Robert E. Lee Day

[IowaPackFan]

Lee had slaves.

Grant had one too. So did Washington and several others.

 

[globalhawk]

Grant had one too. So did Washington and several others.

I agree. I don't think slave owners are anti-slavery. That is your statement.

 

[Jerome Silberman]

Someone having a differing view than you is a “dumb redneck” is where we are.

Our history isn’t great. A poster providing context to add color to a man who is “demonized” because he lead the “south” is just laughable. It’s HISTORY.

By your logic anyone who lived in the south should have moved north - cause it was “better”

I agree that the name calling is unnecessary, but the poster you're responding to is absolutely correct to call a lot of the more generous claims about ol' Bob Lee revisionist history. Lee's legacy and biography have been purposefully crafted to support an erroneous narrative by unscrupulous people.

 

[TC Nole OX]

Lol. Just stop. You’ve been engaging in false equivalency at its most ridiculous level this entire thread. Yeah, someone getting slapped in the face is no different than someone who gets the crap kicked out of them and ends up in the hospital. It’s all assault no matter how you slice it. 🙄

Also, I’m sorry you’ve bought into Southern revisionist history regarding the central issues that led to the Civil War. No one is claiming the North was a utopian paradise for blacks or that every Union soldier was a bleeding heart liberal, but this idiotic drivel about the South being the real victims due to liberal Yankee aggression is only believed by irredeemable morons, most of whom still defend the Confederate flag as being an important part of their American heritage. Is that how you want to be seen?

I mean, if your goal in posting is to come across as a dumb redneck who swallowed some bullshit in a book written by a Confederate apologist and is now regurgitating said bullshit on an anonymous message board, mission accomplished. I hope you’re better than that, though.

Truth

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Someone having a differing view than you is a “dumb redneck” is where we are.

Our history isn’t great. A poster providing context to add color to a man who is “demonized” because he lead the “south” is just laughable. It’s HISTORY.

By your logic anyone who lived in the south should have moved north - cause it was “better”

This isn't "differing views". Zach has told untruths...either intentionally or not...in his inane effort to "both sides" the Civil War.

 

[EZ2BJZ]

Someone having a differing view than you is a “dumb redneck” is where we are.

Our history isn’t great. A poster providing context to add color to a man who is “demonized” because he lead the “south” is just laughable. It’s HISTORY.

By your logic anyone who lived in the south should have moved north - cause it was “better”

Not all different opinions are created equally. Don’t be stupid.

Again, we’re talking about revisionist history. If you live in Tennessee, you should be well acquainted with that. A lot of dumb rednecks there.

 

[bdcolt45er]

I would not consider those in the North all that morally just by todays standards. Slavery was illegal, but that didn't mean someone who was black was treated with much respect.

It is not like any person who happened to be black in Illinois ever voted for Lincoln in any of his elections....they were not allowed to vote. Some states had laws that black people had to register to live there, pay a large fee, and have a white person vouch for them.

The reality is North, South, or West....we have a shitty history. You might be lucky to find a handful of people that you can look at from the past that would be considered decent people today. Being black in the north was just as comfortable as being Jewish and living in Tehran today.

Lincoln had no problem fighting legally to keep people in
chains. He defended a slave owners rights to their "property" in court. Lincoln might not have been a slave owner, but he had no problem with the idea of turning escaped slaves back to their owner.

It is reasonable to say that Lincoln would be considered a racist through our modern lens. No one knows why Lincoln represented Matson. The amount of ink that has been spilled speculating on the reason is indicative that it is anomalous to his thoughts and actions.

We can say with certainty that contemporaries to Lincoln did not see him as being closely aligned with southern ideals. To the point that his election was the spark that set off the war.

Lincoln was not an abolitionist. He opposed slavery and was strongly against the expansion of it to new states. He recognized that southerners were the product of their environment and supported slavery. The lost cause narrative that has been propagated in this very thread purports northern aggression when the opposite is actually the reality. Southerners were insistent that new states allow slavery because they recognized that eventually they would be out numbered by free states. They preemptively left the union in order to preserve their free labor.

 

[NewVicHawkeye]

The Great Southern holiday should be Possum Day as celebrated on the Beverly Hillbillies.

 

[bdcolt45er]

Someone having a differing view than you is a “dumb redneck” is where we are.

Our history isn’t great. A poster providing context to add color to a man who is “demonized” because he lead the “south” is just laughable. It’s HISTORY.

By your logic anyone who lived in the south should have moved north - cause it was “better”

But that's the issue. Lee has been lionized not demonized. He's depicted as a hero. He has statues built in his honor. He is described as a reluctant kindly slave owner who fought to protect his neighbors, not to preserve slavery. He is hailed for his battlefield accomplishments but his failures are ignored.

 

[tumorboy]

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

Can't we all just get along?