Another moment of civility happened many evenings on the battlefields when the fighting had stopped after dusk. See, the north and south had embargoed each others' products, and as a result the north had coffee, but the south had tobacco. So there were many an evening where the two sides would call a temporary truce and trade coffee for tobacco and vice versa, perhaps share a cup and a smoke and a story or two, before returning to their respective camps for the next day's fighting. War is strange that way.
The biggest question through which ANY contention ought to be filtered is "who gets to decide?" In this case, who gets to decide what IS civil? What answer can be divined without establishing THAT primary metric? Seems like THAT is the great issue facing every creature capable of contemplating it. Who gets to decide?
It's interesting to compare Grant and McClellan. While McClellan was seen as not taking enough risks and not being active enough in the war, Grant was seen as bloody and overly violent. While Grant was definitely more active in the war than a lot of other generals in the US Civil War, he definitely took it personally hard. He drank a lot (even for those days).
There is no justification for war. There is no justification for slavery, either, but two wrongs do not make a right. 160 years later and there are still grudges. That's what violence creates. It balkanizes people, and they end up holding on to their ideas even more tightly, with even less critical thought, with even more resistance to change.
I just found your channel and have enjoyed several of your videos, I just couldn't disagree with your conclusion here more. Looking forward to more
The war didnāt set out to free slaves. That idea only came later. The initial reason was to prevent the south setting up a separate country. May have even been an illegal act on the unions part. Bet I get some stick over this comment.
As you noted, the idea of civility in the context of war is messy at best. What does civility mean, and how much do the causes and nature of the war transform it? War is no more monolithic, than the disagreements between individuals. And even then, a war can be viewed as very different things by each side. And isnāt civility about those things we can agree upon as worthy of honoring, even within the context of an armed conflict? So what are the conditions that allow for this type of agreement and yet still exists in a situation where the parties have resorted to violence? In one sense, I think the old idea of honor between combatants is at the heart of this kind of thing. It suddenly put me in mind of the Princess Bride and the fight scene between Andre and Cary Elwes. I put down my sword and you put down your rock and we kill each other as God intended. What a line.
What a difficult leap from something as measurable as temperature to finding the most civil point in a war. All that said, I enjoyed seeing you wrestle with some of that and come out the other side with some genuine insights.
Fun Fact about the name Francis Lieber: "Lieber" is german for "nicer". As in "My new boss is nicer than I initially thought!" The etymology of the name might be something else, could be from Leber (liver) or Liefer (to deliever). But anyway, interesting video as always =)
This is not too far from me. Iām stationed in Williamsburg, and so Iāve been studying a LOT about the civil and revolutionary war we had on this land. Good video! Iāve been watching for about 2 weeks now. After today, Iām officially subbed š thanks for the refreshing content!
Interesting ideas. Had a problem with the suggestion that the abolition of slavery should have been part of strategy from the beginning. A noble notion, except Lincoln rightly knew that if he did that on the outset, the North would have immediately lost all the border states and the South would win within a year. Even Mac's "civilized position" wouldn't have freed a single slave. You know as well as any serious person that history is not two dimensional for mere mortals. Leave that parlor game to the gods.
You were soooo close, but you failed at seeing the point: The pursuit of justice cannot be civil, it will ALWAYS involve the discomfort of a loud and privileged minority.
@johnmcnally7812
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Have you thought of doing the "fishiest" part of the Cod wars?
@unkreativefrog5992
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
"What's so civil about anyway?"
-"Civil War" by Guns N' Roses
@Pretermit_Sound
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
1:52 he even stuck his hand inside his uniform like Napoleon, and it was definitely a conscious decision.
@colonelb
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Another moment of civility happened many evenings on the battlefields when the fighting had stopped after dusk. See, the north and south had embargoed each others' products, and as a result the north had coffee, but the south had tobacco. So there were many an evening where the two sides would call a temporary truce and trade coffee for tobacco and vice versa, perhaps share a cup and a smoke and a story or two, before returning to their respective camps for the next day's fighting. War is strange that way.
Cheers
@QuestionMan
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
The biggest question through which ANY contention ought to be filtered is "who gets to decide?" In this case, who gets to decide what IS civil? What answer can be divined without establishing THAT primary metric? Seems like THAT is the great issue facing every creature capable of contemplating it. Who gets to decide?
@BrandEver117
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Those are terrible hiking shoes, your poor feet lol
@careyharlan3288
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Did your feet hurt after hiking in those shoes?
@tryingmybest206
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Do the most revolutionary part of the Revolutionary War.
@JohnBrownsBody64920
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
It's interesting to compare Grant and McClellan. While McClellan was seen as not taking enough risks and not being active enough in the war, Grant was seen as bloody and overly violent. While Grant was definitely more active in the war than a lot of other generals in the US Civil War, he definitely took it personally hard. He drank a lot (even for those days).
@herzogsbuick
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
There is no justification for war. There is no justification for slavery, either, but two wrongs do not make a right. 160 years later and there are still grudges. That's what violence creates. It balkanizes people, and they end up holding on to their ideas even more tightly, with even less critical thought, with even more resistance to change.
I just found your channel and have enjoyed several of your videos, I just couldn't disagree with your conclusion here more. Looking forward to more
@Geeksmithing
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
I am sure the most revolutionary part of the Revolutionary War as been suggested by now š
@chrishill6276
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
The war didnāt set out to free slaves. That idea only came later. The initial reason was to prevent the south setting up a separate country. May have even been an illegal act on the unions part. Bet I get some stick over this comment.
@butterscotchbear1073
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Do the Mexican war involve the most mexican
@mikemcaulay9507
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
As you noted, the idea of civility in the context of war is messy at best. What does civility mean, and how much do the causes and nature of the war transform it? War is no more monolithic, than the disagreements between individuals. And even then, a war can be viewed as very different things by each side. And isnāt civility about those things we can agree upon as worthy of honoring, even within the context of an armed conflict? So what are the conditions that allow for this type of agreement and yet still exists in a situation where the parties have resorted to violence?
In one sense, I think the old idea of honor between combatants is at the heart of this kind of thing. It suddenly put me in mind of the Princess Bride and the fight scene between Andre and Cary Elwes. I put down my sword and you put down your rock and we kill each other as God intended. What a line.
What a difficult leap from something as measurable as temperature to finding the most civil point in a war.
All that said, I enjoyed seeing you wrestle with some of that and come out the other side with some genuine insights.
@drewbrew444
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
everyone knows the civilest part of the civil war was the battle of Schrute farms
@vincentleinweber6907
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Fun Fact about the name Francis Lieber: "Lieber" is german for "nicer". As in "My new boss is nicer than I initially thought!"
The etymology of the name might be something else, could be from Leber (liver) or Liefer (to deliever). But anyway, interesting video as always =)
@tlo1216
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
These will catch on Phil, I promise. Just keep up your solid work. You're doing great
@alexandrafreitas7528
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Do interesting and keeping in mind the awesome video docās you make. Thanks for sharing! Awesome š
@mshanlon94
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Now do the 30st part of the 30 Years War.
@RandyVazquez
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
This is not too far from me. Iām stationed in Williamsburg, and so Iāve been studying a LOT about the civil and revolutionary war we had on this land. Good video! Iāve been watching for about 2 weeks now. After today, Iām officially subbed š thanks for the refreshing content!
@snowkatyoutube1419
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Amogus video when ?
@desuMaKun
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
But civil in civil war means civilian, right?? Then wouldn't the most civil part be the biggest battle, were most civilian where at war?! =D
@Borinbets
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Have you done one about, ātaxation without representationā on recent D.C. plates? Why is the no emitted?
@Hyf5
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Where is the greatest part of the great war?
@t.texastimmy1022
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
William T. Sherman's answer was to institute terror in General Order No. 120 dated, Nov. 9 1864
https://cwnc.omeka.chass.ncsu.edu/items/show/145
@willmoore8708
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Interesting ideas. Had a problem with the suggestion that the abolition of slavery should have been part of strategy from the beginning. A noble notion, except Lincoln rightly knew that if he did that on the outset, the North would have immediately lost all the border states and the South would win within a year. Even Mac's "civilized position" wouldn't have freed a single slave. You know as well as any serious person that history is not two dimensional for mere mortals. Leave that parlor game to the gods.
@Bettercraz
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
Worldiest part of world war
@8151630
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
You were soooo close, but you failed at seeing the point: The pursuit of justice cannot be civil, it will ALWAYS involve the discomfort of a loud and privileged minority.
@ImprovisersCorp
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
6:30 I thought my screen brightness went down lol
Good video, thanks
@spacecommanderal3176
April 25, 2024 at 3:42 pm
I'm eager to see videos made on the Greatest part of (the Great/)World War I and the Worldliest part of World War II!