Most hated US state?

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by MrFun
Do people in the Southern states know that the Civil War has been over for over a century now?

Sadly, the Confederate Ideology won. Groups like the UDC have made sure the south is littered with Historical markers that distort and outright lie about the Civil War. There are monuments to "Our Confederate Soldiers" in places that were staunchly pro-union, like east Tennesse, North Texas, and Arkansas. Amazingly, if you look around the South, you may wonder that (based on the historical markers) why the South lost if they won every battle.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by mrmitchell

You wouldn't believe how many don't. Then again, the differences between the North and South per racism only ended less than 50 years ago (segregation.)

Racism in the northern states has historically been just as ugly as racism in the southern states. Up to this day, racism was never exclusive to one region.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Lonestar, they did win quite a few of them... if you add up all the battles, the South probably won more of them... they whipped the Union in the early going.

[Odin]

Alabama, too many rednecks (= Conservatives), KKK members, and religious wackos. I would most like to live in northern California, it's not too hot, not too cold, and they have REDWOODS and GIANT SEQUOIAS.

[Gangerolf]

i used to live in minnesota so i feel I have to vote dakota.

though my heart says california

[mrmitchell]

The South won more battles, but due to the fact it was all agricultural and it wasn't getting international support, it just couldn't last. The North, on the other hand, had industry and other resources than just cotton, and was successful in convincing European nations that it wasn't worth trying to help the South.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Lonestar, they did win quite a few of them... if you add up all the battles, the South probably won more of them... they whipped the Union in the early going.

So? They didn't win all of them, not even by a large margin.

The point is, We are affected by the landscaped, and the Southern Landscape is dotted with Historical Markers that do not mention Southern Republicans in Reconstrcution, Southern Unionsts during the war, and Southern Defeats. Hell, even the marker at Ft. Pillow doesn't mention that Bedford Forrest slaughtered surrendering blacks.

You also won't find, in Tennesse a "Forrest whipped here" marker. Anywhere. the founder of the KKK has more markers in that state than Polk, Andrew Jackson, and Andrew Johnson combined. There are virtually no negative markers of him.

This is just in one state.

In North Texas in October 1862, 43 Pro Union residents of were hanged by the Confederate Calvery after a "trial". Crooke County (where the Hanging occured) voted 61% againest secession the previous year. Today, a monument put up by the UDC in 1911 talks about a "Peace Party" supporting a Federal Invasion were "rotted out". There is no mention of the massacre, nor of a similiar massacre of German settlers on the Neuce river.

Neo-confederates (*cough* david! *cough*) have over the years completely obscured what really happened throughout the South.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You also won't find, in Tennesse a "Forrest whipped here" marker. Anywhere. the founder of the KKK has more markers in that state than Polk, Andrew Jackson, and Andrew Johnson combined. There are virtually no negative markers of him.

This is probably because Forrest won most of his victories in Tennessee? He was an amazing general, and won a Hell of lot. I'm not sure if he ever lost, actually.

In North Texas in October 1862, 43 Pro Union residents of were hanged by the Confederate Calvery after a "trial". Crooke County (where the Hanging occured) voted 61% againest secession the previous year. Today, a monument put up by the UDC in 1911 talks about a "Peace Party" supporting a Federal Invasion were "rotted out". There is no mention of the massacre, nor of a similiar massacre of German settlers on the Neuce river.

Lonestar, I'd like you point to me where in the first 13 colonies we have monuments to English tax collectors who were tarred and feathered and left to die.

I think I've made my point.

[mrmitchell]

So? They didn't win all of them, not even by a large margin.

They won a hell of a lot more than I had thought at first. However, general bungling, and lack of resources like I've already said, contributed to that the South could simply not win (survive) a prolonged war.

[The Mad Monk]

I voted for the Arkansas half of Mississippi/Arkansas.

So much bad, so little good.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
[

This is probably because Forrest won most of his victories in Tennessee? He was an amazing general, and won a Hell of lot. I'm not sure if he ever lost, actually.

If he never lost, then how did Sherman's Army get to Georgia?

On at *least* one occasion, a Federal force outnumber 9 to 1 kicked the stuffing out of Forrest (at Short Mountain Crossroads on august 29, 1862). After the Ft. Pillow Massacre, Forrest was reporting to Richmond that Federal Forces were not surrenering, and repatibly repulsing his attacks. You won't find this anywhere on a Historic Marker in tennesse. This is a problem pervalent throughout the Sputh.

Lonestar, I'd like you point to me where in the first 13 colonies we have monuments to English tax collectors who were tarred and feathered and left to die.

I think I've made my point.

No, you haven't. The problems with the Tories was nowhere near the scale of Pro-Union confederates. Every state in the CSA (except SC) sent at least one white regiment to the North. Meanwhile, Our history textbooks and Historical Markers (*I've* seen 'em North Carolina) give at leasts passing mention to Royalists. No such counterpart is given to Unionists.

To paraphrase and modifiy George Orwell. "He who controls the landscape controls the past. he who controls the past controls the future".

[Arrian]

I'd say Jersey, but I'm mostly kidding when I **** on Jersey.

I would think NY would be winning.

I voted Newbanastan, since I'm boring and don't hate any of the states.

-Arrian

[Imran Siddiqui]

If he never lost, then how did Sherman's Army get to Georgia?

He was a calvary commander. His calvary troops were very good... and when I said I'm not sure if he lost, that is what I was refering to.... and the fact that he lost probably very, very few times compared to the times he won.

After the Ft. Pillow Massacre, Forrest was reporting to Richmond that Federal Forces were not surrenering, and repatibly repulsing his attacks. You won't find this anywhere on a Historic Marker in tennesse. This is a problem pervalent throughout the Sputh.

WHY SHOULD IT BE ON A HISTORICAL MARKER?! Forrest saying Federal forces weren't surrendering is suddenly something so important it must go on there?

The problems with the Tories was nowhere near the scale of Pro-Union confederates. Every state in the CSA (except SC) sent at least one white regiment to the North.

I'm sorry, I'd think that 1/3rd of your population supporting the enemy would be more of a scale than one regiment from every state.

The South fought against the North... of course in the South the historical markers are going to play up the South. DUH! The states will praise their own heros, not some Yankee who isn't even a part of the state at all!

[Al B. Sure!]

Emperor:

Actually, Philly dominates in mural art...


it's weird how the south is seen as so racist when it's pretty diverse. The 'epitome' of racism, Mississippi, has the largest Black population of any state in the US and all the other southern states got similiar numbers. it's weird how white Southernors know far more blacks day to day than people in Massachussetts and what not yet the Georgians are racists...

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
[

He was a calvary commander. His calvary troops were very good... and when I said I'm not sure if he lost, that is what I was refering to.... and the fact that he lost probably very, very few times compared to the times he won.

So? If he was as great a Calvery Commander as everyone says, Shermans supply lines would have been severed, and the army would have had to really live off the land.

WHY SHOULD IT BE ON A HISTORICAL MARKER?! Forrest saying Federal forces weren't surrendering is suddenly something so important it must go on there?

Why? Because it happened Ft Pillow doesn't even *mention* the massacre! The effects should be mentioned, along with the Massacre. There is no "fair and Balanced" view of Forrest, it's all "He was a hero".

I'm sorry, I'd think that 1/3rd of your population supporting the enemy would be more of a scale than one regiment from every state.

So? My point is the Torie problem is mentioned in Textbooks and on the landscape. The Unionst issue isn't. Arkansas and Tennesse were forcibly brought into the CSA, againest it's wishes. 40% of Texans were Unionst. It was not safe for Confederate forces to enter parts North Carolina and Tennessee. In Mississippi, the "Free state of Winston" was created, since that county had voted nearly 80% for the Union.

The Unionsts aren't mentioned anywhere.

The South fought against the North... of course in the South the historical markers are going to play up the South. DUH! The states will praise their own heros, not some Yankee who isn't even a part of the state at all!

So? You, as a law student, are giving your blessing for distorting the past? Is that it?