 | | American History American History Forum - United States, Canada, Mexico, Central and South America |
December 3rd, 2011, 04:22 PM
|
#11 | | Son of the Morning Star
Joined: Dec 2010 From: The state that is...Round on both ends and Hi in the middle Posts: 2,613 | Quote:
Originally Posted by Salah I'm inclined to fully agree with you. Some Abolitionists claimed it was their duty to help "civilize" the blacks, and serve as a guiding hand to them - operating under the assumption they were too stupid to function unaided. |
Thanks Salah...it's a shame we have to go through so much to accept others. Imagine there's...wait, about to break into a song... | | |
| |
December 3rd, 2011, 05:23 PM
|
#12 | | Epicurean
Joined: Mar 2009 From: Texas Posts: 24,311 | Quote:
Originally Posted by jegates I think almost everybody (North and South) during the 1860s would be labled a racist by today's definition.. | One has to look no further than by Lincoln's own mouth in his
debates with Senator Douglas for more confusion on the issue
of race.
| | |
| |
December 3rd, 2011, 08:46 PM
|
#13 | | Historian
Joined: Mar 2010 From: Baltimore, Maryland Posts: 1,821 | Quote:
Originally Posted by tjadams One has to look no further than by Lincoln's own mouth in his debates with Senator Douglas for more confusion on the issue
of race. | And, a lot of abolitionists assumed that the freed slaves would be sent "back" to Africa (where? Liberia?), in spite of the fact that most slaves were born in America, some had roots here as long as 200 years before and many didn't even know what part of Africa they had come from. We're still evolving on issues that surround race, but not much evolution had occurred back in 1860.
| | |
| |
December 3rd, 2011, 09:55 PM
|
#14 | | Rplegacy Emperor
Joined: Jun 2009 From: western Terranova Posts: 3,282 | Quote:
Originally Posted by Salah Lee was probably not a racist by how that word would have been defined in the 19th Century. I've read that he disliked the institution of slavery, but his loyalty to Virginia outweighed his moral convictions. | personally, i think that was the case with most confederates, especially since most of the confederate soldiers probably didnt own slaves Quote:
Originally Posted by jegates I think almost everybody (North and South) during the 1860s would be labled a racist by today's definition. Even if a person was against slavery at the time, more than likely they still felt superior to blacks.
Lee was most likely no exception. | agreed
| | |
| |
December 4th, 2011, 04:46 AM
|
#15 | | Southern Unionist
Joined: Aug 2010 From: VA Posts: 5,321 |
Lee's attitude was typical of the period. He spoke against slavery as an abstract evil, but nevertheless owned slaves himself and had at least one I'm aware of beaten for trying to escape. Lee and many other southerners seemed to believe slavery to be the will of their god, and Lee also railed against abolitionists for their open opposition to the institution.
| | |
| |
December 4th, 2011, 07:14 AM
|
#16 | | Epicurean
Joined: Mar 2009 From: Texas Posts: 24,311 | Quote:
Originally Posted by skizzerflake And, a lot of abolitionists assumed that the freed slaves would be sent "back" to Africa (where? Liberia?), in spite of the fact that most slaves were born in America, some had roots here as long as 200 years before and many didn't even know what part of Africa they had come from. We're still evolving on issues that surround race, but not much evolution had occurred back in 1860. | Lincoln supported for a long time the <1816> American Colonization Society, which was the relocation of freed slaves. He later changed his mind.
| | |
| |
December 4th, 2011, 11:36 AM
|
#17 | | Historian
Joined: Jul 2011 Posts: 1,280 | Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord Lee's attitude was typical of the period. He spoke against slavery as an abstract evil, but nevertheless owned slaves himself and had at least one I'm aware of beaten for trying to escape. Lee and many other southerners seemed to believe slavery to be the will of their god, and Lee also railed against abolitionists for their open opposition to the institution. | Yeh, it is a myth that Lee was anti-slavery.
It would have been very hard for Lee to lead on invasion of his own state.
He was in a difficult position for various reasons since his wife's plantation was just accross from Washington. The Union used his land to bury the war dead. His descendents eventually sued and were compensated. The land would be worth several billon $s today.
There was very mixed feelings in VA and all the slave states that seceeded after Fort Sumpter or did not seceed. In the deep south, there was a booming economy based on cotton and slavery. VA was partly an industrial state and many of the slaves had been sold down the river to the big cotton plantations in the deep south. Slavery, other economic issues, and cultural differences with the north were not as important as in the cotton states. The upper south was forced to take sides. The VA session convention initially voted 2-1 against secession, but seceeded rather than allow the Union arny to pass through VA.
| |
Last edited by betgo; December 4th, 2011 at 11:43 AM.
|
| |
December 5th, 2011, 05:45 AM
|
#18 | | Pseudo-American
Joined: Jul 2011 Posts: 2,701 |
Robert E. Lee once wrote in a letter:
"There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil."
But he did not consider slavery and slaves worth fighting a war over.
He joined the Southern Cause, because his only goal was the defense of his beloved State of virginia.
| | |
| |
December 5th, 2011, 07:36 AM
|
#19 | | Lecturer
Joined: Aug 2010 From: Nebraska Posts: 358 |
Well the one thing you can say about the man is that he is generally respected today as he was in his day. That says enough to me about the man.
I was at Arlington a couple of summers ago and his house was falling apart, hopefully they raised enough money to renovate the thing. I cannot begin to fathom how hard it would have been to live so close to the city that housed his enemy, and represented the country he loved.
| | |
| |
December 5th, 2011, 03:07 PM
|
#20 | | Historian
Joined: Jul 2011 Posts: 1,280 | Quote:
Originally Posted by dschardt Well the one thing you can say about the man is that he is generally respected today as he was in his day. That says enough to me about the man.
I was at Arlington a couple of summers ago and his house was falling apart, hopefully they raised enough money to renovate the thing. I cannot begin to fathom how hard it would have been to live so close to the city that housed his enemy, and represented the country he loved. | Lee's home and most of what is now the VA suburbs of DC was seized by the Union at the beginning of the war. He was away in the Confederate army, so he didn't look down from Arlington House on the capital once the war started.
The weird thing is that when Lee sided with the Confederacy, he knew the Union would probably take his plantation right away. However, it would have been hard to lead an invasion of his home state.
Lee was definitely antisecession. Don't know if he was really antislavery or that he didn't believe in the Confederate cause.
| | |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Similar Threads | | Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post | | A Robert E. Lee WHAT IF | mister | Speculative History | 8 | May 10th, 2009 05:17 AM | | Robert E. Lee | kahn | American History | 33 | March 20th, 2009 07:40 PM |
Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.
|  |