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.
1. The Civil War had nothing to do with slavery: Tariff of 1828
Learn some history. The Tariff of 1928 was replaced in 1832 - don't peddle the absurd notion that secession in 1860 was about a tariff that had not been in effect for 28 years. Oh, and the tariff of 1832? That only lasted a year before being replaced.
Now, your empty claims are... ahem, 'interesting'... But why don't we actually ask those who seceded why they seceded?
South Carolina, the first state to secede in a huff, took pains to explain precisely why it was leaving. In so doing, it the word 'slave' and it's variations - slavery, slaveholding, etc. - appear 18 times. It goes on and on here:
Quote:
Quote:
The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. [b]But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.
It continues at length about slavery for paragraph after paragraph. But not once in the entire declaration will you find any discussion of tariffs.
Shall we look at other states? How about Georgia? The word 'slave' its variations here appear no less than 35 times - it's all Georgia talks about when blustering over why its secession is justified. Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - Georgia Secession
And we can always ask Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens for his thoughts, for he was kind enough to give them to the ages in his famous Cornerstone Speech.
Quote:
The new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions—African slavery as it exists among us—the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution.
The Southerners of the Confederacy had no compunctions about stating, loudly and clearly and unequivocally, that they were seceding over the issue of slavery. Oh, how inconvenient that must be to modern revisionists!
So, to sum up:
Q: How do we know that the Confederates seceded from the Union for the overriding reason of preserving the institution of slavery? A: Because they told us so!
Last edited by Unsettomati; 07-07-2015 at 06:34 AM..
It's shame. Though as shameless as some of the apologists are I wonder why they bother. I suppose it's that the people they hope to convince that the rebellion was justified would be ashamed to justify slavery, thus the need for cockamamie rationales like the tariff justification, the agrarian vs. industrial nonsense etc. None of which could justify treason and rebellion, even if true.
Or even more so, said persons might have agreed with the cause, but won't admit it. Who knows why. I've document after document showing that the desire to maintain slavery was a major cause. Even in the face of that, there is still a desire to downplay it.
"In the interest of lower tariffs"? The north wrecked the south's economy by imposing the Tariff of Abominations in the first place.
Tariffs were lowered before the rebellion, then raised during it when the rebelling states no longer had a say. Note too that agricultural northern states didn't rebel, though tariffs weren't in their interests. But northern agricultural states didn't have slavery.
In any event tariffs are a political issue, like any other, and in a representative government you take your losses with your wins and work to get your way in subsequent elections. People don't get to rebel simply because political issues aren't going their way. Didn't you have civics classes in grade school?
And that which united us as a country will continue to keep us divided as a people.
The confederate flag united us as a country?? Didn't it pretty much divide the country all by itself? Why hold onto a symbol of that division if the goal truly is unity?
Or even more so, said persons might have agreed with the cause, but won't admit it. Who knows why. I've document after document showing that the desire to maintain slavery was a major cause. Even in the face of that, there is still a desire to downplay it.
The early designers of the United States of America struggled with the concept of owning people as property. Some agreed & some disagreed, it was one of the largest debates during the Constitutional Congress. They compromised by beginning with the institution of slavery intact, they were, I think, pragmatic anarchists.
When considering the designers of the Confederate States of America, I think it's helpful to look at their Constitution, how did they intend to be different from the United States?
And to elaborate #2, no one has claimed Roof murdered anyone because of the Confederate flag. The flag is a symbol of what he stood for. It did not cause him to kill. It was a symbol he adopted.
Which is why people are calling for the removal of the flag.
The early designers of the United States of America struggled with the concept of owning people as property. Some agreed & some disagreed, it was one of the largest debates during the Constitutional Congress. They compromised by beginning with the institution of slavery intact, they were, I think, pragmatic anarchists.
When considering the designers of the Confederate States of America, I think it's helpful to look at their Constitution, how did they intend to be different from the United States?
Funny, but not so funny is the fact that we still struggle with these ideals as a country. Illegal immigrants from Mexico are treated much like slaves here now. Which is one of the big reasons some oppose allowing them to stay. They are worked beyond tolerance, paid little or nothing, and threatened with deportation if they make a sound about their treatment. Yet 1/2 the population fight for our right to own these people in the name of what's good for business. It's the same then and now. Slaves were tied to big business, nobody wanted to give up their money, now or then. We haven't changed that much.
The battle was over profit, not people. Slaves were just workers who required very little pay in the form of housing and food. Just like today, slave wages and conditions run rampant because someone makes a profit from it. Then slaves were sold from their country for a profit, bought by some Americans to use to make a profit. It was business, and they didn't want to lose their businesses. So, they fought over it.
There are a ton of unethical business practices alive today I have a problem with as well. Profit driven is more appropriate than racism though. If we are going to be honest that is. The flag represents the fight to keep business going in the south, which were run and worked by slave labor.
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 25 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,588,006 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm4
1. The Civil War had nothing to do with slavery: Tariff of 1828
2. As long as progressive leftist moonbats fling epithets at southerners, their region's adopted banner is still a symbol of honor and dignity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest
Despite what the 'Confederate States of America Constitution', the 'Articles of Secession', & the 'Declarations of Causes' says?
Cherry picking documents, does not tell the situation as a whole.
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.
But why don't we actually ask those who seceded why they seceded? 
