The Confederacy was About Slavery

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote,

Quote:

Finally figured out what was bothering me. Your little scenario basically casts the Confederacy in the role of Captain Queeg.

"Yeah, they tricked me, see? I've proved it with... geometric logic! They were taking my strawberries to Fort Sumter, so had I to shoot. They WANTED me to shoot! It's their fault, see? SEE?!?!?"

Enjoyed the read. Thx.

0 Replies

@failures art,

Quote:

It seems that the concerns on the matters of slavery and the confederacy are more focused, by some, on anything but the sale of humans as livestock. Disgusting.

Yeah - I'd pretty much bet my life that as far as the slaves and their descendants were/are concerned the Confederacy and Civil War were about slavery - first and foremost- but what do they know? Who cares what they think?

Let's let all the historians who weren't even there or directly affected tell us what it was about- or the teabaggers- or all the people who've read about it.

I was thinking about it walking my dog. I guess it all depends on who you ask.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Some people on a2k consistently revise history to their way of thinking - which happens to be wrong. Lincoln was against slavery from very early in his life, and saw how disgusting it was when he saw slave auctions, and how they were treated like animals.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

just got back from fishing. An outstanding summary of the racist POV that resides in many of the slavery deniers.

As was said earlier in DD's post.

"This being the sesquicentennial of the Civil War, lets not forget this time, as we did during the centennial, that the reason for the entire conflict was about the institution of slavery"

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Leaving aside the institutional racism, the personal racism of so many people in the world--not just Americans--is so deeply ingrained culturally that it might ineradicable. Anyone who can look at that image of Mr. Obama as chimp and not see that it is racist, or allege that "it's just a joke," has it so ingrained in their subliminal consciousness as to suggest to me that it would never be rooted out. As a white American, i know that racism--casual, unquestioned and in an odd sense "benign" racism--pervades the culture. There are many, many, far too many white people who don't necessarily hate black people, they just happen to "know" that they are inferior.

Admitting the war was about slavery cuts way to close to the cultural bone. It makes racism an issue as between white folks. Consider, for example, what a "hero" R. E. Lee is to Americans.

When I was in DC stationed at Walter Reed, I got to visit Arlington on the 4th of July. The fuss people make about Lee's Tomb made me kinda nauseous.

2 Replies

@snood,

But remember Robert E Lee did not own any slaves whereas US Grant did (Grant freed his in 1859) and his wife had several that were "Gifts from Grants wife's father". These too were freed.

ANOTHER QUOTE

Quote:

1885: "The (South) was burdened with an institution abhorrent to all civilized people not brought up under it, and one which degraded labor, kept it in ignorance and enervated the governing class... Soon the slaves would have outnumbered the masters, and, not being in sympathy with them, would have risen in their might and exterminated them. The war was expensive to the South, as well as to the North, both in blood and treasure, but it was worth all it cost." (Grant, 1885, v1,

0 Replies

@aidan,

Bullshit yourself . Are you seriously suggesting their belief was so strong that they accidentally generated money from slavery ? It was the other way around . The desire to generate money produced slavery.....they then faced criticism so they justified it .

Quote:

So you think, if they hadn't been able to make money off the backs of these people that they'd have treated them as equals?

No . Do you ? As the money making of slaves started to fail, they would have been abandoned for free men and machinery . The USA Civil War probably entrenched attitudes against blacks more than anything .

The Romans had the highest percentage and probably numbers as well of slaves and most of them were white . They didnt think badly of the black man and when they were fighting the Numidian cavalry of Hannibal there was certainly no racism involved apart from the Romans attitude that Romans were equally superior to everyone . No one criticised slavery, no one had to justify it . Eventually the source of slaves dried up and it became cheaper to employ free men . Incremental laws changed the face of slavery so it was comparable to the rights of free men anyway .

People dont usually feel they are committing a crime even when they are....they justify it, especially when they are criticised .

0 Replies

@aidan,

Quote:

I do not hate the south. I was born a southerner.

There is nothing about being born in the south that precludes you from hating it .

The blacks were not imported to the Americas because they were racially inferior . Black slave gatherers brought them to the coast where they were sold by black slave traders to the whites . Blacks were imported to the Americas because they could work in the heat and make money for already rich whites .

As for one persons experiences, they should always be examined but at the end of the day they are still only one persons experiences .

0 Replies

@aidan,

Are you ******* crazy ? Segregation occurred after the Civil War . It was a legacy of the justification for slavery because the North kept insisting that Southerners were immoral to keep slaves . If the North wanted them to be free, fine, but the South was not going to give them equality .

Read carefully...

Money > Slavery > Justification against criticism > Entrenchment of attitude > Civil War > Spite and anger

Quote:

They not only didn't want them living next to them - they didn't want them sitting next to them in school, or on the bus, or drinking out of the same water fountain.

This was only a problem when they were free to do so .

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Was it legal for the colonies to secede from Britain ? Was it legal for the South to secede from the USA ?

Of course they are entitled to enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility if they have legally seceded .

1 Reply

@aidan,

Quote:

there's still controversy over the role of the black person in the US - that's exactly what I've been saying.

In part generated by the Civil War, not the other way around .

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Was it legal for the colonies to secede from Britain ? Was it legal for the South to secede from the USA ?

In case you didn't notice, in both cases a war was fought.

3 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:

Was it legal for the colonies to secede from Britain ? Was it legal for the South to secede from the USA ?

In case you didn't notice, in both cases a war was fought.

The will of the winners prevailed.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

some guy in the universe

The concept of some guy and God are interchangeable to you ? No wonder you have trouble with comprehension .

Quote:

If you recall, the Emanci[ation Proclamation was only addressed at the "Separated states" that were engaged in rebellion. It didnt affect the slaveholders still in Delaware and <MAryland until the 13th AMendment was adopted.

What does that say about the reasons for the war ?

Quote:

"All men are created eqaul" was a hollow phrase until SLavery was abolished and civil rights passed

The authors knew EXACTLY who and what that phrase was pointed at . It was not hollow .

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

In case you didn't notice, in both cases a war was fought.

some folks love asking inane questions.Had the south been able to sue for peace and their terms be accepted, all the history books would certainly be telling a different story

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

I think you are a teabagger!!!

Just call him a nigger and be done with it .

1 Reply

@Ionus,

SLAVES , mostly black, were considered "PROPERTY" and this was defined by the US SUPREME COURT before the civil war. Your arguments keep beaching themselves onto rocks

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

That's right, spread your bullshit and then run away.

Amazing ! Did you have a straight face when you typed that ?

0 Replies

@aidan,

Quote:

why didn't they trade white people for money (and I'm talking specifically in the confederacy)?

Oh but they did, deary....ever heard of indentured servants ? They were white and their lives were comparable to slaves, with the possible exception they might be freed one day ....possibly .

Quote:

What difference would it have made to sell a little white boy or girl instead of a little black boy or girl to work the fields

Are you ******* crazy ? Whites pass out when they work in the fields....blacks could work longer .

Tell me that as someone from the South you already knew all this, you are just playing stupid for the sympathy vote .

2 Replies

@Ionus,

Quote:

I think you are a teabagger!!! Just call him a nigger and be done with it .

The teabagger shitheads , like the Aryan douche bags, are the ones who use racist epithets and think its cool or that they are making some kind of point. Which one are you?

1 Reply

The Confederacy was About Slavery

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know