0:14 I'm so happy for this part of the scene For anyone who is new to Civil War history might be confused on why confederate soldiers are wearing Continental Army uniforms, I can give an explanation. Those guys are men of A Company of the 31st Virginia Militia Regiment, or the Continental Morgan Guard named after Continental Army Brigadier General Daniel Morgan. This unit was not like any other unit, because it was less of a unit and more of a club. You have to apply for membership or get recognize by another member. They were one of the units that stopped John Brown's raid at Harper's ferry in 1859 and even stood guard during his trial. They were then called up for service again in 1861 for full time. This time, the Guard was absorbed into the 5th Virginia Volunteer Infantry Regiment and given the designation K Company. They wore their uniform proudly at the Battle of First Manassas (Bull Run), but as time wore on till the next year, the Continental Army style uniform was being phased out with standard uniforms of the rebel army because of the wear and tear of the uniform. Along with the rest of the regiment, K Company fought in the Battles of Gettysburg and Falling Water among others, including the Battle of Spotsylvania Court House where the regiment suffered many casualties but still won a major victory against Grant's troops. The regiment surrendered in 1865 along with the rest of the Southern forces at Appomattox Court House.
One thing not a lot of people would know, the Confederate Soldiers in this scene dressed in Continental Army uniforms were apart of the 5th Virginia K Company also known as "Continental Morgan's Guard". (Hope I helped someone figure it out.)
@@ademirsegura6307 they did, especially militia and European troops that emigrated before/during the war to fight for America like the Polish, Germans, French, Spanish. Those armies tended to retain facial hair throughout the 18th Century, (mostly handlebar moustaches) as part of their military culture. You'll even find many written accounts of Continental regulars breaking the rules and forgoing shaving in the field. Water was a precious commodity on campaign, not only did the men require it but so too did the horses and oxen. Now I'm not saying long mountain man beards were common by any means; but judging by the of the letters and diaries of disgruntled officers, it wasn't completely out of the ordinary to see Continental troops and especially back country and frontier militia sporting a couple week's growth at any given time.
@@MM-qi5mk Sorry, but you're wrong. It was the North that defined the issue as slavery. Too many Southern lawmakers allowed themselves to be drawn in by those constant attacks from the Northern press and politicians. There was also the fear factor invoked by Northern attempts to incite a murderous race war as a means of subduing the South. The real causes of the war remained economic and constitutional.
OMG I just noticed the Revolutionary uniforms! Sure I learned a branch had fought in the civil war but I didn’t think they would show them in Gods and Generals?!?! I’ve watched this 4-5 times and this is the first time I noticed!!!
The Continental Morgan Guard - company A 31st Virginia Militia (K Company under Jackson). Within a year, the had transitioned to more standard uniforms.
@@ceberskie119 That's my educated guess at their motivation. There really was a unit that dressed that way in Jackson's unit, the continental morgan guard. Though there were other instances during the war.
They are the great great great grandfathers of the traitors who tried to storm the US Capitol in January, a long line of pretend soldiers destined for imprisonment and death.
@@useyourbrain3765 I enjoyed Stephen Lang's performance very much. I did not enjoy the film at all. Tedium personified. Gettysburg the far superior film.
This movie not only sucks donkey dick, it’s anti-American and offensively unpatriotic. It sanitizes and glorifies slave-driving traitors. This movie sits where it belongs- in the garbage can of film history.
@@thomasbrennan6303 Bull crap. This movie is not as good as Gettysburg but it was based on history and gave insights on real people who had to live in this period. I do not know why you want to focus on male donkey appendages, but then again, I do not care. That is your issue. One thing to remember, if you care to ever lern any history, is, at the time, the issue of secession was not a settled issue. That did not occur until Texas v. White, after the Civil War. Just to be clear, I firmly believe the South was wrong to secede and slavery was an unmitigated evil that caused our country to pay the price. That does not mean, however, that those who fought for the South should be demonized.
@@georgesteele2157 Secession not being a legally and constitutionally settled issue in 1861 has absolutely NO bearing on whether slavery is moral or not, or whether those who fought to protect slavery were moral or not, or whether this movie is an unbiased portrayal of the Civil War-- which it is not. Your point is irrelevant to the issue at hand, which is that this movie is flagrant and shameful Lost Cause propaganda that celebrates those who fought for the Confederacy -- and indeed, at times celebrates secession and the Confederacy itself. These men should be studied as important figures in history, but never commemorated. Commemorating these men is commemorating their cause -- to keep a race of innocent people in chains. Do not forget that. Do not side-step that. Do not "yes, but" that. I am personally the descendant of a Confederate soldier. I can view these men as products of their time and place. I cannot view a 21st century movie celebrating them as anything but odious and reprehensible. If you claim to believe the south and slavery were both wrong, then I don't know what your issue is.
@@thomasbrennan6303 Never said that it was. Slavery was extremely immoral. However, you are full of it if you believe that the movie was a "celebration." It was a way to tell the history. My issue is with your hate and ignorance.
@@georgesteele2157 Hate and ignorance? Lol okay I now know what I’m dealing with here. You’re a Lost Cause neo-Confederate southerner. This movie is Lost Cause propaganda which clearly celebrates the Confederacy. The reason you’re butthurt about my criticism of this movie is because you’re a Lost Causer yourself. If you’re telling me otherwise, YOU are full of it.
I am glad that we are a united country today. I love the north and the south. We are one and that is the way it should be. It is important that we take a look at both sides of the American civil war. I doubt very seriously that we have been taught the whole truth about the conflict. There has to be more than just the slavery issue at hand. The confederacy made too many sacrifices for there not to be. There are facts and details missing from our history books. History is often written by the victor. I believe this must be the case.
"So will we never allow the armies of others to march into our states and tyrannize our people" yea let's talk about the Maryland and Gettysburg campaigns there.
Lee reprimanded Confederate troops for taking apples from a Pennsylvania orchard. Lincoln fully supported Sherman burning, raping and looting his way across Georgia. BIG difference.
@@ibeatcodin1day indeed. I much preferred Lincoln's plan for all the freed blacks after the war. Are you familiar with the history of Liberia? Fascinating stuff.
Also, not one piece of private property was vandalized. Not one head of livestock was stolen. Not one woman was raped. Were it not for Gettysburg, the people of Pennsylvania wouldn't have known that they were invaded.
An honest question: It's 1861 you and your people live in Virginia and have done so for generations. Virginia is your country. You have never left your home county, much less your state. Foreign armies amass at your doorstep...boys from New England & Illinois whom you've never met and hold no ill will toward. Your family are tenant farmers who have and hold very little but what you do have is yours. These boys from New England & Illinois intend to march through your back yard and are hostile to your friends and neighbors. What do you do??? Here is a little information for you: In 1847, Lincoln defended Robert Matson, a Kentucky slaveholder, who had brought five of his slaves with him to Illinois. While in Illinois, Jane Bryant, her son and her three daughters escaped from Matson and petitioned for their freedom. Matson retained Lincoln, who used the doctrine of comity, arguing that property owners could take their property (including their slaves) anywhere in the country as long as they were in transit and not in permanent residence in a free state. Fortunately for Jane Bryant and her children, the court disagreed with Lincoln, arguing instead that bringing slaves into the state was a “contravention of the Constitution of Illinois,” and declared the family free. Quote - Honest Abe: “There is a physical difference between the white and the black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together... while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any man am in favor having the superior position assigned to the white race.” Quote - Honest Abe: “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races.” In 1863 Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation... Not for the good of African Americans... Only after 3 years of being completely and totally routed in battle consistently by Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia. The union needed help and lots of it. The south had many supporters of freeing the slaves including the upper echelon of Confederate Generals. Unfortunately they did not do so... The rest is history. Quote - Patrick Cleburne "Surrender means that the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy, that our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers; learn from Northern school books THEIR version of the war, and taught to regard our gallant dead as traitors and our maimed veterans as fit subjects of derision." You know nothing of history and that is why we are doomed to repeat it. I'm not sorry for being southern and never will be. To answer my first question. You would absolutely pick up arms and defend your home...
The slavery that the north benefitted from. Think about who provided the raw materials for the north’s industry? Who provided the cotton for the textiles? Who grew the tobacco they smoked? Who grew the indigo they used to dye their clothes? The CSA did go to war to fight for slavery but the Union wasn’t innocent. They too before the war and still befitted after the war from slavery and then share cropping, which was basically legal slavery.
@@wesmliquid4561 stop pretending that the soldiers fought for their home and country or some bullshit... the south started the war so who was the "invading" force. The vast majority of the southern soldiers fought to preserve slavery and they knew it! To preserve and expand slavery was the number one reason why the secession even happened
Rich men convincing poor/working class men to kill/die, so that those same rich men can use slave labor and not have to pay poor/working class men for those agricultural/industrial jobs occupied with slave labor. And the rich men do this by giving poor & working class men someone to look down on. And it works every time.
If you think that the 1% aristocratic class convinced over half a million southerners to die for African slaves that they had no possession or connection to, then you are out of touch with reality.
It wasn’t tyrannical to anybody. It was a defense. We lost the war, but we haven’t forgotten the volunteers that took our place. A few millennia have passed; yet we still stand here
@@flmcmil They started the war by firing onto Fort Sumter, they hanged anyone that supported the Union or was against slavery, stole from the civilian populations, and massacred Black soldiers without mercy
@@gamerstheater1187 Wow, I can see you've been reading from the Highlights for Children history books. Bring some scholarship to the table next time before you decide to write the same piffle you no doubt spew.
Exactly!!! The real question is, why would a bunch of racist northerners who were steeped in institutional racism and founded on white supremacy want to fight a war to free ethnic minorities?
This is a general inspiring his men, the decision to secede may have been about slavery but the war was about the right to leave a union in which they believed they had no voice and to protect homeland. Far be it for the man that invades his neighbours for an idea to accuse those same neighbours of dishonour for standing up to him
Far be it for men who held 3 million innocent people under the unspeakable brutality of human bondage, solely for the color of their skin, to accuse those seeking to liberate those innocents as "unjust" "criminal" or "depriving them of rights."
@@thomasbrennan6303 at the start of the war Lincoln wasn't even going to liberate the slaves he just didn't want to let the Confederate States leave, he changed his mind halfway through with A LOT of persuasion from activists. At the start of the war which would be the rough timescale of this speech emancipation wasn't even on the table. And might I point out, I acknowledged that the succession was motivated by slavery, but the brave southern boys who fought and died, most of whom didn't own slaves themselves, fought and died for their homeland and their communities, not an idea which is why the South had much less of a desertion problem than the north.
That horse: Andy Serkis. Brilliant performance.
they can't even afford him.
That’s brilliant! 😂
😂
Probably the most intellectually sound comment in this entire section.
I write this on Thursday, January 25 in the year of our Lord 2024. We Texans find ourselves in a similar situation. God help and bless us!
0:14 I'm so happy for this part of the scene
For anyone who is new to Civil War history might be confused on why confederate soldiers are wearing Continental Army uniforms, I can give an explanation. Those guys are men of A Company of the 31st Virginia Militia Regiment, or the Continental Morgan Guard named after Continental Army Brigadier General Daniel Morgan. This unit was not like any other unit, because it was less of a unit and more of a club. You have to apply for membership or get recognize by another member. They were one of the units that stopped John Brown's raid at Harper's ferry in 1859 and even stood guard during his trial. They were then called up for service again in 1861 for full time. This time, the Guard was absorbed into the 5th Virginia Volunteer Infantry Regiment and given the designation K Company. They wore their uniform proudly at the Battle of First Manassas (Bull Run), but as time wore on till the next year, the Continental Army style uniform was being phased out with standard uniforms of the rebel army because of the wear and tear of the uniform.
Along with the rest of the regiment, K Company fought in the Battles of Gettysburg and Falling Water among others, including the Battle of Spotsylvania Court House where the regiment suffered many casualties but still won a major victory against Grant's troops. The regiment surrendered in 1865 along with the rest of the Southern forces at Appomattox Court House.
One thing not a lot of people would know, the Confederate Soldiers in this scene dressed in Continental Army uniforms were apart of the 5th Virginia K Company also known as "Continental Morgan's Guard". (Hope I helped someone figure it out.)
Yep never saw them until just now in the year 2020....I’m so blind!
I never understood why they were dressed continental
@@williambrock3349 of course continentals never had facial hair but hey-ho
@@ademirsegura6307 they did, especially militia and European troops that emigrated before/during the war to fight for America like the Polish, Germans, French, Spanish. Those armies tended to retain facial hair throughout the 18th Century, (mostly handlebar moustaches) as part of their military culture. You'll even find many written accounts of Continental regulars breaking the rules and forgoing shaving in the field. Water was a precious commodity on campaign, not only did the men require it but so too did the horses and oxen. Now I'm not saying long mountain man beards were common by any means; but judging by the of the letters and diaries of disgruntled officers, it wasn't completely out of the ordinary to see Continental troops and especially back country and frontier militia sporting a couple week's growth at any given time.
Steven Langs best acting ever.
Jackson clearly stated the Southern position in regard to secession.
No he presented Virginias reasoning...there were 11 separate votes for secession
@@drewdurbin4968 Exactly. Eleven states seceded, then banded together in a new union.
Very shallow viewpoint, M&M. Ask the men who actually fought, not the big landowners.
@@MM-qi5mk I absolutely disagree
@@MM-qi5mk Sorry, but you're wrong. It was the North that defined the issue as slavery. Too many Southern lawmakers allowed themselves to be drawn in by those constant attacks from the Northern press and politicians. There was also the fear factor invoked by Northern attempts to incite a murderous race war as a means of subduing the South. The real causes of the war remained economic and constitutional.
OMG I just noticed the Revolutionary uniforms!
Sure I learned a branch had fought in the civil war but I didn’t think they would show them in Gods and Generals?!?!
I’ve watched this 4-5 times and this is the first time I noticed!!!
ruclips.net/video/3a3ND86DTCk/видео.html
The Continental Morgan Guard - company A 31st Virginia Militia (K Company under Jackson). Within a year, the had transitioned to more standard uniforms.
More than likely uniforms kept from the war of 1812 given there age.
RIP Stonewall Jackson
...after a second vote on Secession.
We need this urgency today but we’re too spoiled. We don’t have that sacrificial spirit any longer
GOD BLESS MY WONDERFUL FRIEND MOCTESUMA ESPARZA. I AM VERY PROUD OF YOU AND VERY HAPPY FOR YOU. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH MY FRIEND. 🙂
cavalier
Why are their continental soldiers in that line at 00:14?
Wearing their grandfather's uniforms; psychological amping that they are a continued line of revolutionaries rather than upstart rebels.
@@brndnwilks ...is that really it?....thats wierd....ah well
@@ceberskie119 That's my educated guess at their motivation. There really was a unit that dressed that way in Jackson's unit, the continental morgan guard. Though there were other instances during the war.
They are the great great great grandfathers of the traitors who tried to storm the US Capitol in January, a long line of pretend soldiers destined for imprisonment and death.
@@claverhouse1 Okay Steltor, calm down.
DEUS VULT
antillery laend
Why is his voice echoing in an open field outdoors?
a lot of empty space between all of those ears helping to create the perfect echo chamber
@@gozorak Enjoyed that, didn't ya'?
@@useyourbrain3765 I enjoyed Stephen Lang's performance very much. I did not enjoy the film at all. Tedium personified. Gettysburg the far superior film.
This Movie could never be made today in our Woke Society. I'm surprised it's still on RUclips.
This movie not only sucks donkey dick, it’s anti-American and offensively unpatriotic. It sanitizes and glorifies slave-driving traitors. This movie sits where it belongs- in the garbage can of film history.
@@thomasbrennan6303 Bull crap. This movie is not as good as Gettysburg but it was based on history and gave insights on real people who had to live in this period. I do not know why you want to focus on male donkey appendages, but then again, I do not care. That is your issue. One thing to remember, if you care to ever lern any history, is, at the time, the issue of secession was not a settled issue. That did not occur until Texas v. White, after the Civil War. Just to be clear, I firmly believe the South was wrong to secede and slavery was an unmitigated evil that caused our country to pay the price. That does not mean, however, that those who fought for the South should be demonized.
@@georgesteele2157 Secession not being a legally and constitutionally settled issue in 1861 has absolutely NO bearing on whether slavery is moral or not, or whether those who fought to protect slavery were moral or not, or whether this movie is an unbiased portrayal of the Civil War-- which it is not. Your point is irrelevant to the issue at hand, which is that this movie is flagrant and shameful Lost Cause propaganda that celebrates those who fought for the Confederacy -- and indeed, at times celebrates secession and the Confederacy itself. These men should be studied as important figures in history, but never commemorated. Commemorating these men is commemorating their cause -- to keep a race of innocent people in chains. Do not forget that. Do not side-step that. Do not "yes, but" that. I am personally the descendant of a Confederate soldier. I can view these men as products of their time and place. I cannot view a 21st century movie celebrating them as anything but odious and reprehensible. If you claim to believe the south and slavery were both wrong, then I don't know what your issue is.
@@thomasbrennan6303 Never said that it was. Slavery was extremely immoral. However, you are full of it if you believe that the movie was a "celebration." It was a way to tell the history. My issue is with your hate and ignorance.
@@georgesteele2157 Hate and ignorance? Lol okay I now know what I’m dealing with here. You’re a Lost Cause neo-Confederate southerner. This movie is Lost Cause propaganda which clearly celebrates the Confederacy. The reason you’re butthurt about my criticism of this movie is because you’re a Lost Causer yourself. If you’re telling me otherwise, YOU are full of it.
I am glad that we are a united country today. I love the north and the south. We are one and that is the way it should be. It is important that we take a look at both sides of the American civil war. I doubt very seriously that we have been taught the whole truth about the conflict. There has to be more than just the slavery issue at hand. The confederacy made too many sacrifices for there not to be. There are facts and details missing from our history books. History is often written by the victor. I believe this must be the case.
Amen Lonnie. I think both sides had legitimate arguments and grievances aside from the issue of slavery
banne
Im starting to Think that the South were the good guys all along.....
The Federal government is causing the same problems up to this day
"So will we never allow the armies of others to march into our states and tyrannize our people" yea let's talk about the Maryland and Gettysburg campaigns there.
Lee reprimanded Confederate troops for taking apples from a Pennsylvania orchard. Lincoln fully supported Sherman burning, raping and looting his way across Georgia. BIG difference.
@@Nightdiver20 point me to where Lee reprimanded Confederate troops for sending free blacks back south in bondage.
@@ibeatcodin1day indeed. I much preferred Lincoln's plan for all the freed blacks after the war. Are you familiar with the history of Liberia? Fascinating stuff.
4 years AFTER the fact. Don't be stupid....
Also, not one piece of private property was vandalized. Not one head of livestock was stolen. Not one woman was raped. Were it not for Gettysburg, the people of Pennsylvania wouldn't have known that they were invaded.
Fighting against “tyranny” while preserving chattel slavery.
@Willy Davidson your the idiot
An honest question: It's 1861 you and your people live in Virginia and have done so for generations. Virginia is your country. You have never left your home county, much less your state. Foreign armies amass at your doorstep...boys from New England & Illinois whom you've never met and hold no ill will toward. Your family are tenant farmers who have and hold very little but what you do have is yours. These boys from New England & Illinois intend to march through your back yard and are hostile to your friends and neighbors. What do you do???
Here is a little information for you:
In 1847, Lincoln defended Robert Matson, a Kentucky slaveholder, who had brought five of his slaves with him to Illinois. While in Illinois, Jane Bryant, her son and her three daughters escaped from Matson and petitioned for their freedom. Matson retained Lincoln, who used the doctrine of comity, arguing that property owners could take their property (including their slaves) anywhere in the country as long as they were in transit and not in permanent residence in a free state. Fortunately for Jane Bryant and her children, the court disagreed with Lincoln, arguing instead that bringing slaves into the state was a “contravention of the Constitution of Illinois,” and declared the family free.
Quote - Honest Abe:
“There is a physical difference between the white and the black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together... while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any man am in favor having the superior position assigned to the white race.”
Quote - Honest Abe:
“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races.”
In 1863 Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation... Not for the good of African Americans... Only after 3 years of being completely and totally routed in battle consistently by Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia. The union needed help and lots of it. The south had many supporters of freeing the slaves including the upper echelon of Confederate Generals. Unfortunately they did not do so... The rest is history.
Quote - Patrick Cleburne "Surrender means that the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy, that our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers; learn from Northern school books THEIR version of the war, and taught to regard our gallant dead as traitors and our maimed veterans as fit subjects of derision."
You know nothing of history and that is why we are doomed to repeat it. I'm not sorry for being southern and never will be.
To answer my first question. You would absolutely pick up arms and defend your home...
@@greg4318 *You're*
The slavery that the north benefitted from. Think about who provided the raw materials for the north’s industry? Who provided the cotton for the textiles? Who grew the tobacco they smoked? Who grew the indigo they used to dye their clothes? The CSA did go to war to fight for slavery but the Union wasn’t innocent. They too before the war and still befitted after the war from slavery and then share cropping, which was basically legal slavery.
@@wesmliquid4561 stop pretending that the soldiers fought for their home and country or some bullshit... the south started the war so who was the "invading" force. The vast majority of the southern soldiers fought to preserve slavery and they knew it! To preserve and expand slavery was the number one reason why the secession even happened
Rich men convincing poor/working class men to kill/die, so that those same rich men can use slave labor and not have to pay poor/working class men for those agricultural/industrial jobs occupied with slave labor. And the rich men do this by giving poor & working class men someone to look down on. And it works every time.
That's absolutely false.
Did you're Marxist lesbian dance theory instructor tell you all that..
@@HomeSkillit marxists don’t dance.
If you think that the 1% aristocratic class convinced over half a million southerners to die for African slaves that they had no possession or connection to, then you are out of touch with reality.
@@jacksonholmes9955 they died for rich men to have slave labor. Slave labor instead of paid work.
More commie revisionism
This speech is kind of sad when you realize the CSA was absolutely tyrannical to the people of the South
It wasn’t tyrannical to anybody. It was a defense. We lost the war, but we haven’t forgotten the volunteers that took our place. A few millennia have passed; yet we still stand here
@@flmcmil They started the war by firing onto Fort Sumter, they hanged anyone that supported the Union or was against slavery, stole from the civilian populations, and massacred Black soldiers without mercy
@@gamerstheater1187 Wow, I can see you've been reading from the Highlights for Children history books. Bring some scholarship to the table next time before you decide to write the same piffle you no doubt spew.
Found the blue voter
@@carltonreese4854 ever heard of the Gainesville Hanging where multiple people were hanged for not owning slaves
It is a silly movie, but that last line is an epic, laconian burn
Are you ok? Your comment makes no sense whatsoever.
@@MrMountaineer77 meant laconic. Still a silly, lost cause movie, though
@@Fredrikschou " Still a silly, lost cause movie, though"
What a well supported argument.
@@MrMountaineer77 I´m not arguing,I´m stating a fact...
@@Fredrikschou No, you're stating your own subjective opinion, not a fact.
What a lie? State rights? Or rather protect racial slavery!
Exactly!!! The real question is, why would a bunch of racist northerners who were steeped in institutional racism and founded on white supremacy want to fight a war to free ethnic minorities?
@@__hjg__2123 that is a fair question and I’m under no illusions about the north. However I don’t need to sanitise the confederacy to make that point
Spoken like a true northerner. I am not a "Proud Boy", but Stonewall IS the greatest Military mind in US history
Neo confederate propaganda change my mind
Why should I? I have no problem watching a movie funded by the neo Confederacy.
Water is wet change my mind
This is a general inspiring his men, the decision to secede may have been about slavery but the war was about the right to leave a union in which they believed they had no voice and to protect homeland. Far be it for the man that invades his neighbours for an idea to accuse those same neighbours of dishonour for standing up to him
Far be it for men who held 3 million innocent people under the unspeakable brutality of human bondage, solely for the color of their skin, to accuse those seeking to liberate those innocents as "unjust" "criminal" or "depriving them of rights."
@@thomasbrennan6303 at the start of the war Lincoln wasn't even going to liberate the slaves he just didn't want to let the Confederate States leave, he changed his mind halfway through with A LOT of persuasion from activists. At the start of the war which would be the rough timescale of this speech emancipation wasn't even on the table. And might I point out, I acknowledged that the succession was motivated by slavery, but the brave southern boys who fought and died, most of whom didn't own slaves themselves, fought and died for their homeland and their communities, not an idea which is why the South had much less of a desertion problem than the north.
cavalier