Voices of the Civil War Episode 24:"African Americans in the Confederate Army"
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ม.ค. 2014
- By the end of 1863, with the Confederate army lacking resources, funds, and manpower, it had become clear to Confederate General Patrick Cleburne that the south desperately needed to find ways to recruit new soldiers for the rebel cause. Calling it "a plan which we believe will save our country," in January 1864, he called upon the leaders of the Army of the Tennessee and proposed the emancipation of slaves in order to enlist them in the Confederate war effort. In Episode 24 we explore the role of African Americans in the Confederate States Army.
Had the proposal of General Cleburne been implemented, the South might have won its independence.
It is doubtful even enlisting slaves in 61 would have won the war. Union Navy won it. Only a few hundred ironclads could have won a protracted war. and the slaves could not have filled that vacancy
@@karlburkhalter1502 - An estimated 60% of Southern blockade runners got through the blockade. And after the fall of Vicksburg the South was not really cut in half. Supplies form Texas via Mexico came across the Mississippi River like a sieve. I'm not saying the blockade didn't hurt, just that it was not decisive.
@@777Outrigger supplies from Mexico got no further than Shreveport, South was cut in half.
@@karlburkhalter1502 - Like I said before, supplies came across the Mississippi River in great volume. Southern armies never lacked for rifles, cannon, or ammunition. They could've used some more shoes and blankets, though.
@@777OutriggerANV were and AoT were armed by factories in Virginia and Georgia, supplemented by Blockade running to Willmington NC for ANV and Savannah GA for AoT Mexican supplies won the Red River Campaign, but didn't make it across the Mississippi River because US Navy held the River. General Richard Taylor swam his horse beside a rowboat to get across Mississippi in the middle of the night because CSA Navy had abandoned it. Willmington's fall doomed Lee, not Grant. Hint: Farragut and Porter won the War, with Sherman's help. In the end, Grant had little to do with it.
Really good video thank you! An unknown, or, at least a less-known fact discussed about the Civil War.
Awesome 👍
Awesome story
If we weren't going through the crap we are going through today, I would have never come across the vid. I learned more in the last 7 minutes than in all the years I wasted in public education.
I was taught this in public school, the Lost Cause myth of black confederates. I imagine the Civil War seemed less relevant to public schools until recently, what with the histories of 2 Persian Gulf wars, Afghanistan, Syria where their fathers served as probably important then
@@billm8442 The Fact that Black Confederate existed is not a MYTH. It was part of the education associated with the Lost Cause Myth but this part of it was NOT Myth... thought is probably was overblown some. These people existed.
There were Freed Blacks that fought and died for the Confederacy.
There were Freed Blacks that WORKED for the Confederacy in Supply Chain and Logistics and Building Battlements and digging Trenches. In many ways you COULD call them a type of Corps of Engineers Department in the Southern Army
There were Slaves that followed their Masters into War as Body Guards and Cooks and Valets etc.
IN FACT, if you have heard of Nathan Bedford Forrest... he owned many Slaves and most he left at home, But he offered 42 of his slaves the opportunity to follow him into War.
He told them (roughly)... "if they whip us they are going to Free You... but if you come with me I promise that I will Free You after the War". And he MADE SURE to keep his promise.
Late in the War he Freed all 42 of those Slaves. He said he went on a freed them because he had thought "What if I FALL". He knew if he DIED he could not guarantee his promise.
Someone else could have claimed them or returned them to his Plantation. And what if the Yankees didn't free them? So he Freed them to make sure he did not cheat them out of what he promised. They had all served so well in the War "Honorably" as Forrest put it.
The CRAZIEST thing about that part of this TRUE STORY... if the Nathan Bedford Forrest ended up being a 1 of the MAJOR LEADERS of the KKK after the War. Which just goes to show PEOPLE are COMPLEX sometimes.
@@billm8442 I'm guessing you don't live in the criminal run state of California. You can thank the Deep-State for the wars.
@@dannytimmons7801 Born, raised & living in California. Bad guess
@@billm8442 Me too, but not to happy about the left turn the state has taken.
Wow, some of these stories would be awesome in a movie
If any of y'all want to learn more about Blacks in the Confederate Army during the war, I recommend the works of Lochlainn Seabrook. One of these books that I recommend is called, "Everything You Were Taught About African-Americans and the Civil War is Wrong, Ask a Southerner!" It's a great book, you can find it on Amazon. If you get the paperback version, you'll find that it has a pretty cool painting serving as the front cover, of which was painted by Gregory Newson, an African-American Educator and Author, who actually wrote the forward of the book as well. Either way, give it a read when you can.
Deo Vindice my friends.
IronPiedmont1996: Deo Vindice, bro. [>
Thank you
IronPiedmont1996
Ize be free boss iz I fight them yanks what ize do with some land ize stay here whit you MASSA
Yep, emancipation became an option to BOTH sides when it first became a military necessity. For Lincoln and safeguarding the Union, it also served in winning the optics of public opinion and endearing the cause to the family of nations in keeping European powers from intervening. There's far more nuance to the most tumultuous, divisive moment in our history...so much so that it reveals that there are a plethora of people today, conservative AND liberal, that lack the historical consciousness necessary to break out of a black-and-white, simplified narrative, which it simply isn't. Not every Confederate is a villain, whereas not every Unionist is a tolerant abolitionist free from racism (Sherman). They're fallible, complex human beings that lived in the historical context of their time...not ours. Some have more to atone for than others, but all are brave to charge the field regardless...worthy of honor.
Traitors that attacked the United States. Killed American soldiers, in their attempt to destroy the constitution of this country. Their (goals )were?, No matter how eloquent or passive the reasons were written or spoken, suppression and enslavement of american citizens, with no regards to the human rights guaranteed by "OUR" constitution to its citizens... Mass rapes, torture, mutilation and killings based on race to ensure fear and profits. Their is no honor in attacking the constitution of America with the intent to deny a segment of its citizens freedom, forceing them into enslavement for profit..
Lincoln issued his Emancipation Proclamation after the victory at Antietam precisely so that it would not appear to be a craven attempt to recruit black soldiers in response to impending defeat. In contrast, the South issued its call for black soldiers in 1865, as it was staring down the barrel of a gun. It was an act of desperation rather than from any humanitarian motive. No comparison at all.
The following is Abraham Lincoln's explanation for the Emancipation Proclamation: "Things had gone from bad to worse, until I felt we had reached the end of our rope on the plan we were pursuing; that we had about played our last card, and must change our tactics or lose the game. I now determined upon the emancipation policy."
there were black confederate troops in battle,a union officer during the Atlanta campaign reported...we were under intense fire and the battle commenced...after the fight we moved forward and we're surprised to see a number of black confederate soldiers in uniform and had been fighting us,their resistance was stubborn and fierce...there were several of them dead in the trenches we advanced upon....
There were no black 'confederate troops'.
BPD1586 if you believe that then you need to go have a talk with the leprechaun next door....I myself have handled the original enlistment records...you can't deny a cemetery
There were no blacks confederate troops. Why would the south arm the very people they're trying to keep in bondage. Your enlistment records are nothing more than toilet paper...
BPD1586 your opinion is the only refuse here,I'm talking actual history your blowing rhetoric....no slave came to America on a ship bearing a confederate flag, three prominent new England families controlled the slave trade,the South wasn't fighting to keep people in bondage,slavery existed here over a hundred years before the confederacy, Lincoln himself said the war wasn't over slavery...I refer you to his 1862 letter to horrace Greely....slavery existed in the entire country and did not end after the war but continued until 1868 in states that remained neutral during the war...the Confederate army and navy differed from the federal army as I the Confederate army and navy paid both white and black personal equally the federal army paid blacks less until it was finally changed...the federal army and navy was segregated the Confederate army and navy was intergrated....you understand that there were black slave owners in the north and south...white weren't the only people who owned slaves even native Americans owned them...according to you actual union civil war records are toilet paper? neither confederate or federal documents are such...they are the actual accounts not your history revisionist blatherings...your just apparently someone just talking trash to get a verbal ping pong game going and your words are no more than that of a brat....the thing that bothers most is that they did exist...your remarks are completely inaccurate...if you told a federal soldier he was fighting to free slaves he'd probably knock your head off...Gen. Sherman and many other federals hated blacks and came right out and said it...Sherman and Lincoln both said they couldn't exist with white people...you've ran into someone who has been studying this for 50 years and not a Google historian...I only research actual documents not the internet....to deny their existing is to say that you don't need air to breathe....you can't rewrite history only study it....slavery anywhere at anytime is horrible...it still exists today in Africa selling mainly to the middle east and nobody cares...but your completely wrong....to call actual historical military documents toilet paper...well that exposes you as nothing more than someone looking to argue back and forth with just because you have nothing better to do....you can't deny the truth...you can play history revisionist but you can't change reality...you can go play with someone else
@@BPD1586 my Great great grandfather served in confederate army 49th NC REGIMENT. I have heard stories passed down of black confederate troops serving as infantry in confederate army.
"...and the sympathies of his whole race would be due to his NATIVE south" I bet that statement went over alot of yall heads.
I consider myself an intellectual, if you don't mind, would you bring it down for me? I've been trying to find deeper meaning in that statement.
+Elisha H. black people are the indigenous Americans and obviously they knew it back then
@@cbenji07 More indigenous than the actual natives?
@@tsdobbi the people who you are likely referring to are Asians. That's why their DNA matches up with modern Asians and don't match up with with the ancient remains found in America, which contradicts the alleged ancient migration and suggests a more recent arrival.
They meant black people who were born in the South
Holt Collier was the greatest.Read the book at the library Holt Collier and the Roosevelt hunt the origin of the teddy bear.
Nobody ever looks at the slavery of Irish people after Cromwells Irish wars ..that preceded African Slavery,. , nobody ever looks at The British Empires roll as the top seafaring nation ,and its historical significance with slavery to begin with,..
Don't take me wrong, but it's people like you who want to make all slavery equal without understanding the real issue. This great America we live in is the most powerful, and has been, problem is for black people it was built on the backs of our ancestors. yet, we (slaves and their lineage) reap none of the benefits. still today blacks are looked at in a negative light, and some whites refuse to acknowledge privilege. most countries had slaves, but never the way America did it. they basically took an entire country's worth of people, and made them build their country. Not as a result of war or debt, like other countries you bring up.
Im not trying to say slavery was equal ,& I understand the issue , how can you not grasp the slavery issue when you've heard it all your life , as opposed to slavery in Ireland that was never in history , ..but was severe , regardless of how slavery was imposed .,..I think both of us would agree its terribly wrong ,but sometimes its best for a people that were wronged to move forward ,
Its easier to move on when there is no more evidence of slavery. Its wrong no matter the case, but every time its brought up in America, other cases are brought up to discount the way black people feel about it. I've moved on, but I do understand why people are upset.
+Elisha H.; and I understand why my Native American Indian ancestors were upset over genocide of their people ,is their evidence for that ? not as much,.. because the Indian tribal histories were all but erased , by the same European masters , that enslaved the African people ,..
protestant revolution, Cromwell and England took war to Ireland and defeated Catholic Irish late 1500s. afterward for generations sent the catholic Irish into slavery ,..
Here are more balanced videos about Black Confederates:th-cam.com/video/XWuy2fq0PvM/w-d-xo.html and:
th-cam.com/video/fVYLswFcI48/w-d-xo.html and:
th-cam.com/video/NTEbu2rWfo8/w-d-xo.html and:
th-cam.com/video/EL-7NRL3BT0/w-d-xo.html
The geopolitics of those times did have a factor in the outcome for both sides. But the slave issues was only a political poly for the southern states Not a moral one
The Spaniards joined the confederacy Caribbean Puerto Rican, Cubans mostly have black ancestry 🤔
It is my understanding that some States even gave payments to Confederate Blacks after the war.
John Nall A few cooks and musicians got pensions as auxiliaries, not soldiers. Their wives got nothing. The thousands of slaves and freedmen pressed into service as ditch diggers and teamsters got nothing. They were not on any confederate roster.
Debatable... Most southern state records indicate they were denied because, at time in service they were considered property.
@kenny desee my findings challenge your statement...
@kenny desee propaganda from societies sympathetic to the southern confedrate army. Your noble cause is a lie.. History will always relate the south with slaves. Race hating, and self centering lies.. State rights??? To own human beings is a right????
Not true, all attempts for compensation by black men from southern states after the war were denied. State reasoning was they were not soldiers but property ( conscripts).
Moral of the story, life is complicated and not often simple as black and white.
This Confederate General Patrick Ends His 1863
🎉
ER😅😮😢😢😢😂🎉😢😮😅 2:58 😅
The African-American is the true Indian American don’t you ever forget that
Nathan Bedford Forrest had as part of his personal bodyguard a group of black Confederate cavalry.They were said to be pretty tough and good soldiers.
Forrest said there were no better Confederates and fighters than his black Cavalry riders. They had the same Uniforms, ate and slept with the whites. That was unheard of in the Union Army. Segregation came from the North. Before the Civil War Blacks and whites lived together and many for generations. They were considered family.
@han solo Lincoln was a blood thirsty tyrant and a homosexual. He slept with a young Soldier in the White House. He slept with other men. He slept with a young man for 4 years in Springfield.
Kurt Sherrick..And yet they were still body servants and slaves..
Sirs: its interesting to me that most of you would take the time to debate with me your reasonings of why the battle flag of robert e lee and his army would be held up as heritage... For me who honors the American Flag, i would have to hold up the flag of the 7th calvary, or the 5th cav, and the 9th and 10th cav. Because at one time the men in my family served under those flags... But i could not or would not ever claim those flags as heritage. My heritage is in the American flag. Not a military flag. Thank you for the valuable insight.
Long live Africa African s
Can you please read a history book there were no black Confederate soldiers
Black voices He doesnt sound like he looks.More videos please
Look up HK Edgerton.
According to one source ("Black Confederates," which may or may not still be up) Jesse James is quoted as saying there were about 65,000 Blacks who fought for the South. It is certainly known that Gen. Forrest commanded Black troops, whom who spoke highly of.
Yes, General Forrest was not a black-hating white supremacist... He founded his organization as a way to protect the South (white and black) from the Northern "carpetbaggers" and such-like, but abandoned and denounced the organization when those same damned yankees and some southern fools began disguising themselves as his men and stirring racial tensions through acts of violence.
@@sgtbender1335 is that why they terrorized the newly freed black people after the war?
Actually they didn't. The reality is that a bunch of Yankee "Carpetbaggers" saw a masked vigilante group as a perfect scapegoat for their crimes and began terrorizing Southerners of both races while disguising themselves as Forrest's men. Sure, some angry Southerners who'd already had their homes, farms, businesses and families destroyed by the murderous gangs like Sherman's Army joined in the violence (often spurred by the new Yankee governors seizing what little they had left and putting random freed men in charge of or in possession of it). However, senseless violence was never the intent of his organization and once he realized it was being hijacked he tried to disband the entire organization. Most of his men left with him, but they were unable to stop thugs from both sides of the Mason-Dixon from taking it over and turning it into what we know it as today. Forrest publicly decried what it had become, and pleaded with people to cease the violence and disband, but to no avail. The same thugs who attacked the South, raped women, violently murdered children, burnt farms, hung innocents and blamed it on Southerners to fuel the rage of ignorant people to fuel their illegal war.. those same people were still coming down from the North to ravage the South even after the war had ended. Its history man. Try doing some independent research instead of just swallowing the propaganda you were spoonfed in government schools. Sheep...
@@sgtbender1335 let's pretend you're right about everything you wrote. Explain why the south created black codes and Jim crow laws that lasted the next 100 years. Carpet baggers too?
@@stikupartist3698 Legitimate question. Economical and political oppression, and intentional racial divisions (created by the new puppet governments set up in the South post-war) led to a lot of genuine hatred between whites and blacks who were both suffering under those puppet governments. Most of the laws you're referring to were literally created and enforced by those puppet governments for the very simple reason that, "a house divided cannot stand". The North was very afraid of a resurgent "rebellion", and gave us all reasons to focus our hatred on each other, and our energy on barely scratching out a meager survival. Hence why the South that was the economical powerhouse became completely destitute, and also why they refused to prosecute President Davis. They knew their war was illegal, and that they would lose the case in court if they tried to prosecute him. That would illegitimize their war publicly which would in turn justify the South on the International level thereby creating their own worst case scenario (The resurgence of the South with the potential of strong economical and possibly military support from sympathetic nations). War is never simple... certainly never as simple as that one is taught to be.
'...maintain an idea as desperate as emancipation...'
first of all, Robert E Lee was an abolitionist by inclination, so it's not 'desperate' for him to make such a proposition.
secondly, a fair number of Southern states voted to emancipate before the war broke out but obviously couldn't move forward with it when under attack, so again it's really not that strange.
I just can't believe how many people think that slavery was the key issue of the Civil War... it had absolutely nothing to do with it other than the fact that emancipation was propagated to entice blacks to desert the Confederacy, but it didn't really work, because the overwhelming majority of them rightly stayed loyal to the end.
this war was fought because the federal government had been extorting the south for decades with protectionist tariffs building up the North and slowly crippling the South.by 1861 fully 94% of the federal revenue was from the Southern States so they would never let them succeed despite the fact that they had the right to.
it was a criminal war of plunder that killed off the real America and replaced it with a corporate mafia who's chief concern is exploiting Americans. after the war everyone was a slave of the central bank.
no general income tax before the war... no escape from income tax after the war... woops forgot to repeal it, I guess :0
slavery also wasn't the titanic evil it's made out to be... it was simply a socio-economic mode that was phasing out, nothing more. nothing less.
and the last state to quit slavery was New Jersey.
how the fuck can anyone be impressed by Lincoln's speech at the Gettysburg address where he 'emancipated' the slaves in the southern states where he had no authority but didn't emancipate anyone in the states he had power over????? I mean what the fuck was that???? it's the craziest fucking thing you could imagine.
Such a relief to see someone who actually knows some real history of the era. Just finished posting this to someone else when I saw your post.
"Actually, many (blacks) in the South were viewed as part of the family and treated as such whereas in the North they were treated like sub-humans. These blacks were brought from a country where their families had been murdered and enslaved by their rival tribes, and they were sold to whomever arrived on the African coast first. These blacks had never lived so well or had so much as they did in the South and many were actually grateful, and considered themselves fortunate. There were many reasons for their loyalty, and many volunteered as freed men fighting for their beloved South just as their white counterparts did. After the war, many of the freed blacks chose to stay living and working on the farms and plantations where they had been slaves because (as many wrote later in journals and letters) they loved their former masters and considered them family. It wasn't the South that sewed hate between the black man and the white, but rather a greedy villainous North who saw an opportunity to use a national crisis of conscious as a smokescreen for their murder, rape, theft, and general destruction of the South. Slavery was dying out as an institution in the South because of religious reasons and would have ended within a few years as a legal institution in the South even if the war was never fought. Slavery was absolutely wrong, but it had been a national and worldwide commonplace at that time (a social norm so to speak). People were born into a world where it was normal, and countries like Britain and the United States were among the first to say, "Hey, how can we hold slaves and still claim to believe in the ways of Christ who tells us to ""Do unto others as ye would they do unto you?"" ". It was for this reason that both North and South were beginning to abolish slavery as a legal or social norm. This transformation was swifter in the North due to the Industrial modernization of which required less labor and thus allowed for removal of slave labor rapidly without causing economic collapse and famine.
The Economic collapse and famine issues were two of the larger problems which the Southern Congress faced, and they were discussing ways to eliminate these problems. One such solution discussed was a method of phasing slavery out of the South over a period of several years during which freed black families could be set up with their own house and a tract of land for farming an income for themselves. The South knew that without such a method of phasing out slavery there would be the ethical issue of thousands of homeless black families starving in the streets if you were to suddenly declare the institution illegal, and impose a criminal sentence on slaveholders (because no one is going to let former slaves stay on their property if all it takes is for someone to accuse you of still holding some power over them and off to jail you go). The validity of the South's view of a necessary phase out period were realized after the war when poverty and starvation drove many (white and black families) to commit crimes of theft, burglary, robbery, and even murder in an attempt to scratch out survival for their families. Not that the North cared, as they stated in many letters and speeches prior to the close of the war that they were intentionally setting up a desperate situation in the South for the purpose of pitting whites and blacks against each other. The economic collapse and desperation of famine was a sure method of stirring up resentment between the whites and blacks of the South who would inevitably blame each other for these hardships by pure design of the North. There are many letters written by Lincoln and many Northern Military Commanders describing the method of dividing production resources in a way as to prevent efficient production which would lead to further economic despair for both demographics and thereby ensure the South was too busy fighting itself to oppose the Federal Slavery now imposed on every citizen of our Country. Etc etc etc common sense issues to people of that era that don't even dawn on the minds of someone from ours.
From the black perspective you would have to see it as being very divided. The first generation slaves were the "lucky survivors" of African tribal wars and the African slave trade, and (having barely survived with not a single personal possession in the world to their name) would have considered themselves lucky to have a warm place to live, regular meals, and the guaranteed protection of their new masters (because abuse of slaves was actually a more rare incident and even frowned upon by many slaveholders). Abusing a slave (as terrible as it sounds) would have been like buying a Mercedes Benz just to take it home and smash out the windows, dent the doors, and key the paint.... it just logically would not make sense. An injured slave cannot work as productively and is more likely to try to run away (which means no work gets done), and is more likely to seek revenge given the opportunity, so only a fool would abuse their slaves. If your child were to break the house rules and you whip their butt telling them to follow the rules your child will dislike the punishment, but see it as justified based on their actions. However, if you just walk in the door and start whipping them upside the head they will hate you, run away, or seek revenge... same concept.
The other side of the black perceptive of slavery at the time would be found in the second, third, and so on generations to whom slavery was all they knew and who would sensibly resent it, and who would reasonably desire to free themselves (as any person would) to live of their own accord. Finally, Then there were those who were the unfortunate slaves of terrible people who actually committed terrible crimes against them with impunity. I am proud of those slaves (both white and black) who fought back because even in a slave-holding society such behavior is inexcusable and intolerable.
Now before you go hating on me for my objective perspective as a white southerner whose family fought for the South, you should know that one of my ancestors was a slave as well in the Barbados prior to the Civil War. And please don't think I'm ranting at you. I don't completely disagree with your statement as I'm sure it was exactly true in some (maybe even many) cases, but my family's name, reputation, and heritage are constantly being attacked based on false history being taught in schools, and an intentional misrepresentation of the South."
Yours take is a fantasy, based in your feelings of white supremacy. You are the descendant of genecidal immigrants. Nothing more
@@mjs6157 where d'you learn that? Hollywood? just shut up, you mindless idiot... bet you've never read a history book in your life
@James Richardson so many meaningless, wasted words you just typed...
they detract nothing from the obvious two crucial facts I pointed out;
1- the war obviously wasn't about slavery
2- slavery isn't some great evil... it was just pre-industrial working class, i.e the only situation possible to sustain growth in a time when wealth is in few hands and the bosses have to fit the bill for tools, accomodation, feeding and entire projects... you couldn't have people up and leave... where would they go anyway... to just die in the wilderness? xD where would they even get a job? the new world was DEVELOPING.
even then, you think any African slave would be better off staying a slave in Africa which was still in the stone age? I don't think so
any descendent of a slave should be as proud of the fruits of their work as a coal miner in Wales or anyone else ... it's on those foundations the modern world was built.
what the fuck are you talking about 'the South would never emancipate the Slaves'??
of course it would have happened eventually, because with industry and better trade and transport links it would become economically unviable not to emancipate them...
why do you think there's no slavery in the west today, you idiot?
because it's more profitable this way...
but this situation simply wasn't possible in a developing society until it reached a certain benchmark of infrastructure and proliferation of wealth.
there are still region of the world where people would be better off if someone took them in as a slaves... the industrialised (by the west) world isn't one of those places.... but it may become that way again.
to repeat your quote; ''the South would never emancipate the slaves'' xD so why the fuck had three of the Southern States voted to abolish it by the time the wat broke out? lol
a better question is; 'why do YOU have to LIE to get your so-called points across?'
.....ever herd of a cotton gin, by the way? lol a semi automated process... so slavery was already just the same as working in a factory somewhere... except you would never be sacked or have to pay your own way until your contract was up...
@@sgtbender1335 True, every word
As a person who is supportive of the neo-CSA, I desperately wish this were to have happened. But I stick with the neo-CSA because our destiny was emancipation. I see this as a sad failure for us. But today is a new opportunity to free people in place of the people we did not free. To liberate others from the modern oppression is our new goal
I’m willing to bet… most of those so-called African American… were really American Indians….🤔🧐🧐🧐
Most slave owners didn't hurt there slaves but. Was nice to them and. Made them feel like they whare save
ha you one brainwashed nigga
Kenshin 1998 Himura: Your hatred blinds you to the truth.
Alex Pindell not entirely true according to a lot of accounts
Get the hell out of here with that bullshit.
Is that why the slaves rebelled? Because of how nice their masters were?
We WUZ Killers
Comcast Home Business Dragon speaking Comcast Home Business Network History News organization black Smithsonian Washington DC Lucille Green 6925@network
Fake propaganda nice try tho
Go back to Rome
Great video. Quite informative.
However, there is no respect due to the confederacy from african americans. Simply because of the circumstances by which the confederate leaders even began to entertain the proposition of emancipation. Calling a man that you enslave a "soldier" and dressing him in military garb means nothing after you were just beating him down the week before. Being used as a last-minute dying effort to help win a war for the man who's enslaving you garners zero respect nor honor. In fact, it was an ironic tragedy how african americans were finally offered some level of emancipation. By fighting for the side they wished to be free from. That had to be very weird.
It says right at the beginning of the video that the confederate army was lacking manpower, resources, everything. In other words, their backs were against the wall and they were facing assured defeat. Which is also to say, they were going to die. People do very DESPERATE things when confronted with that kind of fear. You have to wonder what the sentiment would be if the confederacy was winning. Before they begin to crumble, there was zero chatter about emancipation in those circles of confederate leadership.
Sadly, the confederates still only saw african american people as tools to be used for their benefit. Mostly agricultural/financial benefit in the beginning. In wartime, it just spread over to military/combat benefit. And they knew for certain that the african american people would HAVE TO BE OFFERED FREEDOM FIRST and at an absolute minimum among any other minor auxiliary "perks". Money, perhaps housing, etc. And they prayed that the african american people would keep their end of the bargain and not sandwich them from behind out of pure revenge.
At the end of the day, the confederates were whipping/raping the african american people forever. Then when their backs were to the wall, african american people were all they had left. And they had no choice but to offer them freedom. A fitting and quite pathetic end to the whole lot of the confederacy.
right on!
+Devin McCoy If all you state were the case, every black man, woman and child would have left the south, forever. But, this is not the case. Also, after the war, just about every black man was a Republican. It was the enslaving democratic "progressive" party that created the hate and barriers and one of the greatest racists was Woodrow Wilson, who premiered that crappy shit called Birth of a Nation, at the White House! Ever since Wilson wrote his version of American History, our public schools have sold nothing but lies to us and you are caught believing their lies. Research people like Prince Whipple if you dare. Semper Fi
StrangeCloud724 Nathan Bedford Forrest had at least 42 of his slaves join freely. Forrest said they were the best Calvery men he had. Forrest was good to his slaves because they made him money. Also he had travelled sometimes hundreds of miles to buy back slaves that his neighbor's sold when they sold his slaves family members so the slaves could keep their families together. Also after the war over 20 returned with him because Forrest was good and worked with them. Also after Forrest gave a speech in Memphis to free slaves about the importance of voting and he didn't tell them how to vote. He believed they should be able to vote when they were freed. It was the North that didn't allow them to vote for decades. And History has Slandered the greatest Calvery leader in History. The Night Riders were against carpet baggers that actually took advantage of Blacks and he disenvowed the KKK when they started going after free slaves. He had not on once of hate for blacks just Yankees he didn't care anything about and Yankees black or white. It's progressive's that try to keep white and blacks at odds with each other. God bless the Christian southern black citizens. Hate is taught. Young children play together and don't give a second thought about the color of the other kids skin. We all should learn from that. And I wished that damn war never happened but it did and it's time for everyone but to go forward. History is full of blood and wars and mankind has not learned a damn thing from it. That's sad.
Lincoln with the Corwin Amendment offered to make slavery a permanent institution in the South if the Southern Confederacy would rejoin the Union. The Confederacy refused because slavery was not the main issue of the War. The main issue was protective tariffs (see Morrill Tariff, protective tariffs) which were collected by the fed for both Southern imports and exports.
The Northern people were very racist and wanted nothing to do with blacks, slave or free. Lincoln's home State, Illinois, along with many other Northern States and even Territories (such as Oregon) had laws on the books or in their Constitutions, called "black codes" which forbade any blacks from residing in their States. In contrast, in the South blacks and whites went to the same churches, worked the fields together (among small farmers) and often lived in the same house. Slaves and their masters usually regarded each other as family. (see "Roll, Jordon, Roll: The World the Slaves Made" by Eugene D. Genovese, and "Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men" by Jeffrey Rogers Hummel). Many blacks who believe Southerners were rabid racists usually live in the North, and have learned racism up there, yet blame Southerners.
Further, abolitionism began in the South, not the North. But Southerners wanted a gradual emancipation, wherein slaves could learn a trade and be able to support themselves and their families after emancipation. Manumission was a common part of the legal system in the South, and many slaves were manumitted by their masters. Northern abolitionists wanted a sudden emancipation for slaves, with no steps even considered as to how slaves would be able to live after gaining their freedom. They didn't care much about the slaves' welfare but rather wanted to break the Southern planters financially and end the historical place of the South in American politics. After Lincoln emancipated the slaves (only in the South, where he had no authority to do so, of course. No freedom was offered to Northern slaves-yes there were still some- or to "border State" slaves) there was no provision for them to live, and tens of thousands of freedmen died, along with their families, of starvation, exposure and disease after the Emancipation Proclamation and the War. You should do some research before assuming to know what was going on or what Southerners, black and white, thought about each other or of the War. They were all Southerners first. It is not inconceivable that a slave could both love his master and want freedom. Or that masters could both love their slaves, yet keep them enslaved rather than throwing them out with no means of support. This was often the case. This is what John Calhoun meant by slavery being a "positive good", because black slaves were considered in the South to be Southerners, not Africans, and were provided for, in exchange for work, and made Christians by Christian masters and the Christian society of the South. Cruel masters were rare, for the norms of the Southern society required fair and just treatment of slaves. Cruel masters were ostracized and sometimes run out of the country by other slave owners. What you have learned is propaganda, which always has its own agenda.
They had a meeting about that and they decided not to because the main reason for the WAR was slavery . SO THEY REJECTED IT .
Main reason for the war was because the union wanted to industrialize the south and make huge city's
@@shawnpruitt4670
The south still ain't industrialized are you SERIOUS !
@@donalddorsey6271 so if your gonna talk about slavery we intergrated our army's and let blacks jews and whites all sleep in the same tent the union didn't do that they segregated. The flag meant speration from a curropt country
@@shawnpruitt4670
The corruption was slavery !
Getting free labor !
@@donalddorsey6271 the curroption was the politicians not us slavery had absolutely nothing to do with the civil war lincoln used that bullshit to start a war he didn't give af about the blacks that's why he segregated his army
This video makes it seem like the slaves were happily working to make sure that slavery remained intact in the confederacy
Both industrial and agricultural production slowed considerably as blacks went on strike and shirked daily labor
Strikes were normal on both sides though. The war was brutal.
lie ,lies and more lies.
History your history the biggest liars in the world 🌎
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/P._G._T._Beauregard
This guy started the war and was victorious at fort sumter.
Guys.
He is not a whyte man.