saofan_315
05/09/10, 11:20 PM
So I've been watching on and off this new series on the History Channel basically trying to create a crash course in American history over the span of a short mini series. I'm a US History major so I can follow along pretty well with the series, especially the more toward the modern era it gets. I just got done watching the episode on the American Civil War and I have a lot to say about it. Granted, I realize that The History Channel only had an hour to cover then entire Civil War, which in itself is nearly impossible to do. They did a lot of things right and covered a lot of important parts on the war, but as I was watching it I couldn't help but notice all of the spots where the series either skipped over or got their history incorrect on. I came up with a pretty good sized list of problems I had with the Civil War episode in particular, but I wanted to know if other people are into watching this series and what they think of the series, as well as what they think of the comments I have to make on it.
Problems:
1. You can't have a Civil War program and NOT mention Ulysses S. Grant at least once.
2. Sherman kicked all people out of Atlanta. They did not evacuate willingly.
3. You failed to mention that the Emancipation Proclamation (EP) did not free the slaves still in the Union (yes, there were slaves in the Union. Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri.
4. The EP only freed the slaves in the South that were under Union control. In other words, it only applied to as far as it could be enforced in the South.
5. There was NO mention of the Union naval blockade or even the overarching military strategy to the war, which was CRUCIAL to the ultimate surrender of the Confederate Army.
6. Lincoln was not so set on emancipating slaves. He stated publicly on numerous occasions that he would free none, some, or all of the slaves as long as it would win him the war.
but my biggest problem:
The Civil War did not display the country's industrial growth and serve as proof for the economic system which was in place. Yes, it was the North's far superior production system which won the war for them, but if the South hadn't been so damn set on growing cotton for the entire ... See More (http://www.absolutepunk.net/)world, then slavery would have been no longer needed and the war avoided.
Let me tell you a little story about the South's cotton industry. It takes a MASSIVE labor force to do grueling and inhumane labor in order to produce cotton on such massive scales (in the 19th Century I'm talking about). This need was supplied by slavery. If the focus of the American people was farming for sustenance and use and not for profit, this labor force would not have been needed and eventually slavery would have ended on its own, most likely well before the Civil War came around in the mid 19th Century. Therefore, it was the country's own economic system (well, particularity the focus the South had in it) that ultimately led to most of the problems which caused the war in the first place. Did the History Channel mention ANY of this? No, not really.
So this came out to be pretty lengthy and kudos to anyone who reads it, but I'm just interested in hearing what people have to say about it.
Problems:
1. You can't have a Civil War program and NOT mention Ulysses S. Grant at least once.
2. Sherman kicked all people out of Atlanta. They did not evacuate willingly.
3. You failed to mention that the Emancipation Proclamation (EP) did not free the slaves still in the Union (yes, there were slaves in the Union. Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri.
4. The EP only freed the slaves in the South that were under Union control. In other words, it only applied to as far as it could be enforced in the South.
5. There was NO mention of the Union naval blockade or even the overarching military strategy to the war, which was CRUCIAL to the ultimate surrender of the Confederate Army.
6. Lincoln was not so set on emancipating slaves. He stated publicly on numerous occasions that he would free none, some, or all of the slaves as long as it would win him the war.
but my biggest problem:
The Civil War did not display the country's industrial growth and serve as proof for the economic system which was in place. Yes, it was the North's far superior production system which won the war for them, but if the South hadn't been so damn set on growing cotton for the entire ... See More (http://www.absolutepunk.net/)world, then slavery would have been no longer needed and the war avoided.
Let me tell you a little story about the South's cotton industry. It takes a MASSIVE labor force to do grueling and inhumane labor in order to produce cotton on such massive scales (in the 19th Century I'm talking about). This need was supplied by slavery. If the focus of the American people was farming for sustenance and use and not for profit, this labor force would not have been needed and eventually slavery would have ended on its own, most likely well before the Civil War came around in the mid 19th Century. Therefore, it was the country's own economic system (well, particularity the focus the South had in it) that ultimately led to most of the problems which caused the war in the first place. Did the History Channel mention ANY of this? No, not really.
So this came out to be pretty lengthy and kudos to anyone who reads it, but I'm just interested in hearing what people have to say about it.