General Lee divided the USA. Who was the hero of the Confederation and why in the South are fighting with monuments?

74
The “war with monuments”, as it turned out, is typical not only for the former republics of the Soviet Union and the former socialist camps in Eastern Europe, but also for the United States itself. The scandal around the demolition of monuments to the leaders of the Southern States Confederation continues. The real epidemic of transferring monuments from the main and central streets and squares of cities in southern states began in 2015, however, the world’s attention was attracted only now, when in Charlottesville, in Virginia, unrest began, caused by the demolition of the monument to General Robert Lee - the legendary Civil Hero. US war. One person died, another nineteen were injured.

Robert Lee - one of the most iconic figures in the new stories United States of America. By the way, this year from the date of his birth 210 has turned years. Robert Edward Lee was born in the distant 1807 year, January 19, in Stradford, Virginia. The father of the future General Henry Lee himself was a hero of the American War of Independence and became famous under the nickname "Cavalier Harry". Ann Carter Lee, the commander's mother, also belonged to a prominent Virgin family and was distinguished by intelligence and dedication. These qualities she passed on to her son. Since the father of the family soon had serious financial problems, the mother of Ann Carter Lee was actually engaged in raising her son and maintaining the family. Robert Edward, who had grown up in such an environment as a teenager, began serving as head of the family as a teenager, since his mother’s health had deteriorated, and there was no man in the house. With the financial problems of the family was associated with the choice of further life path of Robert Lee. If his elder brother Charles still had enough money to pay for tuition at the prestigious Harvard University, then by the time the turn to get a higher education came for Robert, the family was already in a bad way with finances.



But education was nevertheless required - the noble Virginia family did not want its representative to remain an uneducated person on the sidelines of social life. The only way out of this situation was to enroll in a military school - the glorified military academy of West Point. Robert Lee, who was distinguished not only by diligence in his studies, but also by great physical strength, could well have become an ideal officer in the American army. And he became one. While studying at the academy, Li was one of the best cadets in the academy, not having received a single penalty from the higher command. By the time he graduated from West Point, Lee was the second most accomplished cadet in the academy.

At that time, the cadets, depending on their academic performance and inclination, were distributed among the combat arms. The guys are physically strong, but without expressed interests, were sent to the infantry or cavalry. The "smart men", among whom was Robert Lee, were distributed into engineering troops and artillery - those branches of the military, where deeper knowledge of special disciplines and exact sciences was required. Robert Lee was assigned to the engineering troops and was sent to the Corps of Engineers in the rank of second lieutenant. Almost immediately after graduating from the academy, he participated in the construction of the dam in St. Louis, then in the construction of coastal forts in Brunswick and Savannah.

The young officer settled in Arlington, on the estate of his wife, Mary Ann Kastis, with whom he had married 30 on June 1831. Mary Kastis also belonged to the elite of American society - her father George Washington Park Kastis was brought in by his adoptive grandson to George Washington himself, one of the fathers of American statehood. Robert Lee continued his service in the engineering troops and maybe he would never have moved to command posts in the army if not for the Mexican-American war that broke out in the 1846 year. By this time, the 39-year-old engineering officer was already well known to the command. He was sent to Mexico to manage the construction of the roads necessary for the advancement of the American army. But General Winfield Scott, who commanded the American forces, drew attention to the fact that Robert Lee was not only a good engineering officer, but also an excellent rider, a great gunner and reconnaissance aircraft. A man with such data was very much required at headquarters, so Robert Lee was immediately included among the staff officers of General Scott. Thus began his acquaintance with command and staff duties.

However, after the end of the war, Lee again continued to serve in the engineering forces, which made him very much. First, the career of a military engineer did not give him the desired advancement in his ranks and positions. It was possible to serve all my life in middle-level posts by building roads in remote areas. Secondly, the service in the outback, too, was an officer who could not fully engage his family and lead a normal life. In the end, Robert Lee managed to get a transfer to the cavalry. By this time he was already 48 years old - not the youngest age for a military career. However, it was after the transfer to the cavalry with Lee's career growth that was all right. In October, 1859, he commanded the suppression of the uprising of John Brown, who attempted to seize the government arsenal at Harpers Ferry. Colonel Robert Lee commanded at this time not only cavalrymen, but also marines, having managed to quickly put down the rebellion. By this time, Colonel Lee was already 52 of the year and, quite possibly, he would have ended his service in a colonel's rank, like hundreds of other American officers, if not a civil war broke out soon.

General Lee divided the USA. Who was the hero of the Confederation and why in the South are fighting with monuments?
- Battle of Entity. 1862 year. © / Commons.wikimedia.org

In 1861, the new US president Abraham Lincoln invited Colonel Lee to lead the ground forces of the federal government. By this time, the situation in the country heated to the limit. The southern states, and Lee, as we know, was a native of the South, came into sharp conflict with the federal government. At the same time, Colonel Lee was considered a staunch opponent of slavery and the separation of the southern states from the federal center. Lincoln believed that a talented officer could become a reliable commander of the federal forces. However, Colonel Lee himself made his own choice. He wrote to the US president to resign from military service, stressing that he was not able to participate in the invasion of his native southern states.

A little thought, Colonel Robert Edward Lee turned to Jefferson Davis, who was elected president of the Confederate States of America, offering him his services as an officer. Davis gladly accepted the offer of Lee and assigned him the rank of brigadier general. So Lee was promoted to general epaulets, taking up the creation of a regular army of the southern states. Lee took the post of chief military adviser to President Davis, participating in the planning of many military operations of the Confederate army. Then Lee, who was promoted to full general, led the Army of Northern Virginia. He assumed the position of army commander 1 on June 1862, and soon gained enormous prestige among the confederate forces. Southerners were greatly respected and appreciated by General Lee - not only for his talent as a commander, but also for his excellent human qualities as a sociable and good-natured person.



Under the command of General Lee, the Army of Northern Virginia achieved impressive success, having completed a large number of victories over federal troops. In particular, the army of Lee was able to repel a powerful offensive of the northerners, defeating the army of General Burnside in the vicinity of Fredericksburg. In May, 1863, General Lee's troops were able to inflict the strongest defeat on the Nationans in the Battle of Chancellorsville. Next, Lee embarked on a second invasion of the North, hoping to break through to Washington and force President Lincoln to recognize the Confederate States of America as an independent entity. However, 1-3 July 1863, in the area of ​​the city of Gettysburg, another grand battle took place, in which the troops of the northerners, under the command of General George Meade, still managed to defeat the southern genius Robert Lee. True, General Lee’s troops continued to fight against the Northerners for another two years. Robert Lee earned great respect from his opponents. In particular, Ulysses Grant called him none other than “Ace of Spades”. Only 9 on April 1865. The Army of Northern Virginia was forced to capitulate.

Federal authorities pardoned Robert Lee and allowed him to return to Richmond. The retired general became president of Washington College, and five years after the surrender, October 12 1870, died as a result of a heart attack. Almost until the end of his life, he was engaged in organizing assistance to former soldiers and officers of the Confederation of the States of America, trying to alleviate their fate after a victory for the Northerners. In this case, the general himself was struck in civil rights.

For a long time, the merits of General Lee were recognized not only by Southerners and right-wing supporters, but also by many US patriots, regardless of political convictions or origin. The situation began to change not so long ago, when a “left-liberal” turn took place in the United States, expressed at a symbolic level and in a hard rejection of the memory of all representatives of the Confederation. In the views of the left-liberal circles of American society, the Confederates are practically fascists, ideological opponents and almost political criminals. Therefore, they encounter such an attitude on the part of the American Left.
Interestingly, President Donald Trump himself sharply criticized the decision to demolish the monument to General Lee and to transfer the monuments to other prominent figures of the Confederation. However, as is known, the specificity of the political system in the United States is such that the authorities of a particular state can make decisions of this kind themselves. In the southern states in recent times there have been major changes in political alignments, caused by the increase in the number of non-whites and the acquisition of serious political ambitions by the latter.

After Barack Obama, a man of African descent, visited the US president for the first time in American history, it became clear that the political situation in the USA would never be the same. Representatives of non-European groups of states, including African Americans, immigrants from Latin America and Asia, realized that they could well be a serious political force affecting the political life of the country. On the side of non-white groups were left-liberal US forces, including a significant part of the supporters of the Democratic Party and more left-wing organizations. They also provided informational support, as there are many supporters of left-liberal views among American journalists and bloggers who are trying to influence the mass consciousness of Americans.



The authorities of southern cities believe that they are doing everything correctly, because the monuments are not demolished, but transferred to other places. For example, Lexington, the second largest city in Kentucky, discusses moving the monument to General John Morgan and Vice President John Breckenridge. Both politicians fought on the side of the Confederation of States of America, and this deserved criticism from modern American democrats. The latter substantiate the need to transfer the monument to the fact that it stands on the spot where slaves were auctioned in the 19th century, and thus offended the black population of the city. Slogans in support of the African-American population are increasingly appearing on monuments to American generals. The war with monuments acquired a symbolic meaning for modern America.

Representatives of the American white public mobilized to protect the monuments to the heroes of the Confederation, in the first place - right-wing organizations that are still very strong in the American South. The activities of the American right are associated with numerous attempts to defend monuments and prevent the actions of the left, including through direct clashes. Keep up with the right and their opponents. If the rightists are trying to defend the monuments, the leftists have already turned to acts of vandalism, not waiting for the decisions of the administrative authorities to transfer some of the monuments. So, on August 16 in Knoxville was poured paint on a monument to soldiers of the Confederation of the States of America who died in Fort Sanders in November 1863. The monument was installed in the 1914 year and stood for more than a hundred years before it caused hatred from local left-wing liberals.

In New Orleans, it was decided to demolish all four monuments to the heroes of the Confederation, including the monument to Robert Lee, who stood with 1884 year. It is noteworthy that the monuments were placed shortly after the war, despite the fact that the government was opposed by the Confederates, who shed blood in the fight against them. But they didn’t even raise a hand to desecrate monuments to American patriots, even if they understood in their own opinion the optimal political and social model for the United States. But now many people who have recently arrived in the USA are taking part in demonstrations against monuments. They have never been associated with American history, for them it is - a foreign and alien to them history, alien heroes. The political forces that oppose President Donald Trump and who wish to further implement their own ideas in the United States, consisting in the final erasure of the historical memory of the American people, successfully speculate on the fight against monuments.
74 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +15
    21 August 2017 06: 21
    Not General Lee divided the United States, but History. Not everyone liked the order of the North, with its lack of spirituality and the race for clean-fire. It is enough to compare how many great people of art "North" gave, and how much "South"


    And the point here is not in the struggle for freedom of "future African Americans," but in the trivial struggle of the North for its "raw material base." The “North” did not allow the “South” to dictate its conditions to itself.
    And until now, many ROOT Southerners remember that they are Dixies, not Yankees. And all the noise is now raising, those who came to the United States much later than all these events.
    1. +1
      21 August 2017 08: 37
      Well, of course, they offended the southerners. The USA was lucky then that they managed to crush idiots, and so they would be sitting on their cotton plantations with blacks on the sidelines of progress. Slavery would have been abolished anyway, but it would have been too late, the industrial north would have ridden far ahead, and the Confederation would have become the second Mexico.

      The citizen. the war in the USA is a war for a more progressive social system, against those who tried to freeze the archaic.
      1. +22
        21 August 2017 09: 30
        Only now, the south was almost the richest region in the world and without money for exporting cotton figs, the North would have ridden off to the north, the southerners were simply robbed.
      2. +27
        21 August 2017 09: 50
        Quote: EvilLion
        Well, of course, they offended the southerners. The USA was lucky then that they managed to crush idiots, and so they would be sitting on their cotton plantations with blacks on the sidelines of progress. Slavery would have been abolished anyway, but it would have been too late, the industrial north would have ridden far ahead, and the Confederation would have become the second Mexico.
        The citizen. the war in the USA is a war for a more progressive social system, against those who tried to freeze the archaic.


        you talk very categorically about materials you are not familiar with.
        ask who the representatives of the "progressive system" were, that is, Puritan fans.
        those Puritans who went to jail for missing the Sunday Mass, and those whose girls got lashes for a colored ribbon in their hair.
        those puritans who were so afraid of separating the south from them that they decided to subjugate them with weapons only so as not to tear themselves away from the tax feeder. if the division of the states took place, the north would hardly be self-sufficient, and they knew that.
        the north did not allow the south to develop the industry with taxes on the import of equipment.
        familiar handwriting? America has been doing the same for the past decades with the s. America to keep them in control, and not only them.
        these recipes came from northerners whom you call progressive. Well, in purely economic terms, this is progress, for one country, yes.
      3. +10
        21 August 2017 14: 16
        Quote: EvilLion
        The citizen. the war in the USA is a war for a more progressive social system, against those who tried to freeze the archaic.

        Come on. GV in the USA is just a war for preserving the existing order of things: the industrial North milks the agrarian South and dictates the country's foreign economic policy beneficial to the North.
        But even how Lincoln didn’t give a damn about how the South produces what the North pumps out, the progressiveness or regressiveness of the system — the main thing was to preserve the Union as it was:
        My main task in this struggle is to save the Union, and not to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing a single slave, I would do it, and if I had to free all the slaves to save it, I would do it too
    2. +5
      21 August 2017 09: 13
      Those who fight with monuments do not learn history and do not know that the destruction and destruction of monuments is a direct path to the destruction of statehood. In history, a similar thing was observed in Ancient Egypt, for example, during the reign of Akhenaten and Nefertiti, when the demolition and desecration of monuments subsequently led to the destruction of statehood and the conquest of Egypt by neighbors.
      History requires very careful handling. The same applies not only to the Americans, but also to Ukraine, Poland and to us. The destruction and desecration of monuments of the fatherland, the history of the state should be strictly suppressed regardless of the motives that guide the vandals.

      "People-State-Fatherland" - this is the slogan of every Russian patriot.
  2. +4
    21 August 2017 07: 01
    In the United States, many centers of both the old and the new confrontation are smoldering. There is such a series "Longmayer" - there it is very well shown. In this series, there is a moment when the federal center sends to the town where the main character is a sheriff, his black agent. He sniffed there for a short time, and then he told the sheriff that it was a nasty town and something was very “wrong” with him, since he hadn’t seen a single black man in his streets these days ....
    1. +2
      21 August 2017 08: 42
      There was also a film in which a wealthy citizen of the southern town was killed. At the station, the sheriff’s assistants arrested BLACK-SKIN - there were no others in the town! It turned out to be an POLICEMAN arrival! With it, they found the killer!
      Unfortunately I do not remember the name - a film from the 80s ...
      But they parted with the sheriff quite peacefully ...
      1. +1
        21 August 2017 11: 10
        Quote: hohol95
        Unfortunately I do not remember the name - a film from the 80s ...

        This English film was called "In the heat of the night" where the role of a Negro policeman was played by the then popular Sydney Poitier and the sheriff - Hollywood star Rod Steiger .... The film took place in one of the southern states - Alabama .... The film was released in the mid-60s, not the 80s ....
        1. 0
          21 August 2017 11: 25
          He himself is Midnight Heat ... Thanks for the reminder! hi
        2. +2
          21 August 2017 20: 21
          But at the same time I overlooked -
          Military diver (Eng. Men of Honor, original name - People of Honor) is a biographical film directed by George Tillman Jr. about the life of the US Navy officer Carl Brashire - the first African American among graduates of a naval school of divers and lifeguards.
          The main roles were played by Cube Gudding Jr., Robert De Niro, Charlize Theron and Onjanu Ellis.
        3. 0
          15 September 2017 18: 16
          I’ll clarify a little: the film was shot based on the novel of the same name by J. Ball (the Russian name is “Stuffed Night in Carolina”), the events take place in the state of South Carolina. But in the film, everything is transferred to the state of Mississippi.
  3. +6
    21 August 2017 07: 11
    The war on monuments is the last thing. It only attests to the fact that more than one thought cannot fit in the head of a pseudo-patriot, the idea that history is sufficiently diverse and cannot be exclusively black and white simply cannot coexist with the party’s “general line”.
  4. +3
    21 August 2017 07: 30
    In New Orleans, it was decided to demolish all four monuments to the heroes of the Confederation, including the monument to Robert Lee, which stood since 1884. It is noteworthy that the monuments were erected shortly after the war, despite the fact that the opponents of the Confederates were in power, shedding blood in the fight against them.

    And for what? "In an interview with KIRO, Seattle Mayor Edward Murray said:" In the past few days, Seattle residents have expressed concern and disappointment with the symbols of hatred, racism and violence that exist in our city ... This includes both confederate memorials and statues who idolize the founder of an authoritarian Soviet regime ... We should never forget our history. But we also should not idealize those who committed brutal atrocities and tried to divide us on the basis of who we are and where. " “What you can be absolutely sure of is that the statue of Lenin, who has been standing in Seattle for more than twenty years, has never been the culprit of any conflicts and confrontations. Exactly until the mayor of Seattle decided to use it for his own political PR. " Quotes taken from the AIF at the link http://www.aif.ru/politics/world/ilich_v_amerike_
    otkuda_pamyatnik_leninu_v_sietle_i_pochemu_ego_ho
    tyat_snesti
    1. +4
      21 August 2017 10: 13
      Greetings, dear Nikolai! Glad. Interestingly, the comments on this article overlap with the comments of today's story about the Russian General Skobelev, the section "Photos and Videos". Also in the NEWS here, that this coincides with Soros's birthday, and forecasts ----- are very different! And destroying the historical memory of our ancestors is the same as destroying the memory of our loved ones --- older brothers, fathers, grandfathers and great-grandfathers!
      1. +4
        21 August 2017 11: 16
        Quote: Reptiloid
        And destroying the historical memory of our ancestors is the same as destroying the memory of our loved ones --- older brothers, fathers, grandfathers and great-grandfathers!

        Dima. Hey. I don’t remember where I read: “If you want to destroy, destroy the people of the past: folklore, history of customs, mores.” Now the same thing is happening. And not only with the Slavs, but also with other peoples.
        1. +3
          21 August 2017 12: 34
          Good afternoon, Nikolai, Dima! This:
          I don’t remember where I read: “If you want to destroy, destroy the people of the past: folklore, history of customs, mores.”

          refers to the levels of government, impact. It seems the fifth level is historical.
          1. +1
            21 August 2017 21: 47
            Quote: ruskih
            This:
            I don’t remember where I read: “If you want to destroy, destroy the people of the past: folklore, history of customs, mores.”

            refers to the levels of government, impact. It seems the fifth level is historical.

            Likely, when the Westerners appeared, in the 19th century, the direction of worship in the West took shape specifically. But after all, the past of our Motherland was destroyed even before that, and so it has grown enough with fiction.
            However, the past of the USA is very small on a historical scale, everything was too smooth for them and somehow it was wrong.
  5. +2
    21 August 2017 07: 34
    Thanks to the author for a good article.
  6. +4
    21 August 2017 07: 35
    The collapse of the USSR, the identity of the monuments also began ... The boomerang, it always comes back, you won’t intercept it, it’s going to hit the heat ...
    1. +3
      21 August 2017 12: 11
      You recall that personally Ulyanov-Blanc crushed monuments to the tsars, and historical evil?
      1. 0
        21 August 2017 17: 41
        Exactly like churches / churches, many of which were masterpieces of architectural thought of their time and which survived more than one war, kings, etc. For example, in Belarus, after liberation from the Nazis, many such objects were destroyed. The Germans did not blow up, but destroyed their own ..
        1. 0
          15 September 2017 18: 19
          By this time, Ulyanov-Blank has long died ...
      2. 0
        25 August 2017 20: 33
        Yes, well, I was sitting right behind the snarls of the p.crane?
  7. +3
    21 August 2017 07: 55
    Ilya, thanks for the story of a bright and extraordinary person. He could have made a brilliant career with the Northerners, but he sided with Southerners and was faithful to his IDEA to the end, and this is worthy of respect!
    Of course it is foolish to study history in fiction, but the spirit of that time is well shown in the book Contributed by the Wind. "Gossips" and convinced southerners.
    In a sense, the film "Birth of a Nation" is also suitable.
    1. +2
      21 August 2017 09: 28
      Not an idea, he was faithful to the state of Virginia
    2. +2
      21 August 2017 10: 00
      Quote: Monarchist
      In a sense, the film "Birth of a Nation" is also suitable.


      a mere mortal does not master viewing the entire tape!
      I had to be a student of cinematography, interesting but a long bastard.
  8. +2
    21 August 2017 07: 59
    Harpers Ferry took two dozen well done. Startled Virginia homeland scoundrels. This is about Brown’s uprising that Lee crushed. By the way about these events there is a test film with Reagan.
    1. 0
      22 August 2017 23: 30
      Remind Lincoln's review of Brown's “unfortunate victim of the regime”? And what about Brown’s atrocities in Nansas five years earlier?
  9. +3
    21 August 2017 10: 19
    Under Obama, left-wing radicals in the United States went on the offensive.
    Now they are trying to stop them and restore the status quo.
    1. 0
      21 August 2017 14: 45
      How are they trying to stop them? On the surface there are only left-liberal actions, and they are well planned, impudent ... and unpunished.
      1. +5
        21 August 2017 15: 02
        They no longer have a "roof" in Congress.
        Trump’s election itself has reversed the trend, but “suddenly” (sharply) the leftists will not stop, of course.
        For a long time, the monuments in America did not touch, did not get dirty, did not transfer from place to place:
        neither Martin Luther King nor General Lee.
        Every year they organized "funny" reconstruction of the battles of the Civil War, but without malice,
        like knight tournaments in Europe.
        The provocations began blacks. Under the black president Obama, they thought their life was somehow
        will magically improve. And they remained, as they were, in the lagging ones ... and so they began to “move the monuments”.
        Then the "reddish" rednecks, the farmers of the south, stirred up. And with them all the cells of neo-Nazis and racists who sat quietly until they were touched. Well, it started.
        1. 0
          21 August 2017 15: 06
          Well there is no roof. And the monuments flew into exile. Something I do not see the news about how the "stirring up" rednecks at least on the neck gave someone once. The only thing I remember - some kind of plump Intel went out to stand near the monument, where it was merrily leftists left. He looked like a pig like a pig, like God's blessing. Or is this kind of news suppressed? Also probably ...
  10. +1
    21 August 2017 10: 48
    In the United States, the section of society has gone, it seems there will be a variant of Ukraine 2, only many times worse ...
    And it would be better in the USA to decide everything peacefully ..
  11. +3
    21 August 2017 11: 01
    [quote = EvilLion] in their cotton plantations with blacks on the sidelines of progress. Slavery would have been abolished anyway, but it would have been too late, the industrial north would have ridden far ahead, and the Confederation would have become the second Mexico. the war in the USA is a war for a more progressive social system, against those who tried to freeze the archaic.




    Reply


    quote
    A complaint








    [quote = EvilLion] Well, of course, they offended the southerners. The USA was lucky then that they managed to crush idiots, and so they would be sitting on their cotton plantations with blacks on the sidelines of progress. Slavery would have been abolished anyway, but it would have been too late, the industrial north would have ridden far ahead, and the Confederation would have become the second Mexico. [/ Quote]
    Everything is much more complicated there and we don’t know much. recently read archives on the US Civil War almost all are closed.
    Negro volunteers fought in the army of the southerners (somehow it does not fit with the cruelty of the slave owners), blacks were called up from the northerners by force. And they talked about the freedom of blacks in the north after not having successes and affronts ... so it’s not so simple. And do not forget the history the winner writes ..
    1. +2
      21 August 2017 11: 12
      "Negro volunteers fought in the army of southerners (somehow it does not fit with the cruelty of slave owners)," ///

      What is so surprising here? There are plenty of such examples.
      In 1812, serfs (slaves) voluntarily went to war with Napoleon
      together with his master (slave owner).
      That's right: not all landowners (slave owners) were cruel. Some cared
      about their peasants (slaves).
      But the essence of the slave system does not change from these examples. And serfdom,
      and slavery in the States was canceled, by the way, at the same time - in the same year.
      1. +3
        21 August 2017 14: 50
        The serf is not a slave. That is, completely, in general. Unfortunately, our education is not brilliant with our intellect ... Try to search for what is the "right of the fortress". And how were the social relations of that era built ...
        After the 1812 war of the year, then everything became very bad. Because I wanted just slaves, as in Europe. However, this is a slightly different story.
        1. +3
          21 August 2017 15: 10
          Google "newspapers of Russia of the 19th century, the sale of serfs."
          "two fat geese, a healthy girl and a rocking chair are for sale."
          "a samovar, 2 young men and a strong horse are for sale."
          Entire sheets were covered with similar, very mundane announcements.
          By the way, the price of a young woman stably equaled the price of a goose (regardless of inflation)
          but the young man was always sold at the price of a horse.
          If this is not slavery, then slavery does not exist in nature.
          1. +1
            21 August 2017 15: 18
            That is all true. Bought, sold, slavery won. Just because the people who fought on the side of government troops were not released, as it was supposed to happen. The right of the fortress was turned into slavery. And that was a betrayal ...
            And people who left the "fortress right" left for the war. From the state in which they voluntarily stayed according to the Old Russian way of life. Alas. Europe broke into Russia and then won along with Peter 1 (so that he would once again be given a hot pan to lick in hell). The consequences of this defeat are hitting us now.
            1. +3
              21 August 2017 15: 28
              I also don’t like Peter the Great for extreme cruelty,
              but in isolation no country can develop.
              And mankind has chosen the technological path of development. And the wars that
              haven’t gone anywhere, they are also developing technologically.
              And technologies develop only in cooperation between countries. Without alliances - Khan.
              No individual Culibins, Lomonosovs, or Leonardo de Vinci
              they will not be saved from a general lag if the country closes in on itself and blisses out
              "cooking in your own juice"
          2. +1
            21 August 2017 15: 18
            This is not slavery. For example, a slave could be killed, mutilated, and that was further away. And for such a trick over the serfdom you would go to Shilka and Nerchinsk. Well, and so on and so forth.
            1. +5
              21 August 2017 15: 34
              "A slave could be killed, for example, crippled, and that further" ////

              It was impossible to kill, it’s true. But if the serf was flogged or tortured like that,
              that he didn’t die right away, but on the third (or fourth? - I don’t remember exactly) day
              after execution, the death was attributed to "natural causes" and criminal
              things were not up to.

              For the slave’s murder, they were punished in ancient Rome, by the way. In the midst of
              Slave system. There was a difficult criminal code (how to beat, but not impossible) regarding the punishment of slaves, etc.
              1. +2
                21 August 2017 16: 29
                Fairy tales. Look at the code of laws of the Russian Empire. Isa trapping the serfs to death and mutilation sent to hard labor.
                For child molestation 10 years of hard labor.
                It was possible to pay off, but Chikatilo did not come across.
                The serf had his own property, often business, so you can not compare.
                Peter abolished the institute of servirate in 1722, in France in 1789, in England in 1803, and in the SA in 1964.
                1. +2
                  21 August 2017 18: 57
                  Of course, the law was in effect in the Russian Empire.
                  But he legitimized serfdom, which was one of the later forms of slavery. The latest set of laws on serfs:
                  "Code of laws on the state of people in the state" of 1833

                  I did not find the original. Comment:
                  "..There was declared the sovereign right to punish their yard people
                  and peasants, to dispose of their personal lives, including the right to allow
                  or prohibit marriage. The landowner was declared the owner of all peasant property. "

                  In 1861, all this nonsense was banned, well, thank God ...
              2. +1
                22 August 2017 18: 09
                Quote: voyaka uh
                For the slave’s murder, they were punished in ancient Rome, by the way. In the midst of

                according to the law - the slave of the DR is property. But he could not “steal” (since he had property) and was not subject to jurisdiction. Nor could he commit adultery. The owner could punish him, but bring him to court, no. But the owner for the behavior of his property, how else could they judge!
                Serfdom in the Republic of Ingushetia was very cruel. But at first it was in the Republic of Poland the most cruel form of serfdom ... And then the Republic of Ingushetia caught up and overtook the lords.
                Judged units. Maniacs like Saltychikha and then for a personal request. All were bribed. No one could.
                The question is that serfs could not complain, because the courts were under the nobles. Complaints rarely found the addressee. Rebellion was also bad, for complaints even more punished ... the emperors rarely succeeded in obtaining a petition.
                Hopeless existence ....
              3. 0
                22 August 2017 23: 32
                Quote: voyaka uh
                But if the serf was flogged or tortured like that,
                that he didn’t die right away, but on the third (or fourth? - I don’t remember exactly) day
                after execution, the death was attributed to "natural causes" and criminal
                things were not up to.

                But what about the fact that during the day it was possible to give the serf no more than 15 rods? The rod is not a club, I have not heard about deaths from 15 rods!
          3. +1
            21 August 2017 15: 28
            Was a woman worth a ruble? Oh well, it's a race.
            1. 0
              23 August 2017 17: 26
              Then the ruble was not yet "wooden"
          4. 0
            23 August 2017 20: 06
            In the newspapers of the 19th century, such announcements were banned. Maximum end of the 18th century.
  12. +1
    21 August 2017 12: 13
    Quote: voyaka uh
    In 1812, serfs (slaves)

    Do not confuse slavery and serfdom. Slavery in Russia was abolished more than 60 years earlier than the same France. Serfdom existed in some European countries right up to the 20th century.
    1. +1
      21 August 2017 12: 27
      Serfdom after permission to sell serfs without land became slavery.
      1. +1
        21 August 2017 12: 37
        Come on you tell tales.
        The Institute of slavery (slavery) was abolished in the Republic of Ingushetia in 1722 by Peter the Great, in France as early as 1789, serfs were also transferred until permission to sell without land.
        The Institute of serfdom is the only way to ensure the existence of the state and nation in conditions when there are nomadic hordes from the south and east who widely practice the slave trade.
        There was no other way, which is why the Russian state resisted.
        1. +2
          21 August 2017 12: 56
          "The Institute of serfdom is the only way to ensure
          the existence of the state and nation in conditions "////

          The existence of slavery in the south of the USA can also be explained:
          "the only opportunity ... and so on."
          The fact is that slaves from these explanations are not easier. sad
          1. +1
            21 August 2017 13: 02
            But we are not slaves and serfs at that stage.
            Those had their own explanations, the Negroes that they were Hamovo tribes, doomed by the Lord to slave labor to the sons of Japheth. Serfs, often did not envy the bars and in general estate pride, it is a very stable thing, read Chekhov, he became a rich shoemaker and woke up in horror when the devil came for his soul.
          2. +1
            21 August 2017 20: 32
            The formation of serfdom in Europe began in the IX-X centuries. England was one of the first countries where the nobility decided to “attach” peasants to the land. This was facilitated by the extreme impoverishment of the peasantry, forced to sell their allotments and agree to any conditions of the feudal lords in order to earn at least some livelihood.
            The rights of serfs, called villans, were severely restricted. Villan was obliged to work for his master (seigneur) all year round, serving the whole family from 2 to 5 days a week. It is impossible to name a specific year for the abolition of serfdom in England: the softening of its individual elements took place gradually, starting with the uprising of Wat Tyler, which occurred in the XIV century.
            The final disappearance of the signs of serfdom in the economy of the British Crown dates back to the XNUMXth century, when sheep husbandry supplanted agriculture, and the feudal system was replaced by the capitalist one.
            But in central and western Europe, serfdom lasted much longer - until the XVIII century. It was especially tough in the Czech Republic, Poland and East Germany. In Sweden and Norway, where due to the severity of the climate and the lack of fertile soil, the share of agriculture in the state’s economy is very small, serfdom was not at all.
            1. +1
              23 August 2017 17: 42
              Here is Enlightened Europe: the poet and playwright, Honorary Citizen of the Republic of France, Friedrich Schiller, was repeatedly flogged with gauntlets at the behest of his Duke of Württemberg Karl-Eugene, until he finally hit the run from the Duke’s possessions to the Palatinate Margrave in 1782.
        2. +1
          21 August 2017 15: 00
          Countryman, it is appropriate to recall that the word "Slave" was forbidden by Empress Catherine, and in the USA this word was still in the law for another hundred years
          1. +2
            21 August 2017 15: 19
            The landowner was originally a professional warrior who received land from the treasury for his own repair and sustenance of himself and his family. He fought, the peasants had the opportunity to work. He did not come to the war or even to the show - the estate was requisitioned back to the treasury.
            The skew occurred later, during the time of the triangular angle, when at first the landowners wanted to fix up the estate, and then the serving nobility became burdened with service in the European manner. That is, about some kind of "centuries" in Russia, and there is no question.
            Poland? Well, yes, there the pans of three hundred years have been muzzled, from a seven-day corvee to unpunished killings. But in Russia there was nothing of the kind.
            1. 0
              23 August 2017 17: 54
              To be precise, until 1762 all were “serfs” - both peasants and landowners. Some were attached to the ground, the second to the sovereign service. And only Peter III abolished the obligatory service for the nobles, thereby destroying the moral justification of their rights to serfs. I also recall that until the reign of the "boyar" Tsar Vasily Shuisky, the Russian peasant could leave his landowner after harvesting - on "Yuryev Day" (Consecration of the Church of St. George in Kiev 1051-1054).
        3. 0
          22 August 2017 18: 12
          Quote: Koshnitsa
          The Institute of serfdom is the only way to ensure the existence of the state and nation in conditions when there are nomadic hordes from the south and east who widely practice the slave trade.
          There was no other way, which is why the Russian state resisted.

          wrong.
          It was economically feasible to keep free labor in conditions of risky agriculture.
          For the time being progress .. then the country began to simply fall behind. The capitalist countries changed their form of dependence, and the Republic of Ingushetia continued to hold on to the Forced Law in the old fashioned way ... it cost us a lot ... still echoes.
  13. 0
    21 August 2017 14: 56
    Quote: Ken71
    Harpers Ferry took two dozen well done. Startled Virginia homeland scoundrels. This is about Brown’s uprising that Lee crushed. By the way about these events there is a test film with Reagan.

    I found this movie on the Internet. Among other things, I liked the Reigen actor, but the politician is not very
  14. +2
    21 August 2017 15: 36
    Eternal Memory to General Lee!
    Those who stand on the protection of his monuments of courage and stamina.
    Fight how he and God will give you victory.
  15. 0
    21 August 2017 16: 43
    .Nantifa, Black Lives Matter (BLM), American Communists, and Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) - Nazis. BLM is a black racist terrorist organization. DSA is a member of the Socialist International ...
    Leftists, fagots, minorities, about the same as the composition of the Reds in the GW in Russia and Spain.
  16. +2
    21 August 2017 17: 56
    The whole point is in blacks. The lion's share of this audience does not want to work and lives on outright crime, like gypsies and immigrants from the former USSR in the Russian Federation, and accordingly they do not cause the sympathy of the working population. In Russia, after all, the same thing. It is enough to recall the clashes on national grounds in Moscow, Khatkovo, Kandapog and other cities ... Everywhere where THESE appear, they bring their village with them and do not want to live according to the laws of the country of arrival, which predictably rejects them. Recall South Africa, where the blacks who came to power staged chaos with the killings and pogroms of white farmers, as a result of which the white population of South Africa quickly declined due to the outflow of the white population ...
    1. +4
      22 August 2017 07: 13
      You're not right. Among African Americans there are many talented and hardworking, quite decent and pleasant people with whom I personally served for almost half a century, by the way, in the most friendly relations, just like a Russian. True, these are all specialists, IT professionals of the old formation. Modern youth is different, but there really are many who understand that a freebie is a way of life. It began with Lyndon Johnson throwing a handout in the form of AA, that is, some privileges in everything to the whites, and getting a finger is easy to bite off your hand. It turned out to be a feud in society - on the one hand, it seems to be the equality of all, but right there - privileges for some. For example, when applying for a job, with promotion, entering universities and so on. Well, yes this is a difficult and painful question now.
      1. +1
        22 August 2017 09: 50
        Those who enter the middle class and above have no problems with them.
        But they, unfortunately, are disproportionately small in relation to the entire black population.
        1. +2
          23 August 2017 20: 22
          In fact, this is not entirely true, the AA plan makes it possible for very many to get an education, even with minimal initial data (alas, due to whites). But here the rest was spoiled by replanting on Welfer - when it was possible to produce kids from different dads and live comfortably on benefits. now it seems to have stopped, but the generation has already grown. African Americans now also have a very noticeable class division.
      2. 0
        23 August 2017 20: 18
        According to statistics in the USA, about 90% of prisoners are blacks and Latinos, just as migrants from the former USSR commit the lion's share of crimes in Russia ... Yes, of course, there are educated and decent people among any race and nationality, but when it comes to conflicts on racial or national grounds, for the most part they support their own, ignoring justice, truth and legality.
  17. +2
    21 August 2017 18: 52
    Maydaunism returned to the instigators. Deservedly.
    And General Lee is a worthy man!
  18. +2
    22 August 2017 07: 05
    According to the latest survey, approximately 62% of the US population is against the demolition of Confederate monuments. But the extreme left, they are no less furious than the extreme right, as Trump rightly said. In addition, on the side of the leftists, the media, shkolota, students, and generally uneducated but eccentric youth, being fueled by democratic school teachers plus minorities. The same audience raged and freaked out demanding the impeachment of Trump, although he was absolutely legally elected by the working majority, who, by the way, do not care much about the monuments, they do not bother him. Moreover, such a frenzied and very belated war with history and the past does not end well in any country.
  19. -1
    22 August 2017 18: 09
    Quote: ranger
    . The film took place in one of the southern states - Alabama .... The film was released in the mid-60s, not the 80s ....

    This film is based on the work of John Ball "Stuffy Night in Carolina"
  20. 0
    22 August 2017 18: 16
    what a close attention to events inside another country.
    Although the country, which is largely a leader, cannot but be interested. Despite their young age, they had everything there and will still be there. And the War of Independence and civil and world and local wars .. Perhaps they are the most warring people on the planet (even if they do not even suspect it)
    The internal conflict over the attitude to the memos is purely internal. We will not help them with advice. The main thing is to calm down ... otherwise the whole world may suffer because of their tricks. This is not Ukraine with Lenins ... and not the USSR with tsars ...
  21. 0
    23 August 2017 00: 03
    revolution of blacks and latinos !! wink ! yes it’s a holiday !!! Schaub, they are there in their USA and ate each other !!!! there mad caps in honor !!! wassatso fuck all fagots in the Pentagon get fired! and their fools will be appointed !!! The garbage then begins !! - BABY-creatures are subtle, they can start the war !!!! wink
  22. 2ez
    +1
    24 August 2017 16: 42
    And one more interesting fact from the history of the USA of that time. Representatives of the three largest Indian tribes of the time fought on the side of the Confederate Southerners! On the side of slave-plantation owners! Or maybe in the history of AI, is not everything so transparent too?