The Civil War

I think people forget the importance of States in the pre-Civil War period. Even military units were divided by State.

So while the idea of people feeling greater loyalty to their State than to their country is alien now, it was perhaps the norm at the start of the Civil War.

When States left the Union, people had to choose between loyalty to their State and loyalty to their country. That wasn't an easy decision. I guarantee you if other Northern states seceded, plenty of people hailed as heros of the Union would have instead be called traitors today.

Referring to all Confederates as traitors who committed treason is way too simplistic a look that doesn't take the law or the role of States at the time of the Civil War into account. I think it's probably a reaction to the noble lost cause narrative created after the Civil War about the South.
 
striker42 said:
I think people forget the importance of States in the pre-Civil War period. Even military units were divided by State.

So while the idea of people feeling greater loyalty to their State than to their country is alien now, it was perhaps the norm at the start of the Civil War.

When States left the Union, people had to choose between loyalty to their State and loyalty to their country. That wasn't an easy decision. I guarantee you if other Northern states seceded, plenty of people hailed as heros of the Union would have instead be called traitors today.

Referring to all Confederates as traitors who committed treason is way too simplistic a look that doesn't take the law or the role of States at the time of the Civil War into account. I think it's probably a reaction to the noble lost cause narrative created after the Civil War about the South.
Click to expand...

What's also interesting is that counties tried to secede from states during the Civil War. And some did break off from Virginia to become West Virginia, even though the constitution never contemplated such a possibility. There is the "Free State of Winston" which is would be Winston County in Alabama. Many men from confederate states formed regiments named after their state to fight for the Union.

Btw these dissidents from the confederacy were regarded as traitors and treated as such by the confederacy. So...the concepts of treason and traitors were commonly accepted by both sides.
 
sturg33 said:
Looking forward to seeing how the Seattle Autonomous Zone plays out in our modern times
Click to expand...

Same way the Berkeley nuclear free zone has. It is rigorously enforced. The nukes stay in Oakland.

Nuclear-Free-Zone-sign-photo-2011-Faith-Buchanan-Daily-Californian-.jpg
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
What's also interesting is that counties tried to secede from states during the Civil War. And some did break off from Virginia to become West Virginia, even though the constitution never contemplated such a possibility. There is the "Free State of Winston" which is would be Winston County in Alabama. Many men from confederate states formed regiments named after their state to fight for the Union.

Btw these dissidents from the confederacy were regarded as traitors and treated as such by the confederacy. So...the concepts of treason and traitors were commonly accepted by both sides.
Click to expand...

I think the fact that the Confederacy saw those from southern states that fought for the Union as traitors goes to show you how crazy things were. People had to decide between loyalty to their State or to their country, either way they're a traitor to someone.
 
striker42 said:
I think the fact that the Confederacy saw those from southern states that fought for the Union as traitors goes to show you how crazy things were. People had to decide between loyalty to their State or to their country, either way they're a traitor to someone.
Click to expand...

I visited West Point last summer. There is a monument honoring the graduates from West Point who fought in the Civil War. It honors those who fought on both sides. It features rifles pointed downward and buried in the cement, symbolizing the hope that Americans will never again point their weapons against each other in war.
 
I've been reading Grant biographies since the 7th grade. That colors how I view the entire period. Grant himself is a very interesting and inspiring figure. With imperfections and all.

But the most interesting thing about his career to me is what happened to his reputation at the hands of the "lost cause" historians. What they practiced is fake history. But it became the dominant narrative for many people. Even today, what a lot of people know about Grant is he was an alcoholic and had an administration as president that suffered from a certain amount of corruption. And that's it. I find it heartening that some really good bios have come out in recent years that have rescued his reputation from the fake "lost cause" historians.
 
nsacpi said:
I visited West Point last summer. There is a monument honoring the graduates from West Point who fought in the Civil War. It honors those who fought on both sides. It features rifles pointed downward and buried in the cement, symbolizing the hope that Americans will never again point their weapons against each other in war.
Click to expand...

That's pretty awesome. Need more civil war monuments like that.
 
striker42 said:
That's pretty awesome. Need more civil war monuments like that.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there is so much we can do in terms of finding ways to put aside the bitterness that still lingers. I like talking some northern smack here because I know most of the posters around here are from the South. So I yank their chain a little (forgive the pun). But we need to find a way forward and some of these arguments about the past are preventing us from doing so.

The most interesting piece of trivia I found from my tour was that Douglas MacArthur's mother somehow moved onto campus while he was a student there and got herself a room from which she could monitor his room. Who needs a mom like that. Jeez. Needless to say he had problems later in life with respect to relationships with women.
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
I've been reading Grant biographies since the 7th grade. That colors how I view the entire period. Grant himself is a very interesting and inspiring figure. With imperfections and all.

But the most interesting thing about his career to me is what happened to his reputation at the hands of the "lost cause" historians. What they practiced is fake history. But it became the dominant narrative for many people. Even today, what a lot of people know about Grant is he was an alcoholic and had an administration as president that suffered from a certain amount of corruption. And that's it. I find it heartening that some really good bios have come out in recent years that have rescued his reputation from the fake "lost cause" historians.
Click to expand...

No doubt there's a narrative effect there. He's the nemesis of the hero of the Lost Cause movement so he was going to be a punching bag.

I do think Grant being inextricably tied with Lee hurts him outside of the Lost Cause movement. Not because he was an interior general, but because he was a less exciting general. Lee benefits from being an underdog scoring victories against superior numbers. That always plays better than the less exciting but ultimately winning strategies.
 
nsacpi said:
Yeah, there is so much we can do in terms of finding ways to put aside the bitterness that still lingers. I like talking some northern smack here because I know most of the posters around here are from the South. So I yank their chain a little (forgive the pun). But we need to find a way forward and some of these arguments about the past are preventing us from doing so.

The most interesting piece of trivia I found from my tour was that Douglas MacArthur's mother somehow moved onto campus while he was a student there and got herself a room from which she could monitor his room. Who needs a mom like that. Jeez. Needless to say he had problems later in life with respect to relationships with women.
Click to expand...

That will now forever be the first thing I think of when I hear about MacArthur.
 
striker42 said:
That will now forever be the first thing I think of when I hear about MacArthur.
Click to expand...

I used to travel to Japan on business. And one of my hosts took me to the Dai-Ichi building where MacArthur had his headquarters. Unfortunately, I was so out of it that day I really didn't appreciate what they were showing me. He is a sort of god-like figure to the Japanese. He earned their trust by eating a steak that they had prepared for him during one of the first days of the occupation. His aides were afraid they were trying to poison him. But MacArthur realized it was a gesture that meant a lot at a time when many people were short of food. So he enjoyed his steak. And the rest is history.
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
I used to travel to Japan on business. And one of my hosts took me to the Dai-Ichi building where MacArthur had his headquarters. Unfortunately, I was so out of it that day I really didn't appreciate what they were showing me. He is a sort of god-like figure to the Japanese. He earned their trust by eating a steak that they had prepared for him during one of the first days of the occupation. His aides were afraid they were trying to poison him. But MacArthur realized it was a gesture that meant a lot at a time when many people were short of food. So he enjoyed his steak. And the rest is history.
Click to expand...

I love history facts like this.

I believe certain men are made for a moment in history. MacArthur was made for WWII in the Pacific theater.
 
Speaking of history. Interesting that very poorly chosen one is going to Tulsa on the 99th anniversary of one of the worst race pogroms in our country's history. Could be a good thing. Or a bad thing. Or neither. I try to keep open mind.
 
nsacpi said:
ely-parker-with-grant.png


anyone care to try their hand at identifying who these men were?
Click to expand...

Only guesses.

Gen. Grant seated in the middle?

Gen. McClelland standing no the right.
Maj. Gen. Birney standing on the left.
Custer sitting on right.
Colonel Ely S. Parker sitting on left.
 
Runnin said:
Only guesses.

Gen. Grant seated in the middle?

Gen. McClelland standing no the right.
Maj. Gen. Birney standing on the left.
Custer sitting on right.
Colonel Ely S. Parker sitting on left.
Click to expand...

It's a fairly obscure group. The two I recognized were Parker and Grant. Adam Badeaux is between them. And the two to the right are Orville Babcock and Horace Porter.

The surrender documents drafted at Appomattox Courthouse are in Parker's handwriting. Another one of Grant's aides was initially writing down the terms, but he was overcome by the moment and his hands started shaking. So Grant gave the job to Parker.

Parker was also the chief engineer at Vicksburg.
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
It's a fairly obscure group. The two I recognized were Parker and Grant. Adam Badeaux is between them. And the two to the right are Orville Babcock and Horace Porter.

The surrender documents drafted at Appomattox Courthouse are in Parker's handwriting. Another one of Grant's aides was initially writing down the terms, but he was overcome by the moment and his hands started shaking. So Grant gave the job to Parker.

Parker was also the chief engineer at Vicksburg.
Click to expand...

I was sure that was McClellan but he and Babcock resemble one another, not only in facial hair. But McClellan was long out of the picture by then, no pun.

Parker's story is pretty interesting.
 
Runnin said:
I was sure that was McClellan but he and Babcock resemble one another, not only in facial hair. But McClellan was long out of the picture by then, no pun.

Parker's story is pretty interesting.
Click to expand...

Native Americans have always fought in our wars. It is interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top