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.
Living in the South, there is one segment of the population that never says that it represents "southern pride" or "southern heritage". That is the Black population.
There are people who think the goal of the Iraq War was to spread democracy. Is it true?
We tend to take the motives of a few, and present them as the motives of all. There are at least four different groups of people who were in favor of the Iraq War.
1) Those who believed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was funding terrorism, making him an immediate-threat to the United States.
2) Those who believed Saddam Hussein was a tyrant, and who believed it was their moral duty to spread freedom and democracy to Iraq.
These first two include most "normal people". The next two apply only to a specific class of people...
3) Those who believed Saddam Hussein's regime destabilized the Middle-East, and was undermining American National Interests.
4) Those who wanted to maintain control of middle-east oil.
So what was the real purpose of the Iraq War? Basically, all of these narratives are true, but which is the most-true?
The same logic applies to the Civil War. Was Abraham Lincoln fighting a war to end slavery? Were the confederate soldiers fighting a war to preserve slavery?
What has happened with history, is that a single narrative has been pulled-out and held up as the reason for the Civil War. This narrative is of course wrong. Abraham Lincoln DID NOT, nor would he EVER fight a war to end slavery. And likewise, almost everyone in the south thought they were fighting for independence.
To say that the south was fighting to preserve slavery, is to say that the southern soldier was willing to fight and die in a war to keep blacks enslaved. Imagine for a moment that you were southern man who had ancestors who were Confederate soldiers, would you feel differently about that flag?
I could care less what people think a flag represents. The American flag flew over slavery from 1776 to 1865, and four "northern" states had slavery throughout the entire Civil War. The emancipation proclamation didn't free the slaves. So why does nearly everyone believe it did?
You do seem that flag occasionally in parts of PA, NY, and OH. Even in the border states of WV and MD you see them as well. I dislike it as well, but up here, I believe it's more of a "I want less government" or "I don't want anyone telling me what do to" than with southern pride. In fact I had a neighbor in Canonsburg, PA who had one on his porch and I asked him why. He said he does it to **** people off (mainly liberals) and has nothing to do with sympathizing with the South. He made fun of the South too, which I found ironic in so many ways. I was so glad when I moved away from that neighborhood.
How many soldiers today do you think have a political agenda when they deploy to the middle east? How many do you think have great wealth in oil and are deploying to protect their investment?
Now …
How many soldiers in 1861 had a political agenda to fight Washington? How many do you think had great wealth in slaves and fought to protect their investment?
The answers are the same. Very few. Follow the money. The driving force behind war is money and politics while the largest portion of the population, the poor dirt farmer, does the fighting and bleeding and usually not because he has any political interest. Most joined for adventure, to not be seen as a coward, or to protect their family from bushwhackers or Jayhawkers. Many southerners, notably Quakers, were against slavery and protected thousands via the underground railroad.
Decades later, racists started using the confederate battle flag as a rallying symbol. The soldiers in the CW usually fought under a regimental flag or a flag that represented the region they came from.
As far as secession, even Washington DC could not decided at the time if the USA was one country or a coalition of individual countries called states. Many felt they were fighting for their country of South Carolina or their county of Georgia etc.
There were also trade and tariff issues that affected 'big business'.
There were a number of issues and reasons people decided to fight for.
Lincoln distilled it down to preserving the Union and a year or two into the war made slavery and human rights the moral high ground issue and rightfully so.
It took a quarter million dead on both sides to settle the issue of secession and slavery.
When broad, disparaging statements are made against the entire south and southern culture is only shows ignorance. There were parts and people of the south that were terrible and needed changing. Never hold the entire population of eleven states responsible for the sins of the few.
How many soldiers today do you think have a political agenda when they deploy to the middle east? How many do you think have great wealth in oil and are deploying to protect their investment?
Now …
How many soldiers in 1861 had a political agenda to fight Washington? How many do you think had great wealth in slaves and fought to protect their investment?
The answers are the same. Very few. Follow the money. The driving force behind war is money and politics while the largest portion of the population, the poor dirt farmer, does the fighting and bleeding and usually not because he has any political interest. Most joined for adventure, to not be seen as a coward, or to protect their family from bushwhackers or Jayhawkers. Many southerners, notably Quakers, were against slavery and protected thousands via the underground railroad.
Decades later, racists started using the confederate battle flag as a rallying symbol. The soldiers in the CW usually fought under a regimental flag or a flag that represented the region they came from.
As far as secession, even Washington DC could not decided at the time if the USA was one country or a coalition of individual countries called states. Many felt they were fighting for their country of South Carolina or their county of Georgia etc.
There were also trade and tariff issues that affected 'big business'.
There were a number of issues and reasons people decided to fight for.
Lincoln distilled it down to preserving the Union and a year or two into the war made slavery and human rights the moral high ground issue and rightfully so.
It took a quarter million dead on both sides to settle the issue of secession and slavery.
When broad, disparaging statements are made against the entire south and southern culture is only shows ignorance. There were parts and people of the south that were terrible and needed changing. Never hold the entire population of eleven states responsible for the sins of the few.
I get what you're saying here (I think?) however I don't think it's a mistake to hold those responsible accountable, do you?
History matters. Getting it right matters.
The period from Lincoln's election to secession (Secession Winter) is incredibly well-documented & is therefore incredibly 'ripe' for 'getting it right' & thereby provide an excellent opportunity to learn.
Our form of government, then & now, is very similar, & is Constitution-based. What were the leadership, i.e. the elected officials/representatives saying? Documentation includes newspaper accounts, State secession conventions/deliberations (Jan - March), testimony from the Washington Peace convention, letters of secessions from the commissioners of Slave States, list of grievances in State declarations of secession, & so on.
You wrote above that "It took a quarter million dead on both sides to settle the issue of secession and slavery."
Before it got to that point, there were 5 proposed amendments which discussed logical exit strategies for secession.
Additionally, the Congressional Record of the 36th Congress shows the proposals of the many other Constitutional Amendments (President Buchanon was the 1st to propose).
'US Constitution & Secession' is a recent book by Dwight Pitcaithley. His book focuses on analyzing these amendments. Basically he breaks down 350 different topics in the proposed 67 amendments. Slavery expanded in the territories is the largest topic cited. The Slave State position was that Government should protect slavery because slaves are property. 90% of the amendments proposed were about protecting slavery. 2 out of the 350 discussed tariffs. 5 were logical exit strategies for secession. One described having 4 Presidents, 1 each for North, South, East & West.
Other major issues:
Return of fugitives slaves
Protecting slavery in the District of Columbia
Slaves were taken from owners when they went to certain states (Virginia sues NY over this)
Dred Scott decision
Secession issues & reorganizing federal government
Jefferson Davis proposed nationalizing slavery (slaves as protected property)
The Corwin amendment was approved by Senate (& previously approved by the House); on Inauguration Day it was ratified by 5 states.
The Slave States seceded to protect slavery & the notion of white supremacy.
Southern states were railing against the Northern states, its people, abolitionists, & eventually Lincoln.
In his analysis of the proposed Amendments: the slave States were willing to trade State authority to protect slavery for Federal authority to protect slavery. (In other words, it was about property rights & NOT States' rights)
History matters. Getting it right matters.
Historical distortion, evasion, denials, & the damaging revisionism has not served US well.
So in other words you're the perfect liberal. Because ONE bad person, Dylan Roof, happened to fly the Confederate flag it makes that flag unacceptable????
No, feel free to fly your flag and be proud of your "southern" heritage and your "southern" ancestors who lost their lives in service of the Confederacy.
What you need to STOP DOING is simultaneously demonizing the "democrat" party for being the party of racism in 2019 in reference to the 1860s. Those guys were YOUR ancestors.
Either they were your 'honorable, courageous ancestors' or they were 'evil democrat racists' yet republicans in the south today want to have it both ways at the same time.
Historical distortion, evasion, denials, & the damaging revisionism has not served US well.
No one disagrees with your statement. But no one agrees on the history.
There have been countless books written about the Civil War, why would you possibly assume that your book is more true than any other? Because you wish it to be?
The person you responded to mentioned that the primary cause of all wars is money. Or as the saying goes, "Follow the money". And slavery was obviously big-business. But what else was big-business?
South Carolina nearly seceded in 1832. Why? And tell me about the Morrill Tariff? What are the differences between the US Constitution and the Confederate Constitution? And why was Abraham Lincoln willing to fight a war, and kill an unknown amount of Americans, to "Preserve the Union"?
We all know why "the government" fights wars, but why do soldiers fight wars? What did the American soldier think he was fighting the Iraq War for? Why was the American government fighting the Iraq War? The same logic applies to the Civil War.
Last edited by Redshadowz; 02-10-2019 at 08:38 AM..
I get what you're saying here (I think?) however I don't think it's a mistake to hold those responsible accountable, do you?
Responsibility is important.
At the same time, those responsible were wealthy landowners and politicians. The upper class, the rich, those with power.
While those that fought bravely and endured great hardship by the tens of thousands have very little concept of political law or constitutional amendments. Many that fought were not much more than mercenary's on both sides. Whole regiments of Germans and Zouaves and Irish from around world that barely spoke English fought.
The highest form or communication at the time was the telegraph wire and it was accessible to only a few. The blunt fact is that the majority of people by far had little inclination what was being fought for on any kind of a highly intellectual level. They were told they were being invaded or their rights were being taken away or men were coming to take their women.
There were areas in the south where many were against slavery and secession. It is recorded that the hills around Asheboro NC could barely been seen due to smoke from camp fires of confederate deserters hiding out in those same hills. At the same time bushwhackers were literally torturing and killing civilians because their sons and fathers were anti-confederate and refused to serve.
I can not say what percentage but my guess is a large portion of both sides were drafted and in some cases forced into the war based on the beliefs of wealthy politicians and not their own.
Modern racists are twisting ideas and symbols into something they were not.
No one disagrees with your statement. But no one agrees on the history.
[b]There have been countless books written about the Civil War[/], why would you possibly assume that your book is more true than any other? Because you wish it to be?
The person you responded to mentioned that the primary cause of all wars is money. Or as the saying goes, "Follow the money". And slavery was obviously big-business.
South Carolina nearly seceded in 1832. Why? And tell me about the Morrill Tariff? What are the differences between the US Constitution and the Confederate Constitution? And why was Abraham Lincoln willing to fight a war to "Preserve the Union"?
We all know why "the government" fights wars, but why do soldiers fight wars? What did the American soldier think he was fighting the Iraq War for? Why was the American government fighting the Iraq War?
How many books have been written about the proposed amendments? These were proposed to prevent military solutions. I am seriously interested in reading more books about this subject.
Compare the US & CSA Constitutions here in a line-by-line & side-by-side form & here summarized:
Quote:
SUMMARY
Overall, the CSA constitution does not radically alter the federal system that was established by the United States constitution. It is therefore very debatable as to whether the CSA was a significantly more pro-"states' rights" country (as supporters claim) in any meaningful sense. At least three states rights are explicitly taken away — the freedom of states to grant voting rights to non-citizens, the freedom of states to trade freely with each other, and, of course, the freedom of states to outlaw slavery within their borders.
States only gain four minor rights under the Confederate system — the power to enter into treaties with other states to regulate waterways, the power to tax foreign and domestic ships that use their waterways, the power to impeach (some) federally-appointed officials, and the power to distribute "bills of credit."
As previously noted, the CSA constitution does not modify many of the most controversial (from a states' rights perspective) clauses of the American constitution, including the "Supremacy" clause (Art. VI, Sec. 1[3]), the "Commerce" clause (Art. I, Sec. 8[3]) and the "Necessary and Proper" clause (Art. I, Sec. 8[18]). Nor does the CSA take away the federal government's right to suspend habeas corpus or "suppress insurrections."
As far as slave-owning rights go, however, the document is much more effective. Four different clauses entrench the legality of slavery in a number of different ways, and together they virtually guarantee that any sort of anti-slave law or policy would be unconstitutional. People can claim the Civil War was "not about slavery" as much as they want, but the fact remains that anyone who fought for the Confederacy was fighting for a country in which a universal right to own slaves was one of the most entrenched laws of the land.
The government of the USA & the proposed (although never recognized by any but themselves) government of the CSA fought in the American Civil War. The Confederate flag is the symbol of the government of the CSA.
At the same time, those responsible were wealthy landowners and politicians. The upper class, the rich, those with power.
While those that fought bravely and endured great hardship by the tens of thousands have very little concept of political law or constitutional amendments. Many that fought were not much more than mercenary's on both sides. Whole regiments of Germans and Zouaves and Irish from around world that barely spoke English fought.
The highest form or communication at the time was the telegraph wire and it was accessible to only a few. The blunt fact is that the majority of people by far had little inclination what was being fought for on any kind of a highly intellectual level. They were told they were being invaded or their rights were being taken away or men were coming to take their women.
There were areas in the south where many were against slavery and secession. It is recorded that the hills around Asheboro NC could barely been seen due to smoke from camp fires of confederate deserters hiding out in those same hills. At the same time bushwhackers were literally torturing and killing civilians because their sons and fathers were anti-confederate and refused to serve.
I can not say what percentage but my guess is a large portion of both sides were drafted and in some cases forced into the war based on the beliefs of wealthy politicians and not their own.
Modern racists are twisting ideas and symbols into something they were not.
Again, I think I get what you're saying however what was the average person from VA, (even if they didn't own people as property) thinking on these issues:
Return of fugitives slaves
Slaves were taken from owners when they went to certain states (Virginia sues NY over this)
Georges Santayana is likely best remembered for:
Quote:
"Those who do not remember history, are condemned to repeat it.”
Significantly, Mr. Santayana also noted,
Quote:
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes.”
That's all I'm saying.
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.
