tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3067098918914268503.post3465293832028640670..comments2024-03-28T22:50:02.315+11:00Comments on ART and ARCHITECTURE, mainly: meaning of the USA's Civil War - in 1861 and in 1961Helshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02849907428208235392noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3067098918914268503.post-6576548952237606852012-05-09T15:16:57.629+10:002012-05-09T15:16:57.629+10:00Kuroe
Thanks for responding.
I totally agree th...Kuroe <br /><br />Thanks for responding.<br /><br />I totally agree that war is almost always disastrous, and that civil war is obscene as well as disastrous. Parents fighting children, neighbours fighting neighbours :( <br /><br />But going to war to make money? I don't think so. Soldiers either volunteered because they believed in the cause, or they were conscripted and had no choice.Helshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02849907428208235392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3067098918914268503.post-85663895125794793862012-05-08T12:40:09.478+10:002012-05-08T12:40:09.478+10:00Many children and Fathers had gone in the war to g...Many children and Fathers had gone in the war to get money or thinking that it would end in the first battle instead it lasted 3-4 years.620,000 people died and that is just a guess it turns out there could be more. People who lived in the border states or otherwise anywhere else could be rooting for different sides which would even split family's and friends from one another. I feel that war is useless, why fight. For all we know if we were civilized then we could be playing extreme chess to decide what to do instead of fighting. In my point of view it seems that the govement is sending people who are looking for hope to their deaths for a silly thing that they themselves have started.Kuroehttp://yahoo.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3067098918914268503.post-58111104775570610282011-10-30T11:45:21.114+11:002011-10-30T11:45:21.114+11:00foto fanatic
in ordinary wars, armies come and ar...foto fanatic<br /><br />in ordinary wars, armies come and armies go. Old enemies in one war site become allies in the next. Mothers mourn their dead sons, but nations don't even remember. Think, for example, of the shifting alliances and divisions between Talliban, Russia, USA, Afghanistan and Pakistan.<br /><br />But the divisive scars of civil war are never forgotten, never forgiven and they never heal. A miserable and destructive civil war was always going to be an inappropriate subject for national unity, specifically because half the nation felt embittered and defeated, at the hands of their _own_ brothers and neighbours.Helshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02849907428208235392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3067098918914268503.post-83345922438313521692011-10-30T10:02:35.959+11:002011-10-30T10:02:35.959+11:00I still can't get over the catastrophic loss o...I still can't get over the catastrophic loss of life in this war.<br /><br />And as you rightly say Helen, the fact that it was a civil war where soldiers were fighting and killing their own countrymen makes it all the more tragic.<br /><br />Great piece. Thanks.the foto fanatichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17234840691455844914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3067098918914268503.post-79811871322825616412011-10-30T00:01:48.879+11:002011-10-30T00:01:48.879+11:00Debbie
The Civil War Gazette wrote that for the U...Debbie<br /><br />The Civil War Gazette wrote that for the Union side, the historical record is definitive: 9-12% of the Union Army was filled by blacks (180,000-200,000 black Union soldiers). 37,000 black Union soldiers died in the Civil War. Though early black troops were not aggressively deployed as bearers of arms, by the middle of the war more and more black Union troops were entrusted to carry arms and to perform in combat action.<br /><br />Did many black men, free or slave, take up arms for Confederacy? Whatever may have been the number of blacks serving and actually fighting as soldiers in the Confederate army, it must have been a minuscule percentage. It was so insignificant that no-one could say that blacks saw the conflict as a war of Yankee aggression, felt it was their war too, and joined up to fight for the Confederacy.Helshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02849907428208235392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3067098918914268503.post-66813251766627832232011-10-29T19:42:55.884+11:002011-10-29T19:42:55.884+11:00Why did many African slaves, or ex-slaves, fight f...Why did many African slaves, or ex-slaves, fight for the south? Why didn't they run away to a free state?Debbienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3067098918914268503.post-24616627788463704662011-10-29T19:29:27.629+11:002011-10-29T19:29:27.629+11:00What a great map Helen. Apart from anything else I...What a great map Helen. Apart from anything else I'd forgotten / not realised how much territory Mexico had owned. The Alamo comes more into perspective.<br /><br />You take me all sorts of places.<br /><br />http://www.bbc.co.uk/ww2peopleswar/stories/96/a1921196.shtmlHermeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00968366076064269729noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3067098918914268503.post-23584039302937380572011-10-29T19:19:27.401+11:002011-10-29T19:19:27.401+11:00Hermes
Thanks for the references. Two main points...Hermes<br /><br />Thanks for the references. Two main points stand out.<br /><br />Once the war with the USA began, the best hope for the survival of the Confederacy was military intervention by Britain and France. The federal American government realised this as well and made it clear that recognition of the Confederacy meant war with the USA. Apart from the fact that slavery was the core of the South's plantation economy, repugnant to the morals of most Britons, Britain would have been financially insane to back the breakaway Confederacy and to go to war against the north.<br /><br />Controversy over whether Missouri should be admitted as a slave state resulted in the Missouri Compromise of 1820. This specified that the northern half of the Louisiana Purchase territory would be organised as free states and the southern half of the Louisiana Purchase territory would be organised as slave states. What complex and delicate politics!<br /><br />To overlay the Louisiana Purchase territory map over the map showing Union Vs Conferederacy states, perhaps examine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Slave_Free_1789-1861.gifHelshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02849907428208235392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3067098918914268503.post-60579474319005679372011-10-29T17:46:36.203+11:002011-10-29T17:46:36.203+11:00Not really my subject but the invention of the cot...Not really my subject but the invention of the cotton gin made cotton very profitable but the north actually made more money out of the finished goods. Another factor seems to have been whether the Louisiana purchase states were slave states or not. Britain's role is interesting:<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britain_in_the_American_Civil_War<br /><br />The 1960's section is new to me. Fascinating.Hermeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00968366076064269729noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3067098918914268503.post-39833038767394778212011-10-29T16:46:20.253+11:002011-10-29T16:46:20.253+11:00Andrew
although this is a vital topic to discuss, ...Andrew<br />although this is a vital topic to discuss, I felt quite shaky doing the writing. Firstly I know heaps about Britain, the British Empire and Europe, but much less about the Western Hemisphere. Secondly all war is horrific, but civil war is much more divisive, more bitter and more destructive to a nation.<br /><br />Even more than slavery, the issue of rights of the states Vs those of the federal government fuelled the American Civil War. <br /><br />Australia moved peacefully towards Federation on 1/1/1901 and we haven't been too exercised about those issues since. In the USA, it seems, the right wing is still expressing as much anti-Federal government fervour as they did in the Civil War.Helshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02849907428208235392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3067098918914268503.post-75723686357533256352011-10-29T11:38:27.227+11:002011-10-29T11:38:27.227+11:00'and a quarter of all white families in the So...'and a quarter of all white families in the South owned slaves'. Although even now, some people could be considered slaves, it struck me that one human owning another is a very odd thing. A good historical summary, thanks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com