April 9, 1865 Lee Surrenders to Grant

The victors write the history books. If it was the other way around, murderers and pillagers and arsonists like Sherman would have been hanged as war criminals.
Oddly, in this country, the losers wrote the History Books on the Civil War

The Lost Cause movement created a false history minimizing the impact of slavery and glorifying the leaders of the Confederacy

This revised history demonized Grant while turning Lee into a hero
 
Oddly, in this country, the losers wrote the History Books on the Civil War

The Lost Cause movement created a false history minimizing the impact of slavery and glorifying the leaders of the Confederacy

This revised history demonized Grant while turning Lee into a hero

Bullshit. Grant was put on the $50 bill, Lee was mostly saluted for his gracious surrender.
 
You keep saying the South intended to conquer the North. Where is you evidence? Can we move beyond your fact-free speculation?
I don't really have time to hunt links to information I read in real books before the internet existed but I did find this.

Karl Marx - The American Civil War

Hold your nose and read a contemporary account of why the war started by someone who didn't have a dog in the fight.
 
I don't really have time to hunt links to information I read in real books before the internet existed but I did find this.

Karl Marx - The American Civil War

Hold your nose and read a contemporary account of why the war started by someone who didn't have a dog in the fight.


The viewpoint of a Communist isn't really that relevant.

Do you have anything from a capitalist on the war? What was northern American Cornelius Vanderbilt's point of view, example given?
 
The viewpoint of a Communist isn't really that relevant.

Do you have anything from a capitalist on the war? What was northern American Cornelius Vanderbilt's point of view, example given?
I knew you wouldn't read it coward. BTW Communism didn't exist in 1861. Marx was just a newspaper man.
 
Taking a break, beautiful day.
94645C41-5347-4F06-A2D9-BEC801D8DA2D.jpeg
 
The Communist Manifesto, Marx's blueprint for world domination was published in 1848.
The article I posted has a very clear timeline of the events leading up to the civil war. It's the best contemporary treatment of the slavery question I have ever encountered. If you don't want to read it then don't. Continue to wallow in ignorance.
 
Yes

The South overreacted and lost Slavery as a result


Oh? You agree with gipper that Lincoln was NOT motivated by his opposition to slavery?

I am surprised at you. I would think that you would have looked at Lincoln and saw a hard core abolitionists.
 
Lincoln started the war because he wanted money for the federal government. The south refused to pay the Morrill tariff that clearly was designed to harm it’s agricultural economy. It was passed by Northern politicians just days before dishonest Abe’s inauguration, for the benefit of northern industries.

Lincoln was a tyrant who destroyed the Founder’s vision of limited government. He committed treason for warring on Americans, for which he should have been hung in 1861. Thus avoiding a war that killed 850,000 Americans, destroyed half the nation, and lead to a century of injustice toward blacks.

But you know all this, since I’ve told you it over and over again.

Yeah, that Lincoln sure was a tyrant. Only the most despicable and evil of tyrants would deny to Good, White Christian Southerners all the pleasures and profits that comes from tyrannizing Black people.


The Confederacy was the last great hope for Liberty in the world.
Unless you were Black. "No liberty for you! Now get back to work!!"
 
murderers and pillagers and arsonists like Sherman would have been hanged as war criminals.
I demur.
Rather, I would posit that not for the magnaminity of Sam Grant and Abe Lincoln --- R.Lee, J.Davis, and sundry others would have swung on the scaffold at what is now Ft. Lesley McNair. Just like Lincoln's assassins did. Traitors get hung.


The Lost Cause movement created a false history minimizing the impact of slavery and glorifying the leaders of the Confederacy

I'll second that statement. RW is right. In more ways than one.
Thankfully that unfortunate delusion is being dismantled by new views on the events of the Civil War.
 
Yeah, that Lincoln sure was a tyrant. Only the most despicable and evil of tyrants would deny to Good, White Christian Southerners all the pleasures and profits that comes from tyrannizing Black people.



Unless you were Black. "No liberty for you! Now get back to work!!"
You are completely uninformed. Get informed before posting.

Lincoln didn’t give a shit about blacks. He wanted to enslave them forever, if the south wouldn’t secede. Then after the war, he planned to deport them all. He was a disgusting racist even in his time.
 
I don't really have time to hunt links to information I read in real books before the internet existed but I did find this.

Karl Marx - The American Civil War

Hold your nose and read a contemporary account of why the war started by someone who didn't have a dog in the fight.
It might surprise some that Marx defended capitalist imperialist Republicans. But Marx was happy to see “backward” peoples trampled on in the cause of “progress”.

Quote: When the United States annexed California after the Mexican War, Marx sarcastically asked, “Is it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did not know what to do with it?” Engels shared Marx’s contempt for Mexicans, explaining: “In America we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own development that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United States.”

 
Oddly, in this country, the losers wrote the History Books on the Civil War

The Lost Cause movement created a false history minimizing the impact of slavery and glorifying the leaders of the Confederacy

This revised history demonized Grant while turning Lee into a hero
A fantasy view of some movement labeled as "A Lost Cause" doesn't rise to the level of history. Union general Sherman was suspected of being mentally deranged well before he ordered the burning of Atlanta. The history books call him a hero.
 
It might surprise some that Marx defended capitalist imperialist Republicans. But Marx was happy to see “backward” peoples trampled on in the cause of “progress”.

Quote: When the United States annexed California after the Mexican War, Marx sarcastically asked, “Is it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did not know what to do with it?” Engels shared Marx’s contempt for Mexicans, explaining: “In America we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own development that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United States.”

I would challenge you to point to anyone who claims Karl Marx among their heroes. I posted that artcle for it's excellent timeline and breakdown of the arguments being had as the civil war happened. I know it's Karl Marx but it's written in plain language and it all checks out.
 
A fantasy view of some movement labeled as "A Lost Cause" doesn't rise to the level of history. Union general Sherman was suspected of being mentally deranged well before he ordered the burning of Atlanta. The history books call him a hero.

Sherman was a realist who understood the horrors of war

His March to the Sea was a military masterpiece. Taking an entire Army and separating yourself from your supply lines. Few would risk it.

Sherman marched through the south living off of what he could capture. If he had met resistance, his army would have starved.

He crushed the South and ended the war
 
The victors write the history books. If it was the other way around, murderers and pillagers and arsonists like Sherman would have been hanged as war criminals.
Not one murder or rape was ever recorded in Sherman’s March. Targeting infrastructure is taught in Military Tactics 101 on the first hour.
 
A fantasy view of some movement labeled as "A Lost Cause" doesn't rise to the level of history. Union general Sherman was suspected of being mentally deranged well before he ordered the burning of Atlanta. The history books call him a hero.
Sherman was brutal against the South and against Native Americans. Should we praise him for his actions in Georgia while condemning him for his actions out West? Remember Native Americans held slaves too.
 
Last edited:
You are completely uninformed. Get informed before posting.

Lincoln didn’t give a shit about blacks. He wanted to enslave them forever, if the south wouldn’t secede. Then after the war, he planned to deport them all. He was a disgusting racist even in his time.
You are a byproduct of today’s education system.
You have a 180 view of real history.

Lincoln ran on an anti-slave platform and it was his becoming POTUS that triggers the attack on Ft Sumter. Lincoln never owned a slave.
He made the offer to relocate blacks because he knew slave owning Democrats are racist filth who’d never make peace with blacks. And he was right. But he was told by blacks that they wanted to stick it out so he dropped the issue.
 
Lincoln: “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 Negroes, 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.”

 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top