Comments by "" (@theylied1776) on "David Irving - Can you trust ANYTHING he wrote?" video.

We have this exact same problem in the United States with so-called southern authors and historians when it comes to textbooks and novels covering the "history" of the Civil War Era. Several southern authors and historians after 1880 purposely used revisionist history in the narrative, e.g. (Slavery was not the cause of the Civil War, Slaves were happy and content, The Civil War was fought over States Rights). This version of revisionist Civil War "history" is classified as (The Lost Cause).
27
@sylviusleonard5144 Post a link to the video? I've seen at least three of his Civil War documentaries and he's never postulated that states rights was a legitimate cause for the Civil War. Every state in the Confederacy either issued a declaration of secession or article for secession and they all cited slavery as a unifying cause for secession.
4
@DZSabre That is incorrect, the southern states wanted to secede because the federal government was going to make slavery illegal in the Southwest, Northwest, and Western territories. So if any of those territories became States the South believed the northern states would have a majority in the Congress and Senate.
1
@DZSabre There were no slave laws in the U.S. territories. The South did not want the northern states to have more seats in Congress or senators than they did. The South wanted to territories to allow slavery. The southern state we're not fighting for their right to own slaves they were trying to fight for the territories to become slave-owning States. So that would be a little hypocritical of them.
1
@defectiverfanatic Slavery was directly the cause of the war. The southern states wanted slavery in the western territories. Once those territories became states that would mean there would be more slave states , giving the southern states more seats in Congress and more Senators. Slavery in the United States was unsustainable due to the Constitution. The South knew it was only a matter of time.
1
@stevenleslie8557 This is what the revisionist history and the Lost Cause does. It makes people believe that it was a states rights issue. Which it was not. Only 1% of Southerners owned or had slaves. 99% of the southern population really didn't care if some rich landowner had the right to own slaves. In my home state of Tennessee there was an internal Civil War over that very issue.
1
@defectiverfanatic Is English your second language? Because I said it was over slavery in the western territories. The Southern States Wanted to expand slavery into the western territories. They did not want the northern states to have more seats in the Congress and more Senators than they did. https://kr.usembassy.gov/education-culture/infopedia-usa/history/slavery-civil-war-westward-expansion/
1
@defectiverfanatic And besides, your claim is that it was over the state right for slavery. Again, there was no state right in the western territories. They were not States. Like Puerto Rico is not a state, it is a territory.
1
@defectiverfanatic No, you claimed it was over the state right to own slaves. Which it was not. It was over the territories having the right to own slaves once they became States.
1
@defectiverfanatic again, it was not about states rights. This is what the authors of revisionist history for the Lost Cause wants you to believe.
1
@defectiverfanatic What are going on about? You are so far a field that you don't know wh6y your own point is?
1
@defectiverfanatic again every Confederate State either wrote a declaration for secession or articles of secession. The one unifying stated reason was SLAVERY. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states Thank you for (your opinion).
1
@defectiverfanatic Again, the cause of the Civil War was Over the western territories having to right to become slave owning States. The Southern States wanted more representation in the Congress and the Senate. The Civil War had absolutely nothing to do with states rights. That's what the revisionist want you to believe
1
@defectiverfanatic And I will dumb this down even more for you. The reason why the southern states wanted more representation in the Congress and the Senate is because they wanted to make slavery a constitutional right. It was not! The Constitution never mentioned the word slave for a reason. This is why the southern states wanted all of the territories become slave-owning States..
1
@defectiverfanatic I understand why you have to paraphrase my comment because quoting me directly defeats your entire argument.
1
@defectiverfanatic Genius, the Lost Cause myth was not started until after the defeat of the Confederacy. It started around 1880. The time period I'm referring to with the Western territories in the Antebellum South, pre-civil War, was 1820 to 1860. I don't want to call someone an imbecile but my God, pick up a history book! This is why I keep saying that you have no idea what your point is.
1
@defectiverfanatic For a second time, you are talkin about two totally different time periods. On one hand the Antebellum South, pre Civil War when the South wanted the Western territories to become slave owning states was between 1820 and 1860. If the Western Territories had become states that would have given the South enough votes in the Congress and the Senate (to amend the Constitution to make slavery a constitutional right)....secondly, the Lost Cause Myth was not started until the (1880s). Pick up a book before you make yourself look like even more of an ass.
1
@defectiverfanatic "The Civil War was over western territories having the right to embrace slavery and they became States and the South supported this. (meaning they believed it was that future state right to decide on it, and they're going to promote it while the North did the exact opposite You literally in the same comment: it had nothing to do with states rights to own slaves" Those are your words, you demonstrated you had no idea I was talking about two separate time.. Please pick up a history book before you make yourself look like an ass again.
1
@defectiverfanatic Yes it did, then why did you claim that I contradict myself? If it had nothing to do with your argument?
1
@defectiverfanatic I did not contradict myself, I was talking about two separate time periods, you didn't understand it. That was the problem. The issue with the Western territory was between 1820 and 1860. And the Lost Cause myth started in 1880. Two totally different time periods. So how exactly did I contradict myself? Again, pick up a history book before you make an ass out of yourself again.
1
@defectiverfanatic "Again, we're not talking about the Lost Cause myth." Then why did you write... "You have no idea what the Lost Cause myth is nor have you actually read what any revisionist have said". Strange that YOU made that comment if we're not talkin about the Lost Cause myth? Are you having a problem keeping up with your own comments?
1
@defectiverfanatic You really love to paraphrase and to make things up. I completely understand. People like you are trolls and can't admit when you're wrong. This is the actual comment in context: "again, it was not about states rights. This is what the authors of revisionist history for the Lost Cause wants you to believe." Here is your paraphrased attempt: (You: The civil war was fought over states rights is classified as the lost cause). My God you're pathetic.
1
@defectiverfanatic Again, You really love to paraphrase and to make things up. I completely understand. People like you are trolls and can't admit when you're wrong. This is the actual comment in context: "again, it was not about states rights. This is what the authors of revisionist history for the Lost Cause wants you to believe." Here is your paraphrased attempt: (You: The civil war was fought over states rights is classified as the lost cause). My God you're pathetic.
1
@UCS_QPumUbVziHQRkRpmXQYw The YouTube algorithm automatically deletes conspiracy theories. Strange that none of my comments have been deleted here. Funny how that works out? So again, You really love to paraphrase and to make things up. I completely understand. People like you are trolls and can't admit when you're wrong. This is the actual comment in context: "again, it was not about state's rights. This is what the authors of revisionist history for the Lost Cause wants you to believe." Here is your paraphrased attempt: (You: The civil war was fought over states rights is classified as the lost cause). My God you're pathetic.
1
@defectiverfanatic No, I'm not claiming you're a conspiracy theorist. The YouTube algorithm automatically deletes conspiracy theories, channels and comments. But none of my comments have been deleted as YOU claim that yours have. Funny how that works out? https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/may/02/youtube-deletes-coronavirus-conspiracy-theorist-david-ickes-channel So, again: You really love to paraphrase and to make things up. I completely understand. People like you are trolls and can't admit when you're wrong. This is the actual comment in context: "again, it was not about states' rights. This is what the authors of revisionist history for the Lost Cause wants you to believe." Here is your paraphrased attempt: (You: The civil war was fought over states' rights is classified as the lost cause). My God you're pathetic.
1