St. Louis to remove Confederate monument (Washington, Jackson: 2014, crime, attorney)

[MUTGR]

[quote=FrankMiller;48294150It is not the Union's motivations that are on trial today.
[/QUOTE]

No one's motivations should be "on trial" today. But the topic was brought up, so it's relevant.

[SouthCitySam]

Originally Posted by FrankMiller

The war started over slavery...which is the topic of the thread.

But you said the motivation of the Union for engaging in war with the South was off topic. Now you're saying it's the topic of the thread? Great! Glad that's cleared up.

[FrankMiller]

The Confederacy was founded and started the war over slavery. The war was started over slavery. Notice that the Union doesn't enter into that statement at any point?

[Floorist]

Originally Posted by FrankMiller

The war did in fact start over slavery. More specifically, the right of states to institute slavery (but not the right of other states to free slaves within their borders, a practice which greatly antagonized the South at various times before the war).



6 Civil War Myths, Busted
Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - Mississippi Secession
Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - A Declaration of the Causes which Impel the State of Texas to Secede from the Federal Union

The war started over the North, which controlled congress, pushing through a huge tariff on southern goods. The South then tried to negotiate to sell goods directly to other countries and the North stopped that too. The war started as an economic war. And Lincoln, if you bother to read his early writing, had no interest in eliminating slavery. The Emancipation Proclamation, only effected the 7 states that had seceded to that point, which means it would have been unconstitutional. Lincoln was willing to let the rest of the states keep their slaves. And slavery did not start In the South. The first slaves in the colonies were in Massachusetts.

[SouthCitySam]

Originally Posted by FrankMiller

The war was started over slavery.

You're simply wrong. The civil war was fought over economic, power, and control issues built up over the years between the federal government and the southern states. If the south was successful in its bid to separate and form its own independent country, the economy of the remaining states would have suffered, western expansion would have severely faltered, and the viability of the central government authority going forward would be in jeopardy. The war wasn't fought over the moral question of the slavery of Africans. The president himself stated clearly his ambivalence toward slavery.

[MUTGR]

Originally Posted by SouthCitySam

You're simply wrong. The civil war was fought over economic, power, and control issues built up over the years between the federal government and the southern states. If the south was successful in its bid to separate and form its own independent country, the economy of the remaining states would have suffered, western expansion would have severely faltered, and the viability of the central government authority going forward would be in jeopardy. The war wasn't fought over the moral question of the slavery of Africans. The president himself stated clearly his ambivalence toward slavery.

By today's standards, Abraham Lincoln would be considered a white supremacist by his own words. That's what bothers me about tearing down monuments. You can make the case for the Lincoln Memorial too.

[SouthCitySam]

Originally Posted by MUTGR

...You can make the case for the Lincoln Memorial too.

You're exactly correct! I've believed this has been the intent all along. The banning of flags and tearing down of monuments won't stop with the Confederate symbols.

[1grin_g0]

As far as I could tell in the video provided by the OP, the purpose of the memorial site was not to honor the Confederate cause, but to provide a place where people could honor the Confederate soldiers that died in the war. That is an important distinction.

[FrankMiller]

Originally Posted by SouthCitySam

You're simply wrong. The civil war was fought over economic, power, and control issues built up over the years between the federal government and the southern states. If the south was successful in its bid to separate and form its own independent country, the economy of the remaining states would have suffered, western expansion would have severely faltered, and the viability of the central government authority going forward would be in jeopardy. The war wasn't fought over the moral question of the slavery of Africans. The president himself stated clearly his ambivalence toward slavery.

No, the war started because a bunch of southern states formed a rebellion specifically to protect slavery, because the US elected a president from a party founded by abolitionists. Source: the public declarations of the aforementioned southern states. The states rights/economic issues angle is a white supremacist fable whipped up after the war as ex post facto justification. The war was about states rights and economic issues insofar as southern states wanted the right to have slaves for economic purposes (and also they didn't believe negros were people).

If you want to argue that we should tear down Lincoln statues because he was a white supremacist, that's a different argument that does nothing to lessen the fact that confederate monuments are explicitly racist.

[MUTGR]

Originally Posted by FrankMiller

No, the war started because a bunch of southern states formed a rebellion specifically to protect slavery, because the US elected a president from a party founded by abolitionists. Source: the public declarations of the aforementioned southern states. The states rights/economic issues angle is a white supremacist fable whipped up after the war as ex post facto justification. The war was about states rights and economic issues insofar as southern states wanted the right to have slaves for economic purposes (and also they didn't believe negros were people).

If you want to argue that we should tear down Lincoln statues because he was a white supremacist, that's a different argument that does nothing to lessen the fact that confederate monuments are explicitly racist.

Are you saying the civil war was fought by two sides who were both explicitly racist? Then why should any civil war monuments stand?