Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are a good man, Deacon...but I totally disagree with you that many of us (meaning we Southerners) would have been on the "other side"
I know I could NEVER fight against my home state and region. Could you? To my way of thinking -- which I freely acknowledge don't mean jack sh*t -- it would mean turning my back on my own people. And this I could never do. Back then, today, or even in the 22nd Century...
"Winners history" (and I don't blame them...we Southerners would have written it with a same slant had we won) as concerns the War has turned it into a rebellious Southern states versus the United States.
But thing is? What was it? It was not the South against the United States. It was Southern states against Northern states...the latter which kept the name only by default. It really boiled down to young men and teenage boys going off to fight for what they knew best and loved most.
Exactly as I would have been and would be today. Why would I fight for Iowa, New York, or Michigan, simply because they kept the name "United States"? I will stand with my own...and make no apologies for it.
As usual, I'm in complete agreement with you here, my friend. Great post!
Maybe 80+ years ago it was taught differently, but it shouldn't be any different than the way other parts of the country teach it.
it is though, as westerner put it... definitely bias at least from my gf's professor, he went to Auburn and super pro military civil war buff, he'd also ramble on about how obama is leading the country towards marxism. My gf said the prof got called out several times for this stuff. I didn't get the same experience though, but I believe it does exist, just as liberal bias exists on the other side.
You are a good man, Deacon...but I totally disagree with you that many of us (meaning we Southerners) would have been on the "other side"
I know I could NEVER fight against my home state and region. Could you? To my way of thinking -- which I freely acknowledge don't mean jack sh*t -- it would mean turning my back on my own people. And this I could never do. Whether back then, today, or even in the 22nd Century...
"Winners history" (and I don't blame them...we Southerners would have written it with a same slant had we won) as concerns the War has turned it into a rebellious Southern states versus the United States.
But thing is? It was not the South against the United States. It was Southern states against Northern states. It really boiled down to young men and teenage boys going off to fight for what they knew best and loved most.
Exactly as I would have have done. And would do so today. Why would I fight for Iowa, New York, or Michigan, simply because they kept the name "United States" by default? No, I would have then, and would do so today, stand with my own. And make no apologies for it.
Except that a significant percentage of Southerners today have deep roots in the North (ie transplants).
it is though, as westerner put it... definitely bias at least from my gf's professor, he went to Auburn and super pro military civil war buff, he'd also ramble on about how obama is leading the country towards marxism. My gf said the prof got called out several times for this stuff. I didn't get the same experience though, but I believe it does exist, just as liberal bias exists on the other side.
So I have to ask, do you think that my post was biased? Many people from across the nation I have talked to say they were taught with the same perspective. I have heard from some people that were schooled in the North that they were taught that the Union was on a righteous crusade against the evil Southerners. I based my post on that information. Were all of you taught similarly?
You are a good man, Deacon...but I totally disagree with you that many of us (meaning we Southerners) would have been on the "other side"
I know I could NEVER fight against my home state and region. Could you? To my way of thinking -- which I freely acknowledge don't mean jack sh*t -- it would mean turning my back on my own people. And this I could never do. Whether back then, today, or even in the 22nd Century...
"Winners history" (and I don't blame them...we Southerners would have written it with a same slant had we won) as concerns the War has turned it into a rebellious Southern states versus the United States.
But thing is? It was not the South against the United States. It was Southern states against Northern states. It really boiled down to young men and teenage boys going off to fight for what they knew best and loved most.
Exactly as I would have have done. And would do so today. Why would I fight for Iowa, New York, or Michigan, simply because they kept the name "United States" by default? No, I would have then, and would do so today, stand with my own. And make no apologies for it.
So if your state had legal slavery, you would fight to defend it?
So if your state had legal slavery, you would fight to defend it?
Fight for my state and my people? Or legal slavery? Please clarify. There is a huge difference. And I am sorry for you if you don't see it.
What would have been the alternative? To fight for New England? Where vast fortunes were made on the slave trade? And where slavery was first legalized? Or certain states in the midwest where black people were actually banned from residency?
It was always North=Good, South=Bad all my years in school. And we all just accepted it because it happened in the past. A lot of students had Southern pride, but they didn't really speak out about it in class. It was never really a sensitive subject, niether was the Civil Rights Movement.
But it wasn't until I got to college that I started hearing my history professors talk about how the North wasn't really anti-slavery and all that stuff.
Location: Concrete jungle where dreams are made of.
8,900 posts, read 15,933,384 times
Reputation: 1819
Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico
it is though, as westerner put it... definitely bias at least from my gf's professor, he went to Auburn and super pro military civil war buff, he'd also ramble on about how obama is leading the country towards marxism. My gf said the prof got called out several times for this stuff. I didn't get the same experience though, but I believe it does exist, just as liberal bias exists on the other side.
Location: from houstoner to bostoner to new yorker to new jerseyite ;)
4,084 posts, read 12,681,773 times
Reputation: 1974
I felt it was presented in a fairly unbiased, "just the facts, ma'am" manner, not the one-sided emotional response I think may be common to much of the rest of the South and probably the North, too. To be fair, I don't think many, if any, of the battles were fought on Texas soil (TexasReb can correct me if I'm wrong ), so I think we don't have that same response to it as other Southerners. I think this is one of the reasons Texas has progressed more rapidly than many other Southern states. Texas doesn't seem to care nearly as much about the Civil War as the various battles for our state's independence. I don't really remember learning much about it other than the standard stuff from the North's POV and the South's, slavery, cotton, state's rights, Lincoln was a great president, the KKK and lynchings were bad, yadda yadda yadda. But ask me about Sam Houston, Stephen F. Austin, Davy Crockett, James Bowie and his knife, William B. Travis, Santa Anna and we can talk. Remember the Alamo! And don't forget San Jacinto either.
Last edited by houstoner; 05-04-2009 at 07:56 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
), so I think we don't have that same response to it as other Southerners. I think this is one of the reasons Texas has progressed more rapidly than many other Southern states. Texas doesn't seem to care nearly as much about the Civil War as the various battles for our state's independence. I don't really remember learning much about it other than the standard stuff from the North's POV and the South's, slavery, cotton, state's rights, Lincoln was a great president, the KKK and lynchings were bad, yadda yadda yadda. But ask me about Sam Houston, Stephen F. Austin, Davy Crockett, James Bowie and his knife, William B. Travis, Santa Anna and we can talk. Remember the Alamo! And don't forget San Jacinto either. 
