This is an argument about Lee's motives is also made by Roberts, who claims Gen. Lee was not a traitor because he was simply defending his native Virginia against "Northern aggression," not engaging in a civil war to gain control over the government of the United States. True, perhaps the Civil War may not have been specifically about freeing slaves, and it's true that for tactical reasons of maintaining loyalty in the Union states during a brutal conflict, that President Lincoln, in his Emancipation Proclamation, did not free the slaves still held in the Northern states, nonetheless the "War Between the States" was at its core over the issue of preventing the spread of slavery beyond the existing slave states, which had it been allowed to happen would have ultimately ended slavery as representatives of slave-owning states and their interests would have soon become a minority in both the House and the Senate.
Roberts is himself resorting to the very "identity politics" he is criticizing. He is resorting to "white identity politics" in his article to attack the work of historian Reeves and reviewer Ballinger.
DAVE LINDORFF is the founding editor of ThisCantBeHappening.net, and is a 2019 winner of an "Izzy" award for "outstanding achievement in independent media."
(Article changed on April 10, 2019 at 14:10)
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
