The Confederacy was About Slavery

ANUS must only seek help for being congenital liar.

He's not a liar; he's delusional! He has never responded directly to any statement, and only uses ad hominems. He has not proven one claim he has made on any thread on a2k; not one!

No ci, hes also a liar.

He's a lot of things all at once. Personally, I find him to be one of the least entertaining of our cadre of trolls here. Very little imagination, and his insults are boring and pedestrian.

Cycloptichorn

Gomer the Turd must seek help.....
for alcoholism, an inferiority complex, delusions of grandeur, xenophobia, racism, etc...

When you are finished being hysterical othe rpeople in the ol dfolks home want to use the computer...go have a dodder elsewhere . When will you making any direct statements ? Perhaps you are happy with that post as it no doubt took a long time to write . But what did it contribute apart from whining ? Still, it is your vest to date and I congratulate you .

No, he's a witch ! Burn him !

No doubt all of them bad....

Is there safety in numbers ?

You have gone a little off topic, but I am happy for the thread to move in this direction as your stupidity was numbing in the other .

Gomer the Turd tell them about what a victim you are when you insult me and I retaliate .

Silly Female Impersonator tell them about how you spend most of your time telling other posters whats wrong with them but they wont listen .

One eyed horn tell them about how you save dogs but not humans . Scared of competition ?

This is cool that we have all the old fuckwits in the one spot . I hope you brought your flick knifes with you because you are going to need them...your wit is as sharp as a wet rag .

I love people who take today morals and used it to condemn people in past times<not>.

The Northern States was not morally superior to the Southern States their economic system just happen to had neither need or room for slavery unlike the south.

Slavery was in fact part of the human condition for most of the history of the human race and we do not normally condemn Rome or Greek or whatever culture for that fact only the southern states it would seem for slavery being part of their culture and economic system.

In any case there is a hell of lot to be proud of in the southern culture with special note of their abilities to fight a long war against overwhelming odds and do so in a gentlemanly manner for the most part.

Partly true see what happen to the whites and even the mixed bloods in Haiti after the slave rebellion on that island or the killing of women and children during the slave revolt led by Nat Turner in the South.

History is what it is Bill. The abolitionist movement oin the North was a force that was to be contended with. Before the SOuth attacked , just after most of the states had secceeded, the Federal Government and the State of Virginia (through committees of Federal Relations) had almost agreed to have , say Virginia remain with the Union. An intial vote to secede was defeated in the Va legislature on APril 4 1861. The government was bending over backwards to make concessions for allowing slavery to continue in these states and controlling it according to the Kansas Nebraska Act and the Crittenden Compromise. However, when SC fired on Ft Sumter on the !2 of April and then, when Lincoln responded by calling for 75K troops, this pushed the Virginians into the secessionist camp. This was one state whose primary statement for secession did not focus on slavery as the primary cultural reason for its secession. Virginia , in paraphrasing could NOT fore upon its southern brothers (Of course, the dirty secret was that Virginia was serving as a feedtock state for shipping slaves further south.

History is never simple Farmerman and the causes of the civil war is another example of that fact.

New England states consider breaking away from the union also due to Madison trade embargo and that surely have nothing to do with slavery!

But to sum up however without the slave issue and the expansion of slavery into the new states it is highly unlikely that the south would had try to break away from the union.

There were several incidents in which states considered secession.(Hartford Convention,Alien and Sedition, 1826 Tarriffs, Louisiana Purchase pushback). Each of those was a separate incident that had nothing to do with the ultimate issue surounding the secession of the Confederate States, which , as you stated, was slavery centered.

Freeing slaves however or keeping slavery for that matter where not the issue that drove the two sides into war. The secondary issue of slavery being allow into the new states was that issue.

It surely was not mainly a moral battle over slavery but a power battle between the North and the South economic interests.

In any case slavery centered or not concerning the birth of the Confederacy, Farmerman I see no reason at all not be proud of the brave fight and in fact brilliant fight that the Confederacy did put up against an overwhelming enemy.

Morally condemning a historic people by applying the current moral standards of today is illogical and silly.

Just what we needed . . . now Bill is bringing his own particular stupidity to the topic. States had been added before without it sparking a war, tariffs didn't spark a war--only slavery lead those jackasses in the South to start a war. While it's true that history is usually not simple, and leaving aside that Bill usually tries to make it out to be simple, in this case, it was glaringly simple. Slavery was the only issue as between North and South for which the hotheads in the South were willing to start a war.

It must be nice to see the world in a black and white cartoon manner.

Vermont was added to the Union in 1791, a free state. In 1792, Kentucky was added, a slave state. The arrangement was informal, and not the subject of special legislation. Tennessee was added in 1796, and then the states formed from the Northwest territory were added over the years as free states, with a new slave state being added each time--Ohio, then Louisiana, Indiana, then Mississippi, Illinois, then Alabama. It didn't become an issue until Maine was added in 1820, and then Missouri in 1821. At that time, the Missouri compromise was hammered out, which made the latitude which formed the southern border of Missouri the northern limit for slaves states, with the exception of Missouri. It did not become an issue until Kansas was added, which, by the terms of the Missouri compromise should not have been a slave state, but settlers from Arkansas and Missouri had rushed in, and a local war was on--nevertheless, it was admited to the Union in 1861 as a free state.

But none of those events lead to war. It is historical hebetude to suggest that the admission of states to the Union was a cause of the civil war. After Kansas, the next state to enter the Union was West Virginia, in 1863, after the war had already begun.

It's really hilarious to see you make a comment like that. The horseshit you spew about history could not be better characterized than as a cartoon view. A perceived threat to the institution of slavery was the only cause which lead the South to war--not the tariff and not the admission of states to the Union--but only a perceived threat to slavery.

That's pretty fuckin' hilarious, too.