General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Myth of the Kindly General Lee.
The strangest part about the continued personality cult of Robert E. Lee is how few of the qualities his admirers profess to see in him he actually possessed.
Memorial Day has the tendency to conjure up old arguments about the Civil War. Thats understandable; it was created to mourn the dead of a war in which the Union was nearly destroyed, when half the country rose up in rebellion in defense of slavery. This year, the removal of Lees statue in New Orleans has inspired a new round of commentary about Lee, not to mention protests on his behalf by white supremacists.
The myth of Lee goes something like this: He was a brilliant strategist and devoted Christian man who abhorred slavery and labored tirelessly after the war to bring the country back together.
There is little truth in this. Lee was a devout Christian, and historians regard him as an accomplished tactician. But despite his ability to win individual battles, his decision to fight a conventional war against the more densely populated and industrialized North is considered by many historians to have been a fatal strategic error.
But even if one conceded Lees military prowess, he would still be responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans in defense of the Souths authority to own millions of human beings as property because they are black. Lees elevation is a key part of a 150-year-old propaganda campaign designed to erase slavery as the cause of the war and whitewash the Confederate cause as a noble one. That ideology is known as the Lost Cause, and as historian David Blight writes, it provided a foundation on which Southerners built the Jim Crow system.
More at:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-myth-of-the-kindly-general-lee/529038/
Brother Buzz
(36,440 posts)LOL Lib
(1,462 posts)PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,861 posts)That should not be forgotten.
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)Let's say there are two armies: One that wants to loot and pillage your home and one that wants to defend it.
Which army do you join?
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,861 posts)he was a man of honor to fight for his state, against his government and country. He was also a slave owner who was clearly on the side of supporting slavery.
And remind me again which side attacked first. The Union was NOT intent on looting and pillaging. It was intent on keeping the Union together. Lee, and every other Confederate turned against the Union. So, he was a traitor. Not really that complicated.
In fact, had people like Lee stood up and said, "NO. I will not go to war against my country, but do everything in my power to seek a peaceful solution to our differences," things would have been a lot different. Especially if they'd ever come around to understand the horror and absolute wrongness of slavery. Instead, people in the South are still defending it more than a century and a half later. The were wrong then, and they're wrong now.
CanisCrocinus
(109 posts)Right on every point.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,861 posts)NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)That's what armies do. At least civil war armies were somewhat ummm civil and raping was not tolerated.
YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)Oh that's right, it fucking doesn't.
This is pure whataboutism.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)He had nothing to do with it. He left the army when his state left the Union as the vast majority of other southern officers did. Hard to be in an army of a foreign power. When he left, there was not an expectation of war. In Davis's inaugural address, which happened before Lincoiln's, he said "All we ask is to be left alone." Lee had absolutely nothing to do with Fort Sumter. In fact when the first states seceded, he was serving in Texas.
On the other hand, Jefferson Davis was part of the Crittenden Committee of senators who stayed until Christmas in Washington working on compromises that could keep the southern states in the Union. The effort failed because President-elect Lincoln wouldn't offer any guidance on what he would accept or not accept. Senator Seward, representing the Republicans on the committee was unable to make any commitments.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,861 posts)I am holding him responsible for being a traitor to the Union. For fighting against his country. There's a lot of prettifying what he did in the myth of kindly Marse Robert, the justification in the name of States' Rights. The Civil War was fought to protect and preserve slavery, and Lee fought very hard on that behalf.
The glorification of the Confederacy really needs to end. It should be illegal to display the Confederate flag, as it's illegal in Germany (and some other countries) to display the Nazi flag.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)He was indicted for treason and never tried. He was okay with that.
President Davis on the other hand spent the rest of his life demanding his right to an open and speedy trial. It was never given to him. He was left indicted and never tried though he insisted on his trial.
Lint Head
(15,064 posts)Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)Lint Head
(15,064 posts)Achilleaze
(15,543 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)delisen
(6,044 posts)The apologists for slavery had to do intricate mental gymnastics to reconcile slavery with the New Testament.
Mariana
(14,857 posts)In fact you have no idea if Christ owned slaves. If he did, there's no reason to expect to read about it in the Gospels. Slavery was such a normal and common thing that it probably wouldn't have been considered worthy of mention.
It's a real shame Christ never preached against slavery specifically. Imagine how much suffering might have been averted if he had done so.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)(far from, of course..).
Yupster
(14,308 posts)He lived whereever the army put him from Staten Island, New York to Texas. He spent very little time home.
The slaves he owned were inherited from his uncle when he died. It was Lee's job to free them within five years as his uncle's wishes. This was easier said than done, especially living far away and having to do all the paperwork by mail. You didn't just tell the slaves you're free, go away. Generally arrangements were made of where they would go and how they would live, especially the elderly ones.
Lee has been criticized for dragging his feet and taking the whole five years before freeing them. I don't know how damning that criticism is. You'd have to hear both sides of the story to know.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)if you want to call it that, doesn't get him off.
https://www.nps.gov/arho/learn/historyculture/slavery.htm
https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/08/arlington-bobby-lee-and-the-peculiar-institution/61428/
former9thward
(32,016 posts)The ghost of King George III appreciates that.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)their slaves.
Anymore questions?
former9thward
(32,016 posts)Who have no issues in their lives. Of course I am sure you are one...
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)former9thward
(32,016 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)It's like arguing about Hitler's good qualities.
dsc
(52,162 posts)former9thward
(32,016 posts)Not racist, sexist, homophobes, nothing? Careful how you answer. The internet if full of information much to the dismay of some.
dsc
(52,162 posts)but the clear implication of your post was that all of the founders owned slaves. Many of them didn't. Hamilton also didn't to name another one.
Generic Brad
(14,275 posts)It always baffles me why the majority of people who defend Robert E Lee's legacy think their revisionist history bullshit is OK. It's as if they believe we can be convinced their ancestors (and I suppose them by proxy) are honorable people. I have relatives I am not particularly proud of but I do not erect monuments to them or identify with and justify their misdeeds. I am not them. If he was a prick who defended the indefensible, then that is what he was. Suck it up and don't be like him.
YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)Exhibit A: Donald Trump's overwhelmingly and enthusiastic support among Southern whites.
(not lumping in ALL Southern whites with Trump voters, of course, but there is a pattern here...)
UTUSN
(70,700 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Would have failed because the slaves would never have supported a slaveocrat insurrection.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)He had a president who used to be Secretary of War.
President Davis set the overall strategy. Lee was a trusted advisor and had input, but it was Davis who set the strategy.
The option of a guerrilla war wasn't an option anyway. There were certain points that had to be defended. Richmond was the obvious example, not just because it was the capital, but it had the largest ironworks in the south.
If the Confederacy could count on a steady supply of European arms like George Washington had, Lee could have kept retreating further into the south like Washington did.
You also mentioned the other big reason. They were fighting to preserve an order. Guerrilla wars are generally to overthrow an order.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)This is what you get, by the dozens:
FSogol
(45,488 posts)Last edited Sun Jun 4, 2017, 08:04 PM - Edit history (1)
the southern cause. He was urged to keep it going, but he declined. Unfortunately, all of the confederacy deplorables want to keep the cause going. They are frauds, fools, and completely in the wrong with their myths and should be treated as such.
http://www.vahistorical.org/collections-and-resources/virginia-history-explorer/robert-e-lee-after-war
YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)"Heritage not hate," my ass.
SomethingNew
(279 posts)You can generally condemn a man for an overwhelming bad fault (fighting for states that were going to war for slavery) without ignoring any positive qualities he may have possessed.
Lee was on the wrong side of history and it should have been apparent even at the time. That said, like all of us, he is more complicated than that.
GallopingGhost
(2,404 posts)He wouldn't read his kids a bedtime story unless they tickled his bare feet. If they paused, or stopped, he would stop reading and say, "No tickling, no story."
I found that a very strange task to set for your children.
billh58
(6,635 posts)Sounds a lot like today's Trump voters doesn't it? I believe that we are in the middle of a civil war over the same issues that caused the first one: racism, greed, bigotry, and ignorance.