Skip to main content

View Diary: Union-busting: The War of Southern Aggression (177 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The Union really blew in. (9+ / 0-)

    In most Civil Wars, the ruling class of the losing side is gone- not from power, but from the earth. And while that's a horrible thing, the lack of that happening is why the Southern Aristocracy is still in power in much of the south.

    WTF!?!?!?! When did I move to the Republic of Gilead?!

    by IARXPHD on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 07:40:34 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  One of these days... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tookish, esquimaux, elwior, brein

      I'm going to write a contra-factual history (what would have happened if....) of the history of the US if we would have rounded up the Confed Aristocracy and meted out the customary penalty for treason.

      WTF!?!?!?! When did I move to the Republic of Gilead?!

      by IARXPHD on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 07:46:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  This is correct. (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tookish, Marie, fumie, IARXPHD, Pris from LA

      In most wars, the victors hang the leaders of the defeated as traitors.

      This wasn't done because Lincoln regarded said leaders as "fellow gentlemen." The South did not undergo a process akin to de-Nazification because, among other reasons, the North was just as racist.

      •  Are You Saying... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Prognosticator, HylasBrook

        That after World War Two ended, the Allies hung all the leaders, government, military, and business, if they supported the governments of Japan, Germany, and Italy?

        The only trials and executions that I am aware of were for war crimes.  Do you know about some secret executions?

        And you are wrong about your assertion that:

        The South did not undergo a process akin to de-Nazification because, among other reasons, the North was just as racist.

        I would call the scourge that the carpetbaggers brought to the South to be the same as de-nazification.

        •  Re-written history - the South wrote it (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          PhilK, IARXPHD, LucyandByron

          as 'carpetbaggers' from the North, but like the "War of Northern Agression" it wasn't quite like that

          Certainly many took advantage of the South's weakened condition, but many also tried to help the former slaves

          HylasBrook @62 - fiesty, fiery, and fierce

          by HylasBrook on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 10:35:12 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You don't think the Republicans (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            had some "Halliburtons" of the day that swarmed in and made obscene profits, AFTER they'd made obscene profits "dealing" war equipment?

            If they'd expended more of their Righteous Republican Riches and victor's power "to help the former slaves", it wouldn't have taken one hundred years to have REAL civil rights progress in the conquered region!

            Yeah, carpetbaggers were real, and evil, enriching themselves on the suffering of others.  

            If you're talking about the patriarchial, churchy-peacher types who "came to help", well, they were, by and large, a scourge also!   (And still are, sucking money from ignorant, downtrodden people, in exchange for brainwashing said people...)

        •  The Confederacy waged war on its own country (5+ / 0-)

          As Franklin noted at the time of the Declaration of Indepdence: "Gentlemen, we shall hang together, for, if we do not, we shall surely hang separately."  As a general rule, people who revolt against their own government do so at least tacitly understanding the likely risks if they fail.

          There were 11 years of inconsistent and uneven attempts at Reconstruction.  They ended as part of the sordid deal that put Hayes in the WH.  For roughly the next 90 years, life for Southern blacks was marginally better than it had been under slavery.  It wasn't so great for them in the North, either.

          The Confederacy got off easy after the Civil War.

          Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

          by RFK Lives on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 10:50:45 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Charles Sumner wished to cut up new states (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Marie, IARXPHD, elwior

        Sen. Sumner felt that when The South was re-absorbed that the old borders should have been erased in favour of cutting up new states. Electorally breaking up the troublemakers from having too much power. For all intents and purposes West Virginia's loyalty should have been rewarded by offering them the option to reunify with Virginia and take control of the state.
        The entire Confederate Cabinet and most of the Generals should have been strung up. I include Lee with that. If he was such a great General then why did he lose?
        In some ways The South reminds me of The Japanese. The fact that the Southern leadership was not held accountable has resulted in a victim mentality that is similar to how many Japanese have treated World War II, and the fact that Hirohito was not held responsible for his decisions. Instead they scapegoated Tojo.
        In The South pretty much only the Commandant at Andersonville was executed. Most of the others were given a relatively light punishment. Nathan Bedford Forrest was a war criminal even by the standards of the day and should have been hung. Yet somehow that butcher is viewed as a Southern Hero.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site