Restricted Agree to define "Lost Cause"

uaskme

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Location
SE Tennessee
Thanks for your response.
Again, choosing to address the extremes does nothing to advance the discussion. Few here deny that there were other factors involved in the decision to secede. However, clearly the most important factor- the Root Cause of secession- was slavery. Though some- for whatever reason- choose to ignore it, that is supported by overwhelming, first-hand evidence.
Nobody ever said that facts have to conform to anyone's preconceived notions.

Expressing ones opinion as fact, does nothing to further the discussion. It is not a Universally accepted Fact, that all Southern States Seceded as a protection of Slavery. Border Southern States were convinced Slavery was better Protected in the Union. They were correct. Lincoln and the Republicans were far better at it, than the Confederates. Upper South States, seceded as a response to War, which had already began, before they left.

All else is just Single Causer Logic. It is not History.
 
Last edited:

Rebforever

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Thanks for your response.
Again, choosing to address the extremes does nothing to advance the discussion. Few here deny that there were other factors involved in the decision to secede. However, clearly the most important factor- the Root Cause of secession- was slavery. Though some- for whatever reason- choose to ignore it, that is supported by overwhelming, first-hand evidence.
Nobody ever said that facts have to conform to anyone's preconceived notions.
Why don’t you use some of the other reasons along with your favorite word?
You seem to always want the truth but just one word is not the truth, it is half truth.
 

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Expressing ones opinion as fact, does nothing to further the discussion. It is not a Universally accepted Fact, that all Southern States Seceded as a protection of Slavery. Border Southern States were convinced Slavery was better Protected in the Union. They were correct. Lincoln and the Republicans were far better at it, than the Confederates. Upper South States, seceded as a response to War, which had already began, before they left.

All else is just Single Causer Logic. It is not History.
Thanks for your response.
I don't recall claiming that every State seceded because of slavery. What I said was "the most important factor- the Root Cause of secession- was slavery." But one can certainly show by analysis that the root cause for secession of even, say, Virginia was slavery:
1. Q: Why did Virginia secede? A: She was concerned about an 'invasion' by the U. S. Army.
2. Q: Why was there a possibility of a U. S. Army' invasion'? A: The U. S. Army was intent on putting down the rebellion of states that claimed to have seceded.
3. Q: What was the cause of the rebellion? A: Secession and seizure of U. S. property by the States of the Deep South.
4. Q: What caused the secession of the Deep South states? A: Slavery.
 

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Border Southern States were convinced Slavery was better Protected in the Union. They were correct. Lincoln and the Republicans were far better at it, than the Confederates.
Thanks for your response.
Not according to the Lost Cause.
You rightly point out the folly in seceding: the Lost Cause admits no folly.
 

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
You seem to always want the truth but just one word is not the truth, it is half truth.
Thanks for your response.
It is generally considered more productive to narrow consideration to the vital few rather than broadly discuss the trivial many.
Must every post always list every possible reason, no matter how trivial? Surely our members are intelligent enough to add those other factors they feel are worthy of discussion.
 

byron ed

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Location
Midwest
All else is just Single Causer Logic. It is not History.

"Single Causer" is still not a thing (Google it). Parroting won't change that. Once again, if you want to invent something and have it stick it would have to be something that actually is. Hardly anyone claims a single cause. Why shoot blanks? Try "Primary Causer."
 

Rebforever

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Thanks for your response.
I don't recall claiming that every State seceded because of slavery. What I said was "the most important factor- the Root Cause of secession- was slavery." But one can certainly show by analysis that the root cause for secession of even, say, Virginia was slavery:
1. Q: Why did Virginia secede? A: She was concerned about an 'invasion' by the U. S. Army.
2. Q: Why was there a possibility of a U. S. Army' invasion'? A: The U. S. Army was intent on putting down the rebellion of states that claimed to have seceded.
3. Q: What was the cause of the rebellion? A: Secession and seizure of U. S. property by the States of the Deep South.
4. Q: What caused the secession of the Deep South states? A: Slavery.
Slavery was not illegal.
 

Potomac Pride

Sergeant Major
Joined
Oct 28, 2011
Location
Georgia
Thanks for your response.
But why independence? To protect and promote the institution of slavery.

I am afraid it's not quite as simple as that. If you examine the secession documents, there are other reasons besides slavery that are given by the southern states for their desire to achieve independence. For example, the state of South Carolina mentions the inequity of the federal tariff system: "The people of the South have been taxed by duties on imports not for revenue, but for an object inconsistent with revenue -- to promote, by prohibitions, Northern interests in the productions of their mines and manufactures." Furthermore, Georgia had complaints about unfair federal subsidies for northern business interests: "In the first years of the Republic the navigating, commercial, and manufacturing interests of the North began to seek profit and aggrandizement at the expense of the agricultural interests."

In the Texas Ordinance of Secession, there are complaints that the federal government is not adequately protecting their citizens on the hostile frontier. Arkansas was vehemently opposed to the threat of federal coercion and stated "to longer submit to such rule or remain in the old Union of the United States would be disgraceful and ruinous to the State of Arkansas."
 

O' Be Joyful

Sergeant Major
"The Treasury of Virtue, which is the psychological heritage left to the North by the Civil War, may not be as comic or vicious as the Great Alibi, but it is equally unlovely. It may even be, in the end, equally corrosive of national, and personal, integrity. If the Southerner, with his Great Alibi, feels trapped by history, the Northerner, with his Treasury of Virtue, feels redeemed by history, automatically redeemed. He has in his pocket, not a Papal indulgence peddled by some wandering pardoner of the Middle Ages, but an indulgence, a plenary indulgence, for all sins past, present, and future, freely given by the hand of history." (59)

Robert Penn Warren


As further info:

As requested by @CSA Today.
Source is The Treasury of Counterfeit Virtue
Looks like a modern politics criticism to me with a civil war twist. Please ignore modern politics in discussing. Personally I see this as a typical abbevilleinstitute rhetorical exercise.
Have fun and no modern politics.

of note

In 1961, during the Civil War centennial, Robert Penn Warren published a little book called The Legacy of the Civil War. He had some critical things to say about the tendency of his fellow Southerners to use The War as an excuse to avoid remedying their shortcomings. But for our purposes, what he had to say about the American majority is more pertinent. The éclat of having “saved the Union” and freed the slaves had left Northerners with “a Treasury of Virtue.” This is a kind of plenary indulgence that automatically pre-justifies the motives of American violence and the goodness inherent in America’s acts to force the world into conformity with its ideal version of itself. Decide for yourself the degree of truth in Warren’s observation as it applies to the current American posture in the world.


The Treasury of Virtue renders Americans immune to a simple truth. The War was a war of conquest. It was not a righteous crusade or a family spat. Government of the people would not have suffered if a war of coercion had not been launched against the Southern people. The opposite is true. The purpose of the war was fundamentally to protect the prosperity of the ruling elements of the Northern states by keeping the South captive as a market and a source of raw materials and exports. The primary result of the Republican party victory was permanent installment of Hamilton’s blessings—a national debt, a protected market for industrialists, and a collusion between bankers and politicians.


https://civilwartalk.com/threads/discuss-the-treasury-of-counterfeit-virtue.141742/#post-1721806
 

O' Be Joyful

Sergeant Major
That's a good write-up about human nature. I might just have to read or watch All The Kings Men. :biggrin:


warren-legacy-jpg.jpg


https://civilwartalk.com/threads/th...-term-treasury-of-virtue.141887/#post-1724943
 

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
I am afraid it's not quite as simple as that.
Thanks for your response.
Only if one wants to ignore the vital, root cause and distract attention to relatively trivial factors. The fact is that without the festering issue of slavery, no other factor was important enough to cause the secession crisis.
 

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
there are other reasons besides slavery that are given by the southern states for their desire to achieve independence.
Thanks for your response.
Perhaps I have not been clear on this over the past few years, or perhaps you have missed my posts giving my position.
There were many factors that caused the regional differences in the antebellum. However, of these factors, there was one, single root cause for secession: slavery.
Without slavery, there would have been regional squabbles and political posturing over other issues; none of these would have been so important and seemingly impossible to resolve that it would cause a secession crisis.
 

byron ed

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Location
Midwest
Slavery was not illegal.

What's legality got to do with it? Is it to suppose that slavery being legal somehow made it "right"? Is it that "Southerners" today should therefore feel compelled to "defend" a mere short-term and long-defunct slave nation that brought them nothing but grief so long ago? Is Is it to "defend" a nation literally founded on maintaining and expanding slavery? We do all of us hate slavery, right? I mean, nobody here feels that the Confederacy should have prevailed, right? Thank our lucky stars it didn't. We're in a nation where we can play at being Confederate while actually being a U.S. citizen. Life is fun here.
 
Last edited:

Potomac Pride

Sergeant Major
Joined
Oct 28, 2011
Location
Georgia
Thanks for your response.
Only if one wants to ignore the vital, root cause and distract attention to relatively trivial factors. The fact is that without the festering issue of slavery, no other factor was important enough to cause the secession crisis.

I'm sorry but I wasn't trying to ignore slavery but just wanted to point out there were other reasons given for secession. You may consider them to be trivial but they were important enough to the southern states to include in their secession documents. In fact, South Carolina and Georgia both have an entire section which discusses unfair fiscal and trade policy. However, some people simply ignore any issue that doesn't involve slavery. Modern historians agree that secession was motivated by slavery. There were numerous causes for secession but the issue of slavery was the most important of them. However, confusion may exist because some try to blend the causes of secession with the causes of the war which are really separate issues but related. In 1861, Lincoln did not enter into a military conflict against the south to free the slaves but to put down an insurrection.
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
There is a difference between History and Lone Toner Logic!

Yes, there is.

It's called denial for those who will not, under any circumstances, recognize the acknowledged, historical fact, that slavery caused secession and brought on the Civil War.

It continues to fascinate me on how many here who claim to be pro-Confederate advocates, can blandly call their ancestors liars, especially when source documents and evidence show their top concern was the issue of slavery.

Yes, there is a difference between History and Lone Toner and it's called Denial and it is firmly attached to the Lost Cause dogma.

Unionblue
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
To this:
"is the insistence by several here is that the CS went to war to protect slavery. "
The Response:
"Went to war" and seceded were not the same thing. They seceded to protect slavery.

After that, IMO, the Southern States engaged in wrongful acts, unilaterally seizing - well, let's call it - common property, in which both the resident state and the union have sound claims.

But "went" to war? Where did they go?

Long before Ft. Sumter, the slaveholding South committed many acts of war.

Theft, the taking of US soldiers as prisoners of war, seizing ships, payroll, a mint, arsenals, custom houses, forts, barrracks, firing on the Star of the West.

I am often amazed that all these warlike acts can be ignored before Lincoln's call for volunteers, some committed even before some of the states had issued their acts of secession.
 
Top