Restricted Debate Agree to define "Lost Cause"

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
28,929
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
So let us look at some of the main tenets of "Lost Cause" as discussed in previous posts and try to determine if there is justification in Confederate "Lost Cause" ideology.

1.) The South fought for self-governance, states rights, and economic freedom. The preservation of slavery was not a primary cause
of the war.

Perhaps slavery was the primary cause for the 25% of Southern families that owned slaves. However, I believe that for the great
majority of Southerners that causes other than slavery played a greater role in their support of secession. It was not just one
cause, but a combination of causes that led to war.


2.) The South was defeated because of both the larger population and industrial superiority of the North.

So let us look at the numbers to see if there is any validity to this:
2.1 million - the number of Northerners mobilized to fight for the Union Army.
880,000 - the number of Southerners mobilized to fight for the Confederate Army.
The population of the 11 Southern states (including slaves) in 1860 - About 9 million.
The population of the Northern states in 1860 - About 22 million.

By 1860, 90% of the nation's manufacturing output came from Northern states. Only about 40% of the Northern population
engaged in agriculture as compared to 84% in the South.


3.) Confederate Generals such as Lee and Jackson represented Southern nobility and chivalry, while Confederate soldiers in general
were better than their counterparts from the North.

I suppose that the ideas of nobility and chivalry are a matter of one's own interpretation. I do know that most Southerners
did, and many still do, believe that Lee and Jackson embodied the very best characteristics of both traits.

The question of who had the best fighting men is also highly subjective. It is a matter of record that Southern armies, for
the most part, performed very well in the war and often against great odds.

4.) Men such as Sherman and Grant are to be despised because of their brutality and unwarranted destruction of private property.

If you had your property burned to the ground, your crops destroyed, and all of your possessions pillaged, then anyone might
feel justified in harboring at least some ill will toward those who committed such acts,

5.) Reconstruction was a means of Northern political control and punishing the South.

Surely military rule, carpetbaggers, loss of land, unscrupulous government, and for some the loss of citizenship and the right
to run for office were no reasons for Southerners to look at Reconstruction in an unfavorable light? Right

6.) The "Lost Cause" was used as a salve to help heal the wounds of the defeated South and provide justification for the war.

The bravery and sacrifices of the citizens of the Confederacy speaks for itself. The people of the South did not feel that
justification was necessary nor apologies warranted for fighting for a cause they believed was just.

So is "Lost Cause" ideology a myth? I guess it really depends on your point of view.
(Sigh!)

No, it should depend on actual source evidence.
 

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,030
2.) The South was defeated because of both the larger population and industrial superiority of the North.

So let us look at the numbers to see if there is any validity to this:
2.1 million - the number of Northerners mobilized to fight for the Union Army.
880,000 - the number of Southerners mobilized to fight for the Confederate Army.
The population of the 11 Southern states (including slaves) in 1860 - About 9 million.
The population of the Northern states in 1860 - About 22 million.

By 1860, 90% of the nation's manufacturing output came from Northern states. Only about 40% of the Northern population
engaged in agriculture as compared to 84% in the South.
Yet The rebel armies never lacked clothing or equipment in spite of the way the myth portrays them.
It is also a misreading of statistics to compare the total number of men in arms. U. S. soldiers fought for a given enlistment period. Some reenlisted in other units so that they are sometimes counted more than once. The rebel term of enlistment was 'for the duration'.
Similarly, at no time in the conflict were the entire populations of both combatants underarms. The US population was spread over states far from the front- as far as California. At the same time, the rebel armies operated in a smaller area, easier to defend, easier to move troops as needed and capable of more easy supply.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,030
Confederate Generals such as Lee and Jackson represented Southern nobility and chivalry, while Confederate soldiers in general were better than their counterparts from the North.
"Nobility and chivalry" are vague concepts that never won any war. The fighting men in both armies were roughly equal in physical skill and endurance.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,030
Men such as Sherman and Grant are to be despised because of their brutality and unwarranted destruction of private property.
Both sides destroyed property. The real reason Southerners were so severely affected by the destruction was that the war was conducted on their soil: never a good thing.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,030
1.) The South fought for self-governance, states rights, and economic freedom. The preservation of slavery was not a primary cause
of the war.
"Self-governance" to protect, practice and extend slavery; "States rights" to protect, practice and extend slavery; "Economic freedom" to protect, practice and extend slavery.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2011
Messages
5,490
Location
Mt. Gilead, North Carolina
Lincoln favored re-colonization of blacks because he was against slavery. No inconsistency whatsoever. There it is, figured out.

So to be against slavery, one has to be for segregation???????????? But then again Lincoln was a self proclaimed White Supremacist.

Respectfully,
William

One Nation,
Two countries
Confed-American Flag - Thumbnail.jpg
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,030
Reconstruction was a means of Northern political control and punishing the South.
Reconstruction was originally intended to do what the name suggests: reconstruct the infrastructure and society of the states that had been in rebellion against the United States. Most rebels returned to full citizenship during the period immediately following the cessation of hostilities. It was only after it became clear that Southerners were intent on resisting change- particularly extending rights to freed Black slaves- that Congress forced change upon them.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,143
Location
Laurinburg NC
So let us look at some of the main tenets of "Lost Cause" as discussed in previous posts and try to determine if there is justification in Confederate "Lost Cause" ideology.

1.) The South fought for self-governance, states rights, and economic freedom. The preservation of slavery was not a primary cause
of the war.

Perhaps slavery was the primary cause for the 25% of Southern families that owned slaves. However, I believe that for the great
majority of Southerners that causes other than slavery played a greater role in their support of secession. It was not just one
cause, but a combination of causes that led to war.


2.) The South was defeated because of both the larger population and industrial superiority of the North.

So let us look at the numbers to see if there is any validity to this:
2.1 million - the number of Northerners mobilized to fight for the Union Army.
880,000 - the number of Southerners mobilized to fight for the Confederate Army.
The population of the 11 Southern states (including slaves) in 1860 - About 9 million.
The population of the Northern states in 1860 - About 22 million.

By 1860, 90% of the nation's manufacturing output came from Northern states. Only about 40% of the Northern population
engaged in agriculture as compared to 84% in the South.


3.) Confederate Generals such as Lee and Jackson represented Southern nobility and chivalry, while Confederate soldiers in general
were better than their counterparts from the North.

I suppose that the ideas of nobility and chivalry are a matter of one's own interpretation. I do know that most Southerners
did, and many still do, believe that Lee and Jackson embodied the very best characteristics of both traits.

The question of who had the best fighting men is also highly subjective. It is a matter of record that Southern armies, for
the most part, performed very well in the war and often against great odds.

4.) Men such as Sherman and Grant are to be despised because of their brutality and unwarranted destruction of private property.

If you had your property burned to the ground, your crops destroyed, and all of your possessions pillaged, then anyone might
feel justified in harboring at least some ill will toward those who committed such acts,

5.) Reconstruction was a means of Northern political control and punishing the South.

Surely military rule, carpetbaggers, loss of land, unscrupulous government, and for some the loss of citizenship and the right
to run for office were no reasons for Southerners to look at Reconstruction in an unfavorable light? Right

6.) The "Lost Cause" was used as a salve to help heal the wounds of the defeated South and provide justification for the war.

The bravery and sacrifices of the citizens of the Confederacy speaks for itself. The people of the South did not feel that
justification was necessary nor apologies warranted for fighting for a cause they believed was just.

So is "Lost Cause" ideology a myth? I guess it really depends on your point of view.
Bravo! Well said.
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
286
Reconstruction was originally intended to do what the name suggests: reconstruct the infrastructure and society of the states that had been in rebellion against the United States. Most rebels returned to full citizenship during the period immediately following the cessation of hostilities. It was only after it became clear that Southerners were intent on resisting change- particularly extending rights to freed Black slaves- that Congress forced change upon them.
Partially true, and altruistic. But reconstruction also refers to political status, being reconstructed from conquered territory back to state. (For re-admittance into a union they supposedly never left). That's how some former states were denied the right to vote against the 14th amendment referendum, even a couple that had been declared states when they were willing to vote for the 13th amendment).

Exactly when did enlightened equality pop up in the non-seceding states
"Negroes and mulattoes are not allowed to vote."
--Indiana Revised Code 1863

Interesting too, is that reconstruction managed not to create a mass exodus of "Negroes" in the non-seceding states or western territories (like in granting them land as reparations), It kept them bottled up in the South. The Great Emancipator wanted to ship them "back" to Africa or "colonization" as he called in Dec 1862. Lyman Trumbrull said, "...I know it to be so in my State—against having free Negroes come among us. Our people want nothing to do with the Negro." And how many states try to inhibit or ban Negro immigration?
 
Last edited:

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,143
Location
Laurinburg NC
Thanks for your response.
Why would there be a "mass exodus" in the "non-seceding states or western territories"? Instead, there was some migration of newly freed slaves to those areas.
One reason would be they were not wanted there. Another reason might be that the alleged mistreatment of them where they were has been grossly exaggerated.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,030
The Great Emancipator wanted to ship them "back" to Africa or "colonization" as he called in Dec 1862. Lyman Trumbrull said, "...I know it to be so in my State—against having free Negroes come among us. Our people want nothing to do with the Negro." And how many states try to inhibit or ban Negro immigration?
Thanks for your response.
No one is denying the pervasive racism of the 19th Century.
As mentioned, colonization was supported by both Whites and Blacks, who were convinced the races could not peacefully co-exist in America after years of mistreatment of Black slaves. It was viewed as the right thing to do at the time.
Fortunately, since then our country has learned that we can live together peacefully.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,030
One reason would be they were not wanted there. Another reason might be that the alleged mistreatment of them where they were has been grossly exaggerated.
Thanks for your response.
It seems we do not have agreement on what point @Shelby's Foot was trying to make.
The assertion was, "reconstruction managed not to create a mass exodus of "Negroes" in the non-seceding states or western territories".
That is, why weren't Blacks leaving "non-seceding states or western territories."
Again, why would Blacks in, say Indiana, want to emigrate in great numbers to say, Louisiana?
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,143
Location
Laurinburg NC
Thanks for your response.
It seems we do not have agreement on what point @Shelby's Foot was trying to make.
The assertion was, "reconstruction managed not to create a mass exodus of "Negroes" in the non-seceding states or western territories".
That is, why weren't Blacks leaving "non-seceding states or western territories."
Again, why would Blacks in, say Indiana, want to emigrate in great numbers to say, Louisiana?
Sorry, I apparently misunderstood you, I thought you meant emigration from the seceded states, the ones most harshly affected by Reconstruction.
 



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top