Comments by "Jim Werther" (@jimwerther) on "misesmedia"
channel.
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
@timishere1925
I just saw this comment now for the first time. I didn't take notes when I watched this video, but off the top of my head:
1. DiLorenzo insists that the war wasn't about slavery. This ignores Alexander Stephens's Cornerstone Speech, as well as the declarations made by every one of the 11 states which made up the Confederacy, all of which highlighted the "right" to own slaves as the reason for breaking away from the US.
2. DiLorenzo says that Wilson paid Russia to enter WWI near the end of the war, which is impossible considering that they had been involved from the beginning.
3. DiLorenzo says that nullification had been an acceptable path until Lincoln came along, another obviously false claim. When the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions were passed in the late 1700s, George Wahington was aghast. Marbury vs. Madison in 1803 basically ended nullification as an acceptable possibility. When South Carolina began to get itchy in 1832, Andrew Jackson was ready to send in a massive federal force. So no, nullification was absolutely not acceptable in 1860 before Lincoln's presidency.
4. DiLorenzo claims that nullification has made a big comeback over the last 20 years, without providing a hint of evidence for that specious claim.
5. DiLorenzo talks about the US Army committing unspeakable atrocities, as if it were specific to the North. Is he unaware that Sherman specifically burned down houses in order to finally end the war and save lives? (It was very successful, actually.) Has he never heard of the Fort Pillow massacre, and other atrocities committed by the South?
That's just going off of memory in the first minutes after reading the comment here. I'm not terribly interested in taking the time to re-watch the entire thing, all while taking notes. It is rather obvious that DiLorenzo is an utterly dishonest person.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1