Appalling! CNN tries to portray American Civil War soldiers as terrorists (generation, wisdom)
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.
I do know History, and I graduated college with a History Major. I know it was legal under the Constitution and yes they did pay for the slaves, however that does mean they deserved anything from the Government in order to free the slaves. It was a barbaric and heinous practice and needed to be stopped. They deserved nothing for it.
And the Northern slave traders who profited handsomely from the slave trade, they should keep their money and prosper, per your argument. The Northern bankers who loaned money to Southern growers with slaves as collateral, write off those loans, or take possession of the growers' assets?
And you still have yet to weigh in on why the South should have continued to be in a union where they would have no input into the government. It's one thing to be in a faction where you lose an election, it's another thing where you are part of a system that ensures you will never have a say in the government that's supposed to represent you.
The insanity and inhumanity of those who were able to convince themselves that they had a right to buy and sell other human beings has obviously been passed down through the generations to their decendents. Compensated for the "loss" of the human beings that they had bought and used as property???????? Their compensation should have been to serve those they had "lost" in the same manner that those human beings had been forced to serve them.
To say southern landowners were robbed by the federal government because of not being able to own slaves anymore is one of the most BARBARIC and HEINOUS things I have ever heard. They shouldn't have gotten anything from the government for not being able to enslave human beings anymore.
That's very idealistic. But not very practical. If you know your history, then you would know how entwined slavery was with the economy of the South. It wasn't just cheap labor. They were property, collateral for loans. Loans held by Northern bankers. The value of that property in South Carolina alone was roughly five times the GDP of South Carolina. Wipe out that value, and you plunge South Carolina into a Depression much worse than the Great Depression, and Northern bankers walk in and take what they want.
So it was robbery. Robbery by Northern business interests. That's pretty heinous as well.
Let us not forget that the Union did quite a victory dance in the South after their surrender complete with raping, pillaging, looting and general mayhem.
Whether or not most northerners cared or not about slavery doesn't mean the southerners deserved compensation for no longer enslaving human beings. Nor does it mean that they should have left the Union due to fears of slavery ending. And we sure as hell should not be celebrating the actions of the Confederates.
You miss the point. Ending slavery was going to happen anyway. If it's not up to the federal government to compensate people whose property they are taking, it shouldn't also be the federal government's role to destroy half the country's economy, so that the other half can seize the destroyed half's assets. While you want desperately to occupy the moral high road on this issue, the fact is that Northern businessmen were greedy, and had the political power to realize their ambitions. To have it all.
The secessionists recognized that politically they were overpowered, all they had was their economy. Were they foolish and foolhardy? Yes. But they had been manipulated into the position they were in, as well.
Let us not forget that the Union did quite a victory dance in the South after their surrender complete with raping, pillaging, looting and general mayhem.
Please provide some actual, widespread examples of the above. Another "lost cause" apologist.
The fact that CNN gives voice to the tripe spewed by Martin is exactly why they continue to sink like a stone in the ratings. The controversy over the Virgina governors' misstep was a perfect opportunity to have an intelligent, reasoned commentary. Instead, they publish this garbage.
Their continued free-fall as a legitimate news source is well deserved.
To those who want to argue about how the slaves were treated and say that they were not treated like animals, have you forgotten how they were packed like sardenes on slaveships and forced to lay in their own waste? Do you think they ate what the master ate? Do you think rape wasn't common? Or beating?
I don't need a history lesson. I have taken many history classes and contrary to what some of you would like to believe, the majority of slaves did not live well. Living in unsanitary conditions, eating spoiled food, wearing rags, being forced to pick cotton until your hands bleed, giving birth to babies in cotton fields, being sold and separated from your family, forbidden to learn to read, congregate, practice religion, forced to beat your own, take care of someone else's child before you take care of your own and to be hunted and chased by dogs if you try to free for yourself is far from pleasant.
I feed my dogs better food than what slaves ate. I don't abuse my dogs or make them work until they can't. To say that they were not treated like animals would be correct, they were treated WORSE than animals. Not sure why some people feel the need to glorify the old south as if all the slaves were happy and living in "Gone with the Wind" until the yankees came along and ruined everything. BS. It is what it is.
Who packed them on those slaveships? Northerners or Southerners? The Southerners did not own those ships, they weren't the investors who paid for those ships to go to Africa, they weren't the insurance companies who collected premiums for the ships and their cargo. Northerners profited handsomely from the slave trade.
And while some slaveowners treated their slaves miserably, others did not. Slaves were a significant investment, so their incentive to treat them better than you seem to think. Slavery itself is an offense. It doesn't have to be compounded by bad treatment to be offensive. No one is glorifying the South. But demonizing the South is just as untruthful as glofirying it.
it was the Union soldiers who were savages and war criminals. Its common knowledge about Sherman's burning of Atlanta and his march to the sea, a campaign of looting, rape and murder. General Custer too, he deserved to be killed and humiliated by the Sioux Indians after the war for the things he did. Our own state song refers to Lincoln as a despot and tyrant. Maryland was forced to stay in the Union in the Civil War. Just because our state today is overrun by northern liberal transplants, espcially Montgomery County, don't mean all of us have forgotten our history.
I take the gravest possible offense at your comment about Union soldiers, one of whom was my great-great-grandfather. I have no sympathy for the Confederate cause, or it's soldiers, but I believe they fought honorably, as did my Union ancestors.
Your comments are ignorant, inflammatory, and not accurate. BTW, I am far from a "liberal."
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.
