The "False Cause?"

[gunny]

What do they teach where you live and where do you live?

 

[gunny]

Well, I'm a kid in high school with two parents who ain't too interested in the Civil War. I wrote an answer earlier in a thread. Would you like me to answer some more questions?

Great topic question by the way!

See my below reply to myself. Oops!

 

[hanna260]

Yes. What were you taught? Why did the north fight. Was it to preserve the Union or was it a mre ethical or moral view to end slavery. We always hear why the southern soldiers fought. (To preserve slavery - right?). But what was the reason northern boys fought and died from a young person's teachings?

I'm not really comfortable talking about where I live though it's not in any area that was involved in the ACW. Hope that's okay.

Alrighty then, I'm in an advanced US History class this year so we went pretty fast through this- like we spent two days but here we go. We were taught that Lincoln did not free the slaves until 1863- we actually had a debate about whether he deserved to be called the Great Emancipator or not with some saying yes and some saying no. My teacher made it clear that it was a pragmatic decision by Lincoln but also that it changed the Union's war-aims and did change what the war was about. He didn't appear to be on either side. (He's from Alaska.) The textbook talked about emancipation- saying that initially no one in the North wanted it but it eventually gained momentum. It covered the un-equal treatment the black soldiers received. It also did talk about state's rights factoring into secession- even though the textbook made it clear that the South seceded over slavery. It didn't really talk about the common soldier's motivation (it's a pretty dry textbook and again- like two days) but I think the main thing we got out of it was the North fought for Union first and then eventually the war became about slavery because the Emancipation Proclamation made it about slavery.

We also talked about Sherman and total war (they claim he invented it) and some stuff about Grant and Lee- Grant using attrition and Lee being a symbol in the South. Hope this helped. Now if you'll excuse me- got homework to do.

 

[gunny]

I'm not really comfortable talking about where I live though it's not in any area that was involved in the ACW. Hope that's okay.

Alrighty then, I'm in an advanced US History class this year so we went pretty fast through this- like we spent two days but here we go. We were taught that Lincoln did not free the slaves until 1863- we actually had a debate about whether he deserved to be called the Great Emancipator or not with some saying yes and some saying no. My teacher made it clear that it was a pragmatic decision by Lincoln but also that it changed the Union's war-aims and did change what the war was about. He didn't appear to be on either side. (He's from Alaska.) The textbook talked about emancipation- saying that initially no one in the North wanted it but it eventually gained momentum. It covered the un-equal treatment the black soldiers received. It also did talk about state's rights factoring into secession- even though the textbook made it clear that the South seceded over slavery. It didn't really talk about the common soldier's motivation (it's a pretty dry textbook and again- like two days) but I think the main thing we got out of it was the North fought for Union first and then eventually the war became about slavery because the Emancipation Proclamation made it about slavery.

We also talked about Sherman and total war (they claim he invented it) and some stuff about Grant and Lee- Grant using attrition and Lee being a symbol in the South. Hope this helped. Now if you'll excuse me- got homework to do.

That's fine. Wasn't talking about an address! Lol

Just wanted to know what younger people are being taught. There are those who believe the war was fought to end slavery and it's possible there was an era when that was taught. When someone asks what was the war fought over, the average joe would probably say slavery. The south wanted it. That is clear. So if the war was fought over slavery and the north fought them, the average joe would most certainly answer that the north fought to end slavery. You are an educated young person in an advanced class. I expect you to get it. But... What about the average kid?

How many people can't even answer who the first president was? Or recite the Pledge of Allegiance correctly?

Get my drift?

 

[hanna260]

That's fine. Wasn't talking about an address! Lol

Just wanted to know what younger people are being taught. There are those who believe the war was fought to end slavery and it's possible there was an era when that was taught. When someone asks what was the war fought over, the average joe would probably say slavery. The south wanted it. That is clear. So if the war was fought over slavery and the north fought them, the average joe would most certainly answer that the north fought to end slavery. You are an educated young person in an advanced class. I expect you to get it. But... What about the average kid?

How many people can't even answer who the first president was? Or recite the Pledge of Allegiance correctly?

Get my drift?

I think I get what you're saying. I think they did a poll asking kids who was the leader of the Revolutionary army and they said a good percentage answered Ulysses S. Grant. I think most young people if you were to ask would say slavery too.

 

[cash]

My daughter was in high school when we lived in Las Vegas. She came home and said her teacher said the war had nothing to do with slavery. I told her to put what her teacher told her on the test, but he was wrong, then showed her the secession documents and statements from Mosby and Forrest, and of course Stephens. I told her I didn't want her to contradict her teacher in class and get in trouble, that she could do that all she wanted in college because the profs love it.

 

[rhettbutler1865]

" Look out the window ladies (at the slaves picking cotton),. and see what these poor fools are dyin' for...how many now would give a leg for a rich man's slave?" -----Cold Mountain

 

[rhettbutler1865]

I'm not really comfortable talking about where I live though it's not in any area that was involved in the ACW. Hope that's okay.

Alrighty then, I'm in an advanced US History class this year so we went pretty fast through this- like we spent two days but here we go. We were taught that Lincoln did not free the slaves until 1863- we actually had a debate about whether he deserved to be called the Great Emancipator or not with some saying yes and some saying no. My teacher made it clear that it was a pragmatic decision by Lincoln but also that it changed the Union's war-aims and did change what the war was about. He didn't appear to be on either side. (He's from Alaska.) The textbook talked about emancipation- saying that initially no one in the North wanted it but it eventually gained momentum. It covered the un-equal treatment the black soldiers received. It also did talk about state's rights factoring into secession- even though the textbook made it clear that the South seceded over slavery. It didn't really talk about the common soldier's motivation (it's a pretty dry textbook and again- like two days) but I think the main thing we got out of it was the North fought for Union first and then eventually the war became about slavery because the Emancipation Proclamation made it about slavery.

We also talked about Sherman and total war (they claim he invented it) and some stuff about Grant and Lee- Grant using attrition and Lee being a symbol in the South. Hope this helped. Now if you'll excuse me- got homework to do.

Hanna, have you read "Lincoln Reconsidered?" I took a class on this topic in college--it was very enlightening!

 

[hanna260]

Hanna, have you read "Lincoln Reconsidered?" I took a class on this topic in college--it was very enlightening!

No but on the reading list it goes.

 

[rhettbutler1865]

Didn't hurt either, that the professor was so VERY much into the CW...My 1st class, freshman year at 8:00 a.m. (NOT my favorite time of day), and he comes rushing through the door shouting "AND REALLY WHO WAS LINCOLN?" Scared me half to death, but I realized--now Here's a good prof...

 

[hanna260]

Didn't hurt either, that the professor was so VERY much into the CW...My 1st class, freshman year at 8:00 a.m. (NOT my favorite time of day), and he comes rushing through the door shouting "AND REALLY WHO WAS LINCOLN?" Scared me half to death, but I realized--now Here's a good prof...

I have classes at 7:30 so I get you. He certainly seemed to have gotten you all thinking- even if it does sound a wee bit terrifying.

 

[peteanddelmar]

I have classes at 7:30 so I get you. He certainly seemed to have gotten you all thinking- even if it does sound a wee bit terrifying.

HaHa! I win. My classes started at 7 a.m....in a private school! For College.

As far as civil war I was taught almost nothing.
It was avoided.
We jumped right into WW2 mostly.
And Vietnam was too fresh...current event in grade school.

 

[hanna260]

HaHa! I win. My classes started at 7 a.m....in a private school! For College.

As far as civil war I was taught almost nothing.
It was avoided.
We jumped right into WW2 mostly.
And Vietnam was too fresh...current event in grade school.

We are currently learning about WWII! We're not going to spend all that much time on it though. Just a week or two.

 

[peteanddelmar]

It is on p. 488 of the BAPTIST HYMNAL of 1956 Convention Press, Nashville, TN. (Southern Baptist Convention.) On p.633
of the BAPTIST HYMNAL of 1991, Convention Press, Nashville, TN (Southern Baptist Convention) I have been in Southern Baptist Churches for the past 75 years. We sing it on the 4th of July , never fail. True most folks do not know the story behind it, but it has a rousing tune. George Beverly Shea sang it at most Billy Graham Crusades. The only thing is the words have been change to a more religious vein than was originally written.

I go to and independent Christian church and we sing it. Were not even Baptist.
Some of the older folks probably think it's from the Bible and would pitch a fit if it wasn't sung!!

 

[rhettbutler1865]

I also went to a private liberal arts college, and this was the only course on the Civil War era--much the pity. But I was there to act, and my (sorry, not boasting) lead roles kept me in the theater anyway.

 

[rhettbutler1865]

HaHa! I win. My classes started at 7 a.m....in a private school! For College.

As far as civil war I was taught almost nothing.
It was avoided.
We jumped right into WW2 mostly.
And Vietnam was too fresh...current event in grade school.

"Current event in gradeschool?" I was up for the draft my senior year in HIGH school! Boy, i AM getting old!

 

[peteanddelmar]

We are currently learning about WWII! We're not going to spend all that much time on it though. Just a week or two.

Advanced placement huh?
I had all my credits done for high school almost by the end of sophomore year so I got put in "advanced placement"....know what is was called?
A job! I worked 1/2 day my last 2 years of high school.
But you are waaaaay quicker than I was.......
Your mother needs to have you tested.
You might be TEACHING college in 2 years!

 

[gunny]

I suppose the point about this thread is this...

We know the southerners coined the term 'lost cause' but who took it to the next level?

Who specifically made the term a bad thing?

It was never intended to be. The term never would have been coined if there hadn't been a true voice behind the idea that the 'cause' whatever it was to each individual was a true cause. Meaning - important to each individual. To some that was in fact slavery. To others, it was to protect hearth and home.

So, for northerners, they were fighting originally as a call to arms just as the south was. What was their motivation? Or was there one initially?

 

[rhettbutler1865]

Two of my buddies killed in Viet Nam--my lottery number was very high, thank God. (Although my dad was furious when he asked me what I would've done if it was in the top 10...I gave the wrong reply to a combat officer from WWII!

 

[peteanddelmar]

I can think of one guy who was an adherent of both; or neither. Depends on your brand of absolutism, I guess.

"I might say, secondly, some people wonder, well, what has Mississippi got to do with Harlem? It isn't actually Mississippi; it's America. America is Mississippi. There's no such thing as a Mason-Dixon Line – it's America. There's no such thing as the South – it's America. If one room in your house is dirty, you've got a dirty house. If the closet is dirty, you've got a dirty house. Don't say that that room is dirty but the rest of my house is clean. You're over the whole house. You have authority over the whole house; the entire house is under your jurisdiction. And the mistake that you and I make is letting these Northern crackers shift the weight to the Southern crackers."

(Italics Original)

Malcom X, Malcom X Speaks: Selected Speeches and Statements, 1965, pp. 108-109

Ok. I really don't know what cracker means! I probably was one.
Or white trash. No we stayed clean, went to church, and school and brushed our teeth.....LOL.