![]() |
Civil war Perspective - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: Civil war Perspective (/Thread-Civil-war-Perspective) |
Civil war Perspective - Belsnickel - 07-13-2015 We had a bit of a discussion about this topic in another thread, and so I wanted to post this for anyone interested. How the North distorts Civil War history Quote:With astonishing speed — and a surprising new consensus — the status of the Confederate battle flag has been altered. While a reconsideration of that symbol’s original meaning is long overdue, there is a countervailing risk that the righteous satisfaction in some quarters at lowering the flag may blind us to another large misunderstanding of the past. RE: Civil war Perspective - GMDino - 07-13-2015 (07-13-2015, 01:33 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: We had a bit of a discussion about this topic in another thread, and so I wanted to post this for anyone interested. Was it 100% anti-slave vs 100% pro-slave? No. Are the defenders of the "southern heritage" being disingenuous by saying the South fought to preserve state's rights vs preserving slavery? Yes. RE: Civil war Perspective - Belsnickel - 07-13-2015 (07-13-2015, 01:42 PM)GMDino Wrote: Was it 100% anti-slave vs 100% pro-slave? No. Which, you know, the article says. RE: Civil war Perspective - GMDino - 07-13-2015 (07-13-2015, 01:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Which, you know, the article says. Admit I skimmed it (at work). But just agreeing in general. Jerk. ![]() RE: Civil war Perspective - RICHMONDBENGAL_07 - 07-13-2015 (07-13-2015, 01:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Which, you know, the article says. I agree with you (and the author in your post) that there is so much more to the Civil War. However I feel that usually when I see a post or article like this, that someone is trying to diminish or somehow lessen the issue of slavery and it's relativity to the Civil War. I'm not saying that is the case here, just skeptical. I'm curious as to what the point is? RE: Civil war Perspective - fredtoast - 07-13-2015 If I understand this article it seems to say that the South may have been fighting to preserve the institution of slavery, but the North was fighting to preserve the Union. So while admitting that the South supported slavery it is also saying that the North was not really that strongly anti-slavery. While there were some very vocal abolitionist the main reason the North was fighting was to keep the United States united. RE: Civil war Perspective - Belsnickel - 07-13-2015 (07-13-2015, 04:30 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: I agree with you (and the author in your post) that there is so much more to the Civil War. However I feel that usually when I see a post or article like this, that someone is trying to diminish or somehow lessen the issue of slavery and it's relativity to the Civil War. I'm not saying that is the case here, just skeptical. See Fred's (07-13-2015, 05:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If I understand this article it seems to say that the South may have been fighting to preserve the institution of slavery, but the North was fighting to preserve the Union. Pretty much. We tend to look at the Civil War through a lens of "good v. evil," which is something we do with a lot of wars. That lens creates the fiction that the northern states were fighting to end slavery, which was not the case at all. There were abolitionists in the north, but they were a small minority, and most of them still saw the slaves as inferior. They were fighting to keep the U.S. in tact. It's interesting, because this points to something we often come across when looking at historical narratives. You take the viewpoint of all sides and mash them together to come up with something that looks more like the truth than any individual side is telling. RE: Civil war Perspective - RICHMONDBENGAL_07 - 07-13-2015 (07-13-2015, 05:38 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: See Fred's I don't really disagree with any of that. On the Smithsonian channel at 7pm tonight there is a program called "Civil War 360." Really interesting if you haven't seen it. And then right after it at 8pm is "Apocalypse: The Second World War". Then at 9pm "Fall of Japan: In Color". You can see this where all the babes will be hangin out tonight! ![]() RE: Civil war Perspective - BmorePat87 - 07-13-2015 The issue with this article is that the idea that the North was fighting against slavery is a misconception, yes, but there is no century long effort by Northern academia to distort the reality of the war and suggest that the North was fighting to end slavery and not to preserve the Union. I can tell you from experience as a social studies teacher that school systems are sugar coating it either. Well, at least mine isn't. RE: Civil war Perspective - Belsnickel - 07-13-2015 (07-13-2015, 06:33 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The issue with this article is that the idea that the North was fighting against slavery is a misconception, yes, but there is no century long effort by Northern academia to distort the reality of the war and suggest that the North was fighting to end slavery and not to preserve the Union. I can tell you from experience as a social studies teacher that school systems are sugar coating it either. Well, at least mine isn't. I would disagree. I mean, think about the pedestal upon which Lincoln is hoisted as "The great Emancipator." Is it taught in schools today that he had no intention of ending slavery when elected? RE: Civil war Perspective - BmorePat87 - 07-13-2015 (07-13-2015, 06:37 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I would disagree. I mean, think about the pedestal upon which Lincoln is hoisted as "The great Emancipator." Is it taught in schools today that he had no intention of ending slavery when elected? It is certainly taught that it was not his goal coming into the Presidency to end slavery. And, yea, Lincoln will forever be on that pedestal. He was a great president and kept the Union together and ended the Civil War. But it's hard to separate Lincoln's role in the Civil War from everything else. So while the real emancipation (13th Amendment because the Emancipation Proclamation didn't really do anything) is not a part of the Civil War, we will remember it as part of the Civil War era. But none of this suggests that the North fought the war to end slavery. Most knew it had to remain to keep the Union intact prior to the war and hoped that rapid industrialization and containment of slavery would eventually kill the institution organically. RE: Civil war Perspective - Belsnickel - 07-13-2015 (07-13-2015, 07:04 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It is certainly taught that it was not his goal coming into the Presidency to end slavery. Curriculum must be different these days. Even in a southern school, when I went through, that sort of stuff was never talked about. RE: Civil war Perspective - Se ky bengal - 07-13-2015 (07-13-2015, 07:08 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Curriculum must be different these days. Even in a southern school, when I went through, that sort of stuff was never talked about. Same in my school, wasn't Lincoln , one of the biggest slave owners of all pat? RE: Civil war Perspective - Belsnickel - 07-13-2015 (07-13-2015, 08:01 PM)Se ky bengal Wrote: Same in my school, wasn't Lincoln , one of the biggest slave owners of all pat? I don't think Lincoln was a slave owner. The only time in his life he would have really had the chance would have been as POTUS since he lived most of his life in free states. His father's family did own slaves when they were in Virginia, though. Some of the few slave owners in the Linville area of my county (high population of Anabaptists, who were abolitionists). RE: Civil war Perspective - Se ky bengal - 07-13-2015 (07-13-2015, 08:18 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't think Lincoln was a slave owner. The only time in his life he would have really had the chance would have been as POTUS since he lived most of his life in free states. Ah yes thanks for memory reboot. Sorry for misspeaken, bbut I know Mary's family owned slaves. Which Is still bad. I guess it went the times. Reputation for u for jogging my memory. |