*UA-cam demonetized this* for over a year, so please consider buying some merch: teespring.com/stores/the-cynical-historian Or donating to my Patreon: www.patreon.com/CynicalHistorian See following comment for corrections and citations, but first, here are some related videos to check out: 1:00 - What was the Cause of the Civil War? ua-cam.com/video/Mu9-5n0vpGs/v-deo.html 1:00 - 10 Common Slavery Myths: ua-cam.com/video/R1FO9MqWugY/v-deo.html 1:00 - 12 Annoyances for Historians: ua-cam.com/video/4J6IPhEkYmo/v-deo.html 1:00 - Woodrow Wilson: ua-cam.com/play/PLjnwpaclU4wXmCcEx0vfIim_jFMkgtLmS.html 6:25 - 12 Years a Slave: ua-cam.com/video/9JRSMPnbOd4/v-deo.html 6:35, 7:20 - Birth of a Nation (2016): ua-cam.com/video/CHVDfAMKuMg/v-deo.html 11:50 - Atun-Shei Films, Checkmate Lincolnites! ua-cam.com/play/PLwCiRao53J1y_gqJJOH6Rcgpb-vaW9wF0.html 20:50 - Leopold von Ranke: ua-cam.com/video/CfXW37GfnEE/v-deo.html 21:20 - Frederick Jackson Turner, the Frontier Thesis: ua-cam.com/video/oa5M0B7sb5U/v-deo.html 23:05 - WILSOOOON! ua-cam.com/play/PLjnwpaclU4wXmCcEx0vfIim_jFMkgtLmS.html 23:30 - Birth of a Nation (1915): ua-cam.com/video/zzsvOBjRXew/v-deo.html 24:10 - Vigilantism etymology: ua-cam.com/video/RfceCvtEMJ4/v-deo.html 24:50 - Frederick Jackson Turner, the Frontier Thesis: ua-cam.com/video/oa5M0B7sb5U/v-deo.html 27:40 - Rise of the New Left: ua-cam.com/video/fLxPUcZKFuY/v-deo.html 28:15 - Orthodoxy, Revisionism, and Post-revisionism: ua-cam.com/video/xQGs3eYxGRw/v-deo.html 30:10 - When the Western Genre Perished: ua-cam.com/video/x6zD1sjnClM/v-deo.html
*errata* I mispronounced _tenet_ as _tenant_ a few times 15:52 - Memphis Riots of 1866 not 68 (thx deathdog1392) --a few people have complained about what I said about the 1619 Project. Here is a post explaining what those complaints are ignoring: www.reddit.com/r/CynicalHistory/comments/gdoe1h/heres_the_thing_with_the_1619_project/
*Bibliography* Douglas Blackmon, _Slavery by Another Name: The Re-Enslavement of Black Americans from the Civil War to World War II_ (New York: Anchor Books, 2008). amzn.to/2zWOT64 William J. Cooper, _We Have the War Upon Us: The Onset of the Civil War, November 1860 - April 1861_ (New York: Vintage Books, 2011). amzn.to/2T8tIFP David Davis, _Inhuman Bondage: The Rise and Fall of Slavery in the New World_ (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2006). amzn.to/2KRoJpM Eric Foner, _Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877,_ new ed. (1988; New York: Perennial Classics, 2002). amzn.to/34lFOhq Gary Gallagher and Alan T. Nolan, _The Myth of the Lost Cause and Civil War History_ (Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 2000): ebook. amzn.to/2A7nxKy Stanley Harrold, _Border War: Fighting over Slavery before the Civil War_ (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2010). amzn.to/2xbEKSp David Oshinsky, _Worse than Slavery: Parchman Farm and the Ordeal of Jim Crow Justice_ (New York: Free Press Paperbacks, 1997). amzn.to/2udhA8Q Elaine Frantz Parsons, _Ku-Klux: The Birth of the Klan during Reconstruction_ (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2015). amzn.to/2uSkmov ed. David Prior, _Reconstruction in a Globalizing World_ (New York: Fordham University Press, 2018), 121-144. amzn.to/2ztpwGK David M. Potter, _The Impending Crisis: America Before the Civil War, 1848-1861,_ Reprint (1976; New York: Harper Perennial, 2011). amzn.to/3aeYy5q Heather Richardson, “Reconstruction and the Nation,” in _A Companion to the Civil War and Reconstruction,_ edited by Lacy K. Ford (New York: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011), ebook, 540-582/924. Charles Royster, _The Destructive War: William Tecumseh Sherman, Stonewall Jackson, and the Americans,_ New Ed. (1991; New York: Vintage Civil War Library, 1993). amzn.to/39mL6wb Margaret M. Storey, “The Military and Reconstruction, 1862-77,” in _A Companion to American Military History, Volume II,_ edited by James C. Bradford (New York: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010), 640-649. eds. Joan Waugh and Gary W. Gallagher, _Wars Within a War: Controversy and Conflict Over the American Civil War_ (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2009). amzn.to/2UO7biu _The War of the Rebellion: A compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies_ (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1882).
@@lilboyblue3000 Don't buy that argument. The Corwin Amendment was a proposed amendment to the Constitution designed by Northern lawmakers as a last ditch compromise to avoid war. Basically, if it had been ratified, it would have indefinitely prohibited the federal government from legally interfering with the practice of slavery in the states *where it existed at the time* (remember that, it's important). The South almost uniformly rejected the amendment and it was not ratified. So the Lost Cause line is "If the war was really about slavery, why didn't the South just take the deal?" This is highly misleading. Southern states seceded not just to preserve slavery, *but to expand it* to the territories. That had been their aim for decades. They feared that if new slave states were not admitted to the Union, they would be overwhelmed in government by an huge Republican majority. The Corwin Amendment wasn't the North folding to Southern demands. It was one last attempt at a compromise before the shit really hit the fan, and it directly pertained to the primary reason for secession - slavery.
@@CynicalHistorian The revolutionary Karl Marx observed, “The new world has never achieved a greater triumph than by this demonstration that, given its social and political organisation, ordinary people can achieve feats which only the heroes could achieve in the old world.”
@@dannyray3955 No it was not. The South fired first. The South left the union because they wanted to preserve slavery. You are either intentionally dishonest or brainwashed.
Fun fact: The various declarations of secession talked so much about slavery that they utterly exhausted the South's stockpile of the word "slavery" to the point where their history schoolbooks have to strictly ration it to this day.
While anti-slavery Lincoln was lukewarn on emancipation. The fact 7 of the 11 Confederate States seceded before he was inaugurated should be a sign. Not to mention it was the CSA who shot at Fort Sumter first should be another sign at who was the aggressor.
@@SouthernGentleman Grant's wife inherited two slaves from her slave owning family and he freed them. The US Constitution only had a provision to ban import of new slaves while the Confederate Constitution had an entire article on slavery including no restrictions on the right to own slaves and if the CSA got new territory slavery would be legal there.
@@SEAZNDragon Slavery also was not a profitable business. Food, clothing and Shelter for Slaves that complied with the few rules there were cost so much, that the only part of a slaveholding plantation in any size but the largest ones, that brought profits was raising new slaves to sell on the market. Which meant the slaveholders NEEDED slavery to expand to new states that got admitted tot he union or they would be broke in one or two generations. THAT was what drove them off. They hoped once the CSA was established they either could take over much of the unorganized West of the USA too and establish slavery to save them for another 50 years or they might even make a try at Mexico to do the same there. That it would run into an economical wall anyway, just a few years later seems to never have passed their minds. On the other hand that also means that once the slaves were freed most only were able to get employed to starvation wages on their former plantations now as hired labor... which is the part of Cypher's "myth" where it goes uncomfortably to a good number of slaves DID have it better before they were freed as nobody saw a need to pay them well enough to have a similar or better standing than before. It caused the large scale resettlement to the north in areas like Chicago or Detroit, New York or Washington that created the mostly black cities there that now are held up as symbols for mismanaged cities (ignoring the manifold reasons for that, reducing it in a racist way to "it's only the skincolor"). But many of the landowners that now had lost their slaves had not much of a chance as they did not have money to pay better either. A lot of slave owners were anything but stinking rich themselves and as i wrote before, the only part really throwing off profits for most slave businesses was selling "more" slaves, where should it therefore come from when they now didn't even have slaves to sell?
Speaking as a southerner with multiple ancestors who fought for the Confederacy, I can tell you how alluring the Lost Cause myth is. We southerners are a fiercely proud people, and it's far easier to bury your head in the sand and tell yourself that actually the Confederacy was cool than it is to accept that your ancestors fought for something monstrous, both during the war and during the Jim Crow era. This is especially true when so much of the Southern identity is tangled up in the Civil War and slavery. I fervently hope that we can start to accept the past, and in so doing let go of it and focus on who we want to be in the future.
@@pantsedjuniorhayseed4816 Freedom: The slaver army that seceded after the democratic election of an anti-slavery president... fighting for freedom? What a joke. Honor: Many of the soldiers of the slaver army renounced their oaths to the Constitution, and attacked United States soldiers. And they did this to enslave black people forever. Their dishonor is eternal. That's why their monuments are being taken down, and will continue to be. God: The only religion under attack, was their worship of an oppressive socioeconomic hierarchy.
@@pantsedjuniorhayseed4816 that's what every soldier would like to think they fight for, never admitting it's for money, oppression or because they've been brainwashed
As a friend once sayed to plato: Speak clearly plato. do not dance around the issue and awnser the question your self for once. Proof you truely are the most wice of greece. -plato"s republic (Not english, sorry for grammer)
@@KohanKilletz Except the 13 colonies had a much more legitimate reason for leaving, and they actually won and became recognized (admittedly with help). The Confederate "states" simply had a temper tantrum to secede and break away over a guy who hadn't even entered the White House yet in order to preserve an immoral institution. So yeah, still a traitor flag. Lol
It’s unfortunate that America follows the Japanese “it didn’t happen” or “not our fault” approach to dark history instead of the German “it happened, we aren’t proud of it but we will teach it” approach.
It's truly bizarre, I've been to Japan several times and it seems there's a huge historical gap between the Ido Restoration and the atomic bombs. Japan's inability to acknowledge war crimes is still a huge issue in Asia and the Pacific.
Yeah, it really does depend on who taught you as you were growing up, and whether or not you hold on to your beliefs. It's gotten to the point where certain people have practically deified the Confederacy. What can you say victim mentality may be pathetic, but if used correctly you can manipulate people to agree with you.
It really depends on the region of America. The Deep South subscribes to this mentality a lot more because it was there direct ancestors who perpetrated these atrocities
Grant/Sherman didn't go far enough with "total warfare". They wanted a partnership with the south to unite the country after the war. However today southern ignorance is alive and well.
Putting up statues and defaming them is tradition in Europe. It's not homey unless someone has hacked off bits or tried to plaster over them. I never hear any americans defending statues of Stalin.
@@alanmcentee3035 They are not Stalin's or Lenin's subjects at that point. Stalin, Lenin and obscure guys like Feliks have been dead for decades by that time in the late 80's. But the people that commission new Lenin statues are there here and now, sending the secret police to monitor people for listening to antisocial capitalist music.
Even Google caves to the Disgusting whine of white conservative grievance. I say we remove food stamps from all red states and let hunger force them to doing their own damned labor! That will fix their evil
They'll demonitize if it's anti-corporate of risks pissing off right wingers. Anyone who even has the faintest appearance of being "left" can't be victims of "cancel culture".
As someone who grew up in both of the Carolinas, my favorite response to all those who claimed “the Civil War was really about states rights” was always: “Yes, you’re right, it was absolutely about the Confederate State’s right to own slaves.”
The Civil War was fought over slavery, yes, that part cannot be denied. But we have to also remember that it wasn't just about the South wanting to keep slaves. The main ideology for the South wasn't necessarily about keeping slaves, but rather expanding slavery to new territories. The reason why we have the Lost Cause Myth is because when the South lost the Civil War they desperately needed to work on their image. So they told the narrative that the Civil War was about State's Rights to keep it vague. After the Civil War their one true objective was to change everyone's mind on what the Civil War was fought over, to make themselves look like the victims to a tyrannical government threatening their rights.
@@ZairokPhoen That states' rights argument is the same kind of nonsense as neo nazis use when they want to justify WW2 as Germany's "legitimate defense" against communism. What other "state right" than slavery was ever in question?!
I really appreciate and respect the notion of "It's important to understand something even if you dislike it and it's bad, because you need to understand a thing if you want to effectively fight it." Dismissing things doesn't help anyone. Thanks for making this.
I feel like that's something that people need to understand with the Founding Fathers cuz I'm seeing too many people take the fact that most of them were slave owners and running with it, all while at the same time refusing to look at anything else about them.
It seems like nuance is a lost art these days. People are unwilling to acknowledge any truth may exist in a view they disagree with. In my experience, once you get to a moderate level of complexity, very few things are more than 70% true, nor less than 20% true. If you agree with a position less than 100% many will consider you an opponent. I haven't seen much of the 1619 project but many things about slavery I've read seem to think they need to continuously restate that it was a bad thing. Like anyone who didn't know that would be reading that particular source.
How groups deal with their "less than proud" history is actually a fascinating topic within Social psychology. I did my Master's thesis on it and it is shocking to see how much People differ in opinion after being confronted with different historic representations.
As someone who lives in the south and used to live in part of it where that "Less than proud" history was celebrated I can say that many just want to be seen as victims, innocent people who were shoved under the north's boot essentially yet when you speak to them they always talk about how soft and weak the north and if thats true then why did the confederacy fail? Why do many people who wave the Confederate flag speak as if the South never did anything wrong, and some I know supported the idea of "Defending property" without thinking about how the confederacy saw other human beings as property or maybe they do know and are genuinely terrible, but for everyone else in the south we essentially just clown and joke about how backwards and ridiculous their ideals are, its a pretty good way to cope with knowing that people in your state still believe in a silly old ideal that caused a war and only existed for a few years, because my dogs have all lived longer then the confederacy existed
@@THERATSANDTHERATS Its interesting how often lovers who did so.ething awful want to be seen as the victim. Japanese textbooks during world War 2 talk about how awful the atomic bomb was and the devastating effects of it. Meanwhile, most other parts of Asia talk about how Brutal life was under Japanese rule during the time, and the problems that arose once Japan was forced to leave those countries.
it reminds me of an interaction my dad had a few weeks back. he was talking to someone and got to the topic of me studying history at university, and how I was currently studying the Mau Mau Uprising in Kenya and the brutal response it received from the British (i.e. torture of prisoners, over 1 million Kenyans being incarcerated in concentration camps), a very dark and degrading part of my country's history. The guy my dad was talking to had the audacity to say that he thought the Kenyans actually did learn quite a lot from the aftermath, and it "showed them what not to do for the future". Just straight up justified actual war crimes, concentration camps, and colonial atrocity. Oh, by the way, this all happened in the 1950s and 60s. Apparently concentration camps are only bad when European people get imprisoned in them.
@@beedubree2550 This is a pretty common talking point. Liberia is a thing because abolitionists and pro-slavery advocates alike assumed freed slaves would now fair better having lived under "western civilization".
Another good history UA-cam Channel, 'World War II' week by week with Indy Neidell was demonetised apparently because it included too many mentions of Hitler, Nazis and extermination of Jews, which to UA-cam's monitoring programme implied it was extreme right-wing and Antisemitic, although it is neither of those things. It is just that you can't really produce an accurate history of World War II without mentioning Hitler and his policy towards the Jews. The Channel recorded a video protesting at this that featured a number of cats in case that made it more popular with UA-cam and its advertisers.
I’m an 8th generation descendant of Jefferson Davis. I grew up in California, but went to University in the South. I was shocked to receive a letter for a scholarship for the Sons and Daughters of the Confederacy. Despite them attempting to call me multiple times, I eventually turned it down. (Though the debt I’ll be in for the rest of my life has made me doubt my choices) But I was raised understanding the myths of The Lost Cause, and the reality of the War. It was such a shock to witness the outright denial of historical facts in the South, from the average person, to history professors. Mind boggling stuff.
@@TheNightWatcher1385 I genuinely considered it, but I would’ve had to go out to Pulaski, TN (birthplace of the KKK) to accept it, even though their headquarters is 35 minutes north in Columbia, because they were having some freshmen sponsorship program conference or something. Either way, it was a no-go for me.
Living in a small town in VA, I had teachers in HS as recent as the late 90's/early 2000's that called the civil war "The war of Northern Aggression"....Coincidentally, I also had a biology teacher call evolution "the big lie" so.... that school system clearly had a lot of issues.
Fellow small-town Virginian here, I had plenty of teachers like those. However, I also had an amazing U.S History teacher who would take no shit in his class from any aspiring lost causer.
Holy shit. The indians were right about the lies shared in our schools history books. They said to me once, "you have know idea about the real history of your country". You only learn what the school board wants you to learn. Why don't they teach things in school that would actually help people when they get out of school instead of lies?
Well public schools, in most cases, are put together by elected boards, not by education experts. I remember having to have a conversation with my principal for doing a presentation on the Tulsa Massacre in high school, because in 2005 it was a topic still not taught in high schools. Everything was factual, researched and sited, but I had to take an F on the assignment (midterm) because the school board didn't recognize it as "factual history", and had intentionally excluded it from the curriculum. I grew up in Iowa, so it's not just the south either. Every school district basically has a Council of Nicea, choosing what is accurate and what is..."removed", while having no qualifications to do either.
Scary ... I definitely got a "both sides" argument in 8th grade about the Civil War. We had to read "Battle Cry of Freedom" ... I think the intention was to show the complexity of the Civil War but our teacher definitely downplayed slavery in causing the civil war. As an adult doing my own research it's definitely been all-roads-lead-to-slavery when it comes to causes of the Civil War: * It's about States' rights --> the state's rights to do what? * It's about taxes and tariffs --> taxes and tariffs imposed because of what? * It was about the North imposing its will on the South --> the North's will against what? It's all about slavery. 🤦♀️
As a Texan, I can't understand why as a Southerner, I need to place my pride upon a Virginian flag used by an army that fought for a racist society. Why can we not craft a new wave of southern pride that focuses upon the good parts of our culture, and recognize the Civil War and the battle flags for what they are. I can both be damn proud that I'm from Texas, and lambast anyone or any imagery that represents actions that would treat another human being with disrespect.
As a white guy from Georgia (the state) I agree with this statement fellow southerner. It's absurd to have pride about having your home state being apart of an old racist movement that was on its own way out of the country regardless.
@@grahamcochran5400 Although that might be because here in Texas we have more of an independent or rebellious history than the rest of the south. For example, a Mississippian cant look back to an independent Mississippian Republic to draw pride from In the way Texas can.
As a southerner from Georgia I have to say that I feel like now the civil war is a lot more accurately portrait, but I did have a few extremely enthusiastic history buff teachers. I had one teacher that was really focused on the human casualties of war and way humans were treated and he went really into detail about the cruelty of slavery. As someone that lives in a city with a civil war battlefield park, I can say that there is definitely plenty of confederate idolization within the south.
As a Millennial in a GA high school in the early 2000's, I still had a US History teacher that focused her course through the lens of Lost Cause rhetoric. We even had a couple of classes dedicated to listening to presentations from the Daughters of the Confederacy, trying to invite us to "explore our heritage" at their facilities and exhibits after school as well. I can't speak directly to the local curriculum quality for the last decade or so, but LC was definitely skewing portrayals of the Civil War in my neck of the woods as recent as Obama's presidency.
@@russscott6907 Which actually, thru the truth lense, "history is record of reality," as in the term; "History Will Judge!" We learn thru what we see, hear, what our interactions w others tell us, as we all form new history. All that must shift our thinking on how we saw history yrs prior. Before Civil Rts changes, our entire nation thru a lense of 'jim crow,' whatever our views were, It was part of our nation's reality. Because of changes cmg from people's activism a new historic lense has come into being that values lives of African Americans, Natives, women, immigrants more visibility previous generations, where white supremacy controled academia/media even more.
How dare you talk about this issue that I have no idea what it actually is about! The video isn't even out yet I am already outraged at your incompetence to present a thorough and unbiased argument. I will have to unsubscribe from such a heinous channel. Good day sire! I SAID GOOD DAY!!!!!!
They didn’t say shit like states rights until 10 years after they lost. They needed a solid reason to fight. Rather than “preventing servile insurrection” (like it really was) And instead they said states rights and independence to seek more sympathetic and make more sense. “Because why would soldiers fight for slavery? Slavery is bad! There is no way my grandpappy fought for slaves. He never even owned slaves, he was defending his rights!” That’s basically how that goes
In the 1850s states rights were the rights slave owners had, like bringing your slaves up north to free states without losing ownership of their slaves and the right for slave catchers to go north and recapture slaves and bring them back south under the fugitive slave act which turned out to be a disaster as for you had slave catchers rounding up free and former enslaved people alike indiscriminately off the pretense of being antislavery. Slavery was not just a thing that resided in the antebellum south but effected the whole country. From our modern point of view states rights looks like a person's want to fight for one's state and to stand out as the individual and not get swarmed by the collective which are key american values so I see how people become convinced by the lost cause narrative but you must not fall into this trap and actually peer into the eyes of the people who fought for slavery at the time and imagine being in their shoes, they fought for what most wars in history have been waged for.. wealth.
I can only share what I remember from school, 80s child from Ohio here. The South attacked federal installations. The confederate constitution legalized slavery. And they lost. So they are traitors, and instigators. They were ignorant to equal rights. And they were the losing side. Just saying. A lot of this sounds like romanticized history to make lost cause sound valiant instead of vulgar.
@paul lennon politics enslave people. Listen to a man who has enough money to run for any position higher than city council, and you're listening to a man who had never lived in your community. Think for yourself and stop worrying about Republicans and Democrats and you will see they are just trying to bend you to the compliancy. They don't want to help anyone who can't help them stay on power.
@paul lennon are you kidding? Have you checked out their last and current candidates for president? If you read that I was a Democrat from any of my statements, your not reading what I wrote, just seeing what you want. When you have Obama continuing policy such as no tap warrants and Trump spending his time doing, well, whatever he's doing, why would you trust either party?
People who know nothing about the Civil War think it's about slavery. People who know a little about the Civil War think it's about states rights. And people who know a lot about the Civil War know it was about states rights to own slaves
@@jaranarm considering your wording I assume you’re republican yourself. So to change your words to be more accurate, Lincoln(the radical left) vs stuck in the past pro slavery Jefferson Davis(conservative)
@@littlemacisunderrated412 they always try to stick to the party names so they can tacitly say the modern dems were the ones that liked slavery, trying their best to forget that party name is irrelevant compared to party values, conservatives now just like back then were always like this, they hold nearly all the same values just in a different form. Look at the history, look who supports them, see what they fight against.
Actually, it was about the *expansion* of slavery into the territories. Northerners were more than willing to entrench rights of slaveowners to keep their current holdings, just not expand them. But the South didn't want to just keep it.
As someone who grew up in the north till around 11 years old. Who then moved to Georgia to finish out high school, i was amazed at how the south taught the civil war. They consistently taught it as state rights (would not go into detail about it). I question my teacher at the time who said that slavery was of course part of it but that it was mostly about these state rights. This was a stark contrast to how the north taught me about the civil war, who said it was about slavery. I am currently 17 years old. It wasn't until this year when my Ap us history teacher who dismissed this myth of it being about state rights by asking "state rights over what?". It's incredibly interesting to me in how the south teaches it completely different.
If you ever look at the forms of government in the traitor states, they were universally far more injurious of states rights than existed under the US Constitution. For example the confederate constitution proclaimed slavery a permanent institution and severely limited individual states' tarriff and tax gatering rights. And most of the flashpoints leading up to the civil war was southerners using the Federal Government to deny states rights to protect slavery.
Yeah, in the US you still have the South, which is kinda patriotic, even nationalist, and the other states with their culturmarxist, farliberal madness
26:00 - Can confirm. My AP US History teacher in high school refused to teach the AP version of the Civil War, instead only referring to it as the War of Northern Aggression and telling us that slavery was nothing more than a footnote in the reasons for war. Literally had a confederate flag in class and everything. Worst teacher I ever had, anyone wanting to pass the AP exam basically had to teach themselves actual history.
@@demi-femme4821 I’m guessing he did not want to teach history, but what he sees as history. That his history is the true, advanced history and not the one “pushed” by schools.
Considering what Britain was like during the Industrial Revolution, Thornwell might have had a point about British workers, but saying you treat your slaves better than how British industrialists treat their workers is kind of like being the nicest guy in prison.
Even if accurate, it doesn't address the underlying issue that a person cannot be property. That statement should not be a defense of slavery, but an indictment of the British industrialists.
@Harry Paul Well, sadly as an industrialist you basically could do all those things - usually contract at the time afforded you very little in the way of rights as a worker - and there was basically nothing workers could do (hell it's still pretty difficult to complain when your boss harasses you in the workplace), but yes the thing that marks out slavery is the fact that there isn't even a pretense of rights - I think Eric Daniel summed that up pretty well tbh
Well said. I don't understand the mindset of people who twist logic into knots to justify human slavery. If you agree with the concept brutality as being a " relative " trait then the man who only savagely beats a woman must be a "nice guy" in comparison to someone who savagely beats up a woman then rapes her.
@@CG87343 you mean the crowder-pocalypse. Since steven crowder was the reason it started. Because he kept being homophobic and racist towards Carlos maza. :)
@@eodyn7 "That's not even remotely what he was doing." Lmao. He clearly was being homophobic unless perhaps you're just another one of his biased sycophantic fanboys who isn't interested in arguing in good faith and has a wingnut narrative to feed. *eSs JaY dOuBlE u'S!!!* EDIT: Just checked your channel list, seeing you subscribed to the likes of PragerU, Black Pigeon Speaks, and of course failed comedian Crowder along with other despicable POS's. Yep, I was right on the money! 😁
@False Feathers rustled? Lmao ok sure. No it's not the "voxpocalypse" because vox isn't at fault. It was crowder being homophobic and racist that started it. Calling it the voxpocalypse is revisionist and puts the blame on carlos, which serves the bigoted narrative that crowder did nothing wrong. Maybe learn to be more creative, since you seem to only have 1 thing you know how to say.
My ex partner a former History Professor had as the final question of the final exam: "What was the cause of the Civil War? It was an essay question. You could answer it any way you like but if you did not mention slavery as the cause or one of the causes, you failed the whole class, no questions asked.
I was a sophomore in high school (Huntington Beach High School) in 1963 and I had a bitter argument with my history teacher who wanted to tell (correct) me that it was a mistaken notion that the Civil War was the product over the struggle to end slavery. He insisted that it was about "states rights". I never gave in and neither did he. He attempted to chastise me for "influencing other, less intelligent students". And this guy wasn't even a Southerner. He was a supporter of Barry Goldwater.
I'm a senior in highschool this year and when I was in 10th grade I took ap us history and I was taught the lost cause and my teacher would get mad when she would say the civil war was about states rights and I would ask a states right to what? We often got into several arguements that ended in her saying the soldiers didnt fight for slavery and me saying most germans didnt fight just to murder the Jews and her just saying your wrong
I wish i can have that type of discussion, but fortunately my history teachers were smart so there's no need for me to argue with them. Kudos for you to talk like that to your history teacher
glad I wasn't the only one fighting the narrative in high school class rooms. although I've got a step beyond. I'm becoming a history teacher so I can go into high-schools and hopefully keep kids from learning this dribble.
Good for you! I had the opposite experience, there were 1 or 2 kids who argued that the south was just fighting for states rights and my history teacher shut that down real quick!
When I first came to the USA and I was learning US history, I had a teacher who called the Civil War “The War of Northern Aggression” and I assumed it was just an alternative name for the conflict 😬 I’m glad someone corrected me before I went around saying that
Well, the war was started because the north was using tyrannical legislation against the southern states and started arming themselves then in self defense the southern states succeeded only to be destroyed by the north.
@@beavercontrol1743 Technically they responded to a foreign power refusing to leave their territory. Not defending the war, but secession wasn’t against the constitution at the time.
@@TheNightWatcher1385 technically no, the lincoln administration only started raising troops to fight the south after the south fired on fort Sumte. fort Sumter was built on a sandbar in charlston harbour which South Carolina had sold to the US Federal government in 1836. The CSA did not own any part of fort sumter and other similar forts in the south. Also prior to the attack on fort sumter there were many raids on federal armouries and forts across the south. It is incorrect to claim that the CSA was "just responding to [the USA] refusing to leave their territory."
@@TheNightWatcher1385 Regarding the legality of secession Madison wrote in a letter to Hamiilton "The Constitution requires an adoption in toto, and forever." The straight text of the constitution neither explicitly allows for secession nor forbids it. There are clauses that could be argued forbid secession for example; Article 6 Section 2 which was interpreted very early on to mean that federal law outweighs state law. This interpretation implies that a state seceeding, without federal approval, for any reason can be overruled by the federal government. This is all rendered moot by the texas v white decision of 1869 which determined broadly that secession was illegal.
When I was in high school in Virginia in the late early 80's we were shown a film that was titled "Why we still whistle Dixie". To my teacher's credit he explained that he was required by state law to show the film and used the rest of the class to debunk it.
So he managed to teach: 1- the fallacies of the lost cause 2- tell you how real propaganda works Using a propaganda flick he was forced by law to show you. The guy sounds awesome.
Yeah my teacher in Georgia was apparently required to teach the other causes of the civil war and wasn’t allowed to say slavery was what caused the war but rather things like tariffs culture and state rights. He made his view point pretty clear even if he couldn’t flat out say “slavery was the main cause of the war”
@@mackinblack It was a slow and gradual change. Policies shifted after the New Deal, the civil rights movement, and other periods where the Democrats took more socially liberal actions, and became the modern democrat party of today. The Republicans, as the opposition to the Democrats, went in the opposite direction and have ended up as the social conservative party. Democrats aren't flying confederate flags. Republicans are. 120 years ago, the Democrats would and the Republicans would have never. Also, you are more than likely a troll is my guess. If you do want to know more about the party switch, I would watch the Knowing Better episode on it.
@@literallyme2071 it's a bit more complicated than "the parties switched" there were racist democrats as late as the 90s. Only in the last 10 years have they really reached out to minorities. For the last 70 years they moreso cornered the vote
@@jknott1509 I agree but, the Democrats are the more liberal party now. John Oliver shouldn’t be associated with the racists that have been around in the 70/80s.
I am impressed with your video. As a PhD in history I truly believe that truth of our past must be taught: no matter how painful it can be. I do believe our founding documents are wonderful ideals but are ideals we have never truly followed. As a Southerner, a liberal, and a historian the truth is important so we can never repeat our past sins.
I grew up in Mississippi, in a city famous for having the final residence of Jefferson Davis, the president of the CSA. I can tell you with 100% certainty that people here and the south more broadly believe whole heartedly in the Lost Cause myth and treat it as non negotiable fact. Younger generations are much less likely to hold it, but almost everyone 30+ believe it because it’s what they’ve always been told. I had teachers in public school who even taught us the lost cause as history and consciously de-emphasized slavery as a major factor in the civil war. Hell, when I was a kid even I believed it, because it’s what was taught to everyone and anyone who disagreed was treated as biased against the south. I only broke out of it when I became interested in history and started researching the subject for myself. The lost cause isn’t just dangerous, it’s extremely pervasive in the south, and educators have a moral mandate to combat it.
Didn't he live in Liverpool for a time? If he'd stayed longer he might have met the Beatles. on a serious note, the South is still hopelessly fucked up.
Fellow Mississippian and it’s exhausting when trying to explain anything historical to older generation when they denounce anything that they weren’t taught in school
UA-cam gives the job to a robot, and tries to make sure their robot isn't leaked to their competitors. It doesn't need to be a perfect robot, it just needs to work well enough and better/cheaper than people trying to review the torrent of nonsense.
@@tylerklovic3330 It becomes more apparent when UA-cam and others face local languages. If UA-cam doesn't have enough people who can filter stuff in english, how many do you think they have that can check norwegian or burmese stuff.
UA-cam is a blatantly right-wing company that panders to Republican troglodytes to maintain unbridled crony capitalism. Same goes for pretty much all social media and every other corporation out there.
@@scabbarae Right now I think UA-cam just wants to avoid work. It wants to sell ads and consumer data and let people watch fun videos, and not get saddled with a position as the world's largest movie publisher and moderator service. Same with facebook, twitter and other services. Doing nothing has been their default.
@@kennethmcclain3907 literally in the town my hunting land is in... there is a monument paid for by a local - it’s a big flag and a bunch of plagues talking about Lincoln’s tax war .... Now is it as common as it used to be - no, atleast in cities or decent size towns
It was the War Southern Aggression, The south secdeed from the Union illegal, secession was unconstitutional. The South fired on Fort Sumter SC on April 12,1861 at 4:30 am.
Neo confederates today: "It wAs ThE waR OF NortHeRn AgReSsioN!!!!" "StOp tryInG to DesTroY oUr HeritAgE!!!!" Actual confederates in 1861: "We're fighting for slavery." "We know."
couldn't be more true. its hilarious how beyond ignorant they are when the people at the time where incredibly open with their views. no one was hiding it. the vice president of the confederacy had a whole talk about how slavery was their right by god himself
As someone who grew up in the south the reconstruction era always felt like something that was a mistake to me even though I didn’t exactly know why. This changed when I took AP US history in Junior year and learned what Reconstruction actually was and then I essentially realized that there wasn’t exactly a reason to hate it (Also Uncle Tom’s Cabin was to me portrayed as a racist book by those who talked about it occasionally, so there’s another lie I was fed growing up)
I was taught the lost cause myth in my high school in Utah, and that was as recent as 2016. Granted, it was a charter school and the teacher was a conspiracy nut, but it’s still very much alive today. My parents buy into it too.
@@andrewstar21 Coming from a country where every type of education is regulated by the government and homeschooling is not even allowed, that just sounds hella mad. Schools to teach your kids revised history and keep them away from "brown people". Disgusting!
Oh, god, I know what that's like. It's so annoying when I listen to my parents talk about the Civil War and they always talk about how it wasn't about slavery. Ugh. I love my parents and all, but they can just be so, so ignorant about that kind of stuff.
Just an unimportant side note: technically, ‘Song of the South’ doesn’t depict master-slave relations since it’s set after the Civil War, and shows former master-former slave relations (all happy and wonderful, of course, no hard feelings!).
Many slaves did return to their former masters to work for wages, Of course slavery was an evil practice obviously I'm just pointing out that this happened.
And the abuse continued. If my memory serves correctly my grandmother's family were sharecroppers and I was told that they were practically forced to stay ever they were and suffer any abuse inflicted.
@@jordana.6874 That would be because the Jim Crow South made it nearly impossible for them to go anywhere, plus there's always the psychology of "the devil you know"...
The elephant wasn't in the room but on the street when locals asked the drunken bellboy to be its shepherd and when the animal acted as a wild animal would, the Southerners lynched it. During the Spanish flu no less.
@@PredatoryEra I suppose most of those who damn the Confederacy would agree that Gitmo rightly belongs to Cuba, that we hold it in opposition to the tyrannical Castro government.
@@DrCruel Explain how. I'm not being disingenuous, I'm actually curious. I know fascism has pseudo socialistic tendencies because fascism was weird but that's about all I know l.
@Stonewall Jackson Diverse lmao Most of the soldiers of the Confederacy were white, who were trying to protect their state's rights. That being, of course, being the right to own slaves. There were Native Americans who fought, on the Confederate side, but they fought only because they thought that it would protect their tribes from extermination, by the Americans. Just like the Natives, on the Union side, who thought that they would keep their sovereignty by proving their loyalty. Of course, even if the CSA had won the Civil War, it's not like the Confederacy would have expanded anyway, there were even plans to. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_of_the_Golden_Circle
I appreciate your nuance about the Confederate battle flag’s use today, but I’ll see it flown all the time where I am in rural Michigan, in the heart of Yankee country. It doesn’t have anything to do with their heritage; they have to know what they’re doing by flying it.
I live in rural Iowa and I see that flag fairly often as well. I even know some of the people who fly it and can say with the upmost certainty they have no ties to the south. It is crazy on the 4th when I see people with the Confederate flag flying from their trucks, and my so called “patriot” friends using every excuse possible to try and justify it.
Can confirm this about Michigan. I live in the suburban part of it and I see people who've spent their entire lives in Mt Clemens and Clinton Township trying to claim that flag as their heritage. Wonder what part of the heritage they find so appealing that it makes them want to cosplay as these idiots?
I'm a high school history teacher who just moved from California to Texas. I'm dreading it. I'm not quite sure how to structure my lesson plans and the history of the myth into a curriculum that will still find me employed after a while. Terrible situation for educators who want to teach candid, unapologetic, and sometimes uncomfortable truth.
As far as I can tell, Texas public education has long separated itself from the Lost Cause. Their 2007 state textbook explicitly denounced the previous years for including it (hence why I showed that textbook in the video). In terms of navigating the recent anti-history, anti-abortion, and anti-LGBT laws; yeah it's really atrocious. But you can at least take comfort in the fact that all Texan history teachers are having similar trouble with that. Best of luck
go back you f'ed your state now you wan't f up ours? well's was a HUGE racist..perhaps you learned that in school? Texans are 10 times more worried about people coming from califoria then from mexico hehehe
@Pitch Notes It's ironic that under the Confederate constitution that the states had no rights. All power was with the central government. Read it for yourself.
As a black man from Virginia and going to a segregated school. I was taught the evils of slavery and the system that perpetrated it. And I began to read about it own my own. And I guess you can say it stimulated my desire to learn all history. And slavery and the treatment of native Americans was little better than the Nazis treatment of the Jews in Nazi Germany. But it makes people here uncomfortable to remember their past. And until we as Americans and all of us can look back especially the evils perpetrated on just about all people of color and whites who didn't have the same hate in their hearts. That White's from every part of this country, not all but a sizeable majority killed blacks for pure sport and entertainment. And I'm betting that there's a lot of individuals who go looking for their relatives in heaven are going to be disappointed to find them in hell.
@@philipfreeman2863 "not all but a sizeable majority killed blacks for pure sport and entertainment." The fact that you actually believe this nonsense is quite possibly going to allow you to perpetuate the worst sort of sadism on the people you hate in the very near future if political trends continue as they are, all in the name of anti-hatred. The sad thing is that you won't even be able to recognize it even as you are doing it.
@@connor3284 would it make you feel better if he’d said that blacks were killed, raped, dehumanized and abused because whites considered them little more than livestock?
For an interesting illustration of whether or not slavery was really a big deal to the generals, we can look at major-general Patrick Cleburne. Noting that the South was losing the war and needed more manpower, he made a proposal: promise emancipation to blacks who fought for the confederacy. He justified this idea saying "It is said that slavery is all we are fighting for, and if we give it up we give up all. Even if this were true, which we deny, slavery is not all our enemies are fighting for. It is merely the pretense to establish sectional superiority and a more centralized form of government, and to deprive us of our rights and liberties." This was mostly met with polite silence with some outraged, but no support. Making the proposal also got him blackballed from promotions in the army. So I guess they didn't deny it as much as he thought.
That's because Cleburne was far from a typical confederate. An Irish nationalist exiled after the supression of the Young Ireland movement, Cleburne joined theConfederate army to help protect his friends and neighbours (one of a tiny few to do so) and subsequently rose through the ranks. He was one of a vanishingly small number of confederate leaders who didn't care about slavery.
@James Longstreet wrong. Harper's ferry was done by private citizens against the federal government. The first shots were fired by cadets from the Citadel Military Academy on the steamship, Star of the West, which was resupplying Union troops. The Anaconda plan took place after both the attack on the Star of the West and Fort Sumter. The first violence of the occupation of Maryland took place 4 days after the attack on the Star of the West. I stand by my comment en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_of_the_West en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland_in_the_American_Civil_War
how dare you. I am a totally unbiased citizen and I only get my facts from reputable sources. I can tell you right now that Han in fact did not shoot first! confederacy totally did tho lol
@@Johnsmosby33 Lincoln did nothing of the sort. The plantation owners wanted to continue owning slaves, and feared they have actually have to pay thier labor, and they considered Lincoln to be a threat. Secession was done on their own accord
@James Longstreet Sumter was a US base threatened by rebels. By your logic, your saying it's ok if a left wing group trying to secede from the Union takes a naval base in California. The federal government was completely justified in protecting their military base. I still stand by my comment
well you see Mr. Historian let me learn you a wee bit bout this here war of northern aggression. You see the war was in fact about about states rights specifically the states rights to remove the rights of certain people but states rights none the less. And secondly it was in fact a war of northern aggression you see they got very aggressive after we invade and took over multiple american military armories and forts located in the south. And of course the carpet baggers were trying to destroy and punish the south with their reconstruction as they made it so much harder to you know own slaves and all with all their amendments and laws and what not.
Seriously stop twisting the history. There is no such thing as states rights. To own a slave was not a right it was privilege. That war was all about southern white privilege. But also to be clear - north didn't want to free slaves in the south because they like black people. Actually they wanted to free slaves in the south because northern farmers couldn't compete with southern farmers. Northern farmers had more expenses because they had to pay their workers. Slavery was illegal in the north. If you or anyone else reading this thinks that southern farmers had to feed their slaves so they had expenses too - well you all are missing one crucial point. In the north workers who worked in the fields (manual work) had to be payed by their employers and also fed by their employers. Remember two things that makes people civilized. You never can have right to take someone's rights and you can never build your freedom by taking freedom from others.
Served with many Southern boys in the USMC and Navy. As a first-generation American, I never heard of the Lost Cause until my contact with Southerners in the service.
They are not "neutral" parties. They have a huge amount of self-esteem and group-esteem tied up in this issue. The Lost Cause first arose to serve the psychological needs of white Southerners. It still serves that same purpose today.
Southerners here understand that slavery and racism was a factor in the Civil War but diminishes that factor in favor or economic and state rights. It's a bit like saying the Civil rights movement was solely about voting rights while ignoring racism.
My American History teachers in college didn't deny that the US Civil War was chiefly about slavery, but one of the more memorable ones did bring up the North-South cultural and economic differences (noting that these divisions also went East-West), and cautioned that we shouldn't assume that all Northerners or their political leaders were 100% motivated by a desire to free the slaves - in his opinion they were far more motivated by trying to preserve the Union. To say there weren't profiteers aka "carpetbaggers" during Reconstruction would be also inaccurate. Honestly, this ran counter to everything I'd been taught before, where the Civil War was 101% about slavery, the virtuous leaders of the North were only motivated by their hatred of slavery, and that the South deserved everything it got. These same History profs also taught that Woodrow Wilson was one of the worst human beings, ever. So there's that.
Keep in mind the decade leading up to the Civil War starts with the onerous Fugitive Slave Act. This changed the dialogue in the Free States from "oh sure, it'd be nice if there weren't slavery but..." to "A thousand-dollar fine if I harbor or aide in the freeing of a slave? That would be three years of wages. That's more than the cost of slaves or horses! Jerks." Slave-owners were expanding their power over the states without slavery. Laissez-faire robber barons of the modern age would be wise to learn what happened. ...but yeah, Wilson was a dick on so many occasions in so many innovative ways. If it weren't for his post-influenza stroke, who knows what horrors he would've augmented.
@@azraelbatosi There were definitely abolitionists and a movement in the North, I am not denying that not was my History Prof. Do I personally think that ending slavery was a cause worthy of war? Yes. But the more you dig into the motivations of leaders, it seems that ending slavery was not their primary motivation, it was far more about preserving the Union.
@Bronson Kaahui Yes, I gave the concept presented in this video a fair hearing, watching others that made the same points - because it was NOT what I was taught. The more thoughtful College Profs I had were the only ones who presented the idea that Lincoln wasn't motivated primarily by freeing the slaves, he was much more about preserving the Union and I recall that his speeches and writings made this clear. Later on, revisionist history looks at the actions after the War and declares the passage of the Emancipation Proclamation the primary or even the sole motivator - when in fact abolitionist sentiment wasn't that widespread or mainstream, as you've stated. It would be one thing if someone (a strawman perhaps) stated that the Civil War had NOTHING at all to do with slavery - indeed that would be incorrect. But I disagree with the video that this is a widespread belief or that it is taught everywhere, and I imagine that daring to teach that the Civil War had some additional causes is being lumped in with outright Confederate Apologetics.
I was raised immersed in this. Deeply. Once when we were playing Civil War when I was living in Mississippi, my dad got mad and told me I shouldn't pretend to be a Yankee. I don't really know if I can ever fully escape it, but I've been trying to at least learn more.
@Mimi EF This is the information age! I grew up in the North, and I had a history teacher who believed all the Lost Cause Propaganda 😞 My real history education came with books, C Span, and University lectures ( free on line )
Like the replies state, you're already LEAGUES above these confederate apologist whackjobs by even TRYING in the first place! You already win! Now you just have to keep on working at it, and you'll be fine and glorious! Its been five months by now, so I assume you might be closer to fully cleansing your mind of the propaganda by now.
As somebody who grew up in a southern state I didnt know the civil war was about slavery until the 5th grade where I found it online. It was all about how bad slavery was when we were talking about the revolutionary war and the settlers but as soon as the civil war became a topic it was all state rights and how sad brother was against brother.
@@anatomicalx9355 Yeah. Tarfiel is right. Its all over their documents of secession, journals, and what have you that slavery was front and center. Calling it 'states rights' just makes it go down easier then the truth.
@@anatomicalx9355 Believe as you like. A close reading of the old Confederates' words doesn't support states rights as the primary point of contention, except as a fig leaf to justify slavery.
@@anatomicalx9355 You can keep ignoring reality all you want, but the Confederates themselves would laugh at you saying they weren't fighting to keep the institution of slavery.
That's not always true though. Some folks were more honorable and less hateful in the 50s than some alive today. It all depends on the individual. Plus, what do WE do? Import slave-made Chinese goods. Are we really much better than 19th Century folks?
@@doug814 stfu, yes it does. Knowing this kind of thing helps the rest of the world comprehend why the US is in such sorry shape because of the 45th stirring up desperate southerners who cant stand the idea of living in a less-racist country than they have now. It helps the rest of the world to understand to place most of their anger and frustration with the people who are supporting these confederate values and not to hate the entire country.
@@AdamTheCoop1 I mean ... using southerner diminishes the extent ....and acts as if it’s a geographic thing. Also under cuts the position of the south as a hot bed for civil rights heros and icons. Racism at least online comes largely from the Midwest. Where diversity is rarer so they deal with minorities rarely and they went to trump in droves. I mean the massive amount of racists going to these events ... are from the northern part of the US. Especially looking at militia groups.. Michigan is a huge hot bed for that. The south isn’t the bastion it used to be, it’s one of the most diverse area of the union and it’s solely realizing that. I mean look at Georgia in 2020 or how Alabama got a Democrat senator for the first time in 25 years because the African American community realized they have a voice now and they have always had the numbers but they didn’t realize it or weren’t allowed to realize it but now they do. This is a national issue not geographic
@@AdamTheCoop1 or we can look at modern election stats Alabama and Mississippi voted 40% for Hillary and joe While West Virginia , the least confederate state ever - voted less than 30% dem.. it’s a country wide issue not geographic. Iowa used to be dem now, it’s +10 trump same with Ohio. While North Carolina will go blue likely in the next 10 years. That’s not even mention that a lot of those northern states barely went blue. It’s a nation wide issue so I don’t think reducing it to - dumb sad southern are the reason a New Yorker was able to sweep the nation in 2016 - is correct
@@tysmith9309 i didnt bother reading those long winded responses, if you have so much to say please go ahead and join your brethren and make your own channel to share your message with like minded people
@@pbjman5809 Most successful doesn't mean the best, Niall Ferguson was I believe the historian who posited that the French army is overall the most succesful army in the world based on their rate of wars won versus wars lost. According to him, out of 169 battles fought since 387BC, they have won 109, lost 49 and drawn 10. Which is by far the highest rate in the world, although it's fair to point out that France really wasn't a think until Charlemagne and even then it's not actual France as we'd see it today, and that battles won is not an exact measure for success in war due to the simple fact that the small war was at least as important as the much, much more rare large field battles. Still the French Army from it's founding in 1445 has seen much more success overall than any other army in the world, despite having existed for nearly 600 years, which also makes it one of the oldest standing armies in the world, their 1st Infantry Regiment is also one of the oldest, if not THE oldest currently serving military unit, having been formed in 1479.
@@SKa-tt9nm Indeed, and the discourse goes ahead like "if the author doesn't pay attention to this detail, are there other details that are removed, or changed to fit the narrative?" Example: the youtuber "Dark Skies" (I think that's the name) makes short history films with *lots* of historical footage. * Any footage*. German AA-crew on Malta. Germans started bombing Malta - showing B17's. (Well, it *could* have been KG200). This only works for an blissfully uneducated (I.e. 'Murican') audience, as others will indeed stumble on these fact errors. Stumbling stones that are easily removed by the author not having this need for snappy image changes. ('scuse me, now I'm going out to buy some "paalæg")
@@jonashellsborn7648 If he used other historical footage, that's OK as long as it doesn't impact the writing at all and fits with what he is talking about... Also what "narrative" are you talking about. Also its written "pålegg"
i do wonder if yt could get sued based off of breaking their contract/terms of service themselves. technically they followed all the rules of the terms of services, yet didn't get paid. i think it'll inevitably happen but idk when
About the phrase "lost cause": A newspaper editor in Richmond, Virginia, and an apologist for slavery and secession, published a Confederate history of the Civil War called "The Lost Cause" in 1866.
My 4th grade teacher told us the civil war was about states' rights, not slavery. This was in Phoenix AZ in 1964. I didn't buy it. I thought to myself "wasn't the right they were fighting for the right to own slaves"? Denying history shows weakness and lack of character.
Sane People: "the civil war was about slavery" Lost Causers: "hell naw, it was about STATES' RIGHTS!" Sane People: "but which right were they MOST concerned with preserving?" Lost Causers: "your mom"
South: Gets mad about election of abolitionist Lincoln and secedes North: ... South: Attacks Fort Sumter North: Fights back South: "NoRTherN agRESsion!"
Don't forget how southern states started seizing Federal depots and munition stores then escorting Federal troops to their state line in the immediate aftermath of just the election, never mind Lincoln's actual inauguration, and that was before the attack on Fort Sumter.
This is an impressive breakdown and you even covered properly their state of mind. This is the perfect video to refer ppl to when asking what lost cause it. 10/10
When I heard "Grand Army of the Republic" first thing that came to mind was star wars, and was very disappointed when I looked at the screen and saw Confederate Flags and medals.
The droids weren't fighting to preserve robotic superiority. It was a complicated conflict with many causes. The republic started it with a sneak attack on Geonosis. The droids were simply protecting their factories
To me calling the defeat of the South a"Lost Cause' merely means the war was hopeless and the South had no chance of victory. I never knew the 'Lost Cause' was some kind of Southern conspiracy till I saw this video.
As so often, it all depends what you mean by 'Lost Cause'. It might be clearer to use a phrase like 'Confederate nostalgia', as it is undeniable fact implying no positive or negative judgement that the Confederates had a Cause and that they lost, as the Causes of the Royalists in the English Civil War, the 'Whites' in the Russian Civil War or Brutus and Cassius in the Roman Civil War at the end of their Republic may all be called lost causes.
I am not too familiar with american history so I thought the same, who new that in the 21. century with all the books and stuff people still defend slavery
I've lived most of my 70 years in Florida. In 1991, I lived in Decatur, IL for one year. Often when local folks heard my southern accent they assumed they could safely reveal their racial prejudices...proving to me there's no regional monopoly on racism. However, there is a southern mystique that has no connection with the lost cause myth. Rather, it's rooted in music.
Intersting thing is how many historians talk about the migration of blacks from the South, but not really about the migration of whites to "escape'" civil rights. Some Southerners just couldn't stomach that Jiml Crow didn't reinstate slavery. So my go to assumption would be the people you met are at best second generation Northerners.
Dear Cynical Historian, I literally almost busted a gut laughing out loud from 8:30 to 8:54. I taught high school U.S history for 8 years and every so often I'm confronted with this mythology of "states rights" by students and I've always found it amusing. Your illustration with the use of a primary source is priceless lololol. Cheers!
@Laika24102007 so based on my comment, you conclude that I spend my entire scholarly year teaching slavery? And you think that I teach in the United states? And you conclude that I am not engaged in the issues you've raised? Maybe you should stick to watching porn
In other words; History is complicated, we should try to understand it (on its own premises), don't judge the past by the morals of today, but do learn form it to be better for tomorrow?
@@KonradSeverinHilstad you're too milk toast to argue with. There's too much platitude in your statement to rile up any discourse. Be a little more edgy, and you'll get the discourse you seek.
@@henrytep8884 well, I guess most people can't appreciate a philosophical statement on the general nature of history, or it's ideal role in society 🤷♂️
"In fact some of it's strongest membership was in Indiana of all places." Have you been to Indiana? There is a trailer park outside my grandmother's home. I swear I have never in my life seen a higher concentration of confederate flags. And I'm from Texas! It honestly surprises me not one bit.
I’ve been to Indiana once, the whole state is like an embodiment of a trailer park. We stopped at one small gas station with two pumps and an overweight man with a white beard and wearing just overalls and a ballcap walked from across the street to the gas station. The same town had a few confederate flags on flagpoles. I would not feel very safe at all if I wasn’t white, and even though I am white I still got a weird feeling passing through. Made me realize there are worse places to be raised in than IL
@@homosexualitymydearwatson4109 You must not know that 60% of the original settlers of Indiana are from Southern Scotish Heritage. And anything on this planet with a. "X" IS ALWAYS SCOTLAND!
I always love to see supposed "intellectuals" in youtube comments bashing the video creators, calling them uneducated when they, themselves construct their entire argument with worse English than a first grader.
Why wouldn't we romanticize the old south? 60% of the military is southern, and most of the boys dying out in the wars, are southern. Heroin and crack are littered through our neighborhood. Suicide is prominent. We don't like the federal government, but state like Arkansas, with a population so low at 3 million, we don't affect squat. California outvotes us 10 times over. We romanticize the Old South cause we feel like back then we had some sort of say, and we weren't dropping like flies.
@@candidstar3526 dude no matter what side of the conflict you side, you have to agree, The war was a bloody mess. I'm Canadian so don't really care to much for rather side.
@@marschallblucher6197 the toll is much heavier for the south, 1/5 white men died. I believe that is the correct number. But if you scaled that up to modern population that would be 6 million, double the population of Arkansas.
As someone raised in the deep south, the vast majority of people I've encountered who claim the confederate flag is just about "heritage" were also racist (some extremely so). I'm sure there may be some who aren't racist at all, but they have been extremely rare, in my personal experience. My grandfather (who I'm pretty sure was in the Klan, although he never came out and said so) used to love to talk about the "great and noble Ku Klux Klan" and how "it had nothing to do with race", because they went after "sorry folk, black and white". Of course, every single time he would tell a story about the Klan going after some "sorry folk", they were always black. I never once heard him tell a single story about the Klan going after someone who was white, even as he continued to insist that "race didn't matter". My father and his whole side of the family were fully steeped in the "Lost Cause Myth" and it was the only version of history I ever heard from them. My mother and her side of the family were dirt poor and had the kind of casual racism that most people seemed to have, when they weren't blatantly and angrily racist (like my father's family). They were opposed to slavery and they didn't have the same problem with black people that my dad's family did, but they perpetuated all the prevalent myths about them. So much so, that when my mother was in her late 50s and lived next door to a black woman, she told me (in a shocked voice) how clean the woman's house was and that "she doesn't smell at all!" Without a bone of hate in her body, she just genuinely believed all the crap she'd been told and was shocked to find out it wasn't true. Of course, she didn't wrap herself in the confederate flag or revere their leaders, so she doesn't really count when trying to work out how many confederate apologists aren't racist. Other people's experiences may be different, but mine was pretty much that if you saw a confederate flag, you saw a racist, even if they claimed the flag had nothing to do with racism.
@@Dennis-nc3vw Don’t worry, comrade, us pinkos reside in every city, county and state in the Union. If you think there’s somewhere red, conservative, or even reactionary enough for you to hide, well, don’t forget your neighbor can still be just as likely to be a secret pinko as they can a proud member of the KKK.
There were two iterations of the KKK. The original rose during Reconstruction. They overwhelmingly attacked black politicians, black voters and just innocent black people. But they also went after White Republicans and Catholics (particularly Irish immigrants). This first iteration was largely destroyed when many of them were tried and arrested for crimes by the newly created Justice Department (thank, President Ulysses S. Grant for that!). The 2nd iteration came into being some 20-30 years later in the early 1900's. These people did almost exclusively target black people, but also sometimes anyone who wasn't white. I don't think everyone who flies a Confederate flag is racist, but it's 100% certain that they are ignorant
“Radical republicans trying to shove civil rights down our throats” “Radical leftists trying to shove LGBTQ rights down our throats” Reactionary talking points haven’t changed that much.
“Reactionary talking” is actually reactive abuse: when a Narcissist or a toxic person deliberately triggers you into reacting to their abuse. In other words, they do or say something obnoxious, you react, they act innocent and ask you what your problem is. Humanizing the LGBQT community in Legal Code does not compare to the delusion of perceiving oneself as having the right to own another human being.
My dearest Wilhelmina Our unit marches for the comment section on the morrow. I fear you shall not hear from me again. Pray for my and watch after the boys.
@@Joesolo13 I loled - reading that in the style of a Ken Burns documentary, complete with old-timey background music and being read in some famous actor's voice (maybe Kevin Bacon?) ah, but ... Pray for *me
preview comments always over-represent tomfoolery or worse, as you can see with our southern 'friend' and his token reference to the final months of the confederacy where they finally threw out their racial claptrap in desperation. A reference desperately trying to paper over the explicit racism in the confederate constitution, in southern society, et cetera. Next to an explicit symbol of modern racism, the battle flag of the army of northern virginia, of course.
Yeah the comment section of this video is just going to be a hell hole I have not looked very far and I've already seen well things both sides making themselves look like idiots but you know that's the usual for most comments sections of anything this is just a topic that will bring it out more
@@GreenBlueWalkthrough Because the South enslaved people. And treated them like cattle. And instituted racial segregation afterwords. Good night, why’s that so hard to grasp?
Ah, yes, Vietnam. The 20th century Lost Cause for thousands of armchair generals on YT. Did you know the US would have won that war if only hippies and the media had butted out and minded their own business? It's a surprisingly common argument.
Yeah i lived down the road from the klan. They roasted a hog every year. This was in 2002 i was 10. They didnt know we were catholics when they asked my dad to join. He politely refused. This was in indiana lol
vinci vedi vici lex talionas Not shocking. Indiana had the biggest klan chapter in the states. They practically owned the Indiana Republican Party in the early 20th century.
My father told me about the Klan coming after Catholics, although he framed it more along the lines of how it’s never discussed, but.....on a separate note, idk too much about early 20th century Indiana politics, but for most of the rest of America in the early 20th century, it wouldn’t be the Republican Party that the Klan would be backing/owning/supporting...
When I was a kid just old enough to appreciate the significance of "Daisy Dukes" I absolutely loved the Dukes of Hazard. It was a much simpler time then and I was just a kid so even though the show was the exact same plot over and over every week sure did love the General Lee. I never saw the flag for anything other than being rebellious and in the 1980's wearing a Confederate Battle Flag on my jacket as a teen in Upstate NY wasn't seen or meant as anything racist it was more about rebelling against all of the neon and pink and plaid clothing that was "preppy" and popular.... I wouldn't wear one now obviously as what the flag represents now and as I have become more aware, but in those days if someone called me a racist because of the patch on my jacket I would have had no idea what they were talking about....
when I was in highschool, I used to see this kid wearing rebel shirts most of the time. I always saw him chatting and being cool with another student who was black.
The flag was a very fashionable patch to have sewn over the holes in our jeans when we were kids in England/Scotland/Ireland/Wales in the 1960s-1980s too,purely because it was a great-looking American graphic,and in fact still is a design classic!!...I don`t think any of us had any clue what it meant at all,and most probably still don`t and couldn`t care less either way.
@@mjh5437 kind of reminds me of when i was a kid, i used to draw swastikas ( I'm mixed and have dark skin) because i thought they looked cool. It wasn't until i was in middle school (maby a grade or 2 earlier) that i fully appreciated what it meant and how terrible the nazis were.
![[UA] NAVI проти G2 Esports | Blast Premier Fall Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QWlIm4FGESQ/mqdefault.jpg)
*UA-cam demonetized this* for over a year, so please consider buying some merch: teespring.com/stores/the-cynical-historian
Or donating to my Patreon: www.patreon.com/CynicalHistorian
See following comment for corrections and citations, but first, here are some related videos to check out:
1:00 - What was the Cause of the Civil War? ua-cam.com/video/Mu9-5n0vpGs/v-deo.html
1:00 - 10 Common Slavery Myths: ua-cam.com/video/R1FO9MqWugY/v-deo.html
1:00 - 12 Annoyances for Historians: ua-cam.com/video/4J6IPhEkYmo/v-deo.html
1:00 - Woodrow Wilson: ua-cam.com/play/PLjnwpaclU4wXmCcEx0vfIim_jFMkgtLmS.html
6:25 - 12 Years a Slave: ua-cam.com/video/9JRSMPnbOd4/v-deo.html
6:35, 7:20 - Birth of a Nation (2016): ua-cam.com/video/CHVDfAMKuMg/v-deo.html
11:50 - Atun-Shei Films, Checkmate Lincolnites! ua-cam.com/play/PLwCiRao53J1y_gqJJOH6Rcgpb-vaW9wF0.html
20:50 - Leopold von Ranke: ua-cam.com/video/CfXW37GfnEE/v-deo.html
21:20 - Frederick Jackson Turner, the Frontier Thesis: ua-cam.com/video/oa5M0B7sb5U/v-deo.html
23:05 - WILSOOOON! ua-cam.com/play/PLjnwpaclU4wXmCcEx0vfIim_jFMkgtLmS.html
23:30 - Birth of a Nation (1915): ua-cam.com/video/zzsvOBjRXew/v-deo.html
24:10 - Vigilantism etymology: ua-cam.com/video/RfceCvtEMJ4/v-deo.html
24:50 - Frederick Jackson Turner, the Frontier Thesis: ua-cam.com/video/oa5M0B7sb5U/v-deo.html
27:40 - Rise of the New Left: ua-cam.com/video/fLxPUcZKFuY/v-deo.html
28:15 - Orthodoxy, Revisionism, and Post-revisionism: ua-cam.com/video/xQGs3eYxGRw/v-deo.html
30:10 - When the Western Genre Perished: ua-cam.com/video/x6zD1sjnClM/v-deo.html
*errata*
I mispronounced _tenet_ as _tenant_ a few times
15:52 - Memphis Riots of 1866 not 68 (thx deathdog1392)
--a few people have complained about what I said about the 1619 Project. Here is a post explaining what those complaints are ignoring: www.reddit.com/r/CynicalHistory/comments/gdoe1h/heres_the_thing_with_the_1619_project/
*Bibliography*
Douglas Blackmon, _Slavery by Another Name: The Re-Enslavement of Black Americans from the Civil War to World War II_ (New York: Anchor Books, 2008). amzn.to/2zWOT64
William J. Cooper, _We Have the War Upon Us: The Onset of the Civil War, November 1860 - April 1861_ (New York: Vintage Books, 2011). amzn.to/2T8tIFP
David Davis, _Inhuman Bondage: The Rise and Fall of Slavery in the New World_ (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2006). amzn.to/2KRoJpM
Eric Foner, _Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877,_ new ed. (1988; New York: Perennial Classics, 2002). amzn.to/34lFOhq
Gary Gallagher and Alan T. Nolan, _The Myth of the Lost Cause and Civil War History_ (Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 2000): ebook. amzn.to/2A7nxKy
Stanley Harrold, _Border War: Fighting over Slavery before the Civil War_ (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2010). amzn.to/2xbEKSp
David Oshinsky, _Worse than Slavery: Parchman Farm and the Ordeal of Jim Crow Justice_ (New York: Free Press Paperbacks, 1997). amzn.to/2udhA8Q
Elaine Frantz Parsons, _Ku-Klux: The Birth of the Klan during Reconstruction_ (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2015). amzn.to/2uSkmov
ed. David Prior, _Reconstruction in a Globalizing World_ (New York: Fordham University Press, 2018), 121-144. amzn.to/2ztpwGK
David M. Potter, _The Impending Crisis: America Before the Civil War, 1848-1861,_ Reprint (1976; New York: Harper Perennial, 2011). amzn.to/3aeYy5q
Heather Richardson, “Reconstruction and the Nation,” in _A Companion to the Civil War and Reconstruction,_ edited by Lacy K. Ford (New York: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011), ebook, 540-582/924.
Charles Royster, _The Destructive War: William Tecumseh Sherman, Stonewall Jackson, and the Americans,_ New Ed. (1991; New York: Vintage Civil War Library, 1993). amzn.to/39mL6wb
Margaret M. Storey, “The Military and Reconstruction, 1862-77,” in _A Companion to American Military History, Volume II,_ edited by James C. Bradford (New York: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010), 640-649.
eds. Joan Waugh and Gary W. Gallagher, _Wars Within a War: Controversy and Conflict Over the American Civil War_ (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2009). amzn.to/2UO7biu
_The War of the Rebellion: A compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies_ (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1882).
@@lilboyblue3000 Don't buy that argument. The Corwin Amendment was a proposed amendment to the Constitution designed by Northern lawmakers as a last ditch compromise to avoid war. Basically, if it had been ratified, it would have indefinitely prohibited the federal government from legally interfering with the practice of slavery in the states *where it existed at the time* (remember that, it's important). The South almost uniformly rejected the amendment and it was not ratified.
So the Lost Cause line is "If the war was really about slavery, why didn't the South just take the deal?" This is highly misleading. Southern states seceded not just to preserve slavery, *but to expand it* to the territories. That had been their aim for decades. They feared that if new slave states were not admitted to the Union, they would be overwhelmed in government by an huge Republican majority.
The Corwin Amendment wasn't the North folding to Southern demands. It was one last attempt at a compromise before the shit really hit the fan, and it directly pertained to the primary reason for secession - slavery.
Fuck UA-cam
@@CynicalHistorian The revolutionary Karl Marx observed, “The new world has never achieved a greater triumph than by this demonstration that, given its social and political organisation, ordinary people can achieve feats which only the heroes could achieve in the old world.”
The South: starts the war by attacking Fort Sumter. Also the South: Calls the war the War of Northern Aggression.
@@yankeeintensifies hahah the comment was deleted
And their victim mentality lasts to this day.
@@benweir987 oh god, they are so desperate to be victim. It's almost like they're victim of victim mentality.
It was the war of northern aggression......
After the southern aggression
@@dannyray3955 No it was not. The South fired first. The South left the union because they wanted to preserve slavery. You are either intentionally dishonest or brainwashed.
Anyone who dislikes Woodrow Wilson is a friend of mine. Well done.
Ya the good thing
That piece of $h!t...the race game is holding humanity back from our extraordinary potential. We gotta be 10,000 years behind by now.
I hate Wilson so much
help me figure out why..
Bold of you to say I have friends
Fun fact: The various declarations of secession talked so much about slavery that they utterly exhausted the South's stockpile of the word "slavery" to the point where their history schoolbooks have to strictly ration it to this day.
😂😂😂
While anti-slavery Lincoln was lukewarn on emancipation. The fact 7 of the 11 Confederate States seceded before he was inaugurated should be a sign. Not to mention it was the CSA who shot at Fort Sumter first should be another sign at who was the aggressor.
@@SouthernGentleman Grant's wife inherited two slaves from her slave owning family and he freed them. The US Constitution only had a provision to ban import of new slaves while the Confederate Constitution had an entire article on slavery including no restrictions on the right to own slaves and if the CSA got new territory slavery would be legal there.
@@SEAZNDragon Slavery also was not a profitable business. Food, clothing and Shelter for Slaves that complied with the few rules there were cost so much, that the only part of a slaveholding plantation in any size but the largest ones, that brought profits was raising new slaves to sell on the market. Which meant the slaveholders NEEDED slavery to expand to new states that got admitted tot he union or they would be broke in one or two generations. THAT was what drove them off. They hoped once the CSA was established they either could take over much of the unorganized West of the USA too and establish slavery to save them for another 50 years or they might even make a try at Mexico to do the same there. That it would run into an economical wall anyway, just a few years later seems to never have passed their minds.
On the other hand that also means that once the slaves were freed most only were able to get employed to starvation wages on their former plantations now as hired labor... which is the part of Cypher's "myth" where it goes uncomfortably to a good number of slaves DID have it better before they were freed as nobody saw a need to pay them well enough to have a similar or better standing than before. It caused the large scale resettlement to the north in areas like Chicago or Detroit, New York or Washington that created the mostly black cities there that now are held up as symbols for mismanaged cities (ignoring the manifold reasons for that, reducing it in a racist way to "it's only the skincolor"). But many of the landowners that now had lost their slaves had not much of a chance as they did not have money to pay better either. A lot of slave owners were anything but stinking rich themselves and as i wrote before, the only part really throwing off profits for most slave businesses was selling "more" slaves, where should it therefore come from when they now didn't even have slaves to sell?
Southern Gentleman through his wife’s estate. Also, EVERY constitution mentions slavery, and states it as it’s reason for leaving
Speaking as a southerner with multiple ancestors who fought for the Confederacy, I can tell you how alluring the Lost Cause myth is. We southerners are a fiercely proud people, and it's far easier to bury your head in the sand and tell yourself that actually the Confederacy was cool than it is to accept that your ancestors fought for something monstrous, both during the war and during the Jim Crow era. This is especially true when so much of the Southern identity is tangled up in the Civil War and slavery. I fervently hope that we can start to accept the past, and in so doing let go of it and focus on who we want to be in the future.
speak for yourself buddy, someone are proud of what we fought for; freedom, honor and God
@@pantsedjuniorhayseed4816 That's an odd way to describe fighting to preserve slavery forever.
@@pantsedjuniorhayseed4816
Freedom: The slaver army that seceded after the democratic election of an anti-slavery president... fighting for freedom? What a joke.
Honor: Many of the soldiers of the slaver army renounced their oaths to the Constitution, and attacked United States soldiers. And they did this to enslave black people forever. Their dishonor is eternal. That's why their monuments are being taken down, and will continue to be.
God: The only religion under attack, was their worship of an oppressive socioeconomic hierarchy.
@@pantsedjuniorhayseed4816 that's what every soldier would like to think they fight for, never admitting it's for money, oppression or because they've been brainwashed
@@pantsedjuniorhayseed4816 It was about people wanting to own other people as a piece property. Stop lying to yourself.
"Never argue with a fool. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
-Mark Twain
"Those who can make you believe absurdities,
can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
As a friend once sayed to plato:
Speak clearly plato. do not dance around the issue and awnser the question your self for once. Proof you truely are the most wice of greece.
-plato"s republic
(Not english, sorry for grammer)
@@CynicalHistorian "I love lamp." -Brick Tamland
@@CynicalHistorian The more quotes i hear from voltaire the more it makes me want to read his works.
Wrestling idiots can be fun if you have the right mood.
This was a very balanced analysis.
@@Zederok You clearly didn't watch the whole thing.
Michael O'Donnell don’t make me come back down there rebel
Nicolas Noisette states under the protection of a more perfect union
agreed.
Donaldson give me money
Honestly, you have a Confederate battle flag in the background in the art. That's all UA-cam sees.
That gives judging a book by its cover a new meaning. Judging a video by its damn thumbnail
You mean the traitor flag?
@@Darkvega2k7 from the british perspective the stars and stripes are a traitor flag
@@KohanKilletz Except the 13 colonies had a much more legitimate reason for leaving, and they actually won and became recognized (admittedly with help). The Confederate "states" simply had a temper tantrum to secede and break away over a guy who hadn't even entered the White House yet in order to preserve an immoral institution. So yeah, still a traitor flag. Lol
@@KohanKilletz Yea, they are a non-factor. We were already an established, independent nation well before the civil war. Nice try though.
It’s unfortunate that America follows the Japanese “it didn’t happen” or “not our fault” approach to dark history instead of the German “it happened, we aren’t proud of it but we will teach it” approach.
Which America?
It's truly bizarre, I've been to Japan several times and it seems there's a huge historical gap between the Ido Restoration and the atomic bombs. Japan's inability to acknowledge war crimes is still a huge issue in Asia and the Pacific.
Yeah, it really does depend on who taught you as you were growing up, and whether or not you hold on to your beliefs. It's gotten to the point where certain people have practically deified the Confederacy. What can you say victim mentality may be pathetic, but if used correctly you can manipulate people to agree with you.
See i live in texas, and when i was in school we were taught that the civil war was mainly about slavery, ao idk what schools teach blatent lies.
It really depends on the region of America. The Deep South subscribes to this mentality a lot more because it was there direct ancestors who perpetrated these atrocities
the north won the war, but lost the "reconstruction."
yeah
There are many reasons why the north lost the reconstruction, you can look up the answers
As if it had a chance to succeed. You can’t force someone to think a certain way. Even if today people try
@@kenabbott8585 begone, conspiracy theorist. The video debunks you.
Grant/Sherman didn't go far enough with "total warfare". They wanted a partnership with the south to unite the country after the war. However today southern ignorance is alive and well.
Robert E Lee asked to not have any statues erected in his honor, yet after his death, they did it anyway.
Putting up statues and defaming them is tradition in Europe. It's not homey unless someone has hacked off bits or tried to plaster over them. I never hear any americans defending statues of Stalin.
Lee was an honorable man whose sense of honor bound him to the decisions of dishonorable leaders. In many ways he's a tragic figure.
@@SusCalvin Stalin's subjects tore down his statues after his death.
@@kellygreenii It seems that even in death his wishes were not honored. Tis a shame.
@@alanmcentee3035 They are not Stalin's or Lenin's subjects at that point. Stalin, Lenin and obscure guys like Feliks have been dead for decades by that time in the late 80's. But the people that commission new Lenin statues are there here and now, sending the secret police to monitor people for listening to antisocial capitalist music.
UA-cam’s policy is “we’ll demonetize it if we want to.”
Sounds more like a Nazi style corporation than a social media tool. Sounds like it's time for me to cancel my subscription to UA-cam.
Kissing their ring by beating up on Dixie and Lost Cause theory won't get you back money and merely demeans you.
@@robertjohnson5838 But telling the truth has value in and of itself.
Even Google caves to the Disgusting whine of white conservative grievance. I say we remove food stamps from all red states and let hunger force them to doing their own damned labor! That will fix their evil
They'll demonitize if it's anti-corporate of risks pissing off right wingers. Anyone who even has the faintest appearance of being "left" can't be victims of "cancel culture".
As someone who grew up in both of the Carolinas, my favorite response to all those who claimed “the Civil War was really about states rights” was always:
“Yes, you’re right, it was absolutely about the Confederate State’s right to own slaves.”
Exactly. Well done. MRHB.
The Civil War was fought over slavery, yes, that part cannot be denied. But we have to also remember that it wasn't just about the South wanting to keep slaves. The main ideology for the South wasn't necessarily about keeping slaves, but rather expanding slavery to new territories. The reason why we have the Lost Cause Myth is because when the South lost the Civil War they desperately needed to work on their image. So they told the narrative that the Civil War was about State's Rights to keep it vague. After the Civil War their one true objective was to change everyone's mind on what the Civil War was fought over, to make themselves look like the victims to a tyrannical government threatening their rights.
@@ZairokPhoen Kinda like how Jan 6th is being retold in different versions until each person finds a version they accept as their own personal truth.
@@ZairokPhoen That states' rights argument is the same kind of nonsense as neo nazis use when they want to justify WW2 as Germany's "legitimate defense" against communism. What other "state right" than slavery was ever in question?!
In point of fact, it was about the right of the CSA to EXPAND slavery.
I really appreciate and respect the notion of "It's important to understand something even if you dislike it and it's bad, because you need to understand a thing if you want to effectively fight it." Dismissing things doesn't help anyone. Thanks for making this.
“give the devil his due”
I feel like that's something that people need to understand with the Founding Fathers cuz I'm seeing too many people take the fact that most of them were slave owners and running with it, all while at the same time refusing to look at anything else about them.
@@ragingshibe That's sad.
It seems like nuance is a lost art these days. People are unwilling to acknowledge any truth may exist in a view they disagree with. In my experience, once you get to a moderate level of complexity, very few things are more than 70% true, nor less than 20% true. If you agree with a position less than 100% many will consider you an opponent.
I haven't seen much of the 1619 project but many things about slavery I've read seem to think they need to continuously restate that it was a bad thing. Like anyone who didn't know that would be reading that particular source.
You'll get harassed for wanting to learn facts
How groups deal with their "less than proud" history is actually a fascinating topic within Social psychology. I did my Master's thesis on it and it is shocking to see how much People differ in opinion after being confronted with different historic representations.
As someone who lives in the south and used to live in part of it where that "Less than proud" history was celebrated I can say that many just want to be seen as victims, innocent people who were shoved under the north's boot essentially yet when you speak to them they always talk about how soft and weak the north and if thats true then why did the confederacy fail? Why do many people who wave the Confederate flag speak as if the South never did anything wrong, and some I know supported the idea of "Defending property" without thinking about how the confederacy saw other human beings as property or maybe they do know and are genuinely terrible, but for everyone else in the south we essentially just clown and joke about how backwards and ridiculous their ideals are, its a pretty good way to cope with knowing that people in your state still believe in a silly old ideal that caused a war and only existed for a few years, because my dogs have all lived longer then the confederacy existed
@@THERATSANDTHERATS Its interesting how often lovers who did so.ething awful want to be seen as the victim. Japanese textbooks during world War 2 talk about how awful the atomic bomb was and the devastating effects of it. Meanwhile, most other parts of Asia talk about how Brutal life was under Japanese rule during the time, and the problems that arose once Japan was forced to leave those countries.
@@phabiorules "after" you meant.
it reminds me of an interaction my dad had a few weeks back. he was talking to someone and got to the topic of me studying history at university, and how I was currently studying the Mau Mau Uprising in Kenya and the brutal response it received from the British (i.e. torture of prisoners, over 1 million Kenyans being incarcerated in concentration camps), a very dark and degrading part of my country's history. The guy my dad was talking to had the audacity to say that he thought the Kenyans actually did learn quite a lot from the aftermath, and it "showed them what not to do for the future". Just straight up justified actual war crimes, concentration camps, and colonial atrocity. Oh, by the way, this all happened in the 1950s and 60s. Apparently concentration camps are only bad when European people get imprisoned in them.
@@beedubree2550 This is a pretty common talking point. Liberia is a thing because abolitionists and pro-slavery advocates alike assumed freed slaves would now fair better having lived under "western civilization".
Person: says the word confederacy
UA-cam: I’m about to ruin this mans net income
The good(?) news is that they pay so little that it's barely a loss for most low end youtubers
Person: Makes a video about the Swiss Confederacy
UA-cam: NOOOO ADVERTISERS WILL NOT BE HAPPY WITH THIS, REEEEEEEEEEEEEEe
Another good history UA-cam Channel, 'World War II' week by week with Indy Neidell was demonetised apparently because it included too many mentions of Hitler, Nazis and extermination of Jews, which to UA-cam's monitoring programme implied it was extreme right-wing and Antisemitic, although it is neither of those things. It is just that you can't really produce an accurate history of World War II without mentioning Hitler and his policy towards the Jews. The Channel recorded a video protesting at this that featured a number of cats in case that made it more popular with UA-cam and its advertisers.
GOD BLESS THE ENCLAVE SARGE
@@CaptainApathetic Also Person: But... but what about Native confederacie-
UA-cam: *_screeching, frothing at the mouth_*
I’m an 8th generation descendant of Jefferson Davis. I grew up in California, but went to University in the South. I was shocked to receive a letter for a scholarship for the Sons and Daughters of the Confederacy. Despite them attempting to call me multiple times, I eventually turned it down. (Though the debt I’ll be in for the rest of my life has made me doubt my choices) But I was raised understanding the myths of The Lost Cause, and the reality of the War. It was such a shock to witness the outright denial of historical facts in the South, from the average person, to history professors. Mind boggling stuff.
Based.
God bless you for being educated
Dude, I would’ve taken the money and ran. Lol
@@TheNightWatcher1385 I genuinely considered it, but I would’ve had to go out to Pulaski, TN (birthplace of the KKK) to accept it, even though their headquarters is 35 minutes north in Columbia, because they were having some freshmen sponsorship program conference or something. Either way, it was a no-go for me.
@@thechad4485 Given your heritage perhaps they wanted to use you as a spectacle for clout. Probably for the best you didn’t go.
Historical topics are uncomfortable for most people - especially those attempting to rewrite it.
Or when the real truth emerges.
...especially those whose ancestors are shown in a negative, non-redeeming light.
I have seen more rewriting of history based on primary sources. More like consolidating history and replacing false history.
Dixie daughters🤔
Circular argument.
Living in a small town in VA, I had teachers in HS as recent as the late 90's/early 2000's that called the civil war "The war of Northern Aggression"....Coincidentally, I also had a biology teacher call evolution "the big lie" so.... that school system clearly had a lot of issues.
alt right Christians im mostly right winged and thats just dumb
Fellow small-town Virginian here, I had plenty of teachers like those. However, I also had an amazing U.S History teacher who would take no shit in his class from any aspiring lost causer.
Holy shit. The indians were right about the lies shared in our schools history books. They said to me once, "you have know idea about the real history of your country". You only learn what the school board wants you to learn. Why don't they teach things in school that would actually help people when they get out of school instead of lies?
Well public schools, in most cases, are put together by elected boards, not by education experts. I remember having to have a conversation with my principal for doing a presentation on the Tulsa Massacre in high school, because in 2005 it was a topic still not taught in high schools. Everything was factual, researched and sited, but I had to take an F on the assignment (midterm) because the school board didn't recognize it as "factual history", and had intentionally excluded it from the curriculum. I grew up in Iowa, so it's not just the south either. Every school district basically has a Council of Nicea, choosing what is accurate and what is..."removed", while having no qualifications to do either.
Scary ... I definitely got a "both sides" argument in 8th grade about the Civil War. We had to read "Battle Cry of Freedom" ... I think the intention was to show the complexity of the Civil War but our teacher definitely downplayed slavery in causing the civil war.
As an adult doing my own research it's definitely been all-roads-lead-to-slavery when it comes to causes of the Civil War:
* It's about States' rights --> the state's rights to do what?
* It's about taxes and tariffs --> taxes and tariffs imposed because of what?
* It was about the North imposing its will on the South --> the North's will against what?
It's all about slavery. 🤦♀️
As a Texan, I can't understand why as a Southerner, I need to place my pride upon a Virginian flag used by an army that fought for a racist society. Why can we not craft a new wave of southern pride that focuses upon the good parts of our culture, and recognize the Civil War and the battle flags for what they are. I can both be damn proud that I'm from Texas, and lambast anyone or any imagery that represents actions that would treat another human being with disrespect.
As a white guy from Georgia (the state) I agree with this statement fellow southerner. It's absurd to have pride about having your home state being apart of an old racist movement that was on its own way out of the country regardless.
Austin doesn't count.
@@zacharybunting3637 that's a random comment, and I think the capital of the state counts lol. I'm not from there, but I mean, it's the capital so....
@@grahamcochran5400
Although that might be because here in Texas we have more of an independent or rebellious history than the rest of the south. For example, a Mississippian cant look back to an independent Mississippian Republic to draw pride from In the way Texas can.
Southerners are quick to anger , guns ..scary fact...I don't know why..Maybe got in their genes already
As a southerner from Georgia I have to say that I feel like now the civil war is a lot more accurately portrait, but I did have a few extremely enthusiastic history buff teachers. I had one teacher that was really focused on the human casualties of war and way humans were treated and he went really into detail about the cruelty of slavery. As someone that lives in a city with a civil war battlefield park, I can say that there is definitely plenty of confederate idolization within the south.
As a Millennial in a GA high school in the early 2000's, I still had a US History teacher that focused her course through the lens of Lost Cause rhetoric. We even had a couple of classes dedicated to listening to presentations from the Daughters of the Confederacy, trying to invite us to "explore our heritage" at their facilities and exhibits after school as well. I can't speak directly to the local curriculum quality for the last decade or so, but LC was definitely skewing portrayals of the Civil War in my neck of the woods as recent as Obama's presidency.
@@PhantasmXYZI go to school in Northern Mississippi my black teacher pushes the lost cause lol
Saw a confederate flag bumper sticker that read “history of my culture, not history of hate.”
@@russscott6907 Which actually, thru the truth lense, "history is record of reality," as in the term; "History Will Judge!" We learn thru what we see, hear, what our interactions w others tell us, as we all form new history. All that must shift our thinking on how we saw history yrs prior. Before Civil Rts changes, our entire nation thru a lense of 'jim crow,' whatever our views were, It was part of our nation's reality. Because of changes cmg from people's activism a new historic lense has come into being that values lives of African Americans, Natives, women, immigrants more visibility previous generations, where white supremacy controled academia/media even more.
@@russscott6907 Strange that some people don’t understand that the two aren’t mutually exclusive.
How dare you talk about this issue that I have no idea what it actually is about!
The video isn't even out yet I am already outraged at your incompetence to present a thorough and unbiased argument.
I will have to unsubscribe from such a heinous channel.
Good day sire!
I SAID GOOD DAY!!!!!!
Good day to You as well!
Good day to you too! :D
Not funny
@@quanbrooklynkid7776 Nah, it's kinda funny.
Pfft, unbiased
Even as a child, I could not figure out how States Rights can outweigh Human Rights.
They didn’t say shit like states rights until 10 years after they lost.
They needed a solid reason to fight. Rather than “preventing servile insurrection” (like it really was)
And instead they said states rights and independence to seek more sympathetic and make more sense.
“Because why would soldiers fight for slavery? Slavery is bad! There is no way my grandpappy fought for slaves. He never even owned slaves, he was defending his rights!”
That’s basically how that goes
In the 1850s states rights were the rights slave owners had, like bringing your slaves up north to free states without losing ownership of their slaves and the right for slave catchers to go north and recapture slaves and bring them back south under the fugitive slave act which turned out to be a disaster as for you had slave catchers rounding up free and former enslaved people alike indiscriminately off the pretense of being antislavery. Slavery was not just a thing that resided in the antebellum south but effected the whole country. From our modern point of view states rights looks like a person's want to fight for one's state and to stand out as the individual and not get swarmed by the collective which are key american values so I see how people become convinced by the lost cause narrative but you must not fall into this trap and actually peer into the eyes of the people who fought for slavery at the time and imagine being in their shoes, they fought for what most wars in history have been waged for.. wealth.
I can only share what I remember from school, 80s child from Ohio here. The South attacked federal installations. The confederate constitution legalized slavery. And they lost.
So they are traitors, and instigators. They were ignorant to equal rights. And they were the losing side. Just saying.
A lot of this sounds like romanticized history to make lost cause sound valiant instead of vulgar.
@paul lennon politics enslave people. Listen to a man who has enough money to run for any position higher than city council, and you're listening to a man who had never lived in your community. Think for yourself and stop worrying about Republicans and Democrats and you will see they are just trying to bend you to the compliancy. They don't want to help anyone who can't help them stay on power.
@paul lennon are you kidding? Have you checked out their last and current candidates for president? If you read that I was a Democrat from any of my statements, your not reading what I wrote, just seeing what you want.
When you have Obama continuing policy such as no tap warrants and Trump spending his time doing, well, whatever he's doing, why would you trust either party?
People who know nothing about the Civil War think it's about slavery. People who know a little about the Civil War think it's about states rights. And people who know a lot about the Civil War know it was about states rights to own slaves
That is the first thing my history teacher told us about the civil war.
Great round about way to say the civil war was to keep slavery in place
@@jaranarm considering your wording I assume you’re republican yourself.
So to change your words to be more accurate, Lincoln(the radical left) vs stuck in the past pro slavery Jefferson Davis(conservative)
@@littlemacisunderrated412 they always try to stick to the party names so they can tacitly say the modern dems were the ones that liked slavery, trying their best to forget that party name is irrelevant compared to party values, conservatives now just like back then were always like this, they hold nearly all the same values just in a different form. Look at the history, look who supports them, see what they fight against.
Actually, it was about the *expansion* of slavery into the territories. Northerners were more than willing to entrench rights of slaveowners to keep their current holdings, just not expand them. But the South didn't want to just keep it.
As someone who grew up in the north till around 11 years old. Who then moved to Georgia to finish out high school, i was amazed at how the south taught the civil war. They consistently taught it as state rights (would not go into detail about it). I question my teacher at the time who said that slavery was of course part of it but that it was mostly about these state rights. This was a stark contrast to how the north taught me about the civil war, who said it was about slavery. I am currently 17 years old. It wasn't until this year when my Ap us history teacher who dismissed this myth of it being about state rights by asking "state rights over what?". It's incredibly interesting to me in how the south teaches it completely different.
If you ever look at the forms of government in the traitor states, they were universally far more injurious of states rights than existed under the US Constitution. For example the confederate constitution proclaimed slavery a permanent institution and severely limited individual states' tarriff and tax gatering rights. And most of the flashpoints leading up to the civil war was southerners using the Federal Government to deny states rights to protect slavery.
Yeah, in the US you still have the South, which is kinda patriotic, even nationalist, and the other states with their culturmarxist, farliberal madness
The war on Northern Aggression. Lol
I'm 55, and I'm disappointed to hear that they are STILL teaching the Civil War wrong in today's Southern schools.
Grab a clue America.
I can tell you it wasn't about slavery as terrible as it was .
26:00 - Can confirm. My AP US History teacher in high school refused to teach the AP version of the Civil War, instead only referring to it as the War of Northern Aggression and telling us that slavery was nothing more than a footnote in the reasons for war. Literally had a confederate flag in class and everything. Worst teacher I ever had, anyone wanting to pass the AP exam basically had to teach themselves actual history.
Why did he AP History if he wasn’t going to teach the curriculum.
I think someone should have complained to the school.
@@adamabramson6094 commenting on a 3 month old post with your brain dead opinion is weird. Hope you have a shitty racist life.
I bet that teacher got his degree from the Univeristy of American Samoa
@@demi-femme4821 I’m guessing he did not want to teach history, but what he sees as history. That his history is the true, advanced history and not the one “pushed” by schools.
@@KobyOwen Why you gotta diss the land crabs like that 🦀😭
When abusers loose their power over the abused and fear violent retribution, it just proves how horrible they were.
Loose rhymes with Goose. Always.
Yep. Good point. The sad thing is that African Americans never wanted revenge in spite of all that was done to them. All they want is equality.
To loose one's power is radically different than to lose one's power.
@@EpochUnlocked Or used their power to basically remake slavery in the form of the sharecropper system.
Exactly! Why would you fear retribution if you treated people well?!🤷🏽♀️
Imagine your nation having a history shorter then the Wii U
Fortnite lasted longer than them lmfao
Fortnite might last longer than any of us.
I'll take the Wii U any day. I can't play Lego City Undercover on the South.
@@lego007guym8 or the best Mario game
South Vietnam lasted longer than our Southern states
Considering what Britain was like during the Industrial Revolution, Thornwell might have had a point about British workers, but saying you treat your slaves better than how British industrialists treat their workers is kind of like being the nicest guy in prison.
Even if accurate, it doesn't address the underlying issue that a person cannot be property. That statement should not be a defense of slavery, but an indictment of the British industrialists.
@Harry Paul Well, sadly as an industrialist you basically could do all those things - usually contract at the time afforded you very little in the way of rights as a worker - and there was basically nothing workers could do (hell it's still pretty difficult to complain when your boss harasses you in the workplace), but yes the thing that marks out slavery is the fact that there isn't even a pretense of rights - I think Eric Daniel summed that up pretty well tbh
@@ericdaniel323 That's kind of where I was going with that.
@@msaoichan yeah I thought so, just adding my $0.02
Well said. I don't understand the mindset of people who twist logic into knots to justify human slavery. If you agree with the concept brutality as being a " relative " trait then the man who only savagely beats a woman must be a "nice guy" in comparison to someone who savagely beats up a woman then rapes her.
Arguing with UA-cam is a lost cause. The greed and evil is always part of their motivation.
Jim Bucket: Ever since the “VOX ad-apocalypse”, virtually everything even remotely controversial gets demonetized whether it is or not.
@@CG87343 you mean the crowder-pocalypse. Since steven crowder was the reason it started. Because he kept being homophobic and racist towards Carlos maza. :)
@@Lycaon1765 That's not even remotely what he was doing. Leave your SJW nonsense out of here.
@@eodyn7 "That's not even remotely what he was doing."
Lmao. He clearly was being homophobic unless perhaps you're just another one of his biased sycophantic fanboys who isn't interested in arguing in good faith and has a wingnut narrative to feed.
*eSs JaY dOuBlE u'S!!!*
EDIT: Just checked your channel list, seeing you subscribed to the likes of PragerU, Black Pigeon Speaks, and of course failed comedian Crowder along with other despicable POS's. Yep, I was right on the money! 😁
@False Feathers rustled? Lmao ok sure. No it's not the "voxpocalypse" because vox isn't at fault. It was crowder being homophobic and racist that started it. Calling it the voxpocalypse is revisionist and puts the blame on carlos, which serves the bigoted narrative that crowder did nothing wrong.
Maybe learn to be more creative, since you seem to only have 1 thing you know how to say.
You really ought to do a video on the "Black Wall Street" riots. That whole time period of American history i's rarely talked about.
Black Wall Street/Tulsa Massacre
💯
GeekShero more of a genocide
First learned about that from Watchmen, i honestly could not at first believe that it was a real event.
@@CompagnonDeMisere25 Not even the first or the last time its happened.
My ex partner a former History Professor had as the final question of the final exam: "What was the cause of the Civil War? It was an essay question. You could answer it any way you like but if you did not mention slavery as the cause or one of the causes, you failed the whole class, no questions asked.
Based and awesome.
@@Ozzy08018 Thank you
I was a sophomore in high school (Huntington Beach High School) in 1963 and I had a bitter argument with my history teacher who wanted to tell (correct) me that it was a mistaken notion that the Civil War was the product over the struggle to end slavery. He insisted that it was about "states rights". I never gave in and neither did he. He attempted to chastise me for "influencing other, less intelligent students". And this guy wasn't even a Southerner. He was a supporter of Barry Goldwater.
I'm a senior in highschool this year and when I was in 10th grade I took ap us history and I was taught the lost cause and my teacher would get mad when she would say the civil war was about states rights and I would ask a states right to what? We often got into several arguements that ended in her saying the soldiers didnt fight for slavery and me saying most germans didnt fight just to murder the Jews and her just saying your wrong
I wish i can have that type of discussion, but fortunately my history teachers were smart so there's no need for me to argue with them. Kudos for you to talk like that to your history teacher
Wyatt Walker, download the Georgia State Declaration of Secession, and have your teacher read it out loud in class. That will shut her up.
glad I wasn't the only one fighting the narrative in high school class rooms. although I've got a step beyond. I'm becoming a history teacher so I can go into high-schools and hopefully keep kids from learning this dribble.
@@Jarod-vg9wq no
Good for you! I had the opposite experience, there were 1 or 2 kids who argued that the south was just fighting for states rights and my history teacher shut that down real quick!
“A state’s right to do what?”
No one likes to answer that one when I ask it.
People could argue their right to many things, I dont disagree with you, I just want our side to use better arguments
@Nathan Bedford Forrest And the root thing those states rights were claimed to be protecting?
Slavery. Some nice rights you got there.
Precisely. Always gets the southrons.....the states right to own SLAVES. Period.
@Nathan Bedford Forrest It's hilarious how you clearly didn't watch the video.
When they say state rights it was a debate about which has more power Federal law or State Law
“Nonono Cypher don’t you understand those guidelines are for the big boys? Now go play in your sandbox like a good lad”
-UA-cam probably
@Stand Watie Damn, you're old now!
When I first came to the USA and I was learning US history, I had a teacher who called the Civil War “The War of Northern Aggression” and I assumed it was just an alternative name for the conflict 😬 I’m glad someone corrected me before I went around saying that
Yea a lot of southerners (i assume it was southerners sorry if my assumption was wrong) like to downplay the fact the confederates attacked first
Well, the war was started because the north was using tyrannical legislation against the southern states and started arming themselves then in self defense the southern states succeeded only to be destroyed by the north.
@@beavercontrol1743 Technically they responded to a foreign power refusing to leave their territory. Not defending the war, but secession wasn’t against the constitution at the time.
@@TheNightWatcher1385 technically no, the lincoln administration only started raising troops to fight the south after the south fired on fort Sumte. fort Sumter was built on a sandbar in charlston harbour which South Carolina had sold to the US Federal government in 1836. The CSA did not own any part of fort sumter and other similar forts in the south. Also prior to the attack on fort sumter there were many raids on federal armouries and forts across the south. It is incorrect to claim that the CSA was "just responding to [the USA] refusing to leave their territory."
@@TheNightWatcher1385 Regarding the legality of secession Madison wrote in a letter to Hamiilton "The Constitution requires an adoption in toto, and forever." The straight text of the constitution neither explicitly allows for secession nor forbids it. There are clauses that could be argued forbid secession for example; Article 6 Section 2 which was interpreted very early on to mean that federal law outweighs state law. This interpretation implies that a state seceeding, without federal approval, for any reason can be overruled by the federal government. This is all rendered moot by the texas v white decision of 1869 which determined broadly that secession was illegal.
When I was in high school in Virginia in the late early 80's we were shown a film that was titled "Why we still whistle Dixie". To my teacher's credit he explained that he was required by state law to show the film and used the rest of the class to debunk it.
that sound like fascinating pedogogy
So he managed to teach:
1- the fallacies of the lost cause
2- tell you how real propaganda works
Using a propaganda flick he was forced by law to show you.
The guy sounds awesome.
Yeah my teacher in Georgia was apparently required to teach the other causes of the civil war and wasn’t allowed to say slavery was what caused the war but rather things like tariffs culture and state rights. He made his view point pretty clear even if he couldn’t flat out say “slavery was the main cause of the war”
@Derrick Barnes
Same and I don't remember that film either.
@Derrick Barnes
Hey same here and I grew up in Lexington Virginia if you know anything about Lexington.
13:40 "He wanted to destroy his own hometown" That's a very pop punk mood, tbh,
the first hawthorne heights song
Billy Joe Jackson.
“If the confederacy was not about slavery, then someone should go back in time and tell the confederacy that.”
-John Oliver
Imagine not ignoring John Oliver.
@October's very own OVO if you don’t vote for me you ain’t black
@@mackinblack It was a slow and gradual change. Policies shifted after the New Deal, the civil rights movement, and other periods where the Democrats took more socially liberal actions, and became the modern democrat party of today. The Republicans, as the opposition to the Democrats, went in the opposite direction and have ended up as the social conservative party. Democrats aren't flying confederate flags. Republicans are. 120 years ago, the Democrats would and the Republicans would have never. Also, you are more than likely a troll is my guess. If you do want to know more about the party switch, I would watch the Knowing Better episode on it.
@@literallyme2071 it's a bit more complicated than "the parties switched" there were racist democrats as late as the 90s.
Only in the last 10 years have they really reached out to minorities. For the last 70 years they moreso cornered the vote
@@jknott1509 I agree but, the Democrats are the more liberal party now. John Oliver shouldn’t be associated with the racists that have been around in the 70/80s.
I am impressed with your video. As a PhD in history I truly believe that truth of our past must be taught: no matter how painful it can be.
I do believe our founding documents are wonderful ideals but are ideals we have never truly followed. As a Southerner, a liberal, and a historian the truth is important so we can never repeat our past sins.
I grew up in Mississippi, in a city famous for having the final residence of Jefferson Davis, the president of the CSA. I can tell you with 100% certainty that people here and the south more broadly believe whole heartedly in the Lost Cause myth and treat it as non negotiable fact. Younger generations are much less likely to hold it, but almost everyone 30+ believe it because it’s what they’ve always been told. I had teachers in public school who even taught us the lost cause as history and consciously de-emphasized slavery as a major factor in the civil war. Hell, when I was a kid even I believed it, because it’s what was taught to everyone and anyone who disagreed was treated as biased against the south. I only broke out of it when I became interested in history and started researching the subject for myself. The lost cause isn’t just dangerous, it’s extremely pervasive in the south, and educators have a moral mandate to combat it.
Didn't he live in Liverpool for a time? If he'd stayed longer he might have met the Beatles. on a serious note, the South is still hopelessly fucked up.
maybe not hopelessly
Apparently Mrs Davis was not as stubborn about this, and expressed doubts about these things later on in life.
Aren’t these the same people who profoundly say that they are Americans?
Fellow Mississippian and it’s exhausting when trying to explain anything historical to older generation when they denounce anything that they weren’t taught in school
So that great lecture was not labeled "education" but recently I saw a flat-earth video that was?
UA-cam needs to get their shit together.
UA-cam gives the job to a robot, and tries to make sure their robot isn't leaked to their competitors. It doesn't need to be a perfect robot, it just needs to work well enough and better/cheaper than people trying to review the torrent of nonsense.
Karl Gustafsson that’s robotcism 😂😂
@@tylerklovic3330 It becomes more apparent when UA-cam and others face local languages. If UA-cam doesn't have enough people who can filter stuff in english, how many do you think they have that can check norwegian or burmese stuff.
UA-cam is a blatantly right-wing company that panders to Republican troglodytes to maintain unbridled crony capitalism. Same goes for pretty much all social media and every other corporation out there.
@@scabbarae Right now I think UA-cam just wants to avoid work. It wants to sell ads and consumer data and let people watch fun videos, and not get saddled with a position as the world's largest movie publisher and moderator service. Same with facebook, twitter and other services. Doing nothing has been their default.
I was a kid in the 90s and a teenager in the 00s; they taught us about “The War Of Northern Aggression”......
@@kennethmcclain3907 you’re stupid, certain southern schools literally teach it as the war of northern aggression
@@kennethmcclain3907 literally in the town my hunting land is in... there is a monument paid for by a local - it’s a big flag and a bunch of plagues talking about Lincoln’s tax war ....
Now is it as common as it used to be - no, atleast in cities or decent size towns
I was never taught that, but weirdly I was taught that Woodrow Wilson was a great president.
It was the War Southern Aggression, The south secdeed from the Union illegal, secession was unconstitutional. The South fired on Fort Sumter SC on April 12,1861 at 4:30 am.
So you are in your thirties now? And you grew up with this crap? Amazing.
Neo confederates today:
"It wAs ThE waR OF NortHeRn AgReSsioN!!!!"
"StOp tryInG to DesTroY oUr HeritAgE!!!!"
Actual confederates in 1861:
"We're fighting for slavery."
"We know."
couldn't be more true. its hilarious how beyond ignorant they are when the people at the time where incredibly open with their views. no one was hiding it. the vice president of the confederacy had a whole talk about how slavery was their right by god himself
Lmao
It doesn't need to be a choice between heritage or hate, not when it's so easy for it to be both, neatly conjoined.
As someone who grew up in the south the reconstruction era always felt like something that was a mistake to me even though I didn’t exactly know why. This changed when I took AP US history in Junior year and learned what Reconstruction actually was and then I essentially realized that there wasn’t exactly a reason to hate it (Also Uncle Tom’s Cabin was to me portrayed as a racist book by those who talked about it occasionally, so there’s another lie I was fed growing up)
I was taught the lost cause myth in my high school in Utah, and that was as recent as 2016. Granted, it was a charter school and the teacher was a conspiracy nut, but it’s still very much alive today. My parents buy into it too.
Charter schools are not required to follow federal regulation.. charter schools were literally invented to stop interracial integration.
@@andrewstar21 Coming from a country where every type of education is regulated by the government and homeschooling is not even allowed, that just sounds hella mad. Schools to teach your kids revised history and keep them away from "brown people". Disgusting!
In Utah?! Wow!
@@rippspeck that is the truth though…Private Religion, and charter schools were NOT INVENTED until After Brown v Board of education
Oh, god, I know what that's like. It's so annoying when I listen to my parents talk about the Civil War and they always talk about how it wasn't about slavery. Ugh. I love my parents and all, but they can just be so, so ignorant about that kind of stuff.
Just an unimportant side note: technically, ‘Song of the South’ doesn’t depict master-slave relations since it’s set after the Civil War, and shows former master-former slave relations (all happy and wonderful, of course, no hard feelings!).
Many slaves did return to their former masters to work for wages, Of course slavery was an evil practice obviously I'm just pointing out that this happened.
And the abuse continued. If my memory serves correctly my grandmother's family were sharecroppers and I was told that they were practically forced to stay ever they were and suffer any abuse inflicted.
It was about the pleasure of being a slave, like Gone with the wind, romantic view of slavery wasn't it great
@@jordana.6874 That would be because the Jim Crow South made it nearly impossible for them to go anywhere, plus there's always the psychology of "the devil you know"...
@@AndrewAMartin There some stories of freed slave wandering aimlessly on the Southern roads.
Downplaying slavery and ignoring the elephant in the room is why we continue to this issue today. A form of cultural schizophrenia.
Heh, "ignoring the *elephant* in the room"
sounds like those slavery problems are easier to handle than confusions between gun ranges and schools..
Can't fix stupid, not gonna try🤣
The elephant wasn't in the room but on the street when locals asked the drunken bellboy to be its shepherd and when the animal acted as a wild animal would, the Southerners lynched it. During the Spanish flu no less.
The war of northern aggression
The South: FIRES THE FIRST SHOT OF THE WAR
@@goinggodmode9463 What he's saying is the Confederates fired first by attacking Fort Sumter, hence starting the war.
@@goinggodmode9463 The Confederacy was also seizing multiple US forts in the months leading up to Fort Sumter.
@@michaelmoody3737 is property sacred again in USA? Federla Forts not private forts in "confscum" idiocracies
Yeah most of the forts were within Confederate territory that the union refused to give up
@@PredatoryEra I suppose most of those who damn the Confederacy would agree that Gitmo rightly belongs to Cuba, that we hold it in opposition to the tyrannical Castro government.
Fun fact: All four actors who played the Duke family were born in Union states.
You mean those actors weren't actually the exact thing they were playing!!? Like, they were acting and not real, like ACTors?? WE'VE BEEN LIED TO!!
Oh shit
It wasn’t real?? Really??
Thanks Forrest, you dope
@@liamtuttle2707 🤯
@@TheAhirishman it was supposed to be Fun, sorry you didn't get it brainiac
Long story short: *WWWWWIIIIILLLLLSSSSSOOOOONNNNN!!!!!!*
Pretty much sums all the BS this man caused in the US
Impulsive men kill Hitler
Thoughtful men kill Wilson
Joesolo13 or at the very least stopped him from being president
I hate to be that fellow , but Hitler was a socialist only in name. None of the Nazis were.
@@DrCruel Explain how. I'm not being disingenuous, I'm actually curious. I know fascism has pseudo socialistic tendencies because fascism was weird but that's about all I know l.
"I never heard of any other cause of the quarrel than slavery.” -Confederate General James Longstreet
The Lost Cause?
More like,
“Checkmate, Lincolnites!”
The program where we annihilate academic historical consensus in favor of TRUE HISTORY
God I love that video
Christian Thomas
“Video”?
You know there’s three of them, right?
If not, you’re welcome!
HOW DARE YOU TALK ABOUT THE GENERAL! I love each and every video.
@Stonewall Jackson Diverse lmao
Most of the soldiers of the Confederacy were white, who were trying to protect their state's rights. That being, of course, being the right to own slaves.
There were Native Americans who fought, on the Confederate side, but they fought only because they thought that it would protect their tribes from extermination, by the Americans. Just like the Natives, on the Union side, who thought that they would keep their sovereignty by proving their loyalty. Of course, even if the CSA had won the Civil War, it's not like the Confederacy would have expanded anyway, there were even plans to.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_of_the_Golden_Circle
"In fact, some of its strongest membership was in Indiana"
Me..listening to this while in Indiana
"Fuck"
I'm in Indiana also and only recently found out that the towns Whiteland and Whitestown (both near Indy) were named by the KKK.
WTF.
@@lancepeltier1081 I live near there. Couple that with Martinsville and New Pal
I'm in Indiana. My great grandpa Pete was a ranking member in the KKK.
Fuck.
Plenty of lynchings back in the day too.
Lmbo!🤣
I appreciate your nuance about the Confederate battle flag’s use today, but I’ll see it flown all the time where I am in rural Michigan, in the heart of Yankee country. It doesn’t have anything to do with their heritage; they have to know what they’re doing by flying it.
People flew it in Maine when I lived there. Doesn't get more yankee than that.
I live in rural Iowa and I see that flag fairly often as well. I even know some of the people who fly it and can say with the upmost certainty they have no ties to the south. It is crazy on the 4th when I see people with the Confederate flag flying from their trucks, and my so called “patriot” friends using every excuse possible to try and justify it.
Can confirm this about Michigan. I live in the suburban part of it and I see people who've spent their entire lives in Mt Clemens and Clinton Township trying to claim that flag as their heritage. Wonder what part of the heritage they find so appealing that it makes them want to cosplay as these idiots?
Those traitors are dishonoring their ancestors who fought against the Confederacy. It’s sick.
@@keirfarnum6811it’s simple, they HATE black Americans more than they can every LOVE Their ancestors who fought FOR the Union….
I'm a high school history teacher who just moved from California to Texas. I'm dreading it. I'm not quite sure how to structure my lesson plans and the history of the myth into a curriculum that will still find me employed after a while. Terrible situation for educators who want to teach candid, unapologetic, and sometimes uncomfortable truth.
As far as I can tell, Texas public education has long separated itself from the Lost Cause. Their 2007 state textbook explicitly denounced the previous years for including it (hence why I showed that textbook in the video). In terms of navigating the recent anti-history, anti-abortion, and anti-LGBT laws; yeah it's really atrocious. But you can at least take comfort in the fact that all Texan history teachers are having similar trouble with that. Best of luck
go back you f'ed your state now you wan't f up ours? well's was a HUGE racist..perhaps you learned that in school? Texans are 10 times more worried about people coming from califoria then from mexico hehehe
As a Black man raised in the South, when I learned of this I started to question my whole formal education💯
@Pitch Notes It's ironic that under the Confederate constitution that the states had no rights. All power was with the central government. Read it for yourself.
As a black man from Virginia and going to a segregated school. I was taught the evils of slavery and the system that perpetrated it. And I began to read about it own my own. And I guess you can say it stimulated my desire to learn all history. And slavery and the treatment of native Americans was little better than the Nazis treatment of the Jews in Nazi Germany. But it makes people here uncomfortable to remember their past. And until we as Americans and all of us can look back especially the evils perpetrated on just about all people of color and whites who didn't have the same hate in their hearts. That White's from every part of this country, not all but a sizeable majority killed blacks for pure sport and entertainment. And I'm betting that there's a lot of individuals who go looking for their relatives in heaven are going to be disappointed to find them in hell.
@@markcrampton5549 I think I remember that Georgia tried to secede from the confederacy for that very reason, but I can't find proof of that anywhere
@@philipfreeman2863 "not all but a sizeable majority killed blacks for pure sport and entertainment."
The fact that you actually believe this nonsense is quite possibly going to allow you to perpetuate the worst sort of sadism on the people you hate in the very near future if political trends continue as they are, all in the name of anti-hatred. The sad thing is that you won't even be able to recognize it even as you are doing it.
@@connor3284 would it make you feel better if he’d said that blacks were killed, raped, dehumanized and abused because whites considered them little more than livestock?
Hey man, not all Wilsons are the same!
Are you saying you couldn't make for a good villain in a movie? LOL
Naw brother, like you, I am on the side of good!
@@nomad155 that's true. I wonder how much brooding classes are these days! LOL
I wish instead of Wilsooooon it was "Woodroooooooow" as I have a buddy named that who (rightfully) fucking loathes Wilson.
While the “so you’re the little lady that started this Great War” sounds good, I’ve read that it’s actually apocryphal. I don’t know for sure though.
as with any quote attributed to someone decades after the fact, we'll never know. look at the citation to see why
@@itsblitz4437 It is unknown, but Lincoln was known for making hyperbolic statements like this about other events and persons.
@@75sklein and he loved puns. Like, alot.
For an interesting illustration of whether or not slavery was really a big deal to the generals, we can look at major-general Patrick Cleburne. Noting that the South was losing the war and needed more manpower, he made a proposal: promise emancipation to blacks who fought for the confederacy. He justified this idea saying
"It is said that slavery is all we are fighting for, and if we give it up we give up all. Even if this were true, which we deny, slavery is not all our enemies are fighting for. It is merely the pretense to establish sectional superiority and a more centralized form of government, and to deprive us of our rights and liberties."
This was mostly met with polite silence with some outraged, but no support. Making the proposal also got him blackballed from promotions in the army. So I guess they didn't deny it as much as he thought.
Another famous Southerner said that having black soldiers who were competent would be contrary to what they all had said about that inferior race.
That's because Cleburne was far from a typical confederate. An Irish nationalist exiled after the supression of the Young Ireland movement, Cleburne joined theConfederate army to help protect his friends and neighbours (one of a tiny few to do so) and subsequently rose through the ranks. He was one of a vanishingly small number of confederate leaders who didn't care about slavery.
"Knowing thine enemy means knowing their myths."
--Cypher, providing a quote superseding Sun Tzu's famous line "Know thine enemy."
Han and the Confederacy both shot first!
Emily Curewitz: Thank you. This comment made my day. 😂😂
@James Longstreet wrong. Harper's ferry was done by private citizens against the federal government. The first shots were fired by cadets from the Citadel Military Academy on the steamship, Star of the West, which was resupplying Union troops. The Anaconda plan took place after both the attack on the Star of the West and Fort Sumter. The first violence of the occupation of Maryland took place 4 days after the attack on the Star of the West. I stand by my comment en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_of_the_West en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland_in_the_American_Civil_War
how dare you. I am a totally unbiased citizen and I only get my facts from reputable sources. I can tell you right now that Han in fact did not shoot first! confederacy totally did tho lol
@@Johnsmosby33 Lincoln did nothing of the sort. The plantation owners wanted to continue owning slaves, and feared they have actually have to pay thier labor, and they considered Lincoln to be a threat. Secession was done on their own accord
@James Longstreet Sumter was a US base threatened by rebels. By your logic, your saying it's ok if a left wing group trying to secede from the Union takes a naval base in California. The federal government was completely justified in protecting their military base. I still stand by my comment
well you see Mr. Historian let me learn you a wee bit bout this here war of northern aggression. You see the war was in fact about about states rights specifically the states rights to remove the rights of certain people but states rights none the less. And secondly it was in fact a war of northern aggression you see they got very aggressive after we invade and took over multiple american military armories and forts located in the south. And of course the carpet baggers were trying to destroy and punish the south with their reconstruction as they made it so much harder to you know own slaves and all with all their amendments and laws and what not.
it's scary how good of a parody of lost causer comment this is, lol
Seriously stop twisting the history. There is no such thing as states rights. To own a slave was not a right it was privilege. That war was all about southern white privilege. But also to be clear - north didn't want to free slaves in the south because they like black people. Actually they wanted to free slaves in the south because northern farmers couldn't compete with southern farmers. Northern farmers had more expenses because they had to pay their workers. Slavery was illegal in the north. If you or anyone else reading this thinks that southern farmers had to feed their slaves so they had expenses too - well you all are missing one crucial point. In the north workers who worked in the fields (manual work) had to be payed by their employers and also fed by their employers. Remember two things that makes people civilized. You never can have right to take someone's rights and you can never build your freedom by taking freedom from others.
@@safetsabani7919 whoosh
@@safetsabani7919 read the whole comment before replying
@Safet Sabani you must not be from the south because that was straight sarcasm and I could even understand it in text lmao
Served with many Southern boys in the USMC and Navy. As a first-generation American, I never heard of the Lost Cause until my contact with Southerners in the service.
They are not "neutral" parties. They have a huge amount of self-esteem and group-esteem tied up in this issue. The Lost Cause first arose to serve the psychological needs of white Southerners. It still serves that same purpose today.
I find the American idea of citizenship baffling. The United States is not a real country.
@@aethylwulfeiii6502 What do you call it ?
Southerners here understand that slavery and racism was a factor in the Civil War but diminishes that factor in favor or economic and state rights. It's a bit like saying the Civil rights movement was solely about voting rights while ignoring racism.
My American History teachers in college didn't deny that the US Civil War was chiefly about slavery, but one of the more memorable ones did bring up the North-South cultural and economic differences (noting that these divisions also went East-West), and cautioned that we shouldn't assume that all Northerners or their political leaders were 100% motivated by a desire to free the slaves - in his opinion they were far more motivated by trying to preserve the Union. To say there weren't profiteers aka "carpetbaggers" during Reconstruction would be also inaccurate.
Honestly, this ran counter to everything I'd been taught before, where the Civil War was 101% about slavery, the virtuous leaders of the North were only motivated by their hatred of slavery, and that the South deserved everything it got.
These same History profs also taught that Woodrow Wilson was one of the worst human beings, ever. So there's that.
Keep in mind the decade leading up to the Civil War starts with the onerous Fugitive Slave Act. This changed the dialogue in the Free States from "oh sure, it'd be nice if there weren't slavery but..." to "A thousand-dollar fine if I harbor or aide in the freeing of a slave? That would be three years of wages. That's more than the cost of slaves or horses! Jerks." Slave-owners were expanding their power over the states without slavery. Laissez-faire robber barons of the modern age would be wise to learn what happened.
...but yeah, Wilson was a dick on so many occasions in so many innovative ways. If it weren't for his post-influenza stroke, who knows what horrors he would've augmented.
Bronson Kaahui except for those pesky letters northern soldiers wrote home decrying slavery and the need to get rid of it...
@@azraelbatosi There were definitely abolitionists and a movement in the North, I am not denying that not was my History Prof. Do I personally think that ending slavery was a cause worthy of war? Yes. But the more you dig into the motivations of leaders, it seems that ending slavery was not their primary motivation, it was far more about preserving the Union.
@Bronson Kaahui Yes, I gave the concept presented in this video a fair hearing, watching others that made the same points - because it was NOT what I was taught. The more thoughtful College Profs I had were the only ones who presented the idea that Lincoln wasn't motivated primarily by freeing the slaves, he was much more about preserving the Union and I recall that his speeches and writings made this clear. Later on, revisionist history looks at the actions after the War and declares the passage of the Emancipation Proclamation the primary or even the sole motivator - when in fact abolitionist sentiment wasn't that widespread or mainstream, as you've stated.
It would be one thing if someone (a strawman perhaps) stated that the Civil War had NOTHING at all to do with slavery - indeed that would be incorrect. But I disagree with the video that this is a widespread belief or that it is taught everywhere, and I imagine that daring to teach that the Civil War had some additional causes is being lumped in with outright Confederate Apologetics.
What kind of teachers did you have....I guess I've been lucky I've always had pragmatic objective history teachers.
I was raised immersed in this. Deeply. Once when we were playing Civil War when I was living in Mississippi, my dad got mad and told me I shouldn't pretend to be a Yankee. I don't really know if I can ever fully escape it, but I've been trying to at least learn more.
@Mimi EF This is the information age! I grew up in the North, and I had a history teacher who believed all the Lost Cause Propaganda 😞 My real history education came with books, C Span, and University lectures ( free on line )
The fa t u tried is good enough. Most choose willingly to be a sheep
That’s all you can do. Just try to learn more. That’s what any of us can do.
Like the replies state, you're already LEAGUES above these confederate apologist whackjobs by even TRYING in the first place! You already win! Now you just have to keep on working at it, and you'll be fine and glorious! Its been five months by now, so I assume you might be closer to fully cleansing your mind of the propaganda by now.
to be fair, have you seen Yankees? They think iced tea shouldn't have 3 cups of sugar in it. *shudders*
As somebody who grew up in a southern state I didnt know the civil war was about slavery until the 5th grade where I found it online. It was all about how bad slavery was when we were talking about the revolutionary war and the settlers but as soon as the civil war became a topic it was all state rights and how sad brother was against brother.
@@anatomicalx9355 It was about states rights.... to own slaves
@@anatomicalx9355 articles of secession > you
@@anatomicalx9355 Yeah. Tarfiel is right. Its all over their documents of secession, journals, and what have you that slavery was front and center. Calling it 'states rights' just makes it go down easier then the truth.
@@anatomicalx9355 Believe as you like. A close reading of the old Confederates' words doesn't support states rights as the primary point of contention, except as a fig leaf to justify slavery.
@@anatomicalx9355 You can keep ignoring reality all you want, but the Confederates themselves would laugh at you saying they weren't fighting to keep the institution of slavery.
Very impressive essay. I admire how you managed to both condemn the consiparacy, but also maintain nuance.
"Let that past continually remind us that we are better now" Great quote, good analysis!
#PostMalone *has entered the chat*
That's not always true though. Some folks were more honorable and less hateful in the 50s than some alive today. It all depends on the individual. Plus, what do WE do? Import slave-made Chinese goods. Are we really much better than 19th Century folks?
I'm European and not fluent in this topic. This video did an excellent job of bringing me one huge step closer to grasping US history. Thank you!
No it didn't
@@doug814 stfu, yes it does. Knowing this kind of thing helps the rest of the world comprehend why the US is in such sorry shape because of the 45th stirring up desperate southerners who cant stand the idea of living in a less-racist country than they have now. It helps the rest of the world to understand to place most of their anger and frustration with the people who are supporting these confederate values and not to hate the entire country.
@@AdamTheCoop1 I mean ... using southerner diminishes the extent ....and acts as if it’s a geographic thing. Also under cuts the position of the south as a hot bed for civil rights heros and icons.
Racism at least online comes largely from the Midwest. Where diversity is rarer so they deal with minorities rarely and they went to trump in droves. I mean the massive amount of racists going to these events ... are from the northern part of the US.
Especially looking at militia groups.. Michigan is a huge hot bed for that.
The south isn’t the bastion it used to be, it’s one of the most diverse area of the union and it’s solely realizing that. I mean look at Georgia in 2020 or how Alabama got a Democrat senator for the first time in 25 years because the African American community realized they have a voice now and they have always had the numbers but they didn’t realize it or weren’t allowed to realize it but now they do.
This is a national issue not geographic
@@AdamTheCoop1 or we can look at modern election stats
Alabama and Mississippi voted 40% for Hillary and joe
While West Virginia , the least confederate state ever - voted less than 30% dem.. it’s a country wide issue not geographic.
Iowa used to be dem now, it’s +10 trump same with Ohio. While North Carolina will go blue likely in the next 10 years.
That’s not even mention that a lot of those northern states barely went blue.
It’s a nation wide issue so I don’t think reducing it to - dumb sad southern are the reason a New Yorker was able to sweep the nation in 2016 - is correct
@@tysmith9309 i didnt bother reading those long winded responses, if you have so much to say please go ahead and join your brethren and make your own channel to share your message with like minded people
THE ONLY TRUE CONFEDERATE FLAG 🏳️
Isn't that the French flag?
@@zombieoverlord5173 the most successful army in history would like to know your location
@@kirbi4266 France was great, but ‘best in history’ is a bit of a stretch
Fucking savage burn on traitors
@@pbjman5809 Most successful doesn't mean the best, Niall Ferguson was I believe the historian who posited that the French army is overall the most succesful army in the world based on their rate of wars won versus wars lost. According to him, out of 169 battles fought since 387BC, they have won 109, lost 49 and drawn 10. Which is by far the highest rate in the world, although it's fair to point out that France really wasn't a think until Charlemagne and even then it's not actual France as we'd see it today, and that battles won is not an exact measure for success in war due to the simple fact that the small war was at least as important as the much, much more rare large field battles. Still the French Army from it's founding in 1445 has seen much more success overall than any other army in the world, despite having existed for nearly 600 years, which also makes it one of the oldest standing armies in the world, their 1st Infantry Regiment is also one of the oldest, if not THE oldest currently serving military unit, having been formed in 1479.
You can't tell me the war wasn't about slavery when slavery was the backbone of the southern economy.
"..better lives than the British working class"
Shows a picture of Copenhagen
Way to focus on the substance of the video
@@SKa-tt9nm Indeed, and the discourse goes ahead like "if the author doesn't pay attention to this detail, are there other details that are removed, or changed to fit the narrative?" Example: the youtuber "Dark Skies" (I think that's the name) makes short history films with *lots* of historical footage. * Any footage*. German AA-crew on Malta. Germans started bombing Malta - showing B17's. (Well, it *could* have been KG200). This only works for an blissfully uneducated (I.e. 'Murican') audience, as others will indeed stumble on these fact errors. Stumbling stones that are easily removed by the author not having this need for snappy image changes. ('scuse me, now I'm going out to buy some "paalæg")
@@jonashellsborn7648 If he used other historical footage, that's OK as long as it doesn't impact the writing at all and fits with what he is talking about... Also what "narrative" are you talking about. Also its written "pålegg"
@@dr.vikyll7466 Pålæg, velbekomme..
I don’t understand why there hasn’t been a class action lawsuit against UA-cam. They seem to act without having to explain.
Their platform, their rules. Sucks but it is what it is.
i do wonder if yt could get sued based off of breaking their contract/terms of service themselves. technically they followed all the rules of the terms of services, yet didn't get paid. i think it'll inevitably happen but idk when
Dennis Prager tried, what a shame huh...
It’s not illegal given that it’s a private business, so going to court would be a lost cause
Most times, it's just bots with an algorithm.
About the phrase "lost cause": A newspaper editor in Richmond, Virginia, and an apologist for slavery and secession, published a Confederate history of the Civil War called "The Lost Cause" in 1866.
My 4th grade teacher told us the civil war was about states' rights, not slavery. This was in Phoenix AZ in 1964. I didn't buy it. I thought to myself "wasn't the right they were fighting for the right to own slaves"?
Denying history shows weakness and lack of character.
I trust two people with this stuff
Atun-Shei Films and the cynical historian
Same
No cap
Checkmate, Lincolnite is possibly the best series on history youtube
@@maxwellschmidt235 nope Frozen fiftys man
Sane People: "the civil war was about slavery"
Lost Causers: "hell naw, it was about STATES' RIGHTS!"
Sane People: "but which right were they MOST concerned with preserving?"
Lost Causers: "your mom"
It was about states rights. States right to have slavery.
@@vinnyvin4287 Don't care
@@goofy2126 so basically slavery
no u
See the 10th Amendment for an answer to that.
South: Gets mad about election of abolitionist Lincoln and secedes
North: ...
South: Attacks Fort Sumter
North: Fights back
South: "NoRTherN agRESsion!"
🎯
Don't forget how southern states started seizing Federal depots and munition stores then escorting Federal troops to their state line in the immediate aftermath of just the election, never mind Lincoln's actual inauguration, and that was before the attack on Fort Sumter.
This is an impressive breakdown and you even covered properly their state of mind. This is the perfect video to refer ppl to when asking what lost cause it. 10/10
When I heard "Grand Army of the Republic" first thing that came to mind was star wars, and was very disappointed when I looked at the screen and saw Confederate Flags and medals.
Gotta be careful about those damn Clankers. Watch those wrist rockets!!
Grand Army of the Republic was an abolitionist union veterans organization that allowed black veterans to join at the time. Not confederate.
@@TheJazzax I think it's more on the lines that he believed this was a Star Wars video and instead found an American Civil War video.
The droids weren't fighting to preserve robotic superiority. It was a complicated conflict with many causes. The republic started it with a sneak attack on Geonosis. The droids were simply protecting their factories
"The lost cause was rationale by historians."
Are we the baddies?
Vincon ‘Our badges have skulls on... are we the baddies?’ (Mitchell and Webb german soldiers...)
To me calling the defeat of the South a"Lost Cause' merely means the war was hopeless and the South had no chance of victory. I never knew the 'Lost Cause' was some kind of Southern conspiracy till I saw this video.
As so often, it all depends what you mean by 'Lost Cause'. It might be clearer to use a phrase like 'Confederate nostalgia', as it is undeniable fact implying no positive or negative judgement that the Confederates had a Cause and that they lost, as the Causes of the Royalists in the English Civil War, the 'Whites' in the Russian Civil War or Brutus and Cassius in the Roman Civil War at the end of their Republic may all be called lost causes.
I am not too familiar with american history so I thought the same, who new that in the 21. century with all the books and stuff people still defend slavery
As a non-American, I thought the same thing.
Its cause south didnt have like the union
I've lived most of my 70 years in Florida. In 1991, I lived in Decatur, IL for one year. Often when local folks heard my southern accent they assumed they could safely reveal their racial prejudices...proving to me there's no regional monopoly on racism. However, there is a southern mystique that has no connection with the lost cause myth. Rather, it's rooted in music.
Intersting thing is how many historians talk about the migration of blacks from the South, but not really about the migration of whites to "escape'" civil rights. Some Southerners just couldn't stomach that Jiml Crow didn't reinstate slavery. So my go to assumption would be the people you met are at best second generation Northerners.
Time to roast good old Willy again
WIIIIILLLLSSSOOOONNN!
Dear Cynical Historian, I literally almost busted a gut laughing out loud from 8:30 to 8:54. I taught high school U.S history for 8 years and every so often I'm confronted with this mythology of "states rights" by students and I've always found it amusing. Your illustration with the use of a primary source is priceless lololol. Cheers!
@Laika24102007 so based on my comment, you conclude that I spend my entire scholarly year teaching slavery? And you think that I teach in the United states? And you conclude that I am not engaged in the issues you've raised? Maybe you should stick to watching porn
@Laika24102007 Still trying to figure out how to read?
In other words; History is complicated, we should try to understand it (on its own premises), don't judge the past by the morals of today, but do learn form it to be better for tomorrow?
Yep.
Shhh the guys arguing in the comment section might hear you
@@Vodgepie1 well, um... I was hoping that, actually?
@@KonradSeverinHilstad you're too milk toast to argue with. There's too much platitude in your statement to rile up any discourse. Be a little more edgy, and you'll get the discourse you seek.
@@henrytep8884 well, I guess most people can't appreciate a philosophical statement on the general nature of history, or it's ideal role in society 🤷♂️
"In fact some of it's strongest membership was in Indiana of all places."
Have you been to Indiana? There is a trailer park outside my grandmother's home. I swear I have never in my life seen a higher concentration of confederate flags. And I'm from Texas!
It honestly surprises me not one bit.
I’ve been to Indiana once, the whole state is like an embodiment of a trailer park.
We stopped at one small gas station with two pumps and an overweight man with a white beard and wearing just overalls and a ballcap walked from across the street to the gas station. The same town had a few confederate flags on flagpoles.
I would not feel very safe at all if I wasn’t white, and even though I am white I still got a weird feeling passing through. Made me realize there are worse places to be raised in than IL
I wonder how all those Indiana Regiments that fought for the Union would feel about that.
The Confederate Flag is the First National.
@@homosexualitymydearwatson4109 You must not know that 60% of the original settlers of Indiana are from Southern Scotish Heritage. And anything on this planet with a. "X" IS ALWAYS SCOTLAND!
The unofficial motto for Indiana is "We aren't the south so why are we like this? "
I always love to see supposed "intellectuals" in youtube comments bashing the video creators, calling them uneducated when they, themselves construct their entire argument with worse English than a first grader.
intelecshuals.
It's interesting how, given enough time, humans can romantcise about almost anything.
Edit: Didn't expect this to be so controversial
Like the Roman Empire
Why wouldn't we romanticize the old south? 60% of the military is southern, and most of the boys dying out in the wars, are southern. Heroin and crack are littered through our neighborhood. Suicide is prominent. We don't like the federal government, but state like Arkansas, with a population so low at 3 million, we don't affect squat. California outvotes us 10 times over. We romanticize the Old South cause we feel like back then we had some sort of say, and we weren't dropping like flies.
@@candidstar3526 dude no matter what side of the conflict you side, you have to agree, The war was a bloody mess. I'm Canadian so don't really care to much for rather side.
@@marschallblucher6197 the toll is much heavier for the south, 1/5 white men died. I believe that is the correct number. But if you scaled that up to modern population that would be 6 million, double the population of Arkansas.
@@marschallblucher6197 If it was modern Canada, it'd be about 7 million killed.
As someone raised in the deep south, the vast majority of people I've encountered who claim the confederate flag is just about "heritage" were also racist (some extremely so). I'm sure there may be some who aren't racist at all, but they have been extremely rare, in my personal experience.
My grandfather (who I'm pretty sure was in the Klan, although he never came out and said so) used to love to talk about the "great and noble Ku Klux Klan" and how "it had nothing to do with race", because they went after "sorry folk, black and white". Of course, every single time he would tell a story about the Klan going after some "sorry folk", they were always black. I never once heard him tell a single story about the Klan going after someone who was white, even as he continued to insist that "race didn't matter".
My father and his whole side of the family were fully steeped in the "Lost Cause Myth" and it was the only version of history I ever heard from them. My mother and her side of the family were dirt poor and had the kind of casual racism that most people seemed to have, when they weren't blatantly and angrily racist (like my father's family). They were opposed to slavery and they didn't have the same problem with black people that my dad's family did, but they perpetuated all the prevalent myths about them. So much so, that when my mother was in her late 50s and lived next door to a black woman, she told me (in a shocked voice) how clean the woman's house was and that "she doesn't smell at all!" Without a bone of hate in her body, she just genuinely believed all the crap she'd been told and was shocked to find out it wasn't true. Of course, she didn't wrap herself in the confederate flag or revere their leaders, so she doesn't really count when trying to work out how many confederate apologists aren't racist.
Other people's experiences may be different, but mine was pretty much that if you saw a confederate flag, you saw a racist, even if they claimed the flag had nothing to do with racism.
@@rjtheripper931 You just answered your own question.
@@Dennis-nc3vw Don’t worry, comrade, us pinkos reside in every city, county and state in the Union. If you think there’s somewhere red, conservative, or even reactionary enough for you to hide, well, don’t forget your neighbor can still be just as likely to be a secret pinko as they can a proud member of the KKK.
There were two iterations of the KKK. The original rose during Reconstruction. They overwhelmingly attacked black politicians, black voters and just innocent black people. But they also went after White Republicans and Catholics (particularly Irish immigrants). This first iteration was largely destroyed when many of them were tried and arrested for crimes by the newly created Justice Department (thank, President Ulysses S. Grant for that!). The 2nd iteration came into being some 20-30 years later in the early 1900's. These people did almost exclusively target black people, but also sometimes anyone who wasn't white.
I don't think everyone who flies a Confederate flag is racist, but it's 100% certain that they are ignorant
“Radical republicans trying to shove civil rights down our throats”
“Radical leftists trying to shove LGBTQ rights down our throats”
Reactionary talking points haven’t changed that much.
“Reactionary talking” is actually reactive abuse: when a Narcissist or a toxic person deliberately triggers you into reacting to their abuse. In other words, they do or say something obnoxious, you react, they act innocent and ask you what your problem is.
Humanizing the LGBQT community in Legal Code does not compare to the delusion of perceiving oneself as having the right to own another human being.
When it comes to the topic of History, UA-cam's position ranges widely from lazy to dangerous .
Going off the comments we already have, when this premiers... oh dear it’s going to be fun
My dearest Wilhelmina
Our unit marches for the comment section on the morrow. I fear you shall not hear from me again. Pray for my and watch after the boys.
Southern Gentleman by fun, I meant to read, not to participate in.
@@Joesolo13 I loled - reading that in the style of a Ken Burns documentary, complete with old-timey background music and being read in some famous actor's voice (maybe Kevin Bacon?)
ah, but ... Pray for *me
preview comments always over-represent tomfoolery or worse, as you can see with our southern 'friend' and his token reference to the final months of the confederacy where they finally threw out their racial claptrap in desperation.
A reference desperately trying to paper over the explicit racism in the confederate constitution, in southern society, et cetera. Next to an explicit symbol of modern racism, the battle flag of the army of northern virginia, of course.
Yeah the comment section of this video is just going to be a hell hole I have not looked very far and I've already seen well things both sides making themselves look like idiots but you know that's the usual for most comments sections of anything this is just a topic that will bring it out more
I'm 42 and from Texas.
I remember my dad telling me about Yankees and carpet baggers.
And kind of a "the north sucks" pov.. when I was a kid.
@@GreenBlueWalkthrough Because the South enslaved people. And treated them like cattle. And instituted racial segregation afterwords. Good night, why’s that so hard to grasp?
@ Matthew Chapman Pretty much exactly what the US government did to the natives, no?
@@jimherleva4541 Well yeah, but one evil doesn’t justify another
"It was for states rights!"
"states rights to what"
"...fuck"
Question: If the owner of J.E.B. Stuart's original battle flag gave it to you, what would you do with it?
@@johnharris8191 put it on a museum idk
@@facemcshooty6602It sold "for just" $965,000. Now, what would you love to have it? LOL
This would be like if Germany kept up statues of Hitler and said World War 2 was a lost cause
But lost causers will “NOOO ITS DIFFERENT” because they think the confederacy was a just cause because of how brainwashed they are
I feel like more people in america would do this than in germany. Thats the ironic part
Green Blue And? Is this supposed to be an excuse for all the atrocities committed during slavery for millennia just because most societies did it?
THE ONLY TRUE CONFEDERATE FLAG 🏳️
@@GreenBlueWalkthrough 🤷🏽♂️
"Ive been to Vietnam, Iraq, and Afganistan and I can tell you, this comment section is a million times worse."
@@nomad155 Its just me modifying a quote of Kent Brockman from the Simpsons
Ah, yes, Vietnam. The 20th century Lost Cause for thousands of armchair generals on YT. Did you know the US would have won that war if only hippies and the media had butted out and minded their own business? It's a surprisingly common argument.
*worse
@@antred11 thanks m8
My granddad always warned my mom about the klan in Ohio even though we’re white, because we’re catholic he thought they might try to mess with her
They do hate Catholics
Yeah i lived down the road from the klan. They roasted a hog every year. This was in 2002 i was 10. They didnt know we were catholics when they asked my dad to join. He politely refused. This was in indiana lol
@@Will-tm5bj and yet they dress up like spanish catholic priests. Bunch of hateful idiots.
vinci vedi vici lex talionas Not shocking. Indiana had the biggest klan chapter in the states. They practically owned the Indiana Republican Party in the early 20th century.
My father told me about the Klan coming after Catholics, although he framed it more along the lines of how it’s never discussed, but.....on a separate note, idk too much about early 20th century Indiana politics, but for most of the rest of America in the early 20th century, it wouldn’t be the Republican Party that the Klan would be backing/owning/supporting...
When I was a kid just old enough to appreciate the significance of "Daisy Dukes" I absolutely loved the Dukes of Hazard. It was a much simpler time then and I was just a kid so even though the show was the exact same plot over and over every week sure did love the General Lee. I never saw the flag for anything other than being rebellious and in the 1980's wearing a Confederate Battle Flag on my jacket as a teen in Upstate NY wasn't seen or meant as anything racist it was more about rebelling against all of the neon and pink and plaid clothing that was "preppy" and popular.... I wouldn't wear one now obviously as what the flag represents now and as I have become more aware, but in those days if someone called me a racist because of the patch on my jacket I would have had no idea what they were talking about....
when I was in highschool, I used to see this kid wearing rebel shirts most of the time. I always saw him chatting and being cool with another student who was black.
"what the flag represents now" is what it has always represented. I mean, unless you wore it in 1930.
The flag was a very fashionable patch to have sewn over the holes in our jeans when we were kids in England/Scotland/Ireland/Wales in the 1960s-1980s too,purely because it was a great-looking American graphic,and in fact still is a design classic!!...I don`t think any of us had any clue what it meant at all,and most probably still don`t and couldn`t care less either way.
@@mjh5437 kind of reminds me of when i was a kid, i used to draw swastikas ( I'm mixed and have dark skin) because i thought they looked cool. It wasn't until i was in middle school (maby a grade or 2 earlier) that i fully appreciated what it meant and how terrible the nazis were.
I agree that flying the confederate flag doesn’t immediately make one a racist, but it undoubtedly makes them ignorant