[PDF] ↠ The South Was Right! Author James Ronald Kennedy – Natus-physiotherapy.co.uk

The South Was Right! The South Was Right , The Kennedy Brothers Dispel Many Commonly Held Beliefs About The Civil War Their Well Researched Arguments Demonstrate The South S Many Legitimate Complaints During The Antebellum Period, Including Unfair Taxation And Unequal Constitutional Rights The Victorious North Rewrote History To Justify Its Invasion Of The South, Which Was Legally And Culturally A Separate, Independent Country Further, The Kennedys Explain How Lingering Myths About The Civil War Are Still Being Used To Discredit And Exploit Former Confederate States The Authors Bold Ideas And Rigorous Documentation Will Change The Way Readers Think About The Civil War


10 thoughts on “The South Was Right!

  1. says:

    The book claims to have been well researched There are too many distortions within the first 35 pages that I checked Further, one becomes highly skeptical of any supposed learned discussion that is fraught with hyperbole and name calling Basically, the book is intellectually dishonest.


  2. says:

    When I moved to South Carolina, I wanted to broaden my horizons and at least appreciate the Deep South s self vision All I got out of this book was a series of logical fallacies based on some historical and moral arguments that weredesperate justification than concrete proof.Before the southern masses jump down my throat, let me say that the South certainly had some reasoning in their decision to succeed the greatest being a threat to their economic interests and what they perceived as t When I moved to South Carolina, I wanted to broaden my horizons and at least appreciate the Deep South s self vision All I got out of this book was a series of logical fallacies based on some historical and moral arguments that weredesperate justification than concrete proof.Before the southern masses jump down my throat, let me say that the South certainly had some reasoning in their decision to succeed the greatest being a threat to their economic interests and what they perceived as their individual freedoms However, what the Kennedy Brothers claim beyond that is merely their interpretation superimposed on historical fact.They would have you believe that Southern Culture is a distinct, cohesive culture juxtaposed against an antagonistic Northern Culture They would have you think that the decision to succeed was unanimous and popular They would be argue that the South s crusade was not about slavery at all but states rights And they would be wrong.As excellently described by Christopher Collier in Decision in Philadelphia, each part of the colonies before and after the Constitution Convention were equally distinct but geographically limited Georgia would be worlds different from Virgina, Virgina from Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania from Connecticut, etc limiting the extent of a unified southern culture The decision to succeed was ultimately widely supported only when Lincoln called a draft to put the Southern Insurrection in fact, Tennessee never actually voted to join the Confederacy and Kentucky tried to maintain neutrality as best it could Finally, if the Civil War was truly about states rights, I ask you why no other states that had previously lost either power or territory succeeded outside of the slave states New England had suffered early in the nation s history under federalism as had the plains states later on.The question comes down to this what legitimately justifies the succession of a state or group of states from the Union I m sorry to say that the Kennedy brothers have presented no such framework


  3. says:

    I very much appreciated the brothers Kennedy taking the time to write this excellent book We have indeed been fed the Victors version of history in regards to the War for Southern Independence.This book caused me to reevaluate what I had been taught and what I had come to believe was the truth about that war of long ago After reading the thought provoking comments from slaves of the south given after the end of the war, I realized that all was not as we were taught to believe I even lived I very much appreciated the brothers Kennedy taking the time to write this excellent book We have indeed been fed the Victors version of history in regards to the War for Southern Independence.This book caused me to reevaluate what I had been taught and what I had come to believe was the truth about that war of long ago After reading the thought provoking comments from slaves of the south given after the end of the war, I realized that all was not as we were taught to believe I even lived in the south when I was but a child, and I was at a complete loss to understand why the people of the south seemed to have such a defeated attitude so many years after the War for Southern Independence had come to an end Over a hundred years to be exact This book caused me to start researching different viewpoints on the War for Southern Independence I am presently reading, Lincoln, Messiah or Monster by George L Christian Lincoln as the South Should Know Him by O.W Blacknall A View of the Constitution by William Rawle, This book was originally published in 1825 and was used as a textbook at West Point The oddest thing about it is that the primary focus of the book is succession and the right of the states to seek after it and lastly, The Real Lincoln , by Charles Minor After reading this book, I re read the Lincoln Douglas Debates of 1858 and then Democracy in America I must say I gleaned a much deeper understanding of the true Lincoln and what de Tocqueville meant when he said, They the people of a Democracy want equality in freedom, and if they cannot have that, they still want equality in slavery I strongly recommend this book to anyone sincerely seeking after a leadership education as one must have a true and balanced education and understanding of history, not just the victors version of history


  4. says:

    There are not too many books that relate the other side of the story of the war between the states confederates were not exclusively racists or slave owners, there were just as many of those types on both sides of the conflict A fine rebuttal to the attack on southern culture that has been going on since the end of that unecessary war.


  5. says:

    I just wanted to point out that this exists The South Was Right was on sale at the Fort Macon gift shop when I visited in September I had to muffle my laughter horror from the deadly serious looking lady at the cash register Hooray NC state parks.


  6. says:

    Changed the way that I looked at the Civil War drastically That comes from a born and raised Yankee who agreeswith the South on states rights and voting requirements.


  7. says:

    Excellent, well documented book Some say that the language is a bit intemperate, but I have seen farintemperate language in books by respected historians like Samuel Eliot Morrison but that is alright because he says politically correct things Considering how much the South has been trashed by hypocritical Northern historians who cover up or excuse things like the fact that the sanctimonious New England abolitionists grew fat and rich on the slave trade which they continued in Excellent, well documented book Some say that the language is a bit intemperate, but I have seen farintemperate language in books by respected historians like Samuel Eliot Morrison but that is alright because he says politically correct things Considering how much the South has been trashed by hypocritical Northern historians who cover up or excuse things like the fact that the sanctimonious New England abolitionists grew fat and rich on the slave trade which they continued in right up to the end of slavery in Brazil, 1889 , the systematic and Presidentialy approved terrorism with which the war was conducted EXACTLY the kind of thing the US government hypocritically condemns when used by OTHER countries , it is understandable that the authors get rather worked up at times Actually, there is a lot that they could have put in to support their thesis that they left out For example, how when both sides were bothered by the Indians in the Southwest while trying to fight each other, local commanders on both sides proposed an extermination policy towards the Indians The difference is that Jefferson Davis rejected the idea as an infamous crime , while Lincoln APPROVED the same idea from HIS commander.So much for Honest Abe, the great humanitarian And Gen George McClellan, when he took over from John Pope, denounced and rejected the infamous orders of MR John Pope ,saying that he was going to take the highest Christian ground in the conduct of the war, and forbid all pillaging and looting saying that he was not going to return his men to their families as a set of wicked and demoralized robbers


  8. says:

    About as scholarly as The Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky.


  9. says:

    Lost Cause Apologist nonsense by two charlatans masquerading as historians Someone cited this as a reference in a debate and after trying to read it I was embarrassed for them It must have required a lot of effort to get all this nonsense in one little book, but the authors were clearly determined.This would make a good litmus test if you give this book to someone and they like it, then they are too dumb to discuss the Civil War with.


  10. says:

    The TRUTH about the South.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *