Civil war Books From the Southern Perspective

The winner writes the history and that is the view we are all given. So here are a sample of some books from the southern perspective that will leve you asking, why was I not told that before? why was I lied to? Books found on amazon.



Lincoln


Lincoln As He Really Was
The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War
Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe
Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln's White Dream
Dismantling the Republic





The South / Confederacy / States Rights


The South Was Right!
The Confederate Constitution of 1861: An Inquiry into American Constitutionalism
From Founding Fathers to Fire Eaters: The Constitutional Doctrine of States' Rights in the Old South
Redeeming American Democracy: Lessons from the Confederate Constitution
Nullification: Reclaiming Consent of the Governed
Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century




Slavery


Myths of American Slavery
Time on the Cross: The Economics of American Slavery
A South-side view of slavery;
South Carolina Slave Narratives: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers' Project 1936-1938
Georgia Slave Narratives: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers' Project 1936-1938
Everything You Were Taught About American Slavery is Wrong, Ask a Southerner!




Pro South Book Publisher for many more books

http://www.shotwellpublishing.com/
https://www.searavenpress.com/southe...-war-books.htm

 

Given by whom? We've had the South's side of the story...

https://www.amazon.com/Memoirs-Robert-Lee-Military-Personal/dp/3849694674​

https://www.amazon.com/Autobiography-Jefferson-Davis-ebook/dp/B0047743RI​

... since not long after the Civil War.

Oh, please. Why the baloney? Students of American history aren't operating in the dark.

The traitors had every opportunity to have their say.

 

Show me today where in education/media the "south side" is taught as truth and the winning side does not prevail. Yes many southerners were allowed to write books and historical documents have not been destroyed, they are just ignored. Instead we have a pc history based not on history, but politics.


"The first step in liquidating a people is to erase its memory. Destroy its books, its history. Then have somebody write new books, manufacture a new culture, invent a new history"
-Milan Hubl, Czek communist

“If you can cut the people off from their history, then they can be easily persuaded.”
-Karl Marx

"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past."
-George Orwell, 1984.

“It means that the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy; that our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers; will learn from Northern school books their version of the War, will be impressed by all influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors, our maimed veterans as fit objects for their derision.”
-Major General Patrick Cleburne, C.S.A. Jan. 2, 1864

“Any society which suppresses the heritage of its conquered minorities, prevents their history or denies them their symbols, has sown the seeds of their own destruction.”
-Sir William Wallace, 1281

“Modern historians, looking through their rosy tinted lenses of government education resemble the “blind leading the blind.”
-Jacqueline Sprinkle Forward to a Girls Life in Virginia Before the war Sprinkle Publishing Harrisonberg Virginia

“History- a lie agreed upon.”
-Napoleon Bonaparte

 

Teaching "truth" is not teaching history. I can't speak for the media.

They aren't ignored by historians, but I think it's fair to say they're ignored by the general public.

Historians explain, they don't play politics.

You're talking about propaganda.

From a famous book about propaganda.

He's predicting students would be propagandized by the public school system. I think he was right.

A lot of successful societies have obliterated much of their conquered peoples' past. A good example is the Spanish systematically destroying the Aztecs' written record.

Propaganda trashing historians.

Consider the source.

 

the south advocated slavery which automatically negates any opinion they have on the matter irrelevant and worthless...it would like writing a book extolling the virtues of Nazism, no one wants to go there...

 

That is pretty much exactly what I thought.

Interesting that he mentions the Confederate Constitution. It is actually a rather interesting document I think, and included several improvements from our own.

They had their own Electoral College, and elected their President to a single 6 year term. This was 80 years before the US would put term limits on their own President. They also locked down how money could be spent by their Congress, and that a 2/3 majority had to be reached before any spending outside of mandated spending was approved.

However, there are other things that stand out which make it a poor document historically.

Where as the US had prohibited the slave trade in 1808, the Confederate Constitution opened it up again.

Notice that it was not prohibited, simply that they had the right to do so. So if they had won the war, welcome back the International Slave Trade and the Triangle Trade system all over again. Especially interesting is that all the limitations on slavery specifically stated "Negro slaves". Which leaft things wide open for trade in slaves of other races.

Also, any new territory that joined them (through purchase, annexation, or conquest) would have been a slave territory, with the state having no right to prohibit or restrict slavery.

So yea, claiming that these are of any real interest other than historical curiosity is absurd. You might as well talk about Mein Kamph, and say it should be taught in school as the real reasons Nazi Germany felt the need for WWII.

 

the south allowed personal property handed down to be allowed to be just that, personal property. So did the north. Multiple states were slave optional. Further the south advocated above all, the republic of the founders as a political system. The north political slavery as well as slave wage labor.


https://www.christianforums.com/thr...e-political-effects-of-the-civil-war.8093078/


But it would be like me saying today the us allows child sacrifice by the millions [abortion] and uses tax money for it, so we should not listen to them [you]. Or the north did various crimes against blacks/native americans/catholics etc so we should not listen to them. Rather lets stop the emotion and read all views. When only the northern is herd [the winning side] we associate only slavery with the south and come to wrong conclusions.

 

Also

The Confederate Constitution


“It was clear from the actions of the Montgomery convention that the goal of the new converts to secessionist was not to establish a slaveholders reactionary utopia. What they really wanted was to create the union as it had been before the rise of the new Republican party”
-Robert Divine T.H Bren George Fredrickson and R Williams America Past and Present


“when the dogmas of a sectional party, substituted for the provisions of the constitutional compact, threatened to destroy the sovereign rights of the States, six of those States, withdrawing from the Union, confederated together to exercise the right and perform the duty of instituting a Government which would better secure the liberties for the preservation of which that Union was established.”
-Jefferson Davis Inaugural Address Richmond 1862


The original deep south cotton States that left the union first acted as sovereign republics, it was called “Calhouns states right running riot.” But would soon join in a confederacy with its capital in Montgomery, Alabama. They joined and formed the Confederate constitution on March 11 1861. The CSA constitution limits central [ federal] power. The south thought to keep government weak and poor so that states would do the majority of governing. The CSA saw it as the original America constitution properly interpreted and clarified heavily influenced by Jefferson, Calhoun, and the anti federalists. President Jeff Davis said “The constitution framed by our founders, is that of these confederate states.” It was formed after the original united states constitution with some alterations. By these alterations we can see some of the reasons that the south left the union.

“The confederate revolution of 1861 was a reactionary revolution aimed at the restoration of an american democracy as embodied in the Constitution of 1789.”
-Marshall L. Derosa Redeeming American Democracy Lessons from the Confederate Constitution Pelican Press 2007


CSA State Sovereignty

“We, the people of the Confederate States, each State acting in its sovereign and independent character, in order to form a permanent federal government, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity — invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God — do ordain and establish this Constitution for the Confederate States of America.
-CSA Constitution preamble

Each state being sovereign had only one vote on the confederate constitution ratification regardless of population. A main change in the CSA constitution from the United states version of “we the people of the US in order to form a more perfect union.... CSA version reads “we the people of the confederate states, each state acting in its sovereign and independent character ...” The confederacy formed a decentralized government resting on the ultimate sovereignty of the state witch allowed nullification and secession.

“It was not necessary in the Constitution to affirm the right of secession, because it was on attributive of sovereignty, and the states had reserved all they had not delegated.”
-Jefferson Davis the rise and fall of the confederate government

They clarified the people of the states had sovereignty and not the the mass of people [“we the people”] as held by Lincoln and Webster. Further they were a federated [confederated] government, not a consolidated one. The CSA constitution removed the term “general welfare” from the US preamble as they felt it was misused by Lincoln and earlier whigs to say the federal government had powers for internal improvements.

“The CSA framers placed the government firmly under the heads of the states”
-Marshall L. Derosa Redeeming American Democracy Lessons from the Confederate Constitution

“The CSA congress can have no such power over states officers. The state governments are an essential part of the political system, upon the separate and independent sovereignty of the states the foundation of the confederacy”
-Judge Robertson 1864 Confederate Virginia supreme Court Case Burroughs v Peyton

The states had the right to recall powers delegated [not granted] to congress. In the CSA 10th amendment, In uncertainties in ruling between states and CSA government, the states would override the federal government. The confederacy never organized a supreme court since the final sovereignty lied with the states on the constitutionality of laws passed. When discussion arose of a confederate supreme court William Yancy of Alabama said “when we decide that the state courts are of inferior dignity to this court [csa supreme] we have sapped the main pillars of this confederacy.”

“The fear of centralizing tenancies, past experiences under the federal supreme court, and a desire to protect states rights led to the failure to establish a confederate supreme court.”
-J G Deroulhac Hamilton the State Courts and the Confederate Constitution

“The establishments of the [federal] supreme court, with appellate power over the supreme courts of the states would be utterly subversive to states rights and state sovereignty.”
-Henery S Foote of Tennessee dec 16 1863

All power to amend the Constitution was taken out of congress and given to the states. A state convention could be called to amend the Constitution by three states allowing a minority of states to stop all federal action until their grievances were herd and dealt with. Senators were elected by state officials.

“The confederacy was founded upon decentralization”
-Ken Burns The Civil War PBS documentary

Some USA federal court cases were moved to the states in the CSA version. Confederate officials working only in a state are subject to impeachment by that state. The Confederate states also gain the power to make river-related treaties with each other. In the US, the federal government regulates bodies of water that overlap multiple states. CSA had Fewer members of congress. The states of the CSA had the right to coin money. The confederates had the idea that the country capital would not be permanent [ Even Richmond the second capital was never suppose to be permanent] but float from state to state to avoid centralizing power. The CSA Presidents could not be reelected, not wanting politicians to say what was needed for reelection. There were no political parties within the csa. Later during the war President Jeff Davis complained that he did not have the control like Lincoln to fight the war, because of local and states rights.

“States rights dogma...produced secession and the confederacy”
-E Merton Coulter The Confederate States of America Louisiana State University press

• 
  

CSA Weak Federal Government and Fiscal Responsibility


"the confederacy was founded on the preposition that the central government should stay out of its citizens pockets"
-Christine m Kreser Cash for combat Americas civil war magazine

“CS constitution emphasis on small government and states rights”
-Lochlainn Seabrook The Constitution Of The Confederate States Of America Explained A Clause By Clause Study Of The Souths Magna Carta

“If the Confederate States, ever had any doubt as to the necessity of a separation from the people of the North, that doubt would be removed by the recklessness with which they allow their own liberties to be trampled on. They appear to have no idea of free Government. Those necessary restraints on power — those nicely adjusted balances, by which justice and liberty are secured in a free government, are not understood.”
-Report on the confederate committee of foreign affairs 1861

The CSA allowed for fair trade, had uniform tax code and restricted ominous bills and no corporate bailouts, or government subsides. The post office must be self sufficient within two years of ratification. The CSA President had line item veto on spending, No cost overrun contracts were allowed. Congress could not foster any one branch of industry and greater consensus was needed to pass spending bills.

“Montgomery [confederate constitution]...One leading idea runs through the whole—the preservation of that time-honored Constitutional liberty which they inherited from their fathers....the rights of the States and the sovereign equality of each is fully recognized—more fully than under the old Constitution...But all the changes—every one of them—are upon what is called the conservative side..take the Constitution and read it, and you will find that every change in it from the old Constitution is conservative. ..in it are settled many of the vexed questions which disturbed us in the old Confederacy. A few of these may be mentioned—such as that no money shall be appropriated from the common treasury for internal improvement; leaving all such matters for the local and State authorities. The tariff question is also settled. The presidential term is extended, and no re-election allowed. This will relieve the country of those periodical agitations from which sprang so much mischief in the old government. If history shall record the truth in reference to our past system of government, it will be written of us that one of the greatest evils in the old government was the scramble for public offices—connected with the Presidential election. This evil is entirely obviated under the Constitution which we have adopted...
-Hon. Alexander H. Stephens Speech of the to the Virginia Secession Convention, April 23, 1861


The question of building up class interests, or fostering one branch of industry to the prejudice of another, under the exercise of the revenue power, which gave us so much trouble under the old Constitution, is put at rest forever under the new. We allow the imposition of no duty with a view of giving advantage to one class of persons, in any trade or business, over those of another. All, under our system, stand upon the same broad principles of perfect equality. Honest labor and enterprise are left free and unrestricted in whatever pursuit they may be engaged in....the subject of internal improvements, under the power of Congress to regulate commerce, is put at rest under our system. The power, claimed by construction under the old constitution, was at least a doubtful one; it rested solely upon construction. We of the South, generally apart from considerations of constitutional principles, opposed its exercise upon grounds of its inexpediency and injustice.”
--Alexander Stephens "Cornerstone Address," March 21 1861

Actually , while the us banned it 20 years after, the CSA did right away.

The Slave Trade and the Confederacy

The importation of Negroes of the African race from any foreign country, other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same
-Article I Section 9(1) Confederate Constitution


No slave ship ever flew the confederate flag. The slave trade was outlawed by the Confederate constitution. The slave trade that often mistreated and split up black families was looked down upon as a if a crime and moral wrong by the majority of southerners [ and northerners]. At the time, southerners who supported slavery felt that taking a man from freedom, then putting him in bondage, was a sin “man stealing.” Owning a person already in slavery (African slave and slave trade) and taking him in, often better provided for, was not seen as an evil. Southerners did not see bringing new people in slavery as a good thing, and their treatment while transported was cruel, so they outlawed the trade. Virginia, long before civil war, was the first state to abolish the slave trade. In certain circumstances, slaves were happy to be bought, sometimes brought to tears with the hope of getting out of the poor living conditions of the slave trade. Some southerners bought slaves out of pity for their condition. The north, even after it abolish slavery in their home states, were almost entirely responsible for the slave trade and bringing new slaves to the south before it was outlawed. The south had almost no ships that could even travel the distance.

 

absolutely, re exam our history and call out the former hero's whose behaviour is no longer acceptable in our society...

 

Your imagination is running wild here. Only slaves of african decent were legal in the csa as they were inherited property owned by their owners. So thus the slave trade was forever abolished in the csa.


“It was clear from the actions of the Montgomery convention that the goal of the new converts to secessionist was not to establish a slaveholders reactionary utopia. What they really wanted was to create the union as it had been before the rise of the new Republican party”
-Robert Divine T.H Bren George Fredrickson and R Williams America Past and Present

Many say the south was not fighting for states rights but slavery because they falsely say the CSA constitution did not allow states to end slavery. However freeing slaves was a state issue in the CSA constitution. Article 1 section 9 clause 4 applies to congress, not to the sovereign states. This was in fact anticipating non slave states to join the confederacy. Article 4 section 2 clause 1 and article 4 section 3 clause 1 predicted future free states within the confederacy. As many in the confederacy including VP Stevens thought that the non slave holding upper Midwest would join the confederacy because of the tax and trade laws that would compel states connected to the Mississippi river to join the confederacy as non slave states.

“We made ample provision in our constitution for the admission of other States; it is more guarded, and wisely so, I think, than the old constitution on the same subject, but not too guarded to receive them as fast as it may be proper. Looking to the distant future, and, perhaps, not very far distant either, it is not beyond the range of possibility, and even probability, that all the great States of the north-west will gravitate this way.”
-Alexander Stephens "Cornerstone Address," March 21 1861

Confederate convention thought free states would join

https://books.google.com/books?id=z...tutionalism georgia slave only states&f=false

During the constitutional convention Cobb of Georgia proposed that all states be required to be slave owning, yet this was rejected. The south wanted boarder states and the free midwest states to join. Senator Albert Brown of Mississippi stated in the CSA constitution “Each state is sovereign within its own limits, and that each for itself can abolish or establish slavery for itself.” So while slavery was a state option, states rights was applied in the CSA slave or free.

“One good and wise feature in our new or revised Constitution is, that we have put to rest the vexed question of slavery forever, so far as the Confederate legislative halls are concerned.”
-Speech of the Hon. Alexander H. Stephens to the Virginia Secession Convention, April 23, 1861

“Thus slavery was not a constitutional prerequisite for admission, and once admitted, a state could either reorganize or prohibit the institution.”
-Marshall L Derosa the Confederate Constitution of 1861 U of Missouri press 1991

If you could though please compare mein kamph [a book you never read] and the big government socialist nazi to the confederacy and the books [you have not read] above. What has happened is you have had an emotional reaction and fed the winners side that you took hook line and sinker with pleasure. so yea, your post proves the need for a thread allowing information not approved by the winner but historically true.

 

Oh nonsense.

The Republican Party was formed after the Whig Party imploded, and was only able to win because the Democratic Party split.

The election of 1860 (the first for the new party) was a 4 way contest. The Democrats had far more votes than the Republicans, almost twice as many. But they were split between 2 different candidates. Not unlike the 1992 election. That election had 2 different Democratic Candidates, another start-up party from the fractured Whig Party, and the Republican.

The Democrats would have won easily, if they only could have prevented their party from splitting.

No kidding, the International slave trade had died decades earlier. But there was still an active slave trade, both within the US-CSA, and in other countries. And there was nothing prohibiting a slave trade opening up between say Brazil and the CSA. There were no laws prohibiting importing slaves from another slave nation.

 

The North advocated slavery as well. Lincoln proposed letting slavery exist perpetually in the South if the South would not secede. Lincoln "freed" the slaves and only Southern slaves because he sought a military advantage. Are you going to apply your rule to the North and Lincoln and claim "any opinion they have on the matter irrelevant and worthless" or are you a hypocrite?

 

Every symptom and secondary cause can be traced to slavery and race.

The war never would have occurred if slavery had not existed.

90% of every dollar invested in the South was directly or indirectly tied to slavery.

 

It was even less than that. He only freed the slaves in states that were still in rebellion.

Kentucky, Maryland, Delaware, Missouri, Tennessee, West Virginia, and the occupied portions of Louisiana were specifically excluded from his decree.

 

Wrong. It was about economics first and foremost.

If it was about slavery, then why didn't the North abolish slavery in the North before the war and not until after the war?
It it was about slavery, then why did Lincoln only free slaves in states that had seceded, and why did he wait until the war was going badly for the North?

Prove it.

 

I am right, and the "lost cause" defenders have been defeated in this "war" a long time ago, Battle3.

You engage in fallacy of false standard. Your statement about slavery in the North shows just how difficult was the problem.

You engage in fallacy of false standard. Your statement of Lincoln is factual, but means nothing in terms of your assertion.

I don't have to prove anything, until you offer more than your opinion.

 

in other words, one does not offer an assertion with facts to demonstrate the emphasis, and then demand "proof" in data and empirical evidence to refute it.

 

Besides the couple factual mistakes What does this have to do with the csa Constitution? the csa Constitution was a direct response to the new radical nationalist big goverment republican party

'll Take My Stand – Causes Of Southern Secession-The Cotton States
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...southern-secession-the-cotton-states.8088501/

The importation of Negroes of the African race from any foreign country, other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same
-Article I Section 9(1) Confederate Constitution

 

So I dont have to copy paste large amounts of text I will just say your post is why we cannot allow the winner to write the history and the pc police distort it anymore, me must instead study so we can have a historical understanding.


I'll Take My Stand – Causes Of Southern Secession-The Upper South
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...n-the-upper-south-american-civil-war.8088497/

'll Take My Stand – Causes Of Southern Secession-The Cotton States
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...southern-secession-the-cotton-states.8088501/


Slavery's Impact On the Cotton States Causes of Secession
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...he-cotton-states-causes-of-secession.8088502/

 

economics yes, but preserving the union of the founders state sovereignty and states rights more so. People dont realize how much Lincoln and the republicans transformed our union to a centralized nation.

From Confederation to Consolidation the Political Effects of the Civil war
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...e-political-effects-of-the-civil-war.8093078/


I'll Take My Stand – Causes Of Southern Secession-The Upper South
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...n-the-upper-south-american-civil-war.8088497/

'll Take My Stand – Causes Of Southern Secession-The Cotton States
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...southern-secession-the-cotton-states.8088501/

Slavery's Impact On the Cotton States Causes of Secession
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...he-cotton-states-causes-of-secession.8088502/

 

in other words you cant prove the pc version of the war you uncritically accepted.

 

I have no obligation to rebuttal with facts until you have provided a supported assertion. You have just posted a reading list. So you have not read the books, or the blogs, that you have listed.

I understand that.

But until you offer facts with citations that can be checked, all you are doing 1stvermont is giving us your opinions.

They don't count.

 

The notion that the 'victors write the history' is the single laziest thing a person can say about history. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. Read many North Vietnamese/Communist Vietnamese accounts of the Vietnam Wars? Good luck, they are few & far between compared to US & even French accounts. Plenty of other examples. One liners are for comedians & ideologues, not anyone with a serious interest in history.

You need to study a bit of ACW and Reconstruction historiography. Authors sympathetic to the South or the Southern narrative dominated the field for several generations after the war. Other views were very much in the minority until the 30s & maybe longer. You are clearly keen to push a victimhood narrative in which you & people who share your views are the victims. It is super tedious. The internet being what it is you will always find people to reinforce your sense of victimhood, but that doesn't make it any less conflicted.

 

I should check my spelling more carefully. Sigh!

 

From Confederation to Consolidation the Political Effects of the Civil war
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...e-political-effects-of-the-civil-war.8093078/


I'll Take My Stand – Causes Of Southern Secession-The Upper South
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...n-the-upper-south-american-civil-war.8088497/

'll Take My Stand – Causes Of Southern Secession-The Cotton States
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...southern-secession-the-cotton-states.8088501/

Slavery's Impact On the Cotton States Causes of Secession
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...he-cotton-states-causes-of-secession.8088502/