The False Cause: Fraud, Fabrication, and White Supremacy in Confederate Memory

by Adam H. Domby

The Lost Cause ideology that emerged after the Civil War and flourished in the early twentieth century in essence sought to recast a struggle to perpetuate slavery as a heroic defense of the South. As Adam Domby reveals here, this was not only an insidious goal; it was founded on falsehoods. The False Cause focuses on North Carolina to examine the role of lies and exaggeration in the creation of the Lost Cause narrative. In the process the book shows how these lies have long obscured the past and been used to buttress white supremacy in ways that resonate to this day.

Domby explores how fabricated narratives about the war's cause, Reconstruction, and slavery--as expounded at monument dedications and political rallies--were crucial to Jim Crow. He questions the persistent myth of the Confederate army as one of history's greatest, revealing a convenient disregard of deserters, dissent, and Unionism, and exposes how pension fraud facilitated a myth of unwavering support of the Confederacy among nearly all white Southerners. Domby shows how the dubious concept of "black Confederates" was spun from a small number of elderly and indigent African American North Carolinians who got pensions by presenting themselves as "loyal slaves." The book concludes with a penetrating examination of how the Lost Cause narrative and the lies on which it is based continue to haunt the country today and still work to maintain racial inequality.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Civil War, American History, Race, Politics, American Civil War

272 pages, Hardcover

First published February 1, 2020

Reviews

[Christine · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you are dealing with stupid people who do not understand the Civil War, this book helps. Quite a bit.

[Tim Williams · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was looking forward to reading this book. Ultimately, though, the author failed to publish a convincing argument for two reasons. First, the book is a reaction to recent social upheaval over struggles for the dignity of black lives and the related toppling of public statues to the Confederacy, especially those erected in the monument boom of the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth centuries. The author clearly found the discourse in social media particularly fraught over the past five or six years--and, of course, it was. But did the author have a full grasp of the history and the historical arguments necessary to elucidate the nuances of these twin issues?

The book doesn't make a convincing case for either, which is the second issue in the book. First, the book purports to be about "narrative", but the author does not offer a working conceptualization or definition of narrative. Perhaps I'm thinking more like an intellectual/cultural historian with deep interest in literary studies. Still, readers might ask questions: What is narrative? What sort of narratives does the author see here, and how are they related? (For instance, is it clear that Confederate pension petitions related at all to myths of black Confederates?) How is textual narrative different from narratives evoked by monuments or reception of monuments?

Neither does the author really engage with the Lost Causes's narrative development as a genre, which was an intellectual and literary effort that began well before this study. Yet, he only cited this, as far as I can see, in one sentence in the middle of a paragraph when mentioning Edward Pollard.

The author makes the case that fin-de-siecle Confederate pension petitions reveal that southerners who did not fight for the Confederacy lied and said they did. These lies, he argues, were part of the Lost Cause, even if they only represented a slim minority of petitions. This is classic manipulation of data to serve an author's hunch. It’s more likely these men lied because they needed or wanted money and felt confident just being a southerner would not raise suspicion of lies?

There are also issues with addressing multiple issues around definitions of memory, "historical memory," "collective memory," and "Confederate memory." Likewise, issues about regional memories fall flat. He seems to think that "Union memory" disappeared over time, but that's not true at all! The clearest examples are the myths and re-tellings around Lincoln and emancipation, most recently seen in Spielberg's Lincoln and George Saunders's Lincoln in the Bardo. These are the top of the iceberg.

If the Union myth has disappeared, which I don't think it has, what of the work of northern and southern reconciliationists who, in the 1880s and 1890s, also found common ground among themselves as white men who suffered from war, regardless of stow reasons they gave for fighting? Two decades' worth of historical literature explores this development.

1.5/2 stars for me as there were some useful citations.

[Bess · Rating 4 out of 5]

Beyond arming the reader with counterpoints for your relatives that say "it's about heritage, not hate," this book is truly an education. The material is so important, especially to white southerners such as myself who were brought up on the noble Confederate soldier mythos. That said, this book leaves a lot to be desired stylistically; it was written by an academic for academics and boy can you tell!

"As many Black Lives Matter activists have tried to highlight in the twenty-first century, a society that has a history of controlling people of color with violence does not change its ways overnight [....] Similar racist beliefs as to what constituted acceptable behavior and the appropriate response to African Americans who stepped out of their place survived beyond the [Civil War].
White supremacist worldviews justified Klan killings during Reconstruction, lynching during the Jim Crow era, and the use of billy clubs, firehoses, and dogs on civil rights activists in the 1950s and '60s. Fear of black men causing white to resort quickly to violence has a historical precedent that predated the [Civil War] but survives today. That same strand of cultural continuity continues with the disproportionate police shootings of black men. In other words, the modern [Southern] Lost Cause narrative largely overlooks not only the racism within the war but also the conflicts' and slavery's continuing and disturbing impacts on American race relations." (149).

[Michelle · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an extremely important text examining the Lost Cause narrative used by Neo-Confederates and White Supremacists, deconstructing it with extensive research. The example of Julian Carr's dedication speech for the erection of the Silent Sam statue at UNC acts as a springboard for the thesis of the text quite effectively, and Domby does a great job in showcasing how memory of the Confederacy has been constructed in specific ways to further a specific ideology - White Supremacy.

I consider this book to be an extremely vital and important read for anyone interested in the topic of whether Confederate monuments should be taken down or not, as Domby does an exceptional job tying the erection and dedications of these statues to White Supremacy and the overturning of Reconstruction. Another work that I believe this would be paired with exceptionally well is Race & Reunion by David Blight as this text feels like a continuation of that seminal work.

Generally I do not give 5 star reviews to historical monographs, but this one is honestly quite exceptional and feels very urgent and necessary. If I had to find weaknesses, it is perhaps that Domby does not include extensive examinations of literature such as Gone with the Wind or Lost Cause narrative supporting and perpetuating films, as film and literature serve as a kind of cultural litmus test for values of the time and popular culture. Considering this book is focused on the specifics of North Carolina, however, it it is hard to say that that analysis would do much for looking at the legacy of the Confederacy in this single state.

If you were looking for a book to read that deconstructs the lies, fabrications, and myths of the Lost Cause narrative, this would be the one to pick up.

[Liquidlasagna · Rating 2 out of 5]

really strange book

there's interesting material in here, but the interpretations are so questionable it's like a freak show at times.

/////

The Wild Amazone

Narrow research covering a social phenomenon that has persisted for more than 150 years

Historians are supposed to be objective in their research and scholarly writings and refrain from using pejorative words and descriptions.

Yet, Domby, subjectively decided to label the entire Lost Cause as 'False" based upon his narrow research focusing on events that took place decades after the Lost Cause emerged in 1865.

He makes no effort to link the origin of the Lost Cause to his research.

His research into Confederate records is impressive and enlightening, but but his deductive reasoning is flawed.

On page 42, Domby wrote:

"Liberals are the racist in the rhetoric of neo-Confederated”. To this, I offer the following from CNN’s Van Jones: “It’s not the racist white person, who is in the Ku Klux Klan that we have to worry about. It’s the white, liberal Hillary Clinton supporter walking her dog in Central Park who would tell you right now, 'Oh I don’t see race, race is no big deal to me, I see all people the same, I give to charities’ but the minute she sees as black man who she does not respect, or who she has a slight thought against, she weaponized race like she had been taught by the Aryan Nation”

rmarksby


//////

This might explain a lot

People just have problems trying to get into the headspace of the 1860s, and will make a speculative and unconvincing thesis on the interpretation of one sentence...

........

Virginia’s removal of the Robert E. Lee statue from Monument Avenue in Richmond this week made national news. Adam H. Domby, associate professor of history at Auburn University and author of The False Cause: Fraud, Fabrication, and White Supremacy in Confederate Memory, here offers his take on the monument’s history and Lee’s true legacy.

As a statue of Robert E. Lee was lowered to the ground in Richmond, Virginia, on Wednesday, perhaps the most contested Confederate monument had finally met its fate. It was then cut up into multiple pieces to be sent into storage. When I started researching Confederate monuments, I never thought I’d see the day that the Lee statue, the largest Confederate monument besides Stone Mountain, would come down and be cut into pieces. Yet, today Americans have a better understanding of the history of these monuments than they did a decade ago. They understand the historical ties between these monuments and racial oppression.

As I discuss in The False Cause, Confederate monuments like this one were clearly tied to white supremacy from the time they were erected. As I examine in depth in the book, consciously constructed lies pervaded collective memories of the Civil War from Reconstruction down to the present. Let me take up here one particular myth about Lee that those defending Confederate monuments have pushed recently to show that monuments don’t teach history—rather, they erase the past for present needs. Looking to defend the Lee monument, many neo-Confederates and those advocating to keep monuments like his in place have claimed that Lee facilitated reconciliation after the war.

In its most recent iteration, this myth claims that Lee did more for reconciliation than perhaps anyone else. Indeed, even Donald Trump issued a statement to this effect after the Lee statue came down. Unfortunately, it included a variety of ahistorical and false pronouncements, including that “except for Gettysburg” Lee would have won the Civil War and that Lee would have defeated the Taliban(!) But the one that stood out to me was that Trump claimed that Lee was “perhaps the greatest unifying force after the war was over.” If this is what monuments like the Lee statue on Richmond’s Monument Avenue taught Trump and other defenders of Confederate statuary, then these monuments clearly failed to teach accurate history.

Today’s Neo-Confederates often cite Lee as an advocate for racial reconciliation and frequently repeat a story about Lee taking communion with a Black man after the Civil War. But as Andy Hall has shown, this story is an evolution of an older myth that Lee and other white members of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church had taken communion while ignoring a Black man who had knelt alongside them, thus showing their “superiority” to the African American who had the temerity to try and take communion with them. The Black man was never given communion. Not only is the story likely entirely fabricated, it was first used in 1905 to "prove" Lee's devotion to white supremacy and opposition to Black equality and only evolved later to claim the opposite.

But we don’t need made-up tales to know Lee’s views on race and reconciliation. After the war, Lee remained convinced of white superiority and openly spoke about his views. Pushing for the return of white rule in the South in 1866, he testified to Congress that: “I do not think that [the Black man] is as capable of acquiring knowledge as the white man is.” Asked how whites would respond to Blacks being given the vote, he responded that “I think it would excite unfriendly feelings between the two races” before eerily menacing “I cannot pretend to say to what extent it would go, but that would be the result.” Indeed, Lee preferred that Virginia might have a smaller number of congressman than to give the vote to Black men. Lee didn’t stop there, going so far as saying “I think it would be better for Virginia if she could get rid of” the state’s Black population. As some scholars have pointed out, Lee was arguing for ethnic cleansing—not exactly something I would personally deem worthy of celebration.

After the war Lee was certainly making little to no effort to protect African Americans around him. While Lee was president of Washington College (now Washington and Lee) his students sexually assaulted Black girls without ramifications and started their own chapter of the Ku Klux Klan. When Lee bothered to address racist harassment he treated it as a minor transgression, as a crime less serious than when students threatened to take a holiday. Only if you ignore Black southerners as part of the United States can you imagine that Lee facilitated reconciliation and was a unifying force.

Ironically, perhaps the one thing Lee did say that fostered any sense of reconciliation was to oppose the erecting of Confederate monuments. In 1869 he wrote that it was better “not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered.” On the surface, Lee seemed to have wished to forget the war, something neo-Confederates now accuse those seeking the removal of monuments of desiring. Although advocates for taking down Confederate monuments love to cite this speech as evidence that Lee opposed statues, in reality it was a matter of timing that drove Lee, not an aversion to celebrating the Confederacy or any evolving views on white supremacy.

His opposition to monuments in the 1860s was a political calculation as he recognized attempts to celebrate the Confederacy would lead to outrage in the North and might extend Reconstruction. Lee wanted southern whites to regain political control as soon as possible. Yet erecting monuments in 1869 threatened that. It seems likely his view of monuments might have changed had he lived to see Jim Crow firmly established. Indeed in 1866, he had written:

"As regards the erection of such a monument […] my conviction is, that however grateful it would be to the feelings of the South, the attempt in the present condition of the Country, would have the effect of retarding, instead of accelerating its accomplishment; & of continuing, if not adding to, the difficulties under which the Southern people labour. All I think that can now be done, is to aid our noble & generous women in their efforts to protect the graves & mark the last resting places of those who have fallen, & wait for better times."

That last line especially is, to me, indicative of his true feelings. By “wait for better times” Lee meant that when white southerners (the only group Lee included in “the southern people”) were no longer under Reconstruction and occupation by U.S. Army troops (what Lee meant by the “present difficulties”), then monuments would be appropriate.

Even Lee’s opposition to monuments was about defending white supremacy. At some level Lee understood that monuments seek to demonstrate who controls public spaces; erecting them too early would raise the ire of those who opposed the return to power of former Confederates. Lee died in 1870, never seeing the disenfranchisement of Black southerners or the rise of Jim Crow (Lee’s “better times”) that led to the subsequent widespread erection of Confederate monument.
Monuments do not teach history. Indeed, monuments celebrating Lee seem to have obscured the past rather than informed the public. They hide the fact that Lee committed treason, took up arms against the United States Army in an effort to create a slaveholders republic, and at times even that he was defeated. Lee’s army committed war crimes, enslaved free people, and refused to treat Black prisoners as POWs. Monuments help hide these facts by telling us that this is a man worthy of looking up to.

Monuments teach people who to admire. Until the removal of Lee’s statue this week, viewers were forced to literally look up to him on Monument Avenue. But was the real man worthy of the monument he received? Did he represent the city of Richmond’s values in the twenty-first century? The statue certainly represented the values of those who put up the monument as part of residential development that banned African Americans from buying houses.

Monuments seek to silence the voices of those men and women whom Lee enslaved, who recalled him as an especially cruel and harsh oppressor who separated families. The truth about who Lee was as a man (flawed, racist, and loser—at least when it came to the Civil War) is erased by monuments that present him as perfect. It is hardly surprising that defenders of these monuments frequently struggle to identify the root causes of the war they celebrate.

[Sandra · Rating 5 out of 5]

Succinct and impeccably researched, it is a shame the people who need to read this book the most will not. Even though I supported the author’s premise before reading, I learned a lot.

[Reuben · Rating 5 out of 5]

I love the study of history and specifically, the American Civil War. My interest has taken me from books of battles, to actual battlefields, to studies far off the beaten paths. Now, it has brought me to the study of how we remember the war itself. More than the actual conflict this particular branch of study has more application to us today than ever before. We have to get this right.

For over a century, we have not. While the war was won, the Union preserved, and slavery ended, powerful elements of the rebellion were allowed to endure and regain political, economic, and social power to continue to promote the lie of white supremacy in the form the Lost Cause.

Over time we have chipped and whittled away at this perfidious lie of ‘us versus them’ but the lie remains and mutates. This is where the studious application of good history comes in. Adam Domby’s The False Cause exposes the lie through thoroughly sourced arguments in very readable prose. He thoughtfully and articulately dismantles the Lost Cause, the motivations behind it, and leaves nowhere for the ideology of white supremacy to hide. After finishing this book, it becomes clear the Lost Cause remains a desperate attempt to retain power and anglo-saxon hegemony.

A more academic read, this book probably would not appeal to ‘casual’ readers of history. At the same time, I can’t recommend this enough. For the casual reader, this is a book worth engaging with as it ages and marinates its points beautifully and with force. Domby is an academic but that does not hide his passion for the topic.

For more in depth students of the Civil War, this will need to become required reading. Domby really focuses the book on Julian Carr and the Lost Cause as it grows in North Carolina but the implications for the south at large are there and routinely acknowledged.

In the epilogue, Domby finalizes his arguments that Confederate memory, and specifically the Lost Cause, is a lie that has been used to “justify disenfranchisement, oppression, killings, terrorism, and racist policies in the past….” and the essential role historians play in combating lies. At the same time, shining light on the stories of those whom others would have marginalized, recast, or outright removed from history in order to preserve a fraudulent past.

[Derek Griffin · Rating 4 out of 5]

You ever hear a fact or set of facts and just get the feeling it can't possibly be true? This book is the evidence for some of those exact situations. Oftentimes, we accept a set of facts for our collective knowledge but argue their meaning or significance. Domby challenges not only the validity of many of these "facts" but also dives deep to show the reason they were fabricated. Domby shows the intentionality of false narratives and historical fabrications and argues plainly for the use of accurate history to combat racism and white supremacy in its modern forms.

[InspireSeattle · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you are trying to get a better understanding of what all the fuss is about Confederate statues in America, I recommend reading Adam Domby’s book The False Cause: Fraud, Fabrication, and White Supremacy in Confederate Memory. Domby explains how “The Lost Cause” Civil War narrative came about, how statues and memorials to the Confederacy fit within it, and ties these to today’s political divide in America.

After losing the Civil War, the Union left soldiers throughout the south, and implemented “Reconstruction”, with a key goal of providing basic rights to ex-slaves. African Americans made remarkable progress for about twenty years, until the contested election of 1876 where Republicans traded the removal of federal troops from the south for Republican Rutherford B. Hayes being awarded the presidency. Southerners quickly worked to remove rights African Americas had gained.

Key to removing their rights was the need to rebrand the Confederacy’s Civil War effort as not an actual defeat, but as a heroic effort against overwhelming odds, and a moral victory. They rebranded the Confederacy’s effort in the Civil War as The Lost Cause. The title of Domby’s book, The False Cause, is a play on this term. Domby provides extensive research and evidence to show how The Lost Cause was entirely a fabrication, augmented with exaggerations and fraud, and how it provided the necessary ideological support to reestablish white supremacy throughout the south.

Domby gives many examples of how the term “white supremacy” was common language in political platforms throughout the south. To be called a white supremacist was not an insult to a 1900 Democrat; it was a party platform. It was a requirement for election. It was bluntly and openly promoted in speeches, at rallies, as well as at the unveiling of new statues to honor the Confederacy. White southerners reclaimed victory through the reestablishment of white supremacy. The Lost Cause narrative shaped the twentieth century.

Domby details the key elements of The Lost Cause narrative, then provides extensive evidence to refute each claim. The first element is that Confederate soldiers were the greatest soldiers in history, and only lost due to overwhelming resource advantages in the north. “Heroism against great odds.” Domby counters this with extensive data, including the high rates of Confederate desertion. Next is the claim of total commitment throughout the South to the war effort. In actuality, many Confederate soldiers only fought because they were conscripted. West Virginia seceded from Virginia to join the north. White southerners actually contributed over 100,000 men to the union army, and 180,000 African Americans, most from the south, fought for the north.

The third major claim, that the war was not a fight over slavery but rather for “states’ rights” and a struggle for liberty, Domby calls the most obvious lie. This ties with the fourth claim, that slavery was benevolent and that slaves enjoyed their station in the south, so much so that the Civil War and reconstruction upset a natural racial hierarchy. This claim that slaves had it good, conveniently ignores many horrific elements of slavery, including branding, whipping, permanent separation of children from their parents, and the sale of sex slaves. “Slavery was a brutal system of exploitation dependent upon torture.” In The Lost Cause narrative, slaves knew their station, and were happy to stay there. The fifth key element is that Confederates were not actually traitors to the Union, and should be remembered as heroic defenders of American principles, such as white supremacy.

Domby writes that The Lost Cause “provided a foundation on which southerners built the Jim Crow system”, as well as modern white supremacist ideology. It enforces the myth of a solid white south, and white supremacy as a seemingly ordained historical narrative. It justified segregation, disenfranchisement of black voters and racial discrimination.

Domby describes how the vast majority of the Confederate statues and memorials were erected during this period. They were tools to celebrate the post-war success of reestablishing white supremacy. The statues served to teach future generations a whitewashed past with invented memories. Today, many Americans do not understand the true purpose of these statues.

A key character of Domby’s book is Julian Carr, who was the main speaker at the 1913 unveiling of a monument named “Silent Sam” on the University of North Carolina campus. Public opinion in favor of the removal of this statue only recently gained support when it was revealed that in his dedication speech, Carr repeated stressed the need for white supremacy, and told a story of how he horse-whipped a “negro wench” for insulting a white woman. Carr declared that “slavery at the South was the gentlest and most beneficent servitude mankind has ever known,” and claimed that it was never too late to correct the mistake of granting negros the vote.

The Lost Cause narrative achieved its goals. White supremacy was reestablished in the south. Even today, 48% of Americans believed the Civil War was “mainly about states’ rights”, while only 38% thought that slavery was the main cause. Efforts to disenfranchise black voters continues today. Domby writes that “Unrelenting, uncritical defense of all things Confederate often helps provide a historical justification for ignoring institutionalized racism, disparities in opportunities, and continued discrimination.” It provides a crutch for white claims of reverse discrimination that we hear today.

Domby warns “lies have been used to justify disenfranchisement, oppression, killings, terrorism, and racist policies in the past, and they will be used so again.” He closes his book with “fabricating a past with lies and fraud might just be an essential component of American history.”

[Jim · Rating 5 out of 5]

Take your favorite neo-Confederate apologist. Strip him down and run a rasp all over his body until he's red and raw. Then slather him with rubbing alcohol. You still won't get the level of anger this book will cause.
Domby's "False Cause" is a powerful and well documented counter to the myriad of fabrications and falsehoods that have been deployed to erase the racism endemic to Confederate memorialization and history/heritage.
Domby uses the words of white Southerners to show that from the start, racism was fully part of Confederate memorialization
Domby's research is compelling, drawing upon multiple sources to dispel many of the myths used on this endeavor. His chapter on Confederate state pensions shows how pensions were used to create the idea of universal service among white Southern men. He also uses the "Class B" pensions of North Carolina, i.e. pensions for black servants of Confederate soldiers, to show how they propped up notions of black inferiority and subservience. Black Confederates? No, Domby shows convincingly.
His work will be deemed a diatribe by many, but her arguments are forceful and compelling. Hopefully Domby's research will inspire others to delve into more states' archival records more deeply.

[Dale · Rating 4 out of 5]

A Review of the Audiobook

Published by Blackstone Publishing in 2022.
Read by Jack de Golia.
Duration: 8 hours, 58 minutes.
Unabridged.

The cover of the book and the short description offered by my library app gives the impression that this book is pretty much about the "Silent Sam" Confederate memorial that stood at the University of North Carolina from 1913-2018.

This book is much more than that, though. It uses Silent Sam as an entry point into a larger discussion of how North Carolina chose to remember how it performed in the Civil War (more than 10% of Civil War soldiers from North Carolina actually fought for the Union.)

He also discusses how White men lied about their service to get Confederate pensions and the government turned a blind eye in the name affirming White unity and White Supremacy. Whites that fought for the Union (but couldn't qualify for a Union pension) or actively fought the Confederate draft with violence or by simply going AWOL at every point possible were given pensions. The idea is that by the late 1800s and early 1900s the idea was to deny that any Whites had ever disagreed with the Confederacy in the first place. If a little graft and fraud had to be tolerated to achieve the illusion of White Unity than that was a reasonable price to pay.

A large chunk of the book is devoted to making the point of the previous paragraph. It is convincing and a little tedious. Much more profound is the text of the speech that was given by a Confederate veteran and political bigwig at the 1913 dedication. Julian Carr was a political moderate when it came to African Americans in North Carolina, but he makes it abundantly clear that the Silent Sam statue is there as a visible reminder to everyone of the "good old days" when all Whites stood together against the North and all Blacks knew their place.

Interestingly, that is exactly what the modern day anti-monument protesters claimed and exactly what the Neo-Confederates denied.

The book patiently lays out all of its arguments (there are a lot more than I have laid out here) and proves its points - just not always in the most compelling manner.

I rate this audiobook 4 stars out of 5.

https://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2023...

[Joe Keefhaver · Rating 5 out of 5]

There is much concern today about "erasing history." In this highly researched book, Adam H. Domby reminds us of the history that has already been erased (or which some people are trying to erase). This history includes: That slavery, nothing else, was the primary cause of the Civil War. That there was significant opposition to secession in the Southern states. That some 100,000 white Southerners served in the Union Army. That sometimes mainline Confederate troops had to be diverted to put down dissent within the Confederacy. That the Confederate Army refused to treat black Union soldiers as prisoners of war, sometimes massacring them when they tried to surrender. That Robert E. Lee's army kidnapped free blacks in Pennsylvania and took them into slavery. That Reconstruction, which had resulted in many civil rights gains for blacks, was overthrown (often violently) by those seeking to turn back the clock on those gains. That many of today's Confederate monuments were erected to celebrate the end of Reconstruction and the return of white rule. That white supremacist speeches were often given at the dedications of these monuments. In place of real history, Domby said, certain myths have been developed: That Southern equals Confederate and all white Southerners were Confederates. That slavery wasn't brutal. That the slaves were happy, didn't want freedom and didn't know what to do with it when they got it. And the weirdest myth of all, that there were thousands of blacks who willingly served as actual soldiers in the Confederate Army! I highly recommend this book to all who are interested in history and how it relates to some of the events happening today.

[Johnathan Sorce · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm a bit torn on my review of The False Cause. I'm torn because I would absolutely recommend this book to basically anyone - it's really a must read for understanding how ex-Confederates took the truth that the Civil War began to uphold an oppressive, racist regime and turned it into a fabricated memory of a heroic, morally upright civilization which only cared about state's rights. However, I'd only recommend reading the first 2-3 chapters in entirety and then skimming the rest of the book. While Domby provides thoughtful and unique analysis, he does so in an extremely long-winded and very repetitive manner. The book could be cut down by 30% and not really loose much important information. The 2 chapters spent exhaustively examining pension fraud from both ex-Confederates and former slaves were especially tedious and could easily have been combined and shortened. I wish that instead of examining pension records, he had considered factors of the Lost Cause memory like the Rutherford Committee. Strangely, despite the book's seemingly broad title, Domby limits his examination of evidence largely to North Carolina, and I cannot help think that his audience would have been better served had he broadened his scope and consider other more interesting and more varied elements which have played into the pervasive Lost Cause ideology.

[Gregory Jones · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book does a good job of contextualizing the "Confederate monument" debate. It goes beyond the cursory finger pointing and blame game that often leads the headlines on these events. This study shows the deep roots of white supremacy and how that rhetoric was a part of the war and certainly the Jim Crow South that followed.

The author nudges readers (namely professional historians) to be bloggers, speak publicly, and engage with this material in ways that go beyond academic circles. I support that contention. I do wish and hope that there would be ways for educators to take the arguments developed here about the way white supremacy was entrenched in the war and its memory (even and especially from veterans) to create the segregated south. In other words, the lines of continuity from antebellum slavery through Reconstruction and into the segregation era of the 20th century was intentional. The detailed chapters on the Confederate pension system and the "black Confederate" myth will be sections that stay with me for a long time (and that I will recommend to others).

I would definitely recommend this book for scholars of racism, Reconstruction, or really any aspect of white supremacy in the 20th century. I think it could work for advanced undergraduates in an upper division class, although it seems more directly germane to graduate students.

[Gretchen Hohmeyer · Rating 5 out of 5]

"In fact, fabricating a past with lies and fraud might just be an essential component of American history." (Pg 170)

And so ends this book because Adam Domby did not come to play. Up front, this is an academic work with some of the most common issues with that genre (did that sentence need all those words? It didn't), but it is incredibly accessible to the lay person. Wry humor even comes out in parts, which is fantastic. In 170 pages, Domby charts an incredibly packed look at the evolution of the Civil War into the "Lost Cause" narrative. This book was published in 2020, so it references incredibly recent events (up to 2018), perspective missing from the Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader I just finished. I'm on a kick of being fascinated by what Alexis Coe calls "the lies we believe" and I might be jumping from George Washington myths to this to who knows where afterwards but I am FASCINATED. This is a must read for anyone interested in the topic or simply a concise and rich view of a shift in a historical story and continuum.

Read for an upcoming episode of my podcast on the topic of "The Lost Cause."

[Erin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well researched, draws from primary material and shows the parallels in the mythmaking between white Confederates after the war and politicians today. It's amazing how consistent some of the storytelling is.

This really helped me fill in the gaps about where some of the stories about the Civil War an reconstruction period that I learned about in school came from. It makes a lot more sense to see that the people waving Confederate flags are engaged in a 100+ year PR campaign to convince everyone of how great they are. Frankly when you look at the record, the Confederate leadership was impressively bad, and the "nation" was swiftly going broke. If the Union army hadn't won the war, it would have all imploded anyway. Understanding the mythmaking is especially powerful this year in understanding why so many people would choose a leader that wasn't very good, but said a lot of things that they wanted to hear.

[Rebecca · Rating 5 out of 5]

I suppose it only fair to preface this with I am Twitter friends with the author. Indeed because we run in the same circles on Twitter that is how I discovered this work.
Dr. Domby provides a fresh take on the proliferation of Confederate myths and lies steeped in North Carolina's history. Having already read Dixie's Daughters by Dr. Karen Cox and Searching for Black Confederates by Kevin Levin I found this to be a great addition with some good information. Especially his drawing the line between Jim Crow and Lost Cause. You cannot have one without the other. Just as how you cannot have protests against integration and the Civil Rights movement without Jim Crow.
I am appreciative to Dr. Domby for writing this work and especially the calls to historians in the epilogue for the work that we must do. It is not simply enough to publish books fighting back against white supremacy and the lost cause. We have much work to do.

[Mark Moller · Rating 4 out of 5]

False Cause - Scholarship of Veracity

Adam Domby’s “The False Cause” is an excellent work of scholarship and illumination of Lost Cause narratives and how they were buttressed by and created for political purposes. While I enjoyed the work immensely, I had hoped for a more broader focus and generalized exploration of the origins of Lost Cause myths. However, Domby succeeds, in part, by limiting his scholarship and focus on North Carolina (with reasons both personal and scholarly). One can imagine, for instance, the huge undertaking that researching Confederate veteran pension issues would have been across multiple states.

Regardless, this is an important work which highlights the utility and criticality of primary sources to write history that is not mere rhetoric. Thank you to Mr. Domby for his efforts and talents.

[Julie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Overall a really good read. The loss of the fifth star is entirely style-driven. And what’s particularly sad about that is I am pretty sure that my quibbles are things his peer reviewers encouraged him to do. The academic formula, particularly in history monographs, is a grinding, unrelenting commitment to tying every paragraph to the thesis. Coherence actually doesn’t demand that, and when it is done artificially, it annoys. But I’m being precious about this. The research is thorough, the scope limited enough to allow a depth of exploration that still manages to speak to the breadth of the whole American problem, and the argument well-supported by evidence.

[Chris Miller · Rating 5 out of 5]

The last book read of the year turns out to be the most significant. Professor Domby does an excellent job of taking the so-called 'Lost Cause' movement and demolishes the arguments in detail. In a year that has the opportunity to force us to address the issues of race and privilege in America, this book lights the way with a call to action on the issues of monuments, flags, white supremacy, and true equality. A must-read for ALL Americans of whatever stripe.

[Yitzhak · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating peek into various crucial elements of the Lost Cause narrative. The writing was very accessible, yet by no means dumbed down. The work itself was quite interesting, essentially a collection of novel historical/poly.sci. investigations into aspects of Southern society's relationship to its past.

It was a niche book in its particular content, yet the broader message that emerged was quite a general and powerful one. Given how short it is, it's well worth the read.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a FANTASTIC book! It really lays out the ties between the Lost Cause and white supremacy. As a historian, it motivates me even more to combat ahistorical interpretations of the Civil War and other historical events.

[Idril Celebrindal · Rating 5 out of 5]

As the saying goes, “There are 3 kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and Confederate defenders trying to explain their history.”

Well-researched, extremely detailed, logically presented, and further the author managed to keep it almost sarcasm-free, which impresses me greatly; I couldn't do it.

[Trae · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well written and well-argued. Maybe the best book I've read on Confederate memory, and I've read a lot of them.

[Holly Dolezalek · Rating 5 out of 5]

Everyone in America should read this book. The same impulse that prompts people to lie about history (or science) is the one that prompts people to believe in and support dictators.

[Nathan St Pierre · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a Yankee, I'm shocked at how saturated my education was with the "Lost Cause" narrative

[Elizabeth · Rating 4 out of 5]

DNF at p. 72. This was a good read but I've read at least the later chapters in other books. I honestly just gave up on the book but would still recommend it.

[Rachel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Everyone needs to read this book.

[Amber · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely appreciate that Domby is so committed to historical accuracy and applies history to our current events.

[Rachel · Rating 5 out of 5]

A beautiful analysis of what makes up the lost cause and why it isn't based on fact.