[Marxism] Weydemeyer : Marxist on the battlefield in the US Civil War

["Charles Brown" <cbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

ML:
A Communist Club that is not strictly Marxist in New York City in 1857  does
not prove your assertion of a national party adhereing to the  Marxist
"line" in the Civil War.
^^^^
CB: I take it you now admit that there was a Communist Club in New York.
What were the political positions in the working class oriented clubs of
other names in Cincinnati, Chicago, Philadelphia, Milwaukee et al., if any ?

Here's what I had said, substantially correct. There was one club , not
club_s_ named "Communist". However, there were working class oriented clubs
in other cities. The Marxist line in period of the Civil War was to support
the Republican Party.

CB; If the article made it to anybody in the Union leadership, it may have
been through the progressive German immigrant community, which was in
politically conscious organizations, active in the U.S. politics,trade union
and workers movement (obviously) Republican Party issues , etc. There were
Communist Clubs in the big cities which were significantly following the
Marx/Engels party line.  Although the International was not formed until
late 1864, those who formed the International, including especially Marx and
Engels ,had been much involved in rallying the British workers against
Britain joining the war on the side of the South.



Weydemeyer and those associated with him in various political forms


Nobody serious about the subject doubts whether the Union basically
won the war through the Anaconda plan.  You can't name a single
serious Civil War scholar who thinks the Union abandoned the plan in
order to partition the Confederacy along the line of the Mississippi
River or by marching through Georgia...because these moves were part
of the plan.  If you want to demonstrate otherwise, go the library and find
one serious Civil War scholar who thinks that.

^^^^^
CB: You are saying that the Anaconda plan was both to surround and tighten
around and cut through Georgia ?

^^^^^^^

People can make their own judgements as to whether they have to adjust
the dimmer....

You did not demonstrate your claim that Weydemeyer waged a successful
campaign against Confederate guerillas by consulting "another source
as to whether there were Confederate guerrillas in Missouri in this
time period. Low and behold the source I went to said there were
Confederateguerrillas in Missouri at this time. This doesn't
demonstrate that Weydemeyer fought them of course, but it is a
necessary precondition for him to fight them, i.e. that there _were_
Confederate guerillas there at all."

Sadly, you add to the above muddle, "Now it only remains to show they
Weydemeyer was fighting in Missouri at this time".  Together these
would prove: (1) there were guerillas in Missouri; (2) he was fighting
in Missouri; and, therefore, (3) he was fighting guerillas.

I'll pause here so any readers blinded by the brightness of the
argument need to put on their dimmers....

^^^^^
CB: So, whose mystifying now ? Exactly what is your version of what
Weydemeyer did in Missouri ? Do you agree he fought Confederates in Missouri
? Do you say that the biography is wrong ( no doubt because it was written
by a religious "Marxist-Stalinist" worshipping Engels and Marx as Gods),
that Weydemeyer did not fight Confederate guerillas in Missouri , or did he
? Are you saying that Weydemeyer fought guerillas , but they weren't in
Missouri ?That's the sraightforward issue without all the whatever about
brightness and dimmers. Quit playing  games. Do you say or do you say not,
that Weydemeyer fought Confederate guerillas in Missouri ? In some other
state ?

Here's what the Stalinist God EngelsMarx worshipping bio ( which is where I
got it in the first place)of Weydemeyer says:

"There still remained (after the battle of Pea Ridge), however, the guerilla
threat, against which Weydemeyer organized a full-scale campaign. Above all
it was essential to protect from guerilla attacks the line of communications
with Springfield. Along this route in the Currant River Valley, Coleman's
bands operated against the Union Army's transports. In the summer of 1862,
Weydemeyer took command of the forces against Coleman's bands.




ML


CB: Lets go back to early posts in this thread

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Brown [mailto:cbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 3:50 PM
To: 'marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: Weydemeyer and cannons

Mark Lause

Charles, the Prussians were selling cannons they were replacing and the
Americans were, at one point, buying all sorts of outdated European crap.

If you really think the guy whose post you are basing all this isn't a
reactionary moron, send him a note and ask what his basis for making such a
claim.

ML

^^^^^



Mark,

The last sent was from one of the Marx-Engels archives, quote from a letter
from Engels to Weydemeyer. In other words, the letter from Engels that I
just quoted, is a basis for the claim.  The claim wasn't that the cannons
were new and shiny, just that they were cannon.

The passage is ambiguous. It is not clear that Engels means that he Engels
has anything to do with getting the cannons. But he does seem to say that
Weydemeyer is getting cannons. Weydemeyer was a Major General in the Union
army and in artillery.

Mark, I know you are the expert, but these are not nonsensical points. Sorry
about the rightwinger. But in a way, rightwingers are making admissions
against their self-interest. In other words, there is a check on their
varacity. But I take your point  on the reactionary moron.

Charles


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism