Distortions of truth and history: Lee, a better friend of slaves than Lincoln

[Mao]

jimmy, what distortion? I don't think anyone thinks Lee was evil or anything, unless maybe the average American, but I take little heed in what the average American thinks anyway, as they probably couldn't name two countries in Southeast Asia, or the capital of Vietnam, but they could memorize the batting averages of several players.

[SlowwHand]

Ooohhhh. Semantics. That's the way out.

HEY! The Confederacy didn't have slaves, they had freedom deprived citizens.

[red_jon]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Ooohhhh. Semantics. That's the way out.

HEY! The Confederacy didn't have slaves, they had freedom deprived citizens.

Too late, the history books were printed

[Capt Dizle]

Originally posted by Mao
jimmy, what distortion? I don't think anyone thinks Lee was evil or anything, unless maybe the average American, but I take little heed in what the average American thinks anyway, as they probably couldn't name two countries in Southeast Asia, or the capital of Vietnam, but they could memorize the batting averages of several players.

North Vietnam and South Vietnam.

[SlowwHand]

Damn!

[David Floyd]

Wow, I actually agree with BOTH jimmytrick AND slowwhand in the SAME thread

[SlowwHand]

Where's the fainting smiley?

[Capt Dizle]

Originally posted by Mao
...does anyone really think that Lee was evil though? As far as I'm aware, he's always been painted as the heroic southern gentleman who came to the call of his country not because he believed in the CSA cause, but because he refused to take up arms against his family. ...I don't think anyone thinks Lee was some evil malicious bastard and Lincoln was an angel...what's your point?

Point? This is a thread on Apolyton's Off Topic forum. There are no points here.

It must take a twisted mind to expect a pointed thread here in the land of pointless pronouncements. Mao, you are not the kind of guy that keeps a chart on the wall behind your toliet so that you can carefully record the physical characteristics of your bowel movements, are you?

[MrFun]

Re: Distortions of truth and history: Lee, a better friend of slaves than Lincoln

Originally posted by jimmytrick
The old saw that victors write history is never more true than in the case of the black slave in the Civil War. Long before Lincoln acted, Lee argued with the CSA government that the slaves must be freed. Only much later did Lincoln timidly take the step of emancipation and when he did he only freed the slaves in CSA territory, leaving those in Federal controlled border states still enslaved.

Is this your attempt to be funny??


I do not think we should forget how the Confederate army of Northern Virginia kidnapped blacks in Pennsylvania, without even bothering to discern from those who were fugitives, and those who were native, free Pennsylvanians.

[Capt Dizle]

Nor should be forget the 5,000 odd freed slaves that followed Sherman through the South because they didn't know what else to do, or that when Sherman crossed a swollen river several thousand of them drowned without any attempt of ssistance from Sherman who was "glad to be rid of the lot."

[MrFun]

Jimmy, what's your point?

I knew about Sherman's treatment of those blacks who followed his army and the death of those blacks at the river.

We cannot forget about that, either.

[Capt Dizle]

Pisses me off talking about a few kidnapped blacks in Pennsylvania.

Read this lot:

The treatment of runaway slaves by Sherman's officers and soldiers is shockingly poor by modern standards. Although the North fought the Civil War, to some degree, to gain freedom for slaves,[301] Sherman's army behaved on the march as if convinced that these former slaves were an inferior race for whom the army had no special responsibilities.[302] The army failed to provide these refugees with the level of care now legally required, and this lack of care caused much misery.[303] Sherman himself believed that although black people should not be enslaved, they should not be granted equality with white men or accorded much respect.[304] Sherman's views, which were considered racist even in his era, were well known in the army and the federal government.[305]

The former slaves and other refugees who attempted to follow Sherman's army would be protected persons under international law.[306] As protected persons, these former slaves would have been entitled to receive certain specific privileges, and as an occupying power, the Union army was responsible to protect these privileges.[307] These privileges included, in all circumstances, the right to humane treatment, respect for the refugee's physical persons and honor, and the liberty to practice their religion, manners, and customs.[308] Other specific responsibilities that the Union forces owed the refugees included a prohibition of physical or moral coercion and provision of adequate food and medical supplies.[309] Given the abundant supplies found by the foragers during the march and the great extent of the destruction and waste of such goods,[310] Sherman's men obviously could have done much more for these refugees than they attempted. As commander, Sherman was responsible for insuring that such efforts were undertaken, and he ignored this responsibility. The burning of the bridges by one of Sherman's corps commanders in order to isolate a large group of blacks and Sherman's subsequent support for that officer's action are further examples of the lack of care afforded to the refugees. A commander in a contemporary military operation would be responsible for the humane treatment of refugees in the area of operations,[311] and the minimum standard of care would include provision of adequate quantities of food, medical supplies, and shelter.[312] Under no circumstances could a commander allow persons under the protection of his army to be returned to slavery.[313]

Sherman's acts of reprisal in response to the rebels' destruction of their food and livestock were also inappropriate and a clear violation of the law of war.

[Mao]

jimmy, my chart is on the wall in *front* of me in the bathroom thankyouverymuch *hmph!* anyhoo, jimmy, you've probably noticed now anyway that most people here aren't what anyone would consider "average [insert any nationality here]"

[Lonestar]

Nonsense and other comments. While Lee was not the Evil Slaveholding White Man(tm) some have made him out to be, Lincoln was certainly more friendly to the abolitionist cause than some Neo-Confederates would paint him to be.

A pity the South is the largest purchaser of History Textbooks, otherwise maybe our children wouldn't grow up believing that drivel.

[Capt Dizle]

This thread has its roots in another in which some **** labeled the South as evil.