A Class War

[thea_447]

Tommy, <grin> I would certainly Hope that Neil would be less duplicitous than Mr. Lincoln,and no doubt a much better looking gentleman. Wild Rose Greenhow was quite a lady too,but her attributes as a brilliant spy make her a favorite of mine.

Perhaps debate is not the word I was looking for. What I would like would be more of a round table with the Northern view and the Southern view represented. And I would absolutely love to have more involvement from others. As to a limit of words, that sounds like a reasonable idea to me. And if more people joined in, it would be far less noticeable if one of us is "out" for a spell because of ill health, etc. The more the merrier is the maxim, I would think.

I will be fairly easy to please as to the topic. Any ideas on subject matter f}}}rom anyone out there?

Please, we would like to have a lot of people join in the fray. It will be fun. After all, we're honorable people here. (oiling sidearms, smiling slightly ........) Thea

[unionblue]

Thea &amp; Tommy, I think we are on to something here. I too, would like to see more involvement from others here at this board. Let me suggest the following.

Why don't we start a new thread, with the starting subject with something like this: "What, in your PERSONAL opinion, was the cause of the Civil War and how did you come to your conclusion?"

I am not so much for limiting a persons answer, though. Sometimes though I think we could avoid quoting books back and forth and just lay our own views and opinions out there for all to see. Can you see what I mean?

I think it would be a great way to get some background on each of the players/posters and clear the decks letting everyone know where you are coming from.

What do you all think?
Unionblue
PS I glory in the idea of looking like Old Abe, but alas, I come nowhere close in that department. Consider me looking more like US Grant, a man who I think along with Abe, George and John Adams, saved this country.

Ok....a thread about feelings not just facts. I like it. What should it be called? Who should start it? Hmmmmmmmm

The only reason i thought certain limits to length of each post was cause it is easier to stay on topic i think. But as always I am probally wrong. On the other hand. having a thread with no topic. A free form one that can flow in any direction is VERY appealing to me. Who knows where it can go?

I'm all for it..

only thing I can think to name the thread is....Personal Opinions

YMOS
tommy

[unionblue]

Tommy, I ain't saying you can't mix facts with your opinions, but it seems like too often we get onto a subject and then we all try to bury each other in book quotations. It seems like sometimes we are afraid to put our own opinions on the line and see if they can take the hit.

Just my opinion, of course. Why don't we wait for Thea to give her two cents worth and then we'll kick off the new thread?

Unionblue

Neil,
I prefer my giving my opinion than having to list footnotes, sources etc. I will if asked of course. I trust what I say is truth. I have never fabricated anything in a civil war exchange. If I do not believe what a person is stating is true I do my own research to test the veracity of what they are saying myself. Then I can point out where it was wrong or concede it was perhaps right...grudgingly of course. I like the concept of a less formal exchange of ideas. That was one reason I did not jump in on some of the other threads. Lack of humor, understanding and the expectation I had to meet a criteria for exchange was not my forte.

I understand finding a well written idea or fact so I can cut paste it. It saves me lots of time. Yet also it dehumanizes me doesn’t it. It makes it appear I am being told what to think or believe by others. That is why I dislike Historians by and large. Take MacPherson. Everyone says how great and respected he is but in World News and Report he compared the Confederacy to the Nazis. That was his opinion. So why should I not think he will use his personal opinions to influence the facts he gathers. I know a guy, (I will not mention him on this forum but feel free to e mail me.) He has by far the most encyclopedic knowledge of pure facts of the WBTS of anyone I have ever met. Yet he is not a historian. History changes with historians. I love facts. But I withhold the right to interpret them any way I please. I do not need to have it done for me.

I love a free exchange ideas, feelings, interpretations of facts that people have.

As to having concern about taking a hit for my personal opinion........I think I have been beat up pretty good here at times. I have been personally offended. Angry. Upset and very insulted and hurt. But I expect to experience that. They are feelings. I am about feelings as well as ideas. Cause it is feelings that dictate to us what we believe. Not facts alone. That is why the spouse is always the last to know when their mate is cheating. Yet upon reflection realizes they knew all along..They ignore the feelings. They manipulate the facts to help their denial......to protect their feelings.....

I have no idea if any of this makes any sense. As you know I have a tendency to ramble incoherently.


I eagerly await your and Thea’s decision on this. .....Kinda funny but in a way we already started eh?

As Always
YMOS
tommy

[thea_447]

Hi Guys,
I agree that starting a new thread will be the best way to kick this thing off. What about a title like "Personal opinions on the cause of the WBTS?" I loathe to call this the Civil War.

Certainly we can agree however that what we've read, the region we live in,etc. have colored our personal opinions.

I believe that as long as we can back up with fact what we state then a lot of leeway should be given.

As far as people joining this board, I've found this to be a very friendly place. Considering on the previous board we had members who actually stooped to name calling and got away with it, but you couldn't VEER OFF TOPIC! I found somehow that being called a name akin to "street-walker" quite offensive, not mention having my parentage questioned. But that doesn't happen here and I appreciate that fact immensely.

Michael, if you are reading this, I noticed your remarks on the Tenth Amendment and indeed it was a legitimate question. I too have understood throughout life that EVERY single state wouldn't ratify until the secession clause was included. It's those kinds of questions that make us all want to learn more! And that should be encouraged by us all.

For instance, I brought up why wasn't the South }}} offered money for their slaves before the war? Actually here I found out that they were, although I would love to know if it was an equitable price or was it farcical? I still want to know that.

I am new here too and I would love to have you join this group and we can all learn together.
Sometimes the vernacular that we all use might come across entirely differently to another person, but don't take offense, please. No one means any harm here, I'm sure. Believe me, I KNOW when someone is being offensive.

It takes time to get to know members of a new group and they don't realize how easily they converse because they've known one another a long time. Let's all try to get to know one another better.

I leave it to you Neil, and Tommy, to let us all know where and when.
I'm eagerly waiting.

Advance the flag!............Thea

[unionblue]

Alright, it looks like we three agree, now let us hope we can drag a few others from the board into our new thread.

If you all don't mind, I'll lead off and start the new thread and with the subject I proposed, "What, in your PERSONAL opinion, was the cause of the Civil War/War Between The States/The War of Rebellion/etc., and how did you come to your conclusion?"

Sorry, Thea, but I can hardly stand the WBTS handle either and I certainly do not like to call that conflict, "The Late Unpleasantness" as I feel the takes away from the sacrifice made by those who fought and died from both sides.

Why don't we let Tommy pick what phrase we would insert in the title of our new thread? Tommy, just pick a name for the War and insert it in the phrase, "What, in your PERSONAL opinion, was the cause of the ________________, and how did you come to your conclusion?"

I trust Tommy, I don't (hardly ever) always agree with him, but I trust him. And you too, Thea, just not when you pick out a title for the war!

Do we agree with everything else? When Tommy picks the war title, I'll begin the new thread and lead off. Give you two plenty of time to sharpen your knives and load your weapons.

Unionblue

How about...."What, in your PERSONAL opinion, was the cause of the ___WAR_____________, and how did you come to your conclusion?" .....it is simple and on this forum what other war would we be discussing?

YMOS
tommy

[unionblue]

Sounds good to me, and your right, what other war could we be talking about?

Unionblue

[thea_447]

http://docsouth.unc.edu/mckim/mckim.html
Concerning the University of Virginia
from an narrative by a young Confederate Soldier:

"The number itself is significant. If five hundred died, there must have been more than two thousand five hundred, perhaps as many as three thousand, on the rolls of the Confederate armies, who called this University mother. We have no accurate register of the number of alumni who were living in 1861 and fit for military service. But we do know that of the six hundred and twenty-five who were students here when the tocsin of war sounded, five hundred and thirty hailed from the seceding States, and about five hundred and fifteen went to the front. Two of the professors followed their students,--our illustrious professor of Greek, Basil L. Gildersleeve, who was wounded fighting with Gordon in the valley of Virginia--he still lives, thank God! to adorn American scholarship--and Lewis Minor Coleman, our right royal professor of Latin, who fell gloriously while commanding a battalion of artillery at Fredericksburg.
These numbers are significant. They bear eloquent witness, not only to the gallantry of our brother alumni, but to the unanimity of the Southern people in that great struggle, and they afford convincing proof of the falsity of the theory, held by some historians of the Civil War, that the uprising of the Southern people was the result of a conspiracy of a few ambitious leaders. When we see five hundred and fifteen out of six hundred and twenty-five students,1 representing the flower of the intellect and culture of the South-- its yeomen as well as its aristocracy--spring to arm at the first sound of the long roll, we realize that the resistance offered to coercion in 1861 was in no sense artificial, but free and spontaneous, and that it was the act of the people, not of the politicians.