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.
The north's attack on Ft. Sumter was not provoked by slavery.
Um, Civil War 101 states that the SOUTH attacked Ft. Sumter, firing the first shot and thus, starting the war. Regardless that they were basically forced to fire the first shot, they still did it. I'm not trying to be anal, but that is a bit of critical info.
When I see someone displaying the Confederate Flag, my first thought is ignorance, then I ask myself about hate, but usually just settle on ignorance.
The posts on here defending the use of the flag confirm the high level of ignorance on this subject, and revisionist history.
I think a lot of the revisions are from the Christian churches, which played a large role in defending, and even promoting, slavery in the 1800's as morally ok, and even good and righteous. Embarrassed by this history, a lot of effort was poured into rewriting what the Civil War was about... states rights, tyranny, etc. One has to willfully ignore that all of those "other" reasons for the war are so directly and easily tied to the defense of slavery as a "right" (at least if you're white).
Willful ignorance is more dangerous and just plain ignorance, and those going to such great lengths to defend the flag are being willfully ignorant.
“For the life of me, I will never understand how anyone could fight a civil war based in part on the desire to continue the practice of slavery,” Thurmond said.
“Think about it for just a second. Our ancestors were literally fighting to continue to keep human beings as slaves, and continue the unimaginable acts that occur when someone is held against their will. I am not proud of that heritage.”
The north's attack on Ft. Sumter was not provoked by slavery.
Um, Civil War 101 states that the SOUTH attacked Ft. Sumter, firing the first shot and thus, starting the war. Regardless that they were basically forced to fire the first shot, they still did it. I'm not trying to be anal, but that is a bit of critical info.
Um, the undeniable fact is that the federal army was in South Carolina territory after South Carolina seceded. They were an invading army on sovereign SC land. That's an act of provocation.
It's also important to note that this flag wasn't really used much until the 1950's and 60's, largely as a response to more "tyranny" from the Federal government in the form of integration and Civil Rights law.
Basically many in the Southern States were were saying, "yeah, you made us free the blacks from slavery, but we don't have to let those Negroes play in our playgrounds, swim in our pools, or go to our schools. And as a reminder, here's this flag. We can secede if we have to..."
And that "tyrannical" Federal Government was saying, yeah, you kind of have to let black people have the same rights that you have.
And yet, people are still proud of this history? The only way I can imagine being proud of this history is if you are rather blatantly racist towards black people, or willfully ignorant, or both.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,666,340 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan In SC
Um, the undeniable fact is that the federal army was in South Carolina territory after South Carolina seceded. They were an invading army on sovereign SC land. That's an act of provocation.
The troops were at the fort before secession. How is that an invasion?
The troops were at the fort before secession. How is that an invasion?
Nope. They were positioned at Fort Moultrie at the time of secession. They moved to Fort Sumter after SC seceded. They should have moved out of SC instead of moving to another fort in SC.
I love all the white smugness in this thread, but just know that eventually the entire human species will be ONE race, and look slightly mexican. Including everyone's descendants.
I love all the white smugness in this thread, but just know that eventually the entire human species will be ONE race, and look slightly mexican. Including everyone's descendants.
That will be a good thing. Healthier people that don't discriminate against each other based on their race.
The bad thing is that humans are "smart" enough to always find ways to categorize each other. As a foreign born resident I have to say that this is something very noticeable for me here in the U.S. Everybody is categorized. Almost obsessively. You black or white, you are Democrat or Republican, you are religious or non-religious, You are a Yankee or a Redneck. And so on.... It certainly is not a good thing in my opinion.
From the man who would be President of the United States:
“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”
by:
Abraham Lincoln
(1809-1865) 16th US President
Source:
Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858
(The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume III, pp. 145-146.)
That quote was easy to find. What I'm having a hard time looking up is the law or anywhere in the constitution that prohibits blacks (or anyone else) from being offended.
Abraham Lincoln was racist by modern standards. This is irrelevant to the question of whether the South seceded primarily to keep slavery.
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.
