Lee Deification of Robert E Lee

[matthew mckeon]

On one hand you can describe Lee as a true conservative. He wanted to keep things as they were. But even "keeping things as they were" is a type of action, an attempt to shape the future.

 

[matthew mckeon]

But Lee was perceived that way well before the civil war. He had no demerits at West Point, Scott was extremely fond of him as a soldier etc

I agree, he had a fine reputation and was admired by Scott. But relatively speaking, that's a small world, compared to his stature during and after the Civil War.

 

[Jamieva]

True as far as being on a national stage but among his peers he had no equal in the pre war period.

 

[matthew mckeon]

I would disagree with unionblue that Lee or the Confederacy was about keeping the past on its throne. The Confederacy was an American project, growing, changing, evolving. It was a possible future.

And a grim one.

In 1984, the villain sneers at Winston Smith that the despotic government of Big Brother will never fall. " The future is a boot, stamping on a human face, forever." Basically, that's the Confederacy. The face is black.

 

[Waterloo50]

Sounds familiar but truly different circumstances.

True, a much better comparison would have been the American revolution.

 

[FarawayFriend]

I have always wondered what exactly the Confederate envisioned as their future.

Well, there IS a second nation on north American soil - Canada.
I always thought that they envisioned their future as the southern neighbouring nation to the US, as Canada is the northern one.

 

[KeyserSoze]

According to his record at West Point, he was the Marble Man.

How do you figure?

 

[Jamieva]

How do you figure?

Think he means as a result of Lee receiving no demerits

 

[Reb]

H

That was what the South was fighting about - Lee really did represent it. The dedication to family and family name, both establishing it and cleaning it up! - the honor code, the women who were so dedicated to preserving their plantations and their society. Mary was as much a driving force behind Lee's decision as could be. (They should have recruited the women - there'd be a Confederacy now!)

Diane, I think you have come very close to hitting the nail on the head. I think it would be worthy of a thread unto itself. If you think about it, the Confederacy from it's infancy, during the war, and for a long time after, was born, nurtured and raised by the women of the South. In the beginning, the men were urged off to war and pretty much told.... don't come home until you whoop those Yankee's *** back to Boston. After the war, the wives were probably the biggest reason for the establishment of the KKK, when they once again urged off the men to go fight for their women's honor and protection through reconstruction, and then, in 1894, the establishment of the United Daughters. In my family, from Middle Tennessee, all my g grandmothers and aunts were members of both the DAR and the UDC, with history back to the 1600's in Virginia and Maryland. The majority of the family had been slave holders, so your mentioning the women's dedication to the plantations and their society really hit home.
In that light, Robert E. Lee, married to Miss Custis, really had no other choice than the one he made. The honor code wouldn't have allowed him to. I believe that Lee understood the ramifications of his decision very well. I don't think he had any illusions of the reality of it all. Then, it was in for an inch, in for a mile. Stiff upper lip and tally ho.

I can agree that you have to balance the memory of the man with both his accomplishments and his faults. Yes, he fought to perpetuate the already dying institution of slavery and we should remember that. As has been mentioned, in the end, he was just a man. He wasn't really made of marble, but he was more marble like than most, in his time.

 

[unionblue]

I have always believed that slavery under the confederacy would have eventually been abolished, it would have to have been in order for the Confederacy to be recognised and taken seriously by the vast majority of European countries.

I see no historical evidence or actions that would support this belief.

In fact, because Britain would not recognize the Confederacy because of it's desire to keep slavery, weren't all British consuls expelled from Confederate soil?

 

[Waterloo50]

I would argue that the opinions that matter most about Lee belong to African Americans who's ancestors lived during the Civil War and descendents of Unionists ( Dolly Parton arguably being the most famous one has her GGGf was a cavalry trooper in a Unionist regiment from Tennessee) my folks aren't in either category.
Leftyhunter

I had to come back to your post because it took me a while to read between the lines and understand the point that you were making. You are quite right, its those that opposed Lee whose opinion matters.

 

[Waterloo50]

I see no historical evidence or actions that would support this belief.

In fact, because Britain would not recognize the Confederacy because of it's desire to keep slavery, weren't all British consuls expelled from Confederate soil?

I didn't say that Britain would recognise the Confederacy. I said the 'Vast majority of European Countries'.

Besides, this was a what if scenario and I'm not very good at predicting something that never happened. I just held with the belief that had a Confederate government wanted to be taken seriously then they would eventually have to bend to political pressure from Europe, they could of course tell countries like England and France to sling their hooks and mind their own business but something tells me that would never happen. Regardless of how 'neutral Britain may have appeared during the CW' all the evidence points to the British being slightly more pro- confederate than not.

 

[unionblue]

I didn't say that Britain would recognise the Confederacy. I said the 'Vast majority of European Countries'.

Besides, this was a what if scenario and I'm not very good at predicting something that never happened.

Waterloo50,

Thank you for your clarification on the topic.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[Waterloo50]

Waterloo50,

Thank you for your clarification on the topic.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

My pleasure.

 

[unionblue]

But even "keeping things as they were" is a type of action, an attempt to shape the future.

A never-ending future of the present.

What a concept!

 

[Waterloo50]

A never-ending future of the present.

What a concept!

I've lost count of the number of businesses and newspaper articles that use the phrase 'Preserving our Past to secure our future.'

 

[Martini-Henry]

How about your salary has risen in, " real terms."

 

[matthew mckeon]

How do you figure?

That was his nickname, as I recall.

 

[Waterloo50]

How about your salary has risen in, " real terms."

Exactly, we deal with the here and now but the past influences our future, maybe its a British thing but we take pride in our past both good and bad, its what made us who we are today.

 

[Schwallanscher]

Or, we have withdrawn from the European Union, thankfully we don't have the Union pointing guns at us and telling us that we are not allowed to make that choice, regardless of my opinions on the vote to leave, I would defend every British persons right to make that decision, 'ain't no Union gonna tell me or my countrymen what we can and Can't do', sounds familiar doesn't it.

the yankees wouldn't have done it either if jeff davis has had a couple of nukes* lying around

---

* or something similar for those times