Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You would have to have been reading all along. I'll repost them all for you. I'm nice and helpful, like that.
examples of racial hypocrisy doesn't prove the point that you are trying to make which sort of seems to be that blacks liked being slaves And when you refer to a link- most people expect it to be in your message, not 'somewhere' in another of your posts
I sure didn't see any links there, but you refer to Dr. Walter Williams, the libertarian, tea party loving economist and that tells me all that I need to know. Another of his quotes: "The welfare state has done to black Americans what slavery could not have done." Walter Williams is the darling of bigots, by embracing him they can "prove" that they aren't really racist after all. In fact if you read his famous quotes you will see that most of them are repeated multiple times daily without attribution by our wing nut friends right here on CD The 20 Greatest Quotes From Walter Williams - John Hawkins - Page full
Now here are some real links about blacks fighting for the confederacy
"the number of black soldiers in the Confederate ranks was fewer than 200. That small number represents some partial companies of slaves training as soldiers discovered by Union forces after the fall of Richmond.
One reason that only a handful of blacks fought for the Confederacy is that until the last weeks of the war, the Confederate Congress expressly forbade arming enslaved African Americans, who made up the vast majority of the black population in the South." Black Confederates | Teachinghistory.org
“It would be hard to prove that absolutely zero blacks fought in the Confederate army, but I think it must have approached that level. I wonder if “non-white” includes American Indians. I suspect it does and further suspect that American Indians would have been much more prevalent than blacks in Confederate ranks. I haven’t kept a count of how many Civil War soldiers’ diaries and letters I’ve read–I guess it has been quite a few–but I’ve never come across a single instance of a black serving in the Confederate army. Whatever may have been the number of blacks serving and actually fighting as soldiers in the Confederate army, it must have been a minuscule percentage–completely insignificant for anyone trying to make the argument that blacks saw the conflict as a war of Yankee aggression, felt it was their war too, and joined up to fight for the Confederacy. That’s just a fairy tale.” https://civilwargazette.wordpress.co...e-confederacy/
“If slaves will make good soldiers, our whole theory of slavery is wrong.” Lee weighed in on the issue and asked the Confederate government for help. “We must decide whether slavery shall be extinguished by our enemies and the slaves be used against us, or use them ourselves.” Lee asked that the slaves be freed as a condition of fighting, but the bill that passed the Confederate Congress on March 13, 1865,did not stipulate freedom for those who served." Confederacy approves black soldiers - Mar 13, 1865 - HISTORY.com
For anyone trying to say "Blacks supported the cause" or "There were Black Confederates", there were obviously not that many compared to Black Union troops.
179,000 Black men served in the Union Army during by the end of the war. Another 19,000 had served in the Union Navy. And Black men were approved to fight in the Union Army long before the Confederate army approved Blacks to fight for it. Union Army approved the use of Black soldiers on 17 July 1862. The Confederacy didn't do this until 13 March 1865.
And this is what is said about the role Blacks played in the Confederate Army.
"“The majority of black Confederates who actually fought were essentially with the army as servants or personal attendants for officers. This was especially true in the initial part of the war (1861-62), I have read occasionally about these slave/servants taking up a rifle and fighting in the ranks with their master. Otherwise, various mulattoes or persons with light complexions may have been directly enrolled in the army. Since it was against C.S.A. policy to enlist blacks in the fighting army (until the very last
in 1865), I doubt if formal records will show the extent of black combat participation. I’m convinced some did fight, but how many is a very subjective guess.”
-Wiley Sword, historian and Civil War author.
It is proven that there were far more Blacks in favor of the Union cause than the Confederate cause. Majority of Blacks in the USA were living in the South, and were slaves, but the majority of Black troops in the Civil War fought for the Union. Something to consider.
Knowing all of this, it is sadly befuddling why someone would still try to defend the Confederate cause and anything that represents that cause, including the banners used. It's like there are those holding on stubbornly to the Confederate cause.
For anyone trying to say "Blacks supported the cause" or "There were Black Confederates", there were obviously not that many compared to Black Union troops.
179,000 Black men served in the Union Army during by the end of the war. Another 19,000 had served in the Union Navy. And Black men were approved to fight in the Union Army long before the Confederate army approved Blacks to fight for it. Union Army approved the use of Black soldiers on 17 July 1862. The Confederacy didn't do this until 13 March 1865.
And this is what is said about the role Blacks played in the Confederate Army.
"“The majority of black Confederates who actually fought were essentially with the army as servants or personal attendants for officers. This was especially true in the initial part of the war (1861-62), I have read occasionally about these slave/servants taking up a rifle and fighting in the ranks with their master. Otherwise, various mulattoes or persons with light complexions may have been directly enrolled in the army. Since it was against C.S.A. policy to enlist blacks in the fighting army (until the very last
in 1865), I doubt if formal records will show the extent of black combat participation. I’m convinced some did fight, but how many is a very subjective guess.”
-Wiley Sword, historian and Civil War author.
It is proven that there were far more Blacks in favor of the Union cause than the Confederate cause. Majority of Blacks in the USA were living in the South, and were slaves, but the majority of Black troops in the Civil War fought for the Union. Something to consider.
Knowing all of this, it is sadly befuddling why someone would still try to defend the Confederate cause and anything that represents that cause, including the banners used. It's like there are those holding on stubbornly to the Confederate cause.
You also have to realize that after the Civil War, it's not like these Confederate Vets received the same treatment as their white counterparts. It's not like their kids and grandkids weren't persecuted and lynched by the offspring of the white vets. What few straws these supporters are grasping at disappear when looked at a greater context.
...........Knowing all of this, it is sadly befuddling why someone would still try to defend the Confederate cause and anything that represents that cause, including the banners used. It's like there are those holding on stubbornly to the Confederate cause.
Maybe there is a reason to support The Cause.
When Confederate guns opened fire at Fort Sumpter, the state of South Carolina had already seceded and The Confederate States of America already established. So those troops - the union ones - were in a foreign country. In fact, they were asked to go back into their own country and refused.
The Cause was the right to leave the union. That's all The Confederacy tried to do. Leave. Was that a terrible enough crime to warrant the invasion by union forces?
A rhetorical question, of course. But there is a very serious thought going on here: Could the differences been settled by a more patient and tolerant leadership? Or a different style of leadership? Was there any way at all to prevent what happened?
After all, there are some in Texas who talk of secession, and in 1982, Key West, FL actually did secede and became The Conch Republic (look it up). War - at least so far - has not been necessary in either one of those cases.
You also have to realize that after the Civil War, it's not like these Confederate Vets received the same treatment as their white counterparts. It's not like their kids and grandkids weren't persecuted and lynched by the offspring of the white vets. What few straws these supporters are grasping at disappear when looked at a greater context.
There isn't much left to grasp at anymore. The Confederate cause was not really a noble cause. And yet, there are those stubbornly holding on to the idea that it was. It has also been asked why most Blacks don't considering the Confederate flag as part of their heritage. So far, there is little left to the imagination.
When Confederate guns opened fire at Fort Sumpter, the state of South Carolina had already seceded and The Confederate States of America already established. So those troops - the union ones - were in a foreign country. In fact, they were asked to go back into their own country and refused.
The Cause was the right to leave the union. That's all The Confederacy tried to do. Leave. Was that a terrible enough crime to warrant the invasion by union forces?
A rhetorical question, of course. But there is a very serious thought going on here: Could the differences been settled by a more patient and tolerant leadership? Or a different style of leadership? Was there any way at all to prevent what happened?
After all, there are some in Texas who talk of secession, and in 1982, Key West, FL actually did secede and became The Conch Republic (look it up). War - at least so far - has not been necessary in either one of those cases.
The state of South Carolina might have seceded, but it still U.S. property.
And here is the kicker. Why did the southern states want to leave the Union? There are several excerpts stating that the desire to keep and maintain slavery was a big reason for secession. Yes, there were other reasons. However, the fear that slavery would be abolished, well, that is not a noble cause at all.
Location: Subconscious Syncope, USA (Northeastern US)
2,365 posts, read 2,148,847 times
Reputation: 3814
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
The state of South Carolina might have seceded, but it still U.S. property.
And here is the kicker. Why did the southern states want to leave the Union? There are several excerpts stating that the desire to keep and maintain slavery was a big reason for secession. Yes, there were other reasons. However, the fear that slavery would be abolished, well, that is not a noble cause at all.
It wasnt US property in 1861. It was South Carolina property. Massachusetts wasnt US property, it was Massachusetts property.
We were "United States" for a reason.
Think or Europe before the European Union. I wonder how easy of time those that joined the EU will have backing out of it, should they choose to.
The Articles of Secession mention a desire to have slavery several times.
Several links have been posted showing that the Confederate army waited until the end to let Blacks be soldiers in their army as opposed to servants. The links also show that the Union Army let Black troops in before the Confederates did. There is also proof that far more Blacks fought for the Union than the Confederate cause.
This said, can any of this information be refuted? If not, why should I, knowing my family history, support the Confederate cause? Why should anyone support it? The war ended 150 years ago.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And when you refer to a link- most people expect it to be in your message, not 'somewhere' in another of your posts 
