Civil war Books From the Southern Perspective

[Tolkien]

The winner writes the history and that is the view we are all given. So here are a sample of some books from the southern perspective that will leve you asking, why was I not told that before? why was I lied to? Books found on amazon.



Lincoln


Lincoln As He Really Was
The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War
Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe
Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln's White Dream
Dismantling the Republic





The South / Confederacy / States Rights


The South Was Right!
The Confederate Constitution of 1861: An Inquiry into American Constitutionalism
From Founding Fathers to Fire Eaters: The Constitutional Doctrine of States' Rights in the Old South
Redeeming American Democracy: Lessons from the Confederate Constitution
Nullification: Reclaiming Consent of the Governed
Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century




Slavery


Myths of American Slavery
Time on the Cross: The Economics of American Slavery
A South-side view of slavery;
South Carolina Slave Narratives: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers' Project 1936-1938
Georgia Slave Narratives: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers' Project 1936-1938
Everything You Were Taught About American Slavery is Wrong, Ask a Southerner!




Pro South Book Publisher for many more books

http://www.shotwellpublishing.com/
https://www.searavenpress.com/southern-civil-war-books.htm

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I've seen counter pieces done on Lincoln and on the question of secession for years.

Slavery, dress it up any way you want, is one sentient OWNING another against the second sentient's consent. That's just flippin' wrong, full stop.

[Montmorency]

Total Relism.

[Strike For The South]

This list is pure fantasy. The only real history you have is the WPA interviews, which are in their own way problematic.

I encourage everyone to use their reading time on something else.

[Tolkien]

This list is pure fantasy. The only real history you have is the WPA interviews, which are in their own way problematic.

I encourage everyone to use their reading time on something else.


These books you have never read and i assure you contain the history we are told to ignore. If they were "pure fantasy" I would never recommend them, unless of course it were LOTR.

I am of the opinion people should back up their claims. Would you care to debate a civil war subject? do you care to prove a specific category in my op is false? though of course you have not read the books so dont even know the stances taken. But i love to show people they are wrong when they think they are correct. Indoctrination is easy to refute. Do you care to debate?

[Strike For The South]

You assume way too much. These books are among the most circulated lost causer works out there. In fact, it is almost like you've copy pasted from a pre selected list. Historical forums (really the internet generally) very much skew to the "untold" side of history, its unsurprising the the "lost cause" has carved out a deep niche.

Debate you on what? Your ability to copy paste voluminous text proves nothing. It is a common tactic of try hard polemics to bury their perceived opponent in information. As if quantity itself will overcome their poor intellectual position.

Your position is flawed from the start. None of these men are experts in their fields, there are no or few primary sources in any of these texts. This is not history, it is a political position working backwards trying to support itself using presentism.

[Tolkien]

You assume way too much. These books are among the most circulated lost causer works out there. In fact, it is almost like you've copy pasted from a pre selected list. Historical forums (really the internet generally) very much skew to the "untold" side of history, its unsurprising the the "lost cause" has carved out a deep niche.

Debate you on what? Your ability to copy paste voluminous text proves nothing. It is a common tactic of try hard polemics to bury their perceived opponent in information. As if quantity itself will overcome their poor intellectual position.

Your position is flawed from the start. None of these men are experts in their fields, there are no or few primary sources in any of these texts. This is not history, it is a political position working backwards trying to support itself using presentism.


You assume way too much. You assume "None of these men are experts in their fields, there are no or few primary sources in any of these texts. This is not history, it is a political position working backwards trying to support itself using presentism"

but since we both see you will not debate if this is actually true, we both are aware you are in fact operating from your political position with no historical support.


Anytime you wish to man up and try to support your claims. you chose the subject. Making baseless claims and running from debate shows indoctrination needs no historical justification and neither does its followers.

[Fragony]

You give plenty of homework. I like reading so that's fine. Must admit that I know very little about of, that of was about human rights I do not believe but I am not informd very well. Got the author tot me, library is a 2 minute walk