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.
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 28 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,592,007 times
Reputation: 2576
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
I think you wish that was the case. Sounds like gaslighting on your part. Going back to the old days of the South, it wasn't Black people flying Confederate flags or paying homage to Confederate symbols. And no, they didn't need help from leftists. Blacks in the USA haven't made mention to the Confederacy as their "southern heritage". More Blacks are just speaking out because they can. They don't fear getting killed for speaking up vs the early 20th century. Be a Black man and speak out against Confederate symbols in those days. You might get killed. That kept alot of Black people from speaking out against many injustices. Blacks didn't need leftists to tell them how to feel. Alot of Blacks likely felt no love for Confederate symbols, but became less afraid to say so over time.
Older Black people have mentioned their disdain for the Confederate flag while talking to me. I don't know what Black people you've been talking to, but the older Black people I've spoken to never had anything nice to say about the Confederate flag.
Again, instead of gaslighting, you might want to admit that maybe alot of Black people have legitimate reasons for having disdain for the Confederate flag. That outrage was always there, and has been coming out over the last few decades.
There was money in Europe already lined up for the cotton trade prior to the war starting. It's part of what gave the south the idea that they could win (or succeed in their secession).
And Europe had stock-piled cotton beforehand, in case of war. Europe was buying cotton and other commodities from the south, but was selling goods to the north. Their plan was neutrality in the conflict.
And Europe had stock-piled cotton beforehand, in case of war. Europe was buying cotton and other commodities from the south, but was selling goods to the north. Their plan was neutrality in the conflict.
And when the cotton supply from the US South was interrupted, the Europeans (in particular the British), turned to other sources. That's how the British got interested in India, in part.
So I guess you believe I am lying because what I say does not support your rhetoric. I stand by what I said, yea I have spoken to black people who do not care one way or another about the confederate flag. They were to old to be part of the outrage generation and simply do t get all the hubbub about it. I even know one black man who has ancestors who fought for the confederacy. Younger members of his family were predictably unhappy about this but he just saw it as part of his heritage. All of this to me was just more evidence that many young black people have been taught to be so thin skinned and outraged about things like confederate flags and monuments. Who taught them????white leftists did. I know you won’t admit that but it is true.
Of course all this is irrelevant because even if your right and every black person is offended by confederate flags and statues it does not change anything. In the end your outrage does not trump my freedom. We as a people can stop political correctness by simply not giving any thought at all to the offended folks, people who are really just too thin skinned. Let them be outraged....that is their issue and no one else’s.
I never said you were lying. I'm saying that said man you were talking to doesn't negate the fact that the persons I've been talking to say otherwise. The majority of Black people I've spoken to (and I live in Georgia, largest number of Blacks in the USA) have told me that they don't like the Confederate flag. And it wasn't just young people. I was calling you out because you think Blacks are being "coerced by liberals" to despise the Confederate flag. What you're implying, which is just as bigoted as what you claim leftists do, is that Black people can't think for themselves. Leftists didn't have to teach Blacks to feel this way. I would just say leftists helped Blacks be less afraid to express their disdain for such things.
That Black man you met might have seen the Confederate flag as part of his heritage. However, far more Blacks I've met, and that have been interviewed, say otherwise about the Confederate flag. That one man might have talked nicely about the Confederate flag. I know of far more Blacks who view the Confederate flag negatively, even the persons who grew up in the 50s and 60s. That man just gave you the confirmation bias that you want.
This is what I stand by. I think you wish leftists were the ones influencing Blacks to despise Confederate symbols. It bothers you that alot of Blacks don't like the Confederate flag or Confederate symbols. You just tell yourself "it's the leftists fault" or you say "blacks are thin-skinned".
1) You don't think Black people are capable of thinking for themselves
2) You wish it was "Blacks can't think for themselves" because it bothers you that alot of Blacks have disdain for Confederate symbols and you don't want to accept that there is a legitimate reason for it.
3) It bothers you that alot of Blacks feel so strongly about it and would not mind of Confederate statues/flags are taken down.
No amount of gaslighting or confirmation bias will change the reality that most Blacks, despite being from the South, do not view Confederate favorably.
Confederate Constitution,
"Section 9. (I) The importation of negroes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same."
Did you know that the Transatlantic Trade ended here in 1808? Just a bit of trivia for you. (It should make you question, but it won't)
Just there is a bit of 'culture' (and your not investigating any of the linked document I have provided for you) of the south, that is being left out of these discussions, that's all. To be honest, a person would have to go back 3000 years in order to wrap their heads around it.
Slavery, The Institution of ... was established in order to give people an option of not going to debtors prison, in ancient times. By the time the Confederate Constitution was established, it was being fazed out of social economic customs. In studying of Biblical times where as people entered into a covenant to God, they did so, because they thought the Government established Institution was wrong, yet it was the law of the times. Every member of the family did chores (something we have also fazed out), most people, God fearing ones ... brought home another family member and gave to them, chores. (Do preachers still discuss this in Churches, today? I'm thinking they probably don't.)
It wasn't until the Transatlantic Trade did that change, somewhat, for the (free) labor needed to run the business of this country.
I was on the the web site library that I pointed you to and found this published ... Port Royal Experiment
I don't know yet why Andrew Jackson ended it though. Also, I found in my history of recent visited (I thought I had erased) the link to ", the act to increase the efficiency of the army, by the employment of free negroes and slaves." It wasn't the Union Army either ... but then we all know you think that H. K. Edgerton, is a stupid man, so that information will mean nothing to you.
Ira Berlin, historian, wrote, "Slaves Without Masters: The Free Negro in the Antebellum South", initially published in 1974; reissued by the New Press in 2007, I understand it to be an educational find. (Link to the Review)
I don't think there is anything that could be told to you that would make you question that narrative you seem to cling to, so I'm thinking it would be best just to bid you, good day. (I can lead a horse to water, but I sure as hell, can not make him drink it) Take care ...
So what if the slave trade would be no more. I still posted excerpts proving that the Confederate Constitution made provisions to protect the institution of slavery.
Something else. Slavery might have been an alternative to debt imprisonment in Roman times. And INDENTURED SERVITUDE, not slavery gave debtors in the British Isles an alternative to debtors prison. Survive your contract and you're free. CHATTEL SLAVERY, the kind of slavery that was practiced here in the USA, was not an alternative to debtors prison. African slaves being brought here did not choose to come here. They did not have a say in whether or not they want to come or not. They were kidnapped, captured, and shipped here like inanimate objects/animals. They were forced to do the slave labor and that slavery in America was for life. what does religion have to do with that?
And as for Port Royal, that program was started thanks to Union troops liberating the Sea Islands, no thanks to Confederates. By the way, it was President Andrew Johnson that ended that experiment in 1865, not Andrew Jackson.
And I know about free Blacks that lived in the North and the struggles they faced. I'd rather be free in the North than be a slave in the South. Actually, I'd rather be dead than a slave. But do try to convince me that slavery wasn't a bad thing and that the Confederates were doing me a favor.
Last edited by green_mariner; 02-06-2019 at 01:00 PM..
CHATTEL SLAVERY, the kind of slavery that was practiced here in the USA, was not an alternative to debtors prison. African slaves being brought here did not choose to come here. They did not have a say in whether or not they want to come or not. They were kidnapped, captured, and shipped here like inanimate objects/animals. They were forced to do the slave labor and that slavery in America was for life.
That's not what makes chattel slavery truly horrific. Most African kings or Arab slave traders purchased or kidnapped slaves for life. However, their kids would be free men or women. Chattel slavery was remarkable in the sense even the children would be slaves. It actually created a "slave race" if you will.
Most Blacks still don't view the Confederate flag positive light. Only 6 percent of Blacks view the Confederate flag positively. That number is DOWN from 10 percent in 2011. However, 16 percent of Whites view the Confederate flag positively. That number is UP from 8 percent in 2011.
And that 48% of Americans viewing the Civil War as being about states' rights, it still does not negate that slavery was a major part of it. It doesn't negate that in the Articles of Secession, slavery is mentioned frequently and that the states rights part of it had alot to do with want to maintain slavery. What people think vs what is actually true tend to vary in many cases.
Blacks are still far less likely to have any positive view on the Confederate flag than Whites, regardless of geography. And furthermore, you might not like CNN, but a poll showed that most Blacks viewed the Confederate flag as a symbol of racism: https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/02/polit...ide/index.html
That's not what makes chattel slavery truly horrific. Most African kings or Arab slave traders purchased or kidnapped slaves for life. However, their kids would be free men or women. Chattel slavery was remarkable in the sense even the children would be slaves. It actually created a "slave race" if you will.
I forgot to put that part down. I was just trying to show said poster that American chattel slavery was not an alternative to debtors prison. It was a permanent condition. And yes, if you were a slave, your children would be slaves as well.
This is the only way I know how to view the Confederate cause or the Confederacy in general. If I was alive in 1860 as a Black man, chances are I would have been a slave. I knew there was more at hand that just slavery. However, alot of those issues point to the institution of slavery. Confederates were determined to keep the institution of slavery around. It was their livelihood. Slaves were classified as property instead of human beings. Slaves were used for picking the cash crops. They were used for alot of other tasks as well. The planter class looked at slavery as an economic necessity. It was part of the social fabric of the South. Owning slaves signified wealth. It was also about the racial hierarchy. Blacks were looked at as an inferior race, and therefore, they were viewed as being suited to slavery. For some poor Whites, slavery was looked at as "I hope to be a slave owner" or "I'm might be a poor White person, but at least I'm not a Black slave".
The South's version of an agrarian economy was like nothing else in America. It had more in common with the plantation economy of Cuba or Brazil than the rest of the USA. It was mainly a plantation society. Mississippi and Alabama were very agrarian in their economy. The easy going, leisurely plantation life was due in part to slavery. Many in the South feared a loss to their way of life. States rights was tied to slavery. However, the irony of states rights is this. The South wanted the federal government to do MORE to protect its slave-based economy. The former Confederate states wanted the Fugitive Slave Law to be stronger.
The South feared its way of life vanishing. It feared its economy vanishing. It wanted more automony. However, when a large part of that autonomy is based on being able to keep slavery, there is a problem. When the economy and way of life are based on slavery, that is a problem. I'm looking at this as if I had been living back then. All of that would have come at my expense. Fighting for the freedom to deny someone like me freedom. This is a big reason why I few the Confederate flag so poorly. The Confederate cause would have explicitly been at my expense. It would have been a complete detriment to me.
Slaves were not everywhere in the South and we have a saying about it.
No man fought, so another man could keep slaves.
Slaves were the biggest "issue" for the war, but not the biggest reason.
I've read the Articles of Secession. The desire to keep slavery was a big reason the former Confederate states wanted secession.
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.
