re: History Debate: Ulysses S. Grant vs. Robert E. Lee

quote:

---

But there was hardly anything arrogant about it. The Mississippi River had been re-routed many times before Grant's vein attempt.

---

The Mississippi River decides where the Mississippi River goes. Yes, it's arrogant as hell, and while we've succeeded in controlling its flood plains as of late, we've also paid a price for that, and you can always tell when there's flooding where that err in judgement is most evident.

quote:

---

There's no law forbidding the Mississippi River from changing its course. The Federal Government just won't allow it.

---

If it moves, regulate it.

quote:

---

It's a ridiculous book, and I'm sorry, but if someone reads it and feels that it's great and gives you a real history of how things were and why, you're better of not talking to them

---

I am sorry that you weren't capable of seeing the book for what it is and know that it has value. I didn't buy the slave interviews so I got the book that they quoted out of and read it too. It happens to be put out by the LSU press. It was a hard read and I wanted to put it down but I am glad that I didn't. I was able to sift through the bullshite and get something out of it.

quote:

---

The south was right. About everything. There can be no deviation from that point. Whatever the south did, it did in reaction to a negative northern action. The slaves were treated well; the badness of slavery is overstated.

It cherry picks quotes from the Slave Narratives and uses them to make slavery seem almost like a happy, fun place where idiotic blacks loved their massa and didn't want to be free.

It's a ridiculous book,

---

And they really go with the Slaves were happy stuff? Just like the 'only 5% of Southerners owned slaves' they are being mislead with those Slave Narratives. Most of those ex slaves were 80-90 ish year olds & the vast majority Children during slavery by the time the Narratives were collected(1936-38).

The Slave Narratives were collected by the WPA between 1936-1938. If the Slave was born around 1855 they were 10 years old or less by the time of the 13th amendmendent/End of War.(Many were free way before 1865). In 1936 they would be 81 or older recollecting 70 plus year old childhood memories.

Even if they were born as early as 1850 & the vast majority in the narratives weren't the oldest would have been 14 & under during slavery & survived to the ripe old age of about 90.


These Slave Narratives are interesting documents ,but in reality the 70 plus year old recollections of Childhood. Most weren't sexually nor physically mature so most avoided the sexual abuse/violence/back breaking labor (for the most part) of adults.


They mostly coudn't remember most of it & the memories were of playing with other kids(slaves & Owner children), getting sweets from the big house, menial tasks around the Plantation,etc..... With Vague memories of the War, Troops coming through town(especially Colored ones stood out), but there memories of slavery /understanding of the War was limited.

The Narratives would have been far more worthwhile had they been collected 70 years earlier (1870 or so) when there were actual adult slaves still alive & memories fresh(Douglass, Northup for example).

I happen to be fifty one years old and I remember my childhood just fine. So your dumb fricking argument doesn't hold water. Just like the stat you posted that said 49% percent of a states population were slave owners. So how about you Go frick Yourself you lying sack of shite. If the slaves had said that they hated slavery and were beaten everyday you would have ate it up like the sad piece of shite that you are. So keep posting shite that anyone with an ounce of common sense can see as bullshite.

quote:

---

Your best post thus far

---

If you don't like my posts you are welcome not to read them so you frick off too dude.

quote:

---

Just like the 'only 5% of Southerners owned slaves' they are being mislead with those Slave Narratives.

---

Apples and Excrement comparison. Your points regarding the childhood memories of septuagenarians are solid. Your continued insistence that 25-49% of Southerners were rich enough to have owned slaves is absolute rubbish.

In my opinion Lee did more with less for far longer than Grant. Both however were great generals and Grant does get less credit than he often deserves.

As for the Slavery question, yes I think blacks would have been better off in the long term if the war had not been fought. Slavery would have eventually come to an end, but it would not have been quick. I think in the short term blacks would have been far worse off, but much of what happened following the civil war probably does not happen. The plight of freed slaves after the civil war and right up to modern day can in large part be blamed on the anger and bad blood created by reconstruction and carpet baggers. Southern whites who were already angry after losing the war were subjected to reconstruction and the overall destruction of the southern economy and oppressive carpet bagging regimes. They looked for the easiest scape goat for their plight and found the freed slaves. Without the war there is no Klan, Jim Crow, or other oppressive organizations and policies. In my opinion those were all brought about by angry southerners who wanted revenge for what came after the war.

Asked earlier, will ask again:

Where would today's 'African Americans' be had slavery never happened in the US?