First of all, Gr, I don't see where I condemned Mr. Douglass' address as "history written by the victors." Are you sure, with your astute powers of observation, that I actually said anything at all about the address itself? Or could it be that my post was commentary on a different idea?

Further, you assert that I have quoted "doggerel" and a "bit of sophistry." I'm not sure how to address that assertion, seeing that the only quotation I made above was from your excerpt of Mr. Douglass.
Given that you probably were referring to the concept of victor-written history, however, you then suppose from my brief comment that I am holding this out as "a universal truth and excuse for moral relativism," a logical leap of which I can only stand in awe.

There are many things, Gr, upon which you and most of the world will not be able to judge whether you agree with me, simply because I have not told you. It may be that you are one of those folks who are compelled to sort people into a dichotomy of "agree with me on my pet topic(s)" and "other." I feel no corresponding compulsion to help you in this. I said what I intended to say.

Analyze my original statement, then.
"There was a right side and a wrong side in the late war..."
And of course the right side won. Funny how this is always the case, i'n't it?
It's tricky analyzing sarcasm; let's say that my comment just indicates I have an issue with the quoted assertion and leave it at that. What issue could that be? From your Square of Opposition you can construct several opposites to the quote. That there were two right sides, or that there were two wrong sides, or, elliptically, that the supposed right side and wrong side were reversed. The latter statement is what you seem to have leapt to, unjustifiably.

Since you insist on my making a clear statement, here it is. I don't hold that there were necessarily any "right sides" in the Late Unpleasantness. But 600,000 plus deaths are hard to comprehend without somebody being "wrong," and it is desperately important to most people that that somebody not be "us." That is the thinking that is at the core of war, when you come to it.

In closing be assured that I did in fact follow the link and read Mr. Douglass' address. So, by your logic, since I did read the address, I can rest easy that I am not guilty of the terrible things on the other side of the "or," as you presented it. What a relief.

-Glenn