Confederate History verses The People
A big issue in today’s United States is removing Confederate history from the public due to the rise of killings involving race groups. Some will argue that doing away with Confederate history will some solve all problems; others argue that erasing Confederate history will not solve anything. The Solution to whether or not to erase Confederate history is to see if American’s history is better off with it or not.
People that defend keeping the Confederate history backs it up by connecting American and Confederate history together with four facts the Article of Confederation, Presidents of the United States, the Reformation, and the Secession Treaty. Once the United State became whole after the Civil War,
In 1865, the Confederate Armies were defeated by the Union Armies, before the civil war the country was divided North and South. Issues included taxes, states rights, and war but the biggest issue was Slavery. This was an issue for the south but had yet been banned by Abraham lincoln in 1863. Although these problems were significant Jefferson believed that in order to have a normal society you must have struggle, '' The tree of liberty must be refreshed by the blood of the patriots''. Also taxes were a problem for farmers because, farmers were payed very little money and when the Government raised the taxes it forced them to fall into debt.
In Atlanta Ga, Charlottesville Nc, and in every other formerly Confederate State in the U.S. there has been controversial debates on whether or not the current standing Confederate statues should be removed from public areas. Many people claim that a modern society should not honor the racist soldiers who fought for slavery. Others believe that preserving historical accuracy is essential to learning from the mistakes of the past. The opinions of thousands of citizens clash with one another over the debate between offense and information. I believe that it is most beneficial for the majority of people if the current Confederate monuments remain where they are.
David Blight, is a detailed study of the ways that Americans chose to remember the Civil War during the first fifty years following the conflict. Blight argues that throughout this period Americans used the two expression to remember and give meaning to the war with rhetorical effectiveness throughout the excerpt. Blight accomplishes the main theme of competing memories with different ideals of the Civil War seeking to overcome the issue for reunion. A majority of America’s white community chose to obscure the Civil War’s racial meaning behind a front of attitudes that acclaimed both Northern and Southern soldiers. Later Blight uses the themes of ending the war with a push for national reconciliation to demonstrate how the country’s efforts
The Civil War on the other hand, was a period in American history that was marked by great inflation, on both sides of the conflict. Both the Union and Confederacy were faced with the urgent need to generate large quantities of funds to pay for the exorbitant costs involved in prosecuting the ongoing war. Both governments then resorted to the same tactic in order to acquire the funds they so desperately needed to continue to fund their respective militaries. They simply printed more money as they needed in order to pay their outstanding debts. The difference, however, was that the Union’s currency was backed by a gold and silver standard.
During the Civil War there were many differences besides slavery. This war had the most American deaths than all of the wars the U.S. has been in combined! The south seceded from the north for slavery and other less important reasons. The North had more of nearly everything like navy, soldiers,horses, and food, while the south had slaves, cotton, and donkeys/mules. Throughout the war many great leaders rose and fell, battles fought, and great and terrible outcomes.
Despite the many years after the Civil War ended in 1865, the war’s significance was still great enough to have caused such controversy with the public over its meaning. In David W. Blight’s Race and Reunion, the meaning of the war changes throughout the period of Reconstruction not due to the misconception of it solely, but due to what we wanted to interpret from the war (or rather, what we remembered from the war that eventually changed over time). Blight argues, “I am primarily concerned with the ways that contending memories clashed or intermingled in public memory, and not in developing professional historiography of the Civil War” (Blight, Prologue). With this being said, the meaning of the Civil War changed through what people felt and
As you know being in an army could be quite difficult for soldiers. Both Union soldiers and Confederate soldiers train everyday and do certain duties to get ready for the American Civil War. However, there are huge differences between the two armies. Before the war started, most of the soldiers from both North and South had been farmers. If the Southerners did not farm they either became carpenters, mechanics, merchants, machinist, lawyers, teachers, blacksmiths, or a dentist.
Revising History The removal of Confederate monuments is a controversial topic in today’s society. Some people view the monuments as a remembrance of American history and honoring the heroic acts performed by the individuals on the battlefield. Other, however, view them as memorials and symbols of hate that were meant to worship or glorify slavery, and want to see them all come down.
As seen from articles from Confederate Veteran Magazine, the Confederate spirit was upheld throughout the years, mostly by women who felt the need to avenge husbands, brothers, and fathers ' deaths . They did things like erect monuments and statues in honor of heroic Confederate leaders, and taught their version of Civil War history in their schools. Together, many ex Confederates and their supporters formed the southern democratic political party, that upheld the Confederates beliefs and ways of life. Their opposers, the southern republicans, were mercilessly attacked repeatedly by the democrats, in an attempt the avenge the Confederacy. The lost cause split the south
People want to get rid of a chunk of history that is important to us as Americans. As Chip Reid wrote in this CBS News article, “[...] it is heritage and history[...]” This statement has been said before and its value stands. It truly is heritage for people related to fighters from the Civil War, and it is history because, well, it is from the past and important to Americans. Reid also states that “Should living history programs with confederate Reenactors (and their flags) be banned from National Park service sites?”
When individuals ponder everything that went into the making of our nation, there is a plethora of different events to consider. Regardless of how many events, good or bad, have occurred in American history, all human beings alike tend to look at our history with tunnel vision—only focusing on the good. Our citizens, past and present, everyday people to politicians, either fail to acknowledge the existence of our historic downfalls or they manipulate these downfalls into something justifiable. Even more so now than ever, when bad things occur in America, they get purposely swept under the rug and forcefully shoved into the depths of the closet. The reconstruction that occurred post-Civil War is no exception to this aforementioned flaw.
In the news today, a continual debate can be found about the significance of Confederate monuments and if they should remain or be removed. Confederate monuments that have been erected throughout the U.S. should be kept because of the preservation of America’s history. For instance, in the article, The Unbearable Lightness of Confederate-Statue Removal, the author lists how slaveholder monuments aren’t the only statues being vandalized, but the Lincoln Memorial and Mount Rushmore are other symbols of U.S. history that some believe need to “blow up” (Murdock). Every historical symbol can have both people who appreciate it and who oppose it. That doesn’t mean that we should tear down all symbols, but
Both the North and the South found the Civil War to be an extremely contentious conflict. The Civil War was viewed differently in the North and the South. They did share some opinions despite these disagreements. While both sides believed they were acting correctly, neither of them was entirely correct. The opposing and complementary perspectives that the North and the South held towards the Civil War will be covered in this essay.
There was a politically correct remembrance of the Confederacy in that men felt so strongly about their beliefs they were willing to wage war and die for them, many felt that should be honored. My own understanding of the South’s passion with the Civil War is much like Tony Horwitz, In that the War is so intriguing and interesting because it involves the country I live in and the beliefs that are so passionately felt to this day. Born and raised in California I believed racism to be dead and the surprise I received moving to the panhandle of Texas was discomforting. The Civil War has a unique way of luring
The Civil War resulted due to the division and the gradual collapse of the Union between the two sections. It can be argued that both the North and South were distinct regions. However, both regions initially displayed nationalism in various ways at the beginning of the Civil War. Southern nationalism allowed the Confederates to justify their secession and independence. The formation of the Confederacy and the established Confederate Constitution in February 1861, nationalism validated their status as an independent country.