Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Why Grant gets a raw deal from historians

“The historian is usually liberal, more often than not a Democrat. ... The post-Civil War period stands for all the historian opposes. It was an era of Republicans, of big business domination, of few and ineffectual attempts at government regulation, of weak executives, and of an essentially nonprofessional civil service. The historian naturally dwells upon the shortcomings of the period.”

Grant said of Democrats and moderate Republicans:

“During my two terms of office, the whole Democratic press and the morbidly honest and ‘reformatory’ portion of the Republican press thought it horrid to keep U.S. troops stationed in the Southern States. And when called upon to protect the lives of negroes – as much citizens under the Constitution as if their skins were white – the country was scarcely large enough to hold the sound of indignation belched forth by them for some years.

“Now, however, there is no hesitation about exhausting the whole power of the government to suppress a strike on the slightest intimation that danger threatens.”

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/12/why-have-historians-treated-president-grant-so-unfairly.php

Grant and W.T. Sherman were the first American generals – maybe the first generals anywhere – who knew how to fight modern war – with all your heart, all your soul and all your might; by not simply defeating the enemy, but by destroying his will to continue; and that those who provide sustenance to an opposing army are targets. Grant was relentless and ruthless, as any successful soldier must be.



1 comment:

  1. As an unreconstructed southerner I don't have any use for Grant either. Too bad the wrong side won the war for Southern Independence.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.