"The Outlaw Josie Wales", "Segregation Forever" and Asa Carter. Just a taste of the American History

[American hist]

Oct 6, 2022 6:38:50 GMT simon darkshade said:

That’s really a bit all over the place. The original notion - that we should respect the opinions of different historians - is a bit of a motherhood statement and at its heart incorrect. Rather, we should respect those who earn it through their scholarship and works. Not just because of the likes of David Irving, but because no one should get a free pass.

Sure, read what different types have to say, but don’t extend that principle to the long obsolete Lost Cause without a darn good argument in their favour.

I don't think president and historian Woodrow Wilson or at least most dubebed lost cause historians including Shellby foot belong under the rank or comparison of David irving. I mean is to say is historian's often say different things, but that doesn't mean they are wrong or nessarly right. I actually have not read a work that was considered lost cause nor do i consider them a relabel source for information. I would like to read William c Davis work The Cause Lost: Myths and Realities of the Confederacy along with The Myth of the Lost Cause which the author of this post suggested and I had long planned on reading it.My favorite historian of the civil war is proably william c davis who was also called a lost causer by Ah member

In AH I was considered a "lost causer" when I was presenting historical facts of a displeasing behavior of union troops running away. They also confused the reforms of the army of the potamic including Washington's 1862 impregnable defenses with 1861 scant defenses of Washington city.

[American hist]

a historians review



It would have done no justice had Stonewall Jackson not been shown as a horrendous teacher now, the students appear bored out of their soaks but that isn't shown as the professor's fault. My family members who did teach noted that their students often expected to be entertained, but the 19th century isn't our century . I have been listening to the great courses, and he pointed out that the lost causers were not all lies and misconceptions plus, he pointed out they had a point that the North could have done better treating its POWs. I would say Lincoln is much more guilty of Jefferson Davis for his treatment of pows than Davis. Still, while the film could have allowed more neutrality, it is unmistakenly pro-southern, pro confederate, which those teams do not age well to a general audience. agree or disagree with the blog what this professor said about the film it could be said the film gets so much right perhaps and yet so much not for its necessary inaccurcys but the film not providing a disclaimer or point that tells the audience that slavery sucks and it is what caused the film. The outlaw josie wales is for entertainment not history learning vice versia could be said about Gods and generals if it was more about military history

[American hist]

The South preferred state rights because they generally served the South well and could be used as a scape goat. The south before the civil war was a Jacksonian Democratic bastion and when whigs did when they were southern whigs whom were typically slave-owned slaves. The southern whigs were not strong enough to impact the 7 cotton states' constitutions as the document prevents protective tariffs, internal improvements, crony capitalism, and corporate welfare. When I read Kenneth's stamps work How the war came Taught me that it wasn't a myth that many more Yankees if not perhaps the majority of northern people were taking more faith in a stronger centralized government. The Jacksonian party was already declining and losing power as many historians note the Jacksonian spirit went away in 1854 after slavery tore our country apart. Now before the civil war when politicians talked about state rights, it often divided our great nation further, but it was always used to advocate for slavery. In the Jim crow times people used state Rights to have Jim Crow programs. Some people tries to use this propaganda to show how the south wasn't as bad after all A little bit of truth is dangerous goes the saying The black Confederate myths and reality Back to-state rights was a more popular idea in the 19th century which isn't well defined just as much of the lost cause isn't always well defined.

State rights can be anything one wants it to be however while we are in the statute destruction conversation What are we going to do with the union monuments don't always fit a Convenientnartive I believe that the south is or has been obsessed with white supremacy and the whole race issue because it was so relevant to it's daily life and whatever complicated race relations that existed during the days of slavery turned even worse during him crow(which I'm not defending slavery) With the Confederate flag Hate or heritage? This issue has affected where I work as a volunteer at a civil war site. While I don't believe a swastika flag is the eguivilant the CSA battle flag I believe it should be replaced with other civil war flags like the stars and bars csa flag or my favorite the bonnie blue flag that better represents the south/csa more Nobel attributes and aspirations
I feel that it is a yes and no answer if their needs to be school books to be rewritten ,but most students won’t come across the same lost cause history and from the beginning the northern perpective dominated acdimic civil war studies. Pouplmedia as long as I can remember was pro north. The littles rebel, the general, we're over 50 years ago And there were many pro-union books movies and narratives since the civil war ended. While the general was a real life train while I acknowledge that historical event far before I knew of the silent film and later , made the connection

[American hist]

To be Frank, everything about the South or the CSA is considered racist unless it’s about black people. While this isn't supposed to be political but I have to say the current trends have affected my politics and how I view the world. I do think atuns films are helpful, but I think they have done more damage to our society than good. Now that our last veterans are dying off the public is more interested in ww2 and that is probably a good thing as it teaches us fascism is bad, it later moves the viewer with a Gi living happily ever after. I was interested in history as a youngster and when I started to pick up sides it impacted which historical parties should I say ideologies I liked. Before that my political identification was what ever my parents voted for and things later evolved. The South has lost so much and it's continuing to be defeated it. It might as well be changing your name and identity. However, I guess this will be the last Checkmate Lincoln video as I enjoyed it when the historian was present, but I was ready for it to end. The lost causes and csa people knew that history will judge them one day.

[mspence]

I think you need to take Josie Wales for what it was, a Clint Eastwood movie with a variation of his "Man with No Name" character, a guy who did fight for the South but who ultimately realized it was a lost cause, and became an outlaw after he escaped getting gunned down along with the rest of most of his former comrades by a vengeful Northern Senator.
"North and South book II" despite its soap opera shenanigans, remains a favorite of mine from the 80s.
As for rewriting history, the North did this too, portraying the war as a simple black and white struggle between good Yankees and evil Southerners, the "lost cause" myth didn't really start until several decades after the war under the Daughters of the Confederacy who promoted Southern history books with the South's POV. Hollywood has always been more about entertainment than accuracy at any rate.

[miletus12]

Jun 5, 2023 4:18:34 GMT mspence said:

I think you need to take Josie Wales for what it was, a Clint Eastwood movie with a variation of his "Man with No Name" character, a guy who did fight for the South but who ultimately realized it was a lost cause, and became an outlaw after he escaped getting gunned down along with the rest of most of his former comrades by a vengeful Northern Senator.
"North and South book II" despite its soap opera shenanigans, remains a favorite of mine from the 80s.
As for rewriting history, the North did this too, portraying the war as a simple black and white struggle between good Yankees and evil Southerners, the "lost cause" myth didn't really start until several decades after the war under the Daughters of the Confederacy who promoted Southern history books with the South's POV. Hollywood has always been more about entertainment than accuracy at any rate.

You take propaganda and strike it down wherever you find it. "Entertainment" built on a lie perpetuates the lie. 

Miletus
 

[stevep]

Jun 6, 2023 18:55:14 GMT miletus12 said:

Jun 5, 2023 4:18:34 GMT mspence said:

I think you need to take Josie Wales for what it was, a Clint Eastwood movie with a variation of his "Man with No Name" character, a guy who did fight for the South but who ultimately realized it was a lost cause, and became an outlaw after he escaped getting gunned down along with the rest of most of his former comrades by a vengeful Northern Senator.
"North and South book II" despite its soap opera shenanigans, remains a favorite of mine from the 80s.
As for rewriting history, the North did this too, portraying the war as a simple black and white struggle between good Yankees and evil Southerners, the "lost cause" myth didn't really start until several decades after the war under the Daughters of the Confederacy who promoted Southern history books with the South's POV. Hollywood has always been more about entertainment than accuracy at any rate.

You take propaganda and strike it down wherever you find it. "Entertainment" built on a lie perpetuates the lie. 

Miletus
 

  That would mean banning probably the majority of Hollywood's historical output.  Even higher proportions in some other countries.

[miletus12]

Jun 6, 2023 21:09:56 GMT stevep said:

Jun 6, 2023 18:55:14 GMT miletus12 said:

You take propaganda and strike it down wherever you find it. "Entertainment" built on a lie perpetuates the lie. 

Miletus
 

  That would mean banning probably the majority of Hollywood's historical output.  Even higher proportions in some other countries.

You do not censor. You educate. There is a BIG difference.   

[stevep]

Jun 6, 2023 21:22:40 GMT miletus12 said:

Jun 6, 2023 21:09:56 GMT stevep said:

  That would mean banning probably the majority of Hollywood's historical output.  Even higher proportions in some other countries.

You do not censor. You educate. There is a BIG difference.   

  You can only educate if the target population want to learn something different.  Which is even more difficult if the lying is allowed to continue unopposed.

[miletus12]

Jun 7, 2023 8:26:14 GMT stevep said:

Jun 6, 2023 21:22:40 GMT miletus12 said:

You do not censor. You educate. There is a BIG difference.   

  You can only educate if the target population want to learn something different.  Which is even more difficult if the lying is allowed to continue unopposed.

That is why it is called a "culture war", Steve. You do not win such a war by censorship or allowing lies. You explain and explain and explain until the other side gets it. Look how long it has taken to finally confront the "Lost cause" lie?  

Call Robert E. Lee a traitor today; and you see the still fierce pushback, even in New York. But the fact remains that we have "Gods and Generals" still used in some schools as a teaching aid for history classes. 

We are about 158 years from the ACW and we still have its scars. I wonder if the modern British argue over York / Lancaster or whether they allow that Elizabeth I was a murderess, who eliminated a rival to her rule when she illegally ordered the execution of Mary of Scotland?  
  
I am an American, I can answer those questions objectively. York was in the moral right, and Elizabeth was a murderess by International Law.  Shrug. Try handling Civil War history here, though.  Too many LIES get in the way.

We have the same exact problems with the history of slavery, racism, bigotry, genderism, plutocracy, faked news, faked history in history, and Hollywood remaking of reality, itself. You saw me get in trouble in a thread when I lambasted a fake "Americans capture U-boat movie". I get pushback HERE, when I point out such nonsense.

CYNICAL Miletus.    
  

[stevep]

Jun 7, 2023 8:27:34 GMT miletus12 said:

Jun 7, 2023 8:26:14 GMT stevep said:

  You can only educate if the target population want to learn something different.  Which is even more difficult if the lying is allowed to continue unopposed.

That is why it is called a "culture war", Steve. You do not win such a war by censorship or allowing lies. You explain and explain and explain until the other side gets it. Look how long it has taken to finally confront the "Lost cause" lie?  

Call Robert E. Lee a traitor today; and you see the still fierce pushback, even in New York. But the fact remains that we have "Gods and Generals" still used in some schools as a teaching aid for history classes. 

We are about 158 years from the ACW and we still have its scars. I wonder if the modern British argue over York / Lancaster or whether they allow that Elizabeth I was a murderess, who eliminated a rival to her rule when she illegally ordered the execution of Mary of Scotland?  
  
I am an American, I can answer those questions objectively. York was in the moral right, and Elizabeth was a murderess by International Law.  Shrug. Try handling Civil War history here, though.  Too many LIES get in the way.

We have the same exact problems with the history of slavery, racism, bigotry, genderism, plutocracy, faked news, faked history in history, and Hollywood remaking of reality, itself. You saw me get in trouble in a thread when I lambasted a fake "Americans capture U-boat movie". I get pushback HERE, when I point out such nonsense.

CYNICAL Miletus.    
  

  Apart from the fact my initial comment was tongue in cheek your not being consistent.  You say that censorship is wrong then contradict yourself by saying "You do not win such a war by censorship or allowing lies".  If your banning lies that is by definition censorship.

  Education is vital and you can generally win over most people with factual information, albeit that it will take a lot of effort and time.  However you will never persuade all people simply because some will always prefer to believe their lies.  That is a fact.

  Being American doesn't make you or any other American special any more than people belonging to any other group - some members of whom are always claiming their identity makes them exempt from reality.

  You also have your facts wrong about Elizabeth I and the execution of Mary Queen of Scots for plotting Elizabeth's murder.  There is ongoing debate about the relative legality of both Yorkish and Lancastian claims to the throne by the end of the conflict.  Fortunately whatever else can be said about him Henry VII ended the entire mess by following up a battlefield victory by marrying a leading Yorkish, founding a new dynasty, ending the entire horror.

 

[miletus12]

Jun 9, 2023 9:58:06 GMT stevep said:

"You do not win such a war by censorship or allowing lies".

There is only one way to expose a lie, Steve. You SHOW that it is a lie.

Being American, means I am not deluded by "British" exceptionalism. I can join the rest of the planet and call the British out on their actual history; as I do on American history, as you might have noticed.

And we did put a Man on the Moon. That is not exceptionalism, it is a fact. Sort of like Hannibal crossing the Alps with elephants or a Scotsman inventing the steam engine by stealing its principles from German pumping engines used in their coal mines.  

[American hist]

I want to ban Historical inaccuracies in films, but it would be impossible to do, and it would probably violate free speech. If someone attempted to sue a film for the film advertising, they were historically accurate, but they weren't, that could still be hard to do. While we're on the civil war topic, it would be interesting if the South developed a socialist csa party after it; no matter how minuscule and ignored they are, it could happen. Southern socialism However, Socalisim would have been associated with new England fringe groups and social reforms.


However, while there are still fascists in the South, they contradict much of the South conservative population. Now will the South one day elect a fascist governor or a firm white nationalist governor who can return laws to Jim Crow? depending what one call the end and the beginning of the civil rights movement They could theoretically reverse the civil rights laws somewhat, but those federal laws will always be there. Some people argue the civil rights movement is unfinished work, but no one can't discuss progress hasn't been made. The KKK IS kNOw CLASSIFIED as a Terrorist group and has shrunk substantially. People associate relate racism with the Confederacy and at least like to think of the North as less racist than the South. To some extent, the South has it coming because they follow Trump and mindlessly dislike Mexican immigrants.

However, the reconstruction policies were radical policies forced upon the South, and white southerners felt betrayed that the enslaved person and formerly enslaved people were being used as pawns in this debatable structural race war. (No, why not take advantage of enslaved people and arm them for the war effort against a slave nation)

In some ways, since colonial times, enslaved people have been seen as enemies just as society sees criminals as enemies, and those that don't die are locked up.

Since our nation became a Republic, we had sectionalism tensions. We first saw the North and found a clash over who gets the capital and who is responsible for the debt. As a people, we compromised for the will of the nation and her people as Americans have a great talent for compromising . By 1850, the North and South feud was much more apparent, and people could not agree on which policies they wanted enacted to serve each sectional interest. The South knew the North held them back and wished for independence without Northern meddling.



I saw on many occasions that people like to portray the North as the economic saviors who didn't make the economy worse than it already was.




1 The North destroyed the Southern economy through the abolition (The trans connintial in New Mexico territory as it was the fastest route and it was going spare up settlements in arid lands)

2the North rerouted the southern transcranial railway into a much longer route into Utuah -Kansea
3 The tariffs were for the northern benefit to the souths demise
4 The internal improvements generally bypassed the southern united states
5 When the Republicans took over, they only allowed Blackman to vote unless they were Southerner Tory’s , and many Southerners lost their farms and livelihoods thanks to a Union invasion.

5 Also, what little immigrants the South received were tampered with by Northern industrial progress and nativist policies enacted by congress

6 A northern victory means supremacy for northern railroads over southern states economic dependents on the Mississippi river steamboat traffic, such as the emergence of Chicago.when the south industrialized it often did not receive the fruits of its labor, sacrifices and toil. So much for state rights anyway only the South cared about it that much or at least on the national scale as the South didn't matter anymore it became irrelevant


My Ah TL will use elements of the lost cause from the Confederate propaganda machine, depending on what they are saying, as it won't say slavery is suitable for black people.

[American hist]

miletus12, I'll have to watch that movie, the searchers. However, to portray a Confederate point of view, it isn't even about the civil war but rather about fighting Comanches. In the outlaw josie wales, it isn't about what caused the civil war for our nation. The film onley explains what started the civil war for him. The silent first-ever blockbuster Birth of a Nation has no comparison to the outlaw josie wales. I watched the silent film Birth of the Nation, and while it is epic some scenes needed to be cut for time as there is too much fluff going on in the film. While I'm watching a silent film, I would have preferred a better job the film introducing the charters, and I feel bad for the mixed-race charter too. www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/the-worst-thing-about-birth-of-a-nation-is-how-good-it-isWhile the whole film is racist its portrayal of black people is worst during the second half of the film during reconstruction though the civil war parts are easier to defend on its narrative.

If we had to critzise films for being soft on slavery okay,but surly Temple has not shown racism and its just a fictional tale. I liked the princess and the frog movie however I would have liked the friendship to somehow have been not as public because jim crow is in its height. There isn't anything offensively depicted in the film