Scholarly history of Civil War vs. popular "history" of Civil War

[Kuciwalker]

Holocaust deniers at least nominally disapprove of the Holocaust too, obviously...

[Dauphin]

Nominally, quite. I imagine a lot of people in the Middle East and elsewhere think "The holocaust never happened, but if it had.... man that would'a been sweet."

[Lorizael]

"The holocaust never happened, but if it had.... man that would'a been sweet."

I think that's almost an exact quote from Ahmawhozawhatsit, actually.

[Hauldren Collider]

Holocaust deniers at least nominally disapprove of the Holocaust too, obviously...

The equivalent to holocaust denial would be that the south didn't practice slavery. While the cause was clearly slavery, it's hard to argue against the assertion that at least SOME southerners felt it was a matter of state's rights.

And again it's a matter of motivation. The motivation for holocaust denial is rationalizing the destruction of Israel and starting another holocaust. The motivation for this kind of fuzzy thinking with the cause of the civil war is trying to defend your pride in your heritage. Silly yes but dangerous, not really. This isn't making lighter the crime of slavery.

[SpencerH]

I've lived here for 15 years. Based upon my experiences here I dont believe that the 'states rights argument' is asserted as a matter of 'pride'. I believe it is asserted in order to attempt to have any damn yankee agree that the north was not entirely blameless for the war, that most northerners were not altruistic in their desire for the abolition of slavery, and that aside from slavery itself the northern states treated blacks as badly if not worse than those in the south both before and after the war. It's the yankee smugness that wrankles.

[Kuciwalker]

Britain wasn't "entirely blameless" for WW2 either.

[Kuciwalker]

and that aside from slavery itself

Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

[Imran Siddiqui]

And, of course, any potential disdain of smugness is made up in spades when the South jingoistically champions the US in foriegn affairs.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

I've lived here for 15 years. Based upon my experiences here I dont believe that the 'states rights argument' is asserted as a matter of 'pride'. I believe it is asserted in order to attempt to have any damn yankee agree that the north was not entirely blameless for the war, that most northerners were not altruistic in their desire for the abolition of slavery, and that aside from slavery itself the northern states treated blacks as badly if not worse than those in the south both before and after the war. It's the yankee smugness that wrankles.

QFT.

Being a damn yankee I can attest that my first hand observations of racial attitudes and racism are far worse in the north.

[Kuciwalker]

And therefore it's important to support an absurd revisionist history

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Who made that claim?

[giblets]

My understanding is that the war wasn't about slavery, unless you think the South were vindictive racists who wanted to keep the black man down (hmmm). It was about economics. The economic value of keeping slavery made it worth while attempting to secede and it was by far the largest economic factor.

I never studied the stuff, this is just what I absorbed by metaphorical osmosis.

So it wasn't about slavery, but it was?

[Dauphin]

So it wasn't about slavery, but it was?

Just like climate change debate isn't about CO₂ emissions, but about the cost of reducing them. If it cost nothing to stop emitting, nobody would complain.

[Dauphin]

I've never seen what the cost of abolishing slavery was on southern state slave owners. So I could be completely wrong, and it was about them being racist bastards.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Just like climate change debate isn't about CO₂ emissions, but about the cost of reducing them. If it cost nothing to stop emitting, nobody would complain.

An apt comparison. Although, I think process and procedural objections and arguements stir a number of folks in both circumstances. Likely, as many as true believers in the morality of the cause(s).