The South Was Right!

Rating:
Summary: THE TRUTH HURTS!
Review: One of the Best Books I have ever read! Being subjected all of my life to Pro-Lincoln Propaganda.. I have always felt that something was wrong. What it was I could not lay my finger on until now. This Book brushes aside the Cobwebs of History and uncovers the hidden Truth. It may anger you. It may make you feel guilt or pain. But read it through to the end and you will NEVER think of the South in the same way. THE TRUTH HURTS! God will uncover the Truth in his own due time...

Rating:
Summary: One of the best non-fictions I've ever read!
Review: A must read for everyone who thinks they know what the so called Civil War was all about. Finally a book that tells it the way it really was and dispels the myths written by and for the North.

Rating:
Summary: Two plus two is now five...
Review: A must read for anyone who wants to understand the deep divisions that still exist in this fine land. Unfortunately merely writing/reading a history which more closely reflects your beliefs or hopes does not grant it any more truth than that history which you deny. If your thirst for the southern version of history wasn't quenched by Thomas Dixon or Margaret Mitchell then move forward to Shelby Foote. To say that the south has been unfairly looked down upon and missunderstood or missinterpreted surely ignores the actions of a more contemporary south. Would you argue that "State's Rights" should include laws forcing old black women to the rear end of a city bus, or state elected officials standing at the entrance to a High School or College blocking the wishes of young black men and women? I will NOT defend the actions of Northern Generals such as Sherman but YOU (the defenders of the "Old South") must NOT defend the actions of your more recent peers either. Don't dismiss this point as irrelevant because if the majority southern view of the decades of my lifetime (50's, 60's and 70's) reflects the view of the "Old South" then there was NOTHING honorable about the "Southern Gentleman" or "Belle". Anyone who defends the widespread abhorent treatment of blacks in the south in THOSE decades needs help. Of course maybe the Kennedy boys could get together again and write a history of the "New South" and effectively rewrite that truth also. 2+2=4 no matter how many times the Kennedy brothers tell you otherwise!

Rating:
Summary: Reality is unpopular
Review: I agree with most of what David Matanes said. I would use the correct words "human tendancy" instead of "human nature." It is man's nature to live according to his nature. That presupposes he knows what that means. Human tendancy is most often opposite of human nature. In other words, that which is or should be vs that which humans choose. Remember, the truth shall always be found by those in pursuit of it, but they must be purified by the fire of objectivity in their minds first, or they will betray it. And they must trust and use their faculty of judgment. What good are opinions and thoughts void of their owners' support? David is afraid to stand for his beliefs against the crowd. But he signed his name anyway. Maybe that was his subconscious coming out. That is why our country is being sold off- people are selling their souls because they believe they should be guilty for standing for the truth against the opposition. They value comfort and "feelings" over principles and thought. (I'm not indirectly implicating you David.) I suggest people question what they belive and see what the foundations of their beliefs are resting upon. Question the facts of this book, see for yourself. Do your own research. (I agree that the authors' bias and emotions get in the way of their points sometimes.) Check your premises, as Ayn Rand says.

Rating:
Summary: Food For Thought, definitely
Review: Being from Boston, MA, I have developed a viewpoint on this topic that most people would not expect. My education about the issues of this war were naturally quite biased towards the North. I can still remember my teachers becoming quite animated in their denunciation of every point of view presented to explain the Southern position, an attitude that had won me over as well. Unfortunately, later in life, this emotion about the sanctity of the Northern cause also caused me to earn a failing grade on what I considered a rather balanced paper. This anecdote clearly demonstrated, to me at least, that there is indeed a serious Northern bias in the teaching of our history, one which downplays, if not omits, pertinent information unflattering to the North. Anyone who denies that the victors write the official history clearly does not understand human nature. The book by the Kennedy brothers challenges these traditional outlooks rather effectively, but unfortunately very affectively also. The constitutional arguments and alternative images of the Northern motivation for the war make fine, compelling points. However, these arguments would bear more weight if the language were less biased and romanticized. That said, this same language is refreshing in its bias. The same people who complain about it use the exact same tactics when speaking of the North. Still, this book would be better received if it at least appeared more objective and dispassionate. I offer that we Northerners often forget that our section of the nation was part of the cycle of slavery. Yankee traders had brought the slaves to the South earlier on, and more importantly, their role in the cycle was to use the cotton in their manufacturing. They sold the slave to his master, bought the product of the slave and sold it to the world for an enormous profit! Is this fact presented pominently in our Civil War education? I would like to sign my name to this review, but quite frankly, it would not be wise. These viewpoints could earn me some enmity. I do not romanticize the Old South, but I do not endorse the "party line" either. True objectivity is not really appreciated or well tolerated in our society today.

Rating:
Summary: If you still believe in Truth and Liberty, Read this book!
Review: The best book ever written about the Southern Nation - get it and read it NOW if you want to know the truth about Dixie! Southerners, all you have to do is scroll down these "reviews" and read the anti-Southern hatred spewing forth from "readers" who haven't got the guts to sign their names to know why you need to read this. These Yankees are frothing at the mouth, so you know this book MUST speak the truth! Remember, a hit dog hollers! This is an in-your-face book, not for the faint of heart, but if you yearn for a return to liberty and constitutional government, buy this book and keep an open mind.

Rating:
Summary: This book is not for the faint of heart!
Review: I agree with the book's back cover which tells us that it is "not for the weak of heart". If one is not able to discern between a well-documented, authentic, authoritative piece of historical research and a bigoted, paranoid, opinion-heavy attempt to recover an idealized past, they SHOULD NOT READ THIS BOOK. Punctuating their work with editorial comments and personal vendettas, the authors of THE SOUTH WAS RIGHT! shoot themselves in the foot by presenting even the most open-minded of readers with a one-sided picture of a romanticized South and of deified Southerners. Their weak attempts to tear down the image of Abraham Lincoln as one of our greatest presidents and replace it with an "Antichrist Abe" simply do not hold any historical water. To it's credit, THE SOUTH WAS RIGHT! does give us a pricelessly modern look at paranoia and stubborn pride that lead Southern leaders back in 1860 and 61 to abandon the tools of democracy that could have rescued their society from economic ruin and war. The Kennedys are more like their 19th century heros than they think: they possess all the hotheadedness, self-righteousness, and desperation characteristic of their predescessors. In short, this book IS a must-read for anyone interested in the Civil War - as an example of the inability to see past their self-indoctrinization that lead the South to war.

Rating:
Summary: Apiphany
Review: I read this book as open minded as I could. The way the writer tells this made me turn from a normal confused American to a Pro Confederacy Southerner. The more you read the more you hate the country you currently live in. I have finnally realized that all the "history" told in schools is Gov. propoganda. It discusts me. It is a book that any person with an open mind should read. It pulls at your heart and changes your total way of thinking.

Rating:
Summary: Research compromised by unnecessary vitriol
Review: They are on the right track. Facts long concealed and obscured by half lies, half truths and self-rightious northern propaganda are laid bare here. The problem lies in the telling. The facts alone are so compelling that the bitterness in the telling detracts, not adds to the story. The South was and is right. The rightousness deserves the kind of good writing that is the hallmark of the region. A good editor was needed, and missing here.

Rating:
Summary: The book is a sappy idealization of the South.
Review: Admittedly, there is some merit to the constitutional argument. However, even if Lincoln and the North had acquiesced to the South's secession demands, the two rump states, Union and Confederacy, would almost certainly have gone to war later because of the westward expansion of both sections. Second, the constitutional argument is overshadowed by the syrupy idealization of Southern culture. The Southern states routinely denied voting rights to black people until the early 1960s. This practice wasn't Yankee propaganda, but a recent historical fact. How did the supposedly so noble Southern way of life eventually give rise to such a practice? I realize that this question is outside the authors' area of interest, but it I think that is appropriate to look for the roots of twentieth-century Southern behavior in the pre-Civil War South. Another aspect of nineteenth-century Southern culture that the authors conveniently gloss over is the economic bondage in which many of the region's white citizens lived. The Southern white elites were very adept at playing off working-class whites and blacks against each other. This glorious Southern custom tends to make me doubt the nobility of these Southern "gentlemen." Finally, I ALMOST agree with the authors that the South should have been allowed to secede, although my reasons are different than those of the Kennedy's. Had the South been allowed to go its own way, an immoral system, slavery, would have continued indefinitely, but the North would have been spared carrying the Southern albatross around its neck. In case anyone is wondering, I am a fourth-generation Coloradoan, meaning that I am neither a Northerner nor a Southerner.