Talk:Lost Cause of the South/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 7 October 2021. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

Causes of the war

"and that Ft. Sumpter, although in South Carolina, was property of the U.S. Army, and that they shot first." Can someone clarify the "they" here? I'm not up on who shot first. A particular general? Southern unorganized rebels? Organized Rebel army? Thanks, --Waiting for Godot 15:55, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

South Carolina militia under the command of PGT Beauregard bombarded the federal installation at Fort Sumpter.178.167.254.100 (talk) 21:15, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Cites, and more

This thing needs a heck of a lot of citations, and currently reads like a CP hatchet job, except the word liberal has been replaced with Southerner. Thunderkatz^Ho! 18:35, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

Deletion

I don't know if you live in the south, but my time spent at A&M suggests to me that this attitude of "North is to blame" etc., is common. I heard it referred to as "The war over northern incursion" or northern aggression. The article might have problems, but i do think the topic is a fair topic for RW in the whole "denialism" vein.--Waiting for Godot 10:41, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

I would vote against deletion. It certainly could use a major re-write but, on a basic level, much of it is correct. Right now, the article over-simplifies the cause(s) of the American Civil War to just slavery. In actuality, despite how this article presents it, main cause of the Civil War was states rights. It was sort of the umbrella cause under which the other causes manifested. There truly was a revisionism of history almost immediately after the Southern defeat. I would just like to see significant editing rather than deletion. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Your views are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter} 12:30, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

I agree that it shoud stay, but I added the template to force the original writer and others who really support it to clean it up or face vaporization (the article, not the editors). Thunderkatz^Ho! 19:55, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

heh, there are days when I wish I had the power to vaporize "editors" and others. Myself, especially. Can you imagine your day if you could say "begone, silly Boss of mine" or "how dare you forget to bring me lunch" and my favorite "To Hell with you, you non-dish washing Husband!".... ahh... oh well, back to this edit. Do you think we should mearly reflect the southern attitude, or get into the real reasons of the war? can we do both and keep the light hearted (or snarky, as it were) tone?--Waiting for Godot 20:16, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

grammification issues

The way this is set up as an endless series of bullet points makes it a bit clunky to read - some are full sentences, some aren't, and the ones that aren't often don't have an obvious "antecedent" to make them clear. ħuman 13:31, 29 January 2009 (EST)