"The South still lies about the Civil War", Does the North lie?

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Status
Not open for further replies.

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Slavery was not ended in the north until the last slave was free, and it sure wasn't decades. Given, it wasn't many after 1850. Kind of like the hunt for black Confederates, not that many, hard to find, yet there are some.

Interesting thread, compare and contrast by county the decrease in the North and increase in the South of the numbers of slaves.
 

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
OK, so you're claiming there was no complicity at the North. Remember, this thread is about sections lying to one another and themselves.

Do you want to start another thread about Northern complicity with respect to slavery? Will this somehow mess up the Narrative you would like to tell?

The North was into the whole thing, up to its hip boots. If this is painful to you, too bad and if we need a new thread I'm happy to go there with you. Cheers.
No, I just quote facts and figures.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Excellent
It is related to a project I was working on got buried under too much data, trying to filter 100 million records with my assets was overwhelming. Someone else filtered the same records I was looking for. The project was part of a what if, if there was no Civil War, assuming a linear relationship, when would certain Slave States become free.

The big problem of any project is making it understandable.
 

ForeverFree

Major
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Location
District of Columbia
I'm just wondering if this is the same 'argument' that has been turned back on the South in so many ways. None of the progress you've made counts because it all rests on this original 'sin'. The original sin was slavery. You may never gain redemption because you took too long, forced a terrible war, didn't do it of your own volition, etc, etc, etc. When will the South be considered 'redeemed'?
That's a subject for a different thread, and maybe not even then, because of modern politics. I will make the observation that in the South, the debate over Confederate statues is not a case where Northerners are coming down South to complain. It's southern African Americans and many white Southerners who are questioning the placement of these monuments. Perhaps this is their answer to the question of how the South, which is their South too, can be redeemed.

- Alan
 

Cavalry Charger

Captain
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
That's a subject for a different thread, and maybe not even then, because of modern politics.
It's OK because JGG has moved it into a new thread in Campfire Chat where there has been some interesting discussion going on.

I will make the observation that in the South, the debate over Confederate statues is not a case where Northerners are coming down South to complain. It's southern African Americans and many white Southerners who are questioning the placement of these monuments. Perhaps this is their answer to the question of how the South, which is their South too, can be redeemed.
Perhaps it is, and once again modern politics may become an issue.

What I posted, I posted in response to an observation that Northerners also had things to regret in the past, some of which no doubt related to slavery. My impression is they earned their 'salvation' in relation to that through Emancipation and prior actions leading up to that.

The rest of the conversation probably needs to be had elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

O' Be Joyful

Sergeant Major
Forever Free identified the difference between southern "lies" and northern "lies" early in this thread.

The "north," and I guess that also includes all the states that have been admitted since the Civil War as well, don't really have enough of an emotional investment in the war to concoct lies. Those interested in history want to learn the most accurate account possible. Those with no interest in history are perfectly happy to shorthand the war into Lincoln/End of Slavery in the same way they shorthand the Revolutionary War into George Washington/The British are coming.

The "south," on the other hand, has a long history of trying twist the remembrance of that war in order to portray the attempted secession in a more positive light. There are still some in the south emotionally invested enough to try twisting the history. I suspect their number is getting fewer with each generation, and diluted with the modern culture of relocating for jobs, etc.

I first became personally acquainted with persons from southern states after joining the military in 1980. When a friend from Mississippi would say something about the south rising again, or something similar, I would look at him like he was crazy. Why would anyone nowadays be hanging on to that long past war in a personal way?

When I read excuses for that obsession, that the war killed many of a persons ancestors, or that the war took place primarily in southern states, it doesn't ring true. Many losers of more recent wars are able to move on and get over it, and that war killed many Union ancestors as well.

IMO, there are not northern lies and southern lies. There is a dispassionate side that either doesn't care at all, or if they do care, wants an accurate history of the Civil War. And then there is an emotionally-invested side that wants a southern slanted history of the Civil War.

Wow!!! And Right On!!! Dan!!! (Note: As a one-time sports/local events cub-reporter for my local Crime & Obituary Rag...er...Uhh... newspaper, I was taught to abhor the use of exclamation points--they are to be used only rarely in quotes and then sparingly--but I am gritting my teeth ünd waiving the rule in this case!!!) It is 1 short week before I will be observing my fourth year on CWT and you, sir, have put it as well and as succinctly as anyone I have yet seen do so on this board. Excuses are many, Facts and documentation are as always an elusive beast(!).
 

SWMODave

First Sergeant
Forum Host
Thread Medic
Joined
Jul 23, 2017
Location
Southwest Missouri
“In the future they will rewrite our history to match their agenda, they will label us racists and traitors fighting to keep people enslaved; they will make heroes out of the people that burned our homes, destroyed our towns, terrorized our women and trampled the Constitution. They will ignore the fact that we were defending our way of life, the rights of our States to govern themselves and our homes against invaders. They'll ban our flag and pull down our monuments. I hope our children will remember us, preserve our history and teach their children the worthiness of our cause.” - Unknown Confederate Veteran from the early 20th Century...

I found the above quote buried deep inside one of the volumes of the Old Confederate Veteran, it was written by an unknown Confederate Veteran speaking on behalf of a fallen Confederate Soldier with whom he had served during the War.
Need some help if anyone can. I have seen this quote before but this is the first time I have seen someone give a source. I am unable to find it searching the Confederate Veteran series thru the Library of Virgina search engine and wondered if anyone knew the specific source. I would like to read the entire speech/letter/article it was taken from for a potential future story in Soldier's Tales.

If a historic statement, it is very intuitive. If a modern statement, it needs to be identified as such.

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

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Looks like the Monday morning trek to work has muffled conferation.
Need some help if anyone can. I have seen this quote before but this is the first time I have seen someone give a source. I am unable to find it searching the Confederate Veteran series thru the Library of Virgina search engine and wondered if anyone knew the specific source. I would like to read the entire speech/letter/article it was taken from for a potential future story in Soldier's Tales.

If a historic statement, it is very intuitive. If a modern statement, it needs to be identified as such.

TIA
Facebook is the apparent source.
“In the future they will rewrite our... - Defending the Heritage
 

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Need some help if anyone can. I have seen this quote before but this is the first time I have seen someone give a source. I am unable to find it searching the Confederate Veteran series thru the Library of Virgina search engine and wondered if anyone knew the specific source. I would like to read the entire speech/letter/article it was taken from for a potential future story in Soldier's Tales.

If a historic statement, it is very intuitive. If a modern statement, it needs to be identified as such.

TIA
Agenda is a tip off, It is modernism.ngram. Their agenda is also modern.ngram
It was written by a modern.
 

contestedground

First Sergeant
Joined
Jun 16, 2016
I understand what you were doing. I was just poking a little.

Never in my life, have I ever considered Delaware, or Maryland as "Southern", & I have some kin from Maryland. When I think of Delaware, I don't have images of Southern Belle's fixin cornbread, & grits.

I understand some folks consider them both as "Southern". I've always considered them more similar to New Jersey, or Pennsylvania.
Thanks for sharing your definition of "south." Unfortunately, it's not really relevant to what people thought in the 19h century. Marylanders certainly considered themselves southerners, and many of them wanted to join the Confederacy, a decision Robert E. Lee wanted to encourage.

I take Lee over you on the issue of 19th century definitions.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Thanks for sharing your definition of "south." Unfortunately, it's not really relevant to what people thought in the 19h century. Marylanders certainly considered themselves southerners, and many of them wanted to join the Confederacy, a decision Robert E. Lee wanted to encourage.

I take Lee over you on the issue of 19th century definitions.
Don't forget Chief Justice Taney was a Marylander too.
 

Eric Calistri

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
May 31, 2012
Location
Austin Texas
In the vernacular of the 19th century, southern meant slave state and northern meant free state. These were euphemisms similar to the way pro-life and pro-choice are used today. The Mason-Dixon Line was said to separate north from south (PA from MD) for this reason. Some southern states did not secede, but this didn’t make them northern, it made them Union.

DE had, in the 1790’s, had taken some of the same steps to eliminate slavery as it’s neighbors in PA and NJ, tightly restricting the slave trade. By 1860 there were only a few thousand slaves left in DE, making it not quite northern .
 

Andersonh1

Major
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Location
South Carolina
But once signed up, EVERY Confederate soldier fought for the Confederate Government's goal of gaining independence to perpetuate slavery for all time. Nothing "broad brush" about it, it happened! You can try to compartmentalize it, explain it away, complicate it with trivial details, and legalities, but it's still the truth.

Kevin Dally
This reminds me of discussing this topic elsewhere, where I had the following exchange with a fellow poster:

him - I've read what you've written, and it seems to be a lot of trying to muddy the fact that these men were traitors fighting to preserve an immoral institution. There motivation for fighting doesn't matter. Quit trying to ennoble them by saying "they weren't fighting for slavery". They were villains, each and every one, and their legacy lives on in the South today.​
me - History is much more complicated than you portray it here. I have an ancestor who was in the Confederate army. He was there because he was conscripted. He was wounded in the hand at the battle of Fredericksburg and sent to the hospital. He went AWOL for most of 1863, but was eventually arrested and returned to service. He was captured at the 3rd battle of Winchester in September 1864 and spent the last months of the war as a POW at Point Lookout in Maryland. Was he a villain?​
him - Yep.​
This is a perfect example of the modern version of the northern narrative. Lump every last southern man who fought for the CS into one group and condemn them all. It's not nuanced, it's not factual, it's simply judgmental.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
This reminds me of discussing this topic elsewhere, where I had the following exchange with a fellow poster:

him - I've read what you've written, and it seems to be a lot of trying to muddy the fact that these men were traitors fighting to preserve an immoral institution. There motivation for fighting doesn't matter. Quit trying to ennoble them by saying "they weren't fighting for slavery". They were villains, each and every one, and their legacy lives on in the South today.​
me - History is much more complicated than you portray it here. I have an ancestor who was in the Confederate army. He was there because he was conscripted. He was wounded in the hand at the battle of Fredericksburg and sent to the hospital. He went AWOL for most of 1863, but was eventually arrested and returned to service. He was captured at the 3rd battle of Winchester in September 1864 and spent the last months of the war as a POW at Point Lookout in Maryland. Was he a villain?​
him - Yep.​
This is a perfect example of the modern version of the northern narrative. Lump every last southern man who fought for the CS into one group and condemn them all. It's not nuanced, it's not factual, it's simply judgmental.
If I am killed by a soldier, all I know is the motivations of his sovereign. There are few complexities there.
If my ancestor is killed, I don't really care about if the soldier wanted to, was bored or forced to.
 

DanSBHawk

Sergeant Major
Joined
May 8, 2015
Location
Wisconsin
Wow!!! And Right On!!! Dan!!! (Note: As a one-time sports/local events cub-reporter for my local Crime & Obituary Rag...er...Uhh... newspaper, I was taught to abhor the use of exclamation points--they are to be used only rarely in quotes and then sparingly--but I am gritting my teeth ünd waiving the rule in this case!!!) It is 1 short week before I will be observing my fourth year on CWT and you, sir, have put it as well and as succinctly as anyone I have yet seen do so on this board. Excuses are many, Facts and documentation are as always an elusive beast(!).
Thanks OBJ!
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Tin cup

Captain
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Location
Texas
This reminds me of discussing this topic elsewhere, where I had the following exchange with a fellow poster:

him - I've read what you've written, and it seems to be a lot of trying to muddy the fact that these men were traitors fighting to preserve an immoral institution. There motivation for fighting doesn't matter. Quit trying to ennoble them by saying "they weren't fighting for slavery". They were villains, each and every one, and their legacy lives on in the South today.​
me - History is much more complicated than you portray it here. I have an ancestor who was in the Confederate army. He was there because he was conscripted. He was wounded in the hand at the battle of Fredericksburg and sent to the hospital. He went AWOL for most of 1863, but was eventually arrested and returned to service. He was captured at the 3rd battle of Winchester in September 1864 and spent the last months of the war as a POW at Point Lookout in Maryland. Was he a villain?​
him - Yep.​
This is a perfect example of the modern version of the northern narrative. Lump every last southern man who fought for the CS into one group and condemn them all. It's not nuanced, it's not factual, it's simply judgmental.
Does him fighting for slavery and the break up of the Union make him a saint?
To a lot of pro-Confederates he's a saint, that is also what you get on the other side of the spectrum.:unsure:

Kevin Dally
 

Viper21

Brigadier General
Moderator
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Location
Rockbridge County, Virginia
Thanks for sharing your definition of "south." Unfortunately, it's not really relevant to what people thought in the 19h century. Marylanders certainly considered themselves southerners, and many of them wanted to join the Confederacy, a decision Robert E. Lee wanted to encourage.

I take Lee over you on the issue of 19th century definitions.
I wasn't sharing my definition of the South. I gave my thoughts on Delaware, & Maryland in my lifetime. I'm pretty aware of what 19th century Marylanders thought. I have a GG Grandfather who fought with the 1st Maryland Infantry CSA, & another Grandfather who was a judge in mid 19th century Maryland.

Glad we can agree on the words of General Robert E. Lee. Although, I would bet you feel differently about some of his other statements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top