Restricted Debate Is Lost Cause a real thing or not?

uaskme

Sergeant Major
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
1,982
Nowhere was the revolution in Republican policy and thought more clearly revealed than in the columns of the National Republican, spokesman of the Radical, bloody-shirt, bitterly anti-South wing of the party--not the reformist, liberal wing of which Hayes was presumed to be a mild representative.

As for the oft-repeated stories of the bloody-shirt orators concerning intimidation and coercion, the National Republican now inclined to discount them. "we are persuaded that instances of this kind bear the same proportion to the mass that cruel masters bore to the multitude of good ones in the days of slavery." The Negro seemed contented with his lot. Satisfied with his personal liberty, he appears now, as a rule, willing to vote with his former master," This was especially fortunate in view of the statesmanship and sterling patriotism his former master was demonstrating in the electoral crisis.

In the mood of reconciliation there were few who mourned the case of the Negro or gave much thought to the revolution in Northern sentiment on this, the original center of the whole storm now passing. This was true of many of the Negro's champions, The Nation observed philosophically that "the Negro will disappear form the field of politics. henceforth the nation, as a nation, will have nothing more to do with him." And the New York Tribune declared that "after ample opportunity to develop that"as a race they are idle, ignorant and vicious."

As for the feelings of the mass of Negroes themselves, there was undoubtedly widespread fear and apprehension among them over the withdrawal of Federal protection and disillusionment over their abandonment by the Republican party. When they looked to their own leaders for guidance, however, they found them eagerly taking favors and appointments from Hayes. With alacrity and gratitude Frederick Douglass accepted from Hayes an appointment as Marshal of the District of Columbia and settled down in a twenty-one room house in the suburbs in Washington. The appointment was taken as evidence of "Mr. Hayes's desire to satisfy the colored people that his plan of conciliation does not involve forgetfulness of them," With Douglass, the foremost Negro spokesman, and Schurz, foremost reformer, taken into camp, both Negroes and Reformers might consider themselves parties to the compromise. pp229-233 Reunion and Reaction by Woodward

I don't think we can blame the South with all this Lost Cause Nostalgia. If you Study the compromise of 1877 and the period of reconciliation, it is Ripe with Lost Cause Rhetoric. the South must of got it from the YANKEE!
 
Last edited:

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

John S. Carter

First Sergeant
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
1,289
Thanks for your comments. However, I don't really understand what the word enturbetation means in your post. What is that?
Thanks for your comments. However, I don't really understand what the word enturbetation means in your post. What is that?
Incorrect word; correct word is interpretation.My editor was out.
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
28,977
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
Nowhere was the revolution in Republican policy and thought more clearly revealed than in the columns of the National Republican, spokesman of the Radical, bloody-shirt, bitterly anti-South wing of the party--not the reformist, liberal wing of which Hayes was presumed to be a mild representative.

As for the oft-repeated stories of the bloody-shirt orators concerning intimidation and coercion, the National Republican now inclined to discount them. "we are persuaded that instances of this kind bear the same proportion to the mass that cruel masters bore to the multitude of good ones in the days of slavery." The Negro seemed contented with his lot. Satisfied with his personal liberty, he appears now, as a rule, willing to vote with his former master," This was especially fortunate in view of the statesmanship and sterling patriotism his former master was demonstrating in the electoral crisis.

In the mood of reconciliation there were few who mourned the case of the Negro or gave much thought to the revolution in Northern sentiment on this, the original center of the whole storm now passing. This was true of many of the Negro's champions, The Nation observed philosophically that "the Negro will disappear form the field of politics. henceforth the nation, as a nation, will have nothing more to do with him." And the New York Tribune declared that "after ample opportunity to develop that"as a race they are idle, ignorant and vicious."

As for the feelings of the mass of Negroes themselves, there was undoubtedly widespread fear and apprehension among them over the withdrawal of Federal protection and disillusionment over their abandonment by the Republican party. When they looked to their own leaders for guidance, however, they found them eagerly taking favors and appointments from Hayes. With alacrity and gratitude Frederick Douglass accepted from Hayes an appointment as Marshal of the District of Columbia and settled down in a twenty-one room house in the suburbs in Washington. The appointment was taken as evidence of "Mr. Hayes's desire to satisfy the colored people that his plan of conciliation does not involve forgetfulness of them," With Douglass, the foremost Negro spokesman, and Schurz, foremost reformer, taken into camp, both Negroes and Reformers might consider themselves parties to the compromise. pp229-233 Reunion and Reaction by Woodward

I don't think we can blame the South with all this Lost Cause Nostalgia. If you Study the compromise of 1877 and the period of reconciliation, it is Ripe with Lost Cause Rhetoric. the South must of got it from the YANKEE!
C. Vann Woodward


I don't think we can study the Compromise of 1877 with excerpts, but only in context, and some how come to the conclusion "the South must have got it from the YANKEE!" without that context.

Is the above mentioned book by Woodward online where we can view it for study?

Unionblue
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
C. Vann Woodward


I don't think we can study the Compromise of 1877 with excerpts, but only in context, and some how come to the conclusion "the South must have got it from the YANKEE!" without that context.

Is the above mentioned book by Woodward online where we can view it for study?

Unionblue
I don't think we can study the Compromise of 1877 in Secession & Politics at all. We top out at 1869 with Texas v White.
 

uaskme

Sergeant Major
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
1,982
The Republicans needed the South. They gave them what they wanted in relation to the Race Question. This included the Lost Cause Rhetoric. South got Federal Money for rebuilding. Edited.
 

uaskme

Sergeant Major
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
1,982
republicans didn't need South, they won many presidential elections 1880-1928 without any South black or white, they only needed peace
They need peace because the Labor Unions supported by the Northern Democrats, were advocating for Labor. Republicans were calling them, Communist. Beating them over the heads with clubs. Hays was appealing to the Whig element of the South, trying to build a coalition. Southern Democrat votes helped ratify the 76 Election and gave The Presidency to Hays. So yes, he needed the South.

Republicans were also fearful the agrarian West would align with the South. Which they had a natural tendency to do.
 
Last edited:

uaskme

Sergeant Major
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
1,982
first southener was elected president only in 1912. becauce republican votes were divided
Grover Cleveland was elected in 1893 as a Democrat. Harrison crashed the Government before Cleveland took office to teach the country a lesson. He spent the National Treasury, which had a huge surplus. One thing he purchased was Civil War Republican Monuments. Great Spires of Propaganda. Republicans also placed Monument in the West proclaiming, how they had saved the West from the Savage, Stupid Indian for the White Man.

Per Heather Cox Richardson:
The Republican sweep in 1888 sent Democrats scrambling, well aware that once Republicans controlled Congress, they would admit only the sates that favored them. Less than two weeks before he left office, Cleveland signed off on the best deal the Democrats could get. It provided for the organization of Montana and Washington as states in nine months and cut the large Dakota, both of which would be admitted as states at the same time as the other two. This deal would give Republicans the three new states of North Dakota, South Dakota, and Washington, while everyone expected Montana to go Democratic.

The following year Republicans brought two more western states-Idaho and Wyoming-into the Union, creating an unprecedented six new states in a single calendar year. pp125 To Make Men Free by Heather Cox Richardson

So, during this period, Republicans were Murdering Indians and Making new States. Don't guess the Indians got to Claim, Lost Cause? Installing Monuments with Political Propaganda. So, it seems some like the Republican Propaganda, but not the Souths. Regardless, both did it, Republicans were just as wrong as the South.
 
Last edited:

uaskme

Sergeant Major
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
1,982
Moral of the story:

Sweeping, out of context statements/views/personal opinions, deserve a lot of context and study.

Uniionblue
PS: Maybe we should all go back to the actual topic of this thread.
The Moral of the story is, they were all Politicians, they had none. Both sides were Guilty.
 



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