U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-24-2010, 02:15 PM
 
Location: Southeast Arizona
3,191 posts, read 4,133,053 times
Reputation: 2104

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonjj View Post
You seem to be fixated on the idea that I am saying "slavery is the cause of the Civil War". I have never said that. I told you my opinion of the cause: the white elite wanting to hold on to their property and wealth. Ultimately, that's the reason why so many had to die. You forget to mention that it was also that same elite that chose to secede and take every other southerner kicking and screaming with them regardless if they believed in the cause or not.
Your question: "How exactly is seceding ignoring the laws of the land?" is a bit redundant don't you think? I mean, if the nation chose to approve of the southern white elite's demands, there would never have been a war or secession.
This was not a war between the north and the south. It was a war against a fraction of the south: the wealthy slave owners of the south.
Fact is that the secession conventions were held in the states and voted on by county, if the majority votes "yes" then the states secede. Did the planter class play a role, indeed yes, in the fire-eater states especially. But alternatively you have Northern industrialists calling the shots throughout the North.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonjj View Post
Oh lord, not another one. You actually believe that all southerners agreed to secede from the union because of states rights. That is truely sad. Most wars are a result of greed--not ideology. Who exactly prompted the movement for secession? Farmer Joe in Tennessee eking out a living and barely surviving? The unfortunate remainder of Native Americans left in the south? The slaves wanted to revolt against those nasty northerners?

The war was the result of the wealthy white elistist slave owners wanting to hold on to their aristocratic claims. Read more and perhaps you would be more hesitant to call out someone about information you have not yet learned.
See, there you go oversimplifying it again, much of the time it is economics, ideology and DIFFERENCES that start wars. What I'm trying to get at is that you keep insinuating that the ONLY cause of the war was slavery, and I just have to say there was so much more at hand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
While you shouldn't use one Confederate leader to generalize the views of all of the Confederacy, the Cornerstone Speech by Alexander Stephens (vice-president of the Confederacy) was a good indicator of the reasons for the founding of the Confederacy. It makes clear that the immediate cause of succession were issues about slavery.An excerpt:

But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man.

Cornerstone Speech by Alexander H. Stephens
I should also come to say, that in 1861 attitudes likes Stephen's were quite common and pervasive, but fact is, Stephens was Vice-President and not that much of a mover and a shaker. You are judging it with modern eyes, you can't judge parts of history like that with modern morality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-24-2010, 02:27 PM
 
Location: Portland, Maine
4,180 posts, read 13,047,443 times
Reputation: 1609
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert kid View Post
Fact is that the secession conventions were held in the states and voted on by county, if the majority votes "yes" then the states secede. Did the planter class play a role, indeed yes, in the fire-eater states especially. But alternatively you have Northern industrialists calling the shots throughout the North.



See, there you go oversimplifying it again, much of the time it is economics, ideology and DIFFERENCES that start wars. What I'm trying to get at is that you keep insinuating that the ONLY cause of the war was slavery, and I just have to say there was so much more at hand.
hehehe--they voted eh? And here's a question for you Sherlock. Who exactly was voting back then?

I'm not insinuating anything. I told you in black and white the reasons for the war. Yet, you keep insinuating that I am stating slavery as the cause. Again, (I think for the third or fourth time), the white elitist slave owners wanted to retain their wealth and aristocracy at any cost which caused the deaths and destruction of so many. You state that the rag you wave represents the south and their decency. Well, I have a suggestion for you. Go wave that rag on the metro in Atlanta or while walking down the street of New Orleans or any other city in the south. You probably woudn't do that because you know there is shame associated with it. And you justify that shame by claiming heritage and history. That is what is truely sad. Go secretely wave your rag while hiding in your closet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2010, 02:33 PM
 
Location: PG County, MD
302 posts, read 991,859 times
Reputation: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by CelticGermanicPride View Post
if you don't support how this country was created, then why do you continue taking advantage of what my ancestors created? that's like someone who hates animals being killed for meat still eating the meat. if you want to give the indians "their" land back, why don't you cut ties with this evil country and move back to whatever country your ancestors immigrated ffrom so you can finally clear your conscience of the "barbarian" methods that created this country? oh, what's that, you don't want to? you'll complain about how it was created like we should've never have done it, yet you love taking advantage of what was created that would have never been created if it wasn't for the way we created it.
I have no intention of leaving the country, I love where I live. Part of the freedom of living here is that I can speak my opinion. That doesn't mean I respect THE MEANS that were used to create the country. Like I already said, the only reason I brought this up in the first place is that you said anyone living in America should respect your ancestors and what they did. I don't care who did it, for what reason, or what the results were, I don't respect slavery, genocide, forced Christian conversion, etc... People like you turn a blind eye to those types of things because it was your ancestors that did it, but you would be the first ones calling for trials for war crimes and crimes against humanity if a different group of people tried to do it today.

Quote:
i know nothing about chinese law.
And you obviously know nothing about the system the natives had in place regarding land ownership and use.

Quote:
but what you think they did that was wrong was create this country. they created this country's boundaries no different than many other countries created their boundaries. you hate the fact that they forced "native" americans out, yet if they didn't force them back then this country wouldn't have been created because most native americans resisted our presence. so in the end it's almost as if you are against the creation of this country.
I didn't say that "what they did wrong as create this country". I said that I do not respect SOME of the methods that they used to create this country. I'm sorry if it disrespects your ancestors, but I don't value patriotism over humanity.

Quote:
i don't care if they don't respect them in their head because i won't know about it. i care if they don't respect them and make it known, i care if they fly their stupid flag in my face.
So people can think what they want as long as they keep their opinions to themselves?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2010, 02:52 PM
 
Location: Southeast Arizona
3,191 posts, read 4,133,053 times
Reputation: 2104
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonjj View Post
hehehe--they voted eh? And here's a question for you Sherlock. Who exactly was voting back then?

I'm not insinuating anything. I told you in black and white the reasons for the war. Yet, you keep insinuating that I am stating slavery as the cause. Again, (I think for the third or fourth time), the white elitist slave owners wanted to retain their wealth and aristocracy at any cost which caused the deaths and destruction of so many. You state that the rag you wave represents the south and their decency. Well, I have a suggestion for you. Go wave that rag on the metro in Atlanta or while walking down the street of New Orleans or any other city in the south. You probably woudn't do that because you know there is shame associated with it. And you justify that shame by claiming heritage and history. That is what is truely sad. Go secretely wave your rag while hiding in your closet.
You seem to forget that you never state anything outside of slavery, you never state that it is slavery. Yet you beat around the bush and say it was the "white elitist aristocrats", which I am pretty sure is code for "they all fought for slavery and only slavery! Your wrong if you say otherwise!". But since the north had pretty much outnumbered the south politcally and was subject to all the what Northern politicians would dictate if they didn't, which would have destroyed their economy, the effects of the destruction of that economy we are still living, that flattened the southern states for a hundred years.

And for who was voting? Remember this was 60 years before women's sufferage, so it was mainly white men, no indians, no blacks, no women. Pretty standard for 1860, back then it was normal for them.

And about that "rag", last summer, in July of all months (100 degrees, 99% humidity). I went to New Orleans after spending a couple days in Mississippi. While in Mississippi I bought a white T-shirt at the Vicksburg National Military Park. This particular shirt, had "Seige of Vicksburg" on it and a giant Confederate flag on the back with a likeness of John C. Pemberton on it. I walked through DOWNTOWN New Orleans with it on. I didn't recieve any trouble. But, thankfully, my flag isn't in the closet, it's on my wall, both of them 3x5 feet in plain sight from the window!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2010, 03:25 PM
 
Location: Portland, Maine
4,180 posts, read 13,047,443 times
Reputation: 1609
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert kid View Post
You seem to forget that you never state anything outside of slavery, you never state that it is slavery. Yet you beat around the bush and say it was the "white elitist aristocrats", which I am pretty sure is code for "they all fought for slavery and only slavery! Your wrong if you say otherwise!". But since the north had pretty much outnumbered the south politcally and was subject to all the what Northern politicians would dictate if they didn't, which would have destroyed their economy, the effects of the destruction of that economy we are still living, that flattened the southern states for a hundred years.

And for who was voting? Remember this was 60 years before women's sufferage, so it was mainly white men, no indians, no blacks, no women. Pretty standard for 1860, back then it was normal for them.

And about that "rag", last summer, in July of all months (100 degrees, 99% humidity). I went to New Orleans after spending a couple days in Mississippi. While in Mississippi I bought a white T-shirt at the Vicksburg National Military Park. This particular shirt, had "Seige of Vicksburg" on it and a giant Confederate flag on the back with a likeness of John C. Pemberton on it. I walked through DOWNTOWN New Orleans with it on. I didn't recieve any trouble. But, thankfully, my flag isn't in the closet, it's on my wall, both of them 3x5 feet in plain sight from the window!
You know, I am finding this hard to believe but I am actually enjoying you.

I want to address a few things you mentioned. Most wealthy slave owners of the south looked upon their slaves as property much like the plantation, crops, home, animals, or other holdings. There was an aristocracy to the south that was firmly entrenched. The extreme wealthy few who could afford slaves and lavish lifestyles for that era were not about to compromise their earnings especially in the favor of the nueveau-riche of the north. You ask why the Civil War? I believe that is the underlying reason. Not states-rights. Not any kind of ideology. Those concepts may have been thrown out there to support their cause but the main reason: greed. They wanted that lifestyle to continue at any cost. And they really weren't concerned about how many poor white country farmers had to die to support their cause.

You forgot to mention that those white men who could vote also had to be land-owners. And, I am sure there are plenty of books and passages written about people feeling pressure to vote for secession even though they were unsupportive of the issue.

Oh. glad you found a nice shirt to wear. However, it's not the rag. Go get that rag down from the bedroom wall and take it with ya the next time you want to go to New Orleans and wave it proudly. I'm also glad you bought something in Mississippi. They can use the income.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2010, 10:08 PM
 
Location: Washington, DC NoVA
1,105 posts, read 1,947,089 times
Reputation: 775
Quote:
Originally Posted by PGC301 View Post
I have no intention of leaving the country, I love where I live. Part of the freedom of living here is that I can speak my opinion. That doesn't mean I respect THE MEANS that were used to create the country.
yes, part of the freedom of living here is that you can speak your opinion. however if you don't respect my ancestors, the forefathers of this country that gave you your rights, then i'm free to say you don't deserve the rights my ancestors gave their lives for. if that's how you think, then i'm free to say you're a disrespectful ahole. you love where you live, yet you won't respect those who died to give you the right to live where you love to live. if it wasn't for them, you wouldn't be living there.

Quote:
Like I already said, the only reason I brought this up in the first place is that you said anyone living in America should respect your ancestors and what they did. I don't care who did it, for what reason, or what the results were, I don't respect slavery, genocide, forced Christian conversion, etc... People like you turn a blind eye to those types of things because it was your ancestors that did it, but you would be the first ones calling for trials for war crimes and crimes against humanity if a different group of people tried to do it today.
i don't support slavery, i don't support genocide, or forced christian conversion. where you get your information is a complete joke. i support what my ancestors did in fighting native americans because that created this country. that's what i support. i don't know what you mean by me calling for trial on other people for war crimes. if a war is done by the do's and don'ts of war, the rules, then i won't call anybody a war criminal.

Quote:
And you obviously know nothing about the system the natives had in place regarding land ownership and use.
tell me about their "system."

Quote:
So people can think what they want as long as they keep their opinions to themselves?
if their opinion is to burn the american flag and shove their flag in my face then yes, i don't support them having those rights. in fact, if they're going to trot on over here from el salvador and wave their flag in my face, i think i should have the legal right to punch their teeth back into their head. i believe in their right to have the flag of their country but i only support them having the right to fly it on their private property, not outside of their yard. we have other laws on the flag, like not being able to fly a foreign flag to the right of the american flag, no other flag above the american flag, but we have no laws for single flags do we? like the ahole with the mexican flag on his old beater pickup truck i saw driving down 66 a couple weeks ago. no other flag, just his mexican flag. no respect for the country giving him his job and his money and safety, his loyalty still lies to a country with cities like juarez. and last i checked, when you immigrate to the united states, you swear allegiance to the united states and forfeit allegiance to the country you came from.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2010, 11:24 PM
 
Location: PG County, MD
302 posts, read 991,859 times
Reputation: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by CelticGermanicPride View Post
yes, part of the freedom of living here is that you can speak your opinion. however if you don't respect my ancestors, the forefathers of this country that gave you your rights, then i'm free to say you don't deserve the rights my ancestors gave their lives for. if that's how you think, then i'm free to say you're a disrespectful ahole. you love where you live, yet you won't respect those who died to give you the right to live where you love to live. if it wasn't for them, you wouldn't be living there.
Like I've said several times already, regardless of who did it or why they did it, I do not support or respect genocide, slavery, or forced religious conversions. I've mentioned already, we have some of the same ethnic background, so this is referring to my ancestors as well. One more time, I do not agree with or support SOME of the things that they did. I do not value patriotism over humanity or common decency. And just for your information, it makes you look like a little child when you start resorting to name calling.


Quote:
i don't support slavery, i don't support genocide, or forced christian conversion. where you get your information is a complete joke.
If you don't believe that these things happened, then you're either extremely uneducated or willfully ignorant, or both. Maybe you should try learning about history from a textbook or historians instead of Stormfront.

I've said once already it's not my job to teach you things you should have learned in school. But since you apparently haven't, here's a start:

Encyclopedia of North American Indians - - Slavery

Slavery in America

Cosmetic Christianity and the Problem of Colonialism Responding to Brian McLaren Notes from a Small Place

conversion tactics

Native American Genocide


One passage in the 4th link sums up the conversion methods that were used nicely. They could either convert to Christianity or "die from hunger, disease, or violence".

Quote:
i support what my ancestors did in fighting native americans because that created this country. that's what i support. i don't know what you mean by me calling for trial on other people for war crimes. if a war is done by the do's and don'ts of war, the rules, then i won't call anybody a war criminal.
If a group of people came to this country today with the intent of creating a new country (like our ancestors did), and employed the same methods that our ancestors did, they would be tried for war crimes. I don't know why it is that you view those methods as acceptable just because it was your ancestors that used them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2010, 12:25 PM
 
Location: Washington, DC NoVA
1,105 posts, read 1,947,089 times
Reputation: 775
Quote:
Originally Posted by PGC301 View Post
Like I've said several times already, regardless of who did it or why they did it, I do not support or respect genocide, slavery, or forced religious conversions. I've mentioned already, we have some of the same ethnic background, so this is referring to my ancestors as well. One more time, I do not agree with or support SOME of the things that they did. I do not value patriotism over humanity or common decency. And just for your information, it makes you look like a little child when you start resorting to name calling.
i fight for my people before i fight for anybody else. just like i stand by a family member if they screw up. and your term which was designed to prove me wrong is in actually good usage here, we in some cases took it via this "adverse possession."

Quote:
If you don't believe that these things happened, then you're either extremely uneducated or willfully ignorant, or both. Maybe you should try learning about history from a textbook or historians instead of Stormfront.
i don't believe what things happened? i know my ancestors fought the poor indians but they lost at war, and when you lose at war, you friggin lose. no ifs ands or buts. it's worked like that for thousands of years. hardly anything to be shocked about.

Quote:
I've said once already it's not my job to teach you things you should have learned in school. But since you apparently haven't, here's a start:

Encyclopedia of North American Indians - - Slavery

Slavery in America

Cosmetic Christianity and the Problem of Colonialism – Responding to Brian McLaren Notes from a Small Place

conversion tactics

Native American Genocide
first off, it's not your business what i should've been taught in school. second off, i already said i don't support genocide. but it wasn't genocide. it was war. and slavery has been everywhere, europe, africa, and asia. that's nothing unique to my heritage. some native americans even owned slaves.

Quote:
One passage in the 4th link sums up the conversion methods that were used nicely. They could either convert to Christianity or "die from hunger, disease, or violence".
the puritans thought they were one of the lost tribes of israel and tried to convert them "back" to christianity to save them. i'm a pretty religious guy but i'll still admit that's one mistake they made, but not out of them being savages. they thought they were saving them. things were different back then. people were killed in europe over religious matters all the time and native americans are hardly innocent of killing even innocent people.

Quote:
If a group of people came to this country today with the intent of creating a new country (like our ancestors did), and employed the same methods that our ancestors did, they would be tried for war crimes. I don't know why it is that you view those methods as acceptable just because it was your ancestors that used them.
all land is owned by our government so it wouldn't be the same. it would be a war between countries. we have "war laws" set up for that which we didn't have set up back then. i'll admit what we did was more brutal than how we do things now but you can say that for just about every country back then so i'm proud of what my ancestors did, fighting for their descendants great future (thinking of us) before other peoples. and for that they should be respected by all of their descendants. because if they stayed in england, you wouldn't have even been born. you're pure product of immigration. you're irish, german, and italian. your ancestors probably weren't even here during the revolution. so you should be thanking my ancestors for your existence.

Last edited by CelticGermanicPride; 12-25-2010 at 12:34 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2010, 01:06 PM
 
288 posts, read 299,577 times
Reputation: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by kazoopilot View Post
The Europeans invaded Native American/First Nations land and took over, breaking treaties and committing genocide in the process.
Some people just can't live without oversimplifying history. The next thing I'm assuming will be a fairy-tale about heroic and courageous Northerners liberating the slaves from bloodthirsty Southerners?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2010, 01:21 PM
 
Location: Southern Minnesota
5,990 posts, read 11,562,228 times
Reputation: 3232
A hypothetical question for you pro-confederates: if china came here and wanted to take over by brute force, how would you feel about that? It's how they've done it for thousands of years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top