Respect those guys

[Bmac48]

When the "Ta-Nehisi Coates" posting about the Confederate flag was put on the forum, it generated what could have been a heated discussion. It seems that some people would continue to fight the Civil War by other means, as well as fight it many years later, as if their opinions are superior to the men who fought it...specifically the Confederate soldier.

When I came into the wiki a few years ago, I made up the rules section (http://civilwarwiki.net/wiki/CivilWarWiki:Regulations) with Mike Kendra's approval, and the first two rules on the list are:

1. Respect this website and everyone in it.
2. Respect the memory of Billy Yank and Johnny Reb.

Billy Yank was the nickname for every soldier in the Union; Johnny Reb likewise for the Confederacy. And it does not matter a whit what flag he flew under or what his beliefs were. Johnny Reb is still an American citizen, deserving of the same respect Billy Yank receives. I strongly believe that their memories must and shall be respected.

 

[Bonny Blue Flag]

Here Here! Well said.

--BBF

 

[rebelatsea]

I couldn't agree more.

 

[UKMarkw]

This is a must read

 

[AUG]

Definitely, its ridiculous how some out there like to judge others who lived 150 years ago and question their decisions when they themselves never have or ever will be able to meet an ACW soldier. No body can simply suggest they all fought for this or that single reason, for there was no single reason why so many individuals went to war.

 

[I.Dallinger]

I have always felt that unless you are there at the time, surrounded by the feelings and values prevelent, then it is difficult to comment on moral issues that are changed in our modern society. Slavery is abhorred now but an accepted part of daily life then. Who are we now to judge another mans servant as they say. Very valid point in this thread.

 

[Tin cup]

Concerning the people of the South,and their secession...is disagreeing with their cause and reasons for bringing on, and fighting a war, being disrespectful of them?

Kevin Dally

 

[Tin cup]

Definitely, its ridiculous how some out there like to judge others who lived 150 years ago and question their decisions when they themselves never have or ever will be able to meet an ACW soldier. No body can simply suggest they all fought for this or that single reason, for there was no single reason why so many individuals went to war.

AUG 351:

You cannot cover over that the Confederate soldier fought for the goals of the Southern Confederate Government. If saying "there was no single reason why so many individuals went to war" IS to mask that fact over, I think one is doing a disservice to history.

Kevin Dally

 

[Cumpston1862]

"...we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- .... The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract..

 

[James B White]

Concerning the people of the South,and their secession...is disagreeing with their cause and reasons for bringing on, and fighting a war, being disrespectful of them?

And I'd also add, there are different ways to grant respect:

Change the way someone is remembered until they're easy to respect, or

Hold one's disrespect in abeyance while trying to remember them as they were.

 

[John Hartwell]

AUG 351:
You cannot cover over that the Confederate soldier fought for the goals of the Southern Confederate Government.

This statement is accurate as bare, simple fact. But, human beings are not simple, and in judging the individual, his personal perception of what he was fighting for must be considered. There are often vast differences between the reason one man decides to take up arms, the objective he hopes to obtain, and the objectives of the cause he serves (not to mention the 'cause' of the war itself, which is a whole other matter altogether.)

A simplistic judgement is the true disservice to history -- besides being humanly unjust.

jno

 

[I.Dallinger]

You cannot cover over that the Confederate soldier fought for the goals of the Southern Confederate Government. If saying "there was no single reason why so many individuals went to war" IS to mask that fact over, I think one is doing a disservice to history.

Tin Cup, whilst agreeing that what you say is correct, I just question if the majority of them saw it that way at the time or was it loyalty to family, friends, town, state that was uppermost. If any group or State were to try to try to impose their views/way of life on any other State/group then I can see that loyalties could well lay with your home State whatever the matter in dispute. Just a thought.

 

[Tin cup]

I DO question their reasons and motives for the war. So do many others here.

Kevin Dally

You cannot cover over that the Confederate soldier fought for the goals of the Southern Confederate Government. If saying "there was no single reason why so many individuals went to war" IS to mask that fact over, I think one is doing a disservice to history.

Tin Cup, whilst agreeing that what you say is correct, I just question if the majority of them saw it that way at the time or was it loyalty to family, friends, town, state that was uppermost. If any group or State were to try to try to impose their views/way of life on any other State/group then I can see that loyalties could well lay with your home State whatever the matter in dispute. Just a thought.

The sad fact is when they took up arms, their loyalties (wherever they lay) became mute...it was march, fight and die in battle, or die by firing squad ordered by an Officer of the military representing the Government!

Kevin Dally

 

[I.Dallinger]

Without the benefit of being able to speak to any of them then I find it difficult to make a judgement on those motives. I did not refer to 'The War', my reference was to their reasons for their personal service. I can respect a person for putting themselves in harms way for their friends/family/country. As I say I find it difficult to judge if you have no way of establishing the answer.

 

[Bmac48]

Concerning the people of the South,and their secession...is disagreeing with their cause and reasons for bringing on, and fighting a war, being disrespectful of them?

Kevin Dally

This is what Grant wrote down in his Memoirs:

"What General Lee's feelings were I do not know. As he was a man of much dignity, with an impassible face, it was impossible to say whether he felt inwardly glad that the end had finally come, or felt sad over the result, and was too manly to show it. Whatever his feelings, they were entirely concealed from my observation; but my own feelings, which had been quite jubilant on the receipt of his letter, were sad and depressed. I felt like anything rather than rejoicing at the downfall of a foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much for a cause, though that cause was, I believe, one of the worst for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse. I do not question, however, the sincerity of the great mass of those who were opposed to us."

That was April 9, 1865, and the surrender terms which Grant wrote out and Lee signed were based upon mutual respect and dignity. If Grant decided on a course of disrespect, then the country would not have been reunited; it would have engaged in guerrilla warfare that sooner or later the breech between North and South would have been permanent.

So, in saying that, I'd much rather chart the course of respecting Billy Yank and Johnny Reb, no matter what they did. We owe it to them.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/4367/4367-h/4367-h.htm#ch67

 

[brass napoleon]

This is what Grant wrote down in his Memoirs:

"What General Lee's feelings were I do not know. As he was a man of much dignity, with an impassible face, it was impossible to say whether he felt inwardly glad that the end had finally come, or felt sad over the result, and was too manly to show it. Whatever his feelings, they were entirely concealed from my observation; but my own feelings, which had been quite jubilant on the receipt of his letter, were sad and depressed. I felt like anything rather than rejoicing at the downfall of a foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much for a cause, though that cause was, I believe, one of the worst for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse. I do not question, however, the sincerity of the great mass of those who were opposed to us."

That was April 9, 1865, and the surrender terms which Grant wrote out and Lee signed were based upon mutual respect and dignity. If Grant decided on a course of disrespect, then the country would not have been reunited; it would have engaged in guerrilla warfare that sooner or later the breech between North and South would have been permanent.

So, in saying that, I'd much rather chart the course of respecting Billy Yank and Johnny Reb, no matter what they did. We owe it to them.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/4367/4367-h/4367-h.htm#ch67

Exactly! If Grant and Lincoln could do it, after all the years of hardship and heartache they endured, we ought to be able to do it 150 years later sitting comfortably at our keyboards.

 

[AUG]

AUG 351:

You cannot cover over that the Confederate soldier fought for the goals of the Southern Confederate Government. If saying "there was no single reason why so many individuals went to war" IS to mask that fact over, I think one is doing a disservice to history.

Kevin Dally

I don't mean to cover over anything, I am speaking for the individual soldier's personal reasons to go to war, aside from the reasons why the government he is fighting under is fighting for. The way I look at it is that if the soldier's reasons to go to war and the things that keep him fighting are entirely different than his government's goals to start or fight a war, than those are the things he is fighting for, not his government's own agenda. That's just my opinion, but I understand your point.

 

[rebelatsea]

Exactly! If Grant and Lincoln could do it, after all the years of hardship and heartache they endured, we ought to be able to do it 150 years later sitting comfortably at our keyboards.

You hit the nail on the head. AUG351. Absolutely.

 

[I.Dallinger]

I don't mean to cover over anything, I am speaking for the individual soldier's personal reasons to go to war, aside from the reasons why the government he is fighting under is fighting for. The way I look at it is that if the soldier's reasons to go to war and the things that keep him fighting are entirely different than his government's goals to start or fight a war, than those are the things he is fighting for, not his government's own agenda. That's just my opinion, but I understand your point.

You are right. Said it better than me though.