Did Confederate Soldiers FIGHT for SLAVERY?!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 вер 2019
- Episode 2 of Checkmate, Lincolnites! Debunking the Lost Cause myth that Johnny Reb, the common Confederate soldier, didn't fight to preserve the institution of slavery.
Support Atun-Shei Films on Patreon ► / atunsheifilms
Leave a Tip via Paypal ► www.paypal.me/atunsheifilms
Buy Merch ► teespring.com/stores/atun-she...
Official Website ► www.atunsheifilms.com/
wHo WoN tHe DeBaTe???? CoMMeNt BeLoW!!!
Fuck sake I come back to see if you might have taken my advice (assuming my comment came through) that you would stop these political or semi political videos and just do history for fuck sake man
Sir KEK Cry me a fuckin' river
@@Incognito-kt5od History pretty much centers around politics.
Onio fais
Where have you been getting your facts? I’ve been doing my own digging and can’t find anywhere that this war started about slavery more than the south’s longing for freedom. As I understand it, the south decided to break away after “bleeding” Kansas ended in a complete failure. The war was only “made” about slavery to keep Europe mainly England out of the war. England only wanted to continue the export of cotton and tobacco and the union blockade ended all hopes of commerce. Seeing that the union could not fight a war with the south AND England Abe enacted the 13th to deter any chance of foreign involvement.
"No it's not and I say that as a Latino..." is probably the funniest thing I heard today.
I guess he'd know better if he was a 'wise latina?' eh? eh? No? okay....
Well it makes sense to support the confederacy , after losing the mexican american war i can imagine wanting revenge and havin fun seeing killing each other. mueran pendejos mueran ! :v
@@luisgalvan2793 you are aware that many tejanos fought for the independence of Texas right
Shreyas Misra “as a Confederate soldier, I can attest that we did fight to keep slavery”
Confederate apologists: “nuh uh, no you didn’t!”
@Jeremiah Boyd their were a few union soldiers who were latino
"Criticizing the Confederacy is anti American...." Yea... And bashing Nazis is anti german....
Criticizing Stalin is anti-Russian... Or would it count as anti-Georgian?
What's even more delusional is that The Confederate States of America had it's own constitution and formal leadership. It operated just like a foreign government. So how "American" was the Confederacy really
Both are, lol
@@whishiwhooshi5783 Now, communism isn't Russian... 🧐
@@fnfallout5664 and fascism isnt German
“Why would poor people without slavery defend it?”
*sees people who make minimum wage on Facebook outraged over a tax that only effects people who make a $400K salary.”
i love how the actual, number 1, response from most of these people is:
"yeah well, if i get rich one day, i dont want to be paying taxes on it"
@Christian DiPaola The wealthy already took business out of the US. You still believe that trickle down economics works. It does not as proven in the last 30 years. The wealth gap has grown quite large due to tax breaks. So we need to tax them heavily.
@Christian DiPaola I mean, we used to tax the ultra wealthy at 90% and our economy was, quite literally, the greatest in the world. Lots of countries have a high marginal tax rate and their economies still do quite well.
@Christian DiPaola Oof ... man you are _reaching_. Sorry to see you still swallow all the conservative drivel your daddy taught you when you were little. It's sad you never learned to think for yourself.
@Christian DiPaola Simple solution;
If they try to leave confiscate all their property and have them broken on a wheel.
The choice between that and 90% taxes should be a simple one
As a German who definitely has some dead Nazis in my family, I can only wholeheartedly agree with the last sentiment.
My racist and genocidal ass ancestors have nothing to do with me and the only thing I have to do is learn from their mistakes.
I'll always been in awe at how well Germans are able to reconcile with their past you guys truly know how to learn from your mistakes.
@@morsmordre3 ikr? They just say "Ja , we did that bit we can move forward." but here we still have dumbasses who hold onto their "heritage"
@@morsmordre3 general Patton once said before he died it would take a hundred years to de nazifi Germany. So what ended happening was anything related to the nazis was banned, and the countries leaders put an emphasis on learning from their past and trying to reconcile with it. Similar to reconstruction but Done on a national scale and done a little better in my opinion because they let Germany handle a lot of it itself.
@@morsmordre3 Reconstruction went exceedingly well, the standard of living has risen substantially and they don't want to give that up. I guess it's that simple. Ultra-nationalism and radical politics is a sign of a failing nation
Based.
"Hey, didn't I kill you?"
A very strong way to continue a series that was originally a one off
He's like the Lost cause myth, tough to kill
Magically restored to life and got nicer!
@@jeffreygao3956 Like a Confederate timelord
Somehow, the Confederate returned
I expected him to answer "THE SOUTH NEVER DIES!"
Last time I was this early, that evil Fort Sumpter was in the middle of attacking those innocent Confederate cannonballs!
Matthew Coffman lol good one
you idiot the confederate army didn't even yet exist. it was some malitia. so much half assed information every time i give this channel a chance.
@@bubblegumgun3292 ooh man I wonder if you'll appear on the next episode ;) !!
@@matthewcoffman4053 doubt it. I've been here before and all i got snobby comments to just minor points i made.
@@bubblegumgun3292 >Can't spell or capitalize properly.
>Has anime pfp.
>Calls people idiot.
Sureeee buddy, they're the snobby ones.
" socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” -John Steinbeck.
And because it fucking sucks. But what would a little pinko know?
He just didn’t give it enough time.
@@philipmalaby8172 100+ years is not enough time?
@@alreadyblack3341 I’m saying his quote was true but sadly no longer.
@@philipmalaby8172 Granted, thanks for elaborating.
It is absolutely fascinating to me that anyone would call criticism of the C.S.A, a literal belligerent in an American war, "Anti-American."
An American-Civil war
Considering the edicts issued that forgave and pardoned the South for its insurrection, and post-reunification made all casualties during the war American casualties, that's kinda what's going to happen.
if anything criticizing the rebels is more american due to the rebels being traitors to the union
@@kristofevarsson6903 Goes to show how much the Lost Cause perverted not only American history, but continually stunted American culture
@@kristofevarsson6903 They should've beent treated like the Nazis
Poor people going to war to fight for the interests of the rich? What a concept.
rex mundi I know that never happens today.......
That's because they're always convinced that it's also in their interest.
Both sides of the war had abominable garbage where, if you were drafted, you could pay someone to enroll in your place, which enabled the rich to throw money at poor people to throw themselves into meatgrinders like Antietem or Gettysburg where tens of thousands of young men died or were maimed.
It didn’t happen. They went to war to defend their family and home from an invading force.
@@Shanniereb They seceded and they fired first shot, sure that ended up creating an invading force. But through angering a sleeping beast.
My Great Great grandfather, James Turnage was captured at Vicksburg. He was a slave owner from Arkansas. He was wrong.
My Great Great grandfather, Napoleon Spiratos was a pirate and literally raped my Great Great grandmother, morality was much different back then.
@@stefanosspiratos4192 as my father's side is from Poland I am sure there was much of that back in the day as well. All those armies marching through there and all. Dark times. Unfortunately not much has changed really. War is horrific.
John Wiatrak Music yeah war never changes, my Great Great Grandfather was a half Italian half Greek, he fought in the Greek war of independence and he killed a lot of people from what my grandfather said, I don’t condone his actions but life was a much darker place only a 200 years ago
We're not bound by the shortcomings of our ancestors. My children could comb through my life and find some things that would be unpleasantly surprising. What I hope is that they latch onto the positive ways I've impacted their lives and remember me for that.
No person from 150 years ago (and beyond) shares our modern moral compass.
Searching through history in an attempt to name every players faults is a foolish endeavor.
My great great great grandfather was a Fante chieftain who directly participated in the slave trade by selling his captives from tribal raids to English traders along the Gold Coast. He ripped families from their homes and wiped almost 25 different tribes out of the gene pool. I am not proud
I was born and raised in Mississippi and was taught the Lost Cause narrative in school. For many years, I even bought into the myths of the Lost Cause. I don’t anymore. I’m glad for people like you who are willing to challenge the dominating narrative with the truth. Keep up the good work!
and thank you for being bold enough to realize when a narrative given by your teachers, and possibly parents, was non-factual, and having the courage to reconcile with that.
that may seem small, but its not. if it were such a trivial thing, we wouldnt have narratives like the lost cause in the first place.
@@duckheadbob 👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿
Economic disputes between the North and South existed even before the Revolutionary War, and things got even worse after 1828. This mean that the South’s only option was to buy from the North. The tax argument, presented in historical winner historiography was that the north payed more, but that is not the point. The point was THE taxes.
Another thing that is not discussed was about the nature and development of capitalism at that time.
Capitalism cant sustain without exploration. England for example had to dismantle India and Portugal's textile manufacture in order to industrialize. They had colonies for raw materials.
U.S had none of this and the solution was found in his own territory. Expansion and migration. The colonialism period.
U.S was organized in sections, north, south, pacific section they competed with each other.
To put it simple, the exploration of the south, like market reserve, was a must for capitalism development in US.
This lead to a breaking point.
When Lincoln invaded the justification was to "keep the union together".
He broke the pact of America foundation.
Only later after some consideration they found a better justification to this.
@@borali26 what blather!! the "economic" issue was based upon (follow me here) the FACT that wealth in slaves represented MORE than all the rest of US gross natl product at time of the war. you could be an esteemed nazi economist. as w the economist/apologists of the holocast were able to develop advanced economic theories based on exploitation of murdered camp occupants w/out ever mentioning human being were involved, those similar supporters of their "particular institution" invented an entire language defending slavery, while at the same never mentioning the slaves.
@@brucebostick2521You analysing with today's eyes. This is not the way to read history. You have to put yourself in the perspective of that time.
The incipient capitalism in US, at that time, needed to expand and grow and because the country did not had the colonies to explore (like england and france), he found it in his own territory. In the south.
Lincoln never invaded to free slaves, ( killing thousands for a humanitarian cause) but for economical reasons. This is so true; that after the Battle of Antietam he released only the slaves in the south. The north states could keep slavery.
He needed a moral justification for his actions.
Politics are politics.
Slavery are morally condemned today but at that time it wasn't and this is completely different from the nazis. Because the Nazi camps, or British camps in Africa never was morally accepted at their time.
You can ready history with more caution or just follow the mob. Your choice.
I love the last monologue "these long dead racists are not your friends, you have nothing in common with them"
People don't realize that they would hate their great grandpapies if they met them
They would be loved!!!! Your kind is who is hated
@@shanescatsandcannabisfarm2965 probably he would think you as soft affeminate and obnoxious
@@felixbeutin8105 doubtful. He would think your a bitch.
@@shanescatsandcannabisfarm2965 Atleast spell it right
@@felixbeutin8105 your late as hell
The mix of comedy history really does it for me. AMAZING. AS. ALWAYS.
Thanks bud :)
yer fond of me lobster ain't ye?
@Jeremiah Boyd Okay. Yes. You ARE there only to troll.
Jeremiah Boyd found the troll
Unless somebody knows for sure they're great great great granddaddy was in the Civil War you can't say that somebody's great great great granddaddy was in any kind of Civil War so hopefully that guy said so maybe I missed something just because I'm white doesn't mean I had family that fought in the Civil War LOL
How dare you criticise the confederates you American traitor!
Wait...
If you hate the South so much, why don't you secede from this great nation like the uh, the uh, the Communist Northern aggressors!
An Enemy Spy that’s just the thing, the south DID leave this great nation.
@Derick Willis May you please explain further in greater detail how there non-americans filling up? The only case I saw is just a mass migration of Irish coming here because of a recent famine. Other than that, the southern states left because of the main issue of slavery. Taking a person's rights and owning them as a slave seems unpatriotic, if you ask me.
@Warren I just wanted to see the other guy's perspective of their view of this topic. It seems you see both ends of the Civil War. I understand the south wanting to keep slaves due to economic and trade reasons. Was slavery bound to end in the turn of the century?(debatable if you look at other countries facing similar issues to this day). Will racism end in a different scenario of slavery dying off on its own? I disagree because that was an established ideology at that point. So it wouldn't change the public opinion in a century. But other than that you seem to understand on both wings, which you have my respect for that. After all we are human beings with flaws.
@Derick Willis spotted the racist
As a West Virginian I live off confederate tears
In all honesty, you guys have the most badass units
Did you run out of possums?
@@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558 squirrel pie is actually pretty underrated.
We nurse our children on rebel tears here in Maryland
@@gangrenousgandalf2102 Do you really believe in that nonsense that they were "rebels"
As a latino that "I say that as a latino" is the funniest shit that's ever happened
Unrelated, but I love your name dude.
Diablos!! Como "latino" XDD
Them: most of the confederate soldiers didn't own slaves.
Me: yeah... because they couldn't afford them.
Duh...
The cost of a slave was about $40,000 in modern day money. But that $40,000 wasn't like buying a Jeep Cherokee, which would depreciate as soon as you drive it off the lot. Nope. It was like buying a Fully Self Driving Tesla, which actually MADE MONEY FOR YOU. So what would you do with the profits? Buy ANOTHER one, of course? In the meantime, all your neighbors will be jealous. If you were a regular white farmer in the South, and you saw that your neighbor had purchased a slave, and was now sitting on the porch, sipping tea, while you're still out there, in the hot sun, weeding the bean fields, you might aspire to buy a slave yourself, especially when your neighbor teases you for "working so hard" out there.
Well free black men owned slaves across the south and fought for the confederacy too
TaurenTLT How does that make it any less heinous or wrong? But, nice whataboutism you got going on.
@Ebony Panther Two points to that, first the minor one. I really can't imagine a poor southern farmer making money in a way anywhere near similar to how we imagine modern suburbanite wages these days, $370 is still a lot from that perspective.
Secondly and more importantly, this article is sourced from 1863 during the height of the civil war. One of the major reasons the south wanted to expand slavery across the country was because the number of slaves was ever-increasing, and thus depreciating their value as a commodity. This issue is made further a problem during 1863 because this was the time when the South was starting to lose the war, lose ground, and thus dragging down confidence in slaves as a reliable investment. Let's not also forget the war itself having a drastic impact on the stability of the CSA's entire market, not just the slave market. Your own source shows that the prices and trade were fluctuating wildly between each state. As a point of comparison, the average price of a slaves at the very start of the war in 1860 was about $800, and in 1850 it was far far more. So, bottom line this looks like the lowest integer found was taken and is being mistaken for the entire batch to be low-price.
Those"Daughters of the confederacy"sure did a good job at rewriting history.
I like to call them The Divisive Sluts of Treason.
@Wavygeronimo we ll all go down to dixie
Each Dixie boy must understand that he must mind his Uncle Sam
@@generalfred9426 Away, away we'll all go down to dixie
@The Red Menace I wish I was in Baltimore, I'd make secession traitors roar Right away! Come away! Right away! come away! We'll put the traitors all to route, I'll bet my boots we whip 'em out
I have complete sympathy with anyone who feels he oughtn't feel ashamed of anything his ancestors did…as long as he feels he shouldn't feel proud of anything they did.
That’s fair, in a way simply being aware is taking responsibility
Here in the UK many people (usually on the political right) try to distance themselves from the atrocities of the British Empire saying "I can't be accountable for the acts of my ancestors" whilst also proudly boasting "We beat the Nazis in WW2!". (I know it was really the Soviets and Americans who did most of the fighting by the way).
@@olivermoore7020
Don’t count yourselves out so easily. The British landed in Normandy just like the Americans and Canadians did, and North Africa was mostly a British affair.
@@olivermoore7020British air victory over the Luftwaffe in Battle of Britain and British contributions to North Africa campaign, and European campaign shouldn't be downplayed as part of the Allied war effort.
@@guccifer764missing his point, hard
“Syphilis-infested crotch goblin” is going straight in the “best insults” book!
Beat ya to it fella.😏
I’ma tell someone to get eaten by pigmy ants
That confederate got burned harder than Atlanta lol
He got Sherman'd!
As an Atlanta native,i chuckled
LOL!!! Okay.. 4 months later this is still funny!
no wonder it's called HOTlanta
Yes that sure was a brave thing to do.
Use your superior numbers against undefended civilian property.
I was born in the South, and lived here my whole life. However I have never been one to praise the Confederates, or fly a reble flag with the words "The South shall rise again!''. I was born in the United States of America, and not the Southern Confederacy.
@Dustin Stich How?
Dustin Stich hate to break it to you, bud, but Elvis’ music wouldn’t have existed in the Confederacy. Elvis grew up in a poor, predominantly black community, and his music was the result of his attempt to bring music he remembered from his childhood, black music, to a wider audience. In a racist, slaveowning, heavily segregated place like the Confederacy, that wouldn’t have happened.
Based.
@@stefan5573
K
People don' realize Lincoln would have never freed the slaves if the South did not secede from the Union. He used their freedom as an excuse to enroll them to fight for the North. Sadly, after the war was over, freed slaves in the North were treated like dirt and were never given the respect they deserved and were treated no better than freed slaves in the South. The Flag of the USA has a bloody history of Slavery and Genocide, yet we are all told it represent Democracy and Freedom.... BS much?
I love how at 7:35 he looks at the camera and addresses YOU, the viewer, he drops the act and the jokes and is completely serious towards the audience
Let's not forget that hundreds of thousands of Southern men fought for the Union during the Civil War. If you were opposed to slavery and you were living in the South, that was a good option. Every single southern State sent at least one regiment to the Union ranks, and Southern Union soldiers fill many a Union graveyard. So one has to presume that the Southerners that fought against the Union supported slavery, by and large.
That’s how West Virginia came about for example. And in Atun Shei’s video about generals he mentions George Thomas the southern unionist from Virginia.
@@wolftamer5463 - This fact came home to me when I visited Vicksburg battlefield, and realized that the Union graveyards have entire sections for soldiers from southern states.
Not only were there southerners fighting in Union armies (including of course thousands of black men from the South), there were also internal anti-Confederacy revolts and guerillas. By 1865 the Confederacy had lost effective control over much of its territory, even the parts not occupied by the Union armies.
Not true. The highest ranking officer from Maryland in the Union army was a Colonel & a slave owner.
I myself have Virginian Unionists in my family tree.
I had an ancestor who rode in the Alabama cavalry during the Civil War under Forrest. Though my father constantly lauds him and says he didn't own slaves, the fact that all the documents we have refer to him as "the Colonel" makes that point one of suspicion for me.
On a slightly less serious note, I recently learned I've got another ancestor who was in the Indiana cavalry. I get great joy pestering my Arkansas raised father about the "damnyankee" in the family.
Slight issue hoosiers(citizens of the state of indiana Indian was taken) arnt Yankees(we did fight for the union but yankee refers to new England northerners) we are not from new England we Midwesterners are our own thing
@@spartanx9293 You're right but as far as my father's concerned, anyone born north of the Ohio River is a Yankee
@@hemmingwayfan so just Ohio and Canada. Good to know
Ciano Scuro oh wow, I didn’t know he/she was a slave owning racist Confederate soldier. How did you figure that out? Oh? What’s that? You were conflating him/her with his/her ancestors as if they were the same person? Well, I guess that explains it. There are barbaric practices that you are probably fully against that your ancestors may have done, but you don’t know it. This may surprise you to learn, but you are your own person, not your however-many-greats-great-grandfather.
Ciano Scuro I still don’t understand why you think she’s self hating
Can't imagine poor southerners defending the political interests of the elite? They're still doing it today.
Tru dat hahaha😂
@Joshua Heap Absolutely is. Billionaires paying less in taxes so they can pay more and/or get fewer services is literally that.
@Joshua Heap "Education is bad."
@Joshua Heap I get most of my information about the South from what politicians you elect say. Stop electing them.
@@elbruces School isn't the place of smart people
In September of 1963, 50 miles outside of New York, this 7th grader was introduced to our new history teacher. He was interesting, serious and passionate about his subject, giving me a love of history from that time on. He had a colorful and bombastic teaching style but he taught history as an authoritarian.
He asked us, “What was the cause of the civil war?”
To free the slaves. I thought everyone knows that...
He said, “Anyone says that, gets an F for the day. The civil war was fought over state's rights.”
We were 7th grade idiots and the school preferred discipline over the Socratic method. State's rights was a recurring theme for this teacher inserting the concept wherever he could, but he was careful not to mention the word slave. I'm sure he privately thought about it, but it put a wrench in the works.
The terrible thing is that I took it away with me and was persuaded that state's rights was rational, It was not. Something taught to you when your are young is difficult to shake, it takes self honest examination...
Your content is very good, thank you
State's rights is rational when it's applied to minor disagreements over procedure or outcomes, and not over something as brutal as slavery. I think it makes perfect sense for two different states with two different populations to want slightly different civil statutes.
TBH, I'm amazed that anyone's seventh grade teachers doing shit like that managed to actually persuade a single person. I spent my entire pre-adult life in Catholic school being fed nonsense like "The reason humans don't have a breeding season is free will" and "mcdonalds uses worms rather than beef," was punished for arguing against the nonsense, and all it taught me was that I couldn't trust or respect authority figures. It's what hundreds of us learned at the same school. I genuinely cannot form a theory of mind for people who *don't* buck under that kind of yoke.
I'm a northerner who married a southerner. Now while she's not a racist, I have seen her condemn her uncle's racist comments, she still supports the confederacy because she's been taught that the confederacy wasn't racist and "states rights" and all. I do enjoy debunking her arguments for the confederacy pointing it back to racism.
Sounds like a fun marriage dude 😂, hope you guys debate respectfully
Seems like a nice case of future divorce
She is actually correct. It was a state’s rights issue but on a political and economical scale
@RedAlertSteve _ if the "states right" in question was slavery, then yes, she is right. When you read the articles of succession, slavery happened to be the most talked about issue they were succeeding over.
Being a Southerner is a way of life. Y'all gonna side with us soon - Proud Dixie boy.
yes civil war was about state's rights; in particularly the right for states to allow slavery.
Actually, the CSA states felt New York took too strong of a stand and interpretation when it came to States Rights. So the idea they were fighting for States Rights was post-war revisionist propaganda.
@@GetRidOfCivilAssetForfeiture - I figured it was mostly "whatever gets us what we want"; when it was a strong federal government that got them what they wanted, (ie, the Fugitive Slave Act), then it was all about the supremacy of the Union and the ability of the feds to tell states what to do. When the political tides and population densities turned, it was all about distributed government and state's rights.
Except... the constitution of the CSA took that decision out of states hands by mandating slavery to be allowed.
John Doe they kind of had a “big government if it’s our government” mentality. Like establishment Republicans today.
@Emperor - generally speaking, if you have a populist movement, then you say the populist things out loud, and let the subtext be there for everyone who wants to listen to it. As it is, the explicit reason for Succession, according to all the rabble-rousing speeches and legal documents, was slavery. If anything, it would be the other way around: slavery (and white people being inherently superior to black people) was the explicit reason, and the socio-economic benefits for rich people was the subtext.
EDIT - and statistically, something like 25% to 33% of Southerners owned slaves. So, while it was a mark of status, it was very much something the average person could (theoretically) afford or aspire to.
This actually blew a misconception that I'd had for a very long time. I'm no revisionist, but I believed that the poorer men doing the fighting were a lot more distant from the politics of slavery than they apparently were. Seeing this helped to contextualize the origin of the "Lost Cause" myth, without downplaying that they were still people who had other motivations.
The same people complain about jobs being taken by immigrants, you think they would want a free slave to take their job? And possibly have white men picking cotton?
The Southern structure of society was just a ponzi scheme of slavery for poor white men.
Obsecenely Rich Planters: "Help us preserve slavery or you will lose your (much lower but higher than black people's and women's) place in society, and maybe you too can be rich and own slaves!"
It's not new: the Rich in America have been appealing to temporaily embarassed millionares since our founding
I mean, the general population was so butt hurt over the freeing of slaves they were segregating at best or beating and murdering black people at worst for nearly 100 more years. Obviously not every single southerner was out trying to hurt blacks, but it was absolutely an undeniable problem up to and past the civil rights movement. How anyone can think the non slave holding southerners weren’t to some capacity fighting for slavery blows my mind. I mean focusing in on the mindset of a poor southerner back then, ignoring all the racism, probably at the very least did not like the idea of prices for goods going up because you now have to pay for labor on farms.
@@RK-ej1to "Masterless Men: Poor Whites and Slavery in the Antebellum South" is a terrific book on this topic.
@@RK-ej1toso more of a similar outcry towards the Irish and Chinese in the North during this period? You learn something new every day.
"Yeah, here's the thing, and I know you're not gonna want to hear this, but it's time to help people save. With Liberty Mutual-"
Me, on audio only: Wait, what?
What I love about these is that none of these are strawmen because they're all taken from UA-cam comments meaning real people actually have these opinions. That's why this programme is so brilliant and i'm so sad to see it go.
Yeah, if people start calling any form of satire strawmaning show them this.
I want a movie where Stonewall Jackson sat on his horse eating a peach at Antietam, overlooking thousands of dead and dying men. As they wallow in agony on the hellscaped battlefield before him, he takes a juicy bite of said peach and remarks "God has been very kind to us this day." And yeah, that actually happened. He wasn't really a nice guy.
I want a full movie about the regular confederate soldiery at Antietam with a random cutaway to that sometime towards the end.
@Jan Brady about stonewall? What did you expect. He’s a general, not a colonel
@Christopher Strimbu Yeah you can’t really bump Jackson for that when you had Little Mac having breakfast with civilians across the river .
@@elmascapo6588 Shot in the hand , although I can’t say for sure . I learned that from God’s and Generals
😜
Yeah he was described as “cold hearted” by his students at VMI wasn’t he?
The "I say this as a Latino" part made me do a spit take ngl
Sammme. I was not ready.
As a Puerto Rican whos speaks on the behalf of many other Latinos, we revoke is Latino heritage
Wampa That Luke Killed As an African American speaking on behalf of a Latino, this is some hilarious s*~#😂 ..... wth! Lol
@@noaharmstrong861
As a Mexican American, I second the revoking
Isaac Sanchez lmaooo
It’s kinda funny because Johnny reb canonically fought for the confederacy and Billy yank is trying to tell him what happened.
And owned slaves.
A bit late on this but, as an American whose parents were immigrants, where one parent of my father's side was actually an American ex-pat who had a lineage in and of the Confederacy and the Union, history and education of these topics are important. I was born in Virginia. Many who ask where I come from or what I am get confused when I say I'm an American southerner depending on where I am, though often the question itself isn't asked very much if at all. One individual, who was a white scholar, was a bit uneasy when discussing the topic of the Civil War, the South, the Confederacy, and the topic of slavery. I chimed in and said that long down my own lineage on just one path were a family of Confederates, who no doubt acquiesced to the succession, who either owned or fought for slavery, or were of the few that fought for the adventure or simply to protect the individuals they cared about. I can't tell their story as well as some in my family, yet I can say this. Heritage does not define you, your past prior to your birth does not shape you as much as some may think. To hold on to a past that isn't noble nor true of character is a naive and foolish endeavor, being ashamed of it is a sliver of ignorance that you must shed. Rejecting that past isn't the solution, but learning from it is a step in the right direction. It is alright to be the descendent of a Confederate Slave Owner, there are millions in the world with even a sliver of DNA that could be traced to one awful individual or another, I hold no guilt for the suffering that those before me may have caused nor the grief that members of either side of the conflict felt to be put at odds, the emotion of war, conflict, and the politics during and thereafter. Simply accept the fact, learn from it as much as you can, and move on with a higher sense of wisdom and maturity, take with each connection a lesson, and with each lesson a better person has been made. stop
In any case, stop being a dumbass who protects their forefathers for their actions in a world that some can only take as a nightmare or a dream, slavery has happened in this country, is still happening on this planet, and will continue to happen when there are those who make excuses and shortcomings to reach a conclusion based solely on the manipulation of moral principles for selfish gain.
Be Kind. Be Courteous. Have some self respect to your Southern heritage and the good things that came from the South, treat your fellow person as a person, and if not, God bless your soul.
Cheers.
The ending speech you made was really poignant. I feel like a lot of southern revisionists have it in their heads that if the Confederacy was bad that must make them bad, but that's not true. Nobody blames modern day southerners for the war, we all understand that we've all got evil people in our ancestry. The problems for you, however, start when you begin allying yourself with those evil people and identifying with them - that DOES reflect poorly on your character. Much like the Civil War itself, the south continues to blame everyone but themselves for problems and poor judgments that they created for themselves with their own bad and irrational behavior.
@bbonner422 Nazi wrong State Rights 10 th amendment right ... USA
@victor soto Yoruba ...
Wake Up Yoruba Lee and most Christian men. Jesus is right not Africa tribes .
That sentiment applies to Americans with German ancestry as well, in the wake of WW2
I don't blame the confederate soldiers but I do judge them. They knew what they were doin' and what the war was for.
”But criticizing the Confederacy is anti-American?”
”Yes!”
Hahahaha
checkmate, leftists
I have a feeling a lot of people will miss the irony.
@@MarcillaSmith Opposed to the United States, therefore anti-American. They didn't stand for our Republic or our values. That's accurate labeling.
@@MarcillaSmith The labeling is correct but the context is not, especially since the CSA doesn't exist anymore. In fact, the labeling can be true of Central Americans or Canadians but we all know that's not what he meant.
@@MarcillaSmith That's pretty deep. Again, it's about context. 'anti American doesn't necessarily mean what's legally permitted. i.e. eating pizza with a fork is anti-American. I highly doubt the Southern Gentlemen was referring to the First Amendment when he made that statement. In his context, it is anti-American to question the Confederacy as a USA heritage. The irony is that the Confederacy was trying to break away from the USA. Again, context.
"I say that as a latino" Fucking obliterated my sides
He does realize that if your Latino you probably have just as good chance of being lunched as a black man in the south cause they don’t like the colour of our skin lmaoo
@@Were_the_tops Multiple hispanics fought for the Confederacy?
@@Were_the_tops Okay Patrick Bateman.
The line after 3:35 just made me bop my own head because for the longest time I've been trying to wrap my head around confederates and why they would fight for slavery.
Wow, shaving before filming the second part is some commitment! Awesome edit!
Thanks! I think the mustache is a fun look, but my girlfriend hates it, so it's not long for this world :)
true
@@AtunSheiFilms Awww that's too bad. I convinced my bf to grow a beard; he looks much better with it.
"the doomsday prophecy" didn't happen to the point Longstreet completely changed his tune after the war. Switched parties, supported black civil rights and led black militia against the "white league" in the battle of liberty place in New Orleans.
What has history taught us.... people are complicated
Nathan Bedford Forrest, too, although it took him a little longer and he did help the KKK rise to prominence beforehand. Not really sure he redeemed himself, but it is really amazing how people can change. Gives one some hope for the future.
@Novus Ordo We aren't talking about the party switch though?
@@thereyougoagain1280 Pretty sure Forrest only did that to try and save his reputation, it did not come from a place of genuine care
In his memoirs, he defends the cause, but doesn't try to hide what it was. Dickish, but honest.
"Why don't you address John Brown or that genocidal maniac Sherman?"
4 years later: one 30 minute video on Sherman and two 40-minute videos on John Brown
Clearly Johnny Reb was the victor here. Or the viewers. Probably the viewers.
@AtunSheiFilms As a man who grew up in the south who has at least 3 ancestors (That I have found so far, including one was in the Army of Northern Virginia) who served in the Confederate Army, I approve this video.
Noone likes to think of their ancestors as being evil, or at least serving an evil institution, but it's an American reality that we all need to contend with.
The reality is the South fought for independence. The North recognized the southern states' right to continue practicing slavery however long they wanted to, but it refused to recognize their right to self-government. Why don't you want to recognize those basic historical facts?
@@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558 More lost cause hooey. This so-called fight for independence was triggered by the argument over slavery. Yes there were other more general disagreements, just like there are today, but the chief trigger was slavery. In short, the South fought to keep people in bondage to maintain the status quo... More specifically, the southern state governments, pretty much ran by the wealthy planter class, we're worried their bottom line. Even shorter, the south basically threw a temper tantrum because someone they didn't like won the 1860 election. Even though, yes, Lincoln hadn't planned on messing with slavery in the southern states, Just it's further spread. Want proof? Every single one of the southern states, with the exception of Virginia, seceded from the Union even before Lincoln's inauguration.
Also, you would think that if the South really did have a right to secede like you people seem to think they did, they would have put it into their own Constitution which was pretty much identical to the US Constitution minus a few technicalities. Once the state was a member of the Confederacy, it could not secede from the Confederacy without the consent of the other states. A bit odd, no?
@@chrishestand1032 You're even contradicting yourself.
> the South fought to keep people in bondage
> yes, Lincoln hadn't planned on messing with slavery in the southern states, Just it's further spread
So which was it? Did the South wage war "to keep people in bondage" or did the South wage war in order to be able to take slaves to Kansas, Nebraska, etc.?
> Every single one of the southern states, with the exception of Virginia, seceded from the Union even before Lincoln's inauguration.
Not that it matters, but no, that's not even close to true.
> Once the state was a member of the Confederacy, it could not secede from the Confederacy without the consent of the other states.
That's not at all true either. Where do you get that idea? Just some baseless assertion in some stupid video like this?
@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558 Well, information like what I've given you is usually concealed within books.
The preamble of the Confederate Constitution literally states that the sovereign states that have seceded from the United States are forming a "permanent federal government".
Lincoln's inauguration was March 4th, 1861... Every single Confederate state, except Virginia, declared that they were seceding before that date. One of them even did it in late 1860. That was South Carolina.
There were many people who wanted to spread slavery into other parts of the country, this is why places such as Kansas was as violent as it was up to the beginning of the war.
And what I said is not a contradiction at all. That's just what happened. 🤷🏼♂️
@@chrishestand1032 > The preamble of the Confederate Constitution literally states that the sovereign states that have seceded from the United States are forming a "permanent federal government".
And when you hear about "permanent employment" you must likewise take that to mean the employee has no right to quit and the employer has a right to violently subjugate the employee if he tries to quit. Are you so deep in this propaganda that you actually accept these arguments on the basis of no more than that?
> Lincoln's inauguration was March 4th, 1861... Every single Confederate state, except Virginia, declared that they were seceding before that date.
At least you have Lincoln's inauguration date right. Now tell me, just to pick one of the multiple states you're wrong about, when Tennessee seceded.
> And what I said is not a contradiction at all.
So you think it's possible to fight for something that your opponent isn't trying to take away from you and is recognizing your right to keep? How do you figure that?
4:51 is a pretty easy comment to debunk, too. President Lincoln said "I have no intentions to interfere with slavery WHERE IT EXISTS" meaning, in the states that did have it. Lincoln wanted to contain the spread of slavery and he hoped it would die out over time. Love this video, keep up the great work. :)
Yessir
Thanks Mr. Roosevelt
Lincoln was a great politician to his credit. Lincoln certainly claimed that he wouldn't touch slavery for sure, but that just plainly wasn't true. You can tell because of his own actions. He only said that to try and prevent the civil war from happening by being diplomatic; not because he was being sincere.
Lincoln was fiercely abolitionist, had been very public about that for years, and everyone knew it. That was why the Confederates began seceding before Lincoln was even sworn in or was able to do anything as soon as people realized he had won the Presidential vote. It's why in his Presidential Inauguration speech he basically openly told the South that he wouldn't start the civil war, but that they had to. The fact he felt the need to say that shows the political climate of the time that said everyone was expecting a war.
And what did Lincoln do the second he had the chance? Freed Conderate slaves with the Emancipation Proclamation despite it being exetremely non-Constirutional as well as massively violating the rights of the citizens under the cover of wartime measures.
I'm not saying Lincoln was bad for doing so, but pretending that Lincoln wasn't going to exert his political influence to weaken slavery directly or indirectly, in the open or behide closed doors, is just naive. Conderates feared that Lincoln would harm slavery, and they were right to be afraid as history vindicates their fear.
The fact that Lincoln politically maneuvered to be able to claim the moral high ground to more easily begin abolition after the Confederates fired the first shot is a testament to his incredible political skill, not his honesty, since he was stating bold faces lies about his intentions to leave slavery alone like any good politician of his time would have done.
Hell, if you need more proof of this, Lincoln had the Emancipation Proclamation already written and drafted on his desk years before he actually put it into effect. If that doesn't state his true intentions despite whatever came out his mouth than I don't know what does.
@@liarwithagun Lincoln is on the record for being willing to accept slavery in the South if the South would not secede. Abolishing slavery in the South was a long accepted trip wire for secession, and Lincoln did not want to go there. Lincoln remained willing during the war to accept slavery in the South if the South came back, and made such offers to the Confederacy. After numerous rejections , he waited for a Union victory and issued the Proclamation. Lincoln was not an Abolitionist, this was a term for a designated group of people more extremist than him.
@@SandfordSmythe Yes, Lincoln favored union over slavery. I'm not saying he would have forced the emancipation of the slaves if the South wouldn't have seceded or anything. What I'm saying is that two things.
One: Lincoln would have pushed the envelope on slavery as much as he could get away with before it caused rebellion in the South. Maybe he would have tried to repeal the Fugitive Slave Act or something along those lines. I don't mean he would have succeeded, but he would have tried.
Two: The South saw an avowed anti-slavery candidate take the Presidency and rebelled for that reason, having anticipated said President would attempt to weaken the institution of slavery even if he said he wouldn't abolish it outright, combined with their anger that such a President was elected despite their best efforts.
I've been told, multiple times, that being anti confederate is anti American. It boggles my mind.
Well you killed countless atheists during your rind.
@The Red Menace To the Confederate: being anti-confederate IS being 'anti-white'.
It's trash logic but it's theirs.
This guy needs more recognition. He is incredible and makes learning so much fun.
I'm Turkish and didn't have any knowledge about US civil war history but your videos are really entertaining and getting me interested in the civil war. Keep up the good content 👏
haha same
Well then greetings my Turkish friend, and welcome to the wonderful world of American politics!
Didn't ask
True, in north we just call them wokers
I mean, Turkey has a bunch of skeletons in their closet too (something, something, Armenia, something, Kurds). But then again, no country became powerfull by being honest. I'm Dutch, go ask any Indonesian or Surinamer about their history.
Interestingly, there were also many northerners who were very worried about freed slaves coming north and taking jobs away from whites. The past was difficult; the present is not much less so.
@Jim Hope wtf that's just racest shit, so apparently your kind turned the cities to shit long before any African-Americans arrived there.
Yep. That is why white businesses didn't hire black workers after emancipation and why black Americans had to form their own communities. It took nearly a hundred years for white Americans to start accepting black Americans into their communities and even to this day, a lot of white Americans still oppose black Americans living in their community.
@Jim Hope The idea that blacks do not take care of where they live and let it run down is a concept of after the war, and purely preducial.
The problems start with city management which refuses to maintain neighborhoods and building owners who do the same. Everything gets run down and eventually breaks -- as it does. Then you don't repair it as say, oh, look at those blacks in their squalor.
If you did the same thing in a white neighborhood, you would get the same results. The difference is, when whites complain, they are not disregarded with divisive comments about how they are the cause of decay.
Saying that the people of the northern states were afraid of living with blacks is a reflection of your own personal, modern view of the world and not historic at all.
Northerns were afraid of losing their jobs to former slaves who they imagine would be willing to work for almost no play, and thus take jobs away from whites, plus deflate the jobs market
@Jim Hope 1. Racism exists outside the US too.
2. Please explain how Black Wallstreet (Tulsa, Oklahoma before 1921) could have come about, if blacks are as you accuse them.
3. If you want to learn truth you have to be willing to look at different perspectives. There have been many academic studies conducted on the conditions of African-American communities in the US. Poverty is a driving factor. Blacks don't live in squalor because they are black, but because they are impoverished
@Jim Hope In Europe black still experience racism. It's not an American phenominon.
Many blacks in Europe are refugees - not a good starting point for escaping poverty.
I used to buy into the "states rights" thing until I realized it WAS states rights... to own slaves
NeoConfederates: we didn't fight for slavery
Confederates: we didn't?
What do you even mean by fighting for slavery? Do you mean fighting for their independence while continuing to want to keep slaves (just like the 13 states did in 1776)? That's a misleading propaganda phrase if that is what you mean, and if you mean something else, it's almost certainly just a straight up lie with no basis in the historical evidence.
@@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558 oh fuck off. Its right in the constitution. Even if not for slavery the fact remains the racist confederate soldier did not see the black man as his equal nor did he want him free to work beside him as whatever labor there was for common southerners. It makes sense they fought for slave owners. They were still white supremacists and viewed their most poor and low white as better than the best and most rich black.
@@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558 the colonies fought for independence so they could settle land and be free of a power that taxes them without representing them. The south fought to preserve the institution of slavery and to expand it further.
@@LeakyTrees The South didn't fight to preserve slavery any more than the 13 colonies did, which is to say not at all. And the Confederacy wasn't fighting to expand -- were do you think it was trying to expand anyway -- it was fighting for the right to choose its own government. You're not denying that the North wouldn't let the South choose its own government, are you?
@@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558 the southern states seceded because a republican that was against slavery was elected president. They seceded because they felt that the institution of slavery was under threat and they wanted to preserve it. Have you actually read their declarations of secession or are you just talking out of your ass?
50% of Georgia families, in the flatter sections of the states, benefitted from the labor of slaves The banks had loaned money for plantations, equipment and slaves.The railroads and steamboats depended on slave produced freight. The preachers in the Southern churches depended on the tithes of the wealthy folks who gained their money from slavery.
To find out why the secession to preserve slavery was promoted...just follow the money.
Reza Lustig...correct... also, you didn’t have to own 300 slaves; some households owned 1- 2 slaves or 1 to 2 families of slaves.
@@rezalustig6773 The point is not actual ownership but white supremacy that denied them a vote to be voted, to marry and to have any place in society on eye level.
@Saeed B. But that does not mean that people fought for slavery. Now I know that sounds bad but understand that it is exactly the same reason why many people today disapprove of social healthcare.
It is ingrained within Americans that for 1 federal government does not interfere with state policies. And secondly, people love the status quo. To us outside of the US Americans come across as extremely conservative. Politically the Democrats of today are on the right of our rightwing politicians. Conservatism is really big in the US and thinking back to then it only seems logical that people would fight to preserve the status quo.
A southerner would not be keen on thousands of black people entering the job market. Because that is competition. So in a sense, poorer southerners were pro status quo. And honestly, if it comes down to it everyone is the same as that. Look at today in grocery stores when Corona hits. People fight over a pack of toilet paper. You honestly think that anyone facing personal survival would give a shit about anyone else? It didn't matter that the black man was a slave, would kill a white man North of the border just to make sure that I keep what I have was their thinking.
That is why the war itself wasn't necessarily fought over slavery, though slavery is the simmering underlying reason for everything else. And by no means would I diminish the suffering of slaves and ofc they should be freed, no human deserves to be enslaved. But at the end of the line, I doubt anyone really cared about the slaves, to begin with.
It is even more simple. If a plantation owner would be able to work his plantation with machines instead of slaves hed kick them all back on the boat back to Africa. Because at the end of the day he cared about profit. Greed, conservatism & self-preservation are the true reasons for the war.
Didn’t exactly stop there. The north benefited as did the UK and many other countries
@@dgray3771 Oh they fought for white supremacy as they did not want have them as voters nor able to be voted as their representatives, nor able to marry their daughters and sons, nor own land, nor be able to employ whites in their service.
I doubt one person really reassures you that doing these videos changes minds but i can honestly say you changed mine. I started with the gods and generals movie which I'll admit I loved. I was always taught it was about states rights and the confederacy was a noble thing. I figured nothing some random dude on UA-cam could say would change my views so i decided to listen. hearing you give facts i never even knew about and answer longstanding questions honestly helped me swallow my pride and admit I was wrong. So for what it's worth thank you!
tbh, I'm very proud of you, I hope that I can be as open to changing my mind and listening to others who have different points of view as you were here :)
Same honestly, or atleast I thought there was more to it that slavery, but there isnt.
Likewise, as my dad grew up in the time of history revisionism being taught in the 1960's, regarding the "Lost cause", plus his dad learned it growing up in Texas during the 1920's and 30's. Even my black friends growing up thought it was true, we talked about the Confederacy and Union often growing up, about how it was too bad so many were duped into working for the rich men on both sides. This video moved mountains, though I did already read the declarations from the states, I figured that was the upper leadership of the state politicians, being politicians. I didn't know that the journals they wrote were that bad, I had read quite a few myself studying the Civil War and never ran into some of the things Atun Shei mentioned here.
Hell, I did a 20 page thesis on the build up to the Civil War, in regards to political corruption of the parties, and the disregard for individual liberty. I grew up respecting Thomas Jackson, and understanding why he thought it was god who wished him to serve. I even visited the house he died in, Fredericksburg, and the site of both The Wilderness, and Chancelorsville. I wasn't expecting to be ripped out of my safe place, figuring my relatives had been good people fighting for Texas back in the civil war. Apparently they were monsters, and I didn't know that until this, as both my dad and grandad didn't think of it that way. They were local military men, fighting for their state both in world war 1, 2, and Vietnam respectively. None of them were taught that the confederate soldiers were slave friendly, especially given what happened in Texas during the war against Mexico. Sam Houston must have grown a permanent frown when the Civil War started, given he was still alive at that point.
It takes a man to admit when they're wrong. Many people struggle with that.
@@m5a159 If there isn't more to it than slavery, why does everyone that takes the North's side deny all the South's arguments that have nothing to do with slavery, arguments that would still potentially have relevance today, for example, whether the president is justified in using force to prevent a state from seceding, or whether secession was a 10th amendment right of states?
And if there isn't more to it than slavery, why was the motto on the masthead of The Liberator, the abolitionist newspaper "No Union with slaveholders!"? And why did multiple prominent abolitionists defend the right of the southern states to secede? You can disagree with the reasoning of those abolitionists, but it's absurd to say there was no more to it than slavery.
I’ve seen this video at least a dozen times. Your words at the very end at times bring me to tears. My ancestors made huge sums of money on slavery. I need not feel guilty for what they did, but I certainly do not need to idolize these slavers and racists. And I can help share the painful and uncomfortable truths of who they were and why they fought. Thank you.
If you inherited wealth from them, you should donate it to the offspring of the victims of their crimes.
@@thesaurus9226 yep… they had lots of offspring over the centuries and we didn’t inherit anything.
Don't know about you, but my ancestors fought for their homes. Like they did during the Revolution. Only slave I've tracked down was a carpenter who was purchased then freed when he repaid his price by being hired out. He continued to live with the family until purchasing part of the land. It wasn't easy being a freedman in many areas both north and south.
While boys went off to fight for the Confederacy he helped their father protect the farm from deserters from both sides.
Stopping being a cuck and love your ancestors
The end note about racist great grand pappies is particularly well said.
My grandmother was first or second generation Italian American. She lived in New York most of her life. During WWII she worked as a translator in the US censorship office. She spoke English, Italian, French, German, and I believe one or two other languages. At the end of the war she was one of the translators at the Nuremberg trials. She sat in that court room with a hundred or so other people and watched hours of footage depicting the horrors of Germany's concentration camps and death camps.
For the rest of her life, whenever asked about her experience in the war, she would shed a tear for "Those poor Jewish babies." She never forgot the footage of piles of tiny corpses.
She would also pick up her purse and clutch it to her chest anytime a black person would sit next to her on a public bench or bus.
So yeah. Having racist grandparents and great grandparents is the norm, not the exception.
The way she pulls a 180 when a black person is near her when she already knows from footage what racism and hate results in 💀
@@dingkong5034 People are complicated
@@HanHonHonno they aren’t, people are straightforward black and white, you sub human racist vermin.
@@HanHonHonno they aren’t, you sub human racist vermin.
No it isn’t the “ norm” it’s the exception, because not everyone back then was a depraved sub human racist vermin like your hideous grandma. 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
Criticizing people who left America is obviously anti American
Ciano Scuro
America was still a deeply racist country when it was founded, and would be for a long time. However, to say that It was founded “on racism” is a step too far. Saying this implies that the US was founded primarily and expressly to oppress these minorities. This is not true. America was founded on the principles of freedom and democracy. Unfortunately, just like every nation of the time, America remained a product of its time, so this freedom did not initially apply to everyone. Once again, racism was an unfortunate feature of America, not a central purpose of the country.
The founding fathers, by extension, were also products of their time. While they shouldn’t be held totally blameless for their slaveholding, it is worth noting that slave plantations were simply the only way to hold economic power in the southern states.
Overall, I see your point, but calling America a nation built on racism is overkill.
Ciano Scuro obviously the “Thousand Year Reich” and all that wasn’t going to only be based on killing Jews. But what it was based on was the supremacy of the Aryan race. The reason why the Nazis came to power, and their vision for the future, was based on a belief that only the Aryan race could do something that spectacular, and only once the racial hierarchy had been established and racial impurities had been eliminated could that happen. The Nazi regime was fundamentally, at its most basic level, rooted in racism. It was its whole reason for existing. Such is not the case with the US. I have never seen any evidence whatsoever (because there isn’t any) of people in the day talking about the primary if not sole purpose of gaining independence and creating the US was to oppress minorities, because it wasn’t. @The Last Word is completely correct.
Also, in your first comment, you talk about America as some place only for whites, but that non-whites have no place in it. I thought you should know that that makes you sound like a segregationist.
Ciano Scuro do you hear yourself? You’re arguing that the reason why the US was founded was for the sole purpose of oppressing minorities. That the US can’t exist without the oppression of minorities. That if minorities were to one day stop being oppressed, the US would just instantly melt into a puddle like the Wicked Witch of the West. That’s absurd.
Marcilla Smith First of all, no, they weren’t corporations. Some of them were run by corporations for varying periods of time, but even then for the most part the colonies ran themselves. And, even though they were supposed to be profitable, they mostly just traded with the Native Americans and trapped beavers, in the beginning. Second, I was talking about the United States as a single country, not about the origins of particular states, because if we’re going to talk about that, we may as well talk about the states that were founded for the sole purpose of gaining enough votes to end slavery as well. Third, when you say “built on racism,” I don’t really understand what you mean. If you mean what I said in a previous comment, that the US was founded solely for the purpose of racism and can only exist on racism, then that’s simply not true. If you mean something else, please clarify.
Marcilla Smith I’m not sure why you’re counting down, but I’ll reverse the order if you don’t mind.
1. I meant what I said, that I’m not sure exactly what you mean by “built on racism” and I’d like you to clarify. That’s all.
2. I’m honestly not really sure where you’re going with this. But what I’m talking about is the founding of the United States as a nation. While admittedly it took a while and a Civil War to iron out the differences between the states, the United States was founded in 1776, and the United States government as it is was established in 1789. I’m saying that you can find what the US is built on not by looking at how people lived and how they treated each other at the time, but the greater ideals that they were striving towards, that building the US would aid in achieving. And, to me, at least, it’s very clear that those ideals don’t include racism or slavery. You can point out that a lot of states were founded in order to perpetuate racist practices, but by the time of the revolution, most people didn’t want their lives necessarily based around such practices, and they formed a country based on ideals that would have to include everyone at some point, or collapse. In the North particularly, there was an aim to end slavery in the long run. Essentially what I’m saying is that the US was founded on principles of equality, and the practices of slavery and oppression were an inherent contradiction that were eventually realized and eliminated. The US itself is built in opposition to racism, and as long as racism exists it remains on the verge of collapse, as opposed to the other way around.
3. I’m saying that corporations technically were in control of many of the colonies, but those colonies, at least in North America by the time of the revolution, ran themselves as normal societies, not as profit seeking entities.
“why didn’t the north just leave the south in peace”
didn’t
didn’t the south fire first
Yep. The Confederacy started the war. Kind of hard to blame the Union for finishing it.
away down south in the land of traitors, rattlesnakes and alligators, right away, come away, right away, come away.
The North was refusing to remove their forts and troops from Southern territory. So while technically the South fired the first shot, it was at North troops illegally in their territory at that point. So no, the North was not leaving the South in Peace.
Justicar333 Yeeeah but the south declared secession and immediately surrounded a Federal installation with large guns and demanded its surrender, effectively besieging the fort. In addition the CSA was at that point an unrecognized rebellion which had been seizing national armories in several states...
So uh.
South shot first.
@@Justicar333 I wonder why the north left troops in southern territory. Oh maybe it was because the South was rebelling agaisn't the north, and was legally part of the union, and wasn't even a nation. Wow who woulda thunk it. Such a shock indeed! Whats next? Are we gonna find out that the civil war was actaully about slavery, and defintly not about states rights, and tarriffssssssssss??????? iDk.... I guess we'll never know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I am in awe of Atun-Shei's acting and writing and post-production.
Someone cant understand why those in the 1860s would defend "high class ownership of slaves" but defends supply side economics.
See , history can be fun !
Absolutely!
Atun-Shei Films but mu heritage
@@Strawberry-12. Back to the south with you. Just ignore my home state of Texas
Nukclear lol I’m not a southern boy. I’m a northern man
@@Strawberry-12. BACK TO THE SOUTH I SAID!
Just subscribed. Keep up the good work and teach them Confederate wannabes a thing or two about the true history of the American Civil War.
Also, these ‘Checkmate, Lincolnites’ videos are the most funniest and down to earth ones I have seen in a long time.
Thank you so much!
Jeremiah Boyd prevents you from screaming, I guess
Jeremiah Boyd no, I meant it would be difficult to write from the Confederate point of view without either making it funny or feeling really bad about it.
Jeremiah Boyd who on God’s green earth is Kahless?
As a Southerner doing research on family history, I came across the fact that my great-great-aunt owned one slave, and after the end of the war the family went to great lengths to keep him from ever learning about the 13th, 14th, or 15th Amendments, or the Emancipation Proclamation. It wasn't hard, because A- he could not read, B- he was a house slave so they had more or less full control of where he went and who he interacted with, and C- it was a small Texas town and nobody was particularly eager to break the news to him, in fact the entire town apparently was in on it.
It wasn't until the arrival of Federal troops that he was informed of his freedom, and according to dispatches from those soldiers he was apparently the last slave to be freed in the entire county. Said ancestor received no punishment for illegally keeping a slave because of course they didn't.
So yeah, I ain't about to pretend my ancestors were good people.
Whether they were good people or not is entirely beside the point of what was at stake in the war and what divided the North and South that led to and kept the war going.
@@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558 yeah I'm not gonna take the opinion of someone who named themselves after a Confederate general seriously
@@FlashHawk4 Are you capable of thinking in anything but ad hominems?
@@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558 bud, it's not an ad hominem, its how you deliberately chose to represent yourself on a public forum.
@@FlashHawk4 Anything you say about me is an ad hominem.
The concept of a pious christian slave owner is so hard to defend, it’s insane how frequently the south holds to it.
And what about the concept of the Democrat-owned slaves in today's Section Eight Housing?
@@johnharris8191 or the corporate-owned slaves in the prison system? Awful, both.
I have to say, a lot of views that you have argued against I sided with but decided to keep an open mind when watching your videos. Along with that and some more reading I have to say you’ve changed my mind a lot. Really enjoy your content
That's great to hear!
Dip you mind if I ask, what did you change your mind about?
@FEDSJ There are other ways to do that that aren’t celebrating a racist regime
@FEDSJ no not directly however, would you agree for example flying a nazi flag while not celebrating the regime, but to celebrate German heritage and the state of Germany is okay? And if you don't agree do you see how this can be seen as having a ill effect regardless of intent?
@Neo Longist101 why wave anything of Robert e lee? If the confederacy won I wouldn't have any rights
@FEDSJ you are by using the confederate flag. It stands as a symbol for racism and traitors. It will never not and you won't be able to redefine what it stands for.
Yo this gonna be a controversial comment I tend to lean a bit conservative I kinda like the right to owning gUnS I know a lot of our government is flawed such as the health care system both parents work in that field and I will too. but I’m in 100% agreement with you about the confederates agenda I see confederate flags on graves while I on my way to work and I cringe at the sight. I also feel like like my city’s seal should be changed it’s a cotton flower, college, factory and a steer head. It’s been 150 years its been enough time to heal we really need to move on
As I've said it's not a liberal vs conservative thing. It's a truth vs lies thing.
@@AtunSheiFilms You grow a great beard my good sir. And what is that tattoo on your chest? It reminds me of the Brotherhood of the Cruciform Sword tattoo
vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/p__/images/a/af/Kazim.png/revision/latest?cb=20180612160249&path-prefix=protagonist
yeah thats the one
Atun-Shei Films is it?...
Jeremiah Boyd well the thing is...the meaning of a symbol can change.
Take Nazis waving a confederate flag....fo you know why that’s funny?
Jeremiah Boyd absolutely...to me the stainless banner...or “the white mans flag”...illustrates why the battle flag can be flown today without being inherently conflated with some of its historical connotations.
I’d come closer to flying a rebel flag when they made it illegal to do so. As such is the spirit of the flag itself....always has been.
The confederate battle flag specifically designed not to offend Jews.
I really appreciate the message at the end. When I was younger, I learned that I was pretty closely related to Stonewall Jackson, and I tried to take pride in that. I fell in to some lost cause narratives, but I did get out, mainly by doing research into the subject and finding out I was wrong. That was hard to admit. My education in Idaho probably didn’t help me get out of it very much.
Dude stonewall ran a school to teach black children to read and write before and during the Civil War, the church still stands today and black descendents attend, I wouldn't of believed it and as a norse pagan I wouldn't step foot in a church but it's there, and the Bible's and books are on display and they aren't the slave Bible's, I had to have a look at this place since its so controversial but it's all true and the only way to know is to go look with your own eyes, he was also a America soldier, and teacher, I wouldn't call him a horrible person.
@@Civilwar.relics He was an American soldier until he betrayed his oath to uphold the constitution and killed American soldiers in the name of owning human beings. After his death, his own sister wrote she "would rather know that he was dead than to have him a leader in the rebel army"
@@SleventyFive taxes and tariffs. The emancipation was nothing more than a war act, classic move from sun Tzu, if It was a war of slavery the emancipation would have been Lincolns first move, and wouldn't of made deals with the slave states that fought for the union to be able to up hold slavery, sure it was about slavery kinda in 1863 when he thinks about the emancipation, only to cause chaos in a state. And the bill never hits the table till after the war, why is that? And why is a northern state the last to hold slaves that's the questions I'd ask myself, and stonewall did more to help black people, than they try themselves, or we'd have more Lester Holts and less random bullets flying around my city hitting little kids, I think the boondocks episode about Dr King coming back to life, and sees how people act and moved to Canada is about correct. And your probably not even related to the man either just talking, and going off others options and not researching stuff, like I wanted evidence Nathan Bedford Forrest was in the KKK there's none, not one peace of physical or him ever saying he was, while he was being accused of this at the same time he's giving speeches for the NAACP originally called the Independent Order of Pole-Bearers Association, that right there is a klan violation they have a rule book, only evidence you'll find of him in the klan is a Wikipedia opinion piece, if he was they would display his stuff as well anything Nathan Bedford Forrest is of high value. You should read more than just one book on the war, or at least start listening to audible instead of UA-cam people
@@SleventyFive > in the name of owning human beings
Nice revisionist myth if you feel the need to justify a war against constitutional liberty and government by the consent of the governed!
@@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558 The primary goal of the Confederacy, as evidenced by their articles of secession, state constitutions, and other legal documents, was the preservation of the institution of slavery.
Confederate leaders thoroughly documented why they seceded. It was so overwhelmingly about slavery that they couldn't shut up about how much it was about slavery.
The declarations of secession for five states, equivalent to the Declaration of Independence, uses the words "slave" and "slavery" 84 times.
Going back and rewatching the early episodes to prepare for the finale....totally forgot about this gem, "How Dare You Speak Of The General Releasing His Bowels!"
I think ive been gifted a new favourite insult thank you. Great work as always, keep it up!
Crotch goblin!
Honestly, I was expecting you to bring up the Fugitive Slave Act when they did the 'why couldn't the North just leave the South alone!' bit along with the more obvious parts like, y'know, shooting up dozens of federal armories before secession was even formalized and of course shooting first in the war and repeatedly trying to invade the North (wherein they enslaved any free black man, woman, or child they could).
@scott black fuck no it wasnt . It was Federal property .
Today I learned other people use the term crotch-goblins.
I just watched like 5 of your videos back to back. They are the 1st thing I've enjoyed on here in awhile. Very good. I tip my hat to you sir . a gentleman n a scholar. Informative& entertaining n factual which is nice for a change these days.
Can we normalize that pro-confederate is 100% equal to anti-American.
Anyone with a brain realizes that. Loser traitors
Who would wanna be pro American? This country is a cesspool of disinformation and degradation. The only thing I have loyalty towards is my community wich is the south. And I don't know how you can be a traitor when your State is fulfilling it's constitutional right to secede (that was for the ingrates who call secession traitorous and don't know it was a right given to the union of American states).
@Ian Smith is best would you call the soldiers of the war of independence traitors?
@Ian Smith is best so you would consider that you would come from a long line of traitors? Assuming your American.
@Ian Smith is best so you yourself are a traitor? And any body of people that separates themself from their country makes them a traitor?
“How dare you speak of the General releasing his bowels!!”
I agree with reb. Everyone in the south knows General Jackson was in such strong commune with the lord he _prayed_ the poo away!!
Nah, he's just got such a perfect digestive system that like former North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il, he doesn't even need to poop.
@@highjumpstudios2384 Like waifu, they don't poop, they simply fart a flower smelly fart which sound like an harp melody.
@@seinine so that's why some characters have musical stings when they show up.
Thank you for this excellent, informative, and challenging series of videos. Very well done, sir.
That theme from Ravenous is a nice touch at the end. Have yourself another subscriber, sir.
I adore your skits with the Reb
Thank you! They're fun to make.
@@AtunSheiFilms We want more. I already have ideas (as well as potential guest stars):
1. Have Johnny Reb (you never gave your Confederate character a name) claim that Sherman burned down his ancestor's barn in Georgia, and then Billy Yank (you never gave your Union character a name either) read both from Sherman's memoirs as well as diary entries from both sides to show that the myth of "Sherman the Genocidal Arsonist" is really Lost-Cause propaganda. If you want a guest star for this one, I would suggest Lindybeige.
2. Have Johnny Reb trying to defend "Southern Chivalry" when Billy Yank accuses the Antebellum Planters of LARPing as Medieval/Early-Modern European Nobles in what is supposed to be a free and equal republic, and such romanticism is based on the works of Sir Walter Scott. Perhaps you could bring in a UA-camr who discusses medieval history (such as Shadiversity, Skallagrim, or Schola Gladiatoria) as an "expert witness"?
3. Johnny Reb claims that the South could have won, only for Billy Yank to point out the economic development (or lack thereof) in the Antebellum South. TIK is a UA-cam historian who specializes in the economic and ideological contexts to military history, if he isn't busy with his Battleground Stalingrad series you could let him guest-star to talk about the economics of the Civil War.
4. Johnny Reb claims that Britain or France would have helped the Confederacy, only for Billy Yank to shoot that down with how improbable it was. For potential guest stars I would nominate Metatron, Kings And Generals, and The Cynical Historian.
5. Johnny Reb and Billy Yank get into a dispute about the quality of Confederate weapons and marksmanship in comparison to their Union counterparts, so they consult Ian McCollum from Forgotten Weapons to resolve the matter.
7. Johnny Reb claims that supporting the Union in the Civil War would be hypocritical if you supported the US in the American Revolution. Brandon F. guest-stars in-character as a Redcoat to mediate the argument.
@@strategicgamingwithaacorns2874 TIK would be a bit of a loose cannon as he is pretty insane and could either have something really interesting to offer or more of his fantasy bullshit Austrian school drivel
@@strategicgamingwithaacorns2874 What happened to #6?
Alany Walany Accusations without evidence. He puts HUNDREDS of sources in his videos. Not that you care to even try to read them
Sir. You have no idea how much I admire you for taking part in such a brave action and putting yourself in the line of fire. Taking shots left and right in order to maintain proper balance. In the end war is hell. I am fascinated by the American Civil War and in my country there is the same situation happening with our civil war. There are. Two sides who like to think of villa and zapata as enlightened revolutionaries and the other that looks at them as mere terrorists. Both sides are right and wrong and life simply doesn't have easy answers of all Good VS all bad
Youtibe has been recommending me these videos for years, and i am so glad i finally clicked. This is incredible
I think I will forever respect and adore this channel and these damn fine and honorable men! I’d defend this mans videos and the good morrel concept of what he is hoping to accomplish, to my final breathe! That is how much I genuinely believe in looking at both sides of an issue and how absolutely important and brave these videos are!
As a South Carolinian and the descendant of the confederacy I applauded you! Well done once again and not all of us rural southerners support such. I’d love to see you do a video on Ben Tillman. Thanks!
i know it's been 2 years but here are some tips from a non american
southern pride things that don't have to do with the confederacy:
guns
nature
agricultural life
martin luther king
hospitality
dishes
creole culture
soldiers fighting in ww2 and ww1
alternatively if you want californian pride:
arnold schwarzenegger
ronald reagan
nature
western frontier
mediterranean architecture
dirty harry movies
wealth
This is an absolutely fantastic combination of history and comedy. Keep it up good sir!
This is. The best channel I have found in a while. You sure know how to liven the debate and provide great sources foe your arguments. Thank you!
My great grandfather fought in the Wehrmacht in WWII. He disappeared in Stalingrad, probably dying. But just because one of my ancestors fought for the Nazis doesn’t mean that I have to change my views on Nazis.
I have decided to remember my great grandfather in the only way I reasonably can: a person who fought for the Nazis, probably committed at least a few war crimes, and someone who is a stain on my family tree. My suggestion is that the descendants of confederate soldiers do the same.
To live in denial of the possible harm one of your ancestors did does nothing but legitimize their crimes, and increase the likelihood of history repeating itself. You must accept reality, or you will eventually be consumed by fantasy.
Im sure your grandather got sent to the eastern front because he was such a huge supporter of nazis. this idea that all soldiers are a monolith and believe in the cause they fight for, especially in tyrannical regimes like the nazis that literally executed anyone who disagreed in the street via hanging, is a terrifying prospect that is only used to demonize an entirely separate group of people by comparing them to the evil group you generalized all of the members of.
I spat on the "Lost Cause" quite a while back, even though I'll admit Longstreet's memoirs make for a decent read. My folks, on the other hand, have tried to come up with excuses. Before you ask, no, they haven't displayed any prejudices against African Americans, but a lot of the excuses they made seemed borderline childish. Even my dad, cynical expert on history that he is, is somewhat defensive of it. The most I got out of my mother was her admitting that the Confederacy fought to preserve slavery "for economic reasons." The most common response they make is that the North wasn't an egalitarian state that wanted to free slaves and give them civil rights. And while I won't pretend that they were all abolitionists, a good number of them were, more than you think. And even ones who weren't changed their views over time, such as Lincoln and Grant. It showed that they were human, and one of our most important gifts as humans is that we can change, even if it takes time.
Okay, I'm rambling. The point is that I kind of stand out amongst my family in spitting on the Confederacy.
EDIT: I think I've finally started winning them over--by referencing these videos, specifically when you compare the CSA to Nazi Germany. My mother was shocked, and my dad was almost speechless.
@scott black Eh, it was predicted back when the country was created that a civil war would break out if slavery wasn't abolished within the next century.
Didn’t Longstreet denounce all the Lost Cause stuff as it was developing, and (apparently) became an Abolitionist later on in his life? Or is that just wishful thinking?
@@matthewchapman6305 I'm pretty sure he just encouraged reconciliation between North and South. It's a bit suspicious that he's got no Confederate monuments despite having such importance.
I need more of this series in my life. It's like Half in the Bag but based on debunking the lost cause myth.
Fuck movies!
Atun-Shei Films Fuck the union
@@unknown-dq6df says "George Washington", founding father of the Union.
Mike the Weirdo Founding father of America
(Just a username!)
@@unknown-dq6df Union: A collection of united provinces or areas
United States: A UNION of states.
They're the same thing.
Crazy we’re on the finale now
STONEWORKS?
Wait, The Minecraft server?
I've just found your content and I'm going through it now, thank you for your knowledgeable position on these subjects for our education and benefit
God I LOVE this dude I'm so glad I found this channel very informative and entertaining thank you for your hard work ❤️😊
I love how you address people’s comments and objections as well as making fun of the ignorance of their reasoning
four years ago but jesus, someone actually said that criticizing the Confederacy who rebelled against America, is anti American.
You need a period accurate U.S. flag.
This channel gets all the wins! I once saw a confederate flag on a flagpole and got so angry and thought what's the opposite of the Confederate Flag? It dawned on me it would be *THE UNITED STATES FLAG* thank you for doing these.
On the highway here in Kentucky, there's a traitor flag being flown, and right across the road there's an American flag next to a sign with black and white hands shaking and the words "Stronger together." I always wonder which one is the reaction to the other one.
@@benjaminharmon6541 I feel like the U.S Flag with the black and white hands shaking would probably be a response to the confederate one
And yet, slavery was occurring much longer under the United States flag than under the Confederate flag. Brilliant conclusion.
@@KKruse-jb4cu Didn't he have a Check Mate, Lincolnites! episode where he talks about the whole "The United States had slavery longer then the Confederated did"
at one point?
@@KKruse-jb4cu Yeah but one flag explicitly fought for the states' right to permit the ownership of human beings, the other recognized its original sin and abolished it.
Growing up in Alabama and now living in North Carolina I hear this sort of stuff all the time. One of my high school teachers actually taught us that it was over state's rights. Seems crazy looking back on it.
The states right to own slaves lol. Im a southern boy, proud southern, but not a confederate lol
In some instances it was.
@Jeremiah Boyd Dude, calm the fuck down. No need for the name calling. One of the states rights that they fought for, was the right to own slaves. Look it up.
Eh they on preached about the south being "evil"
@Jeremiah Boyd damn straight. Morals change with time. Just look at jim crow laws. Originally the north didn't give a shit as long as the south was happy.
Thank you for teaching and sharing your knowledge. I'm not the greatest reader in the past but I'm changing that status now. It's nice to have a video representation of academic inspiration. Keep up the good work.
I'm just going to say that this was exceptionally good. Right up to and including the closing statement, and the play-out using the Ravenous soundtrack. ♡♡♡
As much as Johnny Reb is a comedic character, you can really feel that confused pain in his voice at 7:25 . I thought it was very poignant how he disappears right afterwards, so Andy is speaking directly to the audience.
As a fellow Latino myself I would like to apologize for that person's naive and delusion comments.
“Ah yes, the totally unbelievable scenario of great masses of people willingly going to kill and die for a tyrannical regime, something which if it did occur would have been a total historical anomaly, with absolutely zero examples before or since.”
Like??? Do these people hear themselves
As the video went the validity of the Confederate’s arguments dropped lower than Southern morale after Gettysburg