The politically incorrect guide to the Civil War by H. W. Crocker 111 The history of the Confederacy 1832-1865 by Clifford Dowdy The story of the Confederacy by Robert Self Henry Abe Lincoln took just under 40 percent of the popular vote I will add to the list of books Interesting today to read the biography of Abe. He split rails. He was a post master and later a lawyer. Some like me see Ft . Sumpter there to defend the harbor of Charleston. Not to provide a Fort for Abe to use to attack the city from. Ft. Sumter pointed it's cannons at the city. 2 forts all total did not surrender fast to the new nation. Sumter and Pickering in Florida. All others were handed to the new Government. Anybody with me so far? If the South seceded today, who would support Trump sending Tanks, war planes, cannons and bombs across the Potomac to wage war on the South? That my friends is the situation the South faced in 1860.
https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Cry-Freedom-Civil-War/dp/019516895X Any book that gives voice to the CSA or doesn't paint them as sadistic and cruel beyond imagination. Some good historical fiction here https://www.amazon.com/Shaman-Cole-...ks&sprefix=shaman++noah,stripbooks,229&sr=1-2 Moi
I agree with the Confederate who hates liberals and "Yankees," Lincoln should have let the South secede. Then the North, eastern midwest and West could pursue continued growth and prosperity. The South, being on its own, with only one foundry, total dependence upon cash crops like tobacco, rice and cotton, and replete with ignorance, poverty, lack of infrastructure and extraordinarily poor state and local officials, could continue to wallow in its own misery. Once the oligarchs who ruled the South, (and still do), realized that slavery was a non-starter, where would they find markets for, well, nothing, since there were no manufacturing or finance centers. England kept the ante-bellum South functioning by infusing cash for cotton due to the enormous textile production requirements in England. Once England began to import textiles from India and elsewhere where labor was incredibly cheap, it became less and less necessary to import American (southern) cotton. So, the South was on a path to nowhere, just as it is today. Without finance, nothing happens, and the South does not possess the ability to finance much of anything without the Northeast. The South and its under-developed population will always retard the progress of the rest of the country, because it culturally represents a separate country. Anyone who has a half a brain, a computer and knows how to use a search engine can find that the South has more of every type of evil than the rest of the country, for example, alcoholism, domestic violence, incest, rape, murder, ignorance, poor education, health problems, poverty, child neglect, etc.... The South, in its rage and hate for "liberals" whom they mistake for "socialitsts" who want to harm them, should secede now, again, and give it another try. Maybe this time we "Yankees" should let them go so we can get on with socio-economic justice and prosperity for the masses. They will continue to weigh this country down forever, because like most uneducated people, they act upon emotion and not reason and facts.
North Carolina and Virginia voted not to secede only months before they voted to do so. Just like the legislatures today, the moneyed interests who control the politicians can sway legislators in whatever direction best serves their interests. Most people in the South did not know about nor support secession. Why? There was poor communication, transport and educational resources to develop an informed society. Like today, the masses had little knowledge, (nor do they now seek it), about what discussions and negotiations are going on at the state and national level. They think in sound bites, often misquoted or misunderstood, which they see or overhear in mass media outlets, or heaven's forbid social media, then they disregard or choose the ones that support their already formed viewpoints. After that, they get on forums such as these and respond emotionally with sarcasm or blunt criticism without evidence, analysis and information gathering. The Adams family, by the way, were like most of the approximately 30% of Americans who wanted to separate from the Crown-- to further their own interests. Most people were fine with British rule. Let's not get too enthusiastic about our "founding fathers." They certainly weren't my idea of people to be admired. For example, Hamilton created the Electoral College so Washington would be elected President, and to keep the riff-raff in check by the patricians should they choose candidates the powerful monied interests did not want. Jefferson was a beauty. He said that while settlers should keep native Americans in debt by selling trade goods so they could acquire their land when unable to pay. The people who attacked the British naval patrols and incented rebellious acts at the onset of the violence, before the starting date historians give to the Revolution, were actually, like John Hancock in Boston and the Brown family in Providence, smugglers. Franklin? Don't even go there. Finally, let me point out an underlying principle which taints all political conversation: some people do not want to share and some do. Some people believe government has a very limited role and some think it acts to keep the lid on inequality and excess by diverting public monies to have nots and by regulations. These are not only ideological differences, they have moral origins and consequences. We know by reading some of the posts in forums and by watching the voting in elections that some have surrendered their moral imperative and denied the existence of a moral commonwealth. This is because of mass unemployment, the seizure of wealth by a small percentage of humanity, globalism, racism, hundreds of years of unwise leadership, and a host of other socio-economic factors. Well, guess what, globalism is here to stay, though most of us didn't want it nor do we like it. If you don't want poor people to have any of your tax money, you know who to vote for. If you believe in helping others less fortunate by accident of birth, deliberate oppression and Chance, vote for those who believe in a sharing commonwealth.
I am gratified that at least three people who hate Yankees have actually read a book, (the writer, the editor and you.) Suggest decent periodicals rather than revisionist fiction which reinforces what you want to believe.
Does that include https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Cry-Freedom-Civil-War/dp/019516895X Any book that gives voice to the CSA or doesn't paint them as sadistic and cruel beyond imagination is propaganda, y'know. Some good historical fiction here https://www.amazon.com/Shaman-Cole-...ks&sprefix=shaman++noah,stripbooks,229&sr=1-2 Just wondering. Try Mark Twain "Concerning The Jew" Twain outlines Jewish Confederates participation. Passover must have been rough for them as Black slaves served the Passover dinner. Moi Neo Confederate Is Anti ism Racial Prejudice?
I mean, Yankees don't want you to buy it because toilet paper is a lot cheaper than that. Plus they're not filled with crap. On the other hand, I get a good laugh at anyone thinking Lincoln won with 40% of the vote means anything.
