Just marathoned this kino. Very moving, gave me an appreciation of the war, despite not being an American

for me it’s the Civil War On Drugs

Glory was pretty good.

It's great. Just sad those potatoes had to get smashed

They should have been grateful the show never addressed Frederick Douglas being an anarchist that hated America and wanted to turn Georgia into a black ethnostate that owed no allegiance to the USA.

absolutely

the black women was the worst part about the documentary. Quite annoying really, how she says crap like "sure we got our freedom, but what about real freedom", and then refuse to actually clarify what it is she wants. Freedom from responsibility?

I can't imagine how terrifying thousands of young men yelling like that would have been.

I'll check these out

Gettysburg is better than Gods and Generals.

Lincoln is a good one if you're interested at all in the political side of the war. Specifically the end of the war with the South's imminent surrender and the passage of the 13th amendment.

I'll check those out too

One of the parts I found so moving, was how the Lee seemed genuinely distressed and sad at having given the command to charge at Gettysburg, and later, how despite finally being victorious, there were no cheers of jubilation when the word of surrender went round the union camp.

Gettysburg towers over the rest.

It's boring. His Vietnam war and Prohibition documentaries are 100x better.

Wrong.

I immensely enjoyed his Vietnam documentary, but this was also total kino, and moving in a way the 'nam docu wasn't.

This is also a book series, worth reading?

gettysburg

over 4 hours long autistic recreation of the battle on location

thousands of reenactors from all over the country volunteering as soldiers

not a single named female character

yep, it's kino time

beats the white bois

bangs southern white women making a mutt population in place of all the dead white racists

holy BASED

Confederates deserve to be in the same discussion as nazis.
Personally I think Nazis deserve a more human treatment; most of them were just guys defending their country, while being ruled by an evil state. That describes confederacy.

The confederate slave system is a blight on humanity & the south deserves more hate for it.

onions

They fought the right war for the wrong reasons.

do southerners still talk like he does? Such a pleasant accent

The best thing to come out of that were the fake ads. It's a bad alt history scenario, the south would have never taken over the north, they wanted to be separate and to form a central American/Carribean north built on plantations, they had no interest in the industrial north.

Army of Darkness

You leave Barbara out of this she's great
But also that's not the reason. Foote is half of a Lost Cause guy, which makes him a white supremacist to libs. I don't think it's fair to him at all but he definitely romanticizes the period which isn't going to win you any friends among academic historians

There was minor controversy at the time for the white guy being the officer in charge, which was the straw that broke the camel's back for my dad and he never voted D again since that was literally just historically accurate

There is no southern accent. Foote sounds like he's from Jackson Mississippi

budget 38 million

box office 600k

Ang Lee didn't get the memo to not make a civil war movie which sympathizes with confederates, but his same autism brought a lot of attention to detail

Not about the Civil War, but Ken Burns' doc about the Vietnam War is also kino. Would recommend.

youtu.be/jsszvmuZBR4?feature=shared
It genuinely is kino of the highest order. There are very few things that I can rewatch a million times without getting tired of it and this is one of them.

for America, James?

no. for Slavery.

This movie is so pro-Confederate, when it ends you'll think the Confederates had won the war

shelby

barbara

you're forgetting the MAN himself

A divided America would have been easily controlled by the European powers and would have never reached its potential. The Confederacy fought the wrong war for the right reasons.

Problem was they should've used her as a non-military POV because, hey, life went on despite these armies marching on and battles everyone talks about. Sadly they just used her for MUH RACISM angle.

go to westpoint

become bros with people from all over the place

war breaks out

you're fighting against people who were your classmates until yesterday

shit sucks

life went on despite these armies marching on and battles everyone talks about

this is the general failing of all us civil war documentaries.

go to school for war

have to go to war

wtf I never asked for this

Most didn't care about slavery one way or the other, but the government had no adequate plan for removing the 4 million blacks who would be freed if slavery ended, and the nightmare scenario that even Lincoln acknowledged was a situation where blacks remained in the US and lived among whites.

This is the scenario that happened, and the best alternate solution they could come up with was a policy of segregation that lasted about a century. Because they didn't write the paperwork soundly enough, it was eventually challenged in court and dismantled with nothing to replace it. Since then, Americans have been trying all sorts of things to deal with the issue of race, still searching for a solution.

could america simply not have decided to NOT have a civil war?

it overplays this idea that Lincoln was at risk of losing the 1864 election to someone who would have immediately ended the war and recognized the CSA. That was never likely to happen.

Does anyone have the vocaroo about buck breaking that was done in Ken Burns style?

It was really to get new officers for Mexican–American War. No one expected an actual civil war.

my favorite civil war movie

Shelby Foote would not have been the Appalachian hillbilly fighting for glory like he LARPed. He would have been another member of the planter class who got exemptions because he owned slaves. His opinion is therefore invalid. Show me the opinion of a West Virginian, not someone seething he was denied his planter class status

Probably. But imagine the kind of issues that would've left. Hell, just look at the unresolved racial tensions that have festered for over 200 years despite and that's after freeing the slaves.

I do not, but I do have the cast recording of the broadway musical that won the tony award for best musical a few years ago, that had a brutal on stage buck breaking done as one of its musical numbers
youtube.com/watch?v=CU1odoDe2ps

The civil war was inevitable. The economic differences between the north and south meant that there were two different groups of oligarchs competing to control the nation whose goals were mutually exclusive. The only peaceful solution would have been to just let the South secede but that would have only delayed the war.

In further proof of this, Foote's ancestors were completely ruined by the South losing. His grandfather had to sell the plantation to pay for gambling debts. He has generational seethe built into his blood. He cannot be an unbiased historian.

no war is ever inevitable

The Civil War was so inevitable the people writing the founding documents of the country said it was inevitable but not their problem

Westpoint was really just an engineering school. Most went there just to learn maths and went on to be engineers in railways or the ferries.

At the time when most of the civil war generals were there it was a constant topic of debate to shut it down because the US government was fearful of a kind of military "aristocracy" class forming and challenging the politicians.

People were predicting the Russo-Ukrainian War all the way back in 1991.

there's no such thing as an unbiased historian. I have a history degree and I can tell you that at least to some degree every historian lets their biases dictate the weight they give to sources that agree or disagree with their preconceived notions and narratives. Ideally a good historian will be able to minimize it and challenge themselves, but it's impossible to be truly unbiased. Especially if you come to a project wanting to tell a specific narrative, because you're then going to minimize sources that don't agree with it.

Maybe this is partly my bias though, since instead of getting a masters in history and trying to become a professional historian and academic, I went to law school.

It only happened because of Putin's vanity and belief that his forces weren't so corrupt and incompetent. If Putin hadn't intentionally chosen to start this war there wouldn't be one.

How do you prevent the war then? The planter class started the war because their traditional control of the government was begining to fade. If the government had kept giving in to the planters the northern industrialists would have started the war. Compromise only delayed the war (to the North's benefit).

I get what you're saying but Foote probably at some point realized that the South not winning ruined his family generationally. The Footes were rich enough and influential enough that there's a chance that he would have been a Southern Kennedy instead of a random historian. This is bias you can't really get around and it's not the same as what you described

It's essentially Lost Cause propaganda because Foote has far and away the most screentime and is thus worthless.

His screen time is all kino though

maybe he could have tried not gambling. I don't see Foote in all the documentaries about gambling being a bad idea, hmm, weird.

no but I do have this.

youtu.be/nANois3n-Cs?feature=shared

Did you read Shelby Foote's work? He acknowledges that the state governments and planters broke away over the perceived threat to slavery. All he said was that the average confederate soldier didn't own slaves and did not believe he was fighting for slavery which is objectively true.

How about the planter class just doesn't chimp out?

Well yeah, when you give the Lost Causer an inordinate amount of screentime to spew Lost Cause shit then it becomes Lost Cause propaganda. The South couldn't win shit coming from Southerners is why it's called the Lost Cause because it romanticizes the South's reasons for fighting as protecting their way of life and homeland in the face of Northern aggression and that their cause was a noble one in spite of, or because of, the fact that they had no hope of winning. That they believed in their cause so much that they still fought knowing they were likely to lose.

That way of life being upholding slavery which was written into the Confederate constitution and explicitly said CSA states could NOT not participate in slavery. I don't care how many "poor simple southern boys who ain't never owned no slave in they lives" got blown apart by cannonballs. They still fought to protect slavery.

have all the political and economic power

start to lose it

"just let it happen bro"

Unreasonable. That would never happen.

mental slight-of-hand means you will never get any group of people to admit they are motivated by the desire for something bad. its the same as racists claiming that their desire to shout the n-word at five year olds stems from love of free speech.

West Point is objectively pretty worthless. Most of the great generals and officers of the war were middling or bottom of their classes. Some, like Garfield, never even attended it and actively despised it and the culture of military men it produced. Guys like Lee and McClellan, overrated self-aggrandizing cocksuckers, were the ones who graduated top of their classes.

How is it mental slight of hand? The average soldier (both sides) didn't care about the slaves. The war was about slavery, but the common people didn't really know that.

But again, slavery was a major issue not because the average person demanded to have slaves, but because it couldn't be cleanly ended. They wanted to uphold slavery because freeing the slaves would lead to a flood of Africans randomly dispersed throughout the South.
The North didn't have to deal with this to nearly the same extent.

It happened for the British planter class in the Caribbean in the 1830s. The government just gave them a massive financial bailout and that solved things.

The American planters had much more political control than the Caribbean planters.

Entire point of a military academy is standardization, anon.

the british government spent almost 10x on the bailout for Caribbean planters than it did on the irish potato famine that caused over 1 million deaths and 2 million emigrations

The Caribbean planters weren't also members of the main government body. For the US the slave owners were the same people who held seats on the senate, governors and executive branch. It wasn't an easy fix of just paying them off.

I can imagine how much that "factoid" gets thrown around by potato niggers like compensating for legally purchased goods is the same as somehow stopping a famine that the Irish walked right into because they thought the blight wouldn't effect them.

To be fair though, the Caribbean plantations provided immense value, Ireland has, to date, provided nothing of value.

I'm not Irish, just pointing out that this was no mere trifling expense. It was more than the entire cost of the Crimean War, which nearly bankrupted Britain. Your Irish hatred and blaming of a famine on its victims (most of which were penniless peasants and paupers with no options whatsoever) is really weird btw.

For me? It's the sequel collaboration with Tariq Nasheed.

youtube.com/watch?v=J37qmUPupHk

You're also derailing the conversation. It's not about hating the Irish, they hate themselves enough for all of us, it's about whether or not the war could be avoided, and objectively it couldn't have been.

Abolitionists were against this for decades. It was never going to happen, they saw it as a massive betrayal of American ideals and preferred dying instead.

no options

How about not having ten kids? How hard is it to not fuck an Irish woman?

telling subsistence farmers with high quotas put on them by their landlords not to have kids to help them in the fields

yeah, okay, that'll work out

It doesn't matter how great a salesman is there's no selling "just go to Liberia. Its soooo cucked of you to not go to Liberia".

yeah, okay, have you ever seen an Irish woman?

Thank God the south lost, now everyone gets to know the joy of living with blacks. It's even more joyful if you live in an area where there are a lot of them, like I do. Thank you abolitionists! Very cool!

"just go to America" was enough of a sales pitch to populate a whole continent. The only difference is those people were willing to get their hands dirty and create something that they would be responsible for and either benefit from or die in the pursuit of.
Blacks in America are the only group I can think of that resisted their own independence and just wanted to stick around in a subordinate role in someone else's country

someone who calls the irish potatoniggers and blames them for the famine has an exceptional and weird amount of hatred for the Irish

Such a noticeable artistic choice to not make the "black" pepes look any different from the "white" one. The Sun looks uncomfortable. Almost subversive, like double subversive back into just saying slavery is bad.

Even if that were true it was the slave owners who started the war, not abolitionists, and abolitionists were obscure and unimportant politically until the 1850s.

So you think it the South won the Confederate government would have said, "no more blacks" ?

People generally went to America because they would have in one way or another been living worse in Europe. People don't actually emigrate with the intention that it'll pay off for future generations, its about what it can give them now. What you're saying is what those future generations tell themselves to feel special.

There'd be lots of them, but on plantations, not in your town. Other poster said living with them, not them existing on a secluded farm

the south would have never taken over the north

you say that but you dont really know for sure, its very possible if they were winning they decide its best to take over the USA to prevent any fight back down the line

You retard they were already living in towns. Fredrick Douglas escaped from Baltimore, and he was able to blend in because it was full of blacks.

People generally went to America because they would have in one way or another been living worse in Europe. People don't actually emigrate with the intention that it'll pay off for future generations, its about what it can give them now.

We're talking about westward expansion here, not Ellis Island. The sales pitch was "you'll probably get scalped and raped or die of dysentery, but there's a possibility to get a piece of land. You'll also have to work on that land until you die, but if you do, you might have something to pass on to your kids."
Liberia was the black equivalent of that, but much more tame, and few people took up the offer. Ironically, the ones who did quickly realized that they could establish slavery there too, and they began making slaves of the nearby tribal Africans.

Lincoln also discussed buying land near Panama, easier to reach than Liberia, that had ample resources and was close enough to the US to be able to get additional assistance if needed. It fell on deaf ears.

No you idiot, I think if the south won there never would've been the Great Migration. I don't live in the south, so if the vast majority of them stayed there things would be very different where I'm at.

he thinks the south only had blacks on plantations

he thinks the slavers breeding slaves to sell wouldn't have ended up selling more and more slaves to the cityfolk in need of cheap servants, who in turn would breed their own to sell or give to relatives and children

lol
lmao

What do you think the free black population of southern towns looked like before slavery ended, and how did they look afterwards?

you'll probably get scalped and raped or die of dysentery, but there's a possibility to get a piece of land

Right, and that motivated them because they didn't have land and couldn't get decent land where they were. And also, this was a gamble that paid off in their lives. It wasn't just "you'll have something to pass onto your kids", its that the life the farm would give them would be better than not having it, and better than what they had where they were. The reason it was good to have a farm to pass onto your kids was because being a landless wage labourer was worse, with less money and food security, less stability, less everything really. It all comes back to benefiting the first generation before any paying off for future generations as a bonus.

much like this I reckon

There were slave states in the union before, during, and after the war. New jersey still had it in1865 and lincoln explicitly stated he was invading to collect taxes that didn't belong to him, seeing as how the South left under Buchanan and the war started under this flaming homo. The upper south only left because this asshole demanded troops to fire on Americans and they refused, and this is one of the reasons that half the union army was completely foreign

It didn't, it was a conflict between two slave holding republics, not a contest over a single government, though the aftermath is yankees replacing the constitution with the 14th amendment and ramming it down everyones throats under military dictatorship, thus nullifying state sovereignty which was the whole point

the founding fathers knew that trying to be fully staterights wouldn't fucking work and would make America unstable in the long run thanks to the same problems as the HRE. but they had to use federalism as a way to get everyone to sign onto the Revolution so they could have a country to fight over later.

Honestly, what the fuck was Mary Chestnut's problem?

gettysburg is a tv show edited down into a film which is why the effects suck/are lacking and its obvious you are watching fat reenactors and not a real depictIon of the battle.

The reason it was good to have a farm to pass onto your kids was because being a landless wage labourer was worse, with less money and food security, less stability, less everything really.

Not necessarily. Normal labor is a lot less risky, a lot more stable than traveling across the country (often through hostile territory) to set up in a place with no safety nets, where you either thrive or die horribly. The idea was that it could allow for a better life, even if it took multiple generations. In Europe, you were basically born noble or you were born a peasant. The westward expansion allowed people to rise out of peasantry, though most wouldn't see the full benefit of it themselves. Outside of mountain men and gold prospectors, it was very much people drawn by the idea of establishing roots and starting a family that would live progressively better lives if they worked for it, not limited by an ancient social structure.
American blacks on the other hand chose to stay in a society that they knew would give them little opportunity or freedom.

States rights to what?

I didn't mention states rights, I said not having a plan in place to get rid of the freed slaves after you end slavery was a major factor in people fighting to preserve slavery.

If the country was divided about the ethics of the meat industry and we were gearing towards its abolition, but the only plan for what to do with all the cows, pigs, and chickens was "just let them go," it would cause a civil war too, with most vegetarians living near meat farms fighting to preserve it. The alternative is your own oblivion.
Most abolitionists did not want slavery to end that chaotically. They formed groups like the American Colonization Society and tried to figure ways to free and repatriate the slaves to their own lands. Thomas Jefferson spent his whole life trying to figure out how to handle this problem, at one point believing that to spread slavery out to more states so that blacks weren't concentrated in plantation breeding grounds would gradually cause their numbers to dwindle over time as they started dying off alone as just single workers here and there.

as it is, we have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other.

I remember I saw one as a kid about Union POWs in what was basically a Confederate concentration camp. I can't remember the name though.

You really can't go wrong with a ken burns documentary.

Most didn't care about slavery one way or the other,

Bullshit. The civil war nearly broke out years early, and forced the Missouri Compromise.
The slave owners had big plantations. If you weren't a rich jew there was no way you could ever compete in an open market.
People who weren't slave owners wanted the new states to be free states so people could actually work and survive by their own merits.
Rich jews wanted slave states so they could just move their plantations there and make even more money. And since the international slave trade had been closed for years and years at that point slaves only became more valuable.
Either way, slavery was an institution on its way out because when the country was founded you needed slaves because there wasn't a large population. As the country grew there was a labor surplus, and eventually you reach a tipping point where its cheaper to pay someone slave wages than it is to feed, clothe, house, and care for an army of human beings forced into subservience.
Not to mention all the christians who objected to slavery on general principle. The quakers, moral paragons of early america, were among the most outspoken.
People cared about slavery, they just didn't really care about the niggers who were enslaved.

the founding fathers

Only if you ignore half of them. It was adams and federalist who wanted a stronger central government while jefferson's democrats wanted states rights, in no small part because virginia was the biggest richest state and didn't want to get short-dicked by everyone else.

THIS. Grant and McClellan both like and admired each other. Even if Mac had won the war would have likely ended the same way.

I'm not going to exagerate and say the Civil War was the dumbest war ever but its like, top 10 percent.

Both in terms of what a dumb reason the Confederacy rebelled for, and how dumb the Union acted. There's these great writings from a Polish guy living in the US in the period, and he's pro union, and he spends years basically having one long brain aneurysm about why the fuck the US government wasn't doing anything about the South. They could have won the war before it started by just marching federal troops South and laying down the law. Part of what prevented something like the Civil War earlier was Andrew Jackson threatening to do the same thing, and everyone knowing that he meant it because he was Andrew Jackson.

This guy was in America because he was part of a rebellion in Poland and had to flee when it got put down by Russia. He knew how literally every other country in the world did not fuck around with insurrection, how little the US would have to take the gloves off to shut it down, and he just couldn't understand why they kept not doing it.

Then when they did end up in a war anyway they appoint McLellan, a pro-slavery guy who literally did not want to win. Then later, finally appoint Grant to lead the war, a guy who actually wants to win, he lets Sherman off the leash, another guy who wants to win, and they wrap the whole thing up in like a year

hmmm