THE BIG MESSY THREAD--Discussion of the Civil War and its relations to FIREFLY
POSTED BY: SouthernMerc
UPDATED: Sunday, October 26, 2003 20:41
VIEWED: 10919
PAGE 3 of 5
Quote:
It was Early, I believe, that neglected to take his chance at securing the high ground after Lee suggested he take it if practicable
I think Early was on the other flank.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Then maybe I'm thinking of Ewell?
Viva Firefly!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think Ewell was with Early on the Confederate Left (Culps Hill). Longstreet was sent to take the Union left while Early and Ewell were to assault Culp's Hill on the Union right. The assaults were to be simultaneous but it didn't work out.
General Hood (who was with Longstreet)wanted to attack the two hills that appeared to be the end of the Union line (Big and Little Round Top). This was plausable because General Sickles of the Union Army had moved out of position earlier in the day. But, Longstreet refused to changed Lee's battle plan. In spite of this as Hood's division pressed the attack at Devil's Den they approached Little Round Top. It was too late, a Union Staff Officer had already noticed that Sickle's Advance had exposed the Union left and sent what troops he could find to hold that hill.
The interesting tie with FF here is how the line soldier feels let down by the Generals. Probably a lot of soldiers with Hood and Longstreet knew they should have divereted and attacked those hills earlier than they did. In Killer Angels Shaara portays Buford setting up the original Union Line just west of Gettysburg and hoping that he'll be reinforced while he holds the best avaialble position. This made me think of Mal waiting for his "gorram airsupport" at Serenity Valley.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
The modern teaching of the Civil War being about slavery is largely a case of political correctness, in my opinion. I think a good case can be made that slavery was dying out, even in the Cotton States -- at least two plans for gradual emancipation were put before Congress by Southern legislators, which were largely disregarded on political grounds (the view of some controlling Northern legislators that if it's Southern, it must be bad).
Additionally, some Southerners were beginning to realize that slavery was simply not as cost-effective as hiring free labor -- free labor only has to be paid during the harvest season, while slaves have to be cared for throughout the year. And these slaves were, in the vast majority, well cared for. They were expensive property, after all. (No, I am not condoning the practice, just pointing out the prevailing view at the time.)
Again, this is opinion, but I tend to think that had the Confederacy survived, emancipation would have still taken place, just a bit later. Robert E. Lee, had he lived long enough, would have very likely become the President after Jefferson Davis, and Lee was against the practice of slavery.
I wonder how events would have changed if this road had of been pursued.
I have read many stories of former slaves simply being turned out after the war, people without homes or work who established farms on undesirable land or starved. If a plan of gradual emancipation had been implemented, education and gradual freedoms offered, and the fact people are more accepting of gradual change than those forced on them, I wonder if the US would have never needed a civil rights movement, and former slaves would have seen a better future, as well as a country not going through a civil war.
Viewing Lincoln in these terms makes many of his actions irresponsible, and very near if not criminal.
As Mal said at the end of Jaynestown
" My estimation that every man that got a statue made of them was one kind of a son of a bitch or another "
" If wishes were Horses, then we'd all be eatting Steak "
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
..If a plan of gradual emancipation had been implemented, education and gradual freedoms offered, and the fact people are more accepting of gradual change than those forced on them, I wonder if the US would have never needed a civil rights movement, and former slaves would have seen a better future, as well as a country not going through a civil war.
Viewing Lincoln in these terms makes many of his actions irresponsible, and very near if not criminal.
I disagree.
The real need for the Civil Rights Movement rose out of Blacks desire for equal treatment under the law (ie the abolishment of Jim Crow). This had nothing to do with the Emancipation Proclomation and everything to with White racisim (both in the south and north). The development of Jim Crow laws was due the failure of Reconstruction and the rise of the KKK. Lincoln had nothing to do with either of these ,he was long dead, put in the ground by that vengeful (please insert the appropriate Chinese expression here)John (and again here)Wilkes Booth. Had Lincoln lived and been able to enact his vision of reconstruction things may have been different. The real criminals you should be indiciting are Booth and Nathan Bedford Forest (ex Confderate General founder of the KKK).
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You are right to a large extent, but if the gradual change was allowed to happen, and if the Southern political figures were sincere about change the following would be the case
1. The Civil war would not have occured, even with the ongoing debate over State rights, etc these problems should have been addressed within the system, without resorting to non political means
2. The former slaves may have ( depending on the sincerity ) achieved equality long before they did
3. Alienation of the South, by working the changes within the system, extremists such as Forrest would have likely been vocal over change but eventually accepted it having had their say. By shoving the decision down theirs throats, in addition to suffering other things at the end of the war, I don't think the same level of antagonism would have occured, or support for those who would pursue it.
My point being, Lincoln started down the road, and was likely the only one who could have altered the outcome by not being as forceful towards his goals. Buchanan made attempts towards this, but I think Lincoln was the only one who could have pulled it off. If after the election of 1860, Lincoln tried to bring a political reconsilation about with the states who seperated, things could have been very different. Once that history changes, we can only guess at the outcome.
" If wishes were Horses, then we'd all be eatting Steak "
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You've come up with a lot of "if's". That's a long way from Lincoln's actions being almost criminal.
The facts remain, the real criminal behavior was the treatment of blacks, before and after the war. An article I read, in one of the local papers up here, documented the existence of postcards where people posed at the site of a lynching, with the bodies hanging from a railroad trestle (The Postcard was dated in circa 1910). Billie Holiday wrote a song "Strange Fruit" inspired by her personal experience when she wandered from the band's bus and found a body hanging in the breeze (I think that was in the 1930's). I personally know a Viet Nam Veteran (recipient of a Bronze Star and Purple Heart)who won't eat Nabisco Crackers to this day because while in full uniform, with Seargant's Stripes on his sleeve he was refused service at a Bus Station Restaurant. They told him to go to the back door, where he was given a cup of soup and some Nabisico crackers.
To the contrary, there is a tale about a communion service at an Episcopal Church shortly after the Civil War. Apparently a black man approached the communion rail at a church in Virgina. No one moved. After some time, with the man kneeling at the rail, a gray haired, distinguished looking man got up and knelt beside him. After this the eucharist proceeded as normal. The disguished gray haired man was Robert E. Lee. (M. Shaara, Killer Angles; Ken Burns,Civil War)
My point is that there is no justification or excuses, those people who commited racist acts because of some sense of loss over the war or reconstruction were just out and out wrong. Why should just treatment of PEOPLE have to be shoved down someone's throat?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
My point is that there is no justification or excuses, those people who commited racist acts because of some sense of loss over the war or reconstruction were just out and out wrong. Why should just treatment of PEOPLE have to shoved down someone's throat?
Once again I agree with you, mostly
My point was, I feel there was many ways to avoid the war in the first place, and I think some of these options should have been pursued before military options.
I am not being an apologist for the KKK or supporting the mistreatment of anyone, The issues over State rights were real, debatable issues. I have read many historians theorize that slavery was becoming a thing of the past in the South even before the war. As your last post shows, with men like Lee, it was going to be a thing of the past. The question I ask, would the former slaves been better off with a systematic, gradual implementation of freedoms, or being thrown into the cold after the war.
Many good men died, and much suffering was felt by all.... my point is could it have been avoided, and the issues of States rights and the abolishion of Slavery been acomplished by other means?? The thought processes of all the leaders leading into Fort Sumter should be examined, I think Lincoln could have done better. Achieved the same goals without paying the same costs. Only an opinion...
" If wishes were Horses, then we'd all be eatting Steak "
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Could the issues brought up POSSIBLY been avoided? Sure thing. But then again, even my hindsight is 20/20. Revisionist, apologist, armchair quarterback; all of these describe hindsight. We know NOW what horrible things our forefathers were doing. But when you're in the hot-seat, it's awfully hard to see all the paths clearly. Be careful with your speculation folks; remember these were people. Not Great Men of History, people. Remember the good with the bad.
I just looked at that paragraph, and it's not making alot of sense (I should quit posting at 3am). Ah, I just remembered the point, I was gonna ask a question. Does anyone know the legal concerns prior to and following the CW? Such as actions taken in congress and what-not regarding the South, and when the South was allowed representatives and senators elected by the South? I'm asking for some hard data that we can chew on here. And someone who can explain the stranger bits. We've touched on some already, I was curious to see if we had more.
Also, this ties in to the treatment of Browncoats following the War for Unification (or is it Unification War, or War to Establish the Alliance?).
Jayne: "How big a room?"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The popular "A People's History of the United States" describes an argument against unfettered Capitalism that was brought forward by the slaveowners. The book describes a late 19th century scenario where a coal mine collapsed (because of a lack of safety standards), workers were trapped and dead, and the owners would run on to the disaster scene and make inquiries as to the health of the donkeys used to pull out the ore carts. The workers were a secondary concern because the owners could simply cross off their names and hire more workers with basically no loss. Modern workplace regulations have helped improve that situation, but in the 19th century, slaveowners looked at the wage-slavery being conducted up north, and argued that Southern-style slavery was more humane because the slaveowner has a vested interest in the welfare of his property. As morally reprehensible as slavery was, the slaveowners had a small point that I'm sure many reasonable Southerners could latch on to.
BTA,
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME