"Twenty thousand of Maryland's sons were able to escape the Union occupation of their mother state and distinguished themselves in the Confederate Army." Spoken like a true confederate. I suggest that the war is over and that the Union prevailed (thank God). I invite you to join us in the 21st century ... reflect upon the mistakes of the past...and to make ours a more perfect union.
You might benefit from reading the other articles, as your comment reveals a misunderstanding of the issues she discusses. It seems your admiration for the Union's victory stems from the belief that the Civil War was primarily about slavery. However, a deeper understanding would challenge that assumption. In reality, the Union's triumph marked the end of the Republic as a collection of sovereign states—the foundation of the American experiment. With the invasion of the South, the era of federal overreach and centralized tyranny truly began.
Yes I understand your point....simply stated the CW was basically about economics. Furthermore, the States gave up their power...especially as the progressive movement gained traction in the late 1800s-early 1900s. It was Wilson that really set things in motion and we still suffer from this period. Interestingly, it appears that the pendulum may be swinging back to the States. However, given the mindset of most States I am not overly encouraged.
The point is that we are all Americans and the whole war was avoidable had people realized that bloodshed would have been avoided. Quite frankly, the south was more in error than the north and were arrogant to boot (they were not as economically powerful as the north). They neglected the fact that we were and remain the United States. Not Marylanders or Virginians (this is where Lee screwed up) - but Americans. To imply their actions were somehow heroic is BS on its face.
OK, now I have a clearer picture of the extent of your knowledge on the subject.
The UNITED STATES is composed of sovereign states who joined into a compact for multiple mutual reasons. Your assertion that we are all Americans first is an idea that mostly came about after the Civil War provided the evidence that the federal government had grown too large and powerful for the states to resist.
The South was not "more in error," a fact easily proven by reading the articles on this substack or from any number of other sources that lay out the causes of the war and the legalities involved.
Suffice it to say, an agreement entered into by sovereign entities is by definition an agreement those entities can leave. There was no legal or even moral justification for the federal government of the United States to forcefully subjugate the states who wanted to leave.
Hey Jason….how many angles can fit on the head of a pin? I’m sure you know…as guys like you get so lost in the weeds as to looking at the big picture. Yours is a typical libertarian fallacy and quite hackneyed. The liberation view of the Civil War, which frames it primarily as a moral crusade against slavery, oversimplifies the complex political and economic realities of the conflict. While slavery was a central issue, the war was fundamentally about the nature of the Union and the struggle between states’ rights and federal authority. The decentralized government under the Articles of Confederation had already proven ineffective, and the Civil War further demonstrated that a fractured union was untenable. The only viable path forward was a stronger federal compact that could unify the nation, ensure economic stability, and prevent future sectional crises. The post-war constitutional amendments and federal reconstruction policies reinforced this necessity, proving that a more centralized authority was the natural and inevitable response to the war’s causes and consequences. Nice try and thanks for playing.
"Twenty thousand of Maryland's sons were able to escape the Union occupation of their mother state and distinguished themselves in the Confederate Army." Spoken like a true confederate. I suggest that the war is over and that the Union prevailed (thank God). I invite you to join us in the 21st century ... reflect upon the mistakes of the past...and to make ours a more perfect union.
You might benefit from reading the other articles, as your comment reveals a misunderstanding of the issues she discusses. It seems your admiration for the Union's victory stems from the belief that the Civil War was primarily about slavery. However, a deeper understanding would challenge that assumption. In reality, the Union's triumph marked the end of the Republic as a collection of sovereign states—the foundation of the American experiment. With the invasion of the South, the era of federal overreach and centralized tyranny truly began.
Yes I understand your point....simply stated the CW was basically about economics. Furthermore, the States gave up their power...especially as the progressive movement gained traction in the late 1800s-early 1900s. It was Wilson that really set things in motion and we still suffer from this period. Interestingly, it appears that the pendulum may be swinging back to the States. However, given the mindset of most States I am not overly encouraged.
It sounds like you have an understanding of the underlying issues so I find the angry aggression of your first comment confusing.
The point is that we are all Americans and the whole war was avoidable had people realized that bloodshed would have been avoided. Quite frankly, the south was more in error than the north and were arrogant to boot (they were not as economically powerful as the north). They neglected the fact that we were and remain the United States. Not Marylanders or Virginians (this is where Lee screwed up) - but Americans. To imply their actions were somehow heroic is BS on its face.
OK, now I have a clearer picture of the extent of your knowledge on the subject.
The UNITED STATES is composed of sovereign states who joined into a compact for multiple mutual reasons. Your assertion that we are all Americans first is an idea that mostly came about after the Civil War provided the evidence that the federal government had grown too large and powerful for the states to resist.
The South was not "more in error," a fact easily proven by reading the articles on this substack or from any number of other sources that lay out the causes of the war and the legalities involved.
Suffice it to say, an agreement entered into by sovereign entities is by definition an agreement those entities can leave. There was no legal or even moral justification for the federal government of the United States to forcefully subjugate the states who wanted to leave.
Hey Jason….how many angles can fit on the head of a pin? I’m sure you know…as guys like you get so lost in the weeds as to looking at the big picture. Yours is a typical libertarian fallacy and quite hackneyed. The liberation view of the Civil War, which frames it primarily as a moral crusade against slavery, oversimplifies the complex political and economic realities of the conflict. While slavery was a central issue, the war was fundamentally about the nature of the Union and the struggle between states’ rights and federal authority. The decentralized government under the Articles of Confederation had already proven ineffective, and the Civil War further demonstrated that a fractured union was untenable. The only viable path forward was a stronger federal compact that could unify the nation, ensure economic stability, and prevent future sectional crises. The post-war constitutional amendments and federal reconstruction policies reinforced this necessity, proving that a more centralized authority was the natural and inevitable response to the war’s causes and consequences. Nice try and thanks for playing.