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.
Again, are you seriously conflating the founding of the United States of America with the founding of the Confederate States of America?
Answer this one question. Why did the Confederate States secede from the United States of America?
Again, there is no Robert E Lee without Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, who owned slaves.
Answer this one question. Why is owning 600 slaves being honored if you claim slavery was bad? Clearly it wasn’t bad enough when you want to honor our slave owning founding fathers, instead of purging them like Robert E Lee
When liberals starts purging it’s founding fathers, then maybe their claims that slavery was atrocious can be taken seriously, and not an empty gesture to pander to people of color.
I'm not attempting to be an American apologist here in my response to you but this is just how I honestly feel: we would be in a different place if American people had not been gaslit for generation after generation with Lost Cause mythologies & propaganda.
Wow --- its only a myth if there is no evidence to its factual presence. Isn't that what people say about God?
During the days of Pharaohs, people relied on those that could read and write to lead them --- people can read and write and they still are reliant on others to explain to 'em how it was. Who is gaslighting who?
Alexander H. Stephens lays it out in his Cornerstone Speech in Savannah, Georgia, on March 21, 1861 why they are seceding to form the permanent union of the Confederate States of America, & explains the reasons are codified by their Constitution:
They attempted to destroy the union of the States, i.e. The United States of America.
That's the first plank:
For the Confederate States, there would be no peace without war. The 36th Congress (before Abraham Lincoln was elected) was all about averting or preventing military conflict. The Confederate States would have none of it.
The Constitution of the Confederate States did not allow secession.
The reason for secession was to protect, expand & justify race-based enslavement.
At the time of the war, slavery was not in jeopardy of being lost --- how could they justify the very way they had of making a living so as to pay their taxes. Removing it would have crippled the Southern economy the North loved so well. Protection for slavery --- was written into that Constitution.
Wow --- its only a myth if there is no evidence to its factual presence. Isn't that what people say about God?
During the days of Pharaohs, people relied on those that could read and write to lead them --- people can read and write and they still are reliant on others to explain to 'em how it was. Who is gaslighting who?
During the days of the American Civil War information from the 1850 & 1860s census suggest that somewhere between 75% & 90% of adult white Americans were literate.
Granted, literacy rates were higher in the Free States but the majority of white Americans at the beginning of the Civil War could read & write. Newspapers alone reached millions, & so did books.
To perpetuate the belief that no one really knew what was at stake is just more Lost Cause ridiculousness.
Alexander H. Stephens lays it out in his Cornerstone Speech in Savannah, Georgia, on March 21, 1861 why they are seceding to form the permanent union of the Confederate States of America, & explains the reasons are codified by their Constitution:
they found the holes that were within the document concerning those securities of our ancient rights, franchises, and liberties.
One example Texas did not have the aid of the u.s. military to help fight off the Indians, those 'protections' were denied.
"3. Resolved, That a national government ought to be established, consisting of a supreme judicial, legislative, and executive."
The laws they passed had to go through Congress --- what did the States see in that? A word you're familiar with ---
Mr. Patterson: "... We would have been as much enslaved in that case as when unrepresented; and what is worse, without the prospect of redress. But it is said that this national government is to act on individuals and not on States; and cannot a federal government be so framed as to operate in the same way? It surely may. I therefore declare, that I will never consent to the present system, and I shall make all the interest against it in the State which I represent that I can. Myself or my State will never submit to tyranny or despotism."
They wanted to freely withdraw, a provision left out of the contract.
Again, there is no Robert E Lee without Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, who owned slaves.
Answer this one question. Why is owning 600 slaves being honored if you claim slavery was bad? Clearly it wasn’t bad enough when you want to honor our slave owning founding fathers, instead of purging them like Robert E Lee
When liberals starts purging it’s founding fathers, then maybe their claims that slavery was atrocious can be taken seriously, and not an empty gesture to pander to people of color.
If I am claiming race-based enslavement was bad?
Are you finally getting it that the Lost Cause mythologies & propaganda were claiming it was a positive & beneficial good for all involved in their 'peculiar institution'? Including for those enslaved?
they found the holes that were within the document concerning those securities of our ancient rights, franchises, and liberties.
One example Texas did not have the aid of the u.s. military to help fight off the Indians, those 'protections' were denied.
"3. Resolved, That a national government ought to be established, consisting of a supreme judicial, legislative, and executive."
The laws they passed had to go through Congress --- what did the States see in that? A word you're familiar with ---
Mr. Patterson: "... We would have been as much enslaved in that case as when unrepresented; and what is worse, without the prospect of redress. But it is said that this national government is to act on individuals and not on States; and cannot a federal government be so framed as to operate in the same way? It surely may. I therefore declare, that I will never consent to the present system, and I shall make all the interest against it in the State which I represent that I can. Myself or my State will never submit to tyranny or despotism."
They wanted to freely withdraw, a provision left out of the contract.
They wanted to freely withdraw to form a permanent union of States where they could freely enslave other people based on race.
Peculiar indeed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1861
War is Peace;
Freedom is Slavery;
Ignorance is Strength
Are you actually still saying "Freedom is Slavery" in 2021?
Wow --- its only a myth if there is no evidence to its factual presence. Isn't that what people say about God?
During the days of Pharaohs, people relied on those that could read and write to lead them --- people can read and write and they still are reliant on others to explain to 'em how it was. Who is gaslighting who?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest
During the days of the American Civil War information from the 1850 & 1860s census suggest that somewhere between 75% & 90% of adult white Americans were literate.
Granted, literacy rates were higher in the Free States but the majority of white Americans at the beginning of the Civil War could read & write. Newspapers alone reached millions, & so did books.
To perpetuate the belief that no one really knew what was at stake is just more Lost Cause ridiculousness.
I'm taking about today -- the deductive reasoning being used today, as folks today should not need someone to interpret the documentation for them --- however it was said during my years in college of 1992, a % amount of Americans are 'culturally' illiterate.
Seeing as how we use today's culture values as if they had the same values then --- well there it is, omit it was their way of life and they dealt with the moral issue without government oversight.
Today the government will have the people believe in their way of life, they don't know how to feed their kids or raise 'em, and the people allow them to rule with oversight on government authority rather than that of their own ---- that is Orwellian, freedom is slavery.
At the time of the war, slavery was not in jeopardy of being lost --- how could they justify the very way they had of making a living so as to pay their taxes. Removing it would have crippled the Southern economy the North loved so well. Protection for slavery --- was written into that Constitution.
Yeah that was what Alexander Stephens was claiming in his Cornerstone Speech:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander Stephens in his Cornerstone Speech
The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization.
This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right.
& goes on to whine about why the United States of America was founded on the wrong ideas, & on & on & on.
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.
