It's Civil War time in Mr. McKeon's Class!

[rittmeister]

He's reading and understanding! I call that a win!

me too

 

[Matt McKeon]

Its Gettysburg time! Despite recent historians rejecting the "high water mark of the Confederacy" narrative, I can't resist.

Plan: Background article on Lee's invasion of the North
Gettysburg but only Chamberlain's stand at Little Round Top
Maps!
Line by line reading of the Address

 

[rittmeister]

Its Gettysburg time!

methinks you are a few days early

 

[Matt McKeon]

We did a line by line reading of the Address., yesterday. It went well. I'm running behind because we lost four days for standardized testing. Monday its Behind the Lines(the Homefront), then 1864-5 on Wednesday.

 

[5fish]

We did a line by line reading of the Address., yesterday. It went well. I'm running behind because we lost four days for standardized testing. Monday its Behind the Lines(the Homefront), then 1864-5 on Wednesday.

It became our new mission statement as a nation...

 

[Matt McKeon]

It became our new mission statement as a nation...

That's an interesting way to put it.

The points I was trying to get across is that Lincoln was not talking about slavery. The closest he gets is "a new birth of freedom" but that's not direct. He's talking about representative democracy. That's what is being tested, and what must not perish from the Earth.

But the democracy he's saving is based on "all men are created equal." So, a new mission statement, or at least an amended one, as you put it.

 

[Matt McKeon]

Today, its "Behind the Lines" or the Homefront. Shoddy, women arsenal workers, soldiers' wives, nursing, giant financial institutions, land grant colleges. etc.

 

[Matt McKeon]

At the end of the Address discussion, I tried to make this point:
Lincoln says the world will little note etc. He's right, the battle has the influence on history, but he's wrong it fact, how an event is understood, how its described is also important. Some blank looks.

 

[jgoodguy]

At the end of the Address discussion, I tried to make this point:
Lincoln says the world will little note etc. He's right, the battle has the influence on history, but he's wrong it fact, how an event is understood, how its described is also important. Some blank looks.

I am not surprised. Sometimes the idea that 'myth' is greater than reality surprises folks.

 

[Matt McKeon]

Its Second Inaugural Address time!

 

[Joshism]

I haven't seen Shendoah but I doubt most Southerners are aware of Unionism. I will see if Netflix has that movie.

I wonder how many people reacted to "Free State of Jones" by assuming the entire thing was pure fiction with no basis in fact, and refuse to accept that it has any basis in history?

I think most people are aware of the USCT to some degree, even if only because of "Glory."

 

[Joshism]

I think the American Civil War needs to be down graded and WWone, WWtwo, and the Cold War need to be given more time in school. The minority kids are becoming the majority of the students and all kids from all ethnic, race, and religion groups will better relate to those 20th century topics, plus those topics effect their lives more than the ever did the American Civil War does. I believe the civil war following the path of NASCAR , golf, baseball into to oblivion... I am a heretic...

When I went through public school in the 1990s, even survey-level undergraduate courses in college in the early 2000s, 20th century history, especially post-WW2, was insufficiently covered. The teachers always ran out of time at the end of the semester and rushed through it.

The current system of splitting American History into Discovery to Civil War and Reconstruction to Present is insufficient. It needs to be split into three parts:

• Colonial America & Independence (up through the War of 1812)
• 19th Century America (1815-1898): Civil War, Reconstruction, westward expansion, and up through "reconciliation" in the form of Plessy v. Ferguson and the Spanish-American War
• 20th Century America (up through the 1980s)

In high school, I would require one per year, with Civics & Government in senior year.

 

[Leftyhunter]

I wonder how many people reacted to "Free State of Jones" by assuming the entire thing was pure fiction with no basis in fact, and refuse to accept that it has any basis in history?

I think most people are aware of the USCT to some degree, even if only because of "Glory."

The movie " Free State of Jones" just wasn't marketed right and yes it wasn't exactly one hundred percent history but then again it's Hollywood. Unfortunately there probably won't be an ACW themed movie for a while. Most of them don't make money and it's not called show buisness for nothing. If I am not mistaken in the last ten years only Spielberg's" Lincoln" actually made a decent profit in the ACW film genre.
Leftyhunter

 

[Matt McKeon]

When I went through public school in the 1990s, even survey-level undergraduate courses in college in the early 2000s, 20th century history, especially post-WW2, was insufficiently covered. The teachers always ran out of time at the end of the semester and rushed through it.

The current system of splitting American History into Discovery to Civil War and Reconstruction to Present is insufficient. It needs to be split into three parts:

• Colonial America & Independence (up through the War of 1812)
• 19th Century America (1815-1898): Civil War, Reconstruction, westward expansion, and up through "reconciliation" in the form of Plessy v. Ferguson and the Spanish-American War
• 20th Century America (up through the 1980s)

In high school, I would require one per year, with Civics & Government in senior year.

You would be right at home with my class. We're supposed to go First Nations to 1900, then 1900 to at least 9/11. But I've only got to Reagan.

 

[Matt McKeon]

Did 2nd Inaugural Address. I'm not pleased with class response.

I divided the address into 5 sections.

1. Introduction. My point: "no gloating, even if the North is finally winning."

2. "four years ago" Lincoln recalls 1861. He uses the formula, the secessionists("insurgents") would make war, and the Government would accept war, putting the responsibility for starting the war on the Confederates. "And the war came."

 

[Matt McKeon]

Did 2nd Inaugural Address. I'm not pleased with class response.

I divided the address into 5 sections.

1. Introduction. My point: "no gloating, even if the North is finally winning."

2. "four years ago" Lincoln recalls 1861. He uses the formula, the secessionists("insurgents") would make war, and the Government would accept war, putting the responsibility for starting the war on the Confederates. "And the war came."

3. The 3rd paragraph: he lays out the cause of the war: slavery, and the controversy in 1861, the slave states desire to spread slavery and the Government's policy was to prevent slavery from spreading.

4. A little seeming even handedness, almost cynical. both sides got a war, longer, bloodier, more disruptive and transformative than they had bargained for. We both prayed to the same God and asked him to help us against the other. But "the Almighty has his own purposes" God is great when he's your buddy and helping you out. But when you have to carry out God's will, it isn't so fun.

 

[Matt McKeon]

Now the nub of the address:

American slavery, not southern slavery. because the southerners are Americans, and the entire nation, North/South supported, profited by and tolerated all. It is an offence, and now God wills it to be removed. The terrible war has punished us for the sin of slavery.

And then the harsh: and if God wills every drop of blood drawn from the lash, be repaid by one drawn by the sword, and all the wealth piled up by slavery be sunk, then God's judgement is "true and righteous altogether" Did you think that there would never be punishment, that we would escape the "scourge"(whip?). Its only justice.

The last, much quoted note of grace, "malice towards none, charity towards all"