Hi everyone.
As my title suggests, I'm finding that there is a trend of modern historians to minimise, devalue and almost show contempt towards ANY Southern perspective of the war. It seems to be quite insidious and indirect. I was recently reading an article somewhere and there was this never ending diatribe of insults aimed towards Mr Shelby Foote. There seems to be the attitude that every historian must have Northern sympathies and the general public must be northern in attitude.
There is a trend of degrading the Civil War by Ken Burns saying that it was Southern in its approach and bias. I don't understand this......the whole first episode was about slavery as the cause. I feel that it's not an appreciated documentary because a Southerner was the primary source of the interviews.
My approach is there's 330 million people in the USA. Not everyone of the population will have a northern bias. There were people on both sides who deserve to be heard.
Does anyone else find this?
As my title suggests, I'm finding that there is a trend of modern historians to minimise, devalue and almost show contempt towards ANY Southern perspective of the war. It seems to be quite insidious and indirect. I was recently reading an article somewhere and there was this never ending diatribe of insults aimed towards Mr Shelby Foote. There seems to be the attitude that every historian must have Northern sympathies and the general public must be northern in attitude.
There is a trend of degrading the Civil War by Ken Burns saying that it was Southern in its approach and bias. I don't understand this......the whole first episode was about slavery as the cause. I feel that it's not an appreciated documentary because a Southerner was the primary source of the interviews.
My approach is there's 330 million people in the USA. Not everyone of the population will have a northern bias. There were people on both sides who deserve to be heard.
Does anyone else find this?
Forum Host
Bringing the