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.
The evidence provided by the historical record reveals the Slaver States were railing against the Free States, its people, abolitionists, & eventually Lincoln.
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 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 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)
Even after the war, attempts were made to appease the Slaver States, they would have none of it. They continued to rail against the Free United States, its people, & President Lincoln. Resentful about losing their 'peculiar institutions', they set out to preserve, protect, & defend their 'way of life' based on white supremacy through the enactment of local & state laws.
The Slaver States resisted assimilation into the Free United States for over a century.
2nd response.
I notice no one else has come to this thread in 3 days. I'm wondering if some people stay away because of any inability to refute what you said.
I propose changing the name to Fort Zap, after legendary military strategist Zap Brannigan.
"In the game of chess, never let them see your pieces. " - Zap B.
I'd prefer something along the lines of Ft. Hobby, for Oveta Culp Hobby. She is from Killeen and she was the first director for the Women's Army Corps during WWII.
This thread is about Fort Hood, named for a Confederate general. Some people are considering renaming it after Roy Benavidez. He was in the U.S. Army Special Forces and he was given the Medal of Honor for valor, due to his role at a battle during the Vietnam War, namely at Loc Ninh. He is from Texas.
This thread is about Fort Hood, named for a Confederate general. Some people are considering renaming it after Roy Benavidez. He was in the U.S. Army Special Forces and he was given the Medal of Honor for valor, due to his role at a battle during the Vietnam War, namely at Loc Ninh. He is from Texas.
Yes, and his name deserves to be on a decent post, not on a pithole like Ft Hood.
Anyone who claims that "states' rights" was the big issue, "states' rights" revolved around one thing: Slavery. The southern states say the non-southern states as hostile to the institution of slavery. The southern states were allowed to have slavery, but they wanted the federal government to be pro-slavery. They weren't looking for federal indifference, they wanted a pro-slavery federal government.
They only cared about states' rights when it suited them. If they cared so much about states' rights, we wouldn't have a Fugitive Slave Act. The Missouri Compromise wouldn't be necessary. Bleeding Kansas wouldn't have happened.
Anyone who thinks this was all about "states rights" can look at the Confederate Constitution. It was indeed about property rights. The right to treat human beings like property. And the South lost the war. Truth be told, the war really should have ended with a war tribunal and the likes of Lee, Hood, and Davis punished for being traitors.
The fact that Confederate generals were let off easy is an example of coddling the former Confederate states. Here is another strange fact. Vicksburg, MS didn't celebrate the 4th of July until the mid 1940s. Vicksburg had Carnival of the Confederacy.
Erecting those Confederate statues and Jim Crow went hand in hand.
I'm all in re: renaming Fort Hood, & other US military bases, et cetera. I'm also all in for the removal of all Confederate statuary, etc., particularly those on public grounds.
There are many reasons why I support, you & I have discussed the various reasons here on these forums, & I very much appreciate the opportunities.
Even if not for all of the reasons previously discussed here & elsewhere, there is another which we've also previously discussed. That is, the efforts to unify the United States of America after the American Civil War through the appeasement of the Confederacy by naming bases, erecting monuments, etc. was a failure. Another 'lost cause' so to speak. It did not work.
Naming or renaming bases, erecting new statues to the Confederacy (yes, they are still doing so) or moving the existing ones littering our free & public spaces will also fail if the reality-based, accurate, based on primary sources, etc. history is not taught.
The 'Lost Cause' mythologies & propaganda is still being taught in some of our primary & high schools throughout the United States. It's not only farcical, it's harmful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
2nd response.
I notice no one else has come to this thread in 3 days. I'm wondering if some people stay away because of any inability to refute what you said.
61
When a country obtains great power,
it becomes like the sea:
all streams run downward into it.
The more powerful it grows,
the greater the need for humility.
Humility means trusting the Tao,
thus never needing to be defensive.
A great nation is like a great man:
When he makes a mistake, he realizes it.
Having realized it, he admits it.
Having admitted it, he corrects it. He considers those who point out his faults
as his most benevolent teachers.
He thinks of his enemy
as the shadow that he himself casts.
If a nation is centered in the Tao,
if it nourishes its own people
and doesn't meddle in the affairs of others,
it will be a light to all nations in the world.
So now Trump is threatening to veto the Defense Authorization Bill if it contains bi-partisan supported language to rename bases named after Confederate Generals.
Both parties were in agreement on this legislation.
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.
