The "False Cause?"

[peteanddelmar]

I suppose the point about this thread is this...

We know the southerners coined the term 'lost cause' but who took it to the next level?

Who specifically made the term a bad thing?

It was never intended to be. The term never would have been coined if there hadn't been a true voice behind the idea that the 'cause' whatever it was to each individual was a true cause. Meaning - important to each individual. To some that was in fact slavery. To others, it was to protect hearth and home.

So, for northerners, they were fighting originally as a call to arms just as the south was. What was their motivation? Or was there one initially?

You know what some southern boys in Virginia were fighting for by 1864?
Robert E Lee.
They'd have went home if he told them too.

 

[hanna260]

Advanced placement huh?
I had all my credits done for high school almost by the end of sophomore year so I got put in "advanced placement"....know what is was called?
A job! I worked 1/2 day my last 2 years of high school.
But you are waaaaay quicker than I was.......
Your mother needs to have you tested.
You might be TEACHING college in 2 years!

You're so very sweet. I do sort of want to be a professor. And I need a job. Okay. Okay. I shall stop derailing gunny's very good thread.

 

[rhettbutler1865]

I suppose the point about this thread is this...

We know the southerners coined the term 'lost cause' but who took it to the next level?

Who specifically made the term a bad thing?

It was never intended to be. The term never would have been coined if there hadn't been a true voice behind the idea that the 'cause' whatever it was to each individual was a true cause. Meaning - important to each individual. To some that was in fact slavery. To others, it was to protect hearth and home.

So, for northerners, they were fighting originally as a call to arms just as the south was. What was their motivation? Or was there one initially?

Look at the Irish and other immigrants, fresh off the boats in New York, starving, no money, promised "glory" in serving their new country!

 

[unionblue]

With all the talk about the "Lost Cause" and the an idea that the southern people didn't support the south's agenda - per say - Is it possible that the winners wrote a history that would make themselves look more saintly?

What I mean is, that if the south wrote using a "Lost Cause" mentality to make their soldiers look more chivalrous, ragged, whatever...

Is it possible that the "False Cause" was later introduced to suggest that "all" Northerners fought to end slavery... thus putting them on a pedestal in moral standing if nothing else?

Just a question.

Perhaps here is an answer.

"We are sometimes asked, in the name of patriotism, to forget the merits of this fearful struggle, and to remember with equal admiration those who struck at the nation's life and those who struck to save it, those who fought for slavery and those who fought for liberty and justice.

I am no minister of malice. I would not strike the fallen. I would not repel the repentant; but may my "right hand forget her cunning and my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth," if I forget the difference between the parties to that terrible, protracted, and bloody conflict.

If we ought to forget a war which has filled our land with widows and orphans; which has made stumps of men of the very flower of our youth; which has sent them on the journey of life armless, legless, maimed and mutilated; which has piled up a debt heavier than a mountain of gold, swept uncounted thousands of men into bloody graves and planted agony at a million hearthstones -- I say, if this war is to be forgotten, I ask, in the name of all things sacred, what shall men remember?

The essence and significance of our devotions here to-day are not to be found in the fact that the men whose remains fill these graves were brave in battle. If we met simply to show our sense of bravery, we should find enough on both sides to kindle admiration. In the raging storm of fire and blood, in the fierce torrent of shot and shell, of sword and bayonet, whether on foot or on horse, unflinching courage marked the rebel not less than the loyal soldier.

But we are not here to applaud manly courage, save as it has been displayed in a noble cause. We must never forget that victory to the rebellion meant death to the republic. We must never forget that the loyal soldiers who rest beneath this sod flung themselves between the nation and the nation's destroyers. If today we have a country not boiling in an agony of blood, like France, if now we have a united country, no longer cursed by the hell-black system of human bondage, if the American name is no longer a by-word and a hissing to a mocking earth, if the star-spangled banner floats only over free American citizens in every quarter of the land, and our country has before it a long and glorious career of justice, liberty, and civilization, we are indebted to the unselfish devotion of the noble army who rest in these honored graves all around us."

By Frederick Douglass, on Decoration Day, 1871, at the Monument to the Unknown Soldiers of the Civil War at Arlington National Cemetery.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[unionblue]

Frederick Douglass said it shorter and sweeter later on in 1878.

"There was a right side and a wrong side in the late war, which no sentiment ought to cause us to forget, and while to-day we should have malice toward none, and charity toward all, it is no part of our duty to confound right with wrong."

Unionblue

 

[gunny]

Perhaps here is an answer.

"We are sometimes asked, in the name of patriotism, to forget the merits of this fearful struggle, and to remember with equal admiration those who struck at the nation's life and those who struck to save it, those who fought for slavery and those who fought for liberty and justice.

I am no minister of malice. I would not strike the fallen. I would not repel the repentant; but may my "right hand forget her cunning and my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth," if I forget the difference between the parties to that terrible, protracted, and bloody conflict.

If we ought to forget a war which has filled our land with widows and orphans; which has made stumps of men of the very flower of our youth; which has sent them on the journey of life armless, legless, maimed and mutilated; which has piled up a debt heavier than a mountain of gold, swept uncounted thousands of men into bloody graves and planted agony at a million hearthstones -- I say, if this war is to be forgotten, I ask, in the name of all things sacred, what shall men remember?

The essence and significance of our devotions here to-day are not to be found in the fact that the men whose remains fill these graves were brave in battle. If we met simply to show our sense of bravery, we should find enough on both sides to kindle admiration. In the raging storm of fire and blood, in the fierce torrent of shot and shell, of sword and bayonet, whether on foot or on horse, unflinching courage marked the rebel not less than the loyal soldier.

But we are not here to applaud manly courage, save as it has been displayed in a noble cause. We must never forget that victory to the rebellion meant death to the republic. We must never forget that the loyal soldiers who rest beneath this sod flung themselves between the nation and the nation's destroyers. If today we have a country not boiling in an agony of blood, like France, if now we have a united country, no longer cursed by the hell-black system of human bondage, if the American name is no longer a by-word and a hissing to a mocking earth, if the star-spangled banner floats only over free American citizens in every quarter of the land, and our country has before it a long and glorious career of justice, liberty, and civilization, we are indebted to the unselfish devotion of the noble army who rest in these honored graves all around us."

By Frederick Douglass, on Decoration Day, 1871, at the Monument to the Unknown Soldiers of the Civil War at Arlington National Cemetery.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

I like it union blue, but it makes the point that even Frederick Douglass stated that the north fought for freedom. So what was the north fighting for? We know what the history books say. What did a northerner fight for?

Was it a false cause in the end?

Point is..

Was there or is there a 'false cause' that kids are being taught today? Sounds like the average kid would think the war was fought to end slavery.

 

[gunny]

Meaning 'liberty and justice'.

 

[unionblue]

I like it union blue, but it makes the point that even Frederick Douglass stated that the north fought for freedom. So what was the north fighting for? We know what the history books say. What did a northerner fight for?

Was it a false cause in the end?

Point is..

Was there or is there a 'false cause' that kids are being taught today? Sounds like the average kid would think the war was fought to end slavery.

gunny,

It really is that much of a puzzle for you, what the North was fighting for? You really have no idea why tens of thousands of men would leave their homes, families, and everything they knew and loved, in order to voluntarily enlist to fight and die in a far away place?

Take a look around at the world of the mid-nineteenth century. What do you see? What type of governments are in place? What are the rights and freedoms of the people in those other nations at that time? Check how many are openly friendly to the United States. Then check and see how many gave a good god*** if the United States survives or not. How many would very much like to see the United States be erased off the face of the earth or fall flat on its experimental face?

Sorry, but I have no problem knowing what the 'North' fought for nor do I have any difficulty whatsoever in seeing what the slaveholding South fought for.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[peteanddelmar]

I like it union blue, but it makes the point that even Frederick Douglass stated that the north fought for freedom. So what was the north fighting for? We know what the history books say. What did a northerner fight for?

Was it a false cause in the end?

Point is..

Was there or is there a 'false cause' that kids are being taught today? Sounds like the average kid would think the war was fought to end slavery.

The average kid won't know or care unless they unplug their TV.
But a few kids will.
Let's hope they take care of it and get it as right as possible. Like Hanna.

But there are just as many adults that don't care, at their peril.

 

[hanna260]

gunny,

It really is that much of a puzzle for you, what the North was fighting for? You really have no idea why tens of thousands of men would leave their homes, families, and everything they knew and loved, in order to enlist to fight and die in a far away place?

Take a look around at the world of the mid-nineteenth century. What do you see? What type of governments are in place? What are the rights and freedoms of the people in those other nations at that time? Check how many are openly friendly to the United States. Then check and see how many give a good god*** if the United States survives or not. How many would very much like to see the United States be erased off the face of the earth or fall flat on its experimental face?

Sorry, but I have no problem knowing what the 'North' fought for nor do I have any difficulty whatsoever in seeing what the slaveholding South fought for.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

I think there's actually a book about how we don't understand just how powerful the cause of "union" could be for these northerners; that it didn't matter what they thought about slavery, they thought (they knew) they were genuinely fighting for their civilization. Same things for southerners but in reverse.

This was their country- and by god- they were not going to see it perish from this earth.

 

[unionblue]

I think there's actually a book about how we don't understand just how powerful the cause of "union" could be for these northerners; that it didn't matter what they thought about slavery, they thought (they knew) they were genuinely fighting for their civilization. Same things for southerners but in reverse.

This was their country- and by god- they were not going to see it perish from this earth.

hanna260,

The book you are thinking about is The Union War, by Gary W. Gallagher.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[hanna260]

hanna260,

The book you are thinking about is The Union War, by Gary W. Gallagher.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

Yep, that's the one! Thanks!

 

[unionblue]

Meaning 'liberty and justice'.

gunny,

Thought you might be interested in a previous thread that covered most of your question here. Check it out.

Why the North Fought.

http://civilwartalk.com/threads/why-the-north-fought.22891/

The very first post might help with the link to the article that began the entire thread.

Enjoy,
Unionblue

 

[gunny]

gunny,

It really is that much of a puzzle for you, what the North was fighting for? You really have no idea why tens of thousands of men would leave their homes, families, and everything they knew and loved, in order to enlist to fight and die in a far away place?

Take a look around at the world of the mid-nineteenth century. What do you see? What type of governments are in place? What are the rights and freedoms of the people in those other nations at that time? Check how many are openly friendly to the United States. Then check and see how many gave a good god*** if the United States survives or not. How many would very much like to see the United States be erased off the face of the earth or fall flat on its experimental face?

Sorry, but I have no problem knowing what the 'North' fought for nor do I have any difficulty whatsoever in seeing what the slaveholding South fought for.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

Wow. Not a puzzle. I know in my mind both what north and south fought for. Just like you do. Probably the same thing.

So what did they fight for?

 

[unionblue]

Wow. Not a puzzle. I know in my mind both what north and south fought for. Just like you do. Probably the same thing.

So what did they fight for?

gunny,

If you and I both know "what the north and south fought for" then why ask?

Just curious.

Unionblue

 

[gunny]

gunny,

If you and I both know "what the north and south fought for" then why ask?

Just curious.

Unionblue

I know what the south fought for, but what about the north? Did they go into the fight with the belief that they were freeing slaves? I don't think so. So, that leaves only the union, or the fact that they were gonna be conscripted much like in the Vietnam War?

Gotta go to bed. Finish up tomorrow?

 

[hanna260]

I know what the south fought for, but what about the north? Did they go into the fight with the belief that they were freeing slaves? I don't think so. So, that leaves only the union, or the fact that they were gonna be conscripted much like in the Vietnam War?

Gotta go to bed. Finish up tomorrow?

I ain't UnionBlue (I seem to be doing a lot of responding to people who don't want me to respond ) but I'm gonna say union- and because their friends were there.

 

[gunny]

Whenever I speak of the lost cause, I have specific authors in mind, such as Edwin Pollard, Mildred Rutherford, Jubal Early, Thomas Dixon, or Margaret Mitchell. Do you have specific authors that you have read in mind?

Eric, I don't have a specific author in mind. I am certain however, that the average kid nowadays believes the war was fought to end slavery. Ask a kid on the street tomorrow. I did.

 

[unionblue]

"In a speech delivered to a group of Americans near Hamburg, Germany, during his world tour in the late 1870s, Grant distilled into five sentences what most loyal citizens would have said gave the most meaning to their great internecine conflict.

"What saved the Union," Grant told the dinner guests, "was the coming forward of the young men of the nation. They came from their homes and fields, as they did in the time of the Revolution, giving everything to the country. To their devotion we owe the salvation of the Union. The humblest soldier who carried a musket is entitled to as much credit for the results of the war as those who were in command. So long as our young men are animated by this spirit there will be no fear for the Union."

The nation's greatest living hero had pared the war's triumphal elements to a single salient point. Citizen-soldiers had saved a democratic republic invaluable not only to its own citizens but also as an example of popular self-rule for the rest of the world. The powerful resonance of this idea among the loyal populace established for the foundation for understanding the Union war."

From the book, The Union War, chapter 5, Affirmation, pg. 161-162.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[Lost Cause]

It is simplistic to say either side fought for one particular reason, especially with the common foot soldier. There were no absolutes. You are not going to easily convince descendants of thousands of USCTs or abolitionists from Massachusets that their ancestors were not fighting to end slavery. Your not going to easily convince decendants of poor dirt farmers in rural Mississippi that their ancestors were fighting to preserve slavery. What about those looking to preserve the union, those drafted, those conscripted, those looking for adventure, those looking for a paycheck, those looking to satisfy their lust for killing? The list goes on and on.....