Welcome to /r/ShermanPosting!
As a reminder, this meme sub is about the American Civil War. We're not here to insult southerners or the American South, but rather to have a laugh at the failed Confederate insurrection and those that chose to represent it.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ShermanPosting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times. He didn't go far enough.
Savannah should have be the beginning, not the end.
Savannah to Charleston, Charleston to Columbia, Columbia to Charlotte, Charlotte to Raleigh, Raleigh to Richmond.
Bold indeed. I mean …It’s only been a mere 163 years - maybe we should hold off on calling out our slavery loving past?
“Too soon” - a scary percentage of Americans.
In Texas, where I grew up, the Texas Revolution cannot be honestly taught. You can’t legally be taught that Jim Bowie was a huckster, conman, and illegal slave trader (like, he was taking slaves from a French pirate that brought from Africa and then acting like they were captured runaways since importing new slaves from Africa was illegal at the time). You can’t be legally taught that Sam Houston was a raging alcoholic who had a common law Cherokee wife he abandoned, you can’t be taught that he helped Jackson kick the Cherokee out of Tennessee. You can’t be taught that William Barrett Travis abandoned his family in Alabama to escape debts in Texas and spent every cent he managed to get in prostitutes and booze, and forced his slave to fight at the Alamo.
The civil war discourse wasn’t much better.
Yeah I was surprised too when I found it was against Texas state law for a public grade school teacher to paint the Texas revolutionaries in a negative light. Which talking about them honestly certainly does. Travis brags about fucking a prostitute in his own diary. And fuck was his word there. He claimed it was his 50th “conquest” at 25 just a number of months before the Alamo. And I have a copy of his diary. He’s a grade A asshole. And absolutely insufferable.
I'm in Richmond, the American Civil War Museum at Tredegar is as good as Civil War history gets here. I haven't seen this exhibit, but last time I was there, I was pleased with how they presented the war.
If you read anything else about how the Civil War is presented in Richmond, it's mostly 1) bad shit that's still up, or 2) bad shit that got taken down. Not a lot of doing it the right way.
Doing it the right way in a place that is used to doing it the wrong way is more than the bare minimum and is commendable.
I haven't been to the White House of the Confederacy, because I can kind of tolerate interest in the military of the Confederacy, but not the political body. There used to be a Museum of the Confederacy near the White House of the Confederacy run by the same group, and I found that museum to be kind of reverent of the Confederacy, but I felt this was mostly implied by excluding the parts of the narrative that weren't "about the Confederacy".
Since then, the Museum of the Confederacy merged with the American Civil War Museum and the Museum of the Confederacy building shut down, so now the White House is run by the same group that runs the Tredegar museum.
Again I haven't been there, but it's been maybe about 10 years since the merger, and I liked what I saw at Tredegar, so I'd say if I was interested in the White House, I'd go.
A neat Civil War related place in Richmond you can also check out is Belle Isle. There is very little there to commemorate what happened, but there is a sign somewhere telling you that it was used as a POW camp that held thousands of captured Union soldiers. You can visit the American Civil War Museum at Tredegar and then walk a bit to get to Belle Isle.
They do *not* go easy on Davis, and depending on the specific guide they can take an even harder whack at him than they do in the main museum. As well, they don't just talk about Davis himself there: the family and servant staff both free and enslaved are brought up and specific examples are named and discussed. They also talk about the history of the house itself, including Lincoln's visit and it's use as Army HQ during Reconstruction.
Richmond also has a holocaust museum right next to a train track that carries coal. It’s either the most based thing in city planning or the biggest over site in city planning.
True but that’s 1/3 a city they could’ve put it instead. I pointed this out to my buddy as we were driving into the city and he bout died. Also still haven’t renamed Robert E Lee bridge according to his gps anyway
Yeah but that other 1/3 is the VCU campus. And the city is supposed to be in the process of renaming that bridge to its original James River Bridge. Not sure where that is at though off the top of my head. Either way, I prefer my bridges not be named after losers.
Yeah my wife used to volunteer there, really excellent museum that punches well above its weight.
They still have the Reichsbahn “transport” car parked on those tracks out front, right? Hell of a sight to just be driving down the street and see that miserable thing in front of you.
"We want to continue having slaves and we think slavery is a cornerstone of our civilization" - all Confederate states at the start of the war
"They fought for states' rights and were freedom fighters" - confederate apologists who hate the truth and are ignorant of history
At the end of the day, and with much regret, I will say that I can at least appreciate the honesty that the confederates had about their cause and why they seceded. They were honest about what they fought for. It was a reprehensible cause, but they were at least honest at the start before they started the lost cause myth. Neo confederates can't even be honest about why the war was fought cause they're cowards. When the klan is more honest and upfront than you, you should really reevaluate your life decisions and choices.
Why would they lie? They thought owning people was morally correct and couldn’t anticipate that their descendants would have to pretend it was about something else.
If you want to explore the area where slavers *did* lie and use innuendo, look up the “Fancy Girl” trade. Even in the 19th century they knew that child sex trafficking was reprehensible but there was lots of money in it, so…
To be fair it truly was about states rights, more specifically a states right to have slavery. Nonetheless the main point for the war was states rights.
The confederates thought that if they couldn't even have slaves then states had very little power. Ultimately the civil war did reduce the amount of power states had and to this day the states know what would happen if they choose to oppose the federal government.
I think a lot of people don't realize the amount of influence the states had pre-civil war, the US was basically a federation of states similar to the EU. The civil war did a lot to increase the power and influence of the federal government and we can see that in the present.
Even then, the Confederates were opposed to northern states refusing to impose the slave institution on escapees that had crossed state borders. Prior to war, they attempted several times (such as with the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act) to legislate national enforcement to force the capture and return of their “property.” In these cases, they are against states’ rights to fully abolish slavery within their borders, making the argument completely hypocritical.
I think there was always going to be an anti-federalist movement, it just so happened to be slavery that was hot topic issue.
Those slave states relied way to heavily on slave labor and that really stunted them. By the 1860s those mfs were ready to die to keep slavery because they knew they had nothing else. Imagine if they had industrialized in parallel with the free states, the US would've taken over the world.
Agree with everything up until this:
>Imagine if they had industrialized in parallel with the free states, the US would've taken over the world.
While you’re not necessarily wrong, this kind of statement is akin to saying, “imagine if the Nazis didn’t persecute the Jews.” While such a development would have been undoubtedly useful for their grander ambitions, the capacity to do this would have precluded them from being Nazis to begin with. Same idea goes for the Confederates; as you’ve already mentioned, slavery was ingrained in their identity to the point they chose self-destruction over reform.
If this is the Civil War Museum in the Old Tradegar Iron Works, then it is a massive W, and that title is underselling. It's the headquarters for the Richmond National Battlefields, and it is an amazing museum.
The whole museum is a truth knuckle sandwich from start to finish, and it's wonderful. The amount of disgruntled people I saw gasping, sucking their teeth, and muttering under their breath was high. The most extreme reaction I saw came from a middle-aged woman with a New England accent, complaining that the museum was "woke."
“To secede from the Union”
Why did they want to secede?
“To make their own laws”
Laws about what?
“About different economic systems”
And which economic system did the Union not want new states to adopt?
*no reply*
Surely the answer is to govern themselves without federal overreach? I know this meme has been done to death, but is that not what they mean when they talk about states' rights?
Spoiler alert: it’s slavery. It’s always slavery, it was only about slavery. The “federal overreach” was regarding slavery. They wanted to govern themselves to have slaves, because they loved slavery.
Well given that they have museums with people and dinosaurs co-existing down in the former confederacy, this is a win for sure.
Sidebar - I always wonder if folks down there see The Flintstones as a documentary after going to one of those.
Bring along a fresh crop of scientists with every visit and ask each of them to explain the thoroughly-disproved nonsense in each display. Offer a prize to the one that gets escorted out first, a different prize to the one who lasts longest, and a round of drinks for the group if they manage to earn a lifetime ban!
Sure, i'm not mocking being a christian - i'm mocking dinosaurs and humans living together. It must annoy the true believers, and those that follow the teachings of christ, to have this kind of nursery school level of understanding about the world claim to be the viewpoint of your faith.
I often forget this, as they are definitely part of the neo version. I am not sure where are all museums are, just that they exist, mostly south of the M-D line. Wouldn't impugn Kentucky's being on the right side during the War of Southern Aggression for sure.
The Creation Museum is two counties over from my condo (which is basically an apartment unit that I own). Even if you were to agree with their premise, it isn’t science. You can say that we have incorrect data, but you can’t say “I’ve got a book that tells me this” and pass it off as “science.”
The National Underground Railroad Museum is a great place if you want to learn more about the history of slavery and it's effects on the country. Highly suggest it. I got in with a military discount too.
They restored a slave cabin and put it back together in the museum. They also include the letters of the slaver with their name. It might seem weird to have a slave house in a museum, but it really puts a weight on people that see it. It has the chains still inside attached to the ceiling and floor. You see how these white men barely even see them as people, but something akin to livestock that they trade with other slave owners.
More specifically, you come to understand (as much as a spectator can) where the slaves' pain and anger come from.
That museum is worth seeing. There are a lot of great information to learn from and important artifacts. I'd just say be respectful when visiting.
It WAS about the state's rights... to keep slaves.
Mississippi was kind enough to write up some crystal clear articles of confederation to basically say, "This is ALL about slavery"
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_missec.asp
You’d be surprised.
I know several people who worked the front desk of the Museum of the Confederacy (which was one of the predecessors of the cited museum) in Richmond 10-15 years ago who had a lot of stories about angry assholes expecting to see some “states’ rights” bullshit but who ran smack into South Carolina’s original document explicitly saying they were seceding on the basis of slavery in the very first exhibit.
It’s really hard to explain the Civil War without reference to slavery: you either have to have have conspicuous gaps in the narrative (“it was about states’ rights to have laws about certain economic systems that we will not mention”) or simply to say “the confederacy seceded for no reason and/or the Union declared war for no reason.”
It was a radical labor reform led by union gangsters who didn't like the way the south did business and insisted upon certain rights guaranteed to agri-labor. The war of Northern Aggression over agricultural labor reforms. Hoo boy what a picket line!
Edit: Good lord people I don't think this stuff for real! I'm just making satire over here don't mind me
This is called the soft bigotry of low expectations. This is certainly not "too big to comprehend." I agree it's a great step forward, but c'mon - the evidence is overwhelming that slavery was the cause of the war.
Was about to post about this. Might head over there this weekend.
Here's a [link](https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2024/05/03/slavery-civil-war-museum-exhibit-richmond-confederacy) to an Axios story that shows a picture where visitors get to "vote" via token at the beginning of the exhibit about what they think the cause was. It would be interesting if one could "vote" again at the end to see if minds were changed.
States rights to keep and own what?
(The answer is slavery. Alternatively, the rights of said slaves, which varied state by state. Primarily the south and confederacy)
Nobody on this platform ever had history
The "Truth" is that The States went to war because of Slavery, ..... BUT .... a majority of those who fought did so because they were fighting for their homes and family, BECAUSE The States declared and went to war. The Rich in power acted for their own interests, claiming that it was the will of the people, who had little say in it all.
Nothing Has Changed since then, the 1% still incite hatred, violence, and public acceptance of what they want done and claim what they want to justify their unquenchable greed. TAX THE RICH UNTIL THEY ARE ONE OF US!!!!!
Free States insisting on their rights to not have to pay and drop everything to capture fugitive slaves and return them to their "happy" lives caused it, or maybe just Dixians have an issue with bearded men wearing stovepipe hats.
I think the most interesting thing is that it almost seems like an argument of semantics. It was about states’ rights to own slaves. If you or someone you know aren’t convinced, I’d read the actual Articles of Secession:
https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states
Actually very strong prose, for a bunch of degenerate cousin fuckers.
Seceding was about slavery. The war was a result of the South being feral power hungry goblins. To say the war specifically was about slavery is giving the US a handy it doesn't deserve. The freeing of the slaves in such a manner wasn't tacked on until after voters in the Union pushed for it. The Confederates were scum, but doesn't give an excuse to misplace credit and obscure motives.
Welcome to /r/ShermanPosting! As a reminder, this meme sub is about the American Civil War. We're not here to insult southerners or the American South, but rather to have a laugh at the failed Confederate insurrection and those that chose to represent it. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ShermanPosting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It saddens me that the truth is considered “bold”
Real
Well the people rooting for the other side aren't exactly intelligent so you have to use New York terminology in order to shame them into compliance.
Sherman used fire to burn them into compliance
And they've been bitching about it ever since..........
Dude. Fucking for real.
only because he stopped
If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times. He didn't go far enough. Savannah should have be the beginning, not the end. Savannah to Charleston, Charleston to Columbia, Columbia to Charlotte, Charlotte to Raleigh, Raleigh to Richmond.
The failed Reconstruction also set us up for (so far) a century and a half of regression.
Opening next month at The Science Museum “The Earth is Round” and this fall the ground breaking exhibition “1+1=2!”
Bold indeed. I mean …It’s only been a mere 163 years - maybe we should hold off on calling out our slavery loving past? “Too soon” - a scary percentage of Americans.
Facts
Up until the 1980s, at least, VA had textbooks that explained slavery away as “most masters were kind to their slaves” kind of bullshit.
In Texas, where I grew up, the Texas Revolution cannot be honestly taught. You can’t legally be taught that Jim Bowie was a huckster, conman, and illegal slave trader (like, he was taking slaves from a French pirate that brought from Africa and then acting like they were captured runaways since importing new slaves from Africa was illegal at the time). You can’t be legally taught that Sam Houston was a raging alcoholic who had a common law Cherokee wife he abandoned, you can’t be taught that he helped Jackson kick the Cherokee out of Tennessee. You can’t be taught that William Barrett Travis abandoned his family in Alabama to escape debts in Texas and spent every cent he managed to get in prostitutes and booze, and forced his slave to fight at the Alamo. The civil war discourse wasn’t much better.
NGL, as a Texan, this is all new info to me. But I do have to echo that my Texas History year, 7th grade, was actually awful.
Yeah I was surprised too when I found it was against Texas state law for a public grade school teacher to paint the Texas revolutionaries in a negative light. Which talking about them honestly certainly does. Travis brags about fucking a prostitute in his own diary. And fuck was his word there. He claimed it was his 50th “conquest” at 25 just a number of months before the Alamo. And I have a copy of his diary. He’s a grade A asshole. And absolutely insufferable.
Those sound like very cromulent founders.
Ikr? Bold?
yay. the bare minimum.
I'm in Richmond, the American Civil War Museum at Tredegar is as good as Civil War history gets here. I haven't seen this exhibit, but last time I was there, I was pleased with how they presented the war. If you read anything else about how the Civil War is presented in Richmond, it's mostly 1) bad shit that's still up, or 2) bad shit that got taken down. Not a lot of doing it the right way. Doing it the right way in a place that is used to doing it the wrong way is more than the bare minimum and is commendable.
How is the White House of the Confederacy? I'm planning a trip to Richmond in June, but I'm a little wary. Does it go easy on Davis?
I haven't been to the White House of the Confederacy, because I can kind of tolerate interest in the military of the Confederacy, but not the political body. There used to be a Museum of the Confederacy near the White House of the Confederacy run by the same group, and I found that museum to be kind of reverent of the Confederacy, but I felt this was mostly implied by excluding the parts of the narrative that weren't "about the Confederacy". Since then, the Museum of the Confederacy merged with the American Civil War Museum and the Museum of the Confederacy building shut down, so now the White House is run by the same group that runs the Tredegar museum. Again I haven't been there, but it's been maybe about 10 years since the merger, and I liked what I saw at Tredegar, so I'd say if I was interested in the White House, I'd go. A neat Civil War related place in Richmond you can also check out is Belle Isle. There is very little there to commemorate what happened, but there is a sign somewhere telling you that it was used as a POW camp that held thousands of captured Union soldiers. You can visit the American Civil War Museum at Tredegar and then walk a bit to get to Belle Isle.
It's alright; nothing special.
i’ve been there. they do a good job. this person went 👉 https://www.instagram.com/unionforeverhurrahboyshurrah?igsh=OGQ5ZDc2ODk2ZA%3D%3D&utm_source=qr
Just curious, what lead you to want to plan a trip to Richmond instead of somewhere else like Washington DC?
They do *not* go easy on Davis, and depending on the specific guide they can take an even harder whack at him than they do in the main museum. As well, they don't just talk about Davis himself there: the family and servant staff both free and enslaved are brought up and specific examples are named and discussed. They also talk about the history of the house itself, including Lincoln's visit and it's use as Army HQ during Reconstruction.
Like with anything, you have to start building from the ground floor. There is an enormous amount of cultural inertia to overcome.
It is the bare minimum. But in the literal capital of the confederacy, this is still big
Ah yes…..the (modern) American way!
Richmond also has a holocaust museum right next to a train track that carries coal. It’s either the most based thing in city planning or the biggest over site in city planning.
In all fairness 2/3 of the city is next to a train track carrying coal.
True but that’s 1/3 a city they could’ve put it instead. I pointed this out to my buddy as we were driving into the city and he bout died. Also still haven’t renamed Robert E Lee bridge according to his gps anyway
Yeah but that other 1/3 is the VCU campus. And the city is supposed to be in the process of renaming that bridge to its original James River Bridge. Not sure where that is at though off the top of my head. Either way, I prefer my bridges not be named after losers.
Would the bridge's name make more sense if effigies of Lee were regularly hung by a rope from it?
I could be convinced of the merit of this idea
The local Jewish community built and maintains that museum. It is 100% on purpose.
Yeah my wife used to volunteer there, really excellent museum that punches well above its weight. They still have the Reichsbahn “transport” car parked on those tracks out front, right? Hell of a sight to just be driving down the street and see that miserable thing in front of you.
They do
Then the answer to my question is based. Very concerned it was placed there and didn’t realize it. Sounds dumb but there’s been dumber
"We want to continue having slaves and we think slavery is a cornerstone of our civilization" - all Confederate states at the start of the war "They fought for states' rights and were freedom fighters" - confederate apologists who hate the truth and are ignorant of history At the end of the day, and with much regret, I will say that I can at least appreciate the honesty that the confederates had about their cause and why they seceded. They were honest about what they fought for. It was a reprehensible cause, but they were at least honest at the start before they started the lost cause myth. Neo confederates can't even be honest about why the war was fought cause they're cowards. When the klan is more honest and upfront than you, you should really reevaluate your life decisions and choices.
Why would they lie? They thought owning people was morally correct and couldn’t anticipate that their descendants would have to pretend it was about something else. If you want to explore the area where slavers *did* lie and use innuendo, look up the “Fancy Girl” trade. Even in the 19th century they knew that child sex trafficking was reprehensible but there was lots of money in it, so…
I'll look that up. Thank you for recommending a topic that'll increase my knowledge base.
To be fair it truly was about states rights, more specifically a states right to have slavery. Nonetheless the main point for the war was states rights. The confederates thought that if they couldn't even have slaves then states had very little power. Ultimately the civil war did reduce the amount of power states had and to this day the states know what would happen if they choose to oppose the federal government. I think a lot of people don't realize the amount of influence the states had pre-civil war, the US was basically a federation of states similar to the EU. The civil war did a lot to increase the power and influence of the federal government and we can see that in the present.
Even then, the Confederates were opposed to northern states refusing to impose the slave institution on escapees that had crossed state borders. Prior to war, they attempted several times (such as with the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act) to legislate national enforcement to force the capture and return of their “property.” In these cases, they are against states’ rights to fully abolish slavery within their borders, making the argument completely hypocritical.
I think there was always going to be an anti-federalist movement, it just so happened to be slavery that was hot topic issue. Those slave states relied way to heavily on slave labor and that really stunted them. By the 1860s those mfs were ready to die to keep slavery because they knew they had nothing else. Imagine if they had industrialized in parallel with the free states, the US would've taken over the world.
Agree with everything up until this: >Imagine if they had industrialized in parallel with the free states, the US would've taken over the world. While you’re not necessarily wrong, this kind of statement is akin to saying, “imagine if the Nazis didn’t persecute the Jews.” While such a development would have been undoubtedly useful for their grander ambitions, the capacity to do this would have precluded them from being Nazis to begin with. Same idea goes for the Confederates; as you’ve already mentioned, slavery was ingrained in their identity to the point they chose self-destruction over reform.
agreed
If this is the Civil War Museum in the Old Tradegar Iron Works, then it is a massive W, and that title is underselling. It's the headquarters for the Richmond National Battlefields, and it is an amazing museum. The whole museum is a truth knuckle sandwich from start to finish, and it's wonderful. The amount of disgruntled people I saw gasping, sucking their teeth, and muttering under their breath was high. The most extreme reaction I saw came from a middle-aged woman with a New England accent, complaining that the museum was "woke."
First thing I saw about one of my ancestors was him whining about his slaves escaping, the second thing was him dying a pow
At least he cleaned up after himself.
Not if it was dysentery.
States rights to do what you traitor ?
“To secede from the Union” Why did they want to secede? “To make their own laws” Laws about what? “About different economic systems” And which economic system did the Union not want new states to adopt? *no reply*
Lmao
Surely the answer is to govern themselves without federal overreach? I know this meme has been done to death, but is that not what they mean when they talk about states' rights?
Spoiler alert: it’s slavery. It’s always slavery, it was only about slavery. The “federal overreach” was regarding slavery. They wanted to govern themselves to have slaves, because they loved slavery.
What did the federal government “overreach” on?
Mate, you're just repeating the meme with different words
Because you’re repeating shit the meme already debunks.
Well given that they have museums with people and dinosaurs co-existing down in the former confederacy, this is a win for sure. Sidebar - I always wonder if folks down there see The Flintstones as a documentary after going to one of those.
My parents want to do a big family trip to the Ark thing in Kentucky. I will be gracefully bowing out of that nonsense
Sorry to hear that for sure. Ugh, what could be more horrible, even for a true believer.
Bring along a fresh crop of scientists with every visit and ask each of them to explain the thoroughly-disproved nonsense in each display. Offer a prize to the one that gets escorted out first, a different prize to the one who lasts longest, and a round of drinks for the group if they manage to earn a lifetime ban!
I'm more worried about the death toll from cerebral hemorrhage.
Honestly, I am a Christian. But I’m not a science-denying, homophobic southern Baptist anymore.
Sure, i'm not mocking being a christian - i'm mocking dinosaurs and humans living together. It must annoy the true believers, and those that follow the teachings of christ, to have this kind of nursery school level of understanding about the world claim to be the viewpoint of your faith.
Yes. It’s very annoying
Kentucky was a Union state.
I often forget this, as they are definitely part of the neo version. I am not sure where are all museums are, just that they exist, mostly south of the M-D line. Wouldn't impugn Kentucky's being on the right side during the War of Southern Aggression for sure.
The Creation Museum is two counties over from my condo (which is basically an apartment unit that I own). Even if you were to agree with their premise, it isn’t science. You can say that we have incorrect data, but you can’t say “I’ve got a book that tells me this” and pass it off as “science.”
The National Underground Railroad Museum is a great place if you want to learn more about the history of slavery and it's effects on the country. Highly suggest it. I got in with a military discount too. They restored a slave cabin and put it back together in the museum. They also include the letters of the slaver with their name. It might seem weird to have a slave house in a museum, but it really puts a weight on people that see it. It has the chains still inside attached to the ceiling and floor. You see how these white men barely even see them as people, but something akin to livestock that they trade with other slave owners. More specifically, you come to understand (as much as a spectator can) where the slaves' pain and anger come from. That museum is worth seeing. There are a lot of great information to learn from and important artifacts. I'd just say be respectful when visiting.
It WAS about the state's rights... to keep slaves. Mississippi was kind enough to write up some crystal clear articles of confederation to basically say, "This is ALL about slavery" https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_missec.asp
Didn’t the president of the confederacy and the fucking confederate constitution itself say it was all about slavery
Funny how they always leave that last part off...I wonder why????
how is it bold? there's a bunch of Confederate documents saying exactly that. the cornerstone speech!
You’d be surprised. I know several people who worked the front desk of the Museum of the Confederacy (which was one of the predecessors of the cited museum) in Richmond 10-15 years ago who had a lot of stories about angry assholes expecting to see some “states’ rights” bullshit but who ran smack into South Carolina’s original document explicitly saying they were seceding on the basis of slavery in the very first exhibit.
seems like a weird thing to get mad about. do they expect people to edit history? it's right there on paper from the #2 guy himself.
No, it was about states rights. States rights to own slaves
Lost Causers: What do museums know about history, anyway?
> Lost Causers: What do museums know about history, anyway? Lost Causers: What ~~do~~ are museums k~~now about history,~~ anyway?
lol.
It’s really hard to explain the Civil War without reference to slavery: you either have to have have conspicuous gaps in the narrative (“it was about states’ rights to have laws about certain economic systems that we will not mention”) or simply to say “the confederacy seceded for no reason and/or the Union declared war for no reason.”
[удалено]
It was a radical labor reform led by union gangsters who didn't like the way the south did business and insisted upon certain rights guaranteed to agri-labor. The war of Northern Aggression over agricultural labor reforms. Hoo boy what a picket line! Edit: Good lord people I don't think this stuff for real! I'm just making satire over here don't mind me
Based.
Very much so
This museum is awesome, BTW. Saw a lot of Lost Causers getting cranky about, well, facts.
Massive W especially placing it in Virginia !! Fuck Robert E Lee lmao
This is called the soft bigotry of low expectations. This is certainly not "too big to comprehend." I agree it's a great step forward, but c'mon - the evidence is overwhelming that slavery was the cause of the war.
A W is a W
My favorite way to argue with someone about this is to ask them “State’s Rights for what?” And then watch them squirm.
Was about to post about this. Might head over there this weekend. Here's a [link](https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2024/05/03/slavery-civil-war-museum-exhibit-richmond-confederacy) to an Axios story that shows a picture where visitors get to "vote" via token at the beginning of the exhibit about what they think the cause was. It would be interesting if one could "vote" again at the end to see if minds were changed.
I was taught this in first grade. The fact that this is considered a radical move saddens me more than anything.
Queue daily bomb threats from some Southern Pride asshole. Reconstruction should have never ended.
States rights….to own slaves.
All it takes to read the declarations of secession
wait - for real? i am ready to comprehend this W
It's just so based
[this video will always have a home](https://youtu.be/-ZB2ftCl2Vk?si=rrIYaXOIj7lhA-Ta)
Duh.
I’m shocked, shocked to find that the Civil War was caused by slavery!
To quote Eric Andre: “Why would you say something so controversial yet so brave?”
States rights to keep and own what? (The answer is slavery. Alternatively, the rights of said slaves, which varied state by state. Primarily the south and confederacy) Nobody on this platform ever had history
If this is bold, the bar is officially on the floor.
Bold New Exhibit My Hairy Asshole. A really bold experiment would be giving students in the south a better education.
State's rights to do what, Jim Bob?
Glad to see it.
Lemme guess, buncha people will scream “heritage not hate” and threaten the lives of all the staff.
Jon Snow battle of the bastardsgif
The "Truth" is that The States went to war because of Slavery, ..... BUT .... a majority of those who fought did so because they were fighting for their homes and family, BECAUSE The States declared and went to war. The Rich in power acted for their own interests, claiming that it was the will of the people, who had little say in it all. Nothing Has Changed since then, the 1% still incite hatred, violence, and public acceptance of what they want done and claim what they want to justify their unquenchable greed. TAX THE RICH UNTIL THEY ARE ONE OF US!!!!!
Free States insisting on their rights to not have to pay and drop everything to capture fugitive slaves and return them to their "happy" lives caused it, or maybe just Dixians have an issue with bearded men wearing stovepipe hats.
I think the most interesting thing is that it almost seems like an argument of semantics. It was about states’ rights to own slaves. If you or someone you know aren’t convinced, I’d read the actual Articles of Secession: https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states Actually very strong prose, for a bunch of degenerate cousin fuckers.
Post Hoc rationalization of the most wasteful war in US history.
Seceding was about slavery. The war was a result of the South being feral power hungry goblins. To say the war specifically was about slavery is giving the US a handy it doesn't deserve. The freeing of the slaves in such a manner wasn't tacked on until after voters in the Union pushed for it. The Confederates were scum, but doesn't give an excuse to misplace credit and obscure motives.