Honoring CSA Soliders

Should Confederate Soliders Be Honored?

  • Yes

    Votes: 52 59.1%
  • No

    Votes: 27 30.7%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 9 10.2%

  • Total voters
    88
Status
Closed

Code Blue

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
3,977
Caribbean
I never said kill. You can do it by spreading pro-Union propaganda, by teaching ordinary Southerners why is slavery wrong, by informing them that the Confederacy started the war, that blacks deserve human rights, etc. I mean, you would probably not be able to convince the older generations, but the younger generations...perhaps. Now, of course, this whole enterprise would probably also be condemned by certain elements in the North as well.
Why do you think that certain "elements" have not been doing that for 150 years? Just because you spread manure doesn't mean anything will grow.

The legality of secession is not really the heart of the Lost Cause. The main elements are:
1. the South didn't fight for slavery
2. the South only lost because the North had more resources
3. the Southern soldier was more valiant than his Northern counterpart
stuff like that.
That's your version of it, and I have made none of these claims, here, (though the northern resources are exactly why the states should note have seceded during a Republican Presidency. I argued the foolishness of southern leadership with you for about 5 pages, a couple of years ago)..

I am not on either side of this, and I see the "myths" of both sides.

The Wiki version of Lost Cause starts out that the - cause was "just." That is the essence. The rest are tangents. Separation is either legally "just" or not. I have always posted here that the Southern argument is essentially legalistic and the Northern argument is essentially moralistic.

And this is what shapes the arguments. Northern supporters want to argue morality, which leads to extravagant or mythical Southern defenses of slavery as a benefit to a race of savages. Southern supporters want to argue the Constitution did not foreclose the independence declared in 76, which leads to extravagant Northern myths about the what the Constitution means.

And also, my reading is that there were agents provocateur (and not patriotic either) in both camps fomenting war.
 
Jun 2019
67
Chicago Suburbs
(though the northern resources are exactly why the states should note have seceded during a Republican Presidency
Actually most of them seceded during Buchanan's democratic presidency. And you have subscribed to the primary tenet of the "Lost Cause" - that secession was legal.
 
Likes: Edratman

Code Blue

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
3,977
Caribbean
Because a person wasn't convicted of treason doesn't mean he was not, in fact, a traitor.
Is that your opinion, or are you quoting Stalin during the purges? lol

The definition of traitor is based on actions not being convicted of those actions. Some things are simply evident; there was a southern rebellion, after all. And people took part in it.
But it isn't evident. Its an opinion. If there were a clause in the Constitution that said, "no state shall reassume its delegated powers," it would be "evident," ie, there would be evidence.. But the opposite is true.
 

Code Blue

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
3,977
Caribbean
Actually most of them seceded during Buchanan's democratic presidency. And you have subscribed to the primary tenet of the "Lost Cause" - that secession was legal.
Nice catch, but you know what I meant. They should have seceded in 1857. Or followed the advice of Alexander Stephens, and realize that slavery was safer inside the union than outside. I'd make the Dems favorites to win the WH in 64 without secession.

As to your other point, you have yet another version of Lost Cause, differing from Maki and Wikipedia. It's like everyone has his own definition, which makes the definition something of a myth. I "subscribe" to the US Constitution (and all the founding documents). That there is no prohibition against so-called secession is a certitude.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2018
378
Sturgeon Lake Mn.
But it isn't evident. Its an opinion. If there were a clause in the Constitution that said, "no state shall reassume its delegated powers," it would be "evident," ie, there would be evidence.. But the opposite is true.
That's your opinion.
 

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,036
Republika Srpska
Why do you think that certain "elements" have not been doing that for 150 years? Just because you spread manure doesn't mean anything will grow.
Oh please, the Southern view of the American Civil War was pretty much the accepted version in the popular culture for a long, long time. Multiple famous movies like Gone with the Wind and Birth of the Nation spread Lost Cause propaganda and Lost Cause history was in Southern textbooks. If certain elements as you called them have pressured the South, then how come the South is full of Confederate monuments and statues of Confederate leaders. How could these "elements" allow this? Hell, even Presidents like Wilson believed in the Lost Cause.
 

Code Blue

Ad Honorem
Feb 2015
3,977
Caribbean
Oh please, the Southern view of the American Civil War was pretty much the accepted version in the popular culture for a long, long time. Multiple famous movies like Gone with the Wind and Birth of the Nation spread Lost Cause propaganda and Lost Cause history was in Southern textbooks. If certain elements as you called them have pressured the South, then how come the South is full of Confederate monuments and statues of Confederate leaders. How could these "elements" allow this? Hell, even Presidents like Wilson believed in the Lost Cause.
Maki, you are arguing stereotypes that you cannot quantify, that I don't believe, and that are irrelevant.

They didn't have the southern version where I grew up. I was 40 years old the first time I heard "war of northern aggression" and didn't know what that meant. I sure wasn't taught any lawfulness of secession. First time I had the argument put to me by a South Carolina lawyer, I thought it was a form of insanity.

The lawfulness of secession is something I figured out on my own, near the end of 2017. I was posting here for three years, cross-examining what few southerners there are, and usually they had no answer. And now, it is the other side that has no answers.

My argument, for this thread, is that the poor grunt soldier, most of them, in almost any war is an exploited fool. Look at Goering's testimony at Nuremberg.. He says, of course the average guy does not want war, there is nothing in it for him. He goes on to say that is what leaders are for, to brainwash them. You must at least suspect the Maine, the Gulf of Tonkin, WMD: these were hoaxes. Why would your cherished wars be immune from the disease of political misrepresentation?

And you arguing to me, the South hasn't been brainwashed enough?
 
Jun 2019
67
Chicago Suburbs
As to your other point, you have yet another version of Lost Cause, differing from Maki and Wikipedia.
I think we all agree on the primary concepts of the Lost Cause ideology. I don't think there is an exhaustive list of those concepts, but the main ones are:
1. Secession was legal
2. The war was about anything except slavery - but slavery was a good thing
3. 1 southern hero was better than any 10 Yankees
4. The USA only won because they had a huge advantage in men and materiel.
5. Nothing that went wrong in the war can be blamed on R. E. Lee
 
Likes: Maki
Status
Closed

Similar History Discussions