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.
Here there is sufficient evidence in the concrete that slavery was not the avowed cause of the conflict. If there was this uncertain notion of the cause of the war among northern sympathizers, how much more befogged must have been the minds of the southern slaves in the hands of men who imagined that they were fighting for the same principles involved in our earlier struggle with Great Britain! To the majority of the Negroes, as to all the South, the invading armies of the Union seemed to be ruthlessly attacking independent States, invading the beloved homeland and trampling upon all that these men held dear.
The loyalty of the slave while the master was away with the fighting forces of the Confederacy has been the making of many orators of an earlier day, echoes of which we often hear in the present. The Negroes were not only loyal in remaining at home and doing their duty but also in offering themselves for actual service in the Confederate army. [The Journal of Negro History Vol. 4, No. 3 (Jul., 1919), pp 239 - 253 (15 pages)]
__________________
There are 253 pages of that Journal, all I give here is a snippet ... I would think that would be enough to cause someone to what to know more ... guess not. (not at gun point)
so as to preserve not only a way of life, but a way of creating revenue that both the white man and the black man had come to utilize ... interesting enough, the history books leave out the snippet of the white woman sent to prison for teaching young black children how to read. History books do not cover the snippets of the Christians that wanted to save the black people's souls so as they would be united in Heaven ... in Heaven ... we are all one. The religion of Politics that is celebrated today ... they leave that out.
I'm currently reading the article right now. Have you read the whole journal? There are 253 pages.
There is sufficient evidence that slavery was a major cause. Not the only cause, but one of the biggest. States rights was part of it. However, some of the issue behind states' rights had to do with slavery. Go talk to the residents of Kansas about that.
Of course some slaves were loyal to their masters. The master knew how to instill fear to keep slaves loyal. Many slaves went to fight for the Union. Far more than those who fought for the Confederacy. There were instances of Black slaves being forced to fight at gun point by their masters. I've looked this up. I study these things because I know there are enough Confederate sympathizers to go around. My point is to prove them wrong.
And I know about White women who did nice things for Black people, to try and help them out. There were White missionaries from the North who sought to help former slaves get educated and do well in the new South. That does not negate the CONFEDERATE CAUSE. Charles Wesley says slavery was not a primary cause.
And then there is what the Articles of Secession and the Confederate Constitution says:
From the Confederate Constitution:
Article I Section 9(4)
No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed[/quote]
Article IV Section 2(1)
The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.[/quote]
Article IV Section 3(3)
The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several states; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form states to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory, the institution of negro slavery as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress, and by the territorial government: and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories, shall have the right to take to such territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the states or territories of the Confederate states.
Quote:
Did you know the population of the south did you know there were more black people living here, than white? Do you know how that effected the power struggle in politics where as the north wished to cash in on the southern revenue and law making capabilities ... ?
In some places there were more blacks living there than Whites. They were only there because of slavery. How about this. Blacks started leaving the South in significant numbers after Reconstruction ended. 90 percent of Blacks used to live in the South. Now it's 55 percent. Blacks used to be the majority in Mississippi and South Carolina. Not anymore. And what good does it do to be in the the majority if you have no political power? What good does it do if you're enslaved?
Quote:
Abraham Lincoln wanted to send the black population away ...
So what? The Confederates wanted to keep Blacks enslaved. If I had my pick of being sent to another country vs being enslaved, I'll go to another country. Freedom or Death.
Quote:
We live together, work together and pray together, it was no different 158 years ago. We know one another not by the color of our skin, but by the fruits of our labor. Through Christ we are united, through politics we are damned.
We might be in a more integrated America than 50, 60 years ago. However, we still have alot of problems. And it was very different 158 years ago. Blacks and Whites were not living and praying together 158 years ago, not nearly as much as you like to think. Black slaves were not even permitted to learn how to read. Black people were enslaved 158 years ago. I don't think most Black people would agree with you.
You know none of this has anything to do with the Founding Fathers. I also know the only reason you brought Native Americans into this is to try and derail the topic. And something else. I'm aware of the displacement of Native Americans in this country. It's something I was taught in school. Here is the difference. The USA flag represents this country. However, the Founding Fathers did not put it in the Constitution to displace Native Americans. The Founding Fathers did not separate from the British Empire for the expressed purpose of displacing and enslaving people. The ideals behind the founding of the USA far more noble than the ideals behind the founding of the Confederacy.
The point is this. Maybe instead of trying to gaslight or claim "Blacks are brainwashed", you might want to ask WHY many Blacks feel how they do about the Confederate flag. Maybe you should consider why the opinion about the Confederate flag varies so vastly between Blacks and Whites.
you make it sound like the South broke the constitution by keeping slavery. It was legal and the norm since the 13 colonies and when the nation was founded, it was protected under the constitution.
That's the reason Lincoln and the North couldn't abolish it even if they wanted to. They didn't have the votes in the North alone and they could care less they needed the tax revenues from slavery to fund the North and run the federal government.....see the Corwin Amendment.
what are you talking about? The ideas behind the founding of the USA were the same ones the South declared their independence, TAXES and break off from a central government that didn't have their best interests.......isn't that what the rich white folks like Washington and Jefferson did while they kept their slaves?
the founding kept slavery legal but they didn't want to pay taxes to the crown.....isn't that what the South did? the difference is Lincoln was more of a tyrant than King George and was willing to destroy and burn every town in the South and put anybody against him in prison including reporters and newspapers to deny the South their independence,,,,,King George didn't go that far even though he had a superior army and navy.
The Civil War was all about slavery, especially for the Confederate side. All that needs to be said. This is irrefutable historical fact.
Not all of it was about slavery. But I agree with you that slavery was instrumental in this. It doesn't matter that Lincoln was no friend of the Black man. Articles of Secession, snippets of it below.
Quote:
The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic. This hostile policy of our confederates has been pursued with every circumstance of aggravation which could arouse the passions and excite the hatred of our people, and has placed the two sections of the Union for many years past in the condition of virtual civil war. Our people, still attached to the Union from habit and national traditions, and averse to change, hoped that time, reason, and argument would bring, if not redress, at least exemption from further insults, injuries, and dangers. Recent events have fully dissipated all such hopes and demonstrated the necessity of separation.
Quote:
In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin. That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.
The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory.
The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France.
The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico.
It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction.
It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.
It tramples the original equality of the South under foot.
It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.
It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.
It has enlisted its press, its pulpit and its schools against us, until the whole popular mind of the North is excited and inflamed with prejudice.
It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists.
It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.
It has invaded a State, and invested with the honors of martyrdom the wretch whose purpose was to apply flames to our dwellings, and the weapons of destruction to our lives.
It has broken every compact into which it has entered for our security.
It has given indubitable evidence of its design to ruin our agriculture, to prostrate our industrial pursuits and to destroy our social system.
It knows no relenting or hesitation in its purposes; it stops not in its march of aggression, and leaves us no room to hope for cessation or for pause.
It has recently obtained control of the Government, by the prosecution of its unhallowed schemes, and destroyed the last expectation of living together in friendship and brotherhood.
Utter subjugation awaits us in the Union, if we should consent longer to remain in it. It is not a matter of choice, but of necessity. We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers, to secure this as well as every other species of property. For far less cause than this, our fathers separated from the Crown of England.
Our decision is made. We follow their footsteps. We embrace the alternative of separation; and for the reasons here stated, we resolve to maintain our rights with the full consciousness of the justice of our course, and the undoubting belief of our ability to maintain it.
Quote:
Texas abandoned her separate national existence and consented to become one of the Confederated Union to promote her welfare, insure domestic tranquility and secure more substantially the blessings of peace and liberty to her people. She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them?
The Civil War was all about slavery, especially for the Confederate side. All that needs to be said. This is irrefutable historical fact.
^^^^ another that drank the kool-aid.......you actually think the whites in the North sent their husbands, fathers, and sons and left their wives and children alone to survive on their lands to fight and die in the South for some black slaves? LMAO!!!!!
If Lincoln used that excuse the North would have shot him dead after his speech.....try again son, plenty of information and facts for you to read that Lincoln and the North could care less about slaves in the South let alone go to war and die for them. LOL!
Last edited by Hellion1999; 02-11-2019 at 02:39 PM..
you make it sound like the South broke the constitution by keeping slavery. It was legal and the norm since the 13 colonies and when the nation was founded, it was protected under the constitution.
That's the reason Lincoln and the North couldn't abolish it even if they wanted to. They didn't have the votes in the North alone and they could care less they needed the tax revenues from slavery to fund the North and run the federal government.....see the Corwin Amendment.
what are you talking about? The ideas behind the founding of the USA were the same ones the South declared their independence, TAXES and break off from a central government that didn't have their best interests.......isn't that what the rich white folks like Washington and Jefferson did while they kept their slaves?
the founding kept slavery legal but they didn't want to pay taxes to the crown.....isn't that what the South did? the difference is Lincoln was more of a tyrant than King George and was willing to destroy and burn every town in the South and put anybody against him in prison including reporters and newspapers to deny the South their independence,,,,,King George didn't go that far even though he had a superior army and navy.
Wrong. The USA founding was about taxes. Secession from the USA, on the other hand, had alot of roots in trying to keep slavery, and the fear that it would be abolished. It didn't matter what the North was going to do. What mattered was what many in the South feared.
The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic. ...
Last edited by Ibginnie; 02-11-2019 at 08:57 PM..
Reason: copyright violation
Wrong. The USA founding was about taxes. Secession from the USA, on the other hand, had alot of roots in trying to keep slavery, and the fear that it would be abolished. It didn't matter what the North was going to do. What mattered was what many in the South feared.
:
if Lincoln and the North had no intentions of abolishing slavery in the South and they passed the Corwin Amendment that basically said:
"No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corwin_Amendment
as long that the South return to the Union and pay their taxes and let the federal government control their economy, Lincoln wouldn't wage war. The South refused and Lincoln sent troops down there BRO!, IT WASN'T ABOUT SLAVERY!!! ...........If the South return to the Union and accepted the North's offer, Slavery would have been legal and the Corwin amendment constitutional law. They didn't return, they didn't want to pay high taxes to the North and they didn't want the North controlling their economy....just like the founding fathers did with the crown....it was about money and control of revenues and resources.
the war couldn't have been over slavery, slavery was already a constitutional right and Lincoln and the North didn't have the power or the votes to abolish it . Lincoln said it many times. He said many times the reason he was fighting the war. Why people like you keep saying it was mainly about slavery is false and a lie.....try again....
you make it sound like the South broke the constitution by keeping slavery. It was legal and the norm since the 13 colonies and when the nation was founded, it was protected under the constitution.
That's the reason Lincoln and the North couldn't abolish it even if they wanted to.
The ideas behind the founding of the USA were the same ones the South declared their independence, TAXES and break off from a central government that didn't have their best interests.......isn't that what the rich white folks like Washington and Jefferson did while they kept their slaves?
.
Partial truth has another name - propaganda!
Let's start with some basic agreements. The Founding of the USA was based largely on selfishness...that is, why have 1/2 a loaf when you have have all of it? Just a few years before the founding, Ben Franklin and friends were asking the King to give them Ohio....and if the King had said yes, chances are the USA never would have been formed (at that time).
Now, onto some finer points. The Founders knew slavery was a problem...just like we know today that Health Care, Debt, Forever Wars, the Drug War, etc. are problems. Knowing about problems doesn't solve them.
The fact that they banned the Slave Trade while still alive (most of them - 1808) negates your point. It was pretty much just a "pass the buck" situation and the difficulty of Constitutional Amendments made it impossible to ban it.
The North OBVIOUSLY didn't need the money since the biggest boom in our history was the century AFTER slaves were freed. Inconvenient, I know, but still true.
You seem to pass right over "all men are created equal" and such things. If that was the foundation and first words of their declarations.....well, throwing it in the trash (as you have done) doesn't quite match reality.
Slavery in terms of numbers was not normal in all of the 13 colonies, nor in the 33 states that existed by 1860. The numbers were heavily skewed toward just a handful of those 33.
Virginia itself had 42% of all slaves....SC and GA had similar vast populations and that's about it. In 1810 (not long after the Constitution), MA. had ZERO slaves and VA. close to 400,000.
Obviously much of the South was dragged into the Civil War by the few states that had the really big numbers....economic interests and all. It wasn't an accident that SC started the mess.
ANY way you look at it - since the Mother Country and Crown abolished it well before the Civil War, the idea of it being normal or acceptable doesn't float other than in a backwards nation (or part of one).
1) The KKK never used bed sheets. They used robes and white pointy hats. Ironic because the KKK hated Catholics.
2) I never asked if the Dixiecrats were a short-lived party. I asked you to think about why the Confederate flag became the symbol of choice for those against civil rights? Why it because the symbol of choice for white supremacists outside of the south? And why it has become a symbol used by some working class/working poor whites who feel at odds with society?
3) And this is something you really need to understand. Why did so many Confederate monuments get erected during the Jim Crow era?
As a Catholic, I guess I missed the white robe and pointy hat memo. Do tell, G_M. I'm confused.
The disconnect between black and white is obvious, as many have pointed out. What you should be asking is, why is it acceptable to fly the confederate flag in a poor, working-class white neighborhood but not in a wealthy, upper middle-class one? Did the less-affluent folks not get the memo that this symbol is offensive? Or do they fly it because it is offensive? It's not lost on me that the group more likely to fly the confederate flag are mostly Trump supporters.
We both know that the disconnect is obvious. One of the biggest reasons I started this thread in the first place. That disconnect needs to be addressed. A symbol is suppose to have a uniting factor. The Confederate flag is not that symbol. More people should consider why.
I too have noticed that the Confederate flag seems to be far more pronounced among working class/working poor Whites than among middle upper class Whites. That is another good question to ask. I rarely ever seen Confederate flags brandished among middle-upper class Whites in the South. I can see a major disconnect there.
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.
...........If the South return to the Union and accepted the North's offer, Slavery would have been legal and the Corwin amendment constitutional law. They didn't return, they didn't want to pay high taxes to the North and they didn't want the North controlling their economy....just like the founding fathers did with the crown....it was about money and control of revenues and resources. 