Confederate Glory

[Ranger2]

I'm a Northerner, and when we learn about the Civil War it was "we, the Union, freed the slaves, the South was evil and wanted slaves so we killed them, Abe Lincoln was a saint, and Robert E. Lee was a hateful racist slave owner."
We learn that the cause of the war was slavery.
That's what you get from a Northern public school.
But what about you Newgroundsers from "Dixie"?

What do you learn about the Civil War?
Different name?
Different views?
What do you learn, Southerners, that we in the North do not about the Civil War?

[A-Carrot-By-Dr-Riot]

That explanation sounds like the sort of thing that's taught in elementary school. Did you get that explanation from a 6th grade teacher or a High School History teacher?

As you study the subject more you might find that there were many many causes for the Civil war, slavery was only one important issue that gets a large amount of attention due to the human element.

[Ranger2]

At 10/25/08 01:30 AM, A-Carrot-By-Dr-Riot wrote: That explanation sounds like the sort of thing that's taught in elementary school. Did you get that explanation from a 6th grade teacher or a High School History teacher?

As you study the subject more you might find that there were many many causes for the Civil war, slavery was only one important issue that gets a large amount of attention due to the human element.

I'll be learning about the Civil War in AP History in about a month or so. Last time I learned about it was 8th grade.

[A-Carrot-By-Dr-Riot]

In AP history the explanation should be much more elaborate than the explanation you gave. I'm not trying to insult you or anything.

I've always found it interesting that the Emancipation Proclamation didn't free slaves in northern states that had legal slavery.

Another fun thought, if Lincoln had been a little faster on the trigger to suspend Habeas Corpus, he could have had General Lee arrested and held without trial before the war started. It's one of the President's 'secret' powers that few people are aware of.

[Ranger2]

At 10/25/08 01:35 AM, A-Carrot-By-Dr-Riot wrote: In AP history the explanation should be much more elaborate than the explanation you gave. I'm not trying to insult you or anything.

The explanation I gave was what you're force-fed in elementary school. It's not my personal explanation for it.
looking forward to learning about the CW in school.

[A-Carrot-By-Dr-Riot]

At 10/25/08 01:37 AM, Ranger2 wrote: The explanation I gave was what you're force-fed in elementary school. It's not my personal explanation for it.

Okay, I agree with you totally then.

My favorite concept that was force fed in school was 'tolerance.' I made the teacher pretty unhappy when I brought up the obvious problem: "Should we be tolerant of intolerant people?" It turned out that most of the people in class were pretty intolerant of the idea of tolerating the intolerant.

I imagine the same sort of thing would happen if you tried to teach more complicated reasons for the Civil war to students who really haven't had practice thinking about things from multiple points of view.

[CBP]

At 10/25/08 01:27 AM, Ranger2 wrote: I'm a Northerner, and when we learn about the Civil War it was "we, the Union, freed the slaves, the South was evil and wanted slaves so we killed them, Abe Lincoln was a saint, and Robert E. Lee was a hateful racist slave owner."
We learn that the cause of the war was slavery.
That's what you get from a Northern public school.
But what about you Newgroundsers from "Dixie"?

What do you learn about the Civil War?
Different name?
Different views?
What do you learn, Southerners, that we in the North do not about the Civil War?

In school they teach us the same thing, but if you research it you can find some interesting facts. Number 1, the Emancipation Proclamation freed only slaves from states that were still fighting the union, other states still had slavery for a little while. Second, Abe Lincoln might never have freed the slaves had it not been for the blockade runners. The north set up a blockade around the south, and the European nations kept sending the confederacy supplies by running through it, but they weren't willing to support the war if it was about slavery. There is no question that slavery was wrong, or that it is a good thing the union won, but I don't think they would have without making the war about slavery. While there is no doubt that Robert E. Lee was a slave owner, that is not why he fought for the Confederacy. He did so because he loved his home state of Virginia, which was part of the Confederacy.

By the way, I don't want to hear anybody bitching about my newgrounds name. Confederate Border Patrol is not racist, it's just something I saw on a hat, decided to piss off my cousins with, and then decided to call my band.

[Al6200]

At 10/25/08 01:27 AM, Ranger2 wrote: I'm a Northerner, and when we learn about the Civil War it was "we, the Union, freed the slaves, the South was evil and wanted slaves so we killed them, Abe Lincoln was a saint, and Robert E. Lee was a hateful racist slave owner."
We learn that the cause of the war was slavery.
That's what you get from a Northern public school.
But what about you Newgroundsers from "Dixie"?

I'm from Maryland, which was a slave state, but couldn't join the confederacy because it was occupied by the union.

We're also taught that the union was good and that the confederacy was bad, but being able to wear the confederate flag was a big issue in my school. All of the rednecks wanted to wear it, even though my school banned it.

What do you learn about the Civil War?
Different name?
Different views?
What do you learn, Southerners, that we in the North do not about the Civil War?

It's the same in the north and the south. It's just that in the south there are a lot of rednecks who want to wear confederate flag shirts, bring the flag to school, etc. And a lot of people still claim that the civil war was about state's rights, and didn't have anything to do with slavery.

[Achilles2]

At 10/25/08 01:27 AM, Ranger2 wrote: That's what you get from a Northern public school.

Correction: That's what you get from your school. That's what they teach back in Elementary and early Middle School.

In High School (especially US History), they teach you a non-biased view of the war. Robert E. Lee wasn't even a racist, believe it or not; he was anti-slavery. But I digress. US History teaches a non-biased view of the war and they always remind you that one side wasn't ultra racist and the other was sent from God Himself.

[Saruman200]

At 10/25/08 01:27 AM, Ranger2 wrote: I'm a Northerner, and when we learn about the Civil War it was "we, the Union, freed the slaves, the South was evil and wanted slaves so we killed them, Abe Lincoln was a saint, and Robert E. Lee was a hateful racist slave owner."

Well, slavery was only one issue. There was tariffs, state rights, and a bunch of other stuff that caused substanial rifts between North and South. And really, the South wasn't all about slaves. Only like a third of white males in the South even owned slaves, and those were the rich ones who hardly did any fighting. So why did the other two thirds fight? They thought they were defending their tradition and their way of life from the North. Abe Lincoln was a pretty good president, but some people don't like him because of his authoritarian political leanings. As for Robert E. Lee, he was against slavery. He just couldn't bear fighting against his home state of Virginia, which was in the Confederacy.

We learn that the cause of the war was slavery.

As I said, there was a lot more than that.

That's what you get from a Northern public school.

Well, I went through 6-8 grade in Texas, the Southern state you'll find, and it was way more in-depth. We learned a little more about the other causes. Abe Lincoln was still made out to be a saint, but Lee was given fairer treatment.

But what about you Newgroundsers from "Dixie"?

I'm not from the South, but as I said I went to school there for three years.

What do you learn about the Civil War?

Dang, I'm answering all your questions earlier.

Different name?

What do you mean by that?

Different views?

Meh, a little more indepth, but the message was still the same: Lincoln=saint, South=bad.

What do you learn, Southerners, that we in the North do not about the Civil War?

Ha, again, I already answered this one earlier. I guess I'm just ahead of myself. :P

[Krispiz]

We're also taught that the union was good and that the confederacy was bad, but being able to wear the confederate flag was a big issue in my school. All of the rednecks wanted to wear it, even though my school banned it.

What do you learn about the Civil War?
Different name?
Different views?
What do you learn, Southerners, that we in the North do not about the Civil War?

It's the same in the north and the south. It's just that in the south there are a lot of rednecks who want to wear confederate flag shirts, bring the flag to school, etc. And a lot of people still claim that the civil war was about state's rights, and didn't have anything to do with slavery.

What i dont understand about wanting to wear the confederate flag is why promote the most problamatic symbol in the south? Why not do something else to represent the South.

[n64kid]

At 10/25/08 01:45 AM, A-Carrot-By-Dr-Riot wrote:

My favorite concept that was force fed in school was 'tolerance.' I made the teacher pretty unhappy when I brought up the obvious problem: "Should we be tolerant of intolerant people?" It turned out that most of the people in class were pretty intolerant of the idea of tolerating the intolerant.

Check my sig bro.

[meow]

At 10/25/08 01:27 AM, Ranger2 wrote: I'm a Northerner, and when we learn about the Civil War it was "we, the Union, freed the slaves, the South was evil and wanted slaves so we killed them, Abe Lincoln was a saint, and Robert E. Lee was a hateful racist slave owner."
We learn that the cause of the war was slavery.
That's what you get from a Northern public school.

Is that what they taught you in northern school? I'm so sorry. You need to go to high school and college.

[madlyinsane]

I'm English, as part of secondary education we studied the American civil war, here's what we were told (from what I can remember);

The war was about the presidency gaining control over the confederate states (Slavery just happened to ebe the final straw).

Abraham Lincoln was against slavery, but was infact against interracial marriages and for segregation.

Robert E. Lee was infact for equal rights and helped to free slaves, but he faught (sp?) for the confederates because he loved Virginia so much.

I'm not sure how much of that is true, but I thought it'd be interesting for you to find out what we've been taught across the pond.

[aninjaman]

At 11/5/08 04:39 PM, madlyinsane wrote: I'm not sure how much of that is true, but I thought it'd be interesting for you to find out what we've been taught across the pond.

Thats a pretty unbiased view of the war. When you learn about your country's history from the perspective of other countries it is interesting. My dad works with a Japanese woman and she said that in Japan they are taught that Pearl Harbor was a preemptive attack.

[Dr-Worm]

At 11/5/08 04:39 PM, madlyinsane wrote: The war was about the presidency gaining control over the confederate states (Slavery just happened to ebe the final straw).

Abraham Lincoln was against slavery, but was infact against interracial marriages and for segregation.

Hrrrmm...that's kind of a major oversimplification of Lincoln's beliefs and his reasons for entering the war, suspending habeas corpus, etc. As he stated many many many times throughout his political career, the single most important thing to him was the preservation of the Union. I can't remember the exact speech, but he once said that he would be willing to free all of the slaves or free none of the slaves if either option was a viable way to save the Union.

The Civil War was, as you said, fought for "control" of the Southern states, but it's about a little more than that. The war was fought because, according to Lincoln, those states had no right to secede. The war had to be fought to uphold the authority of the Constitution, and thus to save the Union. The Emancipation Proclamation, I believe, was primarily passed to rally more support for the war effort in the North (hence the slaves in Union-controlled slave states not being freed by the Proclamation).

[aninjaman]

At 11/5/08 08:26 PM, Dr-Worm wrote: The Civil War was, as you said, fought for "control" of the Southern states, but it's about a little more than that. The war was fought because, according to Lincoln, those states had no right to secede. The war had to be fought to uphold the authority of the Constitution, and thus to save the Union. The Emancipation Proclamation, I believe, was primarily passed to rally more support for the war effort in the North (hence the slaves in Union-controlled slave states not being freed by the Proclamation).

Yes Abe LIncoln fought the war for preservation of the Union but you can say slavery is the reason the south seceded and secession was the reason the war was fought so it can still go back to slavery.

[Dr-Worm]

At 11/5/08 08:59 PM, aninjaman wrote: Yes Abe LIncoln fought the war for preservation of the Union but you can say slavery is the reason the south seceded and secession was the reason the war was fought so it can still go back to slavery.

Well, yeah, of course slavery was a factor in the starting of the Civil War. In fact, it was THE issue that largely divided the country in the first place. My point, though, is that for some reason people tend to view Lincoln as some kind of demi-godly moral crusader who bravely fought to free the slaves because it was right thing to do when that's clearly not actually the case. I'd still say that he was one of our best Presidents, though (all brief forays into authoritarianism aside).

[ChickenReaper]

Ofcourse they learn the same stuff thhey can't glorify the explanation and they start out talking about the civil war very one-sided as to not confuse children but as you get older they get more and more into the details

[zephiran]

i can warmly recommend a certain movie, "Gods & Generals" . It gives a fairly objective point of view of the american civil war while being quite entertaining.

[aninjaman]

At 11/5/08 09:05 PM, Dr-Worm wrote: Well, yeah, of course slavery was a factor in the starting of the Civil War. In fact, it was THE issue that largely divided the country in the first place. My point, though, is that for some reason people tend to view Lincoln as some kind of demi-godly moral crusader who bravely fought to free the slaves because it was right thing to do when that's clearly not actually the case. I'd still say that he was one of our best Presidents, though (all brief forays into authoritarianism aside).

People always build up great presidents to be like demi-gods. Its more patriotic or something.
Abe lincoln was a great president but he was also just a normal human being.

[The-Wolfe]

I learned about the civil war in Maryland, which was considered a southern slave state that didnt try to cede, and as far as I know is about as close to unbiased as you can get geographicaly. Most of what we learned had to do with facts more than ideals, but the gist of it was that the south wanted to cede for various political reasons, many of them having to do with state government vs federal government, along with the issue of slavory. But the issue of slavory took back seat in precidence for the south. Slavory was just the issue that the north used to esentialy get its own people involved. It is hard to get a population motivated for a war fought over political reasons, but to get a population motivated over human rights is easy and straight forward. This was not one of the primary reasons for which the civil war was fought, but the union pressed the issue for its own purpose and benifit. Men fight the hardest for their lives or for freedom. Nobody is ever "good" or "bad" in a war. Its all a matter of perspective.

[The-Wolfe]

At 11/7/08 10:52 PM, Grammer wrote:

What do you learn, Southerners, that we in the North do not about the Civil War?

You mean what they're indoctrinated with so they don't feel bad they were the primary source of all racism in America 200 years ago.

The north was equaly racist, but more towards the individual. In the south, Blacks as a whole were treated poorly, but individuals, especialy house slaves, were treated far better than individuals in the north. When slaves managed to get to the north before slavery was ended in the south, they were treated with absolute contempt, because they were attempting to find jobs and work alongside white people who still thought of them as less than human. While the north was pro abolition, the individuals there were NOT willing to live in any mannor remotely resembling equaly with anyone of African decent. The south is not in the least the primary source of all racism in America, and btw, slavery began 400 years ago, not 200. Cmon man dont pretend like the north were all knights in shining armor coming to free the helpless victims of human rights atrocities. The north was just as much at fault as the south. The north simply found it politicaly advantagious to use the whole "evil southerner" routine for propaganda to get their people involved in the war to keep the nation from spliting.

[frigi]

We learn that the Union was evil and we will one day rise up and seperate from thestates. We also learn not to trust no people from the north.

[Ranger2]

Is that what they taught you in northern school? I'm so sorry. You need to go to high school and college.

I last learned about it in middle school, and I'm in high school now. My guess is we'll learn about it in a month.

[Conspiracy3]

I get something kind of half way in between

I live in northern va, part of a southern state, but it is culturally more like DC than anywhere else.

First of all Robert E Lee was not a racist. He actually opposed slavery. He also opposed succeding fron the union. Lee joined the confederacy because his loyalties to virginia were stronger than his loyalties to the nation and he didn't want to fight against his home state

other than that here we learn pretty much the same thing

[Conspiracy3]

I think i need to clarify something before someone misinterprets what i said and flames me (hasn't happened yet but i know it will)

Robert E Lee was a slave owner, but he was anti slavery. Compare him to someone like Thomas Jefferson who owned a couple of slaves, but unlike the people who owned a plantation and half fed and treated horribly thousands of slaves, treated them relatively well. Robert E. Lee wasn't a racist and was anti-slavery, but while it was legal he took advantage of the law. There is no question that slavery was a horrible and brutal relic from ancient times no longer necessary in today's world, but Lee fought with the confederacy because of his loyalty to Virginia.

[morefngdbs]

I remember some of what i learned in school here in Canada.
The South had decades of strife with the North.
They wanted to be their own Country.
There were economic, political, & social differences.
I remember that Slavery was a huge problem & it actually held up new territories from becoming States because of Slavery. States were know as "Slave or Free States"
Slavery in the South was what made their agricultural system work.While Slavery may have been banned in the North, the lowly worker in the North was often so poorly paid they may as well have been slaves.

But what I remember the best was that the North wanted more control & power to be in the hands of the Federal Government while the South wanted all undefined powers to be controled by the State.
I always thought...undefined powers !?!? does that mean anything that is defined in future can be implemented & or banned by individual States ?

I've probably made some mistakes on what I remember, but its been awhile.

- wow , trying to remember about this has caused my brain to spasm.