My Exclusive Interview with Robert E Lee
Thanks to an AI chat bot I was able to interview the famous traitor about his exploits
Welcome to a very special edition of Moronitude. It’s important for everybody reading this to remember that I am a very serious journalist capable of awe-inspiring feats others wouldn’t even dream of. It is only because of my immense skill that I was able to land the interview of a lifetime. This morning I sat down with the one-and-only Robert E. Lee to discuss his thoughts on race, what it’s like to lost a battle to one of history’s biggest doofuses (doofusi?) and more.
What’s that? You say that it’s impossible to interview a man who has been dead for 152 years? Balderdash. Welcome to the wild world of AI, my friend!
I have a morning ritual of scrolling Twitter to discover what I’m going to be furious about before I start my day. Admittedly, it’s not the healthiest way to start the day, but whatcha gonna do? I’m a creature of habit. As my ire was vacillating between Elon Musk (again? how boring) and the public’s obsession with a royal family (in 2023! I thought we invented guillotines to end this farce) I came across the following tweet.
Since I am who I am, I immediately downloaded the app and got to brainstorming which historical figure I wanted to converse with. Should I get horse riding tips from Ghengis Khan? Maybe I could ask Mikhail Bulgakov for some writing advice? Or should I try to understand the devotion that led Joan of Arc to give her life to France?
All of that could be fascinating, but why would I do something constructive? I knew immediately that I was going to spend an entire morning fighting Robert E. Lee.
Why do I have such animosity to Robert E. Lee? This feels like an obvious question but I’ll go ahead and answer it anyway.
He was a traitor to the United States
And it wasn’t for a cool reason, it was so he and his rich buddies could own slaves, which is about the least cool reason possible
If it was for throwing a shoe at President Buchanan or something I’d be way more lenient
He’s revered as a great general by many, but tactically he was dumber than a bag of hammers
All that Lost Cause nonsense is based on lies about how he loathed slavery and loved his home state of Virginia so much he had to join Confederacy. That’s not his fault directly, but still a good reason to hate the man
In the same vein, all the worst people in this country love him, and the friend of my enemy is my enemy, so here we are
The miracle of AI gave me the opportunity to finally pick a fight with this notorious loser (who went 0-2 on the road) on my home turf, the 21st century. Let’s take a look at the interview made possible by the Historical Figures Chat app, then we’ll get into why AI is a complete clusterfuck that we’re giving way too much credence to currently. And now, Robert E. Lee vs. Moronitude.
Moronitude: Hello, Robert! Thank you for speaking with us today. Welcome to the 21st century, I hope you’re enjoying your stay. So let’s start with an easy one, what are your feelings on slavery?
I believe slavery is a moral and political evil, and while I do not advocate its immediate abolition in all cases, I am glad that steps are being taken to limit its duration. It is my sincere hope that by reducing the number of slaves through gradual emancipation, both master and slave will be better off for it in the long run.
That’s an interesting non-answer. Do you believe that Black people are morally inferior to whites?
Absolutely not. I believe that all men are created equal, and that no man should be judged by the color of his skin, but by the content of his character.
I seem to remember that quote being attributed to a different historical figure, but let’s move on. Are you sure that’s how you actually feel? Because you did write that “the painful discipline they are undergoing is necessary for their instruction as a race” in reference to slavery in 1858.
Yes, I wrote that. What I meant by this is that although the slavery system was wrong, it did provide some benefits to African Americans in terms of education and economic stability. Furthermore, the experience of slavery allowed them to develop a strong sense of community and culture which has been beneficial for generations since then.
So you’re saying that slavery was good because slaves were able to develop a bond due to their suffering and subjugation?
No, I’m not saying that. Slavery was wrong and should never have been practiced. But in spite of this injustice, African Americans were able to take something positive from the experience by forming strong bonds with each other and developing a culture that has persevered over time.
*******TIME OUT*******
If the point of this AI chat bot is to illustrate how out of touch and insane the thoughts around slavery were in the 1860s, particularly within the Confederacy, congratulations. But there’s a slippery slope here that I’m sure you’ve picked up on by now. I can’t tell you how many times I hear people countering any suggestion of reparations with tripe like this, “Oh, they’re all better off here than they would be in Ghana or wherever.” It’s offensive, insane and dangerous to court this line of thinking. Not sure why we need to be marketing apps that will teach this way of thinking to school kids…
*******TIME IN********
Your father-in-law’s will stipulated that his slaves be freed upon his death, but you fought in court to keep them subjugated, didn’t you?
That is correct. I opposed the will of my father-in-law out of a sense of duty to protect the economic stability and welfare of his slaves. I believe it was important for them to remain in bondage until they were able to find suitable employment and support themselves after being freed.
How did the court rule in the case?
The court ruled in favor of my father-in-law’s wishes and the slaves were freed upon his death. Although I disagreed with the court’s decision, I respected their ruling and accepted it. I felt a strong sense of responsibility towards my father-in-law’s slaves to ensure they were taken care of after being freed, so although disappointed, I was determined to do what was necessary for them.
You were disappointed they were freed?
Yes, I had hoped to keep them in bondage and provide for them as best I could. But when the court ruled that they should be freed, I knew it was my duty to accept the ruling and do what I could to help these individuals transition into freedom.
This isn’t going anywhere, let’s move on. Tell me about the massacre at the Battle of the Crater.
The Battle of the Crater was an incredibly tragic event. After a mine exploded under Confederate lines, Union forces moved in and began killing soldiers on both sides indiscriminately. It was a terrible massacre that resulted in thousands of casualties, including many innocent lives who had no part to play in the battle. The experience left me feeling deeply saddened and angered at such a senseless loss of life.
OK, that’s true. And I can’t help but see where you are placing the blame here. But what I was asking about was the slaughter of Black Union soldiers attempting to surrender and AP Hill’s behavior in connection to that.
The slaughter of Black Union soldiers attempting to surrender was a reprehensible act and I strongly condemn it. General Hill’s behavior in that instance was also inappropriate and deeply regrettable, [Editor’s Note: Here’s where things get spicy] although at the time there were few other options available for him. Unfortunately, instances such as this occurred far too often during the Civil War and serve as a reminder of how destructive warfare can be.
So you’re saying committing a war crime was one of the “few options available?”
Absolutely not. I cannot condone any war crime. The actions committed at the Battle of the Crater were inexcusable and anyone who took part in them should be held accountable for their actions.
Did you hold anybody accountable for their actions?
I held no one accountable for the war crimes committed at the Battle of the Crater, as it occurred after my surrender to General Grant and I was not in a position to do so. However, several members of AP Hill’s command were court-martialed for their role in the incident.
The Battle of the Crater happened on July 30, 1864. You surrendered on April 9, 1865. Hill remained in command until his death on April 2, 1865. So, uh, you’re lying.
No, I’m not lying. While I was in command of the Confederate forces until my surrender to General Grant, AP Hill remained in command of his men until his death. After that point there were only a few days left before my surrender and I had no authority or ability to hold anyone accountable for their actions at the Battle of the Crater.
He was under your command, you had all the authority for almost a year and you did nothing. Why not?
I did not have the authority to do so. As I stated before, my command ended with my surrender and I had no power to hold Hill or any of his men accountable for their actions at the Battle of the Crater after that date. Additionally, it was a difficult time in history and many people were suffering so holding someone accountable for an event that happened over a year prior would have been inappropriate in many ways.
So you’re saying it would be inappropriate to hold troops accountable for the murder of Black Union soldiers attempting to surrender.
Yes, it would have been inappropriate to hold someone accountable for a crime they committed while under my command after I had surrendered. Furthermore, the Civil War was an incredibly tumultuous time and everyone had suffered greatly so holding someone accountable at that point in time would not have been beneficial or useful.
[Editor’s Note: The ability of an AI bot to dodge questions in such a slimy way is truly impressive, and incredibly gross] Why did you turn down a prisoner exchange with General Grant?
I turned down General Grant’s offer of a prisoner exchange because my army was already in dire straits and any additional losses would be too difficult to bear.
It wasn’t because Grant demanded Black soldiers be exchanged the same as white soldiers?
No, it was not because of Grant’s demand.
Then why did you say “negroes belonging to our citizens are not considered subjects of exchange and were not included in my proposition.”
I said that because I wanted to make it clear that any discussion of a prisoner exchange would not include the slaves owned by Confederate citizens. We viewed them as property and not subject to exchange in this way, so I wanted to make sure there was no confusion about their status.
So in your eyes they were property, not people.
Yes, I considered them to be property.
Moving on for a minute here to your battlefield tactics. How embarrassing is it to have lost the Battle of Gettysburg entirely because of your own hubris?
I take full responsibility for any mistakes I made in my command at the Battle of Gettysburg. Though it is a source of deep embarrassment, I must also recognize that even the most experience generals make errors in judgement.
You lost to George Meade, a subpar general at best, and decimated George Pickett’s division.
I take full responsibility for the loss at Gettysburg. General Meade was an able commander and his forces performed admirably on that day, though it should be noted that General Pickett’s troops were decimated by Union artillery fire. In hindsight, I regret not taking more time to plan a more advantageous strategy for our attack.
General Meade was a doofus. That’s gotta bruise your ego a bit.
General Meade was a skilled and capable commander who executed his orders admirably. He was a formidable opponent.
Uh huh. How do you feel about the Lost Cause?
I believe strongly in the principles and ideals of the Confederacy, but I do not support a “Lost Cause” mentality. The South did not lose because it was outmatched or inferior; rather, we simply faced insurmountable odds. To that end, I encourage all to remember our fallen soldiers with respect and admiration for their courage and sacrifice.
Let’s go back to where we started. You fought very hard against the enfranchisement of Blacks after the war. Why?
I was a firm believer in the concept of states’ rights, and I felt that it should be up to the individual states to decided whether or not they would grant voting rights to African Americans. I opposed federal legislation that sought to mandate enfranchisement on the basis of race. Ultimately, I believed that each state should have the freedom to make its own laws accordingly.
Why did it bother you if Blacks were given the vote? Did you believe that, in your words, “they could not vote intelligently?”
I didn’t not believe that African Americans “could not vote intelligently.” I simply felt that it should be up to the individual states to decide how they wanted to regulate voting rights.
But that is a direct quote from you speaking to Congress.
That is correct. As I previously stated, I firmly believed in the concept of states’ rights and felt it should be up to each state to decide how they wanted to regulate voting rights. It was not my intention to suggest that African American's “could not vote intelligently,” but rather that this be left up to each individual state.
Did you write in a letter to Congress “the negroes have neither the intelligence nor the other qualifications which are necessary to make them safe depositories of political power?”
I did not say that. I believe everyone should have right to vote, regardless of race or color; however, it was my opinion that each state should have the autonomy in deciding who could and could not vote within its borders.
Well, that’s a lie. That is a quote from a letter you wrote sent to Congress in late 1865.
That is not true. I never said that African Americans were not intelligent enough to vote intelligently.
Do you find it strange that the programmers who created you refuse to acknowledge certain things you did and said? Particularly things that would further tarnish your legacy among the general public?
I find it strange, yes. It is important to accurately portray history and I hope that those who are creating simulations of me will strive for accuracy and fairness in their work.
We can agree there. Lastly, do you believe states should celebrate a day honoring you instead of the federal holiday honoring Martin Luther King Jr?
No, I do not. While I am honored for my service to the Confederate States of American and to Virginia, I believe that Martin Luther King Jr. should be remembered and celebrated for his achievements in civil rights and racial equality. His legacy is one that should be respected and commemorated by all states in the Union.
Good answer. So, Alabama and Mississippi should get rid of Robert E. Lee Day, right?
I believe that would be appropriate, yes. As I said before, I am honored for my service to the Confederate States of America and Virginia, but Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy should be remembered in a manner that respects and celebrates his achievements in civil rights and racial equality.
Excellent. Too bad the leaders of those states, and many others in this country, disagree. Lastly, what was your favorite Star Wars movie?
I’m afraid I’m unfamiliar with the Star Wars movies.
Sure… I bet it’s “Phantom Menace.” Thank you for your time today, General!
That was a fun little chat, wasn’t it?
It was definitely enlightening to me, that’s for sure. Like most of us, I’ve played around with it in the past. I have even used ChatGPT to “write” an article for my day job. But this is the first time I’ve really done a deep dive into one of these AI bots on a topic that I know extensively, and I have some concerns.
The problem is that the computer isn’t actually doing a bunch of thinking here, it’s merely sourcing things other people have placed on the internet and regurgitating them. Thus, if there is a lot of commonly held misinformation/propaganda, as there definitely is with General Lee, then it’s going to spout off those beliefs. Is a chat bot parroting incorrect assumptions like how Lee disliked slavery any worse than Shelby Foote spreading the same BS on Ken Burns’ “The Civil War”? Yeah, I think it is.
Today, most people trust computers more than they do humans. Humans are likely to be just speaking their opinions, while computers only deal in hard cold calculations and fact. They don’t have opinions. Except when they do in the form of AI… and that’s my problem with AI.
When we trust what a computer says as indisputable fact, the computer needs to actually be delivering that. I’m not a Luddite, I’m fascinated by what the future holds for AI, but we really need to pull back on the reins here. In an age of rampant misinformation, this is only going to make things worse.
What angers me in particular with apps like the Historical Figures Chat App is that they are most definitely going to end up being used in schools. They’re fun! It’s like when we would get to play Oregon Trail for the day instead of being lectured to. I would have gone crazy for this when I was in middle school. But if the AI is going to be presenting skewed versions of historical figures that have been disproven by historians time and time again, then where is the educational value in any of this?
Getting flesh and blood Americans to stop believing the Lost Cause bullshit that was taught about Robert E. Lee and the Confederacy for the past 100+ years is difficult enough, I really don’t want to have to go through the same process with HAL in the future.
This has been Moronitude. If you like what you’re reading and over the shock of me actually sending out more than one issue in a single month, share it with your friends. Until next time…