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 the. Democrats are the racist ones. Lincoln was. Republican
Strom Thurmond lead a whole wing of the Democratic Party (The Dixiecrats) out of the Democratic Party in 1966 and into the Republican Party who welcomed them with open arms racism and all! I am one Democrat who said good ridings and please shut the door on your way out!
Strom Thurmond lead a whole wing of the Democratic Party (The Dixiecrats) out of the Democratic Party in 1966 and into the Republican Party who welcomed them with open arms racism and all! I am one Democrat who said good ridings and please shut the door on your way out!
You mean the same Strom Thurmond who paid for his mixed race daughter's education way back in the day? BTW: that lady was smokin' hot when young.
And Lincoln's plan was to free the slaves and then send them to Nicaragua to get them out of the United States.
I saw a copy of a NYT article on the Internet once, from 1862 or '63 about a meeting of a group of black men in NYC who gathered to write up a formal statement protesting Lincoln's plan. Interesting bit of history that often doesn't get covered. They did not want to be relocated.
Yes, Lincoln was a massive scumbag, might be the biggest scumbag in American history.
The original speech he gave is here, but not sure about the article you're talking about, never read it.
"We look to our condition, owing to the existence of the two races on this continent. I need not recount to you the effects upon white men, growing out of the institution of Slavery. I believe in its general evil effects on the white race. See our present condition---the country engaged in war!---our white men cutting one another's throats, none knowing how far it will extend; and then consider what we know to be the truth. But for your race among us there could not be war, although many men engaged on either side do not care for you one way or the other. Nevertheless, I repeat, without the institution of Slavery and the colored race as a basis, the war could not have an existence."
Lincoln had asked the British for help in the relocation of the blacks to Africa and Central America(it would have required thousands of ships to move the millions of blacks in this country, it was basically going to be impossible without the permission and help from the British and their Navy and merchant fleet), but Britain was a pseudo ally with the Confederacy, because they benefited enormously from the south's cotton(they provided several "blockade runner" ships to the south during the war, so they could continue exporting cotton to Britain's factories). Britain refused to go along with Lincoln's plan. Though Lincoln did setup a small colony on an island off the mainland of Haiti, but it was a failure.
Eventually, Lincoln and the Republican party, realized that even after the war was over, the southerners weren't going to support the Republican party, and the policies/programs that were pushed through during the war. And they decided that if they kept blacks in the country, and gave them a right to vote, then all the blacks would vote for the Republican party, guaranteeing that Republicans would win all future elections(in many southern states, blacks outnumbered whites).
During "Reconstruction", all the white people who fought for the south, were barred from voting or holding political office, while blacks were given a right to vote. So, in what by all rights were fraudulent elections, Northern Republicans(called carpetbaggers) came down and were elected to political office, and pushed through the agenda of the Northern Republicans.
After they fraudulently rewrote all southern state Constitutions, and passed many new laws, and seized most of the farmland from all the wealthy planters, and "redistributed it". The balance of power finally shifted, and the early 1870's, the Republicans lost their ability to dominate southern politics, until the 1960's.
We have a tendency to sort of "romanticize" that period. But honestly, from my opinion, pretty much everyone on both sides were pretty much scumbags. Regardless, the war really wasn't about slavery, it was about economics, and power.
It was fundamentally a war between an industrial economy, and an agricultural economy. Had the south been victorious, the Southern states would probably look more like Brazil today, than what it is. And had the south been victorious, the Northern United States never would have become as powerful, and it is difficult to know how that would have played out in regards to future European wars.
So in some ways, the centralizing industrialists probably needed to win, because if they didn't, we might be speaking German or Russian now.
It was a great idea or so they thought and really didnt pan out. They didnt ask the blacks if it was okey to scatter them around, send their children miles away to a school ( forced bussing ) to inferior school systems where in many states and cities it was a total failure. No one is ever going to admit that in this century.
"We look to our condition, owing to the existence of the two races on this continent. I need not recount to you the effects upon white men, growing out of the institution of Slavery. I believe in its general evil effects on the white race. See our present condition---the country engaged in war!---our white men cutting one another's throats, none knowing how far it will extend; and then consider what we know to be the truth. But for your race among us there could not be war, although many men engaged on either side do not care for you one way or the other. Nevertheless, I repeat, without the institution of Slavery and the colored race as a basis, the war could not have an existence."
Lincoln had asked the British for help in the relocation of the blacks to Africa and Central America(it would have required thousands of ships to move the millions of blacks in this country, it was basically going to be impossible without the permission and help from the British and their Navy and merchant fleet), but Britain was a pseudo ally with the Confederacy, because they benefited enormously from the south's cotton(they provided several "blockade runner" ships to the south during the war, so they could continue exporting cotton to Britain's factories). Britain refused to go along with Lincoln's plan. Though Lincoln did setup a small colony on an island off the mainland of Haiti, but it was a failure.
Eventually, Lincoln and the Republican party, realized that even after the war was over, the southerners weren't going to support the Republican party, and the policies/programs that were pushed through during the war. And they decided that if they kept blacks in the country, and gave them a right to vote, then all the blacks would vote for the Republican party, guaranteeing that Republicans would win all future elections(in many southern states, blacks outnumbered whites).
During "Reconstruction", all the white people who fought for the south, were barred from voting or holding political office, while blacks were given a right to vote. So, in what by all rights were fraudulent elections, Northern Republicans(called carpetbaggers) came down and were elected to political office, and pushed through the agenda of the Northern Republicans.
After they fraudulently rewrote all southern state Constitutions, and passed many new laws, and seized most of the farmland from all the wealthy planters, and "redistributed it". The balance of power finally shifted, and the early 1870's, the Republicans lost their ability to dominate southern politics, until the 1960's.
We have a tendency to sort of "romanticize" that period. But honestly, from my opinion, pretty much everyone on both sides were pretty much scumbags. Regardless, the war really wasn't about slavery, it was about economics, and power.
It was fundamentally a war between an industrial economy, and an agricultural economy. Had the south been victorious, the Southern states would probably look more like Brazil today, than what it is. And had the south been victorious, the Northern United States never would have become as powerful, and it is difficult to know how that would have played out in regards to future European wars.
So in some ways, the centralizing industrialists probably needed to win, because if they didn't, we might be speaking German or Russian now.
Much of this is false information masquerading as history and very opinionated. Please stop your foolishness.
And Lincoln's plan was to free the slaves and then send them to Nicaragua to get them out of the United States.
I saw a copy of a NYT article on the Internet once, from 1862 or '63 about a meeting of a group of black men in NYC who gathered to write up a formal statement protesting Lincoln's plan. Interesting bit of history that often doesn't get covered. They did not want to be relocated.
There is a monument to the plans to send Afro-Americans back to where they came from. It is the nation of Liberia on the West coast of Africa a nation founded by American abolitionists as a place to repatriate Black Americans to Africa. They named its first colony and its capital city Monrovia after former President James Monroe who endorsed the project. Other settlements were named Robertsport, Buchanan, Greenville and Harper (all good American names). British abolitionists followed suit and created a place called Sierra Leone with its capital called Freetown.
Whenever I come on the P&OC subforum it looks more and more like Stormfront or FreeRepublic. It's disturbing, once upon a time we dident have very many wingnuts on here. When I first joined CityData this forum was populated by moderates, perhaps even leaning slightly center-left ... today's filled with ultra-far right wing nuts.
Much of this is false information masquerading as history and very opinionated. Please stop your foolishness.
What is false about it? If you think any of it is false, point it out, and I'll provide you substantial and reliable information to prove that it isn't false. The Civil War was for years an obsession with mine. But I don't particularly worry about it these days, because as I said, what happened basically needed to happen.
When most people think of the Civil War, they perceive it as if the United States was the only country on Earth, and that both the cause of the Civil War, and the outcome of the Civil War, effectively happened in a sort of "National vacuum".
In reality, the Civil War was both caused by international economic/political realities, and the events which came afterwards were the result of geopolitical realities.
You mean the same Strom Thurmond who paid for his mixed race daughter's education way back in the day? BTW: that lady was smokin' hot when young.
You should know that white Southerns have been creating mixed race babies since the first black women slaves were brought to the Jamestown Settlement in the 1610s and if blacks weren't available a native American women would do just as well. Thomas Jefferson has several hundred black or mixed race descendants today from a long term relationship with a black woman named Sally who was a slave at Monticello . I wouldn't be surprised to learn the Father of his Country also sired a mixed race child at Mount Vernon. It was perfectly alright if it was kept in the deepest of shadows and never became conversation in polite society.
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.
