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.
You are spot on. One only has to look at Virginia Governor Letcher's conditions for Virginia staying in the Union which were published in the Richmond Examiner in January 1861. They were all about the right of slave owners to keep slaves in their home states and the rest of the union and to have slave owners be able to bring slaves even into free territories.
The average solider fought with bravery, but that doesn't ennoble their cause.
It had become necessary to deny the cause, that's when they created the 'Lost Cause' mythologies. One-face said, & wrote, pontificated before the war, Two-face said, wrote, & pontificated after the war.
To preserve their honor at the expense of reality.
I cannot for the life of me understand why people feel the need to defend the confederacy so much.
These are people who broke away and actively rebelled against the union. The tried to break apart the United States and yet Trump and a large chunk of the GOP want to preserve their legacy as some kind of heroism.
they are TRAITORS to the USA plain and simple.
Why do we need a statue in a traitors name, schools and streets named after them?
People say tearing down the status erases history but does it? We don't need a monument to Osama Bin Laden to remember 9/11 do we? Do we need a statue of Benedict Arnold? Lets have a statue honoring the legacy of King George. Ya know they one we rebelled against for independence.
So someone explain, why should the confederacy be honor like AMERICAN heroes
It all comes down to white people feeling that their 'way of life' is vanishing, so they want to preserve it and 'Make America Great Again,' which is really code for return to how things were - racism, segregation, misogyny, etc.
"I do believe the slaves would have been freed by the south". The invention of the cotton gin negated the need for slaves to pick the cotton so in time they would have been freed anyway.
The cotton gin actually increased the need for slave labor.
Prior to the invention and subsequent adoption of the cotton gin, cotton had to be de-seeded by hand. (If you've ever seen and handled a fresh cotton boll up close and personal, you can get an idea of why the cotton gin was such a game changer.) Mechanizing the de-seeding process meant that cotton production could go up exponentially; getting it to the export market was greatly hastened. Cotton production and exportation was largely what built the Southern agricultural empire.
Cotton still had to be planted and harvested by hand, which meant that more rather than less labor was required.
Which is why I hold the politicians accountable for the war on both sides. In hindsight, there were better ways they could have gone about this without resorting to war but corrupt politicians, wealthy businessmen, and pig headed stubborn idealist would not budge from the course that ultimately led to war.
Why deny everything that was done to avert military conflict? By both sides; 2 sides: for slavery & against slavery.
Slave States would not be appeased.
Obscuring American Civil War history in hollow romance did not make any type of sense then & now, in the present day, it's ridiculous.
It all comes down to white people feeling that their 'way of life' is vanishing, so they want to preserve it and 'Make America Great Again,' which is really code for return to how things were - racism, segregation, misogyny, etc.
The main goal of the Confederacy dovetails seamlessly with that of the Reality-TV-Show-POTUS.
The Confederacy wanted to form a Country to preserve their 'way of life'. Their 'way of life' was entirely based on race-based enslavement.
The Reality-TV-Show-POTUS aims to preserve his own 'way of life'. His 'way of life' is entirely based on conning as many people as he can.
The cotton gin actually increased the need for slave labor.
Prior to the invention and subsequent adoption of the cotton gin, cotton had to be de-seeded by hand. (If you've ever seen and handled a fresh cotton boll up close and personal, you can get an idea of why the cotton gin was such a game changer.) Mechanizing the de-seeding process meant that cotton production could go up exponentially; getting it to the export market was greatly hastened. Cotton production and exportation was largely what built the Southern agricultural empire.
Cotton still had to be planted and harvested by hand, which meant that more rather than less labor was required.
Yes. The cotton gin extended the life of slavery which had been starting to die out.
Re: bold: the 'Lost Cause' narrative is pseudo-history, based on mythologies, & with no evidence to support.
Slaver States v. Free States & their disagreements began at the Constitution Convention & continued right on up to & throughout the war. Here's just some of the evidence:
A review of the Congressional Record of the 36th Congress reveals more than 300 proposals in regard to negotiations, some of these are Amendments to the United States Constitution, all are designed to avert military conflict. (President Buchanon was the 1st to propose.)
'US Constitution & Secession' is a recent book by Dwight Pitcaithley. His book focuses on analyzing the many amendments proposed during this time frame, all designed to avert military conflict.
Basically he breaks down 350 different topics in the proposed 67 amendments. Slavery expanded in the territories is the largest topic cited. The Slaver 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 significant issues discussed:
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 Slaver States seceded to protect slavery & the notion of white supremacy.
Slaver states were railing against the Northern states, its people, abolitionists, & eventually Lincoln.
In his analysis of the proposed Amendments: the Slaver 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. In other words, the Slaver States had an extremely unhealthy obsession about owning people as property, beyond all reason.)
Ban it! Tear it down unlawfully! Hate it! Deface monuments. No need to vote on it. Slavery, racist racist racist racist slavery slavery, repeat.
About 5 or 6 years ago amazon, eBay, and others stopped selling confederate flags due to all the reactionary hoopla. I had no dog in the fight, never lived in the south, never a big Dukes of Hazard fan, and never cared about the confederacy either way.
All this banning frenzy got me interested so I purchased and now fly a confederate flag alongside my U.S. flag as a sign of political protest to those reactionaries tearing down, defacing, and banning not only monuments, statues, and flags associated with the confederacy but others as well.
Confederacy haters are just as annoying as the TDS morons. They go beyond hate and take the law into their own hands. I don’t care if you wear a hat or shirt or fly a flag that’s got BLM on it as annoying and racist as I think that is.
There are many places you can go that if you’re wearing anything MAGA you will get assaulted. Always the left attacking freedom of speech and expression.
Ban it, deface it, tear it down, attack those that display it. I will compensate by putting it back up. Idiots tearing down the Grant statue and Columbus along with plenty of other white representatives that never sided with the confederacy.
I would love to have some of those statues or monuments on my acreage. Don’t like them, ignore them. Seems some enjoy being triggered. Suck it up. Ignore it.
I recently watched a vid of some media outlet interviewing a homeowner that had a flag on his private property. I would have told them to F off. The nerve of these buzzards.
Last edited by Leona Valley; 08-22-2020 at 11:07 AM..
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.
