Living The Civil War | American History through Southern Eyes
2019 ж. 25 Шіл.
194 698 Рет қаралды
American History through Southern Eyes, examining our nations past from a regional perspective. On this episode, life during the Civil War for those at war and at home.
Original Air Date: 2006
Want more history shows? Check out our website at www.gpb.org/television/shows/...
My great grandfather fought at Stones River Tennessee..1863
And that's supposed to be impressive?
Think u missed a couple greats there man
Who cares
So?
What a punk
My great grandfather came from McMinnville TN and was a captain in the Confederate army
Wow, that sucks.
@@mrsatire9475 lol
Great man
Dr. Martin Luther King’s visit to Chicago during the Freedom Movement campaign for fair housing made headlines in 1966. As he led a march through Marquette Park on the Southwest Side, he was attacked with bricks by a racist White mob. He would later say, “I have been in the Civil Rights Movement for many years all through the South, but I have never seen - not even in Alabama or Louisiana - mobs as hostile and hateful as this crowd.” The Fair Housing Act was passed in 1968
So one city is compared to the south and that means the south is better? Or did we forget the creators of the Black Code, and Jim Crow. Or that the highest number of black lynchings was in the south. Let's not forget the lovely post cards of black families being lynched and burned, then to have their body parts cut up to be kept as souvenir. Let's not pretend the inhumane acts of the south were minor in comparison to the north. That is indeed an exaggeration.
@@picakumayou’re a fool
People forget that a lot of seriously racist whites moved north during Reconstruction…. The North also had a fair number of non- abolitionists….. Makes me wonder how many chapters of the KKK were located north of the Mason-Dixon Line….
The idea that small farmers "hoped to become planters" is not an idea from "Southern eyes" but is a Northern idea projected onto Southerners. It was the Northerners, especially the Yankee of Massachusetts, who were concerned always with "getting ahead" and with improving their "status". The Southern yeoman was content with owning their own land and independence from overreaching government.
And few if any poor southern farmers owned any slaves. Only the wealthy /richer plantation owners owned slaves, as a slave was too expensive to buy for the "dirt farmers". Many objected morally to slavery as well.The real reason most southern farmers were fighting for was the excessive taxation of southern goods levied against the Southern states by the northern states, yet little to no tax dollars were ever reinvested back to the southern states. The South was paying between 68%to 85% of all taxes collected in the USA. Some sources say up to 90%. That is the main reason the south was fighting against the North for.
@@fireball1322 Absolutely-the protective tariff and high taxes on Southern exports and imports were causing many Southerners to go bankrupt at that time.
@@karenbartlett1307 And no one ever mentions what started the war was the North's blockade of Southern Ports.Which caused the taking of Fort Sumter and the South to secede. But all that's ever taught is "it was over slavery".......and the rest of the North's lies.
@@fireball1322 Too true!
@@fireball1322 Yes, at the core, wars are fought over economics. (Moral stances might be claimed as a way to get the populace to support war.) Many Southerners were going bankrupt over protective tariffs on their imports and exports, and other tax measures levied by the feds. In truth, all the States lost the War. People don't realize it.
The Northern states profited from slavery as well. They spun the cotton grown in the South, and they wore the clothes produced by the factories, and they owned and or worked in the factories. Every person in the North was not against slavery at the time. The idea of White supremacy was popular at the time.
Yes. The idea of whitey supremacy is still very popular among the willfully ignorant idiots of the world. Some people are caught in a life-long struggle for significance and can be desperate to achieve the 'feeling' that they are significant.
Thank you from the uk studying American history, great great job
Our pleasure!
Dr. Cashin was my history professor and academic advisor when I went to Augusta College/Augusta State University. Dr. Caldwell was also one of my professors..
Very good presentation
Enthusiasm for war is always a curse
Cool
The bottom line is that European model of class was passed on to us and we propelled that system on the lesser people in the US. My ancestors were indentured servents also known as slavery. They escaped their masters and settled in Western Virginia.
Slavery was and is practiced all over the world by multitudes of different cultures and ppl.
@@mason1011 absolutely!!!!!!!
@@mason1011 My family were Scott Irish!
THANK YOU! Hardly ever is this point brought up!
@@mason1011 We're not talking about slavery all over the world. This is the American Institution of slavery. This slavery was the most oppressive slavery ever in history. The names, culture and history were stripped from these human beings. White people are in such denial on what they did to a group of people based on the melanin in the skin. The United States was so oppressive to a group of people, the practice of Jim Crow was so wonderful it encouraged Adolph Hitler to apply it in Germany to the non Aryans and undesirables. The comments on this video are so racist and not empathetic to a group of people that were enslaved for life and generations. No other institutions of slavery had the barbaric practice of slavery that America had, well maybe accept for the arabs. The only empathy is towards white southerners who had no empathy towards another group of human beings. After the civil war, the lynchings and murders committed by these innocent white southerners is barely mentioned in the history books. Dixiecrats at it's finest, now non as Trump supporters. Confederate flags flying high.
One uncomfortable, cold hard truth that almost never gets spoken is one of the main REASONS Northerners didn't want slavery in the new territories. They'll claim it was to keep a "balance of power", but one reason was that Northerners didn't want black people in those areas. Period. But...since it makes Northerners look bad today, that embarrassing fact is left unspoken. (Ohio banned blacks from entering that state AFTER the civil war. Research it. They don't teach that to our children today. That speaks volumes as to the propaganda that rules our country today)
The legacy of racial prejudice wasn’t uniquely Southern. Anyone with a better than average knowledge of American history knows this. You can add Oregon to the list of states prohibiting Black people.
@@Idahoguy10157 - Yes. The USA was full of racist assholes back then.
Here are some facts about USA history, the Electoral College, the 3/5ths rule, and the *civil war*. The sources of this information are the USA Constitution and actual events in USA history: *Slavers are terrorists. Slavery is terrorism. Those who go to war to defend slavers and preserve slavery are also considered terrorists.* The Electoral College was written for only one purpose. The Electoral College was written by terrorists(slavers) to be nothing more than a "welfare benefit" for themselves and other USA terrorists. The E C, plus the 3/5ths census rule, awards excessive national governmental and political power to terrorists(slavers). The Electoral College encouraged and rewarded the terrorism of slavery. The Electoral College allowed terrorists to dominate the USA national government until around 1850-1860. The USA's "founding fathers" were the USA's first group of "welfare queens". Ten of the first twelve presidents were terrorists. What happened around 1860 when abolition and the prohibition of slaver terrorism in the new territories and Western states greatly reduced the "free stuff" to which the terrorists had become so accustomed? One of the biggest blows to the "terrorist welfare queens" was the prohibition of slaver terrorism in Western states. That's one of the reasons you hear that whiney, old csa/kkk terrorist propaganda phrase, "We don't want to be ruled by the coasts!". What happened when the terrorist "welfare queens" lost their "free stuff" from the USA government? What happened when the terrorist slavers could no longer easily dominate the USA national government and national politics? The csa was just a low-life, MS-13-type gang of butthurt "welfare queens". After causing the civil war, the Electoral College became a "welfare benefit" for states which suppress voting. I wonder which states LOVE to suppress voting .......... might they be the former terrorist states and terrorist sympathizer states?
@@rb032682 ….Hey RB, by your definition who ISN’T a Terrorist? By the way….the 3/5th rule went away when slavery ended.
@@Idahoguy10157 - Yes. The freed slaves were then counted as 100% human which gave the former slaver states greater incentive to suppress voting.
we could get real conpex by viewing the Civil War through the eyes of southern unionist in Northeast Tennessee durring the war.
After the War, for the next 120 years, we were punished by the Democrats in power of Tennessee's state government. No roads, no schools, we were the red head step-children.
@@billycampbell854- For accuracy and clarity in USA political/governmental/historical discussions, it is often better to use terms like "liberal" and "conservative" rather than party labels such as "Democratic" or "Republican". It was "conservatives" who were the slaver terrorists. It was "conservatives" who wrote a "terrorist welfare benefit" into the constitution which encouraged slaver terrorism and rewarded the terrorists with excessive national governmental power. (a.k.a. - The Electoral College + the 3/5ths rule.) It was "conservatives" who made a lame attempt at forming a separate country based solely on terrorism. The csa. It was "conservatives" who brought genocide to the American First Nations. It was "conservatives" who formed the kkk and similar terrorist gangs. It was "conservatives" who wrote the terroristic Jim Crow laws. It was "conservatives" who tortured and lynched blacks for "entertainment". It was/is "conservatives" who honor their "Heritage OF Hate". It was "conservatives" who became so butt-hurt about losing their welfare benefit they went to war to preserve the "free stuff" awarded to terrorists(slavers), the csa. It was "conservatives" who were so ashamed of their terrorist crimes against humanity they revised their history books and invented "the lost cause" fairy tale to deflect attention away from their terrorism. It was "conservatives" who invented "Manifest Destiny" in a lame attempt to justify their genocide. It was "conservatives" who erected loser trophies and monuments to honor csa terrorists and csa terrorism. It was/is "conservatives" who attempt(ed) to hide their terroristic greed under the guise of "patriotism" and "christianity".
@@rb032682 Well, here in Northeast Tennessee the war was blamed on the Democrats. It was often said "the Demicats killed my father". After the war "The Demicratic state government in Nashville punished us for our stand. All counties in Northeast Tennessee voted, both times, to stay in the Union except for one. From then to now, there has never been a democrat elected to congress from the 1st us district.
@@billycampbell854 You do know that the Democratic Party was the conservative party at that time?
@@rb032682 thank you! I'm copying, saving, and sharing this!
One more thing since obviously my comment is being screened before being allowed to be seen… For those of you talking positively or negatively about the “reconstruction period” and the second Civil Rights period, do you know your ancestors perspectives on those or what do you think about those time frames?
Less than 100 years had passed since the war of colonial succession from Great Britain. The British reconquest attempt of 1812 was with-in many Americans' living memory. Undoubtedly, GB continued to have reconquest in mind during the 1860's civil war but historians mostly ignore international relations and global trade as factors for internal conflict. The evaluation of legacy nobles roles is completely struck from American history. A more comprehensive review of these factors should be implemented to give a more complete view of North American history.
USA-British relationship after independence was best described as “frenemies”. The UK was America’s biggest trade partner. The only serious effort the British made to hamstring American expansion was to try and conquer New Orleans at the mouth of the Mississippi River. New Orleans being the cork in the bottle of the entire Mississippi River drainage. That being said the US Navy and Army had war plans against the British Empire up until WW2
@@Idahoguy10157 The battle of New Orleans (Andrew Jackson) was after the peace of Gent. Without radio nobody knew British and American did peace in Gent in the nowdays Belgium!
@@avenaoat …. We know about the peace treaty. However had the British Army conquered New Orleans would they give it back? London wasn’t stupid. They knew geography
That makes Mr. Lincoln the greatest man who ever lived freezing the slaves and ending the most meaning war that ever was faught
It wasn't a reconquest attempt, the Americans invaded Canada that started the unpleasantness.
On July 4th the United States of America will celebrate its declaration of independence from the United Kingdom and I rejoice that such is the case. However, the U. S. revolution was nothing more or less than a rebellion against the properly constituted government of the 13 colonies, Great Britain. Slavery was not an issue with either the colonial loyalists or the American colonial rebels. The colonists rebelled because they considered themselves to be at least second class citizens of the U. K. Thus, in the beginning of their protest to the United Kingdom regarding their grievances, they sought their rights as Englishman. It was only when they determined that they could not achieve their rights as Englishmen that they rebelled against the U. K., declaring themselves a new nation free and independent of England. The tenacious rebellious American colonists with much help from France won that rebellion. Thus, those rebellious traitors to Great Britain became the marvelous patriots and founding fathers of the nation known as the United States of America. But, what if they had NOT won their rebellion in their quest for independence? How would victorious England have dealt with Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, and all the rest of the rebels who instigated, promoted, and led the rebellion against His majesty King George III and Great Britain? I think we know the answer to that question. So, the difference in rebellions comes down to who wins by force of arms their wars of rebellion against whatever governments, regardless of the issues that impelled people to take up arms against their properly constituted governments. Yes, who is a rebel and who is a patriot?
I agree...The difference between Rebellion Vs Patriotism is often one sided as history relates.
@David - That's a nice story, but mostly irrelevant to the topic of this video. Here are some facts about USA history, the Electoral College, and the civil war. The sources of this information are the USA Constitution and actual events in USA history: Slavers are terrorists. Slavery is terrorism. The Electoral College was written for only one purpose. The Electoral College was written by terrorists(slavers) to be nothing more than a "welfare benefit" for themselves and other USA terrorists. The E C (+ the 3/5ths clause) awards excessive national governmental and political power to terrorists(slavers). The Electoral College encouraged and rewarded the terrorism of slavery. The Electoral College allowed terrorists to dominate the USA national government until around 1850-1860. The USA's "founding fathers" were the USA's first group of "welfare queens". Ten of the first twelve presidents were terrorists. What happened around 1860 when abolition and the prohibition of slaver terrorism in the new territories and Western states greatly reduced the "free stuff" to which the terrorists had become so accustomed? One of the biggest blows to the "terrorist welfare queens" was the prohibition of slaver terrorism in Western states. That's one of the reasons you hear that whiney, old csa/kkk terrorist propaganda phrase, "We don't want to be ruled by the coasts!". What happened when the terrorist "welfare queens" lost their "free stuff" from the USA government? What happened when the terrorist slavers could no longer easily dominate the USA national government and national politics? The csa/kkk were just low-life, MS-13-type gangs of butthurt "welfare queens". After causing the civil war, the Electoral College became a "welfare benefit" for states which suppress voting. I wonder which states LOVE to suppress voting .......... might they be the former terrorist states and terrorist sympathizer states? Eliminate the Electoral College. It has poisoned the USA!
@@rb032682 man that is a rather sweeping generazation of an explaination. The electorial college was meant and is a system to make the lesser populated states to have a bit more say in the governance of the country...les we have mob rule by just a few regional areas of dense populations. We are not a true democracy, we are in fact a democratic Republic. Otherwise we are better represented accross the entire country and not in the hands a a few states. A pure democracy simply doesn't work and historically, never has worked .
@@denisdegamon8224 - Why are you blindly repeating old csa/kkk terrorist propaganda? You have NO PROOF to back up what you are claiming about the Electoral College. The math in the USA Constitution refutes your claims. Please stop lying!
@@rb032682 go back and educate yourself sonny. Your public education is showing your ignorance.
Nice to see the South's perspective of the Civil War, even as the President of the USA i still didn't know, thanks!
We wanted secede peacefully but you wouldn’t let us
It really blows your mind don't it?💀
@@parkerwilliams7652 So you wanted to keep your slaves and spread that barbaric behavior throughout the United States. You wanted to secede for "states rights,"
@@s0medebr1s The South didn't need to secede to keep it's slaves. Only states could abolish slavery not the general government. Had they been worried about losing their slaves they could have simply stayed in the union and ratified the original thirteenth amendment known as the Corwin amendment and legal slavery could still exist today. As to the spread of slavery that was never going to happen to many Northern Racist moving west.
@@joeallen4329 B fin S 🙄
Let's not forget that it was the African Tribal leaders who sold their own people into slavery.
EXACTLY. But nobody wants to talk about that 🤫
Jeez. I can understand why southerners fought against the north and wanted to secede, but man, some proponents of slavery had a twisted worldview.
Not for the time in which they lived.
@@karenbartlett1307 no, slavery is objectively wrong. I mean, how is it not wrong to beat people up and treat them like animals? Slaves were people too.
@@zfloyd1627 it's considered wrong now, but wasn't at that time by most people. Btw, abolitionism started in the South, but ceased after Nat Turner's Rebellion: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_Turner%27s_slave_rebellion#:~:text=Nat%20Turner's%20Rebellion%20(also%20known,51%20of%20whom%20were%20white.
@@zfloyd1627 Btw, you do know that slaves were held by Tribes in Africa-the Dahomey Tribe were the main suppliers of slaves to European slave buyers: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Kingdom_of_Dahomey
@@zfloyd1627 if slavery is wrong, owning & beating another person is bad, speak up & do smthg about it! World wide, RIGHT NOW, you have millions of people enslaved, THIS VERY DAY! Is this a racial thing or a human dignity issue??
The Civil War has a World Strategic background. UK, France and the Spanish Kingdom began action in Mexico and not beside the Confederacy. Yes Adams did big work for the North in London, but this would not have been enough without some interesting change in the World between 1861 and 1865! Confederacy began to burn cotton to start cotton shortage before the Anaconda plan (Northern blockad) in 1861, what an silly plan! on. Some interesting points: 1. Between 1740 and 1790 the sugar beet industry began in Germany and Napoleon brought the sugar beet industry in France about 1800. About 1830 France became the bigest SUGAR PRODUCER IN THE WORLD FROM SUGAR BEET! (I think this the sugar beet was the biggest knock out on the slavery system in all World!) 2. Before the Civil War United Kingdom perhaps France gathered extra cotton in warehouses. They thought about Civil War earlier. 3. The wool industry and flax industry were lagging behind of the cotton textil industry so a litle shortage in cotton helped the flax and the wool industry well to develop in the industrial revolution. 4. Northern states in the USA became the biggest corn expoter in the World about 1860 (Mc Cormick machines help the farmers to work without slaves!). 5. For example Egypt could buy Northern American corn and Egypt could decrease the domestic corn production, so Egypt could produce more cotton from 1862. 6. Sepoy revolt was over in India so India could produce cotton for export. 7. Brasil could change to cotton from sugarcane, because France (germany etc countries) produced sugar from sugar beet. 8. Together this 7 points "Uncle Tom's Cabin" 's success in France and in the United Kingdom caused the simple people did not want any War beside the Confedercy in France and in the United Kingdom! Earlier the poor people and the Royal Family with Queen Victoria were toghether Northern Sympathizers, but the entry of the newer cotton exporters the bussines class left the Upper class alone with the Southern sympathy in the UK.
I agree that slavery is 100% wrong, but I still think that we should see both perspectives.
@Z - Slavers are terrorists. Slavery is terrorism. Did you say the same thing on 09/11/2001? Why are you attempting to soften the truth?
@@rb032682 no, I did not mean both perspectives on the issue of Slavery. Slavery should be condemned totally. I was talking about what both the south and the north saw of the civil war.
@@zfloyd1627 - Thank you for the clarification. On the side of the slaver terrorists......oh heck.....here is my usual rant about the civil war.... Here are some facts about USA history, the Electoral College, and the civil war. The sources of this information are the USA Constitution and actual events in USA history: Slavers are terrorists. Slavery is terrorism. The Electoral College was written for only one purpose. The Electoral College was written by terrorists(slavers) to be nothing more than a "welfare benefit" for themselves and other USA terrorists. The E C (+ the 3/5ths clause) awards excessive national governmental and political power to terrorists(slavers). The Electoral College encouraged and rewarded the terrorism of slavery. The Electoral College allowed terrorists to dominate the USA national government until around 1850-1860. The USA's "founding fathers" were the USA's first group of "welfare queens". Ten of the first twelve presidents were terrorists. What happened around 1860 when abolition and the prohibition of slaver terrorism in the new territories and Western states greatly reduced the "free stuff" to which the terrorists had become so accustomed? One of the biggest blows to the "terrorist welfare queens" was the prohibition of slaver terrorism in Western states. That's one of the reasons you hear that whiney, old csa/kkk terrorist propaganda phrase, "We don't want to be ruled by the coasts!". What happened when the terrorist "welfare queens" lost their "free stuff" from the USA government? What happened when the terrorist slavers could no longer easily dominate the USA national government and national politics? The csa/kkk was just a low-life, MS-13-type gang of butthurt "welfare queens". After causing the civil war, the Electoral College became a "welfare benefit" for states which suppress voting. I wonder which states LOVE to suppress voting .......... might they be the former terrorist states and terrorist sympathizer states? Eliminate the Electoral College. It has poisoned the USA!
like everything else, comes down to the $
@@rb032682 wait, can you please explain how slavery is terrorism? I know that slavery is really really bad, but I am confused about how slavery is terrorism. Also, the electoral college was invented to give more power to small states (which are not necessarily slave states, in fact, the largest state in the U.S. at the time the constitution was written, Virginia, was actually a slave state). I learned that in school.
довольно познавательно.
Shelby Foote put it, "southerners have a sense of defeat,," the French had it after the Franco-Prussian War. the Germans after WW1, It sets Southerners apart.
The french Canadian from Quebec lost a war too, not of the same type but.... Jeez, I will re-listen to this video. We became independant from France by being dependant (own) by United Kingdom (England, as a matter of fact) Great video.
@@printaboul I believe Canada is the only country that's never lost a war.
Yeah, USA " NEVER " lost a war lol
stephen ortega yeah no, slavery was dying out and would of been abolished by the 80s
@@brandondowd6470 the 1980s maybe... slavery wasn't going to be abolished with consent from the slave holding states by 1880...
People were sold into slavery by others and there own race and has been going on since the beginning of time and has nothing to do with skin color. Like the black Professor said vulnerability was the common denominator to be a slave Regardlessof what color you were. In the antebellum South black women helped raise white families and were much loved by those families and black soldiers did fight for the south contrary to what they want you to believe. Nathan Bedford Forrest said some of the finest soldiers he ever had were black and the words right out of the mouth of Lincoln when he said what he would do to keep the south from leaving the union and not have to fight a war. What he said sure wasn’t against slavery and that was Lincoln so much for why they were fighting the war a bunch of crap they brainwash people with today it’s unbelievable and fake.
Absolutely correct
You seem to think of black people as you would of domestic pets ! Your ignorant attitude is exactly what is wrong with southern culture you live in another world from the rest of the civilized world.
I think interesting to look at the numbers: 1. The most areas in the Confederate states which gave prounionist white volunter soldiers were low % slaves populated counties! The exceptions are few. There were some exception in East Teenneessee where some low% slaves populated counties were proconfederates as Sullivan (8%) and Polk (5%). The lowest slaves pőpulated county (12.3%) Jones county was prounionist in Mississippi state (Hoolywood discovered it). Also Winston county in Northern Alabama was the lowest slaves populated county (3.4%) was strong prounionist and Winston county with the neighbore prounionist counties hid 10 000 Confederate deserters! Ozark region in Arkansas had low% slaves population and gave 9000 white prounionist volunter soldiers. North Carolina gave 10 000 white prounionist soldiers and the most arrived lower slaves % counties. Tenneessee gave 32 000 white prounionist soldiers and the most arrived from low % slaves populated counties. The low% slaves populated West Virginia became new prounionist state. 2. The border states which remained in the Union, the low % slaves populated counties were generally prounionists and the higher % slaves populated counties were proconfederate. In Missouri the St. Louis region, Ozark region and the Iowa border strife areas were prounionists and the Little Dixie counties with higher % slaves population were the proconfederate. Interesting Abraham Lincoln got about 10% in 1860 election and Delaware gave 23.7%. Maryland was similar to Missouri the higher % slaves populated counties were the prounionists. Kentucky was exception, because some higher % slaves populated counties were prounionists in the Middle Kentucky. The cause is interesting the Henry Clay the Whig polititian had big effect in these counties to think of whole country the USA! 3. In the middling% slave populated and the higher % slaves populated areas the everyday life of a without slave holding families were influenced the slavery system. The slave holder families were connected with family and friendly connection, the not slave holder lawiers, shop owners, railway employees, master people, traders, etc lived on the slave working economy. The farmers who did not owne any slaves they produced food and not cotton, so they were not competitors of the cotton plantations moreover they could live beside the plantations. The John Brown raid on Harper's Ferry caused paranoid answer not only among the slaves owners but among the not slave owners alike in the higher % slave populated counties.
I am sorry. Maryland was similar to Missouri the higher % slaves populated counties were the proconfederates.
9:56
Hello, The General Robert E. Lee
Also the north freezes and u can't grow food tobacco year round.
A Southern journalist wrote how the majority of their agricultural food came from the North. He blamed cotton.
War of northern aggression- says it all
What "aggression"??
@@rogerthat4545 The Federal armies invaded the South to stop the session of states from the union. This was of course not forbidden by the US Constitution but nevertheless war ensued
@@rogerthat4545 the northerners invaded the south and burned everything
@@xcharlesbronsonx how do you "invade" your own country???
She states there was "no blockade". Amazing.
of the Northern states
My Great grandfather fought for our good ole south I stand proud for him and nothing will keep me from that Its iny blood.smd I stand for my flag proud
well, bless your racist little heart!
Lee Ann Caldwell, PhD., at 2:00 said the labor, one adult male can produce 3 acres of tobacco a year . This is not the best way to say 3 acres of land is all one person can cultivate given the level of tool technology at the time was limited to animal drawn plows. Planters could not produce enough to meet the demands of the world market of the 19th century. And too little cotton, tobacco, rice, meant the Landowners could not establish a viable and 'operating social system'. But they would not be a good trading partner for British coal, steel and iron manufacturing. The answer was to multiply the number of hands to cultivate the greatest amount of land and this ordered the expansion of slavery. In America a peasantry did not exist, feudalism is not a formidable part of American history as it was in England. A peasantry would have to be created. Farmer/settlers would have to become land owners with more land then they need for their own families they can rent out to other large peasant families. A Native American was not about to become someone's serf. The landowning class never got that far, slavery developed faster than the land could be taken from Native Americans. Force plays a part in this history of changing social systems. The American Indian Wars in the period preceding the Civil War of the first chapters of American historical development hastened the annihilation of one social paradigm of the ancestral common property of Native Americans by a Landed Aristocracy importing slaves facing annihilation from a third, the industrial revolution itself. To make matters worse, the British Empire diverting slaves and immigrants were dumped on the American labor-market and Caribbean hastened the growth of cities and urban development while rural America could not open up fast enough to absorb the first and second wave of displaced peasants from the European country side to the satisfaction of British capitalists.
God Bless Dixie
We, the English had a civil war some 300 years ago. The scars and divisions still exists. I have travelled in America, and even now it seems that the civil war mentality is still there,
The South lost the battle war but won the war
Dolia and I used to have a Plantatian on the looked like Mount Royal, same name, HINT
Every rise is a fall, the United States, which gained independence from Britain, fought a civil war against slavery. In 20th and 21st centuries, wars continues to be imposed on small and weak nations. That's what America did inveded Afghanistan in 2001 but America got stuck here and after longest war of it's history America was defeated by a small Talibans militia force (shame) it was not only very humiliting defeat also it's super power status is on stake.
The south isn't behind In college football ,we are dominant!!!
I think you should shove a "southern football" far up QAnus ....... sideways.
Let's not forget Michigan
@bobamericana3099 That was pre civil war, AND pre Revolutionary War so why would it be mentioned here? Don’t get your Irish ire in a knot. The rest of us Irish are aware and it has been addressed in many documentaries. Many English/British were indentured as well. It was the norm. 7 years to learn your trade and trade for work, food, home.
This isn't to inaccurate.
Too*
@Daniel Lawrence 🙄 Ignorance of how Historians work.
that is a very god point that at home the North had no war aside of loved one in it. the south did not invade the North. It the other way around and a very good point that most people do not even think about. 118:00
They/Lee tried in 1863. North Vietnam did not invade the US either. So what’s your point?
the south fired the first shot at fort sumter. what you expect, a focus group to be held?
no mention of the 300,000 Irish who were "volunteered" for indentured servitude by the British. FAIL ! ! !
indentured were not slaves
Those poor iris men had 2 choices , join the union or go back to Ireland. If a man had 300 dollars . They could by their way out of the war. Who had 300 dollars in 1861, rich people. In the south if a man owned slaves or multiple slaves him nor his son's had to fight for the confederate army. So there again not everyone had slaves. The civil war was not fought over slavery , it was over money , and export of cotton, sugar, and tobacco. We have been lied to about most of American history. Example, the buffalo was not hunted out for their hides they was killed out to starve the native American .
Well, she doesn't ALWAYS live in that house Carl built, sometimes, their are warrants from police depts, you know... I don't always see these robots....
War Between the States
War of Northern Aggression
my great granddad was a slave in texarkana
.Did you know that all blacks was republicans after the civil war?
@TriplePlay 1854 was before the civil war :/
@Roger Wilco Hardly anyone, but democrats still believe they "Own" black people in this country.
Roger Wilco southerners in general are flying that flag
Politics evolve, sir. The republicans today resemble the democrats of that time. Read history.
Arthur Waller- Nowlin i actually have some proof of the party switch. A lot of the older gentlemen I know who hold conservative views still vote Democrat due to them not knowing about the party switch. At least two of them have said they are big fans of trump but are either going to vote Biden or not vote at all because they are democrats.
i love the way north try and claim the war was about slavery!!! lol if thats so why had the war been going on for a few years before the north even first mentioned anything about slavery, and it was only done then as part of the war effort
It was always about slavery. The days of the lost cause myth are over.
Not about slavery? Just read the secession ordinances of the Individual Confederate States, e.g., the one of MS quoted above. The preservation of the South's "peculiar institution" was the underlying reason for secession -- secession was the underlying cause of the war. Might also mention that the first state to secede, South Carolina, and the several that immediately followed SC's example, we're those with the largest slave populations, in absolute numbers, and in relation to the white population. No slavery -- no secession; no secession, no war...
@@richardgreathouse9702 It was about slavery, it's in articles of the confederacy. However, Lincoln certainly didn't care if he freed the slaves or not. If Lincoln could've kept the States together and kept slavery he would've. Lincoln was no hero.
Read! Martin.and Learn dude!
@@s0medebr1s Read Lincoln. It's obvious you haven't.
Slavery was simply a FREE LABOR WORK FORCE. When America ended the Slave Trade. The Slave owners simply changed the Goal Post and made up the law that said the children of slaves would also become slaves. The Planter Class then made the Slave Trade into a Big Money Operation in the sale of slaves. When the Planter Class that started the Civil War did NOT want their Sons to be conscripted into the Army and put in Harms way. They maid up a law that 10 Slaves owned allowed a son to be exempt from military service. Yes, they used their Slaves to protect their Sons. Soon the Poor White Class got WOKE really fast. And the chant among the Poor soldiers was, "RICH mans War, Poor mans Fight". Mass desertions followed, and the War was ended by the Poor Southern Folks who figured out what the Lost Cause really was. Maintaining a FREE LABOR WORK FORCE at all costs.
They depended on crops that were labor intensive. However, they were unwilling or unable to do it themselves. So, keeping slaves and their labor, became so much apart of their lives, they did any and everything to keep it that way. The South's (of course not the entire South) secession from the Union and waging a War that could have potentially destroyed the U.S.A altogether, was proof they did not value the principles of the U.S. Constitution when it came to their wealth, status, or personal gain, much like their decendants do today.
“Much like their descendants?” You’re a fool lady, generalizing any group of people, be it by race, creed, sex, or religion, is a dead giveaway that you’re an ignorant human being. I hope you’re still young and have room to grow because it’s just like they say, there’s no fool like an old fool, and it’d be pretty damn sad for you to take your backwards ideas with you to the grave.
So what is your opinion on Ancient Rome keeping slaves as part of their way of life which the Bible speaks about. Those slaves were of all different descents
Protective tariffs, what were they? The 1813 new england secession attempt, what was it? Northern shipping swelled with profits from the slave trade. The south had no such industry. Why are these questions rarely considered a cause of the war. "The winners write the history." I would add they 'propagate' the seeds of rancor, paddy me boy...
Very much like the United States Congress of today who value the profits of war far more than the lives and lively hood of the people of the United States.
The South was economically and agriculturally superior, especially at the height of the anbellem period. If the succeeding states paid taxes to the union there would still have been slavery much further on. This wasn't about committing treason by succession, or the union taking moral high ground. Even Lincoln said the emancipation proclamation was just political polarization to get lobbyists to fund the war effort. Smh some people. Naive as they come.
Most poor whites, or yeoman farmers were not dreaming of being a plantation owner. BS
curious, what did they fight for?
but they also profited from slave holding plantation owners
You invade my home there’s gonna be a fight you can believe that just like what we got going on today just go on down to Polk Co Florida and talk to the sheriff see what he says
Here are some facts about USA history, the Electoral College, and the civil war. The sources of this information are the USA Constitution and actual events in USA history: Slavers are terrorists. Slavery is terrorism. The Electoral College was written for only one purpose. The Electoral College was written by terrorists(slavers) to be nothing more than a "welfare benefit" for themselves and other USA terrorists. The E C (+ the 3/5ths clause) awards excessive national governmental and political power to terrorists(slavers). The Electoral College encouraged and rewarded the terrorism of slavery. The Electoral College allowed terrorists to dominate the USA national government until around 1850-1860. The USA's "founding fathers" were the USA's first group of "welfare queens". Ten of the first twelve presidents were terrorists. What happened around 1860 when abolition and the prohibition of slaver terrorism in the new territories and Western states greatly reduced the "free stuff" to which the terrorists had become so accustomed? One of the biggest blows to the "terrorist welfare queens" was the prohibition of slaver terrorism in Western states. That's one of the reasons you hear that whiney, old csa/kkk terrorist propaganda phrase, "We don't want to be ruled by the coasts!". What happened when the terrorist "welfare queens" lost their "free stuff" from the USA government? What happened when the terrorist slavers could no longer easily dominate the USA national government and national politics? The csa/kkk was just a low-life, MS-13-type gang of butthurt "welfare queens". After causing the civil war, the Electoral College became a "welfare benefit" for states which suppress voting. I wonder which states LOVE to suppress voting .......... might they be the former terrorist states and terrorist sympathizer states? Eliminate the Electoral College. It has poisoned the USA!
How do you "invade" your own country???
All of my family fought the British and later fought the yankees.
Why don’t they ever talk about how the Southern States seceded from the union legally?
Secession wasn't legal. The right to secede isn't in the Constitution, and the Constitution as a whole was made "to form a more perfect union" between the states. The Southern states did however, form a confederacy, which is expressly prohibited by the Constitution. James Madison (who wrote the Bill of Rights and also a Southerner) wrote that a state can't secede unless it's genuinely being trampled by the federal government. This was in no way happening to the South. As stated in the Constitution and also by James Madison, federal authority outweighs state laws, so if the federal government enacts a law, the states must follow it.
@@MrMah-zf6jk I see…if theft wasn’t specifically illegal, would it be legal? What would they charge a thief with if theft wasn’t illegal? I think you see my point. It does not matter who said what, and the Preamble is an intention, not law. Also, how is a state sovereign enough to vote in their legislative office to join a Union, but not sovereign enough to leave a union? The federal govt is made up by the states, not the opposite.
@@MrMah-zf6jk The US has always been meant to be a nation of laws. L-A-W-S! If their isn’t a LAW forbidding something, it is by default LEGAL. It’s not that difficult of a notion. You just got to get past growing up in schoolrooms where Lincoln’s picture was often allowed to be right next to Washington’s. Lincoln poured the American blood of ~625,000 lives into the butchers bill by invading a newly and LEGALLY formed other union, period. He was an invader and a tyrant that deserved what he got. We have all been forced to live in a tangental country that was not maintained by the free will of all the states. It was all a great big politically correct event that has now led to what we all suffer under today. A hugely polarized country. Lincoln did that.
@@MrMah-zf6jk Just show me the federal law that was on the books in 1860-1861 that made secession illegal and I’ll be the first to publicly proclaim the leaders of the Southern states the profound traitors that the law would indicate them as being. Just show it to me. Shouldn’t be hard if you’re correct. The Senate let Jeff Davis give a farewell address about leaving the union, and then let him ride out of town. They also didn’t put him on trial after the war because he would have been able to mount a defense which would clearly show that they hadn’t done a single illegal thing. The result of that trial would have been that all the Southern states would have simply re-declared their independence from the US.
@@Gen-XTex I literally just proved how secession wasn't legal. The federal government is made up by the people, not the states. Also, I find it kinda funny how you call Lincoln a tyrant, when the South attempted to create a nation entirely built around race-based slavery.
A man was bought for over $1,500. Thay would be $50 grand now. Sad 😞
The truth is that if slavery would not have even existed in the US, the political views of protections and state rights would have eventually caused issues. Slavery wasn’t even the main issue. It was on the negotiation table from the very beginning.
Roger That that’s not what he said. Read the full speech. Lincoln was also s white supremacist, look at his famous debates with Sen. Stephen Douglas. Alexander’s speech only shows he was a white supremacist, this is no different than Lincoln. That speech did not say it was over slavery.
Roger That Lincoln explained to the crowd: “I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races … I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of N*groes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”
Roger That The Morrill Tariff act of 1861 (passed) and the Corwin Amendment was approved on March 2nd, 1861. The Corwin Amendment reads “No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State” This is proof the “Civil War” was about taxation (and economic differences) over the freeing of slaves. Abraham Lincoln approved of this amendment and rather have made more profit than freeing slaves. (Source: The Civil War Day by Day: An Almanac, 1861-1865 Book by Barbara Long and E. Long) Lincoln showed his support for the amendment and stated “Holding such a provision [the legality of slavery] to be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable” (Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe. By Thomas J. Dilorenzo)
Roger That The preliminary emancipation proclamation also gave the CSA the chance to join back into the union and keep their slaves (100 days before the emancipation proclamation). The introduction of the 13th amendment also didn’t necessarily guarantee slave freedom. If the Southern states joined back even as late as months before the war ended, they could’ve stopped the passing of the 13th amendment. Lincoln even knew this and acknowledged that possibility.
@Factless - You attempt to perpetuate the terrorist fairy tale myth is very sad and indicates severe willful ignorance. Here are some facts about USA history, the Electoral College, and the civil war. The sources of this information are the USA Constitution and actual events in USA history: Slavers are terrorists. Slavery is terrorism. The Electoral College was written for only one purpose. The Electoral College was written by terrorists(slavers) to be nothing more than a "welfare benefit" for themselves and other USA terrorists. The E C (+ the 3/5ths clause) awards excessive national governmental and political power to terrorists(slavers). The Electoral College encouraged and rewarded the terrorism of slavery. The Electoral College allowed terrorists to dominate the USA national government until around 1850-1860. The USA's "founding fathers" were the USA's first group of "welfare queens". Ten of the first twelve presidents were terrorists. What happened around 1860 when abolition and the prohibition of slaver terrorism in the new territories and Western states greatly reduced the "free stuff" to which the terrorists had become so accustomed? One of the biggest blows to the "terrorist welfare queens" was the prohibition of slaver terrorism in Western states. That's one of the reasons you hear that whiney, old csa/kkk terrorist propaganda phrase, "We don't want to be ruled by the coasts!". What happened when the terrorist "welfare queens" lost their "free stuff" from the USA government? What happened when the terrorist slavers could no longer easily dominate the USA national government and national politics? The csa/kkk was just a low-life, MS-13-type gang of butthurt "welfare queens". After causing the civil war, the Electoral College became a "welfare benefit" for states which suppress voting. I wonder which states LOVE to suppress voting .......... might they be the former terrorist states and terrorist sympathizer states? Eliminate the Electoral College. It has poisoned the USA!
The lack of generals and their subordinate getting along doomed the south! They fought against each other!
The csa made a lame attempt to form a separate country based solely on the terrorism of slavery. Slavers are terrorists. Slavery is terrorism. Those who go to war to defend slavers and preserve terrorism are also considered terrorists. The csa was nothing more that a low-life terrorist gang. Terrorists deserve no victory, no honor.
@@rb032682 History shows that slavery exists even today! At that time it was acceptable! They were not low lifes as you say! I guess you are one of these who think $3.5 trillion =0! You only get out of life what you put into it nothing is free and no one ows you a living!
@@andybaker5466 - You are a sad example of what happens when the USA allows its citizens to be warped and tainted by 160 years of csa/kkk "lost cause" terrorist fairy tale propaganda.
@@rb032682 You treat my ancestors as criminals I am offended that you say such a thing!! You tear down their monuments and put up ones of George Floyd who was a thug, criminal and probably a racist to! You think that just because we are white and live in the south that we are racist! That is farthest from the truth! You need to learn your facts before you speak!!
@@andybaker5466 - I have learned many facts. Nobody can ever know all the facts, but I have learned enough facts to know that part of USA history fairly well.
Are you serious! SHEESH!!!!!
🤦🏾♂️
Economics there not talking about. Is who is the consumer. ?????? Guess who??? the north and imports and exports to who France England spain
The narrator sounds as if she's upset that slavery ended.
Cedric nhgghhhg L’ Ioo
Most ignorant gene pool.
White wash sugar coated
North and South, we’re one country trying to throw off the yoke of the Washington socialists/communists 🇺🇸
Well it's certainly different back then and people from the north still don't understand southern hospitality
Many good facts. However, it did not address the fact that the civil war or freedom for slaves would not have occurred without secession. The majority of the population did not want the extension on slavery. They were not willing to fight a war to end it. Once war began, then a nation wide end to the vile practice could be achieved. Who know how long slavery would have existed within America if South Carolina had not seceded and fired the opening shots of the civil war. The share cropper system was another form of slavery. Force to keep ex-slaves as a work force, was used to keep the share croppers on the land. Through the use of contracts, economic slavery, legally recognized in the court system, and terror (KKK). Andrew Johnson was not willing to take the political step to guarantee, by force, the full freedom of the ex-slaves and prevent exploitation. This created a civil rights legacy that still has not been totally resolved.
Who made this? Definitely not a Southerner.....most people of the South didn't own slaves, the slave trade was controlled by three prominent New England families, over 100,000 men in the federal army owned slaves including Gen. Grant, Religion was extremely deeply rooted in the South even more so than in the North and was very important to the South, Slavery continued after the war in states that remained neutral....Slavery began in the north trying to blame something on a four year period that existed over 300 years before and continued after the end of the war....this is a joke
Sloan Champion who are the three New England families?
Sloan, it was made by Southerners who actually verify the facts. Can you tell me where you got your so-called facts? Here is the truth: 1) Poor whites in the South fought for slavery, because they were above slaves in the socioeconomic order. 2). Please tell the names of the three New England families, because I've never heard of them and believe me I've researched the Civil War A LOT. 3). If 100 000 slaveholders fought for the Union Army, the emancipation proclamation would have triggered such massive desertions it would have ceased to function as a fighting army. 4). Grant's southern born wife had house slaves but Grant told her to free them once Lincoln made a war aim of ending slavery. When Grant was a dirt-poor farmer before the war his father-in-law gifted him a slave. Grant had a poor relationship with his abolitionist father who was a shameless self-promoter, something the modest and painfully honest Grant disliked. Maybe by accepting the slave he was getting back at dad in some way. Later but still before the war Grant freed the slave even though he was still poor and could have sold him for good money. Grant was a democrat before the war. Secession and Lincoln turned him into a republican. 5). Abolitionism was inspired by Christian principles and why are you implying a slave-based society was more 'christian' than the free North? 19th century America was extremely religious in North and South. This is a meaningless assertion in your part. 6). There were no 'neutral' states. Kentucky tried it for a few months then chose to stay with the Union, as had already three other slave states- Missouri, Maryland and Delaware. 7). Slavery ended in all states at the SAME time once 75% of the states ratified the 13th amendment. If some owners tried to retain it, that was illegal. I need to know if you are talking about specific practices in some ex-slave states loyal to the Union. If this happened I think you are blowing it out of proportion. 8) Slavery was a hot political issue from the mid 1840s when North and South immediately disagreed about whether the huge territory won in the Mexican American war should be open to slavery or not. Northern leaders did not wake up one morning in 1861 and decide to invade the South. The northern people were sick and tired and angry due to southern insistence on slavery being protected by the Federal Government. Yes, it was NORTHERN STATES' RIGHTS that started the war as much as Southern States Rights! The presidencies of Pierce and Buchanan saw basically one huge southern tantrum over slavery in the territories, because both presidents were 'doughfaces'- northern politicians who gave into the South in a crisis. I advise you read some books by real historians and stop simply going to shaky social media sources for confirmation bias.
And Darwin didn't help!!!
Darwin was a massive racist.
@@rvz77 So he's always wrong huh?
Still second class citizenship for all of us under the 14th amendment. Black slaves were just the first to get lied to. Their citizenship was never attached to inalienable rights. Only Anglo's and Mexicans had access to these rights which were contained in the original organic 1787 constitution for the united states. Now, however, since the Act of 1871 after the Civil War, all of us, white as well as people of color, only have government guaranteed rights under THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES(all in caps with "of" instead of "for") and not inalienable rights granted by our creator. Now the rights are "government guaranteed rights," granted by man; in this case the congress sitting in Washington DC. Therefore, all rights are second class rights for all of us now second class citizens under the 14th amendment with the first class rights and citizenship held by our elected officials in congress and the legislatures who are really the minions, acting for the 52 founders and now their posterity who control the big banks and the Federal Reserve.
Thru the eyes of the South....that is the only way it has been portrayed. Dumbfounding to me how little anyone understands the way the war was really fought from our true leaders.
A more accurate title would be "History through Southern Lies".
Just because history is gray and doesn't fit with your narrative doesn't mean it lies.
@@dasbubba841 - Lol! I envy your capacity for delusion. The csa was/is nothing more than a low-life terrorist gang.
@@rb032682 Unfortunately for you, not everyone narrow-mindedly sees the Confederacy like that.
@@dasbubba841 - Why do you think facts are narrow-minded? You're not making sense.
@@rb032682 I simply don't care that the Confederacy was just a slave-owning planter oligarchy. The South is my home, and any man worth his salt defends his home.
War is just a stupid waste no matter what the cause. The Phd guy could actually speak English.
This is not through Southern eyes...these people are hacks and dupes
@Sloan - Agreed. This is what happens when the USA allows its citizens to be warped and tainted by 160 years of csa/kkk "lost cause" terrorist fairy tale propaganda.
Next, the liberals will blame Eli Whitney for inventing the cotton gin.
Except this is not what the war was about.
@Gary Daniel the cause was tariffs and taxes because lincon wanted the profit from the south lincon wanted the south because of its crops the south was very prosperous whole the government itself was poor and failing thus making lincon declare war to take the south the civil war wasn't fought over slavery you have to be ignorant to believe that bullshit
@Gary Daniel if you actually believe hundreds of thousands of men died to keep slaves that my friend is a special kind of stupid I'd advise anyone who believes that to go to their local library or Washington and do there own research
@@jonathanlawson4667 Read the Articles of Cessation' It will tell you why the war was fought.
@@jonathanlawson4667 It was Slavery. Education is a good thing. ( I know many of you down there look down on Education....that too is part of the south's legacy of Athortarianism.
@@wendellspivey3747 Southern Leaders told us why, in no uncertain terms.
Gee I wonder if they broke $50 ,and 5 hours on this. I have seen obscure Lutheran church films that made more sense and contained more facts.
If you ignore the small 4 million under-paid workers, the South was just a porch sitting, lemonade sipping Christian paradise. The so called "slaves" contrary to Northern error-riddled school system, actually volunteered into the American labour force, riding first-class back to the U.S of A. The south fought for a man's God given right to be a legal possession of another man regardless of how much the possessor of said man disapproved. A master's bond with his slave was said to be stronger than his own marriage. Only for a lost slave would a Southern man search to the ends of the earth till the worker is back safe in his rocking arms.
EVERYONE would like to disagree with you. They searched because the slave was their property. The slaves were CAPTURED FROM THEIR HOMELAND a lot of the time. "Safe in his rocking arms"? You mean whip them back to work, right? Also, "God given right to be a legal possession of another man"? That's against human rights, when did God say it?
Allow me to fix your title: American History through WHITE Southern Eyes
peppaschmut
you tube is a great place for cowardice ! no danger of a taste of leather and a demand of satisfaction. there is no honor here. just a forum for belligerent trolls , who wouldn't mutter a word of disrespect in my presence...you know who you are.
You are an idiot, no offense.
@@thomasjamison2050 You are not in his presence, are you?
@@thomasjamison2050 steffen has got you there
Yup , you're an idiot. Agreed
Not rebels; just wanted out.
I blame the damned federals
The myth of the lost cause lives...
Lost Cause Propaganda is real.
@@OldHeathen1963 What does your comment even mean? Propaganda is Real?
Yes. One man can only produce a few acres . So I ll steal the work of other people then. Gross.
Shame on you calling this the view of the south.
They are southerners. They are the south.
The real problem is greed those plantations could have gave slaves freedom and. Then offered a job .none of the war and repression would have happened .planters refuse to change
Of course, hindsight says that it would have saved everyone a lot of trouble if the federal government just bought every slave and set them free (it would have cost about the same as fighting a brutal 4 year long war, plus the costs of Reconstruction).
south firing on fort sumter stopped any further compromise. these so called elite plantation owners would protect their asses by any means to keep their slaves. comes down to $
Slavery has always existed. Learn from our history and never repeat it.
You have point here?
Who else committed treason for slavery?
Laughable.
Only issue about the civil war i laugh about is the great state of by God West Virginia, LMAO you go there take notice of the confederate flags , then ask one of the natives why ? They will say well we our southern we are confederates , well your state broke away from Virginia to be west Virginia to fight for the union , so why the confederate flag in just about every bar down there ? narrow minded much ?? LMAO
West Virginia was also the last slave state to inter the union.
@@joeallen4329 yes I know that, but why boast about being rebels n confederate when they fought for the north
@@abc345ful - This is what happens when the USA allows its citizens to be warped and tainted by 160 years of csa/kkk "lost cause" terrorist fairy tale propaganda.
@@abc345ful Because a lot actually didn't. Large parts of West Virginia was held by the Confederates or bushwhackers.
The southern rebels like the Nazis were good at battlefield tactics and had brave soldiers fighting for immoral goals. They made similar mistakes. You can win most battles and still get beat. Big wars are about logistics and supply production. Always. The South could barely obtain guns, food or shoes for their armies. Start a war and have like two arms factories, really? Nazis were lugging gear across endless Russian tundra with horses. Nazis basically dismantled French arms production that really could have worked for them. Tiger tanks with empty gas tanks destroyed by their own crews. Living off the land doesn't really work during wartime.
Sorry this video is boring. Narrator no emotion. Sad
Lincoln screwed up everything.
Yes Andrew Johnson had the right idea only thing he didn’t understand was treating all people the same no man should own another man less he should be own man or something like that evil bitches
Too bad he only put the country back together. :(
It was the denial of Justice, rapes, murder, kidnapping, terror. That is why southerners had to be hammered into the ground! You were let up to easy.
Instead of putting Africans to work on the plantations the communities of white people should have promoted working with the crops. The entire mentality from the beginning was wrong, to abuse of other people. I think the White Southerners victimized themselves. What prevented them from working on the plantations? They too had legs and arms. Oh I forgot....they felt entitled to NOT WORK as hard as the African American people. Today......we can still see often this come in to play across many different jobs....our country is still struggling with this power dynamics.
@victor escobar: don't forget that slaves were counted as property and worth money.they were bought and sold like cattle so whites could not have a place working along slaves. In fact it was illegal.
Southern Lies....
The history of the civil war that's taught is the North's lies.
@@fireball1322 Stop listening to your drunk uncle! LEARN!!!!!
@@OldHeathen1963 I've read all I can find. From the time period on up. Most of what is taught these days is either Northern misinformation or outright lies about the what actually lead up to, and the causes of the war. it's evident you haven't. Ever heard the history of a war is written by the winner? That means the winner leaves out the truths they do not like/want revealed. BTW, unlike you, I don't have a drunk uncle. Most southerns did NOT own slaves. Just as was stated before. If you don't even know that much, you're grossly uninformed and you are proving it, the more BS you speak. Go read for yourself. You need it.
Lost Cause bullshit, they declared war and lost.
Blacks were not allowed in the"Free Soil"states& territories,even llinois, the land of Lincoln, however The New Englanders had more population,and votes in congress,for subsidized "Free Soil" and development, with Czar of Russia lending his navy,new york,boston, and baltimore harbors, to aid lincoln if Britain and or France entered for the South,new england needed runaways to do all the jobs the Yankee considered beneath him,so that Yankee could start working all those new industrial jobs. Black codes,Black laws, Jim Crow of the north, they will protect our Yankee woman. I thought everybody knew