Robert E. Lee fought in the Mexican war in 1845 and did well for the US. He was considered by Lincoln to be the General of the Northern Armies. He declined and fought for his State as most southerners did. They fought for their states. He is still studied at West Point. His tactics were applied by both sides in WWI. So he was a great General. All his statues were of him as a General, not a plantation owner. By the way, Grant was married to a southern plantation owner and they didn't free their slaves until AFTER the Civil War.
Studies have shown that slavery would have eventually died out with share cropping. Share cropping replaced slavery after the Civil War, so not much changed except the destruction of the south. In my county alone, it took about 40 years after the court house was burned to sort out who owned what land and re-establish property lines. They also burned the railway station and the warehouses in my home county. This was in early 1865. There was really no need in this destruction as the war was almost over by then. 90% of the former slaves stayed on the same plantations and worked as share croppers. Sure they were free, but they knew nothing else except farming. Most didn't read. Some of the younger former slaves went up north to the big cities to look for jobs. Share cropping actually was beginning in the border slave states like Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, and Delaware, thus they didn't succeed.
Lincoln forced the war by using the forts at the entrances to every southern harbor city to collect tariffs. Tariffs were raised in 1858 and they affected exports like cotton as well as imported European goods. Lincoln used tariffs to force the south to give up slavery.
You are vbasically correct..Gen Lee was a great soldier, and Pres Lincoln did offer him the job of overall command of the US Army, which Lee declined.
Of course many of the field grade officers who served on both sides, were West Point grads, who served side by side during the Mexican war.
I believe that if you search further, you will find that the slaves Lee did own, came as property from his wife's family, and Lee was working to
gradually free them.
..But let's go back to the lefty proposition, that "these confederate generals committed the great sin of owning a slave or two.. OK, so why
don't we topple statues of Gen officers, north or south.. who stole something, cheated on his wife, or padded his expense account?
Maybe being especially cruel to animals..or lying about something, should be sufficient excuse to trash any memorial..being as those things are still sins !
So, I am still inquiring..What would you say we caucasian folks who had zip..zilch..nada to do with slavery.. What would it take to make you happy?
Even in Dixie, few people were wealthy enough to own slaves.. Most farmers were not Plantation owners.
In any case, how is it justifiable that 21st century Carl, must somehow, pay for the sins committed by Alvin, back in 1773 (whom he knows nothing about) ?
