The South Was Right!

Rating:
Summary: I'm sorry
Review: I'm sorry the authors of this book will get a dime out of my pocket and might prompt them to think this book is worthy of a sequel, thus ending a tree's life needlessly. By the way, in the review Lamont of Spartanburg, S.C. gave of this book entitled "This book belongs in any serious Civil War Library", he cites that Lincoln sat in "Galena, Ill." as "state after state" left the Union without doing anything, including giving speeches. Lamont says this is evidence of Lincoln's failure as a president. First, Lincoln was in Springfield, not Galena (you might be thinking of U.S. Grant?) Second, Lincoln wasn't president during the first round of successions and
could do little (perhaps your anst should be directed to the sitting president at the time -- Buchanan). Third, Lincoln, did deliver speeches during his train trip to Washington and while he deliberately avoided fanning the flames with inflammatory remarks against the succeeded states, I don't necessarily find this a weakness. A weakness, in my opinion, would have been to inflame an already hot issue before he had even taken the oath of office. Perhaps, Lamont, instead of having tripe like this in your 'serious civil war library,' you need some real history books.

Rating:
Summary: Southern Myths
Review: This book will sit right next to the Communist Manifesto, Castro's Biography, and Mein Kampf on my bookshelf (I reviewed the hardcover edition), to remind me of propaganda. This is just revisionist history. Every "Lost Cause" could write a book like this. All you have to do is exagerrate a couple of ideas of why your side was fighting, ridicule the ethics of the victor, and, voila, you have revisionist history. The truth was that the South was built on feudalistic racism and a bogus idea of what it means to be a man. Isn't it funny that the most "christian" part of the U.S. (Dixie) has: the highes divorce rate, the highest murder rate, the highest illiteracy, crime, vagrancy, etc., etc. The South didn't work, and it doesn't work today. The South fired on the North, and then dragged America into its bloodiest war, without a possibility of winning ! The idea of "Southern Independence" makes me laugh. It is like Germany invading Poland, and then talking about "German Independence". Sorry guys, it does not work that way. The South set up one of the first concentration camps, Andersonville, in which 14,000 Union soldiers died. The camp commandant was hung after the war as a war criminal. So much for Southern chivalry. The South murdered, in cold blood, black Northern soldiers who had surrendered. That was the "Southern Way". The Southern Way has to do with committing war crimes, and then talking about being "Christian" and "chivalrous". I honor and admire U.S. Grant, and Sherman, who knocked the hell out of that world. Thank god for the Northern victory. Long live the UNITED States of America !!!

Rating:
Summary: White Trash Bible
Review: This from a previous review here:

"The atrocities the Union troops committed against the Southern women, New Manchester and Roswell, Georgia. ( Transported to Northern concentration camps, raped along the way. NONE of them ever to be heard from again) Col. John Basil Turchin, formerly Ivan Vasilevich Turchininov, of the Imperial Russian Army, allowed his soldiers to plunder, pillage and rape the women of Athens, Ala. All with Lincoln's approval."

How does this stack up against four score and seven years of slavery? That's the problem. The book talks about the WHITE South. If you add up every Union atrocity and multiply by a hundred that doesn't approach the damage slavery did to millions of Americans (who wants to argue that they weren't?). If the South was right about everything else and wrong about this they still deserved to lose (and it was a blessing that they did). Deal with the truth.

Rating:
Summary: Great historical accuracy
Review: When I hear of the Slavery Reparations Movement, I think to myself "why could I not receive reparations for what United States Troops did to my ancestors when they marched through the South. My own great great grandfather's house and farm was destroyed. Shouldn't I receive reparations for a past wrong such as that? Anyways, the book was not perfect but was filled with facts that I never learned in highschool or college. I was never a big fan of Lincoln before. Now, I'm almost ashamed to call myself a republican.

Rating:
Summary: What an educational read!!
Review: In all of my research for the truth about the War For Southern Independence, I have never read a book with more detailed information, information that was backed up with facts, than I did with The South Was Right! This is a must read for those who have the difficulty of explaining the Northern Aggression and the truth behind the War. Please read and learn!

Rating:
Summary: Give Me A Break
Review: If the South was right why is Trent Lott no longer Senate majority leader? The states rights many of you speak of are the states rights to OWN SLAVES. You think it was about southern independance, Plaease, you merely wanted to be left alone to keep slaves!!! Why did it take 100 years after slavery for African AMERICANS to vote or even take a piss in a public restroom in the south? Read BLACK LIKE ME by John Howard Griffin which is required reading in some schools.
I expect to see other books by this author Dubya was right?

Rating:
Summary: Revisionist Garbage
Review: The only people that would find this book interesting and be gullible enough to believe its outright lies are likely to live in a trailer littered with empty beer cans, pictures of John C. Calhoun and Jefferson Davis on the walls, and adorned with the Confederate Flag. The same people who rate this a five star book are the ones who still cuss at the mere mention of The Great Emancipator and deny the racist implications of flying a Confederate Flag over a state capitol. The Civil War is over and thank God the North won-GET OVER IT! In short, this book is only for ignorant, racist rednecks.

Rating:
Summary: The Civil War is over, get over it.
Review: First let me say, I think everyone who studies the civil war should read this book. I have recomended it to my history professors. I found myself arguing with the book everytime I opened it. I don't doubt the authors did extensive research into their subject.
However, thier method of arguing ideas was fundamentally flawed. According to the authors, all we know about the civil war, or the "War for Sothern Independence", is wrong because it was written by yankee propagandists, northern writters, or outright lies.
The most shinning example of their method of disputing the accepted history of the civil war is the section labled "The Myth of Andersonville". The authors never discuss the atrocities that occured at the camp, never address the responsibility the camp commander diserves for the conditions he helped create in the camp. All they discuss is the murder trial the camp commander faced after the war. The only whitness to testify against the camp commander was later proven to be lying. Dose this remove the responsibility of the events of Andersonville from the camp commander? It dose according to misters Kennedy.
The authors also feel that everyone thinks that Lincoln was a supporter of racial equality, and they spend a large portion of the book making Lincoln look like a petty tyrant that tried to illegally keep the Souther states in the union for economic reasons. First, anyone who stayed awake in history past the fifth grade knows about the extreme tacits used by Lincoln durring the war. The suspension of Habious Corpus, closing down newspapers sympathetic to the Confederacy, as well as his racial views are well known to those who paid attention. The economies of the south did bring in large amounts of revenue, this is not in doubt. However, industrialization of the North made them less and less dependant on the South.
Basically, if the evidence could be bent to support the authors claim, they included it. But, if the evidence goes against the authors claims, it was ignored. They specifically state that Jefferson Davis never suspened Habious Corpus, when in fact he did. The suspension was subject to periodic renewal, and it was renewed. Davis did opt not to renew the suspension later in the war, but he did suspend it.
Lastly, the authors never mention the problems the Confederacy had internally. The main problem being that the Confederacy was a victom of their own belief in States Rights, but that is not discussed. If Misters Kennedy are to be believed, the confederacy would have been a raving sucess had it not been for the invasion by the jellous North.
Dispite the tone of my review, I belive people should read this book. I found the book to be infuriating, inaccurate, and heavily biased. If you study the civil war, this book will definatly help you better understand the enduring myths that some still hold dear.

Rating:
Summary: It's not about racism!
Review: The first thing my co-workers said when they saw the title was, "Oh @#$%, we got a racist, redneck working with us." Well as I have tried to explain it has nothing to do with racism JUST HISTORY!

I have been looking for this type of writing for some time. A good book that brings a fresh look at old ideas, assuming you have never questioned the text books or modern "anti-southern heritage" vogue. Thought provoking and informative. Some areas are not covered deep enough, but thats for another book.

Rating:
Summary: Half and Half
Review: This book has an amazing first half...however about 150-200 pages the book trails off. I reccomend this book only for the die hard southern nationalist. If it had been in paper back and not as expenzive i would have given it 4 stars. By no means a bad book or a waste of money I was just expecting more.