Atlantic Article on The Myth of The Confederacy

twig is right(!):

From wiki, he thought slavery was bad for the white race, but good for the black race:

Countering Southerners who argued for slavery as a positive good, Lee in his well-known analysis of slavery from an 1856 letter (see below) called it a moral and political evil. While both Robert and his wife Mary Lee were disgusted with slavery, they also defended it against abolitionist demands for immediate emancipation for all enslaved.[66]

Lee argued that slavery was bad for white people but good for black people,[67] claiming that he found slavery bothersome and time-consuming as an everyday institution to run. In an 1856 letter to his wife, he maintained that slavery was a great evil, but primarily due to adverse impact that it had on white people:[68]

In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution, is a moral & political evil in any Country. It is useless to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence.[69]

Some weird logic in there.

Interesting. I wasn’t aware of the second part. That is indeed some twisted logic.

1 Like

What is the “adverse impact”? That they were sinning (in his eyes)? And, if it were sinning (in his eyes, which reflect what he thinks God knows what sins are), wouldn’t that Merciful Providence use him as a sin-stopper?
Dude just liked to straddle the fence.

Dude also used his father-in-law’s slaves as slaves to pay off the estate debt instead of freeing them, as the will stated.
He did free those slaves, in 1862, five years after his father-in-law died, as per the will’s specific instructions.

In the alternate reality, I wonder what would have happened to the old Custis estate instead of being turned into Arlington National Cemetary? Would the Confederacy have taken ownership of it had Lee kept his rank in the US Army?

What i mean by this is that the animating force of the country that he chose to support held up slavery as an ideal, even the ideal, worth fighting and dying for.

To the degree to which he did not personally support slavery, he was a hypocrite. That hypocrisy is the only path for him to be a person worth admiring.

It may be that his love of country and warrior ethos compelled him to support the confederacy despite believing slavery was wrong. If so, then this is terribly tragic. He knew slavery was wrong, and damned himself anyway by placing country above God’s justice.

This is not the tragedy I see attributed to him. Instead, the tragedy is that the confederacy could not win, but he supported it anyway. He becomes a martyr for the noble lost cause.

It looks to me like a variety of the logic that the white moderate south has always used to justify slavery, and then segregation, and then remaining systematic racism.

Our ideal as a country is equality. But achieving it is too painful. There has to be some reason why we don’t.

Notice how Lee turns the whites into the victims. It is really they who are hurt by slavery!

Notice too how Lee is turned into a tragic victim by the mythology around him. America’s greatest general, he is offered command of the union army. But he turns it down because he feels compelled to support his country! Sure, his country supports slavery. Lee does not, but what else can he do? The war only lasts as long as it does due to his brilliant command, but in the end he surrenders as a great gentleman

Slavery becomes something that just kind of happens. Through Lee, we as the southerner even experience the civil war as something that just kind of happens. Lee acts nobly. He doesn’t want war or slavery.

This reminds me of the latest laws designed to prevent voting. If they disproportionately affect voters of color, what is a good white southern man to do? He is only doing his patriotic duty by supporting trustworthy voting. Just like Lee was only supporting his country.

1 Like

:iatp: He still seems kinda super racist tbh

In fact I think it’s amazing we don’t hold this to more account in the entire slavery issue:
“How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence.”

Can certainly make (possibly) good people do bad things

1 Like

AKA: “Hey, not my problem. Talk to God.”

…continues to be used by people to justify malicious behavior.

Talk about the “White Man’s Burden”
sheesh…

1 Like

Not entirely sure where to put this - here seem reasonable enough.

I think I noticed some “soft racism” today. It was very soft, but I figured I’d try to think through it anyway.

Today in church the lady who was giving the talk (essentially sermon, but Mormons are all lay people…), mentioned an experience she had with a black lady. At one point she said something to the effect of, “this beautiful woman”. Thinking back, I’m not sure I’ve ever a white person feel the need to point out somewhat randomly that another white person is “beautiful”*, but I hear it used about black people all the time. It’s like they know they need to acknowledge how not racist they are, but inadvertently display their own bias. It seem like she was still subconciously considering the black woman as “other” and need to try and rectify that.

The race of the woman wasn’t particularly relevant to the story except that involved gospel music.

Basically the same as the “articulate” thing with Obama.

*I may be having some confirmation bias here and just don’t remember it happening

Eh, I think people kept pointing out how articulate Obama was because it was such a contrast to George W Bush (and to a lesser extent, John Kerry).

That said, people do sometimes bend over backwards to prove how not racist they are. When I brought my (white) ex-husband to my (99% white) church no one said boo. When I brought my black then-boyfriend everyone was falling all over themselves to come say “hi” and welcome him and invite him to keep coming back. It was funny. Granted, in the years in between I’d gotten more involved in the church such that I was better known too. But still… it was like a crowd around us at the coffee “hour” between services every time we showed up.

That’s undoubtably true - but it probably wouldn’t have come up as much if he were white.

It’s really not a big thing, but it seems like an indication that you are slightly surprised by it (the “articulate” and the “beautiful”).

I’m not convinced of this.

People talked a lot about Clinton’s and Reagan’s communication skills as well.