Improved rewording

‘The Stone women were fugitives until the war ended in 1865. They were graciously allowed to keep their lives, and even retain ownership of their lands. They had to adjust to a new world in which the people they employed now had to be paid. Their former slaves were merciful, and merely demanded compensation for their labor, instead of seeking retribution for their mistreatment’

It’s odd that they don’t quote her actual journal (which is fascinating reading, and it’s unfortunate that they’re presenting it polemically–hard to tell how the chapter itself reads though):

Oct. 1: The most important fact is Lincoln’s proclamation freeing all slaves held by rebel masters after January 1. I wonder what will be the result of this diabolical move. Surely not as bad for us as they intend it to be. I think there is little chance of a happy hereafter for President Lincoln. A thousand years of repentance would be but brief time to wipe out his sins against the South. How can he ever sleep with the shades of the thousands he has consigned to a bloody death darkening his soul?

By the twenty-fourth we will know our fate Submission to the Union (how we hate the word!) , Confiscation, and Negro equality or a bloody unequal struggle to last we know not how long. God help us, for vain is the help of man.

We hope President Davis is really making his way to this department, as we hear. His presence would give new life to the people. Poor Booth, to think that he fell at last. Many a true heart at the South weeps for his death. Caesar had his Brutus, Murat his Charlotte Corday, and Lincoln his Booth. Lincoln’s fate overtook him in the flush of his triumph on the pinnacle of his fame, or rather infamy. We are glad he is not alive to rejoice in our humiliation and insult us by his jokes. The circumstance of his death forms a most complete tragedy. Many think Andy Johnson worse than Lincoln, but that is simply impossible.

We found nearly all the Negroes in a state of insubordination, insolent and refusing to work. Mamma had a good deal of trouble with them for a few days. Now they have quieted down and most of those who left have returned, and they are doing as well as " freedmen " ever will, I suppose.

Sept. 22: A long silence and a year of hard endeavor to raise a crop, reconstruct the place with the problem of hired labor, high water, and cotton worms. Mamma had little trouble in getting advances in New Orleans to plant. Cotton is so high that merchants are anxious to advance to put in a crop, and there is much Northern capital seeking investment in that field. Mr. Given became Mamma’s merchant. Col. Cornelius Fellowes, her old friend, has not resumed business, or only in a small way. The Negroes demanded high wages, from $20 to $25 for men, in addition to the old rations of sugar, rice, tobacco, molasses, and sometimes hams. Many of the old hands left, and My Brother went to New Orleans and brought back a number of ex-Negro soldiers, who strutted around in their uniforms and were hard to control. I was deadly afraid of them.
. . .
Then the water came up and we were nearly overflowed. The cotton planted was very late, and when it was looking as luxuriant and promising as possible and we saw ease of mind before us, the worms came. In a few days the fields were blackened like fire had swept over them. We made about twenty bales and spent $25,000 doing it. What most distresses me is that none of that money went for our personal comfort. All of it went to the Negroes. Mamma would buy only bare necessaries for the table and plainest clothes for the family. Not a luxury, no furniture, carpets, or anything. We are worse off for those things than even in Texas and such a sum spent!

That is fascinating stuff that provides quite a lot of detail and context in which to view the story. Thanks for posting it!

thanks Dick

You would think that maybe the democrats works want to legislate as much as they could before maybe losing the majority.

Uh… Joe, I got some bad news for you.

Do we directly interfere in the elections of other countries?

I think without doubt we have in the past.

Just ask anyone from Central America post the 1880s or so.

And while technically we didn’t so much interfere in Mosaddegh’s election…

I think this is more a “you can learn from our mistakes instead of making them yourself!” situation.

Yeah, but when have we done this recently? Or is this another case where everyone who has ever done anything bad is equal?

This qualifies, doesn’t it?

You’ll say this is a good thing, or that it isn’t strictly speaking an election, but it is undeniably US meddling in the political affairs of another country for the purposes of changing the outcome of the electoral process. The US has, among other things, seized Venezuelan assets in the United States and given control of them to Guaidó.

I don’t think so?
I mean, the US did not orchestrate the Venezuelan presidential crisis. The US chose to recognize Guaido as the legitimate president of the country, as did most of the world, because Maduro was entirely corrupt and didn’t win a legitimate election.

It seems like that’s different than Russian acting to actually change the outcome of our elections through hacking and social manipulation, isn’t it?

Of course it’s different — every example is different! — but there is no doubt that some substantial number of Venezuelans regard it as the US meddling in the outcome of Venezuelan elections. Why is it the place of the US government to pick the winner and to seize national assets and turn them over to their chosen winner?

But it wasn’t the US that did this.

It was pretty much the entire free world that did this.

Minutes after Maduro took the oath as president, the Organization of American States (OAS) approved a resolution in a special session of its Permanent Council declaring Maduro’s presidency illegitimate and urging new elections.[6] Special meetings of the OAS on 24 January and in the United Nations Security Council on 26 January were held but no consensus was reached. Secretary-General of the United Nations António Guterres called for dialogue.[7] During the 49th General Assembly of the Organization of American States on 27 June, Guaidó’s presidency was recognized by the organization.[8] Guaidó declared himself acting president and swore himself in on 23 January.[4] Maduro’s government has accused the United States of organizing a coup d’état to remove him and take control of the country’s oil reserves.[9] Guaidó rejects the characterization of his actions as a coup, saying that his movement is backed by peaceful volunteers.[10]

Guaidó was recognized as legitimate by about 60 countries; Maduro by about 20 countries.[11][12][13] Internationally, support has followed geopolitical lines, with China, Cuba, Iran, Russia, Syria, and Turkey supporting Maduro, while the majority of Western and Latin American countries supported Guaidó as acting president.[11][14][15]

The US did not instigate this crisis, we merely supported the legitimacy of one side over the other, after the fact. And we were not alone in doing so. Indeed, you kind of HAVE to choose one side or the other, right?

Countries declare their recognition of other countries’ leaders all the time. That’s not controversial.

I’m wondering what our response would be if, on January 7th, the Russian government had announced that there was clearly an election crisis in the US, that in their view Donald Trump was the legitimate winner, and then went on to seize American assets in Russia to turn them over to Trump, recognize Trump’s governmental appointments rather than Biden’s, meet secretly with Trump to plot how he could oust the usurper Biden and how they could help? I think we’d call that meddling, even if the Russians threw up their hands and said hey, we didn’t create this crisis!

There’s more to it than the recognition, though.

If Russia did that, and the entire OAS agreed, and the majority of western nations agreed, and our own Congress agreed, then maybe they would have a point?