Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (226)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Whenever people ask me why I want to join the army someday, I just pull this up on YouTube and it says it all

  • I'm a brit and just want to let everyone know that it is not customary to bow infront of the queen it is voluntary. anyways this is a good film which I own on dvd this is probably the best scene out of it.

  • Chamberlain was an extraordinaryly gifted thinker, tactician and leader. At the Confederate surrender Robert E. Lee offered him his sword.. a mark of the esteem in which he was regarded by North & South.

  • @TMMQUINN2011 General Lee never offered his sword to MG Chamberlain. He did not even offer his sword to General Grant and General Grant never asked for it, out of respect.

  • @4:08,

    Great movie and good acting, but this line is baloney. He obviously meant to preach.

  • ...no man has to bow, no man born to royalty, here we judge you on what you do, not who your father was. Here you can be something, here is the place to build a home. But its not the land, mhm, there's always more land. It's the idea that we all have value, you and me...

    Favorite line in the movie... something all Americans should remember. This is why if I ever meet the Queen of England or the Emperor of Japan, I would not bow, but instead, would greet them as fellow citizens of humanity.

  • Your so right Bush did more to ruin this great country, at every level than all of the most liberal presidents put together, obama is simply continuing what bush started, the blame is on bush for developing this cancer

  • To everyone is the South, if you watched this movie even General Longstreet said they should have freed the slaves THEN fired on Fort Sumter. He also said to the British military attache that the British gvm't should NEVER align itself with the confederacy with the institution of slavery. Basically, the south did not have the moral high ground although concerns about increasing federal power may have been warranted.

  • FREE LIBYA!

  • @Johnchuk3 No. It will become another al-Qaeda state.

  • Who would think this was the same guy in dumb and dumber....what a performance

  • Great speech. Stuff this southern revisionist history bullshit. The Confederates were nothing but traitorous terrorists. No better than the nazis.

  • being from Maine I have great respect for this man. I dont think if the 15th Alabama would have defeated the 20th Maine our men would have been shown the same respect as theirs was. True story about Chamberlain giving their soldiers water after they was defeated. The rebs where pigheaded arrogant men. Lee and the Rebel Generals was the only reason those rag tags lasted 4 bloody years. I am truly great full to come from the same state as this man. Long Live The Union!!!

  • was he really dat humble in real life?

  • In the end we are fightintg for eachother

  • I might be from the south, from the heart of Texas I love my homeland so much but it's not the worth of seeing it torn apart from slavery. In 1776 Thomas Jefferson wrote in the DC that every man is created equal. I know that some confederates were fighting for their rights and their home and I seriously respect that, but like what Chamberlain said America should all be free ground, I hate what our gov't has become but the spirit of the people of this nation has not and shall not perish

  • @guitarfreak651

    Out government has become what it is because the average citizen has become complacent and yet at the same time impatient. Lazy. Bitter. They want easy answers to difficult problems. They don't care about "truth" if it's inconvenient and would rather watch Jersey Shore or Who Wants to be a Millionaire. Nevermind the war across the sea, there are sex scandals to watch!

  • God bless the 20th Maine for saving the Union.

  • Every time i hear this speech I feel reborn...as American. As a free man, "I have your back my fellow American's".

  • I WOULD HAVE HAPPLY SERVED AS A UNION SOLDER IF I WAS LIVING IN THAT TIME. I DONT LIKE THE CONFIDERATES

  • what a great great fine man he was

  • What an epic speech, and mustache.

  • @Royalmerc "Gentlemen, I think if we lose this fight... we lose the war. So if you choose to join us... I'll be personally very grateful." -Awesome quote. Me and my friends think he's awesome because of his mustache. XD

  • Where is jeff daniels oscar??? I cant beleive he wasnt nominated for his performance in gettysburg

  • @searching900 I agree. Jeff Daniels was just fantastic in this role. This scene here stays in my mind as one of the greatest speeches given in cinema. If you have not seen Jeff Daniels as G.Washington in 'The Crossing" you really owe it to yourself.

  • @searching900 No doubt Jeff Daniels deserved an Oscar. I recall very clearly Siskel & Ebert called for him to be nominated for this performance. He wasn't even nomniated. This is a truly great performance.

  • @PFB1994 They need to do some Oscar revisions...Kirk Douglas should have got an Oscar for Spartacus...Daniel Craig for Casino Royale, too.

  • This bickering about which side was right is ridiculous. The bottom line is that brothers, best friends, and great men were killed by brothers, best friends, and great men. The outcome was the formation of a nation that could never fathom that such a thing was possible.

  • @pensacolaguy I wish i could like this post multiple times.

  • Comment removed

  • @Butternut731863 The line is what he told the men--Chamberlain was an intellectual...he wouldn't have said "this isn't a job, it's an adventure!"

  • It's a shame that Americans don't have more people like Joshua Chamberlain. The man obviously treated others with respect, had good manners, and was courteous. He believed in a set of values that he believed were right and proper. Finally, he realised that the mutineers were ordinary men in extraordinary circumstances. If more leaders were like this the world would be a much better place.

  • @malcs0 Concur; he's trying to remind us all not to be SNOBS.

  • I saw this scene many years ago when it first came out. I have remembered it and have thought it to be one of the finest moments in the history of acting. Jeff Daniels took this part and taught me about compassion and courage through General Chamberlain's words. This speech was not only about being a patriot but that freedom and justice goes hand in hand.

  • Great speech, though I can't help think it would've been better without that huge mustache covering his whole mouth.

  • AH! In the book, he says the regiment was formed last fall! The writer messed up!

  • What a great moment in American history. What a great teaching device. Would YOU shoot them? Could YOU articulate so clearly the purpose of YOUR organization today? Who would imagine an English teacher grasping the moment so well? The decision: legal? (yes) ethical? (yes) culturally acceptable? (yes) Moral? Not to Chamberlain. And the 116 / 120 who followed were the difference according to military historians. He changed American history from a tiny platform.

  • @Jajisee - What Col.Chamerblain and his men did at Little Round Tip, saved the battle for the Union and probably the war, because as he points out in this segment of the movie, Washington D.C. was just down the road and there would have been nothing to stop the Confederates if Col.Chamberlain and his men hadn't have held at Little Round Top and stopped the Confederates in their tracks. The world would have been a very different place if not for the actions of this man and the men he lead.

  • Hi All, check out the new book titled: GETTYSBURG… OTHER TIMES

    It is a great read about the famous battle. You can get your copy from my YouTube site (GETTYSBURGbook) or search Amazon or eBay.

    Cheers.

  • Love the video. Hate the attacks on anyone who happens to think there were honorable men leading and fighting on the Confederate side or didn't vote for Kerry or Obama. Take a page from the great man this video portrays and have some grace. He was the one who gave the order to the accepting Union Army to come to attention and carry arms when the Confederacy surrendered. The gesture was returned and it was one of the most profound moments of the Civil War. Dignity and respect.

  • @creed61285 Honorable men yes in SOME cases; those that wanted to keep slavery or just be militaristic war-mongers--like today's raghead haters--do not have honorable views. Their hate makes them easy to manipulate by war profiteers. Opposing the southern redneck mentality is not a vote for Kerry or Obama, either. Americans love violence stemming from their Calvinistic disdain for sex in favor of materialism that invariably results in taking resources or liberty from someone else.

  • @dynmicpara I think it's less of an American thing than a human condition thing. People will always want more than they have and they'll always fail to keep things in perspective. This leads to some pretty terrible decisions. The condition will never change, but awareness of it certainly mitigates its influence.

  • @creed61285

    General Gordon being his counterpart. So true, even R.E.Lee showed great dignity and respect when he surrendered his army, rather than it sink into a guerilla force.

  • The Civil War was more about slavery. Slavery was just the last straw. Tension was built up between the North and the South for decades. Tariffs, political parties played a role in that. I disagree with the south's views on slavery but the point of the matter is that the South felt like they had no say, no part in the government that the North had. Weather that's true or not I can't really say. But there was always hatred between the North and South.

  • this is a really great inspiring speech. I think jeff Daniels did an amazing job in Gettysburg, and in Gods and Generals as Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain. Chamberlain deserved the medal of honour for his defensive actions on little round top. what an amazing american!

  • This is a great video. Americans all.

  • I'm an Unreconstructed Southerner, I hate yankees & white liberals. BUT, Chamberlin was a first class warrior. The state of Maine should be proud.

  • While the point of this video is compassion, the idea that the North were courageous in winning the Civil War is laughable. The constant incompetence from the North's military leaders was the reason it took so long as the South was heavily outnumbered, yet had enough strategic ability to win. Furthermore, Chamberlain was a questionable figure in history since casual "historians" will tout him as a hero because of Little Round Top with only referencing his point of view, which might be skewed.

  • @cigar420 COURAGE and compassion go together. The North had it. Don't confuse senior "leaders" in the beginning with the troops. Later in the war, men like Chamberlain, Grant, Sheridan, Buford and SHERMAN far surpassed ANY of the southern general's operational art. Don't forget the south didn't even counter the Union Anaconda strategy, damning them to defeat. What Chamberlain did on Little Round Top is without dispute. You come off as sour grapes.

  • @dynmicpara As if the Confederate troops fought with any less passion? Why would there be sour grapes? My team won. I'm just saying the legend of LRT being pivotal to winning the war is questionable, and since we'll never know what Lee & Hooker's next moves were should the North have lost the flank, we can debate that point of view all day. My point was that the North should've never been in the hole to begin with since they had strength in numbers and ultimately was still a big reason they won

  • @cigar420 It's not about PASSION, it's about MORALITY. The German Nazis fought with passion, too. The south is full of weak ego hotheads who want to try to peer/self-validate with war. This subjective narcissism gets in the way of OBJECTIVE military art; in this case the Union took the high ground and used this leverage to defeat the most emotional southern banzai! charges thrown at them.

  • @cigar420 The large number of comments here from southerners trying to dodge the fact that their cause was wrong, shows they still haven't learned--yet.

  • @cigar420, People only view Chamberlain's story and take it for true. Even though the numbers constantly change after each report oh his. But as for the rest of your comment. I agree 100%

  • love it!

  • Hurrah for the Union!

  • Take this from the point of right now .. in america (the world) , do we want the nanny state, corporate elite 1984 scum take control.?. or do we set us all .. humans  free ..

    plant a garden .. get self sufficient .. re-build your communities ..get right peace ..hopeully its not too late ..

  • Take this from the point of right now .. in america (the world) , do we want the nanny state, corporate elite 1984 scum take control.?. or do we set us all .. humans free ..

    plant a garden .. get self sufficient .. re-build your communities ..get right peace ..hopeully its not too late ..

  • I have been involved in Civil War reenacting for about 5 years now and one of my commanders was a part of the 20th Maine for this movie. He told our unit that to add to the power of Chamberlains speech, Jeff Daniels spoke the entire speech in one take, and some men even had tears in their eyes when the take was over.

  • They fought on both sides for what they believed in. They were all uniformed men, fighting for a direct cause, for both sides. They both served on American Soil, and they were both, "American" as a whole. They were all heroes. Many of the Northerners had Slavery, Saying The South was "Evil" is just ignorant and stupid. They all have my respect, though I love the South. :P

  • @xxxxdukexxxx Be careful with the everyone-was-heroes angle. Germans fighting for the Nazis were "courageous", too but HEROISM should be limited to only those causes that are for the most part JUST. The cause of the south was not just. Could the war been avoided had cooler heads prevailed and technology made slave farming obsolete? Yes.

  • @xxxxdukexxxx The essential problem with the southern redneck mentality is it seeks to scapegoat, look-down on others; a classic us vs. them construct. All of life is NOT some sort of self-centered loathing.

  • everyone needs to see this movie period

  • One correction (bifocals are bad). The 3rd Missouri Mounted Infantry C.S.A. was commanded by John B. Clark. The Lt. in charge of the prison escort was Lt. James W. Graves C.S.A. He was the gentleman with keen situational awareness as well as a sense of what was truly right.

  • Love the marching music, especially the drummer :)

  • (continued) Lt. Clark knew that this group would demand the Union Officer's. Anderson's men would then rob and kill them. Clark asked the Union prisoner's to join his Confederate soldiers to drive Anderson's group away. They readily accepted Clark's offer and they were issued guns. One of the Union Flag Bearers asked if he could raise his "colors" (which he had hidden), next to the Confederate's flag. He was granted permission and the Gray and Blue proceeded to fight side-by-side.

  • Read the book "My Brother's Keeper" by Daniel N. Rolph. In his book he recounts acts of kindness that were shown by both Blue and Gray for "the enemy". One extraordinary event happened Oct 15, 1864. Co. H, 3rd Missouri Mounted Infantry C.S.A. was escorting their prisoners, the 43rd Missouri Volunteer Infantry U.S.A. when Lt. James W. Graves noticed a group of robbers/murderers dressed up as Union Cavalry in their path. They were known as "Bloody Bill" Anderson's group (continued).

  • This was when Officers and NOC's actually gave a shit about the troops they commanded.

  • This was when Officers and NOC's actually gave a shit about the troops they commanded.

  • This was when Officers and NOC's actually gave a shit about the troops they commanded.

  • One thing about Chamberlain is that at a later battle during a fierce right he took a bullet in the abdomen and it got lodged in his bladder. He refused to leave the front until the fighting stopped. That's one dedicated soldier right there!

  • Lincoln was a tyrant who drafted men to fight so that the wealthy bankers and merchants of the North could keep their profits. The South fought for state's rights and freedoms like our founding fathers.

  • @SocratesRulz Is that really so? What good are state's rights if those states enslave the people therein? If the south didn't have slavery, you'd have a case.

  • Slavery would have dissolved eventually like it did in England - Lincoln didn't make it about slavery till after Gettysburg, he USED it as a hot button issue to recruit more soldiers and make people think they were doing it for more than enforcing their ways on others. Did you know Lincoln arrested people for trying to vote in Maryland to secede from the Union? The Maryland anthem talks about what a horrible tyrant he was. @dynmicpara

  • @SocratesRulz The Maryland anthem is a pro-south rag. I can't listen to the old version without wanting to mute the source of the noise.

    We know he suspended Habeas Corpus in Maryland in 1861, no shock. It wasn't the greatest idea, but he had his reasons for it.

    Lincoln was a great president, the idea of slavery had to go, and I will still burn Andersonville to the ground one day

  • @EvaIowaCubsFan Let me know. I will come and join you. My match box is ready. Let me know.

  • This is so moving! I played this at shift change for my troops a couple of weeks ago! An inspiring movie and an inspiring man!

  • Hey, let just stop arguing, agree that the war could have been avoided and should not have happened, and admit that there were great leaders and heroes fighting for what they believed in on both sides

  • Everyone, with all due respect, the war was indeed about slavery. Please search your History of the U.S starting with the 1800's. Particulary the U. S. Senate. I suggest you read the works of Gary Gallaher, Professor of Cival War History, teaching at the University of Virginia. He has a 48 lecture series on the causes of the war, the war itself, and the conclusion of it all. States rights holds about as much water as the infamous "Lost Cause" explaination. Do yourself a favor and look into this

  • sometimes- u gotta give a man a choice to fight and die for a certain event. but if oyu ask and let em know the cost of defending- they will fight for you

  • I hope that someday i can be half the man Col. Chamberlain was, great man, brilliant, kind, fair, a perfect role model for todays officer in the miiltary.

  • what a great american

  • The civil war wasn't even about slavery in the big picture. for the south it was states rights, the north was fighting to preserve the union. Lincoln had no intentions of freeing the slaves until Fredrick Douglas persuaded him to in early 1862. I believe it was Grant who said. "If i can win the war with freeing the slaves. I would. If i can with the war without freeing the slaves. I would." just my two cents

    Cpl. Carroll 15th Mass/4th Alabama

  • Typical False, pro-Southern revisionist bullshit; the whole point of STATES RIGHTS was whether they had a right to enslave people or not. You just don't want to admit that your side was WRONG and a bunch of real HEROES from the North had to correct you, be a MAN and fix your mistake. Then you'll deserve a salute.

  • By the way you speak, my side was right, which it was. I am northerner, I have ancestors who fought for the north. Yes some people in the south did own slaves, but a vast majority who fought in the war did not. The same for their government system. Are you saying that Robert E. Lee, "Stonewall" Jackson, Longstreet, Armistead shouldn't be considered heroes? They are among the many Confederates that are heroes. I have made no mistake. I simply wrote what years of research has told me.

  • Your CONCLUSIONS are wrong. The cause is not determined by the useful idiots engaged in the disaster. Heroes to me have to be fighting for a morally sound, cause, sorry. I like Longstreet's technotactics, Jackson's maneuvering, Lee's engineering but they are not my heroes. Competent evil is still evil.

  • I find it funny how you can so easily call my conclusions, from roughly 15 years of research and 100's of books have told me. But I'll play. Here is a fun fact did you know that the four men I listed were against slavery? That Grant had servants to help his wife when he was at war? (servants was the "politically correct" term for slave back in the 1860's.

  • @ColonelTrainwreck The problem here is your MOTIVE; you are clearly grasping at minor inconsistancies to reject the greater TRUTH which is that the North fought to free the slaves; if you think Grant was wrong for having slaves, then that makes the entire South wrong for having slaves even more so. To stand on the side of truth one does not need others to be non-hypocritical, you just STAND ON IT.

  • The south wanted state's rights. This is fact. The south wanted to have strong state governments as apposed to a strong central government. You know. The way this country was founded. South Carolina realized that D.C. was getting to much power. so they left. Now, their may have been some concern over slavery, which their undoubtedly was. But in the large picture, it wasn't a state's right to slave other men. It was a state wanting to govern it's self.

  • @ColonelTrainwreck NOT. The South wanted to continue slavery which abused the otherwise good idea of state's rights. The perogatives of the state should not include one being immoral. So yes, SOUTHERN MISBEHAVIOR with slavery trashed state powers and set us up for failure with excessive federalism. Thanks for nothing.

  • @dynmicpara Maybe you misunderstood me (Perhaps not enough of my words were CAPITALIZED) I don't believe I ever said that the south wanted to end slavery. And in response to your other comment to me. I don't believe I ever said the war was over slavery. On either side. The south, for their state's rights (Which included the owning of slaves.) The north. to preserve the Union. I might have said the north turned its sights on endeng slavery towards the end of the war, Which is indeed, True.

  • @ColonelTrainwreck The large number of comments here from southerners trying to dodge the fact that their cause was wrong shows they still haven't learned--yet.

  • @dynmicpara Now that is where you are wrong. I am sorry but if you cannot honor them for standing for what they beleive, which i dont. I honor them based on the fact they were great if no excellent generals. Lee would not fight his home. Nethier would Jackson or Longstreet, they fought the north as to not fight their own family. I had a ancestor under Pickett. Richard Garnett. Blown to bits by a union cannon at Gettysburg. I am personally glad he was being on the wrong side an all.

  • @screwme55 Southern generaliship is over-rated. The man we should study and emulate is Sherman. Marching without being tied to railway logistics and destroying the logistics of the brother enemy to make him stop fighting is brilliant humanitarian, operational art the south never even came close to matching.

  • My respects. Just so you know, throughout Europe on both sides the Iron curtain, when it comes to discussing the American Civil War every historian and all people who know about it essentially share your views. Just in the USA there are apologists of the secessionists.

  • @dynmicpara "The cause is not determined by the useful idiots engaged in the disaster." Well said!

    While it is true that military leaders serving an unjust cause MIGHT be honorable individuals from a certain view, and surely a lot of people who are associated with them (or choose to associate with them) seem to relish in that recognition. But at the end of the day, those appraisals are meaningless. Personally I've never had the heart to disagree with them on that, but you tell it like it is.

  • @dynmicpara

    Despite the fact that the South started the war, the huge majority of men were fighting to simply defend what they viewed as their own nation and culture. You of all people should realize that the Soldier is not the Politician, and political motivation has little or nothing to do with the soldiers fighting it, nor the officers leading them.

  • @John234pwns Nation and Culture IS politics.

  • @dynmicpara sure, i hate confederate scum, but, they fought bravely for their cause, and they should be honored for being formidable enemies

  • @dynmicpara Question have you done any ressearch on Robert Edward Lee. I you had you would know that he hated slavery. Case and Point, as a wedding gift his father in-law gave him some slaves, which he promptly freed. The fore mentioned SOLDIERS: Lee, Jackson, Longstreet, and Armistead fought for Virginia that was their cause.

  • @Yorgar I like Lee, Armistead, Longstreet for their tactical skills. I realize that some Southern officers were anti-slavery but pro their state right to choose their conduct. Consider the Finns who were in a similar predicament fighting the Russian communists in WW2; they were not pro-Nazi but had to side with them to A POINT; they didn't fight much beyond their lost borders. If the Virginians had just fought on Virginia you'd have a stronger point.

  • @ColonelTrainwreck

    It's true that many Confederate Soldiers didn't own slaves but they were there, partly at the coaxing of those who did, to protect that way of life. To preserve slavery.

    Should those men be considered heroes? That's a tricky question. They were good commanders, there's no question about that, and they were courageous but they represented the other side, a side that stood for ultimately injustices. If you look at them separately, yes, they are heroes.

  • @ColonelTrainwreck Sir, If you do your homework you will see that most of the confederate generals had already released their slaves before the conflict started. I am a southerner. I was born in the south and raised in the south.My home is in the south. My ancestors fought on both sides. The civil war was to some a war of slavery and to some it was a matter of states rights. It was the will of of the Almighty to keep the union together. I gave 28 years of my life to preserve the union .

  • @ColonelTrainwreck But the vast majority of fighting men of any nation are convinced to fight for the wealthy interests, therefore a war can be about an issue that does not concern the majority of the citizens of that nation.

  • @montague4684 Very true. This must change. We must REFUSE to be sent on fool's errands for the rich.

  • @dynmicpara I am born in the south, but i am pro union. I wear the blue and i reenact. Union Infantry. The south took up arms to the north rather then exahust peaceable ways to it. Lincoln didnt want it going tot he courts either. Chamberlain has given a great example of why the Union HAD to win the war. Hurrah boys!

  • @ColonelTrainwreck

    Colonel, I respect your opinion, but you have to realize something. Sure, it was about states rights but states rights to do what? Preserve slavery.

    And, indeed, at the beginning of the conflict there were enough people in the north who wouldn't mind not freeing the slaves if it could just win the war but, like Grant, the opinion changed overtime as the inhumanity of slavery was better realized.

  • @ColonelTrainwreck Lincoln freed slaves before the war had begun, why do u think that was a part of the causes?

  • Col T, with all due respect, the war was indeed about slavery. I ask that you read the books of Professor Gary W. Gallager. A professor of the History of the Civil War at the University of Virginia. I have studied the 48 lectures he has presented on this subject. The theme of "States Rights" carries only a few drops of water more then the infamous "Lost Cause".

  • @ColonelTrainwreck

    "If i can win the war with freeing the slaves. I would. If i can with the war without freeing the slaves. I would." - Lincoln, 1861

    Pvt. Samuel Ridgeway/ 12th NJ / II Corps

  • @VMask1976 The large number of comments here from southerners trying to dodge the fact that their cause was wrong shows they still haven't learned--yet.

  • @VMask1976 You obviously don't appreciate the difficult--nearly impossible--situation Lincoln was confronted with, holding together a racist North to fight a slave South. Thus, we should appreciate his politics more. Lincoln's overarching goal was to preserve to Union so that slavery could be extinguished.  That is an irrefutable fact born in every public statement he ever made. Without Union, there could be no emancipation. Thank God Lincoln had prudence and not mere passion.

  • @JeffGrim

    Actually I do, but your more than welcome to disagree with me =]

  • @VMask1976 Thank you! For some reason I thought Grant said that.

  • @ColonelTrainwreck Yes, it was about "states' rights" - namely, the right to own slaves. The southern states proclaimed that they would secede if an abolitionist President were elected, and when Lincoln won, that's exactly what they did. Not for any reason other than the fact that they wanted to keep slavery intact as an institution. You can talk about "states' rights" all you want, but the only right in dispute was the right to own slaves.

  • "All races for a common goal..."

    What a bunch of propaganda. At the end of the day, each fights for themselves.

    1) directly

    2) by fighting for their family/folk/race -reflections of self

    or 3) fighting for an ambiguous blob which believes that, by fighting for other families/folks/races and calling it "American" and "moral", they are more godly than others.

    I can fight for a white Christian land and call it "American"..or "for men" - as the founding fathers would have.

  • Not Propaganda; what the Union stood for in the Civil War. You need to get over this us/them crap. There is only US; the human race we all belong to. If you don't like hedonistic black CULTURE attack that as its a CHOICE that can be un-made. Virtue is a CHOICE, embrace it.

  • "I am Kilrain!! And I damn all gentlemen."

    Long live the Union!!

  • The blue-collar mindset that is cynical will not make us better; if idealism from gentlemen is what it takes so be it, vodka martini shaken, not stirred, please...

  • You think Kilrain was cynical? Kilrain had seen the stinking remnants of feudalism in Ireland, where "gentlemen" in great manors and castles lived off the labor of others and lynched dissent, having inherited power, land, and title from their fathers in an ancient tradition stretching back 1000 years.

    'Gentleman" means lord, aristocrat, ruling class-- ie the South.

    I hope you're not including Chamberlain with that kind of "gentleman"?

    Roundheads v Cavaliers

    North v South

  • No, I mean GENTLEMAN as a MORAL, UNSELFISH leader with some IDEALISM as in Chamberlain. Let's not toss our dignity because its been connected to snobbery and leave ourselves without IDEALISM we need to overcome.

  • Well, Kilrain wasn't "accusing" Chamberlain of being the kind of "gentleman" he was damning, and neither am I.

    What Kilrain meant by gentleman has nothing to do with Chamberlain, whom he called a lovely man. Kilrain's "gentlemen" were no such idealists. They were crass, immoral, selfish, and far from idealistic in the sense that Chamberlain was.

    Definitions are in order. Idealism/Materialism have philosophical and common useages which mean different things. So do words like "gentleman".

  • Excellent, thoughtful feedback. I wanted to insure that we don't lose idealism and dignity in a knee-jerk against a badly executed gentlemen concept.

  • Men like Chamberlain are among the rare breed that that pass this earth. He is in good company with the likes of Sgt. York, (WWI) and Audie Murphy and Dick Winters (WWII). Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain will always be my hero!

  • Interestingly, the actor that played the soldier at the bottom right at 0:55 played Chamberlain's commanding officer in "Gods and Generals"..

  • The War wasn't because everyone wanted their great,great,great,great, grandchildren to be able to listen to "rap"....ONLY the ultra rich had slaves forcing the common white man out of work or possible employment- read it and weep!

  • @erwintommy I agree with you we didn't lose 650, 000 dead for black people to have a hedonistic crap gangsta culture--BUT our secret elites murdered MLK who advocated decent living and its never been same since. We must not be hypocrites.

  • When are people going to realize that the American Civil War was NOT about SLAVERY!!!!!!????? The North had slaves. If anyone thinks that an Irish, German or Chinese peasant in big Northern cities had it any better than a black person in the South I would like to hear how. Working conditions and pay in the North was the same as Slavery. It was before the Gilded Age and the disparagement of rich to poor was horrible. A dollar a day in horrid working conditions. Sounds like slavery.

  • @ItNice26 NO, THE CIVIL WAR WAS ALL ABOUT SLAVERY--do states have right to be immoral?

    Hell no. Not in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA where we are supposed to treat people with DECENCY. Let's remember that.

  • No it wasn't, Lincoln admitted it in his inaugural address of 1861. That he had no intention of ending slavery where it was and it was a war against SECESSION. IMMORAL? The North profited for two centuries from slave labor and the North also had slave ports that they used to import workers. Slavery would have eventually drowned in a growing industrial world.

  • You are being selective with the facts. You bitterly omit the FACT that Lincoln DID free the slaves legally and when virtue is acted on it needs to be praised.

  • im not going to praise the 600,000 plus Americans dying

  • No one is praising the deaths, we are praising the GOALS of keeping the union tegether and weaning the south off slavery. Now if we could wean Americans off gangsta and red neck crap we will make some progress towards greatness again.

  • I'm just saying that open- war was not a forgone conclusion and it wasnt necessary. In 1864, the Confederate congress was even pressing for emancipation and negro military service.

    652,000 deaths was not necessary. Thats my argument.

  • @dynmicpara

    You are totally modernizing the issues. There are always idealists, Chamberlain was one and an incredible human being no doubt, but for the most part people EVERYWHERE didn't think like that. For the North slavery in itself was never the issue, the issue was how much power, this institution granted the STATE, In this conflict everything revolves around what rights the state had vs. the federal gov. What Washington could, and could not tell you to do. People seem to carry beleifs

  • from the civil rightts movement into their studies of the civil war, at least Northerners. But this modernization should not happen. Because these issues, the real ones that is, are still things we battle with all the time, what rights the government has. Sadly we are headed, arriving rather in a dark, government controlled situtation. it takes events like the War, and the depression and such to move drastically in those directions, people often seem to forget that.

  • @dynmicpara Why did we have to keep the union together?

    Every nation in the world ended slavery in the 19th century, after the

    Civil War, slavery was still permited in Brazil & Cuba, both countries

    ended slavery without a war.

    Slavery, inflamed the Civil War, BUT, it was fought for money, land

    (2/3 of USA was still unsettled) and who would control this wealth

    and power.

  • @fntime and those that wanted wealth and power based on SLAVERY were wrong and had to be defeated. Does that excuse Northern industrialism as not being the lesser evil? NO. But you have to start somewhere when you fight the most darkest evil.

  • @dynmicpara Why did we have to keep the union together?

    Every nation in the world ended slavery in the 19th century,after the

    Civil War,slavery was still permited in Brazil & Cuba,both countries

    ended slavery without a war.

    Slavery,inflamed the Civil War, BUT, it was fought for money,land

    (2/3 of USA was still unsettled) & who would control this wealth

    & power.

  • @dynmicpara good words ..its interesting that the"gangsta" and "red neck crap" are both aimed at the poorer segments (both black and white) as a form of mental and economic slavery (or acceptance of it) America needs men like Chamberlain to step once again against the slavery of Corporate america and as the book "killer angels states the transplanting of nobility (wealth) as a excuse to rule the less wealthy.

  • @vardiss22 EXACTLY. Slavery is an evil CONCEPT that continues today is more subtle forms, and like you, I WANT TO END IT. Well stated and well done that you are the man like you are. 

  • @dynmicpara ..thank you for replying in kind. men like Chamberlain and others (even Jackson recognized the "new" slavery that would replace the old) lived before a time of Corporate slavery which the North would eventually come to establish in the next century..there were alot good men on both sides that overwhelmed by forces outside of their control...much like today.

  • @dynmicpara Very true. Very true.

  • @ItNice26 we dont praise the deaths. we praise the honor and bravery they showed, in order to keep together THE single greatest country in the world! well, it was, but if obama keeps this up, ill still love my country, just not what its becoming/became.

  • @ItNice26

    you do realize that we are the ONLY nation to withstand a civil war and still have no change we are the people as our constituion says so and it still is today now why wouldnt you praise those 600k men those men died so you could sleep eat pray and play in peace those men shaped our FUTURE our future as the best nation ware there is no one man who can tell us what do to we chose what to do and they listen the government gives us word over EVERYTHING now will you respect that or would

  • @TheQuadStuff Well, others have wiuthstood civil wars, too but your sentiment that unity on moral principles CAN prevail is inspiration we should take to heart. The Southerners are now kick-ass Unionists, in fact too much so. Unity should only occur by the BEST, GREATEST common denominator consensus is reached by individuals arguing for the FACTS.

  • What I am simply saying is that there was better ways to end slavery

  • TRUE. If we could have averted Civil War industrialization would have made man-power intensive slave cropping obsolete. However, the secret elites wanted to destroy America.

  • Thats hearsay. The fact still remains that the war caused more harm than good. Not just 600,000 plus deaths but the reverberating resentment that the conflict caused.

  • No, IT'S A FACT. The secret elites wanted to divide America into a pro-slavery south of lemmings reconnected the the British Monarchy Illuminati etc. Of course the war did damage, DUH that was the point.

  • @dynmicpara Well apparently back then, some people couldn't think long-term

  • Black Southern slaves had it better than "free" blacks in the north; good luck finding a job, decent living conditions, food in the North!

    For Northern whites, it was all fine to "free Southern blacks" until it meant giving something up - like their jobs, wealth, etc. It's also easier to preach about giving other races "freedoms" when you're the first son of a wealthy family, and rather than being a poor rural white, you learn about poor southern blacks after befriending H. Beecher Stowe.

  • The FIRST STEP was political freedom, which the North took for us all.

  • Black Southern slaves had it easier? You mean to say that living in a shack on master's plantation, having your sibling or yourself raped by master, or being whipped and quite possibly hung from a tree was a better living arrangement then being jobless, homeless, and without wealth? I have to disagree my friend. I think that the American continent has been bad for blacks whether North or South. You had just two different levels of treatment given to blacks.

  • "In the south white people don't like having us here (blacks) but would hate to see us go. In the north white people are against slavery but don't want us living next to them."-Anonymous African American during the Great Northern Migration

  • I have black neighbors and I like them. I don't like black gangsta hedonism nor ignorance-glorifying white red neckism; I condemn both and urge both factions to start acting like decent, thinking human beings like CHAMBERLAIN.

  • Thank you good sir, you convey the great message that must be done and enacted for our society to be great. I cannot stand southerners who praise the stars and bars, and say the phrase, "Heritage, not Hate." Heritage? What damn heritage? You mean the heritage of slavery and the heritage of how their boys in gray were fighting to preserve it, and its cruel definition? Those who have said that phrase have probably never read a history book, much less opened one in their entire life.

  • It's the difference between being a bigot and being a racist.

  • Are you kidding me? Of course the Irish and Germans had it easier. Where were the mass hangings of Irish or German men who looked at someone the wrong way? Were they called boy? Were they hung from a tree? Could they come and go as they pleased and not be mistaken as someone else's property? Were they denied military promotions? Could they not become policemen, firemen, or run for politcal office? There is a difference between being poor and black my friend.

  • And the solution to this is to be a BETTER HUMAN BEING than them; this means no gangsta rap music, driving in cars slumped unsafely in the seat, dark-tinted windows, drug-dealing etc. BE LIKE MLK not a crap music artist, be like Chamberlain

  • god rest col chamberlain...a real american hero!!!!

    "The power of noble deeds is to be preserved and passed on to the future. "

    Joshua Chamberlain

  • One of the most touching speeches I have ever heard!

  • God Bless The Republic.

  • ".....in the end we're fighting for each other." All races for a common goal and purpose....Freedom.

  • In the end....we're fighting for each other.

    Powerful words.