Why do we pick the sides we do?

[camp_cook]

Here I sit in front of this screen reading all these posts, and I wonder, why do we pick the sides we do? I would like to know why you picked the side of North or South? Please try to keep it civil, try not to hurt other broad members if you can. As for myself I went South. I come from a house of Yankee's, but I have alway been a Johnny Reb.. My ancestors come from Conn., Mass., N.H., and Maine, but the more I read of Mr. Lincoln the more I dislike him. That cruel war was fought over more than <u>slavery</u>a lone, sorry Neil. I had a teacher when I was young that did not teach the union way. Her great grandfather rode with a southern unit. I also like the southern uniform better too. So I do southern impression at re-enactments and sit around the camp fire talking about the war and drinking hot Dr. Pepper, sorry Tommy no cinnamon stick can not handle it.
As alway I will keep the cook fires going and the coffee hot,
John F. Wiedeburg

[gary]

I'm neutral. As latecomers, none of my ancestors fought in the war and I've not axe to grind with either side. It's all academic (and fun reading) for me.

Since you mentioned uniforms, the gray/butternut uniform of the Confederate was superior in the sense that in standing fight (not in rifle pits), grey shows up less than any other color (thanks to the white sulphurous smoke from all the guns). Fewer hits means fewer casualties. Additionally, even when stationary, grey and butternut tend to blend better with the earth than dark blue. Harder to detect is a good thing. One of the first thing the Indians in the 1st Mich SS (Co. K) did was roll in the dirt or dabble mud over their uniforms. The rest of the regiment watched and mimicked them.

[johan_steele]

It's a good question Mr Wiedeburg. I had seven ancestors wearing blue, suprisingly all survived the war. One w/ Sherman, one w/ the AoP, three fought against the Sioux and the rest spread throughout. My wife is black and I have no doubt that if the CSA had won... well I have too much self respect to buy a woman. I view the actions of the CSA as treason and frankly their reasons seem to be mostly slavery or slavery related. That in itself keeps me from being too sympathetic to their cause.

From the diaries and letters of the day there is quite the range of opinion on the war. I have to admit of those I have read... I find myself identifying with and supporting the Union.

The courage and tenacity shown by both sides is increadible and the stories of every soldier who served is an intriguing read.

[unionblue]

Mr. Wiedeburg, or may I call you John?

This is one question that I really have to think about as I have come to my present conclusions from about 180 degrees from how I once felt and viewed the Civil War.

I once truly believed the South was the victim and that the war had been all about unfair tariffs and States Rights, that slavery had very little to do with the conflict at all. Men who I trusted and considered my dearest friends (and still do, as a matter of fact) would have long talks with me and answer my questions concerning the causes of the war. Quite simply, I trusted them and their views and did very little research of my own.

I was mainly more concerned with the battle tactics of the times and the daily life of an average soldier (North or South) and how they got through such terrible times. Then I started attending reenactments and Civil War presentations. I wanted to make sure that I was giving historical, accurate information out to the school children, young adults and spectators that attended these events.

I started out by learning the equipment and clothing of a civil war soldier. How to load and fire a musket in nine-times, what food a soldier ate, how they talked, how they wrote letters, pitched a tent, what they carried on the march with them, army regulations, bayonet drill, civil war medicine, period customs and every thing else under the sun.

So I was great with technical information, battle tactics and weapons and such at these presentations. But I started getting general questions on the war itself. Why did it start? Why did the men fight? What were their reasons? And a lot more questions than I knew the answers to. So I started reading books at my local library and ordering books from the Military Book Club. And became very bewildered.

The more I read and debated with my Southern friends, the more confused I got. After about 200 books, endless hours of debate and more web searching than I thought possible, I have arrived at my present stand that the war was primarily about slavery. I repeat, I have arrived at MY present stand. I base this stand on historical documents of the time, research, reading and debate on boards with friends such as this.

I also realize, that I am still learning. I also realize that I am MUCH harder to convince now than as was when I first talked to my friends so long ago. But that's why I am on the 'side' that I am. I have no one to blame but me.

And John, I'm sorry that the more you read about Lincoln, the more you dislike him. For me, when I started reading about Lincoln, I had no more feeling for the man than I did about McKinley. Once I started researching him, I became more impressed with the man's ability to change and to see change in the midsts of all that chaos, a change for the better for his nation.

And John, its OK to think the war was more than about slavery. It is your opinion and you are entitled to it. But I remember what a ex-nun friend of mine told me once. More heresy is taught in schools than anywhere else.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

(Message edited by Unionblue on January 30, 2004)

[hoosier]

I was born in the North, raised in the North, and have always lived in the North. My great-grandfather served on the Union side in the Civil War.

Given the fact that I grew up where I did, it shouldn't be surprising that the fundamental premise underlying what I was taught in school about the Civil War was that the good guys won.

I didn't really get interested in the Civil War until I moved to the general vicinity of Gettysburg, about nine years ago. Incidentally, I didn't find out about my great-grandfather's service record until about that time.

Since moving here, I've been a lot more interested in the Civil War than I used to be, and have taken a lot more time to read about it and visit the sites and discuss it on Internet message boards and the like. I've learned a lot.

I still think of my great-grandfather and his comrades in the 16th Vermont as good guys. But if there's one thing I've learned, it is that the guys on the other side who were shooting at (and, fortunately for me, missing) great-grandpa were not bad guys. They were as brave and dedicated and devoted to the cause for which they were fighting as the Union guys were.

But even though I no longer think of the guys who lost the war as the bad guys, I still believe it is best that the Union won, simply because I believe that, on the whole, the area now known as the United States is better off as a single nation than it would have been if it had remained separated into USA and CSA.

[bill_torrens]

The following anecdote doesn’t exactly explain why I support the South, but it sheds light on the way I approach the subject.

The first words I can ever remember an American speaking in my presence were the following:

“Ain’t no brains in Dixie.”

It was in a Munich youth hostel. I was 17 years old and hitching around Europe during the summer before I went to university. Because of my then growing interest in the Civil war I took a great interest in what this group of young Americans were saying, and I distinctly remember the contempt with which this guy said the above words, and how his friends cackled in appreciation.

Up until then I had thought of the Civil War purely as an episode from history. This was the first time that I realised that the animosities still ran deeply. So when I returned home, and resumed watching American films and TV programmes, I started paying closer attention.

And that is when I gradually learned about the Stereotypical Stupid Southerner.

He was everywhere. In comedies he was an amiable buffoon, whereas in dramas he was an in-bred psychopath or a racist brute. It gradually dawned on me that the American entertainment industry routinely and unthinkingly slanders an entire region of its own country.

Three years later I got to visit America and spent a month in the South. I compared Southerners, as I actually found them, with how they were represented in the American media. I learned that almost everything written or spoken about them appeared to be untrue.

Since then I have spent more than 20 years studying mid-19th century American history. I know much more than I did then. But one thing that has never changed is that I simply do not believe a word that any non-Southern American says about that region or its people.

[hoosier]

So, when I say the Confederate soldiers "were as brave and dedicated and devoted to the cause for which they were fighting as the Union guys were," you don't believe a word of it?

Actually, I think your point is well taken. There certainly are Northerners who paint all Southerners with a broad brush, and they're wrong to do so. I'm sorry that your first experience with an American was with such a person.

On the other hand, I don't think it's right for those of the Southern persuasion to paint all Northerners with a broad brush, either.

(Message edited by Hoosier on February 01, 2004)

John,

I lean towards just a bit o' lemon in my hot Dr. Pepper. I only tend to put cinnamon stick in when I'm making a big pot of it.

I have pondered a considerable amount upon the question of "why do we pick the sides we do," yet, once distilled, my thoughts always come back to, "what makes you think I had a choice?"

As a man who was born in Kansas, raised in Tennessee from infancy, whose Grandfather fought for the Union army under General Thomas, and whose mother was English, you’’d think perhaps I’’d feel otherwise. Upon reflection though, I realize that whatever I am, I’m a Tennessean first. Much is made of there being just one cause of the war, the constant inveracity that the South seceded over slavery. But to me, my state did not. The bulk of the soldiers, materials, generals, as well as the battlefields, come from the 4 great states that seceded.... not for slavery, not because South Carolina fired on Sumter, but because they were simply doing the one thing they felt they had to do. They felt they truly had no choice. Neither do I. I’m a Southerner. Being Southern is a difficult thing to explain. I have attempted to do so before with less than stellar success. In the end, I guess it really does just boil down to, "It's a Southern Thang." Well, for as long as we are allowed to have a Southern Thang that is.

Or perhaps it is just intergral to who and what I am rather than a choice.

George,
You are correct, many Northerners do indeed think highly of the courage of the Southern soldier. However, the statements of their bravery almost always seem to contain a disclaimer that they were wrong, and therefore stupid, or wrong and just too cowardly to admit it, etc., somewhat akin to the bravery and loyalty of a dog, incapable of thinking at all. Much less for himself. Whereas historically they will acknowledge the courage of the Southerners during the war, modern interpretation of the South and true Southerners is a different kettle of catfish.

I can personally attest to the fact that here, in the great politically correct USA, it's open season on Southerners. You cannot humiliate, degrade or make fun of any ethnic group or culture anymore in the current climate of political correctness, without a lot of fallout. The only exception to this seems to be the Southern Culture and its people. You can make fun of, denigrate and slight the South and Southerners as much as you please. As far as I know you do not see a comparable, incessant abasement of northern culture, nor its people, in the media.

As to the "no brains in Dixie" remark Bill referred to, I recall Jimmy Breslin saying, on more than one occasion, that there was not a single intelligent person below the Mason Dixon line. These remarks were generally met with a nodding of heads.

While discussing this with a good friend of mine from Illinois, she said, "Actually, I don't think northerners ever even consider the "culture" of the South. We think of groups in need of protecting, like blacks and other "downtrodden" peoples, but it really never occurs to the folks up here that the South has its own vibrant culture, rich history, intelligent people and so much potential. The stereotype up north is that the South is all about stupid, mullet wearing, racist, gun-toting neanderthals with nothing of value to contribute to the country. I'm ashamed of myself for having bought into this view of the South, for having personally dismissed individuals simply because they were from the South, since I come from a family of transplanted Southerners. Unfortunately, the American media only deigns to give us negative images, modern as well as historical, of the South and its people."

I really respected and admired her having the courage to admit that to me. Knowing her as I do, I know it was a hard thing to realize much less admit to since I know she was less than proud of it.

Of course, George, you're completely right. To paint all Northerners with a broad brush would be equally as unjust. But I do not see the media doing that.

YMOS
tommy


(Message edited by aphillbilly on February 02, 2004)

[camp_cook]

Howdy,
I would like to take the time to thank you for responding to my post. Now that you have it has giving me some insight on you and why you feel as strongly as you do on subjects. Thank you again.
Neil you are right, you can point to one thing that started that war. But it was not slavery, it was economics that started the war. Its the haves and the have nots. Neil as an exarmy man you should know this, that all wars are started over this. In the South it was profitable to have slaves { not that I agree with in, slavery was and is still wrong.} As in the North it has a flood of emirgrants for its labor force that would work sublevel wages. The unfair tariffs put on the South by the Fed.. Payed for 90% Feds income that was used in the North. Such as harpor emprovements, and railroads, and the likes. As for the South, they did not get this done for them. They had to ship out raw product out to get finished ones in, and pay the high tariffs in doing so. I am sorry I will get off my soap box now before I say words I can not take back.
Tommy like you I am a tranplant. I came from Japan, and have lived most of my life in Kentucky. And Kentucky is my home and Kentucky is where I will stay. I was one of the lucky ones, I was taken in by my GI father's parants, and rised as thier own. My grandmother was very proud of her English Ancestor, Hugh Boulter who has a thing in the hall of heros in the Abby.
William do you see Hugh's offspring as traitors for taking up arms against the Crown when they came to this land?
As always I will keep the cook fire going and the coffee hot,
John F. Wiedeburg
P.S.
Thank you all again, and yes Neil you can call me anything, but not late to dinner.

[camp_cook]

<font size="+1">sorry about the spelling good Kentucky ed.</font>