Page 11 of 23 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 229

Thread: South celebrates Civil War, largely without slaves

  1. #101
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    GA
    Last Seen
    12-12-10 @ 09:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    258

    Re: South celebrates Civil War, largely without slaves

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    No it wasn't. The declarations of secession by the various Southern states explicitly state it was because of slavery. Period.
    And history and the record of it claims otherwise.

    The war was fought over Southern independence, not over slavery. Lincoln said repeatedly the war was not being fought over slavery. In August 1862, over a year after the war started, Lincoln wrote an open letter to a prominent Republican abolitionist, Horace Greeley, in which he said he did not agree with those who would only “save” the Union if they could destroy slavery at the same time. Lincoln added that if he could “save” the Union without freeing a single slave, he would do so (Letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862, published in the New York Tribune).

    In July 1861, after the First Battle of Manassas (Bull Run) had been fought, the U.S. Congress passed a resolution, by an overwhelming majority, that declared the war was not being fought to disturb slavery, nor to subjugate the South, but only to “maintain the Union” (i.e., to force the Southern states back into the Union). A few months later, in September, a group of Radicals visited Lincoln to urge him to make compulsory emancipation a war objective. Lincoln declined, telling the Radicals, “We didn’t go into the war to put down slavery, but to put the flag back” (Brodie, Thaddeus Stevens, p. 155; Klingaman, Abraham Lincoln and the Road to Emancipation, pp. 75-76). Later on, about halfway through the war, the Radicals and other Republicans succeeded in making the uncompensated abolition of Southern slavery a secondary goal of the war. However, the primary purpose of the federal invasion was always to destroy Southern independence.

    Was the War Fought Over Slavery? | American Civil War

  2. #102
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,513

    Re: South celebrates Civil War, largely without slaves

    Quote Originally Posted by Heavy Duty View Post
    And history and the record of it claims otherwise.
    No, it does not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heavy Duty View Post
    The war was fought over Southern independence, not over slavery. Lincoln said repeatedly the war was not being fought over slavery. In August 1862, over a year after the war started, Lincoln wrote an open letter to a prominent Republican abolitionist, Horace Greeley, in which he said he did not agree with those who would only “save” the Union if they could destroy slavery at the same time. Lincoln added that if he could “save” the Union without freeing a single slave, he would do so (Letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862, published in the New York Tribune).

    In July 1861, after the First Battle of Manassas (Bull Run) had been fought, the U.S. Congress passed a resolution, by an overwhelming majority, that declared the war was not being fought to disturb slavery, nor to subjugate the South, but only to “maintain the Union” (i.e., to force the Southern states back into the Union). A few months later, in September, a group of Radicals visited Lincoln to urge him to make compulsory emancipation a war objective. Lincoln declined, telling the Radicals, “We didn’t go into the war to put down slavery, but to put the flag back” (Brodie, Thaddeus Stevens, p. 155; Klingaman, Abraham Lincoln and the Road to Emancipation, pp. 75-76). Later on, about halfway through the war, the Radicals and other Republicans succeeded in making the uncompensated abolition of Southern slavery a secondary goal of the war. However, the primary purpose of the federal invasion was always to destroy Southern independence.
    Was the War Fought Over Slavery? | American Civil War
    We are talking about the South, not the North. Lincoln maintained it was not about slavery for the North, and it was not in the Northern States.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  3. #103
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,361

    Re: South celebrates Civil War, largely without slaves

    The whole it was for southern independence and state's rights stuff is bull. The south wanted independence so they could keep their slaves. Plain, and simple.

  4. #104
    Dungeon Master
    Veni, vidi, dormivi!

    spud_meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Didjabringabeeralong
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    33,868
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: South celebrates Civil War, largely without slaves

    Quote Originally Posted by Heavy Duty View Post
    And history and the record of it claims otherwise.




    Was the War Fought Over Slavery? | American Civil War
    You're right of course, for 1861, but I'm pretty sure just one year later, in 1862, some bloke announced something along the lines of The Emancipation Proclamation, and signed it into law the next year, or are you going to claim that had nothing to do with the Civil War?
    So follow me into the desert
    As desperate as you are
    Where the moon is glued to a picture of heaven
    And all the little pigs have God

  5. #105
    Bus Driver to Hell
    Thorgasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:12 PM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    68,194

    Re: South celebrates Civil War, largely without slaves

    Lincoln was a politician. He spoke out of both sides of his mouth about slavery. He did say those things that Heavy Duty mentioned. But he also gave his "House divided" speech in 1858. I believe he claimed it wasn't about slavery for political purposes. That's why the Emancipation Proclomation came so close on the heels of his other comments.
    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    Being a psychiatric patient does not mean that you are mentally ill.



  6. #106
    Dungeon Master
    Somewhere in Babylon
    Jetboogieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Babylon...
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,287
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: South celebrates Civil War, largely without slaves

    For me it would kind of be like celebrating a sort of, Apartheid day in South Africa. Which I don't think would go down well.

    Freedom Day all the way, comin up in April

  7. #107
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,356

    Re: South celebrates Civil War, largely without slaves

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    No it wasn't. The declarations of secession by the various Southern states explicitly state it was because of slavery. Period.
    You're looking at it from the wrong perspective, based on a simple knowledge of the period, as a whole. It's been my experience, that when people have their mind made up that, "it was all about slavery", then there's no arguing with them. The problem with their argument, is that they can never explain why Missouri, Kentucky and Maryland remained neutral, if it was all about slavery.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  8. #108
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,356

    Re: South celebrates Civil War, largely without slaves

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    The whole it was for southern independence and state's rights stuff is bull. The south wanted independence so they could keep their slaves. Plain, and simple.
    That's why all those southerners, who didn't own slaves, voted for seccession?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  9. #109
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,356

    Re: South celebrates Civil War, largely without slaves

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimjack19 View Post
    Specifically, the right of a state to enslave other human beings.

    Claiming the Civil War was fought over state's rights or tarriffs is a loathsome attempt to obfuscate the primary motivation for the South's bid for independence.



    Ten years is an arbitrary number you pulled right our of your ass. If you want to blame anyone for the Civil War blame the Southern aristocracy for starting it to preserve the South's slave based economy. The Reconstruction era accelerated the enfranchisement of blacks and the granting of full civil rights to them.
    Any idea why the tarriffs existed?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  10. #110
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,356

    Re: South celebrates Civil War, largely without slaves

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimjack19 View Post
    The Southern aristocracy controlled the South and the Democratic party in the South. The South used a slave based economy.

    This isn't the first time the wealthy elite have convinced the ignorant masses to fight against their own interests. What's particularly galling is that 150 years later you still have ignorant yokels buying into those dusty old rationalizations.
    Actually, the south had an agrarian based economy. But, you know more than all us, "yokels".
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

Page 11 of 23 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •