However think about this:
We are friends & allies with Germany, Italy, and Japan; all the Axis powers. Heck, people go on vacation to Vietnam these days, and spend money there. I know that’s not the same as naming streets and military facilities after their leaders. However, as someone else posted, Confederate generals were still AMERICANs, and after the Civil War, Congress made it law that Confederate Veterans were American Veterans. Thus to remove the names of American Veterans, we are denying their service.
Also know that President Abraham Lincoln offered the command of the entire Union Army to General Lee. Lee, whose allegiance (like most others at the time) was to the Commonwealth of Virginia, politely declined. So Lee wasn’t an awful person; he just ended up commanding the “wrong” side’s force.
The Civil War was NOT fought over slavery; it was fought over States’ Rights, the Tenth Amendment. Slavery was a convenient political hot-button that was used to further divide and demonize. Only less than 10% of Southern land owners also owned slaves. Most Southerners couldn’t even afford slaves. Also, slavery as an industry was unsustainable, and Southern land owners and businesses recognized this. had the Civil War not happened, slavery as an institution likely would have gone away on its own within a decade. That Free Market thing and all. Don’t forget that the North recognized slaves as property, and would routinely return captured runaway slaves to their Southern “owners.” So the North wasn’t entirely blameless in the whole slavery issue. Even tacit acceptance made the North co-conspirators in the practice of slavery. It’s kind of like today’s “Sanctuary Cities” that cry and complain when a busload of illegal border-crossers are deposited in their cities, and then ship them off to another city to deal with (NIMBY). So to demonize one side for losing is kind of disingenuous.
As someone who has spent 15 years in uniform, and been assigned to many of the “questionable” posts, I will continue to refer to them by their former names. I’ve been assigned to Fort Benning, Bragg, Campbell, etc. and will continue to call Fort Rucker “Mother Rucker” as I am an Aviation type.
In total seriousness, if the DoD spent the time, effort, and money it spends on this “woke” crap on the important things, like Soldier issues (housing, family support, Veterans issues, etc.) perhaps retention and recruiting wouldn’t be in the toilet, and our forces would be a lot readier to fight and win any aggression we encounter.
Lee had done so on his own choosing. There was no gun to his head and no alternative offer that dictate self preservation for Lee to fight for slavery. Greed, as always, is the reason Lee and others chose to fight with the southern states known as the confederacy.
Absolutely correct. A tremendous effort was made to reunite and reconcile the states after the war, and that included the recognition of southern military leaders, many of whom were respected by their northern peers.
I always thought it was ironic that Fort McClellan was in Alabama.
All this seems to be lost to the current generation. They don’t understand history, or choose not to.
Now I can’t take you seriously.
I won’t bother arguing, because no one ever changes their mind on this. Just know that you might have gone a bridge too far with your argument, and lost part of your audience.
If you read the acts of secession for the States that left the Union, if my memory is correct, all but one listed the first reason as relating to slavery or the failure of Northern States to return runaway slaves.
So, you can’t genuinely say that the Civil War wasn’t about slavery or that the slavery issue was Union propaganda.
The South was right practically all other issues, but the slavery issued tainted them so badly, it rightly ensured their defeat.
Due to your not understanding the South. As a Northerner by birth, we have been taught it was about slavery. However, Lincoln did not emancipate any slaves in his “proclamation”. He only “freed” the slaves in the CSA-controlled areas. His “emancipation” did not free any slaves in states and territories controlled by the USA. If it were about slavery, why did Lincoln not mention that in his declaration of war?
In the War Against the States, all of the States lost and the Omnipotent Central Government won. In the war to end Slavery, every “freed” Black man became a slave to their new Masters in Washington. Newspeak reigns.
The statement was not specific to the Emancipation Proclamation. The quote I responded to was “The Civil War was NOT fought over slavery.”
Not to get too into the weeds, but this is easily disproven. The leaders of the Confederacy said quite plainly that they were leaving the Union to protect the institution of slavery, which they considered essential to their economic survival. Confederate generals also said as much after the war, and cursed slavery as the cause of their hardships.
This is not to say that the average Confederate Soldier was fighting for slavery. Based on the letters that have survived, that does not seem to be the case. I do think it’s important to draw a distinction between the political causes of the war and the reasons why civilians become Soldiers. But without the institution of slavery, there would have been no reason for the states to secede, and therefore no reason for their Soldiers to fight and die.
As for Lincoln, he said quite plainly that the war was to preserve the union, and that he would either permit or fight slavery to achieve that cause. We see a change over the course of the war, however. Famously in his second inaugural address, he describes the war as a punishment from God for the sin of slavery, both against the southern and northern states, “… until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword.”
As we see with their southern counterparts, the average Union Soldier was not fighting to end slavery. Like their commander in chief, most believed they were fighting to preserve the Union that their grandparents and great-grandparents had established. But as the war progressed and the Union moved south, there is a marked changed in the letters that have survived. More and more Soldiers witnessed slavery first hand, and wrote letters home describing the horrors and the need to destroy the institution.
I’ve probably already written more than anyone will bother to read. As I stated before, no one here is going to change their opinion. I’m only saying that if your rationale for keeping Confederate names on Army posts is that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery, then you’re going to lose that argument.
From confederate generals let that go. You wasn’t involved in the crap your ancestors did so let the names go most bases those confederate generals killed Americans and we honor them? Name a base named for anyone who saved Americans
You admit that Lincoln did not declare war over slavery. The CSA was defending its sole economic interests that would have impoverished them. Proof of such, “Reconstruction” after the war ended. As farms were becoming industrialized, slave plantations were going broke. They knew slavery was going to end as it was not economically viable. They just could not end it immediately without severe economic results. What would happen to you, if you suddenly lost your ability to earn money? The Southern states were being punished economically by the policies of the federal government.
The Biden administration’s priorities are so out of touch and skewed so hard left that we may not be able to repair all of the damage. Look at the woke curricula being taught at our military academies. We are not teaching our future officers military education. This is dangerous, we are becoming the laughing stock of not just our enemies but our allies as well. How can we expect them to respect us and allow us to lead in the event of a world military event? As for renaming this bases, it is yet another buckle and fold to the woke left. Our military bases were recognized, respected and feared worldwide. This not the case anymore, names like Bragg, Hood, Benning, Lee, Polk and Rucker etc. were household names worldwide and carried great weight and respect.
This woke ideology is not by accident, it is designed to destroy the fiber of our nation and turn it into something we will never recognize or be able to overcome or repair. Please vote for candidates that will not allow this to continue. We can overcome the woke left and socialist. But it will take getting involved.
Which was… (drumroll) …Slavery!
Ergo, one cannot reasonably detach the War Between the States from the issue of slavery.
Once again, I’m not here to argue that we need to remove all references to the Confederacy. I oppose erasing history. But let’s not re-write history, either. Histories without warts are propaganda.
Tada! Farming. Yes, planation farming was at the core, but most farmers did not own slaves and the federal policies that were designed to harm the Southern states also harmed them. The issue of slavery was part of the reason due to the economic hardships imposed by the federal policies. After the Civil War, the blacks were still mostly farm hands, etc., doing the same things as when they were slaves. Many had it worse as the Southern economy was destroyed as well as a lot of farm land. “Reconstruction” did not benefit the South, but a lot of wealthy Northerners did benefit from it.
The civil war WAS fought over SLAVERY!!! To say otherwise is to deny the reasons brothers fought brothers. States rights is a flowery way of saying “SLAVERY FOR EVER”!!! Please stop following the propaganda information networks. Read your history. Get informed, stop using corrupt info wars, brightfart, faux follies, or newswax. Do yourself a great service. Read.
Good point Gonzo, do your research. No mention of slavery in the Declaration of War.
I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union, and the perpetuity of popular government, and to redress wrongs already long enough endured.
I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the forces hereby called forth will probably be to repossess the forts,places, and property which have been seized from the Union, and in every event the utmost care will be observed, consistently with the object aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of or interference with property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens in any part of the country.
Further reading the last paragraph I quoted, recall “Sherman’s March to the Sea”. That was wholly against the declaration of war. He was a war criminal.
Not to nitpick, but Lincoln didn’t declare war. First, the president doesn’t have that authority. Second, for political reasons, a declaration of war on the rebellious states would have been a recognition of their independence from the Union. (This is not so different from how King George III had to deal with the rebellious North American colonies.)
If you find an image of the declaration you mention, it does not say “Declaration of War,” as it does in the link you provided. That was something added by the author of the webpage. What it does do is call up the militias (which the president does have the authority to do) in order to “repossess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union.” This would be roughly equivalent to using the National Guard to clear out CHAZ / CHOP. He also called for an emergency session of Congress.
Incidentally, Lincoln hoped he would get southern militias to assist him, but things didn’t pan out as he’d hoped.
I’m sorry this has devolved into yet another argument about the Civil War. Perhaps this says something about the impact on our nation, that folks still like to argue about it 8 score and 1 year later. You know what? Screw it, let’s rename all the Army bases. All of them. Let’s give them Native American names, that way we’ll be sure to confuse spell-checker.
When or how long has it been since you attended any military academy? You speak of this “woke” left or teachings or society (not sure which you are referenced), and I here about this from all of my news outlets. I always thought being awakened to something was suppose to be good? When did this become wrong? Is this the new thing like when they used to say “bad” and the meaning was to infer “greatness”? Please help me understand. I’m probably to old, you know, like the old people that thought lol meant lots of love?
