Robert E. Lee Day

[ZachJump]

Anything I know about Lee tells me he was stuck in a southern system he did not morally agree with, but was not willing to go to kill his neighbors to break from it. It was an era of state before country.

The man ordered his plantation overseer to salt the wounds of slaves after they were lashed. He was also the only slave owner in his area to break up families.

If it was true, obviously unforgivable.

Are you going to trust any testimony from one person, who could not write, about one of the most hated people in the north, 6 years after it happened and very shortly after the war ended?

Wesley Norris could have very well been telling the truth. Never met the guy. Wasn't there.

One does need to hold judgement on that story based on the circumstances it is the only known testimony that Lee did such things. I will say that there is compelling evidence that the lashings took place....but not for salt.

 

[ZachJump]

Just for the record.

I am not defending Lee. He chose the wrong side. He defended the wrong ideas, he owned slaves.....I would hope to God if I was there in that period I would have been in Wisconsin and been part of the start of the Republican party.

 

[ZachJump]

Interesting side bit...when Aaron Burr was finally arrested....it happened in Alabama.

 

[Whatsgoingonwitgyouguys0190]

Uhhhhh, yes he was

Nope he was a loser traitor

 

[ZachJump]

Nope he was a loser traitor

Where he ended doesn't erase what became before. His ending might rightfully define him. Still doesn't erase what he did before.

 

[Whatsgoingonwitgyouguys0190]

Where he ended doesn't erase what became before. His ending might rightfully define him. Still doesn't erase what he did before.

He’s a loser and a traitor

 

[DropitlikeitsHawk]

He’s a loser and a traitor

Jeez you dont say. It doesn’t erase the inaccuracies of the poster and what he said.

 

[TC Nole OX]

Hitler wasn’t an American leader.

He was heavily funded by Americans

 

[TC Nole OX]

 

[gohawks50]

Bingo

Was Benedict Arnold an American leader as well?

 

[IowaPackFan]

Nope he was a loser traitor

I know this has been said before, but allegiance to state superseded allegiance to country back then. It’s been well documented that he didn’t agree with slavery, but his decision was based on that of his state much to the dismay of Grant, Lincoln, and some of his family that lived elsewhere.
I know some people can’t grasp the concept that state allegiance was more important through the lens of today.

 

[fsu1jreed]

It’s been well documented that he didn’t agree with slavery

Really?!?

THE MYTH OF THE KINDLY GENERAL LEE

 

[Aardvark86]

1. Lee gave great service to the us in mexico
2. Thereafter he took up arms against the us, as did many, which is essentially treason (particularly compared to what many call treason these days)
3. His command tactics were first rate during that period
4. Thereafter he lived the way he was supposed to in peace, which is more than many did, giving good service to w and l university.

All that said, the only state that has a historical claim to his heritage, for better and worse, is Virginia. And we’ve let it go. Time to wake up ms/Al. It’s a thumb in the eye of the type the right complains about when the shoe is on the other foot.

 

[blhawk]

I know this has been said before, but allegiance to state superseded allegiance to country back then. It’s been well documented that he didn’t agree with slavery, but his decision was based on that of his state much to the dismay of Grant, Lincoln, and some of his family that lived elsewhere.
I know some people can’t grasp the concept that state allegiance was more important through the lens of today.

Supposedly didn't agree with slavery but owned slaves himself? OK. White supremacists just love defending this POS, that won't change I guess

 

[BlueRidgeHawk]

😂 Lol - Not a racist nor do I give 2 cents what some other states do.

 

[bdcolt45er]

I know this has been said before, but allegiance to state superseded allegiance to country back then. It’s been well documented that he didn’t agree with slavery, but his decision was based on that of his state much to the dismay of Grant, Lincoln, and some of his family that lived elsewhere.
I know some people can’t grasp the concept that state allegiance was more important through the lens of today.

It did to him. Not to everyone. He had a choice. Made a choice and should be judged on that choice.

What do you mean that he didn't agree with slavery? He expressed reservations but at the same time maintained ownership and oversaw an estimated 189 slaves. He fought in court to prevent the emancipation of slaves willed to him that were set to be released. He lost.

I have a hard time believing someone doesn't agree with slavery when they can't be compelled to free their own slaves or allow their slaves to be freed as stipulated in legal documents.

The best we can say about Lee in regard to this is that he expressed more reservations than his peers. But in terms of consequential action it is difficult to argue that he didn't agree with slavery.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Just for the record.

I am not defending Lee. He chose the wrong side. He defended the wrong ideas, he owned slaves.....I would hope to God if I was there in that period I would have been in Wisconsin and been part of the start of the Republican party.

R.E. Lee owned a handful of slaves, himself. Most belonged, officially, to his wife as an inheritance. Her father's will stipulated that they be freed within five years of his death. Lee refused to do that and drove them mercilessly to pay off the estate's debts. The courts finally forced him to honor the terms of the will.

And you don't have to believe what a slave said...Lee broke the long-standing practice of both his and his wife's families by breaking up slave families and selling them off to others - that's a documented cruelty that goes beyond the beatings. He thought slavery was a divine good for the slave and wrote, "The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race...".

His words after he lost don't make him a good man and he should neither be admired nor honored..

 

[IowaPackFan]

Really?!?

THE MYTH OF THE KINDLY GENERAL LEE

His views are very similar to those of Abraham Lincoln. Times were different. It’s like accusing people a couple hundred years ago who had kids with 15 year wives as being pedophiles.

 

[ZachJump]

The best we can say about Lee in regard to this is that he expressed more reservations than his peers. But in terms of consequential action it is difficult to argue that he didn't agree with slavery

That is something I can agree with. Actions do speak louder than words.

I guess my only point to everything I wrote is that it is all to easy to use our current moral values and place them on any figure in the past and find them lacking.

I would imagine we would all have a completely different moral outlook if we were raised, and taught, like those in the past.

Pretty much everyone that died off over 50 years ago would have plenty of moral issues we would take exception to today. Sure their are some people we know of in history that seem great, but the ones we cannot find fault with would be far and few between.

 

[CarolinaHawkeye]

Lee was a traitor and all of those clansmen, who think he's a hero to be celebrated, should have their citizenship revoked and be deported.

 

[fsu1jreed]

His views are very similar to those of Abraham Lincoln. Times were different. It’s like accusing people a couple hundred years ago who had kids with 15 year wives as being pedophiles.

Did Lincoln have slaves that he beat, split families, while saying that the slaves were better off here and that slavery was harder on slave owners than the actual slaves?

 

[TennNole17]

Isn’t Robert E Lee like the “leader” of Kappa Alpha?

 

[ZachJump]

Did Lincoln have slaves that he beat, split families, while saying that the slaves were better off here and that slavery was harder on slave owners than the actual slaves?

No, but I saw a documentary where Lincoln beat and killed Vampires. We all just treat it like Vampires don't have rights also.

 

[IowaPackFan]

Did Lincoln have slaves that he beat, split families, while saying that the slaves were better off here and that slavery was harder on slave owners than the actual slaves?

That’s irrelevant when discussing their views.
For the record, I’m not advocating for Lee to be put on Mt Rushmore or anything, I’m just pointing out that his views weren’t much different than most others in the north or south at that time. The United States was viewed as a pact more so than a contract by many so treason wasn’t even a viable claim. People’s loyalties lay with their state more so than any pact.
People can still respect and honor others despite some negatives. Patton respected Rommel. Grant respected and honored Lee before, during, and even after the war. We respect and honor Thomas Jefferson and Lincoln. Hell, we just honored MLK.

 

[Colonoscopy]

I've always wondered why Iowa City named a Community Center after the man.

 

[fsu1jreed]

That’s irrelevant when discussing their views.
For the record, I’m not advocating for Lee to be put on Mt Rushmore or anything, I’m just pointing out that his views weren’t much different than most others in the north or south at that time. The United States was viewed as a pact more so than a contract by many so treason wasn’t even a viable claim. People’s loyalties lay with their state more so than any pact.
People can still respect and honor others despite some negatives. Patton respected Rommel. Grant respected and honored Lee before, during, and even after the war. We respect and honor Thomas Jefferson and Lincoln. Hell, we just honored MLK.

HOLY. FVCKING. SHIT.

 

[EZ2BJZ]

That’s irrelevant when discussing their views.
For the record, I’m not advocating for Lee to be put on Mt Rushmore or anything, I’m just pointing out that his views weren’t much different than most others in the north or south at that time. The United States was viewed as a pact more so than a contract by many so treason wasn’t even a viable claim. People’s loyalties lay with their state more so than any pact.
People can still respect and honor others despite some negatives. Patton respected Rommel. Grant respected and honored Lee before, during, and even after the war. We respect and honor Thomas Jefferson and Lincoln. Hell, we just honored MLK.

Wow. You seem smart, but that’s ridiculous.

 

[blhawk]

That is something I can agree with. Actions do speak louder than words.

I guess my only point to everything I wrote is that it is all to easy to use our current moral values and place them on any figure in the past and find them lacking.

I would imagine we would all have a completely different moral outlook if we were raised, and taught, like those in the past.

Pretty much everyone that died off over 50 years ago would have plenty of moral issues we would take exception to today. Sure their are some people we know of in history that seem great, but the ones we cannot find fault with would be far and few between.

Pathetic take. The north outlawed slavery in 1804 because they knew it was an abhorrent practice over a half century before the southern traitors tried to leave the union so they could keep their free labor by keeping humans in chains. Not speaking to you specifically but it's totally unsurprising that many of the same pieces of shit who regularly excuse the republican embrace of white nationalism and who disregard/downplay 1/6 are defending Robert E. Lee in this thread. Disgusting.

 

[Colonoscopy]

I think Lee can be respected as a general, as a leader, as a strategist. The same way you might a German military leader during WW2.

But to honor the man given which side he was playing for at the time?

Making Sense of Robert E. Lee

"It is well that war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it."— Robert E. Lee, at Fredericksburg

www.smithsonianmag.com

 

[IowaPackFan]

Wow. You seem smart, but that’s ridiculous.

“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."

Sounds like something someone in favor of slavery would say. It was Abraham Lincoln.

 

[Aardvark86]

Isn’t Robert E Lee like the “leader” of Kappa Alpha?

I think the better phrase would be something like "inspiration of"

 

[tarheelbybirth]

“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."

Sounds like something someone in favor of slavery would say. It was Abraham Lincoln.

LOL...you should sit this one out. What you just posted is bullshit.

Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it. I think Slavery is wrong, morally, and politically. I desire that it should be no further spread in these United States, and I should not object if it should gradually terminate in the whole Union.

Lincoln did not view black people as equal to whites. But he absolutely abhorred the idea of slavery. He was willing to allow it to continue in the South to preserve the Union but refused to allow it's expansion into newly admitted states. And there you have the entire reason for the Civil War. Southern states had the upper hand in Congress but they knew as new non-slave states were admitted, their economic model would end.

 

[TennNole17]

I think the better phrase would be something like "inspiration of"

Right.

https://www.kappaalphaorder.org/ka/history/lee/

Kappa Alpha Order was founded on December 21, 1865, during Lee’s presidency. Lee was not a member of Kappa Alpha Order, but his religious convictions, exemplary ideals, values, strong leadership, courtesy, respect for others and gentlemanly conduct greatly influenced the students at Washington College. His requirement for all students was, “We have but one rule—that every student must be a gentleman.” It is in this spirit that Lee is noted as the Order’s Spiritual Founder

 

[ZachJump]

Pathetic take. The north outlawed slavery in 1804 because they knew it was an abhorrent practice over a half century before the southern traitors tried to leave the union so they could keep their free labor by keeping humans in chains.

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.

 

[blhawk]

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.

The 360,000 Union soldiers who gave their lives to end this atrocity along with their families extend a big middle finger to your stupidity with this rambling bullshit. Nobody is saying the north was perfect with race relations back then but good to know you are one of the piece of shit apologists, especially if you grew up in Iowa...the state that had more Union soldiers killed per capita than any other state

I really miss the days when Iowa was considered a Northern state, doesn't seem that way anymore

 

[ZachJump]

The 360,000 Union soldiers who gave their lives to end this atrocity along with their families extend a big middle finger to your stupidity with this rambling bullshit. Nobody is saying the north was perfect with race relations back then but good to know you are one of the piece of shit apologists, especially if you grew up in Iowa...the state that had more Union soldiers killed per capita than any other state

Ok.

Who am I apologizing for?

I also do not believe that Northern soldiers where there to end slavery as a primary motive, and since around half the southern soldiers were forced to fight I am not sure they were there to defend slavery. Hell most of the southern grunts would have been better off without slavery since then there would be more jobs available.

Buy yes, we can look at history with a modern perspective and judge them. Easy to do. Rightful to do as well so we do not repeate the mistakes of the past.

My biggest problem with just going after Lee is that he is a simple target and let's everyone ignore the sins of the northern past as well.

My favorite was someone posting above that the north banned slavery in 1804...like that was so much better than getting rid of it in the south 60 years later.

Somehow people pile on the South for being slave states....when the North also where slave states for most of the same time period.

 

[Jerome Silberman]

Ok.

Who am I apologizing for?

I also do not believe that Northern soldiers where there to end slavery as a primary motive, and since around half the southern soldiers were forced to fight I am not sure they were there to defend slavery. Hell most of the southern grunts would have been better off without slavery since then there would be more jobs available.

Buy yes, we can look at history with a modern perspective and judge them. Easy to do. Rightful to do as well so we do not repeate the mistakes of the past.

My biggest problem with just going after Lee is that he is a simple target and let's everyone ignore the sins of the northern past as well.

My favorite was someone posting above that the north banned slavery in 1804...like that was so much better than getting rid of it in the south 60 years later.

Somehow people pile on the South for being slave states....when the North also where slave states for most of the same time period.

 

[EZ2BJZ]

Ok.

Who am I apologizing for?

I also do not believe that Northern soldiers where there to end slavery as a primary motive, and since around half the southern soldiers were forced to fight I am not sure they were there to defend slavery. Hell most of the southern grunts would have been better off without slavery since then there would be more jobs available.

Buy yes, we can look at history with a modern perspective and judge them. Easy to do. Rightful to do as well so we do not repeate the mistakes of the past.

My biggest problem with just going after Lee is that he is a simple target and let's everyone ignore the sins of the northern past as well.

My favorite was someone posting above that the north banned slavery in 1804...like that was so much better than getting rid of it in the south 60 years later.

Somehow people pile on the South for being slave states....when the North also where slave states for most of the same time period.

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.

 

[globalhawk]

I know this has been said before, but allegiance to state superseded allegiance to country back then. It’s been well documented that he didn’t agree with slavery, but his decision was based on that of his state much to the dismay of Grant, Lincoln, and some of his family that lived elsewhere.
I know some people can’t grasp the concept that state allegiance was more important through the lens of today.

Lee had slaves.

 

[TennNole17]

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.

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”