Restricted Debate Is Lost Cause a real thing or not?

lurid

Corporal
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Messages
432
You can get a good book on the Compromise of 1877. To get out of Reconstruction, Southern Democrats split with the Northern Democrats and ratified the 76 Election to give Hays the Election. Republicans promised capital improvements and investment. Republicans hoped to sway the Southern Whig element into the Republican Party. Southern Democrats do cross over and vote with the Republicans when it helps them. But the Republicans don’t get the shift they wanted.
I'll take your word for it for the reasons and motives. Nevertheless, the south's voting record was predominantly for the democratic party for over 100 years. Edited.
 

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,167
***Posted as Moderator***
Our Community Guidelines prohibit the discussion of modern politics. Any posts which introduce 20th/21st- century politics into this discussion will be edited or deleted.
 

jgoodguy

.
-*- Mime -*-
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,538
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
As Host
Let us try to keep the discussions to the period prior to 1869.
Texas v White is the last word on secession.
There is a very friendly forum for reconstruction with an active host.

Thanks.
 

19thGeorgia

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
2,929
Even the Confederate leadership of the time knew that the Founders wanted the gradual end of slavery.

Alexander Stephens quoted in the newspaper The Southern Confederacy, eight days before the Cornerstone speech, March 13th, 1861, emphasis mine:

"Another grand difference between the old and new Constitution was this, said Mr. Stephens, in the old Constitution the Fathers looked upon the fallacy of the equality of races as underlying the foundations of republican liberty. Jefferson, Madison, and Washington, and many others, were tender of the word Slave in the organic law, and all looked forward to the time when the Institution of Slavery should be removed from our midst as a trouble and a stumbling block. This delusion could not be traced in any of the component parts of the Southern Constitution. In that instrument we solemnly discarded the pestilent heresy of fancy politicians, that all men, of all races, were equal, and we had made African inequality and subordination, and the equality of white men, the chief cornerstone of the Southern Republic."

Here's the actual page digitized and preserved:
https://gahistoricnewspapers.galileo.usg.edu/lccn/sn82014677/1861-03-13/ed-1/seq-2.pdf

The quote comes about 3/4 of the way down the first column.
Well, your response doesn’t fit in their time line in history. Slavery was legal in America then. I don’t think it is moral to ship someone to another continent because one does not want them mixing with Whites.
Just a year later- from a report on colonization approved by the United States Congress:

"It is useless, now, to enter upon any philosophical inquiry whether nature has or has not made the negro inferior to the Caucasian. The belief is indelibly fixed upon the public mind that such inequality does exist. There are irreconcilable differences between the two races which separate them, as with a wall of fire. There is no instance afforded us in history where liberated slaves, even of the same race, have lived any considerable period in harmony with their former masters when denied equality with them in social and political privileges. But the Anglo American never will give his consent that the negro, no matter how free, shall be elevated to such equality. It matters not how wealthy, how intelligent, or how morally meritorious the negro may become, so long as he remains among us the recollection of the former relation of master and slave will be perpetuated by the changeless color of the Ethiop's skin, and that color will alike be perpetuated by the degrading tradition of his former bondage."

Lincoln said basically the same thing at a reception of a committee of free black men at the White House:
"Perhaps you have long been free, or all your lives. Your race are suffering, in my judgment, the greatest wrong inflicted on any people. But even when you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being placed on an equality with the white race. You are cut off from many of the advantages which the other race enjoys. The aspiration of men is to enjoy equality with the best when free, but on this broad continent not a single man of your race is made the equal of a single man of ours."
 
Last edited:

Florida Rebel

Private
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
70
I most assuredly believe in the Lost Cause! The South came oh so close to gaining the freedom and independence they fought for. But they lost. And losers never get to tell the history OR are allowed to express their opinions in a thoughtful or positive way! Instead, anyone who is southern and cherishes his/her heritage is a bumbling idiot and must have hated black people and loved slavery. But no one wants to try and understand the era back then; how we had 14 states in the USA (four from the North who never seceded!) which allowed slavery but only 7 seceded before Ft. Sumter! Does anyone know (I really doubt this) that VA, NC, Ark and TN were still in the Union UNTIL Lincoln called for an invasion of the deep south? Does everyone know how important and key that was? Put simply, there was NO way Virginia, the most influential of all the states in the USA was going to allow a federal army to march thru her state and invade the deep south. And why Lee turned down the offer to command that invading army because he too could not stomach a government that would make war on it's own people. Please look it up if you don't believe me! Once VA decided she could not support this decision by Lincoln, the other states of NC, Ark and TN all followed suit. So PLEASE don't tell me the war was all about slavery!
Edited.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,167
And losers never get to tell the history OR are allowed to express their opinions in a thoughtful or positive way!
Except in the aftermath of the American Civil War. After all, there wouldn't be a 'Lost Cause' mythology if the losers hadn't had complete freedom to express it in lectures and publications.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,167
anyone who is southern and cherishes his/her heritage is a bumbling idiot and must have hated black people and loved slavery.
Who suggests this? Certainly no one here in this Forum.
Most Americans are mature enough to understand that what someone did 150 years ago does not determine the character of any descendant living today.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
4,637
Location
Germany
I most assuredly believe in the Lost Cause ... Does anyone know (I really doubt this) that VA, NC, Ark and TN were still in the Union UNTIL Lincoln called for an invasion of the deep south?...
I think you severely underestimate many of the members of CWT. The fact that people don´t agree with your opinions and positions does not mean that they are without knowledge. Besides there indeed are some people here who do agree with you (not me though).
 

byron ed

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
2,620
Location
Midwest
...The South came oh so close to gaining the freedom and independence they fought for. But they lost. And losers never get to tell the history OR are allowed to express their opinions in a thoughtful or positive way! Instead, anyone who is southern and cherishes his/her heritage is a bumbling idiot and must have hated black people and loved slavery.
No. You don't get to claim "anyone who is Southern and cherishes his/her heritage," whatever you have to say about them. You just don't. You can attempt to claim you speak for white Southerns, but that's not even remotely true either. Just be honest. you're attempting to claim to represent heritage white Southerns. Of course by your own admission to Lost Cause that's only heritage white Confederates. So you claim to represent heritage white Confederates. ok.

But no one wants to try and understand the era back then; how we had 14 states in the USA (four from the North who never seceded!) which allowed slavery but only 7 seceded before Ft. Sumter!
?? Nobody here has ever denied that that basic fact of history. You'd think you could find that even once in the history of the forum, but no. It's not a thing. Why did you make up that "nobody wants to try and understand" that? What are you doing?

... there was NO way Virginia, the most influential of all the states in the USA was going to allow a federal army to march thru her state and invade the deep south.
YES way. Many Virginians chose instead to defend Virginia from the Confederacy. Quite prominent white Virginians Scott and Thomas included, but also the voting majority in the Western third of the state. That's far different than "NO way" You also know Federal property had been invaded by secessionists first -- before Lincolns call -- so don't even go there. You also know that Anderson was a Southerner defending Sumpter when it was attacked.
 
Last edited:

byron ed

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
2,620
Location
Midwest
I most assuredly believe in the Lost Cause!
btw, It's admirable that you just step up and declare that. Typically the usual half dozen here hem and haw and euphemize the Lost Cause, never stepping up and owning the label (some literally attempting to imply it's a post-modern fabrication), and then they wonder why we don't find them convincing.

I say enough dodging. Just make the case; and include black Americans in that enlightenment (the heritage black Confederates).
 
Last edited:

jackt62

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Jul 28, 2015
Messages
3,326
Location
New York City
I'm curious about the title of this thread. The "Lost Cause" whether one accepts its premise or not, was certainly a "real thing" from an historical point of view. Some aspects of the Lost Cause that commemorate southern honor and valor still hold great appeal to many people. Other aspects dealing with the "war of the generals" in which Lost Causers looked for scapegoats in commanders such as Longstreet, Ewell, and Stuart, may not be as prevalent nowadays. But the fact remains that the south was able to propagate and control its own particular narrative (aka Lost Cause) for decades after the war and well into the 20th century.
 

Viper21

Sergeant Major
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
2,449
Location
Rockbridge County, Virginia
I most assuredly believe in the Lost Cause! The South came oh so close to gaining the freedom and independence they fought for. But they lost. And losers never get to tell the history OR are allowed to express their opinions in a thoughtful or positive way! Instead, anyone who is southern and cherishes his/her heritage is a bumbling idiot and must have hated black people and loved slavery. But no one wants to try and understand the era back then; how we had 14 states in the USA (four from the North who never seceded!) which allowed slavery but only 7 seceded before Ft. Sumter! Does anyone know (I really doubt this) that VA, NC, Ark and TN were still in the Union UNTIL Lincoln called for an invasion of the deep south? Does everyone know how important and key that was? Put simply, there was NO way Virginia, the most influential of all the states in the USA was going to allow a federal army to march thru her state and invade the deep south. And why Lee turned down the offer to command that invading army because he too could not stomach a government that would make war on it's own people. Please look it up if you don't believe me! Once VA decided she could not support this decision by Lincoln, the other states of NC, Ark and TN all followed suit. So PLEASE don't tell me the war was all about slavery!
Edited.
Welcome to the forum Florida Reb..!

There's a ton of information available on this forum, & a LOT of informative folks that hang out here.
 

byron ed

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
2,620
Location
Midwest
...But the fact remains that the south was able to propagate and control its own particular narrative (aka Lost Cause) for decades after the war and well into the 20th century.
No. It was not "the South" that was able to propagate and control its own particular narrative. It was only heritage Confederate Southerners that did that. They were the ones that created the Lost Cause. By today so many heritage Confederates don't buy into Lost Cause. Their focus is on their ancestors who endured and prevailed the miserable mere four years of the Confederacy, not the Confederacy itself. Not the slave nation itself.

Let's not use the term "the South" as if heritage Unionist or apathetic white or black whites Southerners "didn't matter" enough to be of the South, as if half the population there today has no right to claim being "true" Southerners. That's BS and it has to stop.

Increasingly, as we've noticed even on this site, Lost Causers are a waning and bitter minority. They find that as their own children and grandchildren live in the real world, they themselves can't quite get there. Kids chuckle at g'pa for his stale outbursts from both ends.
 

John S. Carter

First Sergeant
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
1,415
Except in the aftermath of the American Civil War. After all, there wouldn't be a 'Lost Cause' mythology if the losers hadn't had complete freedom to express it in lectures and publications.
As in life when one loses we attempt to find reason for losing ,outside our own fault.As to the "LOST CAUSE" we use it to explain to our selves that the reason for the war was that the STATES RIGHTS was being denied The fear of Northern,aka Eastern, power usurping authority with the control of the central government (Republican party gaining more members as time went,with the South fear of losing its majority in Washington and with the fracture in the Democratic party}.The mentality of Southern leadership was of a country based on Jeffersonian principles{agriculture ,17th Century Europe}.In wars the truth of cause is lost to both side ,both sides view their reason as being the correct reason but neither side willing to admit the war could have been prevented but emotions were stronger than logic .The leadership was void when in the time of crisis and that was before Lincoln or Davis.Lost Cause was lost because of a Romantic approach to a way of life and politics that was dying.What the Confederacy was was a last gasp of saving something that should have ceased in with the ratification of the Constitution.States Rights still remains in the political system but it is the Republican/Conservatives that main it ,ironically.
 
Joined
Jun 24, 2019
Messages
22
Conceptually and ideologically, government by consent and The Lost Cause are inseparable. So in that context, The Lost Cause is quite real.
 

John S. Carter

First Sergeant
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
1,415
I most assuredly believe in the Lost Cause! The South came oh so close to gaining the freedom and independence they fought for. But they lost. And losers never get to tell the history OR are allowed to express their opinions in a thoughtful or positive way! Instead, anyone who is southern and cherishes his/her heritage is a bumbling idiot and must have hated black people and loved slavery. But no one wants to try and understand the era back then; how we had 14 states in the USA (four from the North who never seceded!) which allowed slavery but only 7 seceded before Ft. Sumter! Does anyone know (I really doubt this) that VA, NC, Ark and TN were still in the Union UNTIL Lincoln called for an invasion of the deep south? Does everyone know how important and key that was? Put simply, there was NO way Virginia, the most influential of all the states in the USA was going to allow a federal army to march thru her state and invade the deep south. And why Lee turned down the offer to command that invading army because he too could not stomach a government that would make war on it's own people. Please look it up if you don't believe me! Once VA decided she could not support this decision by Lincoln, the other states of NC, Ark and TN all followed suit. So PLEASE don't tell me the war was all about slavery!
Edited.
In all this there remains the question ,if Buchanan had not been a lame duck president and would have taken the initiative ,as a Jackson or Washington had ,what would these states had done ,would they wait to see if Buchanan would follow thur ,would those states which had succeeded returned? As to your statement on Southerners hating blacks and loving slavery.as a descendant of Southern heritage ,may I state my belief that the Lost Cause had nothing to do with slavery.Rights of the people of the states as Thomas Jefferson ,James Madison,as founders of the Democratic/Republican party supported was the Lost Cause. With the end of the war the South was forced to submit to the central government .via the loyalty oath to the central government in order to regain our rights.which according to Lincoln we never lost ,at least was that not what he said in his first year.The Lost Cause was not defeated it just changed parties.If you read of the founding of the political parties one may find that the majority of the Jeffersonian party was in the South while the Whigs maintained the Northeast.The sections were already drawn up by the policial established,What this is about is as you state the victors do write" their" history .
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
29,649
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
Conceptually and ideologically, government by consent and The Lost Cause are inseparable. So in that context, The Lost Cause is quite real.
Wrong.

In the Confederacy, government by consent, conceptually and ideologically, is separate by at least by nearly 4 million people.

Tens of millions more if you count the millions of Northern voters who were denied their government by consent by a minority in the South per the results of a free and fair election as protected and provided under the Constitution.

It was all about denying consent, so in that context, the Lost Cause was real.
 

Florida Rebel

Private
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
70
Had any of us lived in the South during that turbulent era, I wonder how many of our readers would have sided with their states and the Confederacy before or after Ft. Sumter as VA, NC, TN and Ark did? Because we all know how wrong it is to judge people back then by our values today. In my opinion, the vast majority of the southern people, with few exceptions and for numerous reasons, clearly supported their state(s) in leaving the Union. And their men, were more than happy to join the new army and fight for their freedom. So naturally, when the war went the wrong direction and they failed to win their independence, plenty of people from the South were unhappy. That said, I totally see why the "Lost Cause" existed and why the native/white southern population wanted to remember the great people who fought in their war for indpendence.
 

JohnJW

Private
Joined
Jun 25, 2019
Messages
97
Is Lost Cause a real thing or not? Only a real thing in history, but not now? When did that happen?
There has always been an internal struggle in America between believers in a strong central government and believers in state's rights or the supremacy of local decision making over national.

This stems from colonial times when the colonies were independent and very different from each other.

Edited.
So, the original ideas of the post-Civil War "Lost Cause" argument have eroded. I don't think there are many today still demanding a Confederacy. But the underlying philosophy is as strong as it was in 1787 and 1867.

Btw . . . . this struggle between "state's rights" and strong central government is not unique to America. Edited; modern politics
 

John S. Carter

First Sergeant
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
1,415
Wrong.

In the Confederacy, government by consent, conceptually and ideologically, is separate by at least by nearly 4 million people.

Tens of millions more if you count the millions of Northern voters who were denied their government by consent by a minority in the South per the results of a free and fair election as protected and provided under the Constitution.

It was all about denying consent, so in that context, the Lost Cause was real.
Since certain states removed Lincoln and the Republican party off of their ballots,would you consent that this would be denying consent? There were parts of these states which would have voted may be not for Lincoln but then for Republican tickets,sections of those states which did not have a strong slavery population or sympathetic view to the slave owning population.The Lost Cause was lost with the ratification of the Constitution,with the states rendering authority to the Federal government.What parts of the Cause being states rights,that were not removed with the next three amendments,have been ruled unconstitutional by federal court actions .If one reads consent as mentioned in the ratification it comes from the people of the states which comes from the people of the counties or districts.That consent was removed by the radical elements of the political system and given to those who desired the authority to alter the original purpose of the Constitution,The Anti-Federalist papers need to be taken out to understand the Lost Cause
 


Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top