

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union." oops!

@CountBifford 4 года назад

That was Lincoln's position, not that of the general public in the North. In fact, you could rewrite this as "the people want slavery abolished, so I have no choice but to go along with it".

@elrjames7799 4 года назад

@@CountBifford Well: "you could rewrite it", but how would that make it any more valid than the original statement? Maryland, Missouri, Kentucky and Delaware (which were 'slave states') supported the Union.

@worm2576 4 года назад

Elr James and yet he abolished slavery

@elrjames7799 4 года назад

@@worm2576 The emancipation proclamation (applicable only in those States not fighting for the Union) wasn't made until 1863; the 13th Amendment not until 1865.

@erraticonteuse 4 года назад

Fun fact: Lincoln had already drafted the Emancipation Proclamation when he wrote this letter. He was just waiting for the right moment to issue it. It kind of defeats the purpose of "waiting for the right moment" if you're going to tell one of the country's most famous journalists (this was to Horace Greeley) about it ahead of time. TL;DR: Don't believe everything a politician says to a journalist.

@thepamela050 5 лет назад

Gone with the Wind the best movie ever...I guess doing a movie about Yankees isn't as interesting.

@mintlatte9934 4 года назад

I actually love watching that movie. It’s a beautiful depiction of the destruction of the southern way of life.🍿🍿🍿

@thepamela050 4 года назад

@@mintlatte9934 Only destruction is when Yankees move into the South..Notice the Southerners don't move up North in droves like Yankees do to us here in the South..

@Putaspellonyou 4 года назад

It's shit

@thepamela050 4 года назад

@@Putaspellonyou yes it is the Shit..It was great.

@Putaspellonyou 4 года назад

@@thepamela050 it was at best a load of sentimental, tacky crap; at its worst a vile piece of southern revisionist propaganda no more redeeming than Birth of a Nation.

@danbushnell8043 Год назад

The south was right in the conflict

@travisbayles870 Год назад

I salute the Confederate Flag with affection reverence and undying devotion to the cause for which it stands

@vehx9316 Год назад

So you support slavery then.

@travisbayles870 Год назад

@@vehx9316 The Confederacy fought to preserve and protect its Constitutional rights

@vehx9316 Год назад

@@travisbayles870 and again rights to what ? Don't say secession or drafting it's own regulations because those are just a means to an end. There must be a end goal to it . "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product, which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth." That is your so called "rights" there.

@travisbayles870 Год назад

@@vehx9316 Theres nothing wrong with Seccession

@vehx9316 Год назад

@@travisbayles870 again you are dodging the question, why did the south seceded. It's because of slavery. That makes the whole exist of the CSA inhumane,