Who cares grammar cop. In the context in which she's using the similar sounding word it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what's she's getting at
I love history. and i recently just started loving it, history was hard for me when i was younger. But im quite getting the hang of it. My brain works slower than others so its hard to process thing in my head. im sure theres people out there that relate to me. My advice is that maybe if u hate something, maybe try it twice so ur absolutely sure.
I've always had the same problem throughout my years in school and in my everyday life especially when I want to explain something but don't know how to. I was born with a intellectual disability but It's mild compared to the other kids that I used to be put in classes with. I look like a normal person that has noting wrong with them and you wouldn't expect If I had a disability or not unless you started asking test questions. The biggest problem about it is my short term memory and for me to understand something Is to force myself to be interested and review what ever it is more than once. It's fucking annoying to have to go through something like that but I like to remind myself It could always be a lot worse.
I always loved history. Idk if this will help but it’s helped some of my friends when they asked for help with history. It might sound weird but it did help my friends. I’d tell them to try to think of each era as a movie or season of a show but one that really happened & then for some reason it was easier for them to remember
How does this channel only have 656 subs, this has the production quality of a multi million subscriber channel, and only 6,061 views! more people need to see this channel, Liked and Subbed :)
Very good video, as I'm a fan of the Manifest Destiny period of American History and the Civil War. My only inconvenience was that the narrator pronounced "succession" when it was obviously meant "secession".
I already knew most of this, but loved the refresher. History was my favorite subject in School not matter what kind American, World, or as here where I grew up Texas History.
@@smokingstoking7357 I know that, I am a Marine, but you learn another reading history. The good and the bad from people who came before you were born.
A huge part of Union Victory is General Winfield Scott of Virginia, he was the proponent for the Anaconda blockade, this made it a lot difficult for the Confederacy to procure supplies and lost them the battle of attrition.
Isn't he also the general who prevented a potential war (because of the shooting of a pig) regarding the territorial dispute in the Pacific Northwest between US and UK?
I have enjoyed your series on the Modoc war. One of my buddies in college mother was from Oklahoma. She was half Cherokee and half Modoc. He and I had a lot of fun talking about the various Indian wars.
A Good Brief History REFRESHER Lesson For Those That Seem To Have Forgotten How Important That Era Was, And for younger students too that might think it's Dry old stuff from too long ago. Good Job...
Battle of Antietam wasn’t 23,000 killed. It was 23,000 casualties (killed + wounded + missing). The official record shows ~3,650 killed. Also, it’s “Secession”, not “Succession”.
A grossly inaccurate summary of the America’s expansion west. Firstly America didn’t “annex” the central states. In 1803 Napoleon was busy with his war in Europe, he needed money. So France sold America (America was then the easternmost 1/3 of what is now the US) the approx central 1/3 in what was known as the “Louisiana purchase”. Napoleon himself never visited the Americas. Napoleon received $15m for the said lands. In 1803 the lands west of the “Louisiana purchase” lands was Mexico. Although there was a colonial presence in these lands it was limited. The main presence was the indigenous population. IE the Indians.
HA! HA! HA! Your "Howard Zin, A History Of America" BS best serves as toilet paper. That America-hating freak, and his America-Hating Freak Followers such as yourself, now face extinction as million of the people you mis-educated are coming to realize the sliminess of your lies and deceptions. Thanks to truthful Historical videos such as this. And they hate YOU for it. One thing that should be added is that after the war the British Crown paid a $15.5 million fine to the USA for selling warships (e.g. the CSS Alabama) and material to the nascent Slave State, the Confederacy. So the myth that "England ended slavery" can be blown out of the water altogether. Brits loved that slave-picked American cotton in exchange for warships right up to the near end of the American civil war. So you America-Hating Freaks can give up your "the UK ended slavery, but America kept on slaving." Truth is: The Chattel Slavery of North America by European immigrants was imported by the British and maintained by the British (New England colonies attempted to ban slavery in the early 1700s, but the Crown refused), and ended by NORTHERN EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS, the proto-Republican party across the Northern States and within a single human lifetime ended across the entire continent. As fast as it could be done while preserving the union. So to you and your ilk, I say: ruclips.net/video/i2-ktqIsdYo/видео.html
@@Joecms No. It doesn't. Your search for affirmation for "Howard Zin, A History Of America" BS is futile. It best serves as toilet paper. That America-hating freak, and his America-Hating Freak Followers such as yourself, now face extinction as million of the people you mis-educated are coming to realize the sliminess of your lies and deceptions. Thanks to truthful Historical videos such as this. And they hate YOU for it. One thing that should be added is that after the war the British Crown paid a $15.5 million fine to the USA for selling warships (e.g. the CSS Alabama) and material to the nascent Slave State, the Confederacy. So the myth that "England ended slavery" can be blown out of the water altogether. Brits loved that slave-picked American cotton in exchange for warships right up to the near end of the American civil war. So you America-Hating Freaks can give up your "the UK ended slavery, but America kept on slaving." Truth is: The Chattel Slavery of North America by European immigrants was imported by the British and maintained by the British (New England colonies attempted to ban slavery in the early 1700s, but the Crown refused), and ended by NORTHERN EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS, the proto-Republican party across the Northern States and within a single human lifetime ended across the entire continent. As fast as it could be done while preserving the union. So to you and your ilk, I say: ruclips.net/video/i2-ktqIsdYo/видео.html
Great video. This really helped build my understanding of this event that I've put off learning about for too long. Wonderful production quality. Keep on doing what you're doing.
@@theundercoverhistorian *You used the Confederate battle flag to symbolize the Confederacy when you should've used the actual flag of the Confederacy.*
Oklahoma, or Indian Territory at the time, was not Union. It was roughly divided half and half, a territory, and claims the last Confederate general to surrender. It should not be blue
Love the animation!! Maybe u could of made some animations of soldiers marching or fighting instead of seeing a map almost the entire time. Still amazing though!!
England though had some loopholes wit “indentured servants” who were basically temporary slaves mostly from India. It’s why a lot of former British colonies have large random Indian communities in them.
There is one instance (his initial retirement many years before the war, to avoid charges which would be humiliating for his family) of Grant having trouble with alcohol. It is a myth circulated by detractors and the lost cause mentality that he continued to have trouble with alcohol.
You forgot to mention when Kal-El crashed on the Kent Farm. Big turning point in the war and an even bigger oversight by you. You got everything else pretty much right. Great video.
The Federal Army came for territorial expression - their goal was to conquer the Confederacy. Everyone was deemed a traitor located East of the Mississippi and South of Virginia. Federal Army burned the crops - freed the work force - extinguished entire neighborhoods . . . “They” would be in violation of multiple international war crimes if the laws were in effect during the time.
Nice job, but a few edits: 1) Manassas is about 100 miles from Richmond, and 25 miles from Washington DC. DC was more at risk than the Confederate capital. 2) There were not 23,000 killed at Antietam. The figure was 3650. There were 23,000 casualties, but that includes wounded and missing. 3) Lincoln won the 1864 election with 55% of the popular vote. His opponent, General George McClellan, won only Kentucky and NJ, but still captured 45% of the popular vote. Even so, a really nice job.
Everything you said is true, however, #3 in the video is not incorrect. Lincoln received 91% of electoral votes and that is the number they use here. The president is elected by the states and is one of their rights. Popular vote means nothing nor should it to avoid tyranny of the majority.
Your assessment of what started the War Between the States. Check the history of the Morrill Tariffs, their inception, their reason and their progression to Fort Sumter being fired upon in April of 1861 which was the start of the War between the States!!!
This video has lots of issues - first of which is she can't even use the word "secession" correctly. Please think more about what you are showing your classes if you think this is good.
As with most Civil War videos, the comment section is filled with arguments. The Civil War continues to provoke debate because people not only disagree about the answers, but the questions that should be asked. With that in mind, I'll post a number of questions along with my answers. If you want to reply, please stick to the format. It would be good stick to particular questions, or the importance of a particular question, as opposed to a making a generalized statement about the war. 1. Was slavery the primary reason why the south seceded? - Yes 2. Did the north go to war in order to end slavery? - No, they went to war to preserve the Union. 3. Did Lincoln or others governing the northern states have any plans to abolish slavery in the near future? - No, but eventually they would, and the leaders of the south knew that if they waited too long to secede that it would be too late. 4. Were tariffs a major cause of secession? - No, and there is a ton of misinformation about this. 5. Did most southerners own slaves or come from slave owning families? - No 6. Did most of the south's leaders who made the decision to secede own slaves or come from slave owning families? - Yes 7. Would most southerners (black or white) have benefitted from independence? - No, just wealthy slaveowners. 8. Did most southerners want to secede? - If you include slaves, no. 9. Did most free southerners want to secede? - We don't know. Once the war started, they felt that it was their duty to defend their home states, but that does not mean that they agreed with the decision to secede. The process by which that decision was made was dominated by wealthy slaveowners, the same ones who would benefit from secession. 10. Were southerners more racist than northerners? Not really. It's a subjective call. 11. Was slavery on its way out in the south? - No 12. Would slavery in an independent CSA have eventually ended? - Yes, but it's not clear when or how. 13. Was secession legal? Debatable, but it is definitely not the only relevant question.
@@ferlandohall2005 The short answer would be racism. We can talk about that if you want, I'm just wondering if there is a particular point you are making about my comment or the Civil War.
"A little too keen on whiskey?..." I don't understand what that means.. That man was leading the most important war in American history 2nd to only the Revolutionary War and the most bloody war in American history to the present day I think he deserved a drink or 20.
I wouldn't have said the South's economy was struggling. If you look at the South's share of the GDP, and the reasoning behind King Cotton the South's economy was fairly strong. For future reference, population, and population growth is not a foolproof indicator of economic strength. There are other errors but this one... well... was probably the biggest.
@Jerry Davis You need to chill out. First, I'm not, nor have I ever been, a Democrat. Second I've learned MY history. In case you need to be informed sir, MY history is Dixie's history. I've ties to Dixie from Jamestown until the end of the Second World War. As for the Cotton Economy, You should read Chapter 15 of Dr. Samuel W. Mitcham jr.'s book "It Wasn't About Slavery: Exposing the Great Lie of the Civil War."
@@reminder9146 Exactly the war was not about slavery if so, why did the north have slaves and continued to even after the war ended. Lincoln wanted the port accesses the south had along with all those tax dollars that he or should I say the north wasn't getting and the country was in need of revenue badly. I could go on about how the crimes committed by the Union army were so sickening and how most of the Souther army were not slave owners but poor farmers and sharecroppers who joined after the south was invaded by the north and what little they had was burned or stolen by them and their families killed .
@@reminder9146 Agreed. Most people today do not know that in the mid 1800s, the county of Adams with the county seat of Natchez, Mississippi had more wealth than Wall Street. If anyone tours the Natchez pilgrimage either in the spring or the fall, they they can go on guided tours covering well over 150 National historic registered locations showing many of the finest mansions ever built in the US.
@@TheDiamonddust1 100%. Also Lincoln had reservations about abolishing slavery. His true goal was to reunite the country and actually was going to let the south keep slavery. He was against it going westward. The real reason for civil war was because the south was prosperous due to the cotton trade and they were wealthier than the north. Had nothing to do with slavery until Lincoln knew the south wasn't going to give in.
@@ShaneM223 Agree also Abraham Lincoln and Emancipation act on its first draft listed the south could keep its slaves even though at that time the south had already begun letting them go. Lincoln also says in this same act that he was going to remove all blacks from the US and colonize them somewhere beyond our borders.
Wrong-Rebbies had way more casualties for one the Union's slaughter at Vicksburg. Rebbies lost manpower troops deserted, too poor and malnourished for the fight. Lee forced to surrender Grant obliterated all transportation, food, and supply routes.
They were fighting in both sides, depending on their own interests..! That's why General Sherman sent expeditions to terminate them, bunch of traitors.
I noticed that you neglected to mention that the War of Northern Aggression was not a legal war. The Confederacy exercised their Constitutional rights to separate from the oppressive federal government. When told that he should let the South go, Lincoln was recorded as saying "let the South go? How will we pay for all this?"
Like most histories of the war, this ignores the Union invasion of neutral Missouri, whose legislature had voted against secession, and one of the first and bloodiest battles of the war, Wilson's creek, where the North's best general, Lyons, was killed.
@@patrickstephens1809 Sorry. The NUMOROUS Civil War History Book and Films that I Have Give A Very Balanced Report Of That Event. But if you would rather GLORIFY A Loosing Cause, that's up to you. However up here in Central Pennsylvania on Memorial Day, (when they put flags on the graves), there is still One Confederate Flag placed on that fellows grave every year. Visit Gettysburg for a Couple of days to see the HUGE Size of that Battlefield that was fought for 3-Days. And you might better Understand What A Useless WASTE of Human Life, (over the Idea of Continuing To Enslave People), Was All About.
Great video but Pretty sure the colours are the wrong way round. At the time The northern free states were republican/red and the southern states were democrat/blue
@Patriotic American I understand that but it kind of seems like they are trying to change history implying that the republicans are the confederacy and racist and that the democrats are the union. Even though it is the other way around.
@@Coyotl. The Union has been represented by the color blue, and the Confederacy by red, for literally decades. I've always assumed this was because of the blue Union uniform, with red being used for the South simply because it is such a clear contrast. It's got nothing to do with modern party identification. The Union couldn't have won without 'War' Democrats like the hero of Gettysburg, Winfield Scott Hancock. The Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens wasn't a Democrat. He was a 'Cotton Whig' (pro-slavery) who was an old friend of Lincoln, who was once a 'Conscience Whig' (anti-slavery). After secession political parties in the South were abolished because it was thought there was no longer any need for them, so Democrats and Whigs were mixed together in the Confederacy. So these colors were never meant to represent parties.
It went a little woke there at the end. Slavery was brought to an end but the war wasn’t about discrimination. As long as we humans notice our differences from one another there will be acceptance, indifference and yes, discrimination. What is it with people that think that ignorance, hate, jealousy, discrimination and anything else from the ugly side of being human can be removed like a bad tattoo. IT CANNOT BE DONE.
CORRECTION: WV was not a state prior to the CW 1861. Grant not Lee was the great strategist. This little video is full of inaccuracies making it a very unreliable resource.
West Virginia was founded June 20, 1863. Correct but it was settled and colonized long before then. Even before it was truly a state it was still recognized as its own settlement, district, or colony. It officially became a state in 1863 but it was already seen as a separate state or entity from Virginia. Also who was the better strategist is an opinion so that's not an inaccuracy.
@@brefunchess7551 FACT: The USA won the CW in part on its general's tactical and strategical planning-the cutting off of the South's supply, food, and transportation lines in a lil' town that goes by the name of Vicksburg- have you e v e r heard of it? And the USA under General Grant's command strategically took complete control over a lil' river running north and south specifically the entire span in one southern state.
Money. The South wanted to leave. They knew taxes were going to go up on their business, in order to expand west and build railroads!! The South held secession conventions where people voted to leave. The North INVADED the South. The North couldn’t let the South leave as the Federal Government was financed by foreign trade taxes. The North needed that Money. And a monopoly on manufactured durable goods sold within the country. ( no lambourghinis sold here, OR, huge taxes!!! The South wanted to buy cheap British made ploughs!!! *china!?* ) Read Lincoln’s FIRST inaugural address!!! He doesn’t want to end *it* in the South specifically!!! Look up the “Corwin Amendment” the North was perfectly willing to ACTIVELY PRESERVE it’s institution within the South!!!! - Wars are about MONEY AND POWER, every single one. They always have been and always will be. And they’ll always be fought by poor people.
The secession conventions were dominated by wealthy slaveowners and people from slave owning families. People who did not come from slave owning families had little say in the matter and slaves had none.
Lincoln trounced the Constitution and engineered the start of the war. Need to look at more primary source material, not just books written by the victors.
Waw ! I was watching the video and I decided to turn off full screen, to see how many views the video had. And, I see 10 000 views ! I really thought that it was going to be 1/2/3 millions ! Really ! It’s very well designed, and very well explain ! Congrats !
Yes, we don't have many videos so far which probably explains those numbers, but we're glad you liked it! You can also check out our iOS app if you want more educational content with that style, here's a link to it: apps.apple.com/fr/app/pyke/id1468007995?l=en. Anyway, your support means a lot to us, thank you very much :)
@@theundercoverhistorian Your’e welcome ! I’ve already downloaded the app a few days ago, just after watching this video. And it’s pretty good ! (Maybe just do something with the dark mod because it’s a bit broken, and the ability to replay the modules) Anyway, it’s very good !
@@s00n64 Thanks for giving the app a try, we're glad you liked it. And yes, we're still working on it so there are a few things to fix like the dark mode and still a lot of levels to add. It's a lot of work though so it takes a bit of time, especially since there's only one guy (me) running all that lmao. We would say it's still a bit of a "beta" version but it's going to improve a lot with time.
@@theundercoverhistorian No problems, I’ve seen in the about section that you were alone, and you also seem to be French (your name and the fact that the app is only available in English and in French) so, bonne chance :), et j’espère que l’app rencontrera un gros succès (et qui sait, peut être après la développer pour d’autres disciplines).
Both sides are right. Slavery is completely and utterly 100% wrong. All humans are created equally. But the states should have the right to leave the union if the majority of the population of that state agree. By the same token, a state should also be able to be kicked out of the union. The Constitution is a contract and nowhere does it say that states can't leave the union. The only reason states can't leave the union is because of a supreme court ruling. The original founding document, The Articles of Confederation, ratified by the states in 1781, explicitly states that states will remain sovereign and independent.
I totally agree with you. Son consequently, the bloody war to keep the States united was unconstitutional in every regard to begin with. Lincoln had once said that if he could save the Union without liberating slaves, he would, and if he could save the Union by liberating all the slaves, he would. So as far as this documentary is concerned Lincoln's freedom proclamation was meant to discourage foreign intervention. For which reason I cannot understand how in heaven Lincoln receives so much homage. The North literally ravaged and burned the South upon entering. 700,000 dead on both sides, millions wounded, many more millions of lives upset.
@@luisgonzagaosollo7970 Union in and of itself is not evil or bad. The best example I have is Germany after unification of previously independent states in 1870. Things eventually didn't go that well for Europe with a large and powerful unified Germany, especially in the 20th century.
@@stephenkammerling9479 Germany, the loser, has always been portrayed as the bad guy and epitome of evil ever since. By the victors. US, Great Britain, France and Belgium combined have murdered more people or civilians in their history than Germany ever did. King Leopold of Belgium is responsible for more than 10 million civilian congolese. But nobody really cares. If the Germans did it, it was a war crime. If the US did it, burning millions of German civilians alive during the bombing campaign in Europe, it was okay. Recently, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens murdered, there livelihood overturned. Hasn't gone well for the world after the Union got its act together.
Maybe states should have the right to secede if a majority of its population agree, but that's not what happened in the Civil War. Wealthy slaveowners dominated southern state governments and secession conventions. People who did not own slaves had little say in the matter, and slaves had none.
The civil war was fought geographically over aggressive and illegal western expansion. The Union conquered not only sovereign Confederate Territory, but also sovereign Native American Territories. The last Confederate General to surrender was a man by the name of Stand Waite, a Cherokee Native American. In fact, all Natives who participated in the civil war fought with the Confederacy, this is because the father's of the Confederacy believed in private property right's and State rights! Ideologically the war was fought over the illegal implementation of a Federal Nationalized Democracy. The Union in 1776 was established as a Constitutional Confederate Republic. The Confederacy was ideologically fighting to preserve the constitutional Republic that they believed in and wanted their nation state's to continue living under. Slavery should have been left up to each individual State to abolish on their own terms. The federal government ended up costing over 620,000 deaths instead of just allowing state's to abolish slavery on their own. Authoritarianism never works, even in 2021🤔
Let me ask you this question, if the majority of the southern states economies were based on slave labor, if all states were given their own time line to abolish slavery, how long would slavery have lasted in the south??? Only reason i ask this is because some states were so entrenched in that way of life do you think it would have lasted well into the 1900’s🤔
@@reefb4364 well I do believe certain state's would have continued slavery for in my estimation another 30 years. The 🇺🇸 stopped participating in the African Slave Trade in 1808, we had enough slaves here. Slavery was a horrible atrocity that nobody can defend, but it was sadly socially accepted in many nations in the 1800s. Yes that was changing by the 1850s, but the South was "entrenched" heavily as you stated and would have continued for some time. But in all honesty, and many will disagree with me, but I believe that it would have been better to let slavery go for another 30 year's. Instead we saw brutal war that killed over 600,000 innocent American's. Lincoln could have also tried negotiating with the South, rather the Union invaded which is just unimaginable to me.
@@rebelsoul5980 I see your point but another 30 yrs of treating HUMAN BEINGS almost less than animals would be an intolerable situation that could only be addressed by blood shed. It’s sad to think that America normalized that behavior and thought it was ok, but when money is involved usually morality and empathy goes out the window. So playing Devils advocate, if slavery continues 30 more years - let’s say 1899 or 1900- does that mean Jim Crow and Segregation get pushed into the 80’s and 90’s???
I'm not an American, I don't live in America. Why do some Americans have the Confederated flag outside their house? I went on vacation to Texas and a few houses around the neighborhood I stayed had the Confederated flag. Is that mean they still support slavery?
@@stopit5848 There continues to be volumes written on the subject and I will only say one thing, ------ the historians always write from the side that wins.
This is a very over simplified biased one-sided view of the Civil War. Lincoln gave two inaugural addresses, and, to borrow language from the narrator, "Pretty Much" declared war on the cotton states in his inaugrual address. A fact "pretty much" not mentioned by the narrator. This is what hastened secession (which was Constitutional too btw..and I can prove it). The Civil War was in response to secession.
I never paid attention in history classes so I never learned, but here I stoned at 2:39am.
Thank you so much
S
same lmao this was easy to understand yet I learned a lot hell ya
History is very important as it repeats itself. People who know history are more likely to get rich and avoid being the target of genocide.
Arizona territory was a Confederate territory
im higher than a boeing 747 rn and i got a e.o.c tmr wish me luck fam
the joke about if the milk or the cereal goes 1st was crazy 💀
Where's the part when Lincoln killed The vampire boss on a burning train carrying fake silver?
Am sorry what ?
@@kyotosinfinity5959 it's a movie reference "Abraham Lincoln the vampire hunter."
🤣🤣
Nga what
Narrator keeps mis-pronouncing SECESSION as SUCCESSION.
That drove me crazy
No she said it right!
And she said “pacificly” instead of specifically lol
Who cares grammar cop. In the context in which she's using the similar sounding word it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what's she's getting at
She is an Indian.
I love history. and i recently just started loving it, history was hard for me when i was younger. But im quite getting the hang of it. My brain works slower than others so its hard to process thing in my head. im sure theres people out there that relate to me.
My advice is that maybe if u hate something, maybe try it twice so ur absolutely sure.
I've always had the same problem throughout my years in school and in my everyday life especially when I want to explain something but don't know how to. I was born with a intellectual disability but It's mild compared to the other kids that I used to be put in classes with.
I look like a normal person that has noting wrong with them and you wouldn't expect If I had a disability or not unless you started asking test questions. The biggest problem about it is my short term memory and for me to understand something Is to force myself to be interested and review what ever it is more than once. It's fucking annoying to have to go through something like that but I like to remind myself It could always be a lot worse.
I love history too! Even when you live through it, it keeps changing. You never know what history is going to be tomorrow.
bruh u sound so goofy
@@stabbz6479 Didn't ask
I always loved history. Idk if this will help but it’s helped some of my friends when they asked for help with history. It might sound weird but it did help my friends. I’d tell them to try to think of each era as a movie or season of a show but one that really happened & then for some reason it was easier for them to remember
How does this channel only have 656 subs, this has the production quality of a multi million subscriber channel, and only 6,061 views! more people need to see this channel, Liked and Subbed :)
Thank you very much for your support :)
Now they have over 26k views and 800 subs! 😌
ikr
ruclips.net/video/rY9zHNOjGrs/видео.html
Probably still new
Very good video, as I'm a fan of the Manifest Destiny period of American History and the Civil War.
My only inconvenience was that the narrator pronounced "succession" when it was obviously meant "secession".
I absolutely love this type of art style! What a great voice actor too! You will surely become huge if you make more videos like this one.
Thanks a lot! You're channel's super cool as well!
Your*
@@theundercoverhistorian minor spelling mistake, entire channel ruined, disliked, unsubbed
@@povotaknight2063 I have brought dishonor upon myself, I shall commit seppuku now
no don't do it@@theundercoverhistorian
EXCELLENT SHORT AND SWEET from a long term CIVIL WAR HISTORY BUFF....BORN IN GETTYSBURG PA.....(1954)
Currently resident of Annapolis MARYLAND
I already knew most of this, but loved the refresher. History was my favorite subject in School not matter what kind American, World, or as here where I grew up Texas History.
Texas was in the confederacy
There isn't a both sides, it's the American side or else
@@smokingstoking7357 I know that, I am a Marine, but you learn another reading history. The good and the bad from people who came before you were born.
@@RobertJones-ux6nc this voice person didn't read history, I visited Gettysburg, Pennsylvania before she was born
@@RobertJones-ux6nc have you been north of the Mason Dixon line
You re doing a really hard work and you are going to expand this channel
Secession. Not succession
A huge part of Union Victory is General Winfield Scott of Virginia, he was the proponent for the Anaconda blockade, this made it a lot difficult for the Confederacy to procure supplies and lost them the battle of attrition.
Isn't he also the general who prevented a potential war (because of the shooting of a pig) regarding the territorial dispute in the Pacific Northwest between US and UK?
I have enjoyed your series on the Modoc war. One of my buddies in college mother was from Oklahoma. She was half Cherokee and half Modoc. He and I had a lot of fun talking about the various Indian wars.
the series was so bad what are you talking about
A Good Brief History REFRESHER Lesson For Those That Seem To Have Forgotten How Important That Era Was, And for younger students too that might think it's Dry old stuff from too long ago. Good Job...
This helped me A LOT!
Glad we could help :)
Except it left off the existing factor of the Native American Indian holding Territory at the time.
@@theundercoverhistorian Too bad it's not completely factual and one-sided!
Since it's not factual, how is it helpful?
Battle of Antietam wasn’t 23,000 killed. It was 23,000 casualties (killed + wounded + missing). The official record shows ~3,650 killed. Also, it’s “Secession”, not “Succession”.
Oh please...if you knew then why you watch,dont critisise this ugly
@@ellaandmichelle3444 To help educate the uneducated.
@@370Zulu whatever,
@@ellaandmichelle3444 The facts in the video were wrong. He was correcting them. Not really a big deal bro
@@ellaandmichelle3444 there is many flaws in the video with inaccuracies
Really well done and to the point. Thank you.
be quiet boomer
Well explained. I am in India, and this explanation help me to understand today's America . Thank you
A grossly inaccurate summary of the America’s expansion west. Firstly America didn’t “annex” the central states.
In 1803 Napoleon was busy with his war in Europe, he needed money.
So France sold America (America was then the easternmost 1/3 of what is now the US) the approx central 1/3 in what was known as the “Louisiana purchase”. Napoleon himself never visited the Americas. Napoleon received $15m for the said lands.
In 1803 the lands west of the “Louisiana purchase” lands was Mexico. Although there was a colonial presence in these lands it was limited. The main presence was the indigenous population. IE the Indians.
Yeah this needs work.
HA! HA! HA! Your "Howard Zin, A History Of America" BS best serves as toilet paper. That America-hating freak, and his America-Hating Freak Followers such as yourself, now face extinction as million of the people you mis-educated are coming to realize the sliminess of your lies and deceptions. Thanks to truthful Historical videos such as this. And they hate YOU for it. One thing that should be added is that after the war the British Crown paid a $15.5 million fine to the USA for selling warships (e.g. the CSS Alabama) and material to the nascent Slave State, the Confederacy. So the myth that "England ended slavery" can be blown out of the water altogether. Brits loved that slave-picked American cotton in exchange for warships right up to the near end of the American civil war. So you America-Hating Freaks can give up your "the UK ended slavery, but America kept on slaving." Truth is: The Chattel Slavery of North America by European immigrants was imported by the British and maintained by the British (New England colonies attempted to ban slavery in the early 1700s, but the Crown refused), and ended by NORTHERN EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS, the proto-Republican party across the Northern States and within a single human lifetime ended across the entire continent. As fast as it could be done while preserving the union. So to you and your ilk, I say: ruclips.net/video/i2-ktqIsdYo/видео.html
@@Joecms No. It doesn't. Your search for affirmation for "Howard Zin, A History Of America" BS is futile. It best serves as toilet paper. That America-hating freak, and his America-Hating Freak Followers such as yourself, now face extinction as million of the people you mis-educated are coming to realize the sliminess of your lies and deceptions. Thanks to truthful Historical videos such as this. And they hate YOU for it. One thing that should be added is that after the war the British Crown paid a $15.5 million fine to the USA for selling warships (e.g. the CSS Alabama) and material to the nascent Slave State, the Confederacy. So the myth that "England ended slavery" can be blown out of the water altogether. Brits loved that slave-picked American cotton in exchange for warships right up to the near end of the American civil war. So you America-Hating Freaks can give up your "the UK ended slavery, but America kept on slaving." Truth is: The Chattel Slavery of North America by European immigrants was imported by the British and maintained by the British (New England colonies attempted to ban slavery in the early 1700s, but the Crown refused), and ended by NORTHERN EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS, the proto-Republican party across the Northern States and within a single human lifetime ended across the entire continent. As fast as it could be done while preserving the union. So to you and your ilk, I say: ruclips.net/video/i2-ktqIsdYo/видео.html
The video doesn’t claim that the central states were annexed, it clearly shows the the Louisiana purchase. You are confused and angry for no reason.
Arizona was claimed by the conferacy, then retaken by the union
Quality/subs is off the charts
Thanks!
At first, I thought that history was boring but when I watched this video this subject became fun for me. So awesome job on the video!!!
We're glad you liked it!
History is as interesting as you make it
Great video. This really helped build my understanding of this event that I've put off learning about for too long. Wonderful production quality. Keep on doing what you're doing.
Thank you so much ☺️
Except it left off the existing factor of the Native American Indian holding Territory at the time.
you have no knowledge
@@theundercoverhistorian *You used the Confederate battle flag to symbolize the Confederacy when you should've used the actual flag of the Confederacy.*
Oklahoma, or Indian Territory at the time, was not Union. It was roughly divided half and half, a territory, and claims the last Confederate general to surrender. It should not be blue
Very true, this map is inaccurate.
Mistakenly stated that 23,000 were killed at Antietam.. 23,000 casualties, number killed was around 3,600.
Love the animation!! Maybe u could of made some animations of soldiers marching or fighting instead of seeing a map almost the entire time. Still amazing though!!
@Alice K-a yh but i dont want to see a map the entire time
Literal child mentality
Lame.
You just gained a new sub and a fan too.
Keep doing your thing!! You gone be big.
Beautiful work, man! Incredible video!
Thanks!
Not true, though!
Fun fact: The first countries that stopped slavery were Denmark and Norway in 1807
Germany 1101
Russia 1720s
Denmark was 1792
Norway was 1804
England was 1807
United States 1865
England though had some loopholes wit “indentured servants” who were basically temporary slaves mostly from India. It’s why a lot of former British colonies have large random Indian communities in them.
@@brandonlyon730 yup in Trinidad also has a large indian population
There is one instance (his initial retirement many years before the war, to avoid charges which would be humiliating for his family) of Grant having trouble with alcohol. It is a myth circulated by detractors and the lost cause mentality that he continued to have trouble with alcohol.
thats not true at all
Alaa sir!
Thanks for taking us on this virtual journey, and keep up the excellent work! Looking forward to more travel inspiration from your channel.
sorry.
wrong video 😄
Awesome thank you for the explanation!
You forgot to mention when Kal-El crashed on the Kent Farm. Big turning point in the war and an even bigger oversight by you. You got everything else pretty much right. Great video.
😂😂😂bro
Kneel before Zod!
u have no idea what ur talking about hashtag no knowledge
@@LebronJames-sb2cj It's part of Superman's origin story.
@@ChickSage what u talking bout
This channel is underrated
Just told to watch this. Amazing vid!! Great narrator
thank you ! this came in clutch .
No problem :)
At 3:20 and 3:27 the word "succession" is used but it should of course be "secession".
Makes me sad that so many died :/ War is awful… Rest in peace all you souls
The Federal Army came for territorial expression - their goal was to conquer the Confederacy.
Everyone was deemed a traitor located East of the Mississippi and South of Virginia.
Federal Army burned the crops - freed the work force - extinguished entire neighborhoods . . .
“They” would be in violation of multiple international war crimes if the laws were in effect during the time.
@@ilanabutterfinger6883 CSA did rebel and fired first
Please keep making videos!!
Nice Video and good explanation ...given in very short and sweet manner ..keep up work !
I am stupid and this helped me a lot lot lot lot cuz I am stupid and this is his dotter
Nice job, but a few edits: 1) Manassas is about 100 miles from Richmond, and 25 miles from Washington DC. DC was more at risk than the Confederate capital. 2) There were not 23,000 killed at Antietam. The figure was 3650. There were 23,000 casualties, but that includes wounded and missing. 3) Lincoln won the 1864 election with 55% of the popular vote. His opponent, General George McClellan, won only Kentucky and NJ, but still captured 45% of the popular vote. Even so, a really nice job.
Everything you said is true, however, #3 in the video is not incorrect. Lincoln received 91% of electoral votes and that is the number they use here. The president is elected by the states and is one of their rights. Popular vote means nothing nor should it to avoid tyranny of the majority.
You need to make more videos you could seriously make a great channel out of this style
Thanks! And we're sorry for the wait, new videos are on the way, coming out soon!
@@theundercoverhistorian nice
This is so good
Very well produced
Thanks!
Thank you for a concise history of the war that can be shown at most grade levels of schools everywhere.
Your assessment of what started the War Between the States. Check the history of the Morrill Tariffs, their inception, their reason and their progression to Fort Sumter being fired upon in April of 1861 which was the start of the War between the States!!!
Sorry, brother, but they cherry-picked their information.
This video has lots of issues - first of which is she can't even use the word "secession" correctly. Please think more about what you are showing your classes if you think this is good.
Sorry, but no serious person can take this bit of fluff as history.
As with most Civil War videos, the comment section is filled with arguments. The Civil War continues to provoke debate because people not only disagree about the answers, but the questions that should be asked. With that in mind, I'll post a number of questions along with my answers. If you want to reply, please stick to the format. It would be good stick to particular questions, or the importance of a particular question, as opposed to a making a generalized statement about the war.
1. Was slavery the primary reason why the south seceded? - Yes
2. Did the north go to war in order to end slavery? - No, they went to war to preserve the Union.
3. Did Lincoln or others governing the northern states have any plans to abolish slavery in the near future? - No, but eventually they would, and the leaders of the south knew that if they waited too long to secede that it would be too late.
4. Were tariffs a major cause of secession? - No, and there is a ton of misinformation about this.
5. Did most southerners own slaves or come from slave owning families? - No
6. Did most of the south's leaders who made the decision to secede own slaves or come from slave owning families? - Yes
7. Would most southerners (black or white) have benefitted from independence? - No, just wealthy slaveowners.
8. Did most southerners want to secede? - If you include slaves, no.
9. Did most free southerners want to secede? - We don't know. Once the war started, they felt that it was their duty to defend their home states, but that does not mean that they agreed with the decision to secede. The process by which that decision was made was dominated by wealthy slaveowners, the same ones who would benefit from secession.
10. Were southerners more racist than northerners? Not really. It's a subjective call.
11. Was slavery on its way out in the south? - No
12. Would slavery in an independent CSA have eventually ended? - Yes, but it's not clear when or how.
13. Was secession legal? Debatable, but it is definitely not the only relevant question.
Could you explain the why we had 100 years of legal lynching post 1865?
@@ferlandohall2005 The short answer would be racism. We can talk about that if you want, I'm just wondering if there is a particular point you are making about my comment or the Civil War.
Imagine your competition being Oversimplified
I like this video better.
I'm reading Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell. Somewhere in between I thought to find out more about the civil war and came to watch this video.
Great Video!!!
"A little too keen on whiskey?..."
I don't understand what that means.. That man was leading the most important war in American history 2nd to only the Revolutionary War and the most bloody war in American history to the present day I think he deserved a drink or 20.
Thanks for this it helped a lot with my Civil war essay paper
ur an actuall civillian
Thank you for telling me about the colonies that the Civil war of the United States.
I wouldn't have said the South's economy was struggling. If you look at the South's share of the GDP, and the reasoning behind King Cotton the South's economy was fairly strong. For future reference, population, and population growth is not a foolproof indicator of economic strength. There are other errors but this one... well... was probably the biggest.
@Jerry Davis You need to chill out. First, I'm not, nor have I ever been, a Democrat. Second I've learned MY history. In case you need to be informed sir, MY history is Dixie's history. I've ties to Dixie from Jamestown until the end of the Second World War. As for the Cotton Economy, You should read Chapter 15 of Dr. Samuel W. Mitcham jr.'s book "It Wasn't About Slavery: Exposing the Great Lie of the Civil War."
@@reminder9146 Exactly the war was not about slavery if so, why did the north have slaves and continued to even after the war ended. Lincoln wanted the port accesses the south had along with all those tax dollars that he or should I say the north wasn't getting and the country was in need of revenue badly. I could go on about how the crimes committed by the Union army were so sickening and how most of the Souther army were not slave owners but poor farmers and sharecroppers who joined after the south was invaded by the north and what little they had was burned or stolen by them and their families killed .
@@reminder9146 Agreed. Most people today do not know that in the mid 1800s, the county of Adams with the county seat of Natchez, Mississippi had more wealth than Wall Street. If anyone tours the Natchez pilgrimage either in the spring or the fall, they they can go on guided tours covering well over 150 National historic registered locations showing many of the finest mansions ever built in the US.
@@TheDiamonddust1 100%. Also Lincoln had reservations about abolishing slavery. His true goal was to reunite the country and actually was going to let the south keep slavery. He was against it going westward. The real reason for civil war was because the south was prosperous due to the cotton trade and they were wealthier than the north. Had nothing to do with slavery until Lincoln knew the south wasn't going to give in.
@@ShaneM223 Agree also Abraham Lincoln and Emancipation act on its first draft listed the south could keep its slaves even though at that time the south had already begun letting them go. Lincoln also says in this same act that he was going to remove all blacks from the US and colonize them somewhere beyond our borders.
Omg, everything about this channel reminds me of Duolingo! Sheeesh!
Great video! Thank You
Reported casualties of the war were 600000 soldiers the majority Union.
Wrong-Rebbies had way more casualties for one the Union's slaughter at Vicksburg. Rebbies lost manpower troops deserted, too poor and malnourished for the fight. Lee forced to surrender Grant obliterated all transportation, food, and supply routes.
Wow. Excellent overview in just over 12 minutes. And pretty much just the facts, including maps. Great work!
Thanks!
@@theundercoverhistorian 👍
Except it left off the existing factor of the Native American Indian holding Territory at the time.
This channel has less subscribers but breaks it down way better than the Oversimplified channel which has over a million subscribers.
BRUH This helped my out so much! subbed.
same
@@mersity5229 Needed this for my social studies questions lol
A very fair high level overview of the main issue (Slavery) leading to war the states to war. Worthwhile listening>
And the native Indians don't get a mention
So? That’s not rly important rn.
They're save in the west
They were fighting in both sides, depending on their own interests..! That's why General Sherman sent expeditions to terminate them, bunch of traitors.
It wasn't the North Vs. the South. It was Republicans fighting Democrats that didn't want to give up their slaves.
Exactly
Actually it was Republicans and 'War' Democrats from the North fighting Southern Democrats and ex-Whigs.
Northern liberals vs southern conservatives.
earned my sub, really underappreciated channel
Just found this. Yet another history channel. Cool.
I noticed that you neglected to mention that the War of Northern Aggression was not a legal war. The Confederacy exercised their Constitutional rights to separate from the oppressive federal government. When told that he should let the South go, Lincoln was recorded as saying "let the South go? How will we pay for all this?"
Quite right sir.
oppressive!!!!??
Like most histories of the war, this ignores the Union invasion of neutral Missouri, whose legislature had voted against secession, and one of the first and bloodiest battles of the war, Wilson's creek, where the North's best general, Lyons, was killed.
Thanks for speaking up. We must remember that the union army got to write the history. So we only got one side.
Exactly! it left off the existing factor of the Native American Indian holding Territory at the time.
@@patrickstephens1809 Sorry. The NUMOROUS Civil War History Book and Films that I Have Give A Very Balanced Report Of That Event. But if you would rather GLORIFY A Loosing Cause, that's up to you. However up here in Central Pennsylvania on Memorial Day, (when they put flags on the graves), there is still One Confederate Flag placed on that fellows grave every year. Visit Gettysburg for a Couple of days to see the HUGE Size of that Battlefield that was fought for 3-Days. And you might better Understand What A Useless WASTE of Human Life, (over the Idea of Continuing To Enslave People), Was All About.
I love history you can always learn something from it
Thanks a lot
A facile, at best, explanation of the events this video claims to cover.
Great video but Pretty sure the colours are the wrong way round. At the time The northern free states were republican/red and the southern states were democrat/blue
@Patriotic American I understand that but it kind of seems like they are trying to change history implying that the republicans are the confederacy and racist and that the democrats are the union. Even though it is the other way around.
@@Coyotl. The Union has been represented by the color blue, and the Confederacy by red, for literally decades. I've always assumed this was because of the blue Union uniform, with red being used for the South simply because it is such a clear contrast. It's got nothing to do with modern party identification. The Union couldn't have won without 'War' Democrats like the hero of Gettysburg, Winfield Scott Hancock. The Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens wasn't a Democrat. He was a 'Cotton Whig' (pro-slavery) who was an old friend of Lincoln, who was once a 'Conscience Whig' (anti-slavery). After secession political parties in the South were abolished because it was thought there was no longer any need for them, so Democrats and Whigs were mixed together in the Confederacy. So these colors were never meant to represent parties.
This video gave me so much information!
another geaser like u
Wish you lots of subscribers , the video is as awesome as your voice 😊
Thanks!
It went a little woke there at the end. Slavery was brought to an end but the war wasn’t about discrimination. As long as we humans notice our differences from one another there will be acceptance, indifference and yes, discrimination. What is it with people that think that ignorance, hate, jealousy, discrimination and anything else from the ugly side of being human can be removed like a bad tattoo. IT CANNOT BE DONE.
All of these short "history" lessons are just Leftist propaganda tools used to influence the short bus kids.
CORRECTION: WV was not a state prior to the CW 1861. Grant not Lee was the great strategist. This little video is full of inaccuracies making it a very unreliable resource.
and grant was never in the west
@@k1ngdabatman599 Yes, he was.....He fought in the west and even the Mex-Am war.
West Virginia was founded June 20, 1863. Correct but it was settled and colonized long before then. Even before it was truly a state it was still recognized as its own settlement, district, or colony. It officially became a state in 1863 but it was already seen as a separate state or entity from Virginia. Also who was the better strategist is an opinion so that's not an inaccuracy.
@@brefunchess7551 FACT: The USA won the CW in part on its general's tactical and strategical planning-the cutting off of the South's supply, food, and transportation lines in a lil' town that goes by the name of Vicksburg- have you e v e r heard of it?
And the USA under General Grant's command strategically took complete control over a lil' river running north and south specifically the entire span in one southern state.
@@brefunchess7551 i'm saying in the civil war
How do you have less than 1000 subs? Woah!
Very informative ty
Money.
The South wanted to leave.
They knew taxes were going to go up on their business, in order to expand west and build railroads!!
The South held secession conventions where people voted to leave.
The North INVADED the South.
The North couldn’t let the South leave as the Federal Government was financed by foreign trade taxes.
The North needed that Money.
And a monopoly on manufactured durable goods sold within the country.
( no lambourghinis sold here, OR, huge taxes!!! The South wanted to buy cheap British made ploughs!!! *china!?* )
Read Lincoln’s FIRST inaugural address!!!
He doesn’t want to end *it* in the South specifically!!!
Look up the “Corwin Amendment” the North was perfectly willing to ACTIVELY PRESERVE it’s institution within the South!!!!
-
Wars are about MONEY AND POWER, every single one. They always have been and always will be.
And they’ll always be fought by poor people.
It wasn’t about money, do research
The southern states didn’t have any money. Then or now.
The secession conventions were dominated by wealthy slaveowners and people from slave owning families. People who did not come from slave owning families had little say in the matter and slaves had none.
@@evosioa2944And what “research” did you do?
This video is too similar to OverSimplified The American Civil War but I loved it anyway Thanks!!
Thank you for this video.
The sad thing about civil wars is that no matter which side is triumphant, the country loses
Abraham Lincoln ... By far the greatest President in American History. Under all circumstances he kept the United States together.
Lincoln trounced the Constitution and engineered the start of the war. Need to look at more primary source material, not just books written by the victors.
You need to read a bit more and realize what kind of a man Lincoln really was, not the deified version.
Anyone who fights against slavery is a great man.!
AZ and NM were confederate territories during the Civil War. Both sent troops and arms to Texas. Your map is wrong
Waw ! I was watching the video and I decided to turn off full screen, to see how many views the video had. And, I see 10 000 views ! I really thought that it was going to be 1/2/3 millions ! Really ! It’s very well designed, and very well explain ! Congrats !
Yes, we don't have many videos so far which probably explains those numbers, but we're glad you liked it! You can also check out our iOS app if you want more educational content with that style, here's a link to it: apps.apple.com/fr/app/pyke/id1468007995?l=en. Anyway, your support means a lot to us, thank you very much :)
@@theundercoverhistorian Your’e welcome ! I’ve already downloaded the app a few days ago, just after watching this video. And it’s pretty good ! (Maybe just do something with the dark mod because it’s a bit broken, and the ability to replay the modules) Anyway, it’s very good !
@@s00n64 Thanks for giving the app a try, we're glad you liked it. And yes, we're still working on it so there are a few things to fix like the dark mode and still a lot of levels to add. It's a lot of work though so it takes a bit of time, especially since there's only one guy (me) running all that lmao. We would say it's still a bit of a "beta" version but it's going to improve a lot with time.
@@theundercoverhistorian No problems, I’ve seen in the about section that you were alone, and you also seem to be French (your name and the fact that the app is only available in English and in French) so, bonne chance :), et j’espère que l’app rencontrera un gros succès (et qui sait, peut être après la développer pour d’autres disciplines).
@@s00n64 Thanks very much for your support ;)
This was a video that my teacher gave me to listen to:)
Both sides are right. Slavery is completely and utterly 100% wrong. All humans are created equally. But the states should have the right to leave the union if the majority of the population of that state agree. By the same token, a state should also be able to be kicked out of the union. The Constitution is a contract and nowhere does it say that states can't leave the union. The only reason states can't leave the union is because of a supreme court ruling. The original founding document, The Articles of Confederation, ratified by the states in 1781, explicitly states that states will remain sovereign and independent.
I totally agree with you. Son consequently, the bloody war to keep the States united was unconstitutional in every regard to begin with. Lincoln had once said that if he could save the Union without liberating slaves, he would, and if he could save the Union by liberating all the slaves, he would. So as far as this documentary is concerned Lincoln's freedom proclamation was meant to discourage foreign intervention. For which reason I cannot understand how in heaven Lincoln receives so much homage. The North literally ravaged and burned the South upon entering. 700,000 dead on both sides, millions wounded, many more millions of lives upset.
@@luisgonzagaosollo7970 Union in and of itself is not evil or bad. The best example I have is Germany after unification of previously independent states in 1870. Things eventually didn't go that well for Europe with a large and powerful unified Germany, especially in the 20th century.
I meant "not evil or good" in my first sentence in previous message.
@@stephenkammerling9479 Germany, the loser, has always been portrayed as the bad guy and epitome of evil ever since. By the victors. US, Great Britain, France and Belgium combined have murdered more people or civilians in their history than Germany ever did. King Leopold of Belgium is responsible for more than 10 million civilian congolese. But nobody really cares. If the Germans did it, it was a war crime. If the US did it, burning millions of German civilians alive during the bombing campaign in Europe, it was okay. Recently, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens murdered, there livelihood overturned. Hasn't gone well for the world after the Union got its act together.
Maybe states should have the right to secede if a majority of its population agree, but that's not what happened in the Civil War. Wealthy slaveowners dominated southern state governments and secession conventions. People who did not own slaves had little say in the matter, and slaves had none.
The civil war was fought geographically over aggressive and illegal western expansion. The Union conquered not only sovereign Confederate Territory, but also sovereign Native American Territories. The last Confederate General to surrender was a man by the name of Stand Waite, a Cherokee Native American. In fact, all Natives who participated in the civil war fought with the Confederacy, this is because the father's of the Confederacy believed in private property right's and State rights!
Ideologically the war was fought over the illegal implementation of a Federal Nationalized Democracy. The Union in 1776 was established as a Constitutional Confederate Republic. The Confederacy was ideologically fighting to preserve the constitutional Republic that they believed in and wanted their nation state's to continue living under.
Slavery should have been left up to each individual State to abolish on their own terms. The federal government ended up costing over 620,000 deaths instead of just allowing state's to abolish slavery on their own. Authoritarianism never works, even in 2021🤔
Let me ask you this question, if the majority of the southern states economies were based on slave labor, if all states were given their own time line to abolish slavery, how long would slavery have lasted in the south??? Only reason i ask this is because some states were so entrenched in that way of life do you think it would have lasted well into the 1900’s🤔
@@reefb4364 well I do believe certain state's would have continued slavery for in my estimation another 30 years. The 🇺🇸 stopped participating in the African Slave Trade in 1808, we had enough slaves here. Slavery was a horrible atrocity that nobody can defend, but it was sadly socially accepted in many nations in the 1800s. Yes that was changing by the 1850s, but the South was "entrenched" heavily as you stated and would have continued for some time. But in all honesty, and many will disagree with me, but I believe that it would have been better to let slavery go for another 30 year's. Instead we saw brutal war that killed over 600,000 innocent American's. Lincoln could have also tried negotiating with the South, rather the Union invaded which is just unimaginable to me.
@@rebelsoul5980 I see your point but another 30 yrs of treating HUMAN BEINGS almost less than animals would be an intolerable situation that could only be addressed by blood shed. It’s sad to think that America normalized that behavior and thought it was ok, but when money is involved usually morality and empathy goes out the window. So playing Devils advocate, if slavery continues 30 more years - let’s say 1899 or 1900- does that mean Jim Crow and Segregation get pushed into the 80’s and 90’s???
I love this clip!!!
I love this video, thank you so much!
hi~ korean.. ^^
It's incorrect but good work.
CH1NG CH0NG WIN WONG ASIAN BOY
I'm not an American, I don't live in America. Why do some Americans have the Confederated flag outside their house? I went on vacation to Texas and a few houses around the neighborhood I stayed had the Confederated flag. Is that mean they still support slavery?
"Southern Pride" Which is just a dumb way of saying they're racists.
Yeah, it's 100% because they're racists. Don't believe anybody who tells you different-- they're either lying or blind/deluded.
"we are honouring our heritage"
My arse that "heritage" isn't worth any honour at all
AMERICA 🥺🥺🇺🇸🇺🇸
Beautiful animation
4:30 nobody notices how fire the background beat is? 🔥🔥
This is highly inaccurate. Another attempt at rewriting history.
You're highly inaccurate Reich winger.
Can you really sum up the Civil War in 12 minutes? No, no you can't.
Can you really sum up a twelve minute lecture in two sentences? No you can’t.
@@stopit5848 There continues to be volumes written on the subject and I will only say one thing, ------ the historians always write from the side that wins.
That Cereal orMilk joke makes me remember @Oversimplified
Very interresting video about American History.
This is a very over simplified biased one-sided view of the Civil War.
Lincoln gave two inaugural addresses, and, to borrow language from the narrator, "Pretty Much" declared war on the cotton states in his inaugrual address. A fact "pretty much" not mentioned by the narrator. This is what hastened secession (which was Constitutional too btw..and I can prove it).
The Civil War was in response to secession.
At least it finally put an end to slavery
The sad part is seeing all the praise this video receives. Talk about the dumbing down of America...
We will rise again.
Thanks for share, excellent.
No problem 😉
Really good video, love it.
Thanks