Yes, he graduated 21st in his class out of 39, but it's important to point out that they started with 77 cadets. Nearly half didn't even make it through to graduation. 🎓

Outstanding session. Thank you.

How good was Grant? Throughout the civil war, Confederate forces caused about 2.0 casualties, for every one they suffered. Grant reversed this trend. For every casualty he lost, his command caused 1.25 casualties. This ratio was helped by the eliminating of three Confederate armies by Grant's soldiers, at Fort Donelson, Vicksburg and the Appomattox campaign. No other Union commander had such 'luck'. The Lost Cause argument managed to hurt Grant's reputation by ignoring Fort Donelson, ignoring Vicksburg, ignoring Chattanooga and only focusing on the Overland campaign. Which, admittedly, probably could have been done better. Sherman driving on Atlanta had a 1 to 1 ratio of casualties, up until Hood took over, when the ratio became a lot more favorable for the Union. In the Overland campaign, it was more like 1 to 2, like a typical Confederate to Union loss ratio. But for Grant's entire Civil War record, his loss ration was remarkably good. Despite being outnumbered two to one, the Confederates had some big advantages. 1. Got to fight on defense, on terrain they would more familiar with, with local guides to help. 2. Soldiers motivated by defending their homes. 3. A factor not talked about much, but I think was a big factor. White supremacy. People were racists, both North and South. People can fight hard for ignoble causes. While on a long hot exhausting march, or a chaotic environment of a battlefield, issues like "Preserving the Union" might seem a little abstract. While "Must keep the races separate" might drive a dark heart to endure much. The same notions could drain a Union soldier of energy during tough times. Under these circumstances, Grant not having the usual 1 to 2 casualty ration, even having a small advantage, despite his largest campaign being less than ideal, is remarkable. Note: One could argue my third point is not supported by statements made by Confederate veterans after the war. I would argue that people are not always honest.

Not too many know Mark Twain began in the proconfederate militia in Missouri (his native city Hanibal was at the edge of the the proconfederate Little Dixie in Missouri) in 1861, but he became prounionist in Nevada by 1863 and he helped and published Grant's autobiograph.

Very enjoyable text. Strongly recommend it.

Thank you.

Good speaking voice. Fine book. I think Chernow does the best job of presenting and analyzing Grant's alcoholism. It appears Grant was in essence a binge drinker who broke up long periods of family sobriety and the tensions of war and generalship with short, intense whisky blitzes. So many episodes in Grant's life are truly riveting and filled with conflct, despair, affection, friendship, greatness, grief, courage, foolhardiness, but most of all a kindness of spirit and embrace of character and rectitude.

Why do the people who post these videos think we want to listen to two people talk for 11 minutes before we hear the person we clicked on this to hear?

Lecture begins at 12:00 minute spot

Wonderful!

Wonderful book, one ofy favorite Grant bios.

12:55 What cause is larger than myself? Why?

Should there exist any such thing as “public policy”? Why? Other than a monopoly on force to serve the defense of rights, property, and contract why should government do ANYTHING else? Why isn’t all of it, other than police, courts, and military the sole prerogative of private, sovereign citizens?