Johnny Reb or Yankee? Which are you?

I find the Civil War to be one of the most interesting times of American History. Even today, 150 years later, people are still very passionate about this war and what it meant. When I was younger I always assumed I would have fought for the North. As I evolved into my more Libertarian adult self I changed my mind and would have been a Confederate.

Seeing how I changed over time I can only imagine how confusing it was for brothers, fathers and sons who all ended up fighting on opposite sides during the war. Your average soldier didn't own slaves and didn't care about slavery one way or the other. Your average soldier was either passionate about the Union or a freedom loving Southerner who felt his state had a legal right to leave the United States whenever they felt the Feds no longer represented their best interest.

Anyway, I know I believe in the cause of the Southern man. I believe that his fight for freedom from Federal tyranny was just, slavery not withstanding. I live in Cincinnati which is a border city between the North and South. We have the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center here and have an interesting history here as the first stop of freedom for escaping slaves.

I am not debating slavery as it was obviously an abhorrent practice. I understand it could be a deciding factor for fighting for the North, but I am more interested if you believe the South had a right to secede? Are you a Johnny Reb or a Yank?

a reply to: Metallicus

I kind of like em both....

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Metallicus

I kind of like em both....

I agree. They both have good arguments on their side.

This is what is so fascinating about the war. People could fall on one side or the other or somewhere in-between. These were your neighbors, relatives and friends you were fighting. Even many of the generals on both sides were friends. It was just a very strange, weird, difficult time.

One of my favorite mini-series was North and South along with The Blue and the Gray. Both dealt a bit with the war from perspective of family and friendship ties more than simply the historical perspective. It's those human issues along with the plethora of great generals that make the period so very interesting to me.

a reply to: Metallicus

I always liked johny reb, but then I like the underdog.

Plus slavery aside I can agree with the fear of such a powerful central government, today shows there fears were correct.

Plus I tend to like southerners. Everyone I met in the north tended to be arrogant arse holes, so I can understand why they would want to pick up a rifle and shoot them

It always amazes me, that a country that had been in existence for less than 100 years decided to blow itself apart.

Judging from your post you know next to nothing about the Confederacy and have fallen for the "freedom loving South" crap that many people have fallen for. Read the Confederate Constitution and you will find out that you would have less freedoms had the South won the war instead of the North. Not to mention if you were black then you would have no freedom at all. Constitution of the Confederate States; March 11, 1861 So the "freedom loving South" is nothing but a joke.

a reply to: buster2010

Yes, well, it's pretty obvious to all of us that you're a Fed-loving Yankee.

My allegiance is with the Union, but my heart is with the South. Slavery holds no interest for me as it hasn't existed in the US for over a hundred years and my family's never owned salves. Unfortunately if the South had won, we would probably be speaking German. With out the full power of the US, to assets England, Russia and the rest of the Allies, I expect the Axes powers would have won WWII.

Even now I think the Federal system is far too powerful, and the true power should reside with the states.

At this point I think the US is too far gone to relinquish power back to the states, and the wants or needs of the shrinking middle class fall on deaf ears. I have no supporting links, just my humble opinion.

a reply to: Metallicus

Very similar to your thoughts...I have tried being liberal and conservative, and neither fit the bill, but there isn't much about the libertarian ideals that I disagree with. And I, too, with the issue of slavery removed, would have been more in line with the thinking of the confederates.

And I also live in the Cincinnati area (Erlanger, in NKY). Nice to know I'm not alone around here, in thought or location.

That was then. This is now. I would have been neither. Still wouldn't be. Just as I wouldn't have chosen a side in the Revolutionary War. Wars are fought for the greater wealth of already rich men. People that fight their wars are suckers.


Conflicts of ethnic cleansing do not apply to this standard above.

We do have to remember though extremely brave men died both sides.

Civil wars are the most bloody and heart wrenching. And really no ones wins.

I doubt many in the rank and file of either side fought for any grand idea or evil idea except for there fellow brother in arms at there side.

originally posted by: alldaylong

It always amazes me, that a country that had been in existence for less than 100 years decided to blow itself apart.

Britan has had plenty of civil wars.

We may have one of the longest running and stable governments but to get there we had to fight more than a few civil wars ourselves from 1066 right up till 1651 or 1783 if you count our little spat with our American brothers.

The USA is lucky its only had to do it once.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: buster2010

Yes, well, it's pretty obvious to all of us that you're a Fed-loving Yankee.

Freedom loving Yankee tyvm.

I think I would have sided with the First Peoples and organized a retaking of the Americas from the colonials. The end of the civil war would have been a perfect time to strike. Perhaps with the backing of Tsarists Russia we could have at least carved out a nation and not be pushed to near extinction as has been the case we have now. This might be a good plot for an alternate timeline fiction come to think of it.

a reply to: Metallicus

And it was primarily the southern states that didn't 'pay their fair share' of Federal expects that brought about the Constitution and the Federal right to tax.

Yep - the south (and that's a very loose catagory) wants all the protections of the Federal Government but doesn't want to pay for it.

Only the states, not Congress, had the authority to impose taxes and raise revenue.

Accordingly, Congress had to request for funds from the states. Per Article VIII, these funds “shall be supplied by the several States in proportion to the value of all land within each State.” 6 How that money was raised, within each state, was up to the state legislatures.

Unfortunately, this money was oftentimes not raised by the states or given to the national government long after it was due.

As a result, Congress faced substantial revenue shortfalls.

Without payment from the states, Congress struggled to pay off America’s foreign debts and was incapable of fulfilling its other tasks, such as managing foreign affairs. Moreover, the unpredictability of the central government’s revenue stream made establishing a national budget nearly impossible. Not knowing how much and when states were going to pay their share severely handicapped an already-limited national government.

ushistoryscene.com...

originally posted by: machineintelligence
I think I would have sided with the First Peoples and organized a retaking of the Americas from the colonials. The end of the civil war would have been a perfect time to strike. Perhaps with the backing of Tsarists Russia we could have at least carved out a nation and not be pushed to near extinction as has been the case we have now. This might be a good plot for an alternate timeline fiction come to think of it.

You must be a Canadian...First Nations peoples and such...
Never could have happened in the US. The (and by the I mean some of my kin as well) American Indian tribes had suffered great losses of life by the horrid conditions forced upon them by the US government before the Civil War. Sure some Cherokee and other southern tribes fought with the "rebs", but the rest could barely survive let alone fight a war at that point.

I do really dig the sentiment though and the idea.

originally posted by: crazyewok
We do have to remember though extremely brave men died both sides.

Civil wars are the most bloody and heart wrenching. And really no ones wins.

I doubt many in the rank and file of either side fought for any grand idea or evil idea except for there fellow brother in arms at there side.

Crazy, I have really enjoyed your posts as of late. I think I might actually be starting to like you.

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: crazyewok
We do have to remember though extremely brave men died both sides.

Civil wars are the most bloody and heart wrenching. And really no ones wins.

I doubt many in the rank and file of either side fought for any grand idea or evil idea except for there fellow brother in arms at there side.

Crazy, I have really enjoyed your posts as of late. I think I might actually be starting to like you.

Haha I do grow on people

Like you I do like my history and the civil war is a intresting if not tragic period.

I like reading some of the memos and dispatchs from both side as it can really remind you that they were real people.

I'm going to claim Miccosukee/Seminole and mind My own bee's wax...

Will You have some Maize?


namaste