Something has happened in the United States recently, leading to a historical figure who has been dead for nearly one hundred and fifty years, General Robert E. Lee, to the cusp of the times. Today we will talk about why the social rift in the United States would talk about this person.
Robert. General Lee was a famous American general, he was born in Virginia, Virginia was the "main state" of the southern camp during the American Civil War, and this will be said later.
Born into a military family, his father was a famous general in the Revolutionary War, and he entered the West Point Military Academy in 1825, and later graduated second.
Robert at West Point. plum
The first highlight of his life was during the Mexican-American War. From 1846 to 1848, a war was waged between the United States and Mexico, which is not exhaustive. You can look at the map, Mexico was originally very large, through this war the United States took more than half of Mexico's territory, today's Nevada, California, California, Arizona, etc., are stolen at this time.
Robert E. Lee shined in this war, he was the commander-in-chief's staff officer, and planned many very classic battles. To give an example, once the U.S. army wanted to break through a section of the Mo army to occupy favorable terrain to get a defensive line, he went deep behind the enemy to reconnoiter, because the road was very dangerous, he often hung himself on the cliff to sleep, and finally found a very dangerous path, the U.S. army through this small detour behind the defeat of the Mexican army with a small loss.
John Brown before his execution
Some of his experiences after the Mexican-American War, the evaluation of all parties began to be controversial. The first was the capture of John Brown. John Brown was white himself, but he was against slavery. In 1859, he led a "revolt" with his black brothers. This had nothing to do with Robert E. Lee, but he happened to be passing through the neighborhood on vacation, and he happened to be the most senior officer in the neighborhood, so he urgently signed that he would lead a force to suppress it. Lee suppressed the uprising and arrested John Brown, who was later executed.
This was not a big deal at the time, our history books called this an uprising, and the word used in American history books was "raid", that is, "attack, robbery". This is not a "Spring and Autumn Brushwork" that deliberately belittles this uprising, and the mainstream values of the United States are critical of slavery, and there is no question of deliberately belittling the slave uprising. The reason I use this word is because the scale is so small, in fact, it is more than twenty people, and it is indeed a bit big to call it an uprising.
It was not a big deal at that time, but today it seems to be a "historical counter-revolution". Because it involves slavery, and slavery in turn involves race, which is a particularly sensitive nerve in American society.
Robert Edward E. Lee (January 19, 1807 – October 12, 1870) was an American military man
Everyone must understand that once the historical problem is connected with the social problem, it is not a simple historical problem, and then the historical problem becomes a symbol. White supremacists support Robert E. Lee, not necessarily because they really know the character well, but because defending the Robert E. Lee statue became a way for them to express their racist sentiments. Opponents, too, see this as an anti-racial and anti-white supremacy approach. What is actually the position of General Robert E. Lee on the issue of slavery is controversial, and many materials show that he is actually opposed to slavery, of course, there are those who believe that this evidence is not valid, and this question will be mentioned later.
In short, it is somewhat similar to the problem of Hong Xiuquan smashing the statue of Confucius in the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom. He didn't know Confucius himself, and he hated the imperial examination, because he couldn't always pass the examination. But what does Confucius himself have to do with the imperial examination? Confucius had not yet passed the imperial examination when he died. It was only because the rulers of later generations had shaped Confucius into a symbol of the imperial examination system, so he wanted to smash it, and the fact that he smashed Confucius like this had nothing to do with Confucius himself. Controversial historical figures and historical events often easily become such symbols that reflect social problems.
Preparations before the Outbreak of the Civil War
Robert E.E.'s later experience is even more controversial. In 1861, the outbreak of the Civil War was a foregone conclusion, and since he was a famous general and the headmaster of the West Point Military Academy, both sides signed him. General Lee's final choice to serve in the South is the most important reason why victims of racial discrimination in American society today hate him.
We all know that the American Civil War was highly correlated with the issue of "slavery." To put it simply, the federal government (the northern states) advocated the abolition of slavery, and the southern states were firmly opposed to the abolition of slavery, and since the government insisted on abolishing it, the southern states would have to break away from the union, so the two sides were at war.
As bystanders, when we look at this history, we must understand a problem, although this war is because of humanitarian problems, but in fact it also contains huge interest problems, and if we read more history, we will know that many of these problems are in essence a matter of interests.
The Civil War broke out
Why did the North oppose slavery? This is determined by his economic structure. At that time, the north of the United States was mainly industrial and manufacturing, and the south was mainly plantation economy. To put it bluntly, the capitalists in the North have the final say, and the development of capitalism requires free labor. The reason why Britain became the world's factory in those years, where did the workers come from? It is a large number of landless peasants after the land enclosure movement. For industry in the North of the United States to develop, it needs a large number of free laborers, black and white, and black is more powerful and cheaper. At that time, the black slaves were all personally dependent, trapped in the plantation by the slave owners, which limited the development of manufacturing.
The main economic structure of the American South was the plantation economy, which relied mainly on black slaves for labor. Thus a contradiction arises: the industrial capitalists in the North need free labour-power, the slave owners in the South need black slaves, and the industrial capitalists in the North want to turn the black slaves of the southern slave owners into free labour-power, and this moves the lifeblood of the slave owners.
That is to say, the driving force behind the macro view is actually profit, but many historical figures in the micro view advocate that the abolition of slavery is really considered from the perspective of humanity and civilization, which should be viewed separately.
In fact, there are many similarities between the contradictions of the American Civil War and the current contradictions of the European Union on the refugee issue. The eu is extremely divided on the issue of refugee reception, and although there is a debate about humanity and universal values, there are more realistic reasons than these reasons.
▲ Civil War
Why does Germany advocate hosting refugees? Germany is a big manufacturing country, the population is negative growth, the welfare level is still so high, resulting in extremely high labor costs, dirty work who will do it? Britain is different, it was the world's factory, now it is not manufacturing, it does not need so much cheap labor. So the refugee problem in Germany does more harm than good, but in England the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, how can there be agreement?
Returning to the subject, whatever the motive, the result of the American Civil War was the nominal freedom of the slaves, and that was where progress came. The reality is that today's White Supremacy in the United States has begun to rise again, so it is symbolic to look at this history at the moment, the North is the party that liberates the black slaves, and the South is the party that oppresses the black slaves. Victory in the north, liberation of black slaves. The South triumphed, and the slaves continued to be oppressed.
What is Robert E.E.S. in this role? According to economic strength, the north is obviously higher than the south, and the war is behind the economy, so the north should have easily defeated the south, but the actual situation is that the north was blinded by the south at the beginning of the war.
Robert E. Lee in 1865
On the one hand, the combat effectiveness of the northern army is not as good as that of the south, the slave owners in the south of the United States are indeed more militaristic, and the armies of the southern states have just fought the Mexican-American War and are more experienced.
On the other hand, there is robert E. Lee's personal factor, he is too capable of fighting, always winning with less and winning more with weakness, without his command, the Southern Army will lose earlier. Moreover, he refused to be called by the federal government to join the "rebel army", so there was a huge controversy in the public's opinion of him, and when this historical controversy was combined with social problems, it led to the crowd to "take sides" in front of his statue.
But if he is not treated as a symbol, but restores history itself, in fact, his choice has little to do with whether he supports slavery or not.
▲U.S. State Map
On the eve of the outbreak of war, he wrote to his sister, saying, "Although I serve the Union and am loyal to my responsibilities as an American citizen, I have not been able to resolve to raise my hand against my own relatives, children, and families." So he quit his military post and went home, where he was later drafted into the army in Virginia. This has to do with the foreshadowing laid at the beginning, he is a Virginian, and Virginia is the "main state" of the rebellious states, and if he joins the federal army to suppress his state, he will betray his homeland.
At that time, the United States was still a relatively loose federation, and our history books translated it as "Confederacy", which translated it very eloquently. The independence of the states is the first, the federation is second, the states have the laws of the states, and the states collect their own taxes. So in the context, he was first a Virginian and then an American. After the Civil War, the United States became a close union, so it was reasonable and reasonable for him to think that way. From his letters, he considered the question of whether to fight for his homeland or for the Union, not the question of defending slavery or overthrowing it.
Black slavery in the United States
There is much evidence that proves that he himself was not fully supportive of slavery. He freed his own slaves, and he repeatedly stated that slavery was uncivilized, and that he had earned his free status by opening up slaves to join the army in the war later in the war.
Of course, the same material interpretation can also be diametrically opposed, people who hate him believe that his black slaves are inherited from his father-in-law, and the release of black slaves is the father-in-law's will, he said that slavery barbarism is not necessarily true, and the absorption of blacks into the army is due to the lack of soldiers in the later stages of the war...
In an attempt to reconcile the torn society quickly, and after the Civil War, the Federation did not count the wars against the southern states and did not try any war criminals, and General Lee was quickly pardoned, basically a positive image, a hero of the United States, with statues in many places. Nearly 150 years after General Lee's death in 1870, one group of people wanted to tear down his statue and another group wanted to guard his statue. This is a kind of "symbolization" phenomenon after the combination of historical image and social reality, and it reflects the Tearing American Society behind it, which has little to do with history itself.