Welcome to the Free Talk Live bulletin board system!
This board is closed to new users and new posts.  Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years.  Details here.
185859 Posts in 9829 Topics by 1371 Members
Latest Member: cjt26
Home Help
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  General
| | |-+  The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8   Go Down

Author Topic: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession  (Read 40605 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #60 on: May 06, 2009, 05:22:16 PM »

Quote
Yes, it was a war for freedom just as much as the American Revolution was a war for freedom.  If you are unaware slavery was an institution before and after the Revolutionary war.  It was a war of Federalist vs States Rights Advocates.  The Federalist wanted a centralized power elite to govern the nation.  More populated area or richer areas would influence government to take from the less populated and less wealthy areas.
Don't give me this "States' Rights" crap. Remember what George Wallace said, that "States' Rights" means exactly the same as segregation? What kind of people do you think supported him? Yeah . . .

Maybe this will help you wrap your head around the concept.  It was a war of Federalist vs. Decentralized Locally Controlled Government.  The later form of government is what is in the Constitution.  The concept is local people should be involved in making choices for their communities without the heavy hand and influence of other areas which may use their superior numbers to invoke the tyranny of the majority.  Or something the founders called Mob Rule.  

And even though Rich Industrialist benefited from the 35% tariffs which bankrupted and impoverish many southerners motivating them to want to leave the union.  It also benefited Northern citizens in general because they were able to shift their tax burden onto other territories, territories which didn't have enough votes to protect itself from unjust lopsided taxes.

Right.

Freedom how, btw? Certainly not freedom for the Negro slaves, which is essentially why the states broke apart.

Economy, bullshit. One of the backbones of the Southern economy was Negro slavery, which was outright stated by the Confederate vice-president as the cornerstone of the CSA, and was set in the Confederate constutition as one of the reasons why there was secession.

It's not right to own another person.
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER

Brooklyn Red Leg

  • The Red Legged Devil
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 764
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #61 on: May 06, 2009, 08:54:53 PM »

One of the backbones of the Southern economy was Negro slavery

Again, Slavery was based on Caste, not Race. There were plenty of slaves whose skin colour was as white as snow, who didn't have much in the way of Negro ethnicity. Just as there were Negro Slaveowners.

Quote
set in the Confederate constutition as one of the reasons why there was secession

Bullshit.

Quote
Section 9 - Limits on Congress, Bill of Rights

1. The importation of negroes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same.

2. Congress shall also have power to prohibit the introduction of slaves from any State not a member of, or Territory not belonging to, this Confederacy.
Logged
"Democracy, too, is a religion. It is the worship of jackals by jackasses." - H.L. Mencken


Er_Murazor's KoLWiki Page

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #62 on: May 06, 2009, 09:12:20 PM »

One of the backbones of the Southern economy was Negro slavery

Again, Slavery was based on Caste, not Race. There were plenty of slaves whose skin colour was as white as snow, who didn't have much in the way of Negro ethnicity. Just as there were Negro Slaveowners.

Quote
set in the Confederate constutition as one of the reasons why there was secession

Bullshit.

Quote
Section 9 - Limits on Congress, Bill of Rights

1. The importation of negroes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same.

2. Congress shall also have power to prohibit the introduction of slaves from any State not a member of, or Territory not belonging to, this Confederacy.

No, slavery was based on race. If you were half-black or a mulatto, you were considered all black by most of the Confederate States. Those same states that had laws on the books against black people reading and writing, or forced the North to participate in Fugitive Slave Laws . . .

Also, slavery within the Confederate States was encouraged by the Confederate Constitution. Importation of slaves from outside the Confederacy would be detrimental to the internal slave trade.
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER

MacFall

  • Agorist
  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2295
  • No king but Christ; no law but liberty!
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #63 on: May 06, 2009, 10:17:00 PM »

Since you apparently missed it the first time...

Luke, what exactly made it a noble and heroic act for the American colonies to secede from the British crown over a 4% tax rate, while it was wrong for the Southern states to secede over a 35% tariff that was impoverishing them?

It was essentially the same political act. The only difference was the governments involved in the conflicts. And don't tell me the difference was slavery, either - slavery was not even brought up as a causus belli except by one of the seceding states, and it was not even made an issue by the north until 4 years after the war had started.
Logged
I am an anarchist! HOOGA BOOGA BOOGA!!

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #64 on: May 06, 2009, 10:23:03 PM »

Since you apparently missed it the first time...

Luke, what exactly made it a noble and heroic act for the American colonies to secede from the British crown over a 4% tax rate, while it was wrong for the Southern states to secede over a 35% tariff that was impoverishing them?

It was essentially the same political act. The only difference was the governments involved in the conflicts. And don't tell me the difference was slavery, either - slavery was not even brought up as a causus belli except by one of the seceding states, and it was not even made an issue by the north until 4 years after the war had started.

Odd, it seemed to be thought of as a casus belli by most people at the time, whether they admitted to it or not . . . Slavery actually was a fundamental difference between the North and the South.

That being said, "states' rights" are as useless to me as "federal rights." Individual rights are the ones that matter.

Also, slavery was brought up by a lot of people, including the Confederate Vice President, as one of the things the Confederacy was built on . . .the "cornerstone" as it was . . .
« Last Edit: May 06, 2009, 10:26:01 PM by Queen of the Harpies »
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER

Brooklyn Red Leg

  • The Red Legged Devil
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 764
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #65 on: May 06, 2009, 10:58:45 PM »

No, slavery was based on race. If you were half-black or a mulatto, you were considered all black by most of the Confederate States. Those same states that had laws on the books against black people reading and writing, or forced the North to participate in Fugitive Slave Laws . . .

::sighs::

You are without a doubt, ignorant.

Quote
Like the patriarchs of old our men live all in one house with their wives and their concubines, and the mulattoes one sees in every family exactly resemble the white children--and every lady tells you who is the father of all the mulatto children in everybody's household, but those in her own she seems to think drop from the clouds, or pretends so to think.
--Mary Chesnut, March 1861

Quote
Over 3,000 Negroes must be included in this number [of 64,000 Confederate troops].  These were clad in all kinds of uniforms, not only in cast-off or captured United States uniforms, but also in coats with Southern buttons, State buttons, etc.  Most of the Negroes had arms, rifles, muskets, sabers, bowie knives, dirks, etc. ... and were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederate Army
-- Dr. Lewis Steiner Chief Inspector of the United States Sanitary Commission, Fredrick, Maryland 1862
Logged
"Democracy, too, is a religion. It is the worship of jackals by jackasses." - H.L. Mencken


Er_Murazor's KoLWiki Page

MacFall

  • Agorist
  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2295
  • No king but Christ; no law but liberty!
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #66 on: May 06, 2009, 11:37:15 PM »

Slavery actually was a fundamental difference between the North and the South.

No, it wasn't. There were Northern states that had slaves, and the Constitution (as interpreted by the SCOTUS) protected slaveholders by upholding anti-manumission laws and forcing state governments to apprehend and extradite escaped slaves.

BTW I'm not in favor of "states rights" either, and I'm no fan of the Confederacy. I'm just in favor of having more and smaller territorial governments than fewer and larger ones, given that choice.
Logged
I am an anarchist! HOOGA BOOGA BOOGA!!

Luke Smith

  • Guest
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #67 on: May 07, 2009, 02:33:02 AM »

Since you apparently missed it the first time...

Luke, what exactly made it a noble and heroic act for the American colonies to secede from the British crown over a 4% tax rate, while it was wrong for the Southern states to secede over a 35% tariff that was impoverishing them?

It was essentially the same political act. The only difference was the governments involved in the conflicts. And don't tell me the difference was slavery, either - slavery was not even brought up as a causus belli except by one of the seceding states, and it was not even made an issue by the north until 4 years after the war had started.

A colony of a nation is not the same thing as a nation itself. Although the 13 Colonies were under the rule of Britain, they were not part of Britain in the same way that England, Scotland, and Wales are part of Britain. On the other hand, South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, etc., are part of America in a way that the Northern Mariana Islands, Wake Island, Puerto Rico, Guam, etc., are simply not.

Now in the charters for the 13 original colonies, the people who were setting up the colonies did promise loyalty to Great Britain, but it was loyalty as a colony of Great Britain, not loyalty as in becoming one of the Kingdoms of the United Kingdom of Great Britain (Kingdom of England, Kingdom of Scotland, Kingdom of Wales). So because they became colonies rather than Kingdoms, they still had the right to secede later on.

The same thing applies for today's US overseas territories that are not States. Because they are not States, they are not a permanent part of the nation, and thus reserve the right to secede later on, as both Palau and the Philippines have done. But if and when they ratify the Constitution and are approved by the Congress, they will become States, and thus gain all the rights that go along with being States, but will no longer be able to secede.

Now what the confederates tried to do is they tried to take States and break them off of the Union through secession anyway. That is not legal secession. That is treason.
Logged

Andy

  • Verbose.
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2722
  • Ask me later.
    • View Profile
    • My Blawg
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #68 on: May 07, 2009, 03:06:48 AM »

I don't think you know what the word 'nation' means Luke.

Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)

  • A Cut Above The Rest
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8299
  • If government is the answer, the question is stupi
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #69 on: May 07, 2009, 04:34:56 AM »

Since you apparently missed it the first time...

Luke, what exactly made it a noble and heroic act for the American colonies to secede from the British crown over a 4% tax rate, while it was wrong for the Southern states to secede over a 35% tariff that was impoverishing them?

It was essentially the same political act. The only difference was the governments involved in the conflicts. And don't tell me the difference was slavery, either - slavery was not even brought up as a causus belli except by one of the seceding states, and it was not even made an issue by the north until 4 years after the war had started.

A colony of a nation is not the same thing as a nation itself. Although the 13 Colonies were under the rule of Britain, they were not part of Britain in the same way that England, Scotland, and Wales are part of Britain. On the other hand, South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, etc., are part of America in a way that the Northern Mariana Islands, Wake Island, Puerto Rico, Guam, etc., are simply not.

Now in the charters for the 13 original colonies, the people who were setting up the colonies did promise loyalty to Great Britain, but it was loyalty as a colony of Great Britain, not loyalty as in becoming one of the Kingdoms of the United Kingdom of Great Britain (Kingdom of England, Kingdom of Scotland, Kingdom of Wales). So because they became colonies rather than Kingdoms, they still had the right to secede later on.

The same thing applies for today's US overseas territories that are not States. Because they are not States, they are not a permanent part of the nation, and thus reserve the right to secede later on, as both Palau and the Philippines have done. But if and when they ratify the Constitution and are approved by the Congress, they will become States, and thus gain all the rights that go along with being States, but will no longer be able to secede.

Now what the confederates tried to do is they tried to take States and break them off of the Union through secession anyway. That is not legal secession. That is treason.
I think you just pulled a lot of shit out of your ass right there.
Logged
"Do not throw rocks at people with guns." —Hastings' Third Law
"Income tax returns are the most imaginative fiction being written today." —Herman Wouk 

"If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom." - Dwight D. Eisenhower

MacFall

  • Agorist
  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2295
  • No king but Christ; no law but liberty!
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #70 on: May 07, 2009, 11:01:34 AM »

I was going to say something like "Luke must have failed American history", but more likely they just didn't teach pre-Revolution history at whatever government indoctrination center he attended. I know they didn't at mine. But anyway, if he had known a damn thing about pre-revolution American history, he would know that the British crown set up the colonies, not the colonists; that the crown created a central government over all the colonies in the 1750 and considered that nation a part of his realm, including a provincial government the same as any English county would have had; and that every last one of the founding fathers knew they were engaging in an act of treason when they seceded.

But we can't blame him for being a total ignoramus. He's just repeating what his government school teachers, his government approved textbooks, and government employed intellectuals told him about the government.
Logged
I am an anarchist! HOOGA BOOGA BOOGA!!

libertylover

  • No Title Needed
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3791
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #71 on: May 07, 2009, 01:15:56 PM »

http://georgiaheritagecouncil.org/site2/commentary/davis_davis_slavery.phtml
Quote
Most of Jefferson Davis' public references to slavery were associated with the rights of the states and people under the 10th Amendment. He seldom addressed slavery in and of itself except as a constitutional issue.

He held private beliefs that slavery would end in a reasonable time, as it was ending in most parts of the world. One of his big concerns was the "property" aspect and just compensation to the owners for those emancipated.

He had further concerns with the release of millions into a society with little or no means to provide their own shelter, food, clothing, medical and elder care.

For the reasons above, and more, he advocated and supported Manumission, a process whereby a current slave could be awarded a share project from which he could earn money. This money would be held in escrow until an agreed amount could be paid for Free Man status.

While history has not greatly extolled the results of Manumission or gradual emancipation, it was quite widely adopted, and the numbers of Free Men were growing as a result. In fact, there were more black Free Men in the South than the North at the outbreak of hositilities (due largely to northern state black codes and their tendency to "sell them South"). In European nations and colonies, slavery was abolished with gradual emancipation without any war whatsoever, allowing for owner compensation and the education of the people to become freemen.

Northern Slaves were not freed until well after the Civil War.  So much for the war being over slavery.
Again Grant and Sherman both owned slaves.  Lee and Jackson didn't own any slaves.  The south wasn't a wash in only plantations and slaves.  75% of the free Southern population owned no slaves.  Many were homesteaders and farmed their own land without any slaves.  Slaves were a luxury near the start of the War of Northern Aggression.  This was due to the invention of many new farming technologies which made labor much more productive.   Jefferson Davis established schools for his slaves in the anticipation that slavery as an institution was ending.   Many other plantation owners did the same thing but because in some places it was still illegal they did so quietly.  Otherwise you would have to believe that newly freed adult slaves learned to read with no prior instruction. 
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/williams1.html
Quote
General Jackson might even be described as a civil-rights leader. Yes, that’s right, a civil-rights leader. In the nineteenth century, prior to the War of Federal Aggression, Virginia law prohibited whites from teaching blacks to read and write. Though Stonewall Jackson was known as an upstanding and law-abiding citizen in Lexington, he routinely broke this law every Sunday.

Though the law was not strictly enforced, Jackson quietly practiced civil disobedience by having an organized Sunday school class every Sunday afternoon, teaching black children to read, and teaching them the way of salvation. There are still churches active today that were founded by blacks reached with the Gospel through Jackson's efforts. Jackson taught the Sunday school class for blacks while he served as a deacon in Lexington’s Presbyterian Church. It was in the autumn of 1855 that Jackson, with the permission of his pastor, Dr. William S. White, began the class in a building near the main sanctuary. Every Sabbath afternoon shortly before 3:00 pm, the church bell would toll letting everyone know it was time to worship the Creator of all men. Jackson quickly gained the admiration and respect of blacks in the surrounding area as his zeal was apparent, and he took this solemn responsibility seriously. Attendance often numbered more than one hundred
Logged

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #72 on: May 07, 2009, 01:23:32 PM »

The point still stands, however, that there were laws on the books in the various Confederate States against blacks reading and writing, against blacks holding land, etc.

As for "War of Northern Aggression"? Bullshit, the CSA started the war by firing the first shots.

Besides, in the popular mind, the war *was* about slavery . . .
« Last Edit: May 07, 2009, 01:25:13 PM by Queen of the Harpies »
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER

libertylover

  • No Title Needed
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3791
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #73 on: May 07, 2009, 01:37:15 PM »

The point still stands, however, that there were laws on the books in the various Confederate States against blacks reading and writing, against blacks holding land, etc.

As for "War of Northern Aggression"? Bullshit, the CSA started the war by firing the first shots.

Besides, in the popular mind, the war *was* about slavery . . .
The popular mind is wrong as the winners write the history books and lied about their true motives.  BTW Norther wealth was based on immigrant child labor in horrific hazardous work environments.   Children who were not afforded any sort of education. 

The Federalist were trespassing on Southern Sovereign territory and refused to leave.  They were blockading city.  What were the Southerns suppose to do invite them over to tea and BBQ.  Aggression in the form of the blockade was the first act of war on the South.   
 
Logged

TimeLady Victorious

  • Aprilicious
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3837
    • View Profile
Re: The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession
« Reply #74 on: May 07, 2009, 02:14:09 PM »

The point still stands, however, that there were laws on the books in the various Confederate States against blacks reading and writing, against blacks holding land, etc.

As for "War of Northern Aggression"? Bullshit, the CSA started the war by firing the first shots.

Besides, in the popular mind, the war *was* about slavery . . .
The popular mind is wrong as the winners write the history books and lied about their true motives.  BTW Norther wealth was based on immigrant child labor in horrific hazardous work environments.   Children who were not afforded any sort of education. 

The Federalist were trespassing on Southern Sovereign territory and refused to leave.  They were blockading city.  What were the Southerns suppose to do invite them over to tea and BBQ.  Aggression in the form of the blockade was the first act of war on the South.   
 

Yeah, didn't that blockade happen only after the war began? If we're going to play this "Constitution" game, the lands the Federal government had were constitutionally the Federal government's, not the individual States.
Logged
ENGAGE RIDLEY MOTHER FUCKER
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8   Go Up
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  General
| | |-+  The Truth About The Civil War and Southern Secession

// ]]>

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 32 queries.