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.
1) Come up with proof that 95% of Whites in the south never saw a Black slave. Black slaves were the majority of Mississippi and South Carolina's population. Slaves were in large numbers in places like Georgia, Alabama, and Louisiana. Texas and Florida too. Many Whites were too poor to own slaves. But there were certainly some non-slaveholders who wanted slaves. On the flip side, if you were talking about Whites living in Appalachia, that would be a different story.
2) Black slaves did not own any property. Do not lie to me. Any place they raised chickens, that was the slave master's property.
3) It was about southern whites and their lifestyle. It was a lifestyle that would not have existed without Black slave. In that aspect, it was very much about keeping Blacks enslaved. The war for SOUTHERNERS was very much about keeping Blacks enslaved. Just because it was not about freeing the slaves for northerners does not negate that it was about keeping slavery for the south.
4) Mentioning children dying in textile mills up north, I will mention this. I would rather be dead than be a slave.
5) Lee had a choice. He could have fought for America, whom he was sworn to fight for, or he could have fought for the Confederate's cause. He chose the Confederate cause. Regardless of whether it was "beloved Virginia", it was still the Confederate cause. It was a cause of keeping slavery. Go read the Articles of Secession if you think it isn't true. And Lee was not against slavery. He even said that slavery was necessary for the Black race. Lee was wrong, period.
6) Here is the thing about sharecropping. At least a man would have a choice. A sharecropper at least had the hope of getting off the place, or said person could have just said forget it. Sharecropping was not a good thing, but slavery was worse. A slave was not even considered a human being.
At the end of the day, no Confederate soldier deserves any honors, period.
1.) I read it in a book some where and it stuck with me. It wasn't phrased as 95% but more that only 5% owned a slave, I see you have conflicting numbers, but most white peasants hunted in the commons and raised small animals in the same way. They fought for the same political rights when landowners were closing off the commons, and yet they still fought for the south.
Those soldiers who bleed weren't fighting for slaves, and even most of these slave holders weren't what you think. Most of them worked on the field with the owners, and numbered no more than a few.
2.) Do you need a paper for property to be yours? They used it, lived in it, and did what they needed with it. That for practical purposes was for them. That produce didn't go to the master, it went to them and their families.
3.) Do you know who the dukes and baronesses were of pre-industrial England? Have you read north and south, or heard of Victorian England? They didn't 'own' slaves but their lifestyle was much the same. It was a culture that breed from the top with a higher class that set values both aesthetic and otherwise for everyone else.
They were land peasants who worked based on land ownership, and land ownership was entitled by lineage. These peasants often stood with the nobility more than the industrialists. You can mock them or hate them, but you should try to understand and sympathize with them.
The south had its same system of land ownership; in Europe renting of land destroyed food security for the surfs. You think that made them happy? The south had a sense of noblesse oblige the north didn't understand and wished to destroy.
It was about stability above creative destruction, and you can disagree but it is what it was. And they had a shared culture, which they were willing to fight for. Were slaves a part of it? of course, but don't pretends whites who had never seen a slave did this from so misconceived notion eugenics or nazi racialism.
4.) Please many didn't have a choice, they were paid by wage slavery, a concept going back to the days of cicero. They didn't have a family structure to fall back on, and they either worked or died, there was no freedom involved.
5.) he was willing to give up all the slaves to the north, but it wasn't his choice. If you were in his position, maybe you would see things differently. He was wrong only in that he lost, but maybe it was right from his perspective.
You could say a union victory was 'right' historically, but that has no bearing on Lee's situation, and he is not the villain you make him out to be.
6.) Sharecropping was tied to crop lien system where none landowners were loaned supplies for farming from northern merchants with the collateral being cotton. The southern plantation owners you hate were the ones who made sure blacks were growing cotton all day and not diversifying their crop yield or going hunting. And as they were the landowners they treated them as slaves nonetheless.
So they kept growing cotton (for northern factories) or got beat, because they had to. That 'slavery' didn't end until world war 2. Its not as flashy as uncle tom's cabin, but the reality for most blacks in the south went back to being the same.
I'm not saying the confederacy was right or that they should have gained independence. I am saying there was more going on then just some humanitarian struggle, and from their perspective things were very different.
History clearly shows that the Confederate cause was about keeping slavery. A person has the right to fly a Confederate flag. A person has the Constitutional right to have laws jockies. The question is this: Given what we know about the Confederate cause and what the Confederate flag represents, is it morally sound to fly a Confederate flag?
Not sure why anyone would want to fly the flag of losers.
I thought Trump only liked 'winning'. We know he hates service members that we're captured- they're losers. So why love the confederate 'loser' side if you're a Trump fan? I don't know... Seems like a conundrum.
Status:
"Let this year be over..."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Where my bills arrive
19,219 posts, read 17,102,322 times
Reputation: 15538
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionsgators
you didn't answer my question. I wouldn't blame an arab country for firing on the US if our navy was hanging out in the persian gulf. the fact is, the north can be blamed just as much for starting it. they are also the ones still fighting it.
What don't you understand, even though a resupply was ordered of a Federal Installation the South chose to open fire, there is no mention of a US Naval Warship being involved.
As I said before just because they said were out of here doesn't mean that was accepted. How is the North fighting it because the public mood has changed and monuments to the traitors are no longer in vogue?
Status:
"Let this year be over..."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Where my bills arrive
19,219 posts, read 17,102,322 times
Reputation: 15538
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
Good one.
History clearly shows that the Confederate cause was about keeping slavery. A person has the right to fly a Confederate flag. A person has the Constitutional right to have laws jockies. The question is this: Given what we know about the Confederate cause and what the Confederate flag represents, is it morally sound to fly a Confederate flag?
To many that fly them is Heritage not Hate, feel free to get into the discussion with them but you already know how far that will go. My favorite are the ones along the interstate so people can drive by and laugh.......
Not sure why anyone would want to fly the flag of losers.
I thought Trump only liked 'winning'. We know he hates service members that we're captured- they're losers. So why love the confederate 'loser' side if you're a Trump fan? I don't know... Seems like a conundrum.
Don't forget that Trump "LOVVVVVVVES the poorly educated" voters - so much easier for him to con!
1.) I read it in a book some where and it stuck with me. It wasn't phrased as 95% but more that only 5% owned a slave, I see you have conflicting numbers, but most white peasants hunted in the commons and raised small animals in the same way. They fought for the same political rights when landowners were closing off the commons, and yet they still fought for the south.
Those soldiers who bleed weren't fighting for slaves, and even most of these slave holders weren't what you think. Most of them worked on the field with the owners, and numbered no more than a few.
2.) Do you need a paper for property to be yours? They used it, lived in it, and did what they needed with it. That for practical purposes was for them. That produce didn't go to the master, it went to them and their families.
3.) Do you know who the dukes and baronesses were of pre-industrial England? Have you read north and south, or heard of Victorian England? They didn't 'own' slaves but their lifestyle was much the same. It was a culture that breed from the top with a higher class that set values both aesthetic and otherwise for everyone else.
They were land peasants who worked based on land ownership, and land ownership was entitled by lineage. These peasants often stood with the nobility more than the industrialists. You can mock them or hate them, but you should try to understand and sympathize with them.
The south had its same system of land ownership; in Europe renting of land destroyed food security for the surfs. You think that made them happy? The south had a sense of noblesse oblige the north didn't understand and wished to destroy.
It was about stability above creative destruction, and you can disagree but it is what it was. And they had a shared culture, which they were willing to fight for. Were slaves a part of it? of course, but don't pretends whites who had never seen a slave did this from so misconceived notion eugenics or nazi racialism.
4.) Please many didn't have a choice, they were paid by wage slavery, a concept going back to the days of cicero. They didn't have a family structure to fall back on, and they either worked or died, there was no freedom involved.
5.) he was willing to give up all the slaves to the north, but it wasn't his choice. If you were in his position, maybe you would see things differently. He was wrong only in that he lost, but maybe it was right from his perspective.
You could say a union victory was 'right' historically, but that has no bearing on Lee's situation, and he is not the villain you make him out to be.
6.) Sharecropping was tied to crop lien system where none landowners were loaned supplies for farming from northern merchants with the collateral being cotton. The southern plantation owners you hate were the ones who made sure blacks were growing cotton all day and not diversifying their crop yield or going hunting. And as they were the landowners they treated them as slaves nonetheless.
So they kept growing cotton (for northern factories) or got beat, because they had to. That 'slavery' didn't end until world war 2. Its not as flashy as uncle tom's cabin, but the reality for most blacks in the south went back to being the same.
I'm not saying the confederacy was right or that they should have gained independence. I am saying there was more going on then just some humanitarian struggle, and from their perspective things were very different.
1) Alot of Whites likely didn't owned slaves in certain states. However, many did. And by the way, I do not have conflicting numbers. In Mississippi and South Carolina, a majority of those living there were enslaved. In 1860, Mississippi had 791,305 people. 436,631 were slaves. In South Carolina, of 703,708 people living there, 402,406 were slaves. 462,198 slaves lived in Georgia, out of a population of 1,057,286. 964,201 people lived in Alabama, 435,080 slaves were among that population.
While the dirt poor among the White population didn't own slaves, and were not well of, it still doesn't change what the Confederate cause was about.
2) Slaves did not own any property. Slaves were counted as property. The slaves were just using the land. The slave master owned all of that land. Using land is not the same as actually owning it. Borrowing is not the same as owning.
3) I know about those baronesses and the industrial barons. Here is the the thing. The persons on the land, they could just walk off at any time. In America, slave patrols were formed specifically to make sure slaves could not get off the plantation. Slaves could be bought or sold at the whim of the slavemaster. If you work in the industrial world, as bad at the conditions were, you can just walk away. Say what you will about having a family to support. This is the thing. It still does not negate what the Confederate cause was about, and what the Confederates were about. I'd rather be dead than be a slave.
What the South had was different. It was CHATTEL SLAVERY. Blacks were OWNED AND TREATED AS PROPERTY. They were denied any personhood.
4) Again, I'd rather die than be a slave. It is better to die than to be owned by someone. Live Free Or Die is not only New Hampshire's motto. It's how I see the world.
5) I don't care about Lee's position. Lee still owned slaves. Lee still felt that Blacks needed to be slaves because he claimed "it's important for their training and discipline in this lifetime". It doesnt change the fact that he chose the Confederacy. The Confederate cause is still a cause about slavery and white supremacy.
6) I know what sharecropping is about. My grandparents were sharecroppers. They got off of the farm and moved north, and never returned. Under slavery, no slave had a chance. At least my sharecropper grandparents left, and never went back.
I look at it from this perspective. The Confederate cause stood explicitly for keeping slavery and white supremacy. The Articles of Secession and Confederate Constitution explicitly mention this. The Confederates wanted to keep slavery and keep Blacks enslaved. Anything that you say cannot negate that. It is wrong and those who fought for the Confederacy, regardless why they personally fought, they still fought under that cause. In Germany they don't honor Nazi soldiers, regardless of why they personally fought. We should not honor Confederate soldiers here.
Don't forget that Trump "LOVVVVVVVES the poorly educated" voters - so much easier for him to con!
Did you forget the demographic that fuels the Democratic party - the ignorant, uneducated, welfare class.
THAT'S your base.
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.
