Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 01-04-2011, 03:37 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,232 posts, read 46,578,960 times
Reputation: 11083

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte View Post
For slaves, it was the same for every slave. For the slave master, it was different.
The slaves got the same quality of clothes as the master, because all clothes came from the same source.

Common sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-04-2011, 03:55 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 36,975,677 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
The slaves got the same quality of clothes as the master, because all clothes came from the same source.

Common sense.
You get funnier by the post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 04:43 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,232 posts, read 46,578,960 times
Reputation: 11083
And I haven't seen proof that I was wrong. When all clothes come from the same source, there is no better or worse.

Just like generic orange juice bottled at the Tropicana plant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 05:03 PM
 
72,875 posts, read 62,373,317 times
Reputation: 21825
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
And I haven't seen proof that I was wrong. When all clothes come from the same source, there is no better or worse.

Just like generic orange juice bottled at the Tropicana plant.
Not really. Just because it comes from the same source doesn't mean all is equal. The slave master could save the best for himself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 05:09 PM
Status: "117 N/A" (set 3 days ago)
 
12,920 posts, read 13,611,483 times
Reputation: 9673
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
And I haven't seen proof that I was wrong. When all clothes come from the same source, there is no better or worse.

Just like generic orange juice bottled at the Tropicana plant.
Some states had laws about the kind of clothes slaves were to wear. Fabric called "Negro Cloth" was sold to plantations.

Slave clothing and African-American culture in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries - page 3 | Past & Present
had on "an old white negro cloth jacket and trowsers", while a "new negro fellow of the Jalunka country, who speaks no English" wore an "old white negro cloth jacket and breeches".(10) For the most part, slaves were either given ready-made clothes or used "negro cloth" to make trousers, petticoats and the like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 05:14 PM
 
72,875 posts, read 62,373,317 times
Reputation: 21825
There is one thing that makes me wonder. I have run into otherwise nice, rational people, from the South, that will argue to the bone that slavery had nothing to do with the secession of the Southern states. I have proof(specifically the Articles of Secession) to the contrary. I figured slavery had something to do with it. I just wish I knew this in high school.
A few years ago I had a talk with a friend from high school. She told me that some students in our old high school merely wore the Confederate flag t-shirts for less than nice reason. Furthermore, she mentioned that alot of the students didn't even have relatives who fought in the Civil War.
I remember one summer I made my opinion known about the Confederate flag. The person I made this known to responded somewhat by mentioning that her ancestors didn't own slaves. Well, looking at it now, I feel that is even more of a reason not to wear the rebel flag. The way I look at it, it was not in the best interest of most Southerners to fight in the Civil War. Most White Southerners didn't own slaves. Alot of elite Southern leaders were standing up and openly admitting they were prepared to fight to keep and expand slavery. It is in the Articles of Secession. However, most White Southerners didn't own slaves, were too poor to own any, and couldn't benefit from slavery. As valiantly and bravely as they fought, I feel thy were being used. They were sent off to war for something they would not benefit from. If you are a plantation owner and you have slaves, why pay someone to harvest your crops? You don't need to. You have slaves to do that for free and you own them, so you have a permanent source of labor. How does the average poor White person in the South benefit? Not at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 05:43 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,690,103 times
Reputation: 9324
Quote:
Originally Posted by subsound View Post
NYT: South celebrates Civil War, without slaves - U.S. news - The New York Times - msnbc.com

The war has been re-branded as celebrations come up to drastically play down the role of slavery, and the fact it even happened. Instead many are making it all about "states rights" while the good ol' southern boys were defending their homes from the warring North.

Screw that one of the tantamount reasons to secession was to keep human beings as property I guess.

I've never heard anybody deny the existence of slavery.

But to put it in perspective, only a tiny percentage of the people owned slaves. I don't think too many of the poor farmers would have given their lives if it were only about slavery.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 05:51 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 36,975,677 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
I've never heard anybody deny the existence of slavery.

But to put it in perspective, only a tiny percentage of the people owned slaves. I don't think too many of the poor farmers would have given their lives if it were only about slavery.
The constant refrain then and throughout the 19th century was that by abolishing slavery, the intent of the abolitionist and the "Black Republicans" was to place black people on a equal footing with the same political rights as white people. That was the stated motivation of po white folks, before, during and after the civil war. Strangely, it is not unlike the pabulum still being fed by the current crop of neo-Confederates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 05:52 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,690,103 times
Reputation: 9324
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte View Post
The way I look at it, it was not in the best interest of most Southerners to fight in the Civil War. Most White Southerners didn't own slaves. Alot of elite Southern leaders were standing up and openly admitting they were prepared to fight to keep and expand slavery. It is in the Articles of Secession. However, most White Southerners didn't own slaves, were too poor to own any, and couldn't benefit from slavery. As valiantly and bravely as they fought, I feel thy were being used. They were sent off to war for something they would not benefit from. If you are a plantation owner and you have slaves, why pay someone to harvest your crops? You don't need to. You have slaves to do that for free and you own them, so you have a permanent source of labor. How does the average poor White person in the South benefit? Not at all.

Yes, it was a war that the South should not have fought. It was also a war that Lincoln and the North should not have fought. Slavery could have been ended without war. If Lincoln were really a great leader, he would have worked to end slavery without war.

But states rights and the oppression of the North made that impossible. I doubt that very many of the soldiers on either side were fighting over the issue of slavery.

In my book, they are all American war heroes. Always will be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2011, 06:21 PM
 
72,875 posts, read 62,373,317 times
Reputation: 21825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Yes, it was a war that the South should not have fought. It was also a war that Lincoln and the North should not have fought. Slavery could have been ended without war. If Lincoln were really a great leader, he would have worked to end slavery without war.

But states rights and the oppression of the North made that impossible. I doubt that very many of the soldiers on either side were fighting over the issue of slavery.

In my book, they are all American war heroes. Always will be.
If slavery had not existed to begin with, maybe this would not have happened. I will also agree that states rights played a roll. Many used states rights as a reason to keep slavery, sort of like "It is our state right to have slaves, not for the federal government to tell us". The British Empire abolished slavery without a single bullet fired. Everyone ended it and Canada stopped having slavery for that reason. In the USA, it didn't work this way.
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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:35 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top