The Unfortunate Truth About The Civil War

Share
Embed

Comments • 7 249

  • Jody Sams
    Jody Sams 6 days ago

    Abe also said white man will always be superior to blacks so he was a racist that flag stays gone the wind is true not a lie and dont hate black but you dont like me flying csa flag go fuck yourself

  • Jody Sams
    Jody Sams 6 days ago

    He own no slaves your a dumbass
    General lee was a hero he willing lee surrender to save live of family im hunting you down

  • Jody Sams
    Jody Sams 6 days ago

    Lot of us love blacks

  • Jody Sams
    Jody Sams 6 days ago

    Wrong wrong wrong

  • Josh G
    Josh G 7 days ago

    "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it." We shouldn't go tearing down statues and monuments because we aren't mature enough to understand the history behind them. We need to know the truth, not repeat the past, and use these monuments as a reminder of how far we have come as a country. People are so offended and ill-informed, quick to jump to conclusions, and quick to destroy the symbols of things that have happened.

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 days ago

      EXACTLY. Instead of learning about WWII in books and museums, we need to build gleaming 40-foot statues of Hitler all across America!

  • Robert McDowell
    Robert McDowell 8 days ago

    Why NOT then go back to Africa and bask in the paradise that you perceive it to be? What's wrong with admitting that you are better off now in America?

    • Robert McDowell
      Robert McDowell 5 days ago

      +RonPaulHatesBlacks I'm sorry "Ron Paul Hates Blacks"... YOU have NO right to imply that I have entirely missed ANYONE'S point! Your username alone implies that you are NOT a bastion of "fair mindedness"! I listened exactly to what this dude was crapping on about... and, to be fair, I even watched his TRASH again for a second time!
      I think that YOU miss the point of being an American! Try to be "uplifting" and NOT disjointing, like SOOO many hopeless imbeciles are doing these days.
      If you DON'T like the greatest country on Earth... carry your ass somewhere else!
      Quit trying to destroy the ONE true beacon on Earth... LOSERS!!!

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 days ago

      You missed his point entirely.

  • Jordyn Alexis
    Jordyn Alexis 9 days ago

    That ad was engaging

  • mrdave2112
    mrdave2112 16 days ago

    It was not a civil war but a war for imperial federalism of the British Crown. Your history books will not illustrate that. Watch the video, pay your taxes, and for god sake use the dollar bill.

  • Roderick Shelton
    Roderick Shelton 17 days ago +1

    You are very indoctrinated... Not educated

  • Guilherme 01SS
    Guilherme 01SS 20 days ago

    There’s a some mistakes with this video. But I like the number 1, how he portrays Lincoln how he really is!

  • Chris Daniels
    Chris Daniels 21 day ago

    People should be outraged this guy is spreading so much wrong and stupid facts that make people think the United States is bad and their only allowed to spread lies thanks to the founding fathers.

  • Chris Daniels
    Chris Daniels 21 day ago

    Funny that their teaching people the civil war was about slaves.

    • Chris Daniels
      Chris Daniels 18 days ago

      RonPaulHatesBlacks where did u find that? Snopes? Wikipedia ? If u think Ron Paul Hates blacks your so mind fucked it’s ridiculous. Right now their changing are history to fit your brainwashed narrative. Look at a history book from this year to 20 years ago to 30 years ago. They teach that Germany surrendered in world war 2. Your full of shit and I feel sorry for you. Go tear down some
      More statues. If the south was that rich and half the people owned slaves the north would have been slaughtered in the civil war.

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 20 days ago

      +Chris Daniels Actually, the 1860 census found that 1/2 to 1/3 of white Southern families owned slaves, depending on the state, while many others owned slaves in the past, RENTED them in 1860, and/or were saving to buy them in the future.

    • Chris Daniels
      Chris Daniels 20 days ago

      +RonPaulHatesBlacks that's because they would be bankrupt if their slaves were free'd. What percentage of people do you think owned a slave? 1% maybe 2%?

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 21 day ago

      The rebels cited "slave" and "slavery" a whopping 80 separate times in their own declarations of secession. Read them yourself and see.
      www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states

  • Major Truth
    Major Truth 23 days ago

    Treason???? LINCOLN was guilty of treason as defined by the Constitution, and no one else. This guy is so fos!

  • LoopKC
    LoopKC 26 days ago

    Lake Victoria in Uganda is beautiful but it’s one of the most dangerous lakes in the world

  • Justin Enright
    Justin Enright 28 days ago

    You never mentioned centralized banking, and what other countries were financially backing the north and the south. Cough cough* France and England. You didn't mention Robert E. Lee in the Union Army. Said he had prior experience, then said what? regon over country? You can't blame someone back then for beying loyal to where he if from. I'm sure he knew when he switched sides the odds were against him. Brothers killed brothers slaves and Natives fought for the south.
    You don't mention the dates that the majority of the statues were erected. That would have helped your case for post civil war racism.
    All in all I'd give you a C if this was an American history HS presentation. Green screen lighting was a tad off. ;) you have tons of potential! Get deeper, explore every angle, and keep having fun. I have me snorting jalapeno juice on my channel so if ya ever ain't got shit to do! ;) I'm just a Jayhawk from Kansas with Red Boots!

  • J Merck
    J Merck Month ago

    This was nothing more than an undercover racist remark video. I am all against slavery and racism but slavery was the best thing that happened to blacks, or would you rather be the potbelly kid with flies in his eyes on the commercial begging for just $.10 a day. American slavery was the best thing that happened to blacks...maybe not at the time but you wouldn't be where you are today without it

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 22 days ago

      If not for slavery, black folks would have immigrated here as free men and women. You know, like every other group on Earth.

  • Frederik
    Frederik Month ago

    Fun fact: the money for the Louisiana Purchase was borrowed form a British bank.
    Quick remark tough: did Washington, Adams, Jefferson and the lot not choose region over country? So you're only a traitor if you lose your civil war?

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 21 day ago

      +Frederik Calm down, crybaby. People in the past knew slavery was wrong, especially after Uncle Tom's Cabin. As Lincoln said in his First Inaugural Address, "One section of our country believes slavery is *right* and ought to be extended, while the other believes it is *wrong* and ought not to be extended. This is the ONLY substantial dispute." The same is true today. Which side you support depend entirely on whether you believe slavery is morally wrong. Simple.

    • Frederik
      Frederik 21 day ago

      For the xth time: I DO THINK IT IS WRONG. Just because I realise that people in the past didn't think so does not make me a racist!

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 21 day ago

      +Frederik I still think slavery is morally wrong and indefensible. Maybe you will too, when you grow up.

    • Frederik
      Frederik 21 day ago

      There we are... Almost to the word identical even. I was almost beginning to wonder if you had gotten any sense for perspective

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 21 day ago

      +Frederik You're not memorable. Sorry. All you losers look alike under your bedsheets and hoods.

  • Dj Tapatio
    Dj Tapatio Month ago

    That son of a bitch nat turner killed the abolition movement in its cradle

  • Aegon Targaryen
    Aegon Targaryen Month ago

    Yeah, because Uganda is such a peaceful wonderful place, with a thriving economy, stable government, a genocide free clean cities, and a quality of life that's unmatched by the western world.

  • Mondo Gonzo
    Mondo Gonzo Month ago

    Leftist even lie about history. Try doing a video on Albert Pike. He's the only confederate general in Washington DC with a statue and a memorial. Yeah.. I didn't think so. Your Master's master would never let that happen.
    Maybe you should focus on trying to get blacks to stop killing each other...on every continent on Earth throughout all of history.

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks Month ago

      Cool racism. Folk are more likely to die from you domestic terrorists than from "blacks killing each other."

  • rene L
    rene L Month ago

    Hmmm, never mentioned the bank of the confederacy, interesting.

  • Daniel Kirkman
    Daniel Kirkman Month ago

    Did you do any research or you just passing on stories
    I can see while you're no longer a history teacher you're very very bias and you only play to the fact that fit your needs

  • Josh Rick
    Josh Rick Month ago

    God this video sucks and you're so fucking annoying when you talk gaagaa.

  • StodOne
    StodOne Month ago

    if only slavery was a thing for a little more i bet that a lot of african americans wouldn't commit crime as much as they do now as they would have been trained how to live in a normal civil society i totally understood what that general wanted to say but you have to take everything out of context gee.
    Also how did confederation commit treason? As far as I know from trying to understand stupid americans explaining this shit a bunch of hillbillies with pitch forks won against soldiers so who was fighting who? To be honest i dont care about american history i dont even know why i am commenting here , compared to where I am from USA history is a joke in my opinion shouldn't be considered history yet.

  • Nate Bueche
    Nate Bueche Month ago

    Classic example of the winning side writing history. I'm pretty sure the south tried to succeed because they felt that the union States were gaining too much political power. Slavery was one of the factors in that war but I think it was more of a political war. You could argue that the south fought for slavery BUT the north didn't fight to end slavery, they fought to maintain Union control and to regain taxation of the Confederate states (Slave states). All that said I'm glad the union won because this country would be terrible if the south won.

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks Month ago

      If the South seceded because of taxation or "political power" unrelated to slavery, the rebels would have said so in their own declarations of secession.
      www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states

  • Liza Tanzawa
    Liza Tanzawa 2 months ago

    TYVM, very informative!!

  • black rain938529
    black rain938529 2 months ago

    Robert E Lee freed half of his slaves as the civil war began, the former slaves found out what the north was doing to their slaves and most of the former slaves returned to the south to join the confederate army

  • Jeremy Cline
    Jeremy Cline 2 months ago +1

    Saying the word hashtag and just throwing out which terms to Google is no form of explanation.
    I am now dumber for having watched this.

  • Wylee elPuppo
    Wylee elPuppo 2 months ago

    I'm a homo.

  • F6FZeroKiller
    F6FZeroKiller 2 months ago

    Lol. The Civil War was about taxation without representation. Slavery was just a loop hole most people didn't care about at the time. Not to mention a lot of tribes weren't too happy about having to give up their own slaves from enemy tribes. It was a fucked up war and both sides had their reasons. It's a good thing the North won, though. Europe at the time wanted to retake certain territories and they were counting on our civil war to weaken us. However, after they saw how savage we were to each other, they changed their minds. Also... those statues need to be left alone. They are a part of American history. No one even gave a shit about them until politically backed groups were paid to "care".

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 2 months ago

      If the Civil War had anything to do with taxation, the rebels would have said so in their own declarations of secession, all of which are free online.
      www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states

  • Jeramee Quicksill
    Jeramee Quicksill 2 months ago

    Well you have a lot of good points; although, when you pat those who tear downs statues and monuments you destroy history. Those things happened, and it stands there as recognition of the horrors of the human condition, to tear them down further moves along the narrative of brainwashing and keeping the new generations in the dark about their own history. Fucking globalists amirite? Has anyone here ever seen the Georgia Guidestones? There is a lot to surmise from that monument, which nobody I've ever encountered likes to acknowledge. But 'muh mainstream news! but muh teleprompter preacher!'

  • Moxy O'Onyx
    Moxy O'Onyx 2 months ago

    #BRAVO

  • Agent Q
    Agent Q 2 months ago

    fuck this fuck this guy

  • Yankee Canivers
    Yankee Canivers 2 months ago

    Once you put the slavery issue I shut this off. Slavery is still going on in africa RIGHT NOW, but you choose to bring up the bad past. Stop the slavery going on now libya they are selling human's. Most of the slave were shipped to south america sold by arabs and warring black tribes no video on thatShame on you all

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 2 months ago

      Yeah, Africa is the worst for slavery LOL
      www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/slideshows/5-of-the-worst-countries-for-human-trafficking?onepage

  • Jamie Penne
    Jamie Penne 2 months ago

    You also left out the fact that Democrats or the ones really pushing for racism up until the southern strategy put forth by the Republicans Andrea reason to leave it out just that it makes it less politically palatable

  • Jamie Penne
    Jamie Penne 2 months ago

    Overall pretty good but why leave out the fact that the South realize that they were going to lose political power if more States became non-slaveholding States. It doesn't do a lot to justify slavery but it might give more credibility to the idea of states rights. Overall I think it's still wrong but you seem to purposely leave it out because it makes it more complicated.

  • Weekend Viking
    Weekend Viking 2 months ago

    The statues were put up for the wrong reasons, and they’ve never been considered famous works of art so there is no loss there.

  • Cole Capshaw
    Cole Capshaw 2 months ago

    crap

  • storminmormin14
    storminmormin14 2 months ago +1

    Should we have Benedict Arnold statues commemorating the accomplishments he achieved before becoming a turncoat?

  • K37
    K37 2 months ago

    The union offered Robert e lee a job. He turned it down

  • Danny Trantham
    Danny Trantham 2 months ago

    History is always written by the Victor. Either you know this and are fucking with me....or your very naive. Either way your a mediocre troll at best. Good luck. P.S. ......every culture owned slaves. Your all sheep.

    • Danny Trantham
      Danny Trantham 2 months ago

      +RonPaulHatesBlacks Idc bout jews, russians, germans. Im Italian kid. Mussolini bitch😂😂😂

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 2 months ago

      The battle cry of Holocaust deniers!!!

  • Southern Soldier
    Southern Soldier 2 months ago

    What about the American revolution we were traitors but we built statues and buildings in their honor

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 2 months ago

      They don't build statues and buildings in England. That's the point.

  • Southern Soldier
    Southern Soldier 2 months ago

    No it’s history it has affected us all and all of Sudden it’s a big problem and some of them have been there for a hundred years(statues)

  • Keith Austin
    Keith Austin 2 months ago +1

    "Heritage"
    Bitch the Confederacy was around the same length of time someone is in highschool. This heritage stuff is bullshit.

  • Comrade Ash
    Comrade Ash 2 months ago

    My great-great-great-great grandfather freed his slaves before the war and used his inherited fortune to fund his own cavalry unit. He fought to protect South Carolina and rose to the rank of Lieutenant General. By the time the war ended some of his properties had been burned to the ground by Sherman and Grant's troops. He later became a senator and many of his supporters were former slaves.

  • MordanGeeman
    MordanGeeman 2 months ago

    The South was garbage during the civil war, but we shouldn't erase history to make people feel better. Creating a nation is dirty work and it is bound to have misteps, terrible events, and bad systems in place. Rome was not built in a day and neither was America. Slavery is an ugly part of our history but it isn't exclusive to our country and to be fair it shouldn't be held against folks who are alive today and never had a hand in it. We can all agree today that slavery is bad and that should be something that unites us instead of divides us. I'm not saying forget about the past, but dwelling on something bad that occurred 200 years ago between our ancestors shouldn't prevent us from getting along in modern times.

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      So, we should erect monuments to traitors? That doesn't make any sense.

  • Kazi Supreme
    Kazi Supreme 2 months ago

    Lol let's get the black guy to talk about slavery

  • the Christian communist

    I do think they should still have the statues maybe not in public but atleast in a museum because they are history, and it does matter. Or even just keep them where they were originally placed for people to decide if the statue has its own right to stay depending on which person it was made after. Instead of fights and riots.

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      The monuments aren't history, they are propaganda. You don't get context from a statue. Many of these monuments proclaim the CSA's fight for white supremacy as just and proper. They are a reminder for the white community to fight for their supremacist, and a reminder to the black community of their place. Not to mention, allowing monuments to traitors to stand just doesn't make sense.

  • Tiny Tom Cruise
    Tiny Tom Cruise 2 months ago

    THANK GOD SOME MAINSTREAM CHANNEL TALKS ABOUT THIS SO THESE DUMB PEOPLE CAN BE EDUCATED ABOUT THE WAR

  • C K
    C K 2 months ago

    Why's your map blue in the north and red in the south? Should be flipped since the Democrats were predominantly FOR slavery while Republicans such as Former Pres. Lincoln were against it. The Republican Party was for abolishment, then afterwards when slavery was abolished and there was only segregation the democrats and republicans did a switcheroo and both parties sort of flipped their standards around.
    Also for those wondering, no, I don't consider myself a Demoncrat or a Republican. I believe we should have more tea party and independent representatives so there's less squabbling between the elephfats and A$$es. And more work being done.

  • Urban_Nation
    Urban_Nation 2 months ago

    Just saying, the left is creating reverse segregation

  • Regis Caruso
    Regis Caruso 2 months ago

    So why haven't they torn down any northern slave owner statues.

  • Regis Caruso
    Regis Caruso 2 months ago

    The well informed dude forgot to mention that General Lee, the Southern general freed his inherited slaves when he went off to war, whereas General Grant, the Northern general didn't free his bought slaves until after the war.

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago +1

      Lee didn't free those slaves until 1862. And he only did it because of a court order.

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 2 months ago

      Ulysses S. Grant personally bought multiple slaves did not free them until after the war? Really? How many did Grant own? When did he own them? Where did they live? What were their names?

  • Steve Reynolds
    Steve Reynolds 2 months ago

    1:49 and stopped, can't listen to like, like, like, like, lol don't use this person ever again cracked

  • Jerry Herry
    Jerry Herry 3 months ago

    The way he talks is annoying, he talk quietly most of the time so I increase the sound, but than he yells PEW PEW and I loose hearing in my left ear. 👂

  • Jordan Reynolds
    Jordan Reynolds 3 months ago

    Nice video, totally agree but I would have to say that I do disagree with you on tearing down the statues because that was built back way long ago, and yes we all now know slavery is wrong but I feel we need to leave reminders like that to help us remember what a horrible mistake we made by thinking that one soul was worth less than another.

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago +1

      You don't build monuments to mistakes. No one is going to forget the Civil War because there isn't a monument to the CSA.

  • George Phillips
    George Phillips 3 months ago

    People want to take down statues and change state flags, but not the political party that want that wanted the expansion of Slavery to other states and start back to slave trade from Africa. If a change should be done the Democrat Party should change its name because of its deep roots in slavery.

    • George Phillips
      George Phillips 3 months ago

      I believe that politicians are not the answer we need in America. It's people helping one another, but sadly we as a nation we don't help our neighbors. We look at the color and size of a person,and not who they really are as a human being.

    • George Phillips
      George Phillips 3 months ago

      It still doesn't change their past. The Kansas Nebraska act and trying to pass run way slave laws and many other atrocities. True change is needed. History has a way of revealing the truth about all of our past.

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 months ago

      The parties switched positions a long time ago. Nice try tho.

  • Joe DiMaggio
    Joe DiMaggio 3 months ago

    This guys an idiot, you would fight for your country if a foreign army invaded it as well. If blacks weren't better off here why did your "Ugandan ancestors" immigrate here?

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      No. This isn't ancient Rome attacking some lost-to-time enemy, then demonized through their recording of events. We have mountains of documentation from that era. We know exactly what the South was saying and doing. We absolutely know their motivations. So, if you find expanding and ensuring the perpetuity of African chattel slavery noble, then that's your prerogative.

    • Joe DiMaggio
      Joe DiMaggio 2 months ago

      +Scott Ledridge history is on the side of the victors you say?

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      They may have considered the US Army to be foreign, but that doesn't mean they were right in their consideration.
      People have the right to rebel, but they have to win that rebellion. Our Revolution was illegal, but we won. The South's rebellion was illegal, and they lost. One was for a noble cause, the other was ignoble.

    • Joe DiMaggio
      Joe DiMaggio 2 months ago

      +Scott Ledridge to the CSA the US army was a "foreign" army..... People have the right to rebel, no?

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      The US wasn't a "foreign army". If the South didn't want a war, they shouldn't have rebelled and started a war.
      Immigration and slave trade are very different things.

  • Definitive Entertainment

    Cool video! Shitty presenter. Jokes fell flat, and he’s hard to understand. It’s like Kermit the frog whispering..

  • 1274627 26e66262
    1274627 26e66262 3 months ago

    If we forget the past we are doomed to repeat it, leave the monuments but ensure a plaque explains why they were wrong.

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      Who writes the explanation on the plaque?

  • Dylan Wilson
    Dylan Wilson 3 months ago

    Actually the civil war was not about racism it was about the yanks treating the south folk like shit so the revolted tyrannical government see this was the right they had

  • Afro
    Afro 3 months ago

    I II
    II I__

  • johnnymcblaze
    johnnymcblaze 3 months ago

    Big government vs small independant state hood. The slavery issue was a smokescreen. Race hate and divide and conquer still serve this purpose. And the wheel turns.

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      That's why primary sources are so important when someone tries to dismiss what you say as a sweet lie. Whether one wants to accept the primary sources, they are what they are.

    • johnnymcblaze
      johnnymcblaze 2 months ago

      +Scott Ledridge People with take a sweet lie over a hard truth anyday.

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      They obviously liked what they heard.

    • johnnymcblaze
      johnnymcblaze 2 months ago

      +Scott Ledridge The words of a few brought to the ears of the many.

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      My point still stands. The secessionists were clear with their intent to expand and ensure the perpetuity of slavery. They published declarations of secession, speeches, etc... making their motivations very clear.

  • Crown the Raven 13
    Crown the Raven 13 3 months ago

    Thank you for clearing that up for me....let's face facts, the truth considered dangerous in the eyes of those who would benefit from a lie.

  • Brent Walls
    Brent Walls 3 months ago

    You have to comment on taxes one way or the other if your going to talk about why the civil war started at all

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 months ago

      The rebels didn't mention taxes when they seceded. If he has to comment on taxes, then he has to comment on lizard people, fluouride, and chemtrails, too.
      www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states

  • creativeusername
    creativeusername 3 months ago

    You know what really gets my goat? When people use hashtags in conversation let alone use them at all its just annoying and stupid, that fad needs to die.

  • Kaleb Johns
    Kaleb Johns 3 months ago +1

    I agree with your point but white people didn't take blacks from Africa, black people literally sold other black people to white people. Slavery is wrong but blacks aren't the only people who were enslaved, even in America the Native Americans were enslaved first. In ancient Greece they literally enslaved each other everyday and you don't see them complaining about their ancestors that were enslaved by their other ancestors. Now with that being said I completely agree with the point of this video.

  • SmellMySpoon EatableMeat

    peaches n cream loooooooooooooool

  • james perkins
    james perkins 3 months ago

    Right so the south was so wrong to go to war and are traitors but he says nothing about the hundred of union soilders who committed horrible war crimes after the war was over like looting and raping southern women and houses and land and let’s not forget that southern reconstruction was just one big joke because of the union

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 months ago

      Right so the Nazis was so wrong to go to war and are traitors but he says nothing about the hundred of Allied soilders who committed horrible war crimes after the war was over like looting and raping German women and houses and land and let’s not forget that reconstruction was just one big joke because of the Allies

  • HmoobTuber
    HmoobTuber 3 months ago

    Pay Attention class, this is going to be on the final.

  • Just A Thought
    Just A Thought 3 months ago

    Yes, some of the "humor" kind of crashes into the usual way these conversations flow, but that aside for now. I don't disagree with most of this video and, personally, I never "got" all this confederate (small c please) flag and statue crap. Oh, at the end of the Civil War one might expect the losing side to put up things like this but ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THREE YEARS LATER? GIVE IT UP, YOU IDIOTS! Your stupid war is long over. However.............there are still a few points I'd like to throw in, none of which particularly disagrees with the video, but are clarifications. First. Lee as a genius of a general, regardless of his well ignored racism. The fact is that, absent the presence of Stonewall Jackson, Lee wasn't such a genius. Note his battles AFTER Jackson dies. LOSER. Secondly, the reference that the speakers ancestors might have been sipping fruit juice beside a Ugandan lake had it not been for........................let us all remember that little short legged Europeans, namely the ENGLISH, FRENCH, SPANISH, PORTUGUESE and NORTH AFRICAN PIRATES, among others, all set up shop at the AFRICAN SLAVE STORE, which was fully staffed, supplied and for the benefit of BLACK AFRICANS who won the local wars and had CAPTURED SLAVES/PRISONERS to sell! Does anyone still believe that short legged white guys in funny looking clothes actually chased African dudes into jungles and captured them? DO YOU? ANOTHER VERY WRONG AND CONTINUED MISREPRESENTATION. The only reason blacks GOT to America............those friendly BLACK SLAVE SELLERS IN AFRICA. So let's remember that part. Everyone has dirty hands in this business, EVEN when you simply have to accept that, in the early 19th century, stupid people thought in other ways and, sadly, one of the ways they thought was that Africans were not "quite" fully human, merely CLOSE. I know this is an insulting thing to say but BACK THEN, a LOT if not the MAJORITY of Western European civilization regarded Africa and it's people that way. Or said they did to make excuses. (Actually, I will leave it to others to debate the issues of relative I.Q. and if there is something inherently, let us say, bothersome and/or insistent about these I.Q. test score differentiations. For now, let's leave all that aside.) So, Lee is no genius and NO, a black Ugandan would NOT be sipping juice beside a lake; whoever BEAT that Ugandan in a local war would be selling the speakers ancestor into slavery TO whites! Sorry but that is a bigger reality than that Lee was quite the straight ahead, attack full frontally dummy that he showed himself at Gettysburg to BE. He made Meade look like a genius and ole George was not! In any event, let's move on to number THREE. I know he calls it treason to attempt to secede from the Union, and technically that is true. But consider today. Blue and Red America despise each other and are ready to come to violent blows, as threatened by certain big talking but ultimately cowardly blue radical groups who love to pose and talk a lot. I wonder if, should the speakers personal beliefs be reflected either in Blue or Red extremism, would he then call it treason? We mostly, today, believe that racism is evil, but back then they did NOT believe so, not some clear majority. Sick but true. So, given that, if you happen to be on the side that FIRST decides to leave, even if the other side is inclined to let them GO, is it really TREASON? I would stop short of using that word because, as the former "HISTORY TEACHER" admits, and this is key: it DEPENDS WHO WON THE WAR, doesn't it? Had the South won, would it be taught as treason or being FED UP with being a part of a nation that honors all races, something the South did NOT. Oh, WE can despise the old South and I wonder about the sanity of anyone who wants a "plantation wedding" (but that devolves to fat, idiot females in love with images and fact less "feelings". This is why fat slobs with tattoos all over their 350 pound bodies say YES to the $ 4000 dress!) So, Lee was an idiot; a Ugandan would have been sold by a winning tribe and it's only treason if you lose. Okay, these are obvious. Finally, one last sad shrug. Sure, what happened to the previous "owners" of the land we call the USA were ground down under "Manifest Destiny". Could it have been otherwise back in those days and times? What would you expect was going to happen? When a new community enters an area, there is always immediate hostility between the two sides and this can often........lead..........to............WAR. One side was HUGE and MODERN. One side was SMALL and rather poorly armed. The latter put up a superb fight and it should be the fight that won the moniker "The Lost Cause", NOT the Civil War, southern view. However, it is less a case of robbing a group of small and not that lovingly attached tribes of land and simply recognizing the inevitability of what happened. Sanity suggests our brilliant native friends should of taken one look at what was coming and declared "Do you have any schools where I can learn English AND business accounting?" Some DID and declared they'd fight no more because it was just STUPID and would lead to the total destruction of "native" American culture. It nearly DID. Fighting against inevitability is always a "lost" cause, and often described as a noble one, even if resistance WAS FUTILE. Besides, what no one really ever got, including ME, whose primary sympathies lies with the "natives", is that the "natives" were not "native" to anything. This is why I use quotations. These tribes had displaced previous civilizations and groups so their claims to territory, ill defined except for "from the mountains to the setting Sun" were not going to work in small claims court. They had no modern claim to anything and really merely took from previous "owners". So the title to the lands were hard to find and thus no final closing of the real estate transaction was possible. We own this. Show us the deed. We claim it. Show us the deed. We will never let you take our land. Load cannon. We have many warriors and arrows. Bayonets at the ready. We will fight you to the death. FIRE! And so it goes, or should we say, so it went? Today there are casinos where the former "natives" live and profit as American citizens. They can stay on those rather small areas called reservations or join the main stream population. It's not perfect but it kind of beats what they do in other parts of the world to "inconvenient populations" within larger groups. So, finally, to review: LEE AN IDIOT; Ugandans ENSLAVED/no fruit juice; Labeling something TREASONOUS depends who wins and gets the label maker, like it or not. Extra BONUS correction: BIG pushes LITTLE aside and easily when in ttruth LITTLE actually owns no deed to the land HE TOOK from someone else. Otherwise this video is pretty good and viewing it will show why the points above, if corrected, do NOT change the point and meaning of this video one bit. So see it!

  • Jace Rosé
    Jace Rosé 3 months ago

    A lot of misinformation here. The South did not start or want the civil war. They declared independence and the North attacked them.

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 months ago

      Of course the South wanted and started the Civil War. They declared independence and immediately raised an army and started attacking American soldiers and military bases, including Fort Sumter.

  • Walter Brigges
    Walter Brigges 3 months ago

    The monuments have already been put on the ground right after the war ended if the union solders and the northern citizens could welcome the confederates as united states citizens again we can too

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      Those monuments weren't raised right after the war. They were raised decades after, whenever the white community felt the need to reassert their supremacy. It's well documented that during times of racial strife is when the erection of these monuments peaked. So, yeah, the confederates were welcomed back right after the war, but that was because they put away their uniforms and flags. Lee, himself, said that continued display of the flag would only continue feelings of separation.

  • Danny Trantham
    Danny Trantham 3 months ago

    Northern states mad over Southern states ability to grow year round. What the Northern states offered was Communism or War. Slaves werent even part of the deal until Northern Armies broke the treaty and disrupted ammo and supply lines. But glad you told the entire story. History is always written by the Victor

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      Please provide your primary sources that proves any of this. Because according to the primary sources from the rebelling states, slavery was their cause. They said it repeatedly.

  • Iraq Lobsta!! 45
    Iraq Lobsta!! 45 3 months ago

    Um... This is one sided as hell with a whole lot of half truth to it. Than again my middle school history teacher was full of shit ass well. If you keep telling Americans, and people in general the same lies over and over again they usually believe it. And public schools are a cesspool of lies. And look who runs them? I'm not a republican, though I do lean right on a lot of issues, I also lean left on others. But both sides try to feed you some bullshit and you gotta do your own research.
    The stupidity of the American people is easy to take advantage of....
    Johnathan Gruber- Architect of ObamaCare

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      Your proclamation of "half-truths" and that you considered your "middle school history teacher was full of shit *_ass_* well" certainly gave the impression that you think you know better.
      "According to primary sources most people that were around when Columbus sailed to the "new world" assumed the earth was flat." - No. That isn't right, either. They knew it was round. Columbus just thought the world was much smaller than everyone thought. The "flat earth myth was started by Washington Irving. That isn't a primary source.
      But, to your point, whether they thought it was flat or not, our ability to reflect lets us know differently. This isn't the same thing as being able to read the motivations from the men that seceded. A lack of understanding empirical evidence is different from proclaiming motivations for doing something. The South proclaimed their intention to expand and ensure the perpetuity of African chattel slavery.
      "According to primary sources Napoleon was shorter than average men for the time period." - What primary source says that? That's convention. That's a modern myth from a misunderstanding of English and French units.
      Again, the secessionists, the men who decided to rebel against the US, wrote speeches, published documents (personal and state) that made it clear that their intention to expand and ensure the perpetuity of African chattel slavery was their motivation. You can read the secession declarations published by several states. The Cornerstone Speech by Alexander Stephens, the Senate farewell speech by Davis, etc... *If you can prove those men didn't know what they were talking about in explaining their actions, everyone, and I mean everyone, would love to see it.*

    • Iraq Lobsta!! 45
      Iraq Lobsta!! 45 2 months ago

      Scott Ledridge I never said I was of "superior intellect" just decided to dig deeper and do my own research. Anyone with a tenth grade reading level is able to do their own research. According to primary sources most people that were around when Columbus sailed to the "new world" assumed the earth was flat. That's bullshit. According to primary sources Napoleon was shorter than average men for the time period. Also bullshit. I can keep going.
      So act like a smart ass all you want lol. Doesn't make you right

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago

      According to the primary sources (I assume with your superior intellect, that would be important as a source to you.), he's right.

    • Iraq Lobsta!! 45
      Iraq Lobsta!! 45 3 months ago

      BTW unsubbed. Good job VOX jr

  • TheReindeer TheRabbitTheBat

    Hmm, for some reason I just remembered that song right now. "I-Im the Cult of Personality..." (Ban nah nah, bah nah nah, bah nanananah!)

  • Leo Yohansen
    Leo Yohansen 3 months ago

    There's no mention of the fact that the Union had slave states all throughout the war. There's no mention of the fact that the Emancipation Proclamation had only been issued half way through the war and didn't apply to the Union slave states that had never seceded. In fact, had the south voluntarily rejoined the Union, slavery would have continued. There's no mention of the fact that secession had not been an act of treason as there had never been any law stating that the states that had freely joined the federal union could not also freely leave that union. The slave owning George Washington and others had engaged in treason in choosing geography over country which people celebrate to this day every fourth of July. There's no mention of the fact that there were many lethal riots in the north in response to the draft as no one wanted to risk there lives for slaves. There's no mention of the fact that captured slaves were regarded as contraband in the Union and not immediately set free. There's no mention of the fact that Abraham Lincoln had been as much of a racist as Robert E. Lee and had also spoken of African Americans as being inferior to the point of wanting to have them deported to what would be Liberia. You can't morally pick which racists you want to honor and which racists you don't simply because your country was capable of conquering them. Bring down the statues of ALL the racists, including the ones you like to call your presidents and heroes or else quit pretending that you're really against racism.

    • Leo Yohansen
      Leo Yohansen 2 months ago

      Scott Ledridge, "He said "Every true Union State peacefully and voluntarily abolished your beloved slavery years before the Civil War". He qualified to exclude Border states." No, he clearly didn't. He made no distinction or reply of a "true" state excluding border states which would have been pointless if he had since it would have been a selective distinction in order to absolve the Union of having any culpability in slavery.
      As for the Fugitive Slave Act and the Kansas-Nebraska Act being nationally unpopular, they were no more nationally unpopular than they had been nationally popular. They had both been passed by representative majorities from the north and the south and had not been unpopular in the south. They had been unpopular with the general population of the north which only makes it national if you choose to exclude half the nation.
      As for the southern economic interests and the political desire to have maintained them, slavery had been at the foundation of those interests, not an issue separate from those interests as many would superficially choose to portray it. It would be no less superficial than if people argued that the genocide to have accompanied the expansionist notion of a manifest destiny had somehow been independent of an economic desire for land. In either case, those economic interests had been primary, not the atrocities to have defined them, and the Union had been involved in managing those interests, not in abolishing them, as many would have it superficially be portrayed.

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago +1

      "what didn't exacerbate border states after the EP had no reason to have exacerbated them before as the contraband issue had only been an issue pertaining to the states at war, not those remaining in the Union." - As did the EP. So, neither directly affected the Border states. That isn't to say they weren't bothered by it. Neither were abolition. Though they did pave the way.
      "As for the issue of abolition, take that up with the person I had been responding to about "Both the Union and the Confederacy had maintained slavery throughout the war." before making an erroneous claim that "No one is saying that they didn't"." - He said "Every true Union State peacefully and voluntarily abolished your beloved slavery years before the Civil War". He qualified to exclude Border states.
      "The southern states had wanted to protect their economic interests by maintaining their national influence." - ... through slavery. Every superficial "cause" relates back to slavery. Political freedom = ability to expand and perpetuate slavery. Economic issues = as they pertain to slavery. National influence = their ability to stave off the restriction or abolition of slavery.
      "You can argue all you want on whether or not their perceptions had been justified but it doesn't change the fact that that is how they had seen it." - What they did is what they did. You agree with it, or you don't. But, it wasn't constitutional, and the charge that they were fighting some unconstitutional movement just isn't true, either.
      "There had been no issue of expansion apart from the issue of maintaining their national political influence." - And because their national influence was tied to slavery, when slavery was threatened most, that is when they rebelled.
      Their national influence in other matters was stronger than ever. Because the South controlled the Senate, tariffs were lowered for 30 years after Nullification Crisis; resulting in the lowest tariffs in US history to that point. The Fugitive Slave Act was passed despite it being nationally unpopular. The Kansas Nebraska Act was passed despite being nationally unpopular.
      So, again, all of these superficial explanations are rooted in the expansion and perpetuity of African chattel slavery.
      _"We must expand or perish. We are constrained by an inexorable necessity to accept expansion or extermination."_ - Robert Toombs
      "Had Lincoln lost the election, the very same issues would have all remained without the same degree of perceived political marginalization." - There wouldn't have been a President committed to the restriction of slavery in office. If Lincoln lost the election, that would have probably also meant Congress wouldn't have turned over the way it did.
      So, while the Kansas Nebraska Act wasn't working out the way the South wanted, their chances to create something more ideal would have been much greater, just as they were able to turn over Jefferson's Northwest Ordinance with the Missouri Compromise, then turn that over with the Kansas Nebraska Act. But, what did happen is that someone committed to restricting slavery was elected and the South immediately rebelled.
      In the final couple weeks of the war, Lee convinced Davis to sign a special order allowing blacks to enlist, but only at their owner's behest. Turnout was so poor that Lee wrote back to Davis exclaiming the South must love slavery more than freedom.

    • Leo Yohansen
      Leo Yohansen 2 months ago

      Scott Ledridge, what didn't exacerbate border states after the EP had no reason to have exacerbated them before as the contraband issue had only been an issue pertaining to the states at war, not those remaining in the Union. As for the issue of abolition, take that up with the person I had been responding to about "Both the Union and the Confederacy had maintained slavery throughout the war." before making an erroneous claim that "No one is saying that they didn't". So, okay, I was wrong about the Missouri Compromise as the issue actually goes back even further to the Northwest Ordinance which of course changes nothing as the issue remains the same. The southern states had wanted to protect their economic interests by maintaining their national influence. Once they had perceived their national influence to have been significantly diminished as the result of the newly elected administration, they sought secession. You can argue all you want on whether or not their perceptions had been justified but it doesn't change the fact that that is how they had seen it. There had been no issue of expansion apart from the issue of maintaining their national political influence. Feeling politically marginalized had been the immediate cause that had led to secession. Had Lincoln lost the election, the very same issues would have all remained without the same degree of perceived political marginalization.

    • Scott Ledridge
      Scott Ledridge 2 months ago +1

      +Leo Yohansen Declaring captured slaves contraband before the EP was necessary as slaves were constitutionally considered property, and to dismiss that and free them outright would have exacerbated the Border states, whom they were trying to keep from rebelling. But, again, abolition wasn't the goal of the federal government. So, that the federal government wasn't immediately freeing the slaves isn't surprising.
      "also suspiciously gives no context as an issue of expansion had not been an issue until the Missouri Compromise... " - It's certainly more context than "political freedom". But, sure, we can continue to develop context.
      You're wrong on the Missouri Compromise. Before then, any new states forming from the federal territories would be free, per Jefferson's Northwest Ordinance. The South didn't want an imbalance of free and slave states, so the compromise was born.
      The Kansas Nebraska Act made it so that new forming states would be able to choose. But, after losing Kansas as a slave state, the South saw their ability to win new states as nil. Hence, Lincoln's insistence that slavery be restricted to where it existed, led the South to rebel.
      "... we see that the ultimate cause in the eyes of the south had not been an issue of expansion but one of growing sectional unconstitutional restrictions..." - Here we go again... In what way were things"sectional"? In the ways of slavery.
      As pointed out, you're wrong on the pre-Missouri Compromise era. So, as Lincoln pointed out in his Cooper Union Speech, the federal government's ability to restrict slavery was neither unconstitutional or controversial to the Founders or anyone else, until the South decided it was so.
      And even after the 1860 election, there was nothing unconstitutional. The Kansas Nebraska Act still stood. Lincoln had done nothing at that point. He hadn't tried to reverse the Kansas Nebraska Act. He hadn't tried to interfere with slavery. Even Alexander Stephens told the Georgia legislature that to leave when nothing unconstitutional had happened would put them on the wrong side of history. In fact, if anything had happened, but it happened legally, that still wouldn't have been unconstitutional.
      Slavery as a vehicle still means that slavery was the issue. Since you brought up the South Carolina's secession declaration to say that slavery was just a vehicle... Let's look at what it says:
      "The people of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled, on the 26th day of April, A.D., 1852, declared that the frequent violations of the Constitution of the United States, by the Federal Government, and its encroachments upon the reserved rights of the States, fully justified this State in then withdrawing from the Federal Union; but in deference to the opinions and wishes of the other slaveholding States, she forbore at that time to exercise this right..." - So, they, as well as the other slaveholding states take issue with things the non-slaveholding states were doing. I wonder what could be the contentious issues between slaveholding and non-slaveholding states. And why South Carolina thought it relevant to make that distinction.
      They go on to give a misrepresented history lesson... I guess they forgot who James Madison was.
      Then they complain about the lack of enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act by the Free states. Which is fair. But, the Free states had a problem with that, too. The Free states didn't want to participate in the institution of slavery. They thought it should be a federal matter (which it was). Whenever the federal government was called upon to enforce it, they did.
      _"a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction."_ - Again, there was a particular way they were sectional.
      _"This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety."_ - They don't want equality with what they believed should be slaves.
      *_"On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States."_* - Expansion.
      Then they wrap up. So, again, expansion was the immediate cause. Without it slavery was assuredly doomed.
      "Now, as for Thomas Jefferson, I never said he couldn't relinquish his legal social privilege, I mentioned the fact that he didn't. That only after his death did he allow his slaves to be free." - I didn't say you said it. I said that. He couldn't relinquish because they weren't his to relinquish. He made arrangements for some to be freed because, through the sale of 130 slaves, his debts were paid.

    • Leo Yohansen
      Leo Yohansen 2 months ago

      Scott Ledridge, the Union declaring escaped and captured slaves to have been contraband at the beginning of the war was neither otherwise illegal nor a problem for exacerbating things as it had ended after the Emancipation Proclamation. In addition, to simply say "Again, abolition wasn't the issue. It was expansion. It's the same reason the South didn't take the Corwin Amendment. Neither the EP nor the Corwin Amendment did anything to ensure the expansion of slavery." also suspiciously gives no context as an issue of expansion had not been an issue until the Missouri Compromise had imposed a national geographical restriction that at the time had threatened future southern influence in national politics and therefore had threatened southern economic interests. Until that time, any state had been free to either accept or prohibit slavery and the specific expansion of slavery had not been at issue. It wasn't until the Missouri Compromise had made it an issue that both northern and southern political interests had then sought to expand their influence to newly admitted states especially after the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. So, when the Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union had been issued, we see that the ultimate cause in the eyes of the south had not been an issue of expansion but one of growing sectional unconstitutional restrictions that had then demanded secession under the newly elected Republican executive office. Independence from political restrictions and diminishing national political representation of interests had been the cause. Slavery had simply been at the foundation of those economic interests just as opium had been at the foundation of the economic interests of the British during the Opium Wars. Once secession had been declared, there could be no interest in expansion without expected violent conflict with any territory claimed by the Union. The interest in expansion had been within the political context of influence within the federal Union. Once influence within the federal union had no longer been seen as a viable objective, secession had been sought. Now, as for Thomas Jefferson, I never said he couldn't relinquish his legal social privilege, I mentioned the fact that he didn't. That only after his death did he allow his slaves to be free.

  • Janet Shore
    Janet Shore 3 months ago

    your a joke fool.. Even Abe didn't want to stop slavery fool.. He stated that a black man will never equal a white man...

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 months ago

      Lincoln opposed slavery his entire political career, and he freed 4 million slaves. Hell, he's the only reason you don't own slaves today.

  • charles belser
    charles belser 3 months ago

    I could not make it past the first couple of minutes of ghetto hand signs , vulgarities and obvious liberal prejudices . This is why our young people are hopeless fools.

  • Tony Campbell
    Tony Campbell 3 months ago +1

    General Sherman went too easy on the South.

  • Dan Lewis
    Dan Lewis 3 months ago

    I enjoyed the video. Also please stop using memespeak #this symbol takes up space words are meant to be in. #stop it.

  • wholeNwon
    wholeNwon 3 months ago

    Difficult to disagree with any of that but the sophomoric jive talk and need to intersperse coarse language with compelling arguments is unbecoming the subject (and the speaker).

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 months ago

      I can't believe anyone would use coarse language on the Internet!!! Sorry you needed a trigger warning.

  • Mr. NoChill
    Mr. NoChill 3 months ago

    Ive known Abraham Lincoln didnt make that happen out of the kindness of his heart since i was 5! It was politics and buisness

  • Anime Lover
    Anime Lover 3 months ago +6

    For those who are equating Robert E Lee and George Washington thats wrong. George Washington betrayed Britain and I’m sure they don’t have statues of him in parks or monuments. Robert E Lee betrayed the union, the country we are today. So why should we celebrate they one who tried to separate us the same as the one who made us?

    • Hairyparrot
      Hairyparrot 2 months ago

      obviously.... you don't read everything, or read well. you have a real hang up over "beloved slavery". maybe your ignorance, or narrative of the civil war blinds your coherency. you seem to post the same arguments over and over and others see you as ignorant. i see it as blindness of the issues. good luck and as someone once said... reading is fundamental.

    • Hairyparrot
      Hairyparrot 2 months ago

      P.S. how is slavery beloved? it was an unfortunate part/ingredient of an agrarian society/economy of the Colonies and later the United States. from the African continent, to the fields of the south and some northern states all who dealt with slavery were complicit..... white and black.

    • Hairyparrot
      Hairyparrot 2 months ago

      History is a set of lies agreed upon. Napoleon Bonaparte
      History is mostly guessing; the rest is prejudice. Will Durant
      Poetry is nearer to vital truth than history. Plato
      Difficulty is the excuse history never accepts. Edward R. Murrow
      History books that contain no lies are extremely dull. Anatole France
      Watch the History Channel if you want it literal and historically perfect. Emily Blunt
      You don’t hate history, you hate the way it was taught to you in high school. Stephen Ambrose
      Each one writes history according to his convenience. Jose Rizal
      We must admit that history is enjoyable to a large extent because it enables us to pass judgement on the past. Douglas Hurd
      People take the longest possible paths, digress to numerous dead ends, and make all kinds of mistakes. Then historians come along and write summaries of this messy, nonlinear process and make it appear like a simple, straight line. Dean Kamen
      The moral is don't cherry pick history to fit a narrative. History is a far more complicated, perplexing and painful thing/event that humans visit upon themselves continuously (it's not a crime show solving crimes in 60 minutes, or less) ......

  • seiwat wow
    seiwat wow 3 months ago

    It is widely known that General Ulysses S Grant owned more slaves than Robert E Lee Robert E Lee also was the person who attempted to heal the country after the war by being the first person to take communion in a church with a newly freed black slave get your history straight before you disparage of families Legacy Robert E Lee was also the godson of George Washington and married Martha Washington's niece you don't know what you're talking about when you talk about him

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 months ago

      Ulysses S. Grant personally owned multiple slaves? Really? How many slaves did he own? When did he own them? Where did they live? What were their names?
      Robert E. Lee was Washington's godson? Really? When was Lee born? And when did Washington die?
      LOL!!!

  • Zp Hedwig
    Zp Hedwig 3 months ago

    Gator Bait

  • Jeffrey Robinson
    Jeffrey Robinson 3 months ago

    Would you so quickly condemn the Aztecs for human sacrifice, Polynesians for infanticide and murdering young children who were ‘ugly’. The Muslims who first started to remove large numbers of black Africans as slaves long before the America was discovered by the west?
    Slaves were a normal part of civilization for 5000+ years, and represented an enormous amount of wealth. When the north ended slavery they didn’t free the slaves, they sold them south. Now the north was maneuvering to end slaver sans payment to the owners.
    The war wasn’t about slavery it was about the destruction of southern wealth.

    • Jeffrey Robinson
      Jeffrey Robinson 3 months ago

      The Elders the only difference is in your mind. There are today members of PETA who think the killing of an animal is the same as killing a human.
      The Germans were ashamed of killing the Jews and tried to hide it. When caught they tried to blame someone else. Contrast that to the Japanese who did not run from what they did or try to ‘pass the buck’, because the Japanese leaders did what was acceptable in their society.
      Look up the triangle trade. Look who was making wealth off of slavery. Until a few Christians in the late eighteenth century, mostly Quakers, started thinking about it, no one in the world thought the institution of slavery was morally wrong. This includes slaves. As many enslaved people bought and owned slaves after they were freed. Spaces formed the bases of the late Egyptian army, they took over Egypt and became slave owners. Some of the large plantations of Louisiana and Arkansas were Blacks whose ancestors had been slaves. Enslaved Pueblo people rebelled drove out Spanish and enslaved Hopi and Comanche people.

    • The Elders
      The Elders 3 months ago

      Jeffrey Robinson Most of those slaves were freed, SOME others were sold. Unfourtunently, due to them being 'personal property' the owners could choose either one. Owning and hurting another human being is far cry from not eating meat. For thousands of years, most people would imprison those who thought the earth was round. That's not justified because it was there way of life. Nazi soilders are not obstained from blame because killing jews was their way of life.

    • Jeffrey Robinson
      Jeffrey Robinson 3 months ago

      The Elders what do you think the north did with its slaves,all the states of the north at one time had slavery in their borders.All those slaves were sold not freed. Slaves got to the south in north made bottoms. Try to divorce emotion from your thinking. Slaves had been a normal part of civilization for the whole of civilization history. Then suddenly people were being told the whole basis of their civilization was evil and the basis of their wealth was wrong. How do you think you would react?
      Imagine if veganism came to be normal. Would you think it fair your life was condemned because you ate meat? How about the man boy live society. I think the people who want sex with children are evil. What if their ideas become mainstream. Do you think instantly 2000 years of western civilizations view of protecting children becomes instantly evil?
      We think what’s normal and right is what our society tells us is normal and right. Few of us can think out side of the box, and fewer still very far out of the box. Slavery still exist in Africa ran by people who think it’s right. Girls are still mutilated by people who thinkGod demand it. While I can condemn the act, I stop to think about how the people living that life saw the world.

    • The Elders
      The Elders 3 months ago

      Jeffrey Robinson We condemm all of the people you mentioned. Something being a normal part of something doezn't make it right. The north did not sell slaves to the south, because that's not how that worked. No the north was not sabotoging the south, because that leaves the now military weakend south open for invasion, which is the oppisite of what the north wanted.

  • Punjig
    Punjig 3 months ago +1

    This guy is ABSOLUTLEY WRONG. If people would take the time to read the Corwin Amendment and the Johnson-Crittenden Resolution they would see that they clearly dispel the myth of slavery being the cause of the war. The Marxist-indoctrinated crowd just doesn’t get it. The War of Northern Aggression had NOTHING to do with slavery, but was fought to repel an illegal invasion of sovereign states that had legally seceded from an over-reaching, intrusive, tyrannical, overtaxing government. Slavery was a dying institution and no other country on the planet waged a war to end slavery. It died a natural death everywhere else, so why do people think we needed a war here to end it? The North hated blacks and were not invading the South to free the black race. What sense does that make when there were more Union officers and soldiers who owned slaves than there were Confederates soldiers who owned slaves? If people would take the time to read the Corwin Amendment and the Johnson-Crittenden Resolution they would see that they clearly dispel the myth of slavery being the cause of the war. Lincoln threatened war in his inaugural address when he stated that the duties and imposts would be collected from the seceded states "by force if necessary". He could not bear to lose the revenues being unconstitutionally extracted from the South because the South was footing over 80% of the federal tax bill while the rich Northern industrialists and bankers were reaping the benefits. The war was all about ending self-government, subjugating the people of the South, looting the natural resources of the South for the benefit of the North, and establishing a strong, centralized government that would have control over the states. The CSA seceded and fought for the same reasons that our Founding Fathers seceded from and fought Great Britain. If slavery was the cause, as the Marxists contend, then isn’t it strange that not one letter, not one, has been found from either Confederate or union soldiers stating that this is what they were fighting about? Instead, numerous letters found from Confederate soldiers state that they were fighting for independence and in defense of their homes and families. Letters from union soldiers state that they were fighting to “restore the union”. The Confederate Battle Flag and all the Confederate monuments have nothing to do with slavery or white supremacy, but a people who defied tyranny and fought to preserve the Constitution and the principles upon which our Founders established a new country. Lincoln was for white supremacy. Just read his quotes about the inferiority of the black race and how he had never been in favor of making voters or jurors out of them. Yet he is worshiped as the Great Emancipator. He freed nobody. The 13th Amendment ended slavery, eight months after the war was over. These lunatics taking down Confederate monuments are no different than Nazis or ISIS by attempting to destroy and rewrite history. And quit putting the blame for slavery on the South. It was the Yankee slave traders who brought the slaves to America, flying Old Glory on the masts of the slave ships. Not one single slave ship ever flew a Confederate flag. These "take'em down" idiots are puppets for the global puppet masters seeking to destroy every bit of our history, culture, and Christianity. It won't stop with Confederate monuments. Washington and Jefferson will be next. What about the White House and other beautiful historic buildings in Washington D.C. built by slaves? Will they be taken down too? The hypocrisy of the Marxist left is easy to see. They tolerate only what they agree with, but expect EVERYONE else to tolerate the left's views. Communists is what they are. A blight on our soil and a disgrace to the great people of history who fought to make us free. It is particularly sad to see Southerners doing the bidding of the Cultural Marxists. These Marxists are never satisfied.

    • The Elders
      The Elders 3 months ago

      Punjig I name call because you give the implication of supporting slavery, and ignorantly insult my beleif system! Slavery is an EVIL, CORRUPT, system. Btw, if that's your only response to everything I said, I'm going to guess my work is done.

    • Punjig
      Punjig 3 months ago

      +The Elders "I'm A Christian" So why do you instist on name calling just because you have a differance of oppinion. Also, don't precieve to know anything about me or my politics, my post had NOTHING to do with politics. It is just simple facts. No, I don't support an "Evil, Corrupt System" I support the TRUTH. You see the truth is that the Victors (Re-) Write history. I don't see LEFT Wing or RIGHT Wing, I see the head of the bird! Your vote only MAKEs you feel empowered, yet you have NO Power. Trump is a Scam played on the American People and so was Obama. I plead with you and everyone else, learn the REAL History and then you will understand.

    • The Elders
      The Elders 3 months ago

      Punjig Also, no slave ship flew the conferderate flag because slave importing grinded to a halt when the confederacy started. They didn't HAVE a flag, moron! Also, no we are not! I'm a christian! Just because someone disagrees with you politicaly does not mean they disagree on everything. The white house is stare propert, and it and everything else you mentioned have monuement docterates, stopping the possibility of tearing them down. Jefferson and washington fought for freedom, and although they owned slaves, one was quoted saying it was wrong, and freed his slaves when he died, and the other married a slave, and freed her and children upon his death, giving her the plantation. Seems like redemption to me. Leftist ideals dirrectly conflict with communist ideals. If you think half the country are horrible people for not voting the same as you, your just a terrible person.

    • The Elders
      The Elders 3 months ago

      Punjig No, the war was about stopping people from running off with union land, union money, and owning other FUCKING human beings! The south was not like the revelutionarys, because unlike the founding fathers, they had no good reason to leave. Also, stop calling us marxist. Liberal is not marxist you bafoon! The letter thing was bullshit. In fact, most of the black union soilders fought to free family in the south. Yes, many southern soilders fought for southern pride and not slaves, but many nazi's fought for german pride and not jew killing. You are stilll supporting an evil, corrupt system.

    • The Elders
      The Elders 3 months ago

      Punjig The Union officers owning slaves is false, as in most of the north, slavery was illegal.
      Yes, lincoln said he would collect taxes by force if nessesary. That's because they weren't paying their fucking taxes! That is illegal. If you don't agree with your government, just try not paying taxes. You live on union bought land, you follow union rules.
      Taxes are not unconstitutional, that's fucking stupid. Also, the north paid more taxes.

  • Bob Johnson
    Bob Johnson 3 months ago

    This is America, we can erect a monument to whoever we want to and so can you.

  • 31st Virginia Reenactors

    Alright, before you say ANYTHING about me loving the CSA, I don’t and to be honest I hate them. However this video is vastly oversimplified but In a way Neo-Confederates don’t think about, people think BOTH sides were fight over slavery, as if they argued, “slavery is good” and “slavery is bad”.The south seceded over slavery but the north fought to keep the Union. So it IS fair to say it was over slavery, but both sides weren’t fighting over it.

  • Jinx
    Jinx 3 months ago

    First of all, Robert E Lee fought in the Civil War because he chose his State over the Union....that is a well documented FACT. Secondly the ONLY treason trials at the end of the war were those involving the people involved in the murder of Lincoln, so while many southerners were viewed as traitors, they were never tried and convicted as such. Last but not least, you all forget one very important point here. In accusing those who fought for the South in the war of being 'racist', you are using modern sensibilities and hoisting them onto people who lived over one hundred years ago. Slavery was wrong, here in 2018 we fully understand that. People of color are equal, in all aspects, to whites, here in 2018 we fully understand that. In 1861 it was the fundemental belief of the vast majority of white Americans (South AND North) that slaves were a lesser form of human being. Even by the end of the war in 1865, those beliefs still held firm. Today, the vast majority of us know that those beliefs were incorrect, just a tiny minority still cling to those out dated views. But back in the 1800's the opposite was the case, the brave minority who spoke up, and fought, for the slaves to be free were viewed to be quite mad in some cases. To say that 'the south' fought for slavery is incorrect, the causes of the American Civil War were many and varied, and so where the reasons why many southerners fought for the Confederacy.

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 months ago

      Slavery was wrong in 1861, and people knew it. Every other Western nation had long since abolished slavery, the new Republican Party explicitly opposed slavery, and Uncle Tom's Cabin was the best-selling novel of the 19th century.
      To say the South fought for your beloved slavery is simply true; the rebels cited "slave" and "slavery" a whopping 80 separate times in their own declarations of secession and said "Our position is *thoroughly identified* with the institution of slavery -- the greatest material interest in the world." Lincoln agreed, saying "One section of our nation believes slavery is *right* and ought to be extended, while the other believes it is *wrong* and ought not to be extended. This is the ONLY substantial dispute." The same is true today. Southerners and other Americans believe slavery is morally wrong and indefensible, and racists don't. Simple.
      www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states

  • William Sullivan
    William Sullivan 3 months ago

    I would have loved having this guy as a history teacher.

  • nietzsche Freud
    nietzsche Freud 3 months ago

    N@d!

  • MrFelblood
    MrFelblood 3 months ago

    4:33 Er ... By that logic, George Washington was a traitor who chose the 13 Colonies over the British Empire.
    There is a meaningful difference between fighting for your freedom of self-determination and fighting for your freedom to deprive others of their self-determination. Reducing such moral complexities to "Rebels bad; empires good," is not a positive step. Even if the persons who were totally in the wrong were also the ones who violated the Code of Chivalry, that isn't what makes them wrong.

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 months ago

      Of course George Washington was a traitor. He knew he'd be hung to death if they lost, like Nathan Hale. But George Washington wasn't fighting for a "cornerstone" of neverending slavery and white supremacism.

  • Ellis Copeland
    Ellis Copeland 3 months ago

    definitely a "middle" school teacher. he has an 8th grade understanding at best

  • Nick Shepherd
    Nick Shepherd 3 months ago

    Oh my, these are all easy hypotheses to research though non of them can be proven as fact but only best guesses considering the cherry picked information used to sight the given ideas. In truth there are many reasons why over 600,000 people were willing to pay the ultimate price during the Civil War. If you want to find some first hand accounts I would suggest going to the numerous journals that are preserved from the time period and formulate your own ideas as to why states turned away from the federal government. Perhaps checking the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights to see what it has to say about the states. Oh and also while your at it look into the taxation and tariff systems of the time period. A good read of the Confederate Constitution may also help. Point being history is in the telling but always question the teller or you will only know the one narrative presented. Free thought and free thinking truly does belong to the people.

  • Cyclo TeChTwIsTeR
    Cyclo TeChTwIsTeR 3 months ago

    If you're going to bring up Black slavery you need to mention how your great great great Grand Parents sold your asses in the First place. Does that Truth not matter? #BlackRacist

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 months ago

      LOL. Confederate slavery was morally right and never should have ended because other, long-dead black people were involved in the slave trade in the 1600s. BEST. ARGUMENT. EVER!!!

  • Arthur Morgan
    Arthur Morgan 3 months ago

    Robert E. Lee was right they were better off here and not being enslaved by blacks that treated them worse and did not have the technology the us had or Europe would not to day be dieting from Ebola and other diseases, Oh and not be invaded by Germany, France, UK, Belgium, Italy, and 5he us that btw had the smallest Colony their and was to send blacks their to Colonize their home but we all know that ended. Btw the south did not go war with the us the us attacked them but I do support the us

    • RonPaulHatesBlacks
      RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 months ago

      Such a great point. Black people should be THANKING white people for the honor and privilege of being raped, whipped, and lynched!!! YOU'RE WELCOME.

  • Tina Clayton
    Tina Clayton 3 months ago

    Yeah! Let's displace all the "native" americans and take their land! You know, the land that warring tribes took from each other!

  • dbltrplx
    dbltrplx 3 months ago

    What is more unfortunate is there is another one coming that is going to make the last one look like a square dance.