Reply #26: On Lee.

[Atypical Liberal]

I am not going to defend the cause of the Confederacy. It seems to me the American Civil War was much like every other war, even unto this day - a war instigated to protect the financial interests of the wealthy elite and fought by poor people with no real interest at stake but caught up in nationalistic pride and "freedom".

There is no doubt in my mind that the people who financed and organized the Southern Secession did so because their financial interests were threatened, and that meant slavery. But it is also true that at that stage of our country's history one's state was considered far more to be one's home and governance than one's country. As Shelby Foote said in Ken Burn's documentary, The American Civil War made the United States an "is". Before the ACW, it was "The United States are". After the ACW, it was "The United States is". People of that era had a very real sense of loyalty to their state, and this cannot be dismissed.

Lee did make his decision to turn his back on his oath, commission, and country lightly. It is said that he went and spoke with his commanding officer about trying to find some compromise, but was told that he would not tolerate any half-commitments and if he was not completely on board he should resign, which he ultimately did.

The people of the South, including Lee, fought for a cause that had an abomination at its core. This is undeniable. But it should be noted that the war ended as it did largely because of the efforts of Lee, and also Grant. At a word, Lee could have dispersed the South's troops into a guerrilla warfare that could have dragged on for years, and in fact this was the plan of action advocated by Jefferson Davis. This was expressly against Lee's wishes. He felt that as vanquished people they should strive to re-integrate themselves into the Union and, as he told his soldiers, to go forth and be good citizens.

Likewise, the generous terms (initially rejected by Washington) that Sherman gave to Johnston to secure the surrender of the Army of Tennessee also went a long way to bringing a peaceful close to the end of the war.

It is my opinion that the efforts of those four men, acting alone, by the way, Sherman, Johnston, Lee, and Grant, did more to shape the close of the Civil War than anyone else. Had the Union victors been more harsh in their prosecution of their foes, or had the defeated been less chivalrous in their defeat, the war could have dragged on much, much longer. In the end, Lincoln's sense of reconciliation was made much, much easier because of the actions of those generals.

Also in Ken Burn's documentary was an anecdote concerning Lee after the war. He was attending church services, when a black man went up to the dias (to receive confession, or absolution, or whatever it was that particular denomination did, I forget). No one else did. Lee got up, went to the front, and knelt down beside the black man, and thus everyone else did, too.

Lee's cause was unjust, but Lee did seem to have a strong sense of morality and justice about him, twisted by the issue of slavery though it may have been. I think he was a man dedicated to his State, and extremely gracious and compliant in defeat.