Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-12-2011, 10:58 AM
 
Location: Willow Spring and Mocksville
275 posts, read 396,781 times
Reputation: 482

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nighteyes View Post
As am I, and as do I, though not for the reasons many may expect. Though it should be obvious by now, I still think it needs to be said that not everyone who willingly fought for the Confederacy did so to protect slavery. Heck, a large number of the Confederate soldiers didn't own slaves, and most of them couldn't spell "slavery". (For that matter, neither could a large portion of the Union troops.)

Many of my own ancestors, although they fought on the Confederate side, did not do so to protect & defend slavery or the Confederate States of America. They were, however, strongly AGAINST the Union: a government that, approximately 30 years earlier, took their homelands away and moved large numbers of them along what later became known as The Trail of Tears.

How's THAT for motivation? ("The enemy of my enemy is my friend.")

-- Nighteyes (Choctaw)
Sure, no arguments here. As I had pointed out in a previous post, the threat to Slavery was undoubtedly the cause for secession, but Slavery was not necessarily the motivation for everyone who supported or fought for the Confederacy. The two are not synonymous. (Though many Neo-Confeds try to bait and switch.) People had many different motivations for what they did, and even these might change over time. In my own family alone there were differences. For example, several ancestors enlisted in 1862 when they were in their forties, when they were not required to do so. (The ages for conscription would not have "caught" them until it was raised in '63.) One of them fell at Petersburg in '64. But another ancestor enlisted in '62 in his twenties, and fought until he was wounded at Seven Pines, then bought a substitute. Another one never served at all.
In North Carolina, the majority opposed secession until Lincoln's call for troops. Afterwards, most people supported the Confederacy, contributing more troops than any other state. But Richmond's heavy handed attitude towards North Carolina (including abuses by conscription officers, the brutal tithe-tax, and confiscations by foraging teams) caused a great deal of resentment, festering to considerable proportions by 1864. In spite of the great numbers of NC troops, there were fewer NC officers promoted. (See Clingman's Brigade in the Confederacy 1861-1865 by Frances Casstevens). Richmond newspapers routinely criticized the performance of NC troops. Desertions of NC troops have been exaggerated, proportionally they were similar to other states. Motivations ran the gamut of true disaffection to simply worry about families at home.
The planter class in NC was concentrated in the eastern part of the state, along with most of the political power. In NC alone, Regional differences in outlook between the coast, piedmont, and mountains were profound, and this is reflected in diaries, letters, and even newspapers.
Another aspect which has not been fully explored are the Southerners who lived in the North and fought for the Union; and Northerners who lived in the South and fought for the Confederacy. I am also extremely interested in Jewish participation in the Confederacy.
I will cease my disjointed rambling now......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-12-2011, 12:52 PM
 
Location: Wheaton, Illinois
10,261 posts, read 21,748,788 times
Reputation: 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strelnikov View Post
I am also extremely interested in Jewish participation in the Confederacy.
I will cease my disjointed rambling now......

Ramble away, I find your posts reasonable and interesting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 12:53 PM
 
Location: Aloverton
6,560 posts, read 14,457,035 times
Reputation: 10165
Quote:
Originally Posted by mco65 View Post
No doubt that slavery was the reason for Southern succession and War.. but not for the North. The North's reasoning for War was to preserve the Union, PERIOD! Lincoln even said that if he could end the war without freeing a single slave, he would do it.
No one is arguing otherwise that I know of. This has been reiterated many times by just about everyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 12:57 PM
 
Location: Wheaton, Illinois
10,261 posts, read 21,748,788 times
Reputation: 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strelnikov View Post
Another aspect which has not been fully explored are the Southerners who lived in the North and fought for the Union; and Northerners who lived in the South and fought for the Confederacy.
Well one of the best Federal leaders was Thomas, a Virginian. He didn't live in the north as such being a regular soldier but he was married to a New Yorker. And one of the worst Confederate leaders was Pemberton, a notherner, from Pennsylvania as I recall and I think married to a southerner.

Farragut was a southerner but so completely professional navy I doubt his southerness entered into his thinking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Bay Area - Portland
286 posts, read 521,270 times
Reputation: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strelnikov View Post
I agree. Most people do prefer "sound bites". The only Neo-Confederates I have any experience with are Neo-Confederate Civil War Reenactors, and while they are a definite minority within that hobby, they are a stridently vocal one. What I find ironic is that they are a group of people who love to tout their superior historical knowledge and dedication to "educating the public"; and who continually howl about "northern propaganda". Ironically, much of what they disseminate is little more than propaganda itself.
I find their simplistic image of all Southrons boldly standing shoulder-to-shoulder in stalwart defiance of the infernal Blue-coated foe to be much less interesting than the reality. At least in North Carolina, there were widely varying levels of commitment to the Confederate cause, ranging from dedicated to decidedly lukewarm. Opposition to the Confederacy ranged from actively subversive to passive, i.e. avoiding conscription, hiding supplies, harboring deserters, etc. Loyalty was a fluid thing, particularly as the war progressed. There were many complex dynamics, including family, local community, and economics. I suspect that many people just wanted to be left alone by both sides.
I am a Southerner and have quite a few ancestors who fought ( and some died) for the Confederacy. While I am intensely interested in their service, I feel no need to justify their actions or to revise history. They were who they were, not what I want them to have been. After talking to some of the aforementioned Neo's, I get the feeling that their views have more to do with modern politics than history. Disenchanted or frustrated with the modern government and society, they seem to be using their carefully constructed image of the Confederacy as some sort of rebellious proxy.
Very well said! I would rep you again if I could…

There may have been many reasons why someone took up arms against their country, but the ultimate result of a confederate win would have been the continuation of slavery. I’ll never understand why some are so proud of the traitorous actions of their forefathers, much less take pleasure in reenacting their sordid history. I’m surprised they don’t get to the crux of the matter and reenact KKK cross burnings and lynchings, but of course that would be politically incorrect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 01:24 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
6,793 posts, read 5,660,890 times
Reputation: 5661
I believe they do re enactments in the north as well...
The re enactors are not doing this to some how glorify slavery or the OLD SOUTH as much as they are doing it because they LOVE HISTORY. Sordid or NOT, it is OUR HISTORY and not just the SOUTHS History but the entire COUNTRY's History, including the NORTH.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 01:40 PM
 
Location: Aloverton
6,560 posts, read 14,457,035 times
Reputation: 10165
Quote:
Originally Posted by mco65 View Post
I believe they do re enactments in the north as well...
The re enactors are not doing this to some how glorify slavery or the OLD SOUTH as much as they are doing it because they LOVE HISTORY. Sordid or NOT, it is OUR HISTORY and not just the SOUTHS History but the entire COUNTRY's History, including the NORTH.
OKAY. I am PRETTY sure we all get THAT too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 02:53 PM
 
2,945 posts, read 4,990,784 times
Reputation: 3390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cletus Awreetus-Awrightus View Post
What puzzles me about this discussion is the use of language.

The question is typically: "What was the civil war about?" I don't think all sides are in agreement about what is truly being asked. Are they asking, "What are the causes of the Civil War?"

If so, there is a chain of events that took place. Slavery was one of them, nobody can dispute that. Taxes and states' rights were another. However, to say that "The Civil War was about slavery" implies (to me, at least), that the north was fighting to end slavery, and that is an assertion I disagree with.
This.

Because the North sure wasn't feeling ex-slaves either. Separate but equal. Just looking at the relations and mentalities of many Northern cites you see it's still that way. NYC is super diverse but separate but equal. Everyone has their areas and it's kind of understood that it's best that way. And the way people talk about Chicago too as far as race relations. Very diverse but you stay with yours on your side and we'll stay on ours and smile and nod. Detroit too.

The South's not perfect by any means but they have had to come to terms more and deal with face to face the past issues more than just separate but equal and brushing it under the rug.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 09:21 PM
 
Location: Willow Spring and Mocksville
275 posts, read 396,781 times
Reputation: 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishtom29 View Post
Well one of the best Federal leaders was Thomas, a Virginian. He didn't live in the north as such being a regular soldier but he was married to a New Yorker. And one of the worst Confederate leaders was Pemberton, a notherner, from Pennsylvania as I recall and I think married to a southerner.

Farragut was a southerner but so completely professional navy I doubt his southerness entered into his thinking.
I remember reading that Thomas's sisters never spoke to him again after his decision to stray with the Union. His brothers were more forgiving but his sisters were intransigent on the issue. Interestingly enough, Solomon Meredith, one of the commanders of the famous Iron Brigade, was a transplanted North Carolinian. He had been living in the north for about 30 years, so he no doubt considered Indiana to be home rather than North Carolina.
I have to agree about Farragut!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-13-2011, 05:19 AM
 
Location: Atlanta
6,793 posts, read 5,660,890 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by j_k_k View Post
OKAY. I am PRETTY sure we all get THAT too.
Apparently, WE don't all get THAT!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:12 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top