Author Talk with Heather Cox Richardson on How the South Won the Civil War

In this recording from 22 September 2020, Heather Cox Richardson, historian and author of the new book How the South Won the Civil War, provides us with insight into the essential paradox of American history-that democracy has always depended on inequality-and why that makes democracy vulnerable to oligarchs. She debunks the myth that the Civil War released the nation from the grip of oligarchy, expunging the sins of the Founding, and reveals how and why the Old South not only survived in the West, but thrived.
This event may also be viewed on CrowdCast: www.crowdcast.io/e/ouphcr
global.oup.com/academic/produ...
Heather Cox Richardson is Professor of History at Boston College. Her previous works include West from Appomattox and To Make Men Free.
© Oxford University Press

[@rickchumsae7974]

Heather arrived too late in my life to save my sanity, but she did help me maintain a consistent level of insanity.

[@dennisossianderrmplmtcst2053]

That’s really next level humor, thank you! Best wishes with your return to sanity. Kindly, Dennis

[@GRJ-uz7kf]

Hey, I'm in my 70's, and it's never too late.

[@andramcdowell3193]

More of her please. Thanks 🙏 for having an intelligent person speaking. More lessons please. Thanks 🙏

[@bubbercakes528]

Nice to see a Christian that does not like Trump. 😊

[@maybeme94]

Love seeing this interview…and Heather’s work has sustained my sanity over the past several years 2019+… Thank you!

[@suadpattonbey7239]

Just seeing this now but still so relevant

[@nacarreira777]

She's a national treasure IMHO.

[@sharonsilva9063]

@@nacarreira777 I am no k

[@cmgweb6951]

I love this woman already! "....I know some shit.", and crocheting 'treason weasals"! Hilarious! Now I'm gonna have to find me one of those treason weasels! This is one of the best synopsis of how we got here, with great points of important historical import, leading right to where we are now. Will definitely keep up with Heather and her future writings and views. Fantastic review of who we really are.

[@franksullivan1873]

I just wish our Republic could allow our citizens to have the right to vote on big life changing policies.Abortion and Immigration need not be decided by 435 people in the House or 100 people in the Senate.535 people should not be the referendum on everything in our lives.

[@karenhartman9774]

Thank you! Agreed. Love this comment!

[@LondonEE16]

People are too easily swayed by media and politicians lies. Look what happened in the UK with Brexit. People voted (albeit by a small margin) on something on which they were little informed as well as being told outright lies by the Tories (350m a week would be redirected to the NHS - a lie pulled out of thin air and of course, the opposite happened, they are dismantling the NHS.

[@franksullivan1873]

@@karenhartman9774 Karen,Thank you for agreeing.I just keep hearing from politicians that they have the best interests of the people and are always a disappointment.Why can’t we have our own best interests in a solid vote on what the majority of citizens choose to vote for?This waste of time in Congress can be made more efficient and effective if we decide the changes we need....not the so called representatives.

[@UTubeISphere]

Actually, just five out of nine Supreme Court justices might be required. Switzerland probably is the country most famous for referendums and might be the best (but applicable?) case study to look at.

[@glendabarton45barton48]

Well it's just been decided by much less than that

[@ssmith2019]

Thank you Heather Cox Richardson ! Your "Letters" are truly a Lifeline !

[@bubbercakes528]

I live in a Republican dominated area and most of the young people I meet are now Democrats. My parents were lifetime Republicans and they did not vote for Trump.

[@moorek1967]

Most of the young people you know follow trends and have low self-esteem issues thinking the opinions of Europeans matter. Be honest with yourself.

[@reesetorwad8346]

Oh, did you go into the voting booth and make sure? Let's be very clear, nobody will EVER truly know who somebody else voted for, it's a fed crime to even try to find out, and anybody can SAY anything they want.

[@electrified7309]

@@reesetorwad8346 republicans all say "the democrats are cheating" but the truth is its the Republicans that are cheating with things like gerrymandering and closing polling stations in the cities on election day. In the last 20 years democrats have won the popular vote every year but for some reason republicans keep winning. Can you please explain this. Please 🙏

[@englishsteve1465]

@@reesetorwad8346 - Let's be very clear, as you suggest. People are free to divulge the way they vote at any time and they very often do so. Could they lie ? yes. Do more than a tiny percentage lie ? I really doubt it. Is Reese super salty because he is probably an old, white, Trumpanzee who wants to turn back the clock ? Oh yes.

[@reesetorwad8346]

@@englishsteve1465 lmao, You poor thing, you're not even on the right planet. How could you possibly be that wrong? What's worse is that even if you'd been correct, your statement would still be completely, utterly irrelevant. Now, you tell me: Am I trying to win you over? Better yet, stfu until you learn how to read. Edit: Btw, "Trumpettes" is objectively better. And why insult chimps?

[@MCJSA]

Communicating through emotions in narrative reminds me of George Lakoff's work on framing and metaphor. Also work in computational linguistics to identify specific rhetorical markers in the use of vocabulary / terminology to signal specific attitudes or trigger emotional responses sympathetic to a particular policy or ideology. Work has been done on this with the British press at Lancaster University.

[@rapauli]

OK, her predictions were spot-on. Bring her back for more.

[@jessereichbach588]

Her predictions were the complete opposite of true. Many of them completely unverifiable or unfalsifiable. What reality do you live in? And overall things have been worse since..... lol

[@ciri1993]

@@jessereichbach588 Lmao

[@ginagasior9414]

If it was about FREE AND FAIR voting every state would have mail in voting, drop boxes, same day registration/voting...

[@keithwilliams8342]

and how do you prevent ballot box stuffing? free, fair, and VALID VERIFYABLE VOTING is what is required.

[@fotenetrigonis3081]

Simply one of the Best Historians and Human Beings who truly strives to share her Immense Knowledge and Passion of History. Professor Richardson is a true Patrol and uses her gifts to advance the understanding our current Politics are in and thoughts of what a true Democracy should be to benefit the majority of all us Americans.

[@kevinrussell1144]

Yeah, she's on the Red Patrol and Communist-apologist tour. If it is a VERY short book, it may not be enough for bird-cage liner.

[@karenhartman9774]

You know you’re standing on the truth when the bots and culted ones jump on your comments!

[@kevinrussell1144]

@@karenhartman9774 My computer (or KZbin, or software connected with the site) won't even let me see the threads preceding your comment. If you're saying I'm a bot or cultist, I have no comment, but I think you're referring to Prof. Richardson and fellow travelers. She and they are post-Modern, which means truth never figures in anything. Tongue in left cheek she implies the South "won", then proceeds to tell more Marxist whoppers that her flack brigade laps up greedily. My bird prefers the funny papers to Ms. Richardson's cr*p.

[@JerryGarciaPOBox]

​@@karenhartman9774 isn't that the truth. The sad truth.

[@xtinkerbellax3]

@@karenhartman9774 Especially when they trot out the C word.

[@marilynworth997]

I agree with Richardson's observations about modern readers and how to write books for them (us). I find that big books are often written by younger writers, and small books are often written by older writers, (often the same writer years later) -- who now have the power to distill their ideas into an elixir truly worth reading.

[@MarmaladeINFP]

The reason is that those older writers already supported their arguments with evidence in previous books. But it is counterproductive to attempt to distil one's ideas before one has even proven one's ideas as evidentially valid

[@MaitriNancyLivingCoCreatively]

Have read and listened to Heather from the start . Thank you Oxford. 💙💙💙 Lincoln was a progressive in my view.

[@hugovargas7411]

Especially for his time

[@maplebrook1955]

I really enjoyed hearing her present different events in an historical context, as opposed to one side or the other just continuously spewing forth their self righteous diatribe. It was so refreshing just to consider different views on a variety of topics rather than focusing so seriously on whether I agreed with her or not. It makes me recall how much I enjoyed watching Bill Buckley's Firing Line because the dialogue always seemed to be so thoughtful and reasonable. I'm also reminded of the conversations I used to have with my old conservative uncle. We didn't always agree, but we enjoyed the exchange of ideas. At this point, I'm interested in hearing her views on the reversal of Roe vs Wade, and what seems to be an increase in the number of mass shootings.

[@MarmaladeINFP]

Of course, in this talk here, HCR specifically points out that Bill Buckley was one of the signs when things were going wrong in America.

[@katherineburford7864]

Great comments. When her speech slows down, her thoughts are succinct and form logical shafts, repetition decreases, and reflection increases, the presentation is fine. Consider listening to Mr. Rogers as a model. Thanks for giving us this perspective.

[@TheJamesRedwood]

Wow, so confident, rightly so. Powerful stuff.

[@intercat4907]

This video is why we educate the next generation. Brava.

[@Queenie-the-genie]

Wow - what an avalanche of valuable information. brilliant.

[@kevinrussell1144]

What an avalanche of racist, Marxist garbage.

[@averayugen8462]

I heard in 1971 the James Shenton course on the Civil War and Reconstruction. Played on WBAI. Seems like this hovered around his theme too

[@marjohnsmusings3222]

This is so important right now.

[@Paulus1]

Excellent book that explains a lot. Well worth reading.

[@tamilhoward9708]

Loved this presentation of the timeline of lies and storytelling to gin up Americans against each other. And thanks for naming the players since the late 1800s and through the 20th century to today.

[@NarguesseMcKellip]

Please, Americans, listen, really LISTEN, to this highly intelligent, deep-thinking political historian. No one explains better or more rationally the direction America might be taking if we are not mindful of history. Don't think it cannot happen here.

[@IhateCCP]

Please, be aware of her biases. She is a propagandist. Not a historian. (although you may argue all historians are propagandist). Her writings are not made with rigor but emotional appeals. Please please double check her claims. They are not true, they are merely emotional potent oversimplifications (per Chomsky).

[@HabAnagarek]

@@IhateCCP still waiting for your point by point, annotated retort.

[@IhateCCP]

@@HabAnagarek Her logical fallacies are numerous. I will give you one example. She does not understand what 'liberal' or liberalism mean. She uses that term without rigor and in fact is describing neoliberalism. She try to ascribe liberal ideology onto neoliberals. This is not only a logical fallacy but just outright wrong. She also touched on Communism. She does not understand Communism. She has an extremely pretentious understanding of Communism.

[@HabAnagarek]

@@IhateCCP You say a lot but explain nothing. Empty words.

[@hitthegoat]

@@IhateCCP what the fuck are you talking about

[@arwurth]

The "What divided us?" Question around 19:29 was terrific to listen to. It really has become the same as pro wrestling

[@jakelong6860]

Trump rallies on full WWF display.

[@karenhartman9774]

Grateful for this interview. I’m glad to subscribe.

[@renata31000]

Brilliant, indeed. Thank you!

[@markholbrook7181]

Coming to this late (and have subscribed you your newsletter). One timely read that addresses some possible reforms that might get bipartisan support: After Trump: Reconstructing the Presidency by Bob Bauer and Jack Goldsmith.

[@toddlichtenwalner8461]

Superb critique of oligarchy in the US.

[@cecilwinthorp4038]

It never ceases to amaze me how what once were rational and thought provoking conservatives having been transformed into irrational fascist and the saddest part is that they're completely oblivious to their own transformation.

[@xtinkerbellax3]

Nah, they're aware. The constituents are largely fools but the politicians know exactly what they're doing.

[@davidtrindle6473]

Some listen to fox all day, and that’s the info they rely on.

[@andramcdowell3193]

Excellent 👍💯

[@MaiTaiCassanova]

Spot on! Excellent discussion and so very necessary!

[@atibakojo3478]

I've been saying it something like this for years. How can your battle flag still be flown if you really lost? How do you have statues of traitors in your cites? Lol Ah America.

[@dhulbert855]

Really interesting that the less disparity between the rich and the poor, the more the general populace believes in leveling the playing field! Something about that struck me as oxymoronic...

[@marcusdavis5599]

It's not true though. Not materially. Just rhetorical. They more we made strides socially there was a reaction it.

[@dhulbert855]

@@marcusdavis5599 Not sure which aspect of Heather's assertion you're disputing. The 'reaction' to it was in the general populace or in the oligarchy who foisted the view on the populace?

[@Hassan20118888]

Great interview. Interesting book.

[@akesha4138]

Wait! Have to put on my I.Q.. booster cap to take this all in - her ability to free associate important historical events in context, importance and chronological order is truly outstanding, Hence the listener is NOT expected to take it all in one one session. Review will be needed to fully understand this presentation to the fullest. Core I.Q. is created by exposure to new conceptual material, where the ability to use information to simply enrich one's overall knowledge is present. Accuracy is when the conceptual and actual events do correlate in the light of the present. I admit to being entranced by her intellect.

[@jarrodanderson2124]

How the clickbait snagged a youtube recommendation.

[@ebthedoc4992]

Thanks, Prof. HCR, for the reminder of why this old New Englander so loves the thinking Downeast mentality. I was 13, when our Dad (originally from Silesia) farmed me out to an elderly patient in Dover, one Summer: Clarence farmed ~ 65 acres of shore near the Bellamy Reservoir, and was a deep thinker - he taught me hilarious jokes, and how to hay huge fields behind a pair of evilly farting hosses, with rake and pitch-forks. The eroded, deeply scarred granite roots of what were once the tallest mountains ever, on Earth lend gneiss to your backbone, don’t they…

[@jurassicnev67]

Heather is such a legend of Integrity.

[@christopherroe6432]

Recently read several George Orwell essays. Short, powerful, and memorable. What's not to like?

[@nickdannunzio7683]

Myths are like air-mattresses... they feel really good to rely on, and are usually filled with hot air (like this vid)... yet when deflated, the uncomfortable, cold, hard, underlying truth is revealed...

[@SwisstedChef2018]

Anyhow, fantastic discussion.

[@johnwisdom9208]

Came across this today, and I wonder what you’d say today. Love your old books in the background .

[@IExpectedBSJustNotThisMuchBS]

I’ve been saying this since Reagan.

[@gerahasse4307]

Incredibly interesting and relevant.

[@debrasnider7116]

Thankful for you

[@MrSidney52]

If they won; why are they still fighting it? I would agree that the concessions they got founding the country has tied it in knots every since. Just imagine how much further advanced in every way imaginable if we didn't have a conservative millstone around our neck?

[@arinthel]

Probably as advanced as Eastern Germany was compared to West Germany.

[@MrSidney52]

@Alex Wolf I use conservative as an encompassing term to define the right. I would argue they have never really wanted to assimilate into the 'United' State. Right from the start the south insisted on States rights. Instead of one set of laws good enough for the whole country. In theory they wanted to keep slavery. In practice we can't be united with each state going separate ways depending on who wins office.

[@MrSidney52]

@Alex Wolf If that helps you sleep at night.. Historians in general disagree. But that doesn't really matter does it?

[@yfna1]

@Alex Wolf I would say the Confederacy fits every definition of " conservative ". Small government, state's rights, to such an extent that it hampered their ability to wage an effective war. Jefferson Davis had to fight for a greater degree of integration and cooperation between the states, some of whose governors considered him a tyrant. Deeply religious, rooted in tradition and the maintaining of a status quo rooted in landed aristocracy and of course, the retention of chattel slavery. Even after the war, and the end of reconstruction and the military occupation of the south,, the states which composed the Confederacy sought to continue many of the same practices under different names. Share cropping, prisoner leasing, black codes, Jim Crow... The Confederacy was a conservative, white supremacist, separatist movement, largely orchestrated by the wealthy land owners.

[@grayden4138]

@Alex Wolf "The Confederacy was not conservative" and gonna have to stop you right there, because that is categorically false. They were, by today's political standards, Conservative. The party names swapped, but the values, ideologies, political, and social tenets have largely remained the same. Any group of humans who claim to be for freedom, equality, and justice who also think it's their right to keep other humans as property, and because they see them as less than human or even inhuman, aim to prevent them from exercising "God given" rights or outright claim they have no rights, are not a rational group of people. I don't even know if calling Southern Americans, both pre and post-civil war Conservative or Liberal makes a difference. It was entitled, self-anointed rich, white land owners too lazy to do the work themselves, and too cheap to pay anyone a decent wage to do the work because that would eat into their bottom line. Sound familiar? Its a lot like corporate America today.

[@katejudson8907]

Refreshing.

[@vKarl71]

For anyone interested in accurate information - such as historians - it's terrible that Google has eliminated the automatic posting of the date of KZbin uploads - and seems to have removed the dates from most videos. This vid was from September of 2020.

[@massonman9099]

are there two books with exactly the same title?

[@truthbtold2910]

So I'm fairly bright, read a lot. I consider various points of view, and this how I felt after listening to her go on and on. 😳🤪🤯

[@velmex12]

That title should gain a lot of views and book sales.

[@petercolledge2236]

May I ask how much the work of WEB DuBois has influenced Heather's book?

[@markabbott3936]

I'm reading DuBois's Black Reconstruction (a history of the Civil War's end and the several decades thereafter, with lots of detail on the black population's role, views, and actions/reactions) ... and I'd guess Heather R. found this detailed account VERY influential in her work. As well she should have -- I have learned TONS of stuff from DuBois that seldom even got hinted at in any U.S. history course in college.

[@OldHeathen1963]

@@markabbott3936 Community College?🤔 Because it wasn't Yale!

[@edwardromana]

Very interesting Q&A but how does all this support "How the South Won the Civil War" thesis

[@skyeseaborn1170]

Fantastic job!

[@josephhuether1184]

What a difference a 2 years make. It is worth noting how easily Heather was able to throw up concerns predicting the possibility of “hacked” voting machines in 2020 and what it says about people’s perceptions of election integrity ACROSS the political spectrum. To the “engineer” in me it just points to the continued need for a combination of analog and digital technology along with human oversight that allows broad and easy access along with redundancy that enables sound verification as elections get tighter and tighter in the future. For the most part we DO still have this.

[@rayRay-pw6gz]

You make no sense.

[@kennethbailey6634]

I think this fraud stuff is saying that we don't believe our Secretary's of State and the DOJ. To me that is scary,I believe them. We didn't know about the sealed boxes and certifications until now. If they are doing their job,and it appears that they are and have been. Than why is anybody questioning of the election officials. This is going down a chance crazy road to nowhere.

[@rayRay-pw6gz]

@@kennethbailey6634 if you can get enough people to repeat the lie . The lie becomes real . That is their game plan . And it works.

[@jennymisteqq5399]

What about mail-in ballots? Plenty of shenanigans there.

[@xtinkerbellax3]

@@jennymisteqq5399 According to who?

[@mka1967]

No....that whole argument that we wait for the bad people to die is a really dangerous false hope.

[@danielwnorowski2553]

More bad people are warming up in the bullpen

[@lifecloud2]

Ah! I love this line: "The individual against the behemoth state." I know this was related to McCarthy but I can see how it applies to trump.

[@Zimmy907]

I alone can fix it.

[@lifecloud2]

@@Zimmy907 HAHAH!!

[@dominique217]

Is it The Wrap?

[@cookiebuzz]

I really enjoyed this interview and will look for the book. (But tell me Professor, just how many cups of coffee did you drink prior to the interview 😂)?

[@wmichaelh29]

There's a lot of good stuff here. I just wish I was smart enough to understand it all.

[@thetombaxter]

Did she mention Stetson Kennedy's How the South Won the War?

[@MCJSA]

The structure she is describing, 7,500 word chapters written as essays, reminds me of Barbara Tuchman's work.Tuchman was not a professionally trained historian, so maybe that's one reason she didn't always follow traditional historiographical formats.

[@RichardYoung999]

Excellent

[@WBradJazz]

So smart

[@jamesbailey5350]

I believe that the candidacy of Ross Perot was a stalking horse ploy hatched by the Republicans, which spectacularly backfired. One of the remarkable things about the Reform Party is that not only did their rhetoric parallel WWF scripts, but they actually ran pro wrestlers as candidates.

[@OldHeathen1963]

I'll take Jessy over PeRot any day of the week!!

[@lawrenceralph7481]

Historians always have to have an angle. Is it the best angle after 150 years and perhaps 100,000 books on every minute event real or imagined regarding the First American Civil War?

[@avjake]

Clearly, I should have been listening to Heather running play-by-play during the insurrection.

[@fairalways]

But...were not a democracy. The EC and our lack of equal representation via the Senate strikes me as the sticking point in that foundational idea.

[@klausbrinck2137]

Most countries aren´t democracies, but republics. And for a republican, democracy is the same as communism to a Nazi: The eternal enemy... Democracy is the nest evolutionary step after the republic, and thus, the greatest threat for any republican. Imho the republic stands much, much nearer to oligarchy, than the republic stands to democracy. Or, in the worst case (since the Romans were the ones to have invented it, so, what can you expect?): Republic is just a cover name for oligarchy.

[@milycome]

Yes, of course you're correct. I totally agree. We are Not a Democracy. For the first roughly 90 years of our country neither blacks nor women could vote. For an additional 50 more years before women could vote. What about voter suppression have to do with Democracy? Nothing whatsoever. What does Gerrymandering have to do with Democracy? Absolutely Nothing Whatsoever. And of course, as you mentioned two Senators from each state regardless of population has Nothing Whatsoever to do with Democracy. Proof positive that the U.S. is of course Not a Democracy. Case Closed !! The only True Democracy is one where you have a one person one vote popular vote tally to determine the winner.

[@klausbrinck2137]

@@milycome In modern societies, it seems to be the best. But don´t loose the focus on the best (and most unrealistic) solution: People are educated enough, to argue logically and civilised. One, really anyone, makes a proposition, and by voting, the least viable propositions are excluded. Then a new discussion-round begins, and voting follows, till one single proposition is left. That´s how it was done in ancient Greece, and the reason they viewed Romans as barbarians, even after they got conquered by them. We don´t need a private company like Google spying on us, in order to feel the pulse of the nation, and provide the products that will make us happy! Not if we decide, that we can make it (even much better) by ourselves. In ancient times, they would vote once every day, so, it´s impossible today???

[@milycome]

@@klausbrinck2137 Yes, having a direct democracy where virtually every issue is voted upon weekly or even daily is more doable today then ever before due to technology. Everyone 18 years of age or older gets to vote on all issues from their computer or smartphone. The system would be set up in a super secure fashion totally immune to being hacked or having votes changed. The security issues would have to be worked out first. Also, the laws or issues voted upon would have to be fully explained in detail and truthfully and accurately presented so there would be no room for inaccuracies, misunderstanding, or falsehoods in what it is that you're actually voting on.

[@fairalways]

@@milycome and yet, that obvious truth gets so easily buried by so many who wish to idealize us.

[@Nigelrathbone1]

Misleading book title - She's talking about the evolving politics through the decades following reconstruction.

[@saintlybeginnings6296]

15:14 - guess since this was prior t the ‘correct’ results, she is allowed to say this w/o being removed from the internet and cancelled.

[@sandicampbell3252]

As I watched this, we've just had the third of the Jan. 6th hearings on the insurrection. We could probably could fuel the planet with the energy of heads spinning alone at the moment. I start every day with "Letters" and can't give Heather enough praise (without it sounding like hero worship).

[@gaguy1967]

how come no one was charged with the crime of "insurrection" ?

[@jds6206]

Everyone has an opinion. Some opinions are well documented; some are emotion-based. They all matter.

[@Bigwave2003]

8:13 Still not talking about How the South Won the Civil War. Goodbye. I'm here for specific info, not a gab fest.

[@dibensy59]

I'm always amazed at modern white people that are critical of their white ancestors who created a country for them to inherit and enjoy instead of thanking them. As Robert Frost said, " A liberal is a man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel. " I think this applies to Heather and I hope she can overcome her bad case of presentism and appreciate what's left of the country her founders had intended for her.

[@duncan4034]

Some of us prefer the historically accurate story of who our forefathers actually were, and some prefer the mythology

[@phaedrussmith1949]

Not certain the founders had the "hers" much in mind.

[@anthonynicoli]

The Dalmer account is chilling.

[@georgefurman4371]

This is why we should always take the official revised history with a sceptical and critical attitude and research the actual facts with intellectual seriousness and without prejudice for shocking opposed conclusions. By the way ..another Trump adm. will mean full blown fascism. That is a fact already normalizing.

[@456zounds]

Yes, including the damned Warren Report "official narrative"...as well as the "9-11" junk report "official narrative" (with Arabs having "downed" the towers...when there is VERY little evidence for that).

[@georgefurman4371]

@@456zounds good to be critical of those institutions conspiracy narratives. I would not dwell in them.

[@456zounds]

@@georgefurman4371 You seem to be missing the point. The Power Elite (the "Revisionists") pushes these NON "Conspiracy Theory" fake narratives. In fact, that term (as Mark Lane insisted LONG AGO) was essentially invented by federal agencies IMMENSELY eager to debunk the many critics of the (blatantly dishonest and politically motivated) Warren Report. The Kennedy assassination "Lone Nut Theory" ...and the "9-11" "The Arabs dunnit!" official narratives are PURE JUNK...and speak of plenty of "mischief" "behind the scenes."

[@georgefurman4371]

@@456zounds I believe there is a conspiracy narrative. But the most important to give relevance is that off the economic class in power. The ones corrupting government in order to take government are the ones promoting those conspiracies to deflect from the struggle for democracy. And the ones that divide us and deflect from their responsibility in the way the economy is handled. The political right is the problem since they are invested in that campaign to obstruct all attempts at trying to give us a real democracy.

[@marilynbables8071]

Viva Appomattox!!!

[@drewdp515]

Im only three minutes in and i already have a sneaking suspicion that she's never read John C. Calhoun. Which is kind of disturbing if true.

[@quiggleyscripple]

How would her reading of Calhoun (or not) have changed the material covered in this interview?

[@TTTzzzz]

You don't have to be smart to be a dictator. Ruthless, yes.

[@jakelong6860]

Dam she was 100% on point. How can she be a conservative is just crazy.

[@dominique217]

A year later, it's interesting to see how threatened many are by this historian. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

[@marcusdavis5599]

Her predictions were dead wrong.

[@dominique217]

@@marcusdavis5599 Sure. 👍🏽

[@bubbercakes528]

I’m not threatened by her at all. It is the radical right which threatens me. Those racist, ignorant savages who push nationalism and old testament mentalities.

[@chrispaschal7955]

Threatened by what?

[@Anthony-hu3rj]

@@marcusdavis5599 1) She said Trump would lose. He lost. 2) She said if Trump doesn't get elected he will inflame his base into a scary level of division. I don't see anything where she is "wrong."

[@Solar10101]

How do you feel now?

[@geofromnj7377]

Bill Kristol writes for the Daily Beast.

[@MaitriNancyLivingCoCreatively]

Love you Heather. I guess you saw seditionists coming.

[@michaelgreene6441]

Lemme save you an hour. “They didn’t”

[@djstarr-lowery4047]

Please. When are we going to let it go? I was born and raised in Pennsylvania so please forgive but we spent maybe four pages on the civil war. My husband and I (he's a southerner) we're married on top of Kennesaw mountain. Why? Because I was so tired of hearing his family talk about me as a Yankee that we felt this was the best way to calm those Waters. But here we are over and over and over. When people stand up for slavery - ownership of another human being, how does that make sense? I often wonder about the women who justify the civil war, do they also justify women being chattel? If you're going to continue to bring it up then descendants of slavery have a right to continue to ask for retribution

[@radishpineapple74]

I'd recommend skipping the part from 6:49 to 13:27 when she talks about the production and publishing process of her book. Most people are not interested in this.

[@robcoghan5204]

At least she didn’t have a bias

[@-xl7ep1se3i]

สวัสดีคะทุกท่านที่เคารพอย่างสูงคะ

[@windomearle2932]

If you want people to read the book, it would be helpful to provoke some thought in the first ten minutes.

[@456zounds]

There were a few good ideas here...but she NEVER discussed the premise of her featured book!!! How DID the South win the war, dammit?!!!

[@1ouncebird]

Yes, what the hell? I know that the South / Conservatives have continued fighting the civil war for 150 years but I didn't know that they had won the thing.

[@456zounds]

@@1ouncebird As it happens...I believe I have PART of the answer...in that MANY of the US military bases (and plenty of "porkbarrel" funding) have historically gone to the South, but this interview seemed to have ZERO content on the premise of her book. WTH?

[@MsMathChique]

11 minutes into her talk and I have no idea what her book is about but there is a lot of story telling about what?

[@baja1988_Texas]

"Cowboy individualism" describes everything you need to know about Heather. She hates John Wayne and loves John Lennon.

[@rentiap]

I have been searching for quite some time to find a treaty of peace signed between the North and the South at the so-called end of the Civil war. Like the Paris peace treaty between Britain and The thirteen colonies 1783. Can anyone supply such a thing?

[@Jeffhowardmeade]

No. A treaty is something agreed to by two sovereign states. The Confederacy never achieved sovereignty, and the United States was not about to legitimize the rebellion by agreeing to one. The closest thing to it was the various oaths former Confederates had to take before voting or holding office. The war was officially concluded on August 20, 1866, when President Andrew Johnson declared it over.

[@jamesbailey5350]

Ratification of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments as a condition to exit Reconstruction, and be restored to the Union.

[@rentiap]

@@Jeffhowardmeade Yeah sorry. A declaration by an employee of the Congress is not in any way the same as a peace treaty. Nice try. We're still under General Orders No. 100 by President Lincoln, 24 April 1863.

[@rentiap]

@@jamesbailey5350 The 13th was the smoke. The 14th was telling who could be and how you would be re enslaved. and; The 15th was the way they got free people to volunteer unto the servitude, voluntarily by "registering" to vote. and then when one votes. That signified your agreement/consent to be governed. Just how dumb are all of you lowly, second class status, voluntary servitude 14th amendment citizens who are subject to the jurisdiction thereof the United States? Of course voluntary servitude was never mentioned, nor discussed in your Constitution.

[@Jeffhowardmeade]

@@rentiap So then we agree. There was no peace treaty.

[@ichisatori]

capitalism depends upon inequality, not democracy.

[@TielhardSJ]

Democracy cannot survive in the presence of Capitalism.

[@MaitriNancyLivingCoCreatively]

@@TielhardSJ I so agree to both comments. Capitalism is heirachy. Screw non whites and poor.

[@ddaengdad4123]

@@TielhardSJ when you acknowledge that your aren’t capable of managing your own life successfully.

[@jameseverett4976]

When will at least one marxist, communist or socialist start a company and pay their employees a comparable wage to what they, the owner, are making? Answer: NEVER. Never in a million years. Marxist are as ruthless as anyone when it comes to business. Everyone is a capitalist when it comes to their own possessions, assets and businesses. The day a socialist lives according to his/her own beliefs, then my ears are open to anything they have to say. Why is that that Christians are always challenged, and pressured to live as they teach, but marxists/socialist NEVER are?

[@TielhardSJ]

@@jameseverett4976 Why are you telling lies to defend a point that nobody made?

[@narkelnaru2710]

@ 14:40 ...... This is an extremely important point about the voting machines. I hope someone else can corroborate this story so that this be clearly documented. In no sane democracy should even one vote be compromised. If the story about voting machines in North Carolina is true, then it needs to be cited as the fallibility of elections in America. This would be a bigger news story than Kris Kobach's wild goose chase after 2016.

[@heroicskeleton1566]

Really? They hold elections for one day on a weekday, and limit poling locations in certain areas just to make it harder for certain people to vote. Districts are garrymandered to shit, and the electoral college disproportionately favors smaller states... but somehow THIS compromises our infallible "democracy"?

[@narkelnaru2710]

@@heroicskeleton1566 If the counting is compromised .... in any way whatsoever ... then everything else is compromised. Also, we Democrats are against voter-suppression of any kind.

[@elless4817]

If we want our votes to count we need to get rid of the Electoral College system. Hillary got 2,865,075 more votes than Trump but she lost because of our stupid voting system. That’s almost 3 million voters whose votes were essentially erased. Gore lost to Bush in the same way. It’s an out dated system that we no longer need.

[@Gk2003m]

6:00: yes, the people embrace a national fiction. They’ve been primed all their lives to do this, by sitting in the pews and uncritically accepting the staggering fiction foisted upon them by priests, rabbis, reverends, imams.

[@marbury2403]

That's been my experience. And we thought the Soviets were the ones doing that.

[@Gk2003m]

@@marbury2403 They were. They made a religion out of Marx. A godless one, but a religious belief system nonetheless. Complete with the fearless leader - savior persona (Stalin).

[@andrewbarnowski3602]

@@Gk2003m sorry but please read a little more, Stalin wasn't a fan of Carl Marx. Seriously read some of the man's writing, Stalin wanted state owned means of production, Marx didn't, Socialist Communist sound alike but have different figure heads and ideas. God how are education system fails us

[@Gk2003m]

@@andrewbarnowski3602 you are saying that as if I claimed stalin fulfilled the visions of Marx. I’m well aware there are differences. Marx imagined that his vision would implement itself automatically, as capitalism failed again and again. When I say “made a religion” out of something, it means (in my mind anyway) a perversion. Religion is perversion. What’s true is true; the same thing believed is a lie. Religion is always belief, and is always a lie. Btw, Marx’ prescriptions for the problems of capitalism were flawed. However, his analyses of the problems themselves were spot on.

[@Raydensheraj]

@@Gk2003m Stalinism is a thing...Stalin was just another authoritarian Fascist.

[@porterbrass]

All of this comes down to some very basic principles from our constitution, that “all men are created equal”. Some argue that this has been misinterpreted, because many of the authors were slave owners (ex. Thomas Jefferson). I find these arguments to be completely silly and racist. Just like God gave us brains to think, the constitution gave us brilliant guidelines, with the assumption that future generations will have common sense and large portions of human dignity to march further forward. Unfortunately, in modern times, common sense has been overtaken by even more clever and crafty forms of evil in politics. You are correct that those that stand for honesty and integrity in our democracy must shout louder than those that don’t. It’s simply truth that many people were enslaved against their will in the early part of our history. The fact that they want to be respected and participate equally in the American dream should not be interpreted as a threat to white people. It should be celebrated as our constitutional charge to make it so.

[@GuessWhoAsks]

The Bible allowed its followers to own slaves though.

[@porterbrass]

@@GuessWhoAsks Old Testament. Jesus brought forth a cleansing of the old ways of animal sacrifice and slavery. Your contextual point is exactly what slave owners used against their slaves on the plantation and in church. Be careful with using single verses for justifying hatred and prejudice because the Bible has many of them as examples of sins of the time and cautionary lessons.

[@GuessWhoAsks]

@@porterbrass Jesus never condemns slavery. Where in the bible would someone come to understand that the bible does not allow its followers to own slaves?

[@porterbrass]

@@GuessWhoAsks I assume by your statement that you’re not a Christian so I suggest you read up on it.

[@GuessWhoAsks]

@@porterbrass Are you not willing or able to share your beliefs with me. Do you belive the bible is the inspired word of God and all true, or just part of it?

[@kalonicamcquesten692]

36:00 Spiral growth!

[@kalonicamcquesten692]

I want a to hear forum with you and Elisabeth Warren. Turn around the ship.

[@thomasharrison4554]

Was it “The Lincoln Project”