Is Texas more Western or Southern? (Houston, Howe: tax, law, authority)

[TexasHorseLady]

And I'm born and bred in East Texas, ancestors go back to pre-Republic in that neck of the woods (they went and fought in this little battle at a place called San Jacinto just down the road), and I don't consider Texas to be part of The South. Never have. (Well, some wishful thinking when I was pre-adolescent, but reality would not be denied, and even then it was "wouldn't it be nice if" rather than thinking it actually was. ) Perhaps because my parents made sure that I was familiar with all of the varying parts of Texas and its history from an early age.

[Nairobi]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

And I'm born and bred in East Texas, ancestors go back to pre-Republic in that neck of the woods (they went and fought in this little battle at a place called San Jacinto just down the road), and I don't consider Texas to be part of The South. Never have. (Well, some wishful thinking when I was pre-adolescent, but my personal perception based on my own experiences would not be denied, and even then it was "wouldn't it be nice if" rather than thinking it actually was. ) Perhaps because my parents made sure that I was familiar with all of the varying parts of Texas and its history from an early age.

Now this makes much more sense.

[TexasHorseLady]

Thank you, Nairobi, but I meant exactly what I said. Not what you would like for me to have said in order to bolster your opinion.

[Nairobi]

I always found it funny how so much emphasis is put on the uniqueness of Texas as if the other southern states are really just one big blob of sameness with no distinctive qualities within themselves. Texas isn't the only state that can cherry pick at reasons to dissociate itself from the rest of the region.

"Texas is Texas". Yeah, well, Louisiana is Louisiana, Florida is Florida, Arkansas is Arkansas, Georgia is Georgia, etc....

[Nairobi]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Thank you, Nairobi, but I meant exactly what I said. Not what you would like for me to have said in order to bolster your opinion.

So my view is merely an opinion, but yours is an indisputable fact? Hmm.

I'm sure you did mean to say what you said, just like I meant to edit your post.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by doctorjef

Well, actually there are many Southerners whom I revere: Martin Luther King, Jr; Rosa Parks; Medgar Evers; Barbara Jordan; Frederick Douglass -- to name a few.

And I can understand that. They are not heroes of mine, but I can empathize with why they are yours, given your ideological/historical vision. Mine are more Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, even George Wallace, in his way..just because he had the guts to speak the truth about the political parties...And J. Evetts Haley...now THERE was a man with cojones! LOL

Yes, I know the topic of this endless thread. I was responding to a subsidiary issue that had been raised about Texas' socio-political circumstances upon admission to the Union and what was characterised as it having been admitted "as a Southern state", i.e. a state with institutionalised slavery. What else could the poster have meant that would have been relevant politically. The same post then went on to speak of Texas' history as part of the CSA and its subsequent Reconstruction period like other Southern secessionist states (acutally, as you know, Reconstruction was more prolonged in Texas).

Yes it was. And I am proud of Texas history for that reason if nothing else. That is to say, Texas flat refused to meet the demands that secession be declared null and void "ad initito". That is (as you know) from the beginning. The most Texas (by way of the Legislature) would go is to say it was made "null and void" by the result of the War itself. To do otherwise? As they saw it (and I emphatically agree) would mean branding their ancestors as "traitors".

Please don't presume to educate me on the subject of Northern collaboration with, and participation in, the institution of slavery.

Hey, my friend? I am NOT presuming to lecture you. Never have, and show me where I did. If anything you are giving it to me. All I am saying is that for every scab "you" can pick? I can also match with all things those which discriminated against the South.

Finally, almost all Americans with ancestry in the South and whose Southern ancestors had any financial means, have slave-holding ancestors in their lineage, as is true for me -- my maternal ancestors came to North Texas from Tennessee, bringing with them an extended family whom they held in bondage. I'm aware of the realities.

Ok, then why do you focus on the "sins" of the Texas/South, so much? Why not direct it at the northeastern slave-shippers. Slavery in the South could not have been possible without northern merchants bringing them here. You know that as well as I do.

[Nairobi]

Hey, now, Dr. King is everyone's hero.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by Nairobi

So my view is merely an opinion, but yours is an indisputable fact? Hmm.

I'm sure you did mean to say what you said, just like I meant to edit your post.

Well, I guess that's the difference between us. I will disagree (or agree, for that matter) with you on issues until the cows come home, but I would never edit something you said in order to change its meaning to fit my own point of view.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by doctorjef

Well, the old man was on his last legs by the Civil War and didn't live to see the end of it. The more prescient pronouncement he made was that Texas and the South had very little chance of winning a struggle against the Union. His position was hardly analogous to someone like Lee, who resigned his commission with the United States Army in order to take up arms against the Union (you may say "in defence of Virginia and the South", but when the shooting war began, it was taking up arms against his lawful country).

Yes, Houston was prophetic on that point. His underlying reason for opposing secession was that it would lead to a war that -- in the long run -- the South could not possibly win. BUT...the main point is, that when it came down to it, Houston cast his lot with Texas and the South...whatever the outcome might be. Houston was NOT a northern symathizer, as some history books sorta portend to make him out to be. He was a Southerner who deeply loved the South; enough that he expressed it in very sublime ways. I truly respect the memory of Houston...even if I might have opposed him at the time. But he WAS a Texan who loved Texas and a Southerner who loved the South.

No, Houston did NOT take up arms against his "lawful" country. How do you figure that...?

Far as that goes, neither did any other Southerner who defended their homeland against invasion (and that includes your own ancestors who felt the same way). The War could have been avoided if Lincoln had not been hell-bent on coercing the Lower South (which included Texas at the time) back into a Union they no longer wanted to be a part of. All the South wanted was to be left alone...

[Nairobi]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Well, I guess that's the difference between us. I will disagree (or agree, for that matter) with you on issues until the cows come home, but I would never edit something you said in order to change its meaning to fit my own point of view.

Your original post is unchanged, so no worries, THL. Me editing your quote was simply a humorous way of pointing out that your take on the issue was just an arguable opinion. That's all. No harm was meant.