The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Pat Buchanan ArchiveBlogview
After the Confederates, Who's Next?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

On Sept. 1, 1864, Union forces under Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman, victorious at Jonesborough, burned Atlanta and began the March to the Sea where Sherman’s troops looted and pillaged farms and towns all along the 300-mile road to Savannah.

Captured in the Confederate defeat at Jonesborough was William Martin Buchanan of Okolona, Mississippi, who was transferred by rail to the Union POW stockade at Camp Douglas, Illinois.

By the standards of modernity, my great-grandfather, fighting to prevent the torching of Georgia’s capital, was engaged in a criminal and immoral cause. And “Uncle Billy” Sherman was a liberator.

Under President Grant, Sherman took command of the Union army and ordered Gen. Philip Sheridan, who had burned the Shenandoah Valley to starve Virginia into submission, to corral the Plains Indians on reservations.

It is in dispute as to whether Sheridan said, “The only good Indian is a dead Indian.” There is no dispute as to the contempt Sheridan had for the Indians, killing their buffalo to deprive them of food.

Today, great statues stand in the nation’s capital, along with a Sherman and a Sheridan circle, to honor these most ruthless of generals in that bloodiest of wars that cost 620,000 American lives.

Yet, across the South and even in border states like Kentucky, Maryland and Missouri, one may find statues of Confederate soldiers in town squares to honor the valor and sacrifices of the Southern men and boys who fought and fell in the Lost Cause.

When the Spanish-American War broke out, President McKinley, who as a teenage soldier had fought against “Stonewall” Jackson in the Shenandoah and been at Antietam, bloodiest single-day battle of the Civil War, removed his hat and stood for the singing of “Dixie,” as Southern volunteers and former Confederate soldiers paraded through Atlanta to fight for their united country. My grandfather was in that army.

For a century, Americans lived comfortably with the honoring, North and South, of the men who fought on both sides.

But today’s America is not the magnanimous country we grew up in.

Since the ’60s, there has arisen an ideology that holds that the Confederacy was the moral equivalent of Nazi Germany and those who fought under its battle flag should be regarded as traitors or worse.

Thus, in New Orleans, statues of Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States of America, and General Robert E. Lee were just pulled down. And a drive is underway to take down the statue of Andrew Jackson, hero of the Battle of New Orleans and president of the United States, which stands in Jackson Square.

Why? Old Hickory was a slave owner and Indian fighter who used his presidential power to transfer the Indians of Georgia out to the Oklahoma Territory in a tragedy known as the Trail of Tears.

But if Jackson, and James K. Polk, who added the Southwest and California to the United States after the Mexican-American War, were slave owners, so, too, were four of our first five presidents.

The list includes the father of our country, George Washington, the author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, and the author of our Constitution, James Madison.

Not only are the likenesses of Washington and Jefferson carved on Mount Rushmore, the two Virginians are honored with two of the most magnificent monuments and memorials in Washington, D.C.

Behind this remorseless drive to blast the greatest names from America’s past off public buildings, and to tear down their statues and monuments, is an egalitarian extremism rooted in envy and hate.

Among its core convictions is that spreading Christianity was a cover story for rapacious Europeans who, after discovering America, came in masses to dispossess and exterminate native peoples. “The white race,” wrote Susan Sontag, “is the cancer of human history.”

Today, the men we were taught to revere as the great captains, explorers, missionaries and nation-builders are seen by many as part of a racist, imperialist, genocidal enterprise, wicked men who betrayed and eradicated the peace-loving natives who had welcomed them.

ORDER IT NOW

What they blindly refuse to see is that while its sins are scarlet, as are those of all civilizations, it is the achievements of the West that are unrivaled. The West ended slavery. Christianity and the West gave birth to the idea of inalienable human rights.

As scholar Charles Murray has written, 97 percent of the world’s most significant figures and 97 percent of the world’s greatest achievements in the arts, architecture, literature, astronomy, biology, earth sciences, physics, medicine, mathematics and technology came from the West.

What is disheartening is not that there are haters of our civilization out there, but that there seem to be fewer defenders.

Of these icon-smashers it may be said: Like ISIS and Boko Haram, they can tear down statues, but these people could never build a country.

What happens, one wonders, when these Philistines discover that the seated figure in the statue, right in front of D.C.’s Union Station, is the High Admiral of the Ocean Sea, Christopher Columbus?

Happy Memorial Day!

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

Copyright 2017 Creators.com.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Political Correctness, The Confederacy 
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. While I’m not an exponent of the confederacy, it seems to me to be political correctness run rampant to pull down the memorials and these efforts will eventually bring blowback to the PC crusaders.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /pbuchanan/after-the-confederates-whos-next/#comment-1885538
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Until the average American loses the fear of being called names, and before the time that patriotic Americans resurrect some of the left’s knowledge about hell-raising from the 1960′s, things will get worse, and maybe the founders’ statues will fall. This knowledge is that there is power in numbers, they can’t arrest all of us, and even if they do, getting arrested for fighting the PC will be a feather in my cap, and possibly most importantly, the girls really “dig” a rebel.

    Until then, there will only be a few defenders, with wacky names like “Baked Alaska” with no support from the general population. Do not fret too much, Pat, Peak Stupidity is coming.

    Read More
  3. “When the Spanish-American War broke out, President McKinley, who as a teenage soldier had fought against ‘Stonewall’ Jackson in the Shenandoah and been at Antietam, bloodiest single-day battle of the Civil War, removed his hat and stood for the singing of ‘Dixie’, as Southern volunteers and former Confederate soldiers paraded through Atlanta to fight for their united country.”

    There’s a sucker born every minute.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sowhat
    Grand-standing...how corny!
    , @Kilo 4/11
    You and the other asshat "sowhat" are not fit to clean a Confederate private's mess kit. Your failure to apprehend the nobility of McKinley's feeling and the generosity of his gesture is typical of you low bred critics of your betters.
  4. The left does this because they know they can, with little or no repercussion.

    The U.S. must be littered with statues of MLK and “holocaust” memorials. While we’re not at the point yet of taking jackhammers to these abominations, they can be vandalized and defaced.

    Until the alt right learns to fight dirty and nasty like the left, they will continue to do this and with each victory gain confidence and boldness. The alt right are the outcasts and rebels and must learn to think and fight like that.

    Next up is the statue of Sam Houston in the eponymous city. And after that, how long before the calls begin to rename the city and state of Washington?

    Read More
  5. KenH says:

    We are in the throes of an American Bolshevik revolution and it’s being largely inspired and led by the very same (((people))) who started the Russian revolution in 1917. It’s obvious the stars and stripes and all of America history is next on the chopping block. In typical Bolshevik fashion the heroes will be recast as villains while the former villains become heroes. People like MLK and Hussein Obama will become the new founders while the cucks clap like circus seals.

    The only open question is whether they wish to mass murder 25 million, mostly white Americans as Bill Ayers and his ilk wished to do. Since they are working tirelessly to disarm white Americans through “common sense” gun laws my money says that is still their deepest, darkest desire.

    Their claims of America’s founding being steeped in “racism and imperialism” is ahistorical crap. Anyone who’s literate in world history knows that all nations were founded by violent conquest and displacement of the original inhabitants. And all people practiced slavery and have the capacity to commit evil deeds. The left plays fast and loose with the historical record to paint the conquest of America by European whites and slavery in the antebellum South as uniquely evil and unprecedented that now merits the destruction of their monuments to confederate leaders.

    Read More
    • Agree: bluedog, Rurik
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    The left plays fast and loose with the historical record ...
     
    Pretty nearly everyone, it seems, plays fast and loose with practically everything so long as it suits them. Then the fashions can change in the blink of an eye.

    It's ALL smoke, mirrors and other assorted bullshit in the extreme.
    , @Corvinus
    "Anyone who’s literate in world history knows that all nations were founded by violent conquest and displacement of the original inhabitants. And all people practiced slavery and have the capacity to commit evil deeds."

    Thus by your own metric, the United States was created by imperialistic and racist people who just happened to be European and who just happened to be following in the footsteps of all groups.
  6. While we’re on the topic of the cultural damage being done to civilization by ignorant SJW barbarians, it is interesting to note that the statue of Justice outside a courthouse in Dacca, Bengal was denounced, then demolished by…(this one’s easy)…Islamists.

    Too bad the Queen’s Own Shropshire Rifles weren’t there to give that mob a “wee whiff of grape”.

    Read More
  7. “As scholar Charles Murray has written, 97 percent of the world’s most significant figures and 97 percent of the world’s greatest achievements in the arts, architecture, literature, astronomy, biology, earth sciences, physics, medicine, mathematics and technology came from the West.”

    Undeniably, this statement is more or less true of the Renaissance era that started around the 15th century when Europe awakened from the dark ages. However, this cannot be held as a fair and accurate statement about the overall period of recorded history. From the beginning of the agrarian society in Mesopotamia till today, the flame of civilization has passed many times from other cultures to and from the West. From Indians, Egyptians and Phoenicians to the Hellenic cradle of Western society, to the rise of China passing through the Persian civilization, we can sense that while the contribution of the West was awesome, civilized achievements in arts, sciences and philosophy and were not a Western monopoly.

    As for the constant vilification of the White race, it is evident in so many fields, chief among them the film industry coming from Hollywood. The recent movie ” Free State of Jones” is a typical Hollywood assault on the American White Southern society of the pre civil war era. This smacks of pure anti White racial prejudice, supported by the liberal intelligentsia that acts at the behest of the New World Order to riddle the white race with a feeling of guilt that will make White people more susceptible to mix with other races in a vain effort to escape the guilt burden. If we take a hint from the Protocol of the Elders of Zion, we can understand the true purpose of these psy-ops against the White race.

    Considering the damage perpetrated on the Middle East at the hand of American and European troops, we might give credence to the theory of White wickedness, but if we look at who is in the driver’s seat of the geopolitical train of Wetern countries, then we could come to the fair conclusion that the Western soldier is nothing more than a pawn on the globlalist chess game. A similar examination of the genocide of the origin of Native American and the extinction of the roaming buffalo herds would lead us to the Mammonite’s undeniable responsibility for this very sad tragedy.

    Read More
  8. What we have here is a western Cultural Revolution. Old Customs, Old Culture, Old Habits, and Old Ideas must be destroyed. A revolution propelled by tens of thousands of little Maos in media, academia, business HR & PR departments and government.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Olds

    Read More
  9. Saddam statues were deliberately pulled down in Iraq – the country hasn’t known peace since

    Lenin and Stalin statues were pulled down in Ukraine – the country is now in its own cold war

    ‘Victors’ like Sherman, Woodrow Wilson, , Mao, Pol Pot, the Bolsheviks, etc, will erase history and uproot local cultures in order to ensure that their victory is total. When resisted , they’d probably escalate to mass genocide without hesitation.

    USA has shunned historical complicity in past genocides, and its modern existence is plagued with a distorted and dangerous guilt industry at home, and a sadistic and reckless war policy abroad.

    Things seem to be getting stranger and/or worse with each passing day

    Read More
  10. I think the Right should get behind importing the Taliban from Afghanistan who blew up the Buddhas, and setting them to work on Mount Rushmore’s slaveowning Presidents. Since the general populace cannot draw the conclusion on where we are headed, do it now.

    Read More
  11. J1234 says:

    After the Confederates, Who’s Next?

    I’m guessing Midwesterners. Seriously. They’re too white.

    A few years ago, my response would be interpreted (and delivered) as absurdly humorous. Today, however, I’m not being humorous at all…just trying to guess which direction the blind insanity of the left will veer next.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    I’m guessing Midwesterners. Seriously. They’re too white.
     
    You may be right. There is an Indian man named Raj Chetty who is doing a taxpayer-funded study using your "confidential" tax returns to find out where people are most upwardly mobile.

    He is of course discovering that those places are white.

    Chetty's conclusions ignore race, and they could be used by your government as a reason to move more non-whites to those white areas in the Midwest.

    Read about the study, and its faults, at the upper left of the Unz Review page right now:

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/tyler-cowen-interviews-raj-chetty-on-my-critique/

    , @Paul Yarbles
    The goal of the left is to weaken the power of white heterosexual males in the western nations. One technique is to undermine the sense of self-worth of white heterosexual males so they are demoralized and, thus, become unwilling to defend their position.

    Two ways self-worth is weakened are:

    (1) asserting that color/diversity, gayness and non-masculinity all have greater value then their antitheses and

    (2) denigrating the history, culture and achievements of both America and Europe since these are intimately linked to white males.

    Confederates were low-hanging fruit to be picked off and discarded. After all, who's going to defend slavery? Who's next? What's some other low-hanging fruit? You need a target that is both primarily white, male and heterosexual and also is linked in the minds of many in the public with racism, homophobia, and/or sexism.

    One candidate is majority white fraternities at universities. Given the mindset of the powers-that-be at universities, how are they still around?
    , @The Alarmist
    Why do you think the heart of Midwesterness, Minnesota among other places, is being targetted with a demographic time-bomb in the form of Somalis?
  12. nickels says:

    This article convinced me to download Jefferson Davis’s Rise and Fall of the Confederacy audiobook!
    New project for the commute. Take a break from Roman/Greek history for a bit.

    Read More
  13. Next it’ll be all statues of white men…then all statues of white women…

    Read More
  14. @J1234

    After the Confederates, Who's Next?
     
    I'm guessing Midwesterners. Seriously. They're too white.

    A few years ago, my response would be interpreted (and delivered) as absurdly humorous. Today, however, I'm not being humorous at all...just trying to guess which direction the blind insanity of the left will veer next.

    I’m guessing Midwesterners. Seriously. They’re too white.

    You may be right. There is an Indian man named Raj Chetty who is doing a taxpayer-funded study using your “confidential” tax returns to find out where people are most upwardly mobile.

    He is of course discovering that those places are white.

    Chetty’s conclusions ignore race, and they could be used by your government as a reason to move more non-whites to those white areas in the Midwest.

    Read about the study, and its faults, at the upper left of the Unz Review page right now:

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/tyler-cowen-interviews-raj-chetty-on-my-critique/

    Read More
  15. Sowhat says:
    @Eustace Tilley (not)
    "When the Spanish-American War broke out, President McKinley, who as a teenage soldier had fought against 'Stonewall' Jackson in the Shenandoah and been at Antietam, bloodiest single-day battle of the Civil War, removed his hat and stood for the singing of 'Dixie', as Southern volunteers and former Confederate soldiers paraded through Atlanta to fight for their united country."

    There's a sucker born every minute.

    Grand-standing…how corny!

    Read More
  16. @J1234

    After the Confederates, Who's Next?
     
    I'm guessing Midwesterners. Seriously. They're too white.

    A few years ago, my response would be interpreted (and delivered) as absurdly humorous. Today, however, I'm not being humorous at all...just trying to guess which direction the blind insanity of the left will veer next.

    The goal of the left is to weaken the power of white heterosexual males in the western nations. One technique is to undermine the sense of self-worth of white heterosexual males so they are demoralized and, thus, become unwilling to defend their position.

    Two ways self-worth is weakened are:

    (1) asserting that color/diversity, gayness and non-masculinity all have greater value then their antitheses and

    (2) denigrating the history, culture and achievements of both America and Europe since these are intimately linked to white males.

    Confederates were low-hanging fruit to be picked off and discarded. After all, who’s going to defend slavery? Who’s next? What’s some other low-hanging fruit? You need a target that is both primarily white, male and heterosexual and also is linked in the minds of many in the public with racism, homophobia, and/or sexism.

    One candidate is majority white fraternities at universities. Given the mindset of the powers-that-be at universities, how are they still around?

    Read More
  17. Since the ’60s, there has arisen an ideology that holds that the Confederacy was the moral equivalent of Nazi Germany and those who fought under its battle flag should be regarded as traitors or worse.

    Curious pattern: USA modeled Sherman’s March to the Sea — the total destruction by fire and brimstone, of the grand legacy of the South — in its total destruction by fire and brimstone of the grand legacy of Christian Germany.

    Today, the perpetrators of both of those acts of total destruction — holocaust — continue their pursuit of the total obliteration of the history and culture of the incinerated and vanquished people (not only that: one set of perpetrators-victors claims unique victimhood).

    If EITHER of these symbols and sets of history can be silenced and censored, then freedom of speech is meaningless.

    Read More
  18. Dave337 says:

    I doubt the future will notice as new generations are brought up under the current system. Even in places like Alabama the back country is full of liberal ideology.

    Read More
  19. anon says: • Disclaimer

    I am going to take a wild guess and say Susan Sontag is a Jew.

    Am I right?

    Read More
  20. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Robert E Lee was a gentleman, a great military leader, and was tremendously respected by both sides before and after the Civil War. At the start, he was offered command of the US military, a tremendous honor and the opportunity of a lifetime for an officer, but he turned it down, not for any love of slavery, but because he couldn’t bring himself to fight against his homeland of Virginia. The complete opposite of these white cuck politicians persecuting whites and their history for 30 pieces of silver.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Good post, but to word it more accurately, General Lee decided to fight for his country vs. become the leader of an invasion force.
    , @rw95
    What do Italians, Poles or Spaniards have to do with this history? How do they have any connection with the "historic American nation" you quite aptly describe here?
    , @Rich
    That Lee was a gentleman and tremendously respected by both sides after the war, is indisputable. His greatness as a military leader, however, is questionable. His poor generalship led to the defeat of the Confederates at Gettysburg and their ultimate surrender. Where was his great victory? Harper's Ferry? As a staff officer in the Mexican-American War? I believe Lee was a poor choice to lead the Southerners and that a better General could've staved off the South's defeat.
  21. @Anonymous
    Robert E Lee was a gentleman, a great military leader, and was tremendously respected by both sides before and after the Civil War. At the start, he was offered command of the US military, a tremendous honor and the opportunity of a lifetime for an officer, but he turned it down, not for any love of slavery, but because he couldn't bring himself to fight against his homeland of Virginia. The complete opposite of these white cuck politicians persecuting whites and their history for 30 pieces of silver.

    Good post, but to word it more accurately, General Lee decided to fight for his country vs. become the leader of an invasion force.

    Read More
  22. rw95 says:
    @Anonymous
    Robert E Lee was a gentleman, a great military leader, and was tremendously respected by both sides before and after the Civil War. At the start, he was offered command of the US military, a tremendous honor and the opportunity of a lifetime for an officer, but he turned it down, not for any love of slavery, but because he couldn't bring himself to fight against his homeland of Virginia. The complete opposite of these white cuck politicians persecuting whites and their history for 30 pieces of silver.

    What do Italians, Poles or Spaniards have to do with this history? How do they have any connection with the “historic American nation” you quite aptly describe here?

    Read More
  23. Rich says:
    @Anonymous
    Robert E Lee was a gentleman, a great military leader, and was tremendously respected by both sides before and after the Civil War. At the start, he was offered command of the US military, a tremendous honor and the opportunity of a lifetime for an officer, but he turned it down, not for any love of slavery, but because he couldn't bring himself to fight against his homeland of Virginia. The complete opposite of these white cuck politicians persecuting whites and their history for 30 pieces of silver.

    That Lee was a gentleman and tremendously respected by both sides after the war, is indisputable. His greatness as a military leader, however, is questionable. His poor generalship led to the defeat of the Confederates at Gettysburg and their ultimate surrender. Where was his great victory? Harper’s Ferry? As a staff officer in the Mexican-American War? I believe Lee was a poor choice to lead the Southerners and that a better General could’ve staved off the South’s defeat.

    Read More
    • Replies: @for-the-record
    I believe Lee was a poor choice to lead the Southerners and that a better General could’ve staved off the South’s defeat.

    With more than twice the population of the South (3 1/2 times, if slaves are excluded) and 9 times the industrial capacity, Northern victory was inevitable -- barring a political solution.

    , @Diversity Heretic
    Chancellorsville is generally considered Lee's greatest victory. Unfortunately, Stonewall Jackson was killed in the aftermath. I think that most historians consider Lee a gifted commander, although not a military genius (Jackson and Nathan Bedford Forrest might have been in that category). Lee did very well with limited resources. His worst decision, the frontal attack on the third day of Gettysburg, may have been based on a tactic that worked for the French at the 1859 Battle of Solferino.
  24. @Rich
    That Lee was a gentleman and tremendously respected by both sides after the war, is indisputable. His greatness as a military leader, however, is questionable. His poor generalship led to the defeat of the Confederates at Gettysburg and their ultimate surrender. Where was his great victory? Harper's Ferry? As a staff officer in the Mexican-American War? I believe Lee was a poor choice to lead the Southerners and that a better General could've staved off the South's defeat.

    I believe Lee was a poor choice to lead the Southerners and that a better General could’ve staved off the South’s defeat.

    With more than twice the population of the South (3 1/2 times, if slaves are excluded) and 9 times the industrial capacity, Northern victory was inevitable — barring a political solution.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rich
    Exactly. With a mostly rural, and much smaller population, why in heaven's name does Lee invade the North? His only chance of victory would have been a delaying action and guerrilla warfare until the North grew tired of trying to force the South remain in the Union. Not that this would have guaranteed victory, but it would have preserved their manpower and enabled them to keep the fight up for much longer.
  25. Mark Caplan says: • Website

    There’s probably a cogent quote floating around out there that well-captures our predicament. How’s this: “Every kingdom divided against itself has brought desolation.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    There’s probably a cogent quote floating around out there that well-captures our predicament. How’s this: “Every kingdom divided against itself has brought desolation.”
     
    How's this?

    Isaiah 9 16 ----For the leaders of the people cause them to err: and they that are led by them are devoured. ----
     
    Or this?

    1 Samuel 11
    Samuel said, “If you have a king ruling over you, this is what he will do: He will take away your sons and force them to serve him. He will force them to be soldiers—they must fight from his chariots and become horse soldiers in his army. Your sons will become guards running in front of the king’s chariot.
    12 “A king will force your sons to become soldiers. He will choose which of your sons will be officers over 1000 men and which will be officers over 50 men.
    “A king will force some of your sons to plow his fields and gather his harvest. He will force some of your sons to make weapons for war and to make things for his chariots.
    13 “A king will take your daughters and force some of them to make perfume for him and some to cook and bake for him.
    14 “A king will take your best fields, vineyards, and olive groves. He will take them from you and give them to his officers. 15 He will take one-tenth of your grain and grapes, and he will give them to his officers and servants.
    16 “A king will take your men and women servants. He will take your best cattle[a] and your donkeys. He will use them all for his own work. 17 He will take one-tenth of your flocks.
    “And you yourselves will become slaves of this king. 18 When that time comes, you will cry because of the king you chose. But the LORD won’t answer you at that time.”
    19 But the people would not listen to Samuel. They said, “No, we want a king to rule over us. 20 Then we will be the same as all the other nations. Our king will lead us. He will go before us and fight our battles.”

     

  26. Rich says:
    @for-the-record
    I believe Lee was a poor choice to lead the Southerners and that a better General could’ve staved off the South’s defeat.

    With more than twice the population of the South (3 1/2 times, if slaves are excluded) and 9 times the industrial capacity, Northern victory was inevitable -- barring a political solution.

    Exactly. With a mostly rural, and much smaller population, why in heaven’s name does Lee invade the North? His only chance of victory would have been a delaying action and guerrilla warfare until the North grew tired of trying to force the South remain in the Union. Not that this would have guaranteed victory, but it would have preserved their manpower and enabled them to keep the fight up for much longer.

    Read More
  27. “They” are on a mission to eliminate whiteness. Southern whiteness is the worst kind. White queers and white women are better than straight white men. But whiteness is incurable and inexcusable and evil and therefore not eligible for inclusiveness.

    Read More
  28. @Rich
    That Lee was a gentleman and tremendously respected by both sides after the war, is indisputable. His greatness as a military leader, however, is questionable. His poor generalship led to the defeat of the Confederates at Gettysburg and their ultimate surrender. Where was his great victory? Harper's Ferry? As a staff officer in the Mexican-American War? I believe Lee was a poor choice to lead the Southerners and that a better General could've staved off the South's defeat.

    Chancellorsville is generally considered Lee’s greatest victory. Unfortunately, Stonewall Jackson was killed in the aftermath. I think that most historians consider Lee a gifted commander, although not a military genius (Jackson and Nathan Bedford Forrest might have been in that category). Lee did very well with limited resources. His worst decision, the frontal attack on the third day of Gettysburg, may have been based on a tactic that worked for the French at the 1859 Battle of Solferino.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rich
    Chancellorsville, was, in many ways a Pyrrhic victory. The Confederates lost too many men, as well as General Jackson. Historians disagree, and not to take one of his few successes away from Lee, but part of the reason for his victory was the incompetence, and noncompliance, by some Union commanders with General Hooker's orders. With that victory, I believe Lee overreacted and thought he could mortally wound the Union with his incursion into Pennsylvania. With that bad decision, he doomed the South's meager chances.
  29. Rich says:
    @Diversity Heretic
    Chancellorsville is generally considered Lee's greatest victory. Unfortunately, Stonewall Jackson was killed in the aftermath. I think that most historians consider Lee a gifted commander, although not a military genius (Jackson and Nathan Bedford Forrest might have been in that category). Lee did very well with limited resources. His worst decision, the frontal attack on the third day of Gettysburg, may have been based on a tactic that worked for the French at the 1859 Battle of Solferino.

    Chancellorsville, was, in many ways a Pyrrhic victory. The Confederates lost too many men, as well as General Jackson. Historians disagree, and not to take one of his few successes away from Lee, but part of the reason for his victory was the incompetence, and noncompliance, by some Union commanders with General Hooker’s orders. With that victory, I believe Lee overreacted and thought he could mortally wound the Union with his incursion into Pennsylvania. With that bad decision, he doomed the South’s meager chances.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    Thanks for your comment. Lee's objective in invading the North was three-fold. The 1862 invasion had the objective of winning a major victory on Northern soil and convincing either Great Britain or France to intervene on the side of the CSA. Royal Navy warships escorting Confederate merchantmen past the Union blockade might have been a tide turner. In 1863 the chance for foreign intervention had more or less passed, but Lee hoped that even the temporary capture of a northern capital (Harrisburg) or major city (Philadelphia) would undermine Northern political resolve to continue the war and the North would agree to a negotiated settlement with the CSA. In both cases he hoped to carry the war away from Virginia. A grudging defense centered in Virginia might have been more successful, but it would have been, well, in Virginia, with all the consequences of war falling on Virginians.

    Southern commanders in other theaters (e.g., Joe Johnston), with the exception of Forrest, did not show anywhere near Lee's talent. In fairness, Lee was at his best when he had Jackson by his side.

    I'm not sure how Chancellorsville can be considered a Pyrrhic Victory, at least insofar as that term is generally understood. The Army of Northern Virginia inflicted considerably more losses on the Army of the Potomac than it suffered and drove them from the field. It might have made Lee overconfident, but Lee was always a very aggressive commander--he thought constantly of attack.
  30. @Rich
    Chancellorsville, was, in many ways a Pyrrhic victory. The Confederates lost too many men, as well as General Jackson. Historians disagree, and not to take one of his few successes away from Lee, but part of the reason for his victory was the incompetence, and noncompliance, by some Union commanders with General Hooker's orders. With that victory, I believe Lee overreacted and thought he could mortally wound the Union with his incursion into Pennsylvania. With that bad decision, he doomed the South's meager chances.

    Thanks for your comment. Lee’s objective in invading the North was three-fold. The 1862 invasion had the objective of winning a major victory on Northern soil and convincing either Great Britain or France to intervene on the side of the CSA. Royal Navy warships escorting Confederate merchantmen past the Union blockade might have been a tide turner. In 1863 the chance for foreign intervention had more or less passed, but Lee hoped that even the temporary capture of a northern capital (Harrisburg) or major city (Philadelphia) would undermine Northern political resolve to continue the war and the North would agree to a negotiated settlement with the CSA. In both cases he hoped to carry the war away from Virginia. A grudging defense centered in Virginia might have been more successful, but it would have been, well, in Virginia, with all the consequences of war falling on Virginians.

    Southern commanders in other theaters (e.g., Joe Johnston), with the exception of Forrest, did not show anywhere near Lee’s talent. In fairness, Lee was at his best when he had Jackson by his side.

    I’m not sure how Chancellorsville can be considered a Pyrrhic Victory, at least insofar as that term is generally understood. The Army of Northern Virginia inflicted considerably more losses on the Army of the Potomac than it suffered and drove them from the field. It might have made Lee overconfident, but Lee was always a very aggressive commander–he thought constantly of attack.

    Read More
  31. @J1234

    After the Confederates, Who's Next?
     
    I'm guessing Midwesterners. Seriously. They're too white.

    A few years ago, my response would be interpreted (and delivered) as absurdly humorous. Today, however, I'm not being humorous at all...just trying to guess which direction the blind insanity of the left will veer next.

    Why do you think the heart of Midwesterness, Minnesota among other places, is being targetted with a demographic time-bomb in the form of Somalis?

    Read More
  32. Rich says:

    Pyrrhic in the sense of what old King Pyrrhus said, that if they had many more victories like that, they’d have lost anyway. The Confederates defeated the Union Army, but in the process lost 10,000 men, as well as arguably their best leader in Jackson. Although the North lost about 17,000 men, they had a huge population from which to draw more soldiers, where the South’s smaller population prevented that.

    I understand why Lee invaded the North, I disagree with his reasons, and with hindsight, a lowly corporal like me, is right. Northerners and Southerners were basically the same people, with the same fighting spirit, I doubt that the capture of a capital city would’ve so disheartened the Northerners, that they would’ve surrendered. The capture of New Orleans or Vicksburg didn’t bring about an immediate surrender of the Confederacy, I don’t think Harrisburg would’ve ended the Union effort.

    I believe a better general would’ve resisted the urge to attack, and have forced the North to act. Northerners, in my opinion, wouldn’t have been as anxious to have kept the fight up if it were guerrilla warfare in the deep South. A guerrilla war would have meant a lot of suffering and loss in the South, but they suffered and lost anyway.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    You make some good points, but I don't think "Northerners and Southerners were basically the same people, with the same fighting spirit" holds up. Albion's Seed has a good exposition of (more finely grained) differences between US regions.

    The North had its own form of fighting spirit (and individuals vary greatly of course), but I think it is fair to say the manifestation was very different.

    I also don't think "The capture of New Orleans or Vicksburg didn’t bring about an immediate surrender of the Confederacy, I don’t think Harrisburg would’ve ended the Union effort." is a good comparison though I tend to agree with your conclusion (on the other hand I'm not so sure about Philadelphia).

    I think the South clearly recognized the potential of guerrilla warfare in extending the conflict (and some of the most effective campaigns/generals looked a lot like that, e.g. Forrest). IMHO one of the most underappreciated aspects of the Civil War is the South's decision to forgo guerrilla warfare after conventional defeat. I wish the people taking down statues of Robert E. Lee would take some time to think about that: https://almostchosenpeople.wordpress.com/2015/04/08/april-8-1865-lee-rejects-guerrilla-warfare/
    (but that won't happen because it is all about muh feelz)
  33. @KenH
    We are in the throes of an American Bolshevik revolution and it's being largely inspired and led by the very same (((people))) who started the Russian revolution in 1917. It's obvious the stars and stripes and all of America history is next on the chopping block. In typical Bolshevik fashion the heroes will be recast as villains while the former villains become heroes. People like MLK and Hussein Obama will become the new founders while the cucks clap like circus seals.

    The only open question is whether they wish to mass murder 25 million, mostly white Americans as Bill Ayers and his ilk wished to do. Since they are working tirelessly to disarm white Americans through "common sense" gun laws my money says that is still their deepest, darkest desire.

    Their claims of America's founding being steeped in "racism and imperialism" is ahistorical crap. Anyone who's literate in world history knows that all nations were founded by violent conquest and displacement of the original inhabitants. And all people practiced slavery and have the capacity to commit evil deeds. The left plays fast and loose with the historical record to paint the conquest of America by European whites and slavery in the antebellum South as uniquely evil and unprecedented that now merits the destruction of their monuments to confederate leaders.

    The left plays fast and loose with the historical record …

    Pretty nearly everyone, it seems, plays fast and loose with practically everything so long as it suits them. Then the fashions can change in the blink of an eye.

    It’s ALL smoke, mirrors and other assorted bullshit in the extreme.

    Read More
  34. @Mark Caplan
    There's probably a cogent quote floating around out there that well-captures our predicament. How's this: "Every kingdom divided against itself has brought desolation."

    There’s probably a cogent quote floating around out there that well-captures our predicament. How’s this: “Every kingdom divided against itself has brought desolation.”

    How’s this?

    Isaiah 9 16 —-For the leaders of the people cause them to err: and they that are led by them are devoured. —-

    Or this?

    1 Samuel 11
    Samuel said, “If you have a king ruling over you, this is what he will do: He will take away your sons and force them to serve him. He will force them to be soldiers—they must fight from his chariots and become horse soldiers in his army. Your sons will become guards running in front of the king’s chariot.
    12 “A king will force your sons to become soldiers. He will choose which of your sons will be officers over 1000 men and which will be officers over 50 men.
    “A king will force some of your sons to plow his fields and gather his harvest. He will force some of your sons to make weapons for war and to make things for his chariots.
    13 “A king will take your daughters and force some of them to make perfume for him and some to cook and bake for him.
    14 “A king will take your best fields, vineyards, and olive groves. He will take them from you and give them to his officers. 15 He will take one-tenth of your grain and grapes, and he will give them to his officers and servants.
    16 “A king will take your men and women servants. He will take your best cattle[a] and your donkeys. He will use them all for his own work. 17 He will take one-tenth of your flocks.
    “And you yourselves will become slaves of this king. 18 When that time comes, you will cry because of the king you chose. But the LORD won’t answer you at that time.”
    19 But the people would not listen to Samuel. They said, “No, we want a king to rule over us. 20 Then we will be the same as all the other nations. Our king will lead us. He will go before us and fight our battles.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Under the Cone of Silence

    15 He will take one-tenth of your grain and grapes, and he will give them to his officers and servants.
     

    17 He will take one-tenth of your flocks.
     
    My 2016 tax rate was significantly higher than the 10% tax to the King of 1 Samuel 11. I guess we are all lowly servants, either to a monarch or a "democratic" rabble.
  35. Tiny Duck says:

    I am a teacher at a public school and daily encourage my white female students to bear children (if they insist on having children) with Men of Color.

    white men ARE the cancer of the world. The brutal truth is that they must be taken out of power if we are to have a world worth living in

    Read More
    • LOL: Rurik
    • Replies: @Kilo 4/11
    Even though our world includes you, it is very much worth living in. The summer isn't even here, and the pavement apes are already offing each other with wild abandon.
  36. res says:
    @Rich
    Pyrrhic in the sense of what old King Pyrrhus said, that if they had many more victories like that, they'd have lost anyway. The Confederates defeated the Union Army, but in the process lost 10,000 men, as well as arguably their best leader in Jackson. Although the North lost about 17,000 men, they had a huge population from which to draw more soldiers, where the South's smaller population prevented that.

    I understand why Lee invaded the North, I disagree with his reasons, and with hindsight, a lowly corporal like me, is right. Northerners and Southerners were basically the same people, with the same fighting spirit, I doubt that the capture of a capital city would've so disheartened the Northerners, that they would've surrendered. The capture of New Orleans or Vicksburg didn't bring about an immediate surrender of the Confederacy, I don't think Harrisburg would've ended the Union effort.

    I believe a better general would've resisted the urge to attack, and have forced the North to act. Northerners, in my opinion, wouldn't have been as anxious to have kept the fight up if it were guerrilla warfare in the deep South. A guerrilla war would have meant a lot of suffering and loss in the South, but they suffered and lost anyway.

    You make some good points, but I don’t think “Northerners and Southerners were basically the same people, with the same fighting spirit” holds up. Albion’s Seed has a good exposition of (more finely grained) differences between US regions.

    The North had its own form of fighting spirit (and individuals vary greatly of course), but I think it is fair to say the manifestation was very different.

    I also don’t think “The capture of New Orleans or Vicksburg didn’t bring about an immediate surrender of the Confederacy, I don’t think Harrisburg would’ve ended the Union effort.” is a good comparison though I tend to agree with your conclusion (on the other hand I’m not so sure about Philadelphia).

    I think the South clearly recognized the potential of guerrilla warfare in extending the conflict (and some of the most effective campaigns/generals looked a lot like that, e.g. Forrest). IMHO one of the most underappreciated aspects of the Civil War is the South’s decision to forgo guerrilla warfare after conventional defeat. I wish the people taking down statues of Robert E. Lee would take some time to think about that: https://almostchosenpeople.wordpress.com/2015/04/08/april-8-1865-lee-rejects-guerrilla-warfare/
    (but that won’t happen because it is all about muh feelz)

    Read More
  37. Rich says:

    I do kind of remember Albion’s Seed and the comparisons between where the various peoples of the British Isles ended up, and even with that, I think they were pretty similar. Northerners weren’t going to surrender any more easily than Southerners.

    The people taking down the statues are the same people who murdered the Tsar’s family in Russia, assassinated the Poles at the Katyn Forest, raped females from 8 to 80 after defeating Germany in WWII, and starved the Ukrainians. They’re Bolsheviks, people without honor. This whitewashing of history, twisting of narratives and anti-White hysteria has already gone too far. The Confederates fought honorably, and deserve to be remembered.

    Read More
  38. I agree with much of Pat says but I also agree with what Susan Sontag says.

    The tearing down of Confederate memorials is more an attempt at eliminating any form of former visible resistance to the current government and its fantasy histories. Only the Black Panther Party provided a resurgence of resistance akin to the Confederacy. It too was destroyed from both within and without.

    Unfortunately Pat’s bias towards the Western\White race is somewhat phantasmal as much of popular western history is. First and foremost, many of the ancients in the Mid East and Africa created as many achievements as the West has; the latter being predicated on much of what the ancients developed from law to science.

    Even modern anthropologists are beginning to demonstrate through new research that the ancients were in many respects far greater in intellectual and scientific capacity than the modern West and that their subsequent achievements were even greater as a result.

    The greatest achievement of the West unfortunately has been its penchant for destruction and war; something other races and the ancients never reached to the same degree. So for all its inventiveness, the West owns a zero-sum result given that its wars, destructive nature, and massive and continuing racism has eliminated any such advantages.

    Returning to the Confederacy; there was much wrong about what this short-lived nation-state stood for but there was for sure as much culture and a way of life worth fighting for that did not rely on the mass industrialization of everything around it. And in many instances African slaves were treated far better than those who fled to the north where they were hated just as much, though the propaganda over the years has relieved northerners of their shared sense of prejudices.

    To be sure, even if the Confederacy had won the conflict, the institution of slavery would have been short-lived as most other nations similar to the north were industrializing. By 1863, Great Britain who eventually came to interpret the War for Southern Independence as nothing more than to retain the institution of slavery (which it was not), found another supplier for their cotton needs, pulling the economic rug out from underneath the Confederacy.

    And though the French monarchy was looking to support the South, it did not happen to any
    extent similar to Britain’s support.

    In any event, tearing down monuments that remind us of a relevant part of our national history is historically amoral and by doing so will not stifle the growing resistance of many Americans to the type of national government that now plagues this country…

    Read More
  39. Kilo 4/11 says:
    @Eustace Tilley (not)
    "When the Spanish-American War broke out, President McKinley, who as a teenage soldier had fought against 'Stonewall' Jackson in the Shenandoah and been at Antietam, bloodiest single-day battle of the Civil War, removed his hat and stood for the singing of 'Dixie', as Southern volunteers and former Confederate soldiers paraded through Atlanta to fight for their united country."

    There's a sucker born every minute.

    You and the other asshat “sowhat” are not fit to clean a Confederate private’s mess kit. Your failure to apprehend the nobility of McKinley’s feeling and the generosity of his gesture is typical of you low bred critics of your betters.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    I think he was referring to the southern-origin soldiers, not to William McKinley. I'm inclined to share his sentiment regarding their participation in that totally unnecessary war against Spain, which threatened the United States, well how exactly? But hey, our glorioius victory over Spain put us in the Phillipines, where we could be on a collision course with Japan, and Puerto Rico, that jewel in the crown of American territories.
  40. Kilo 4/11 says:
    @Tiny Duck
    I am a teacher at a public school and daily encourage my white female students to bear children (if they insist on having children) with Men of Color.

    white men ARE the cancer of the world. The brutal truth is that they must be taken out of power if we are to have a world worth living in

    Even though our world includes you, it is very much worth living in. The summer isn’t even here, and the pavement apes are already offing each other with wild abandon.

    Read More
  41. Corvinus says:
    @KenH
    We are in the throes of an American Bolshevik revolution and it's being largely inspired and led by the very same (((people))) who started the Russian revolution in 1917. It's obvious the stars and stripes and all of America history is next on the chopping block. In typical Bolshevik fashion the heroes will be recast as villains while the former villains become heroes. People like MLK and Hussein Obama will become the new founders while the cucks clap like circus seals.

    The only open question is whether they wish to mass murder 25 million, mostly white Americans as Bill Ayers and his ilk wished to do. Since they are working tirelessly to disarm white Americans through "common sense" gun laws my money says that is still their deepest, darkest desire.

    Their claims of America's founding being steeped in "racism and imperialism" is ahistorical crap. Anyone who's literate in world history knows that all nations were founded by violent conquest and displacement of the original inhabitants. And all people practiced slavery and have the capacity to commit evil deeds. The left plays fast and loose with the historical record to paint the conquest of America by European whites and slavery in the antebellum South as uniquely evil and unprecedented that now merits the destruction of their monuments to confederate leaders.

    “Anyone who’s literate in world history knows that all nations were founded by violent conquest and displacement of the original inhabitants. And all people practiced slavery and have the capacity to commit evil deeds.”

    Thus by your own metric, the United States was created by imperialistic and racist people who just happened to be European and who just happened to be following in the footsteps of all groups.

    Read More
  42. @jacques sheete

    There’s probably a cogent quote floating around out there that well-captures our predicament. How’s this: “Every kingdom divided against itself has brought desolation.”
     
    How's this?

    Isaiah 9 16 ----For the leaders of the people cause them to err: and they that are led by them are devoured. ----
     
    Or this?

    1 Samuel 11
    Samuel said, “If you have a king ruling over you, this is what he will do: He will take away your sons and force them to serve him. He will force them to be soldiers—they must fight from his chariots and become horse soldiers in his army. Your sons will become guards running in front of the king’s chariot.
    12 “A king will force your sons to become soldiers. He will choose which of your sons will be officers over 1000 men and which will be officers over 50 men.
    “A king will force some of your sons to plow his fields and gather his harvest. He will force some of your sons to make weapons for war and to make things for his chariots.
    13 “A king will take your daughters and force some of them to make perfume for him and some to cook and bake for him.
    14 “A king will take your best fields, vineyards, and olive groves. He will take them from you and give them to his officers. 15 He will take one-tenth of your grain and grapes, and he will give them to his officers and servants.
    16 “A king will take your men and women servants. He will take your best cattle[a] and your donkeys. He will use them all for his own work. 17 He will take one-tenth of your flocks.
    “And you yourselves will become slaves of this king. 18 When that time comes, you will cry because of the king you chose. But the LORD won’t answer you at that time.”
    19 But the people would not listen to Samuel. They said, “No, we want a king to rule over us. 20 Then we will be the same as all the other nations. Our king will lead us. He will go before us and fight our battles.”

     

    15 He will take one-tenth of your grain and grapes, and he will give them to his officers and servants.

    17 He will take one-tenth of your flocks.

    My 2016 tax rate was significantly higher than the 10% tax to the King of 1 Samuel 11. I guess we are all lowly servants, either to a monarch or a “democratic” rabble.

    Read More
  43. […] Behind this remorseless drive to blast the greatest names from America’s past off public buildings, and to tear down their statues and monuments, is an egalitarian extremism rooted in envy and hate. […]

    Read More
  44. @Kilo 4/11
    You and the other asshat "sowhat" are not fit to clean a Confederate private's mess kit. Your failure to apprehend the nobility of McKinley's feeling and the generosity of his gesture is typical of you low bred critics of your betters.

    I think he was referring to the southern-origin soldiers, not to William McKinley. I’m inclined to share his sentiment regarding their participation in that totally unnecessary war against Spain, which threatened the United States, well how exactly? But hey, our glorioius victory over Spain put us in the Phillipines, where we could be on a collision course with Japan, and Puerto Rico, that jewel in the crown of American territories.

    Read More
  45. Ben Frank says:

    We are all next.

    DeGaulle now. Jefferson, Washington and the rest after.

    http://www.dw.com/en/france-outraged-by-desecration-of-charles-de-gaulle-tomb/a-39016138

    Remember the old Soviet joke:
    Q. “Why do the KGB operate in groups of three?” A. “One can read, one can write and one to keep an eye on the two intellectuals.”

    Anybody who can read and write will eventually be a target. Mao, Pol Pot and Mugabe provided the script which the progressives follow.

    Read More
  46. Agent76 says:

    February 26, 2017 Democrat Party . . . White sheets to brown shirts Part 1

    The Democrat Party is the oldest continually functioning political party in the world, dating back to 1792, as the Jeffersonian Republicans or Democratic-Republicans. it was the party of Thomas Jefferson; a party formed in opposition to the aristocratic Federalist Party of Alexander Hamilton and the Founders who believed in a strong central government. The name “Democrat Party” was adopted in the 1830’s during the Jackson Presidency.

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/02/26/democrat-party-white-sheets-to-brown-shirts-part-1/

    May 26, 2016 The First African Americans Elected to Congress

    These were the first African Americans elected to office. Many people don’t know much about them. Here are a few facts that might surprise you.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
Confederate Flag Day, State Capitol, Raleigh, N.C. -- March 3, 2007
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The evidence is clear — but often ignored