Texas board unanimously votes to remove Confederate plaque from state Capitol

[hado117]

All the seceding states which formally listed their causes, stated that protecting dlavery was their reason for leaving.
And the Confederacy fires the first shots.

Now if you want to argue that the North was not explicitly trying to end slavery, you would be correct, but the issue that lead to war was slavery.

wrong again! slavery was made the issue because it was thought the english wouldnt get involved in a war for slavery. and why do you think the south voted democrat for the next hunnert years ! hmmm?

 

[pinqy]

wrong again! slavery was made the issue because it was thought the english wouldnt get involved in a war for slavery. and why do you think the south voted democrat for the next hunnert years ! hmmm?

The Declaration of Causes of Seceding States
GEORGIA For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic.

MISSISSIPPI Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization.

SOUTH CAROLINA. We assert that fourteen of the States have deliberately refused, for years past, to fulfill their constitutional obligations, and we refer to their own Statutes for the proof.

The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

I already quoted Texas, and Virginia doesn’t actually state any cause other than oppression of slaveholding states.

Is it your claim that these states were lying when they said the reason was slavery? Follow the link and read for yourself.

 

[phattonez]

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-...votes-to-remove-confederate-plaque-from-state

Texas officials unanimously voted on Friday to remove a Confederate plaque from the state Capitol that claims slavery was not the root cause of the Civil War.

The Preservation Board, which is in charge of historical monuments at the Capitol, voted to take down the “Children of the Confederacy Creed,” The Dallas Morning News reported.
=================================================
This plaque, has been on display in the Capitol since 1959, pledges "to study and teach the truths of history (one of the most important of which is, that the War between the States was not a rebellion, nor was its underlying cause to sustain slavery)."

I thought I was in George Orwell's Ministry of Truth for a moment, watching them methodically rewrite or 'correct' the past in order to make it more truthfull in relation to the present.

Now they'll never be called racist again!

 

[hado117]

The Declaration of Causes of Seceding States
GEORGIA For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic.

MISSISSIPPI Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization.

SOUTH CAROLINA. We assert that fourteen of the States have deliberately refused, for years past, to fulfill their constitutional obligations, and we refer to their own Statutes for the proof.

The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

I already quoted Texas, and Virginia doesn’t actually state any cause other than oppression of slaveholding states.

Is it your claim that these states were lying when they said the reason was slavery? Follow the link and read for yourself.

slavery didnt become the issue until 1861,

 

[Hawkeye10]

slavery didnt become the issue until 1861,

Slavery became an issue that needed to be dealt with during the 1840's, it was the inability of the nations leaders to come to terms with the disagreement, their lack of willingness/ability to solve it, that lead to the war. It was the failure of leadership that lead to all of that misery.

We seem to be doing the exact same immorality/stupidity now.

HOLD ON!

 

[hado117]

Now they'll never be called racist again!

ya know, there might not have been a president abraham lincoln

 

[hado117]

Slavery became an issue that needed to be dealt with during the 1840's, it was the inability of the nations leaders to come to terms with the disagreement, their lack of willingness/ability to solve it, that lead to the war. It was the failure of leadership that lead to all of that misery.

We seem to be doing the exact same immorality/stupidity now.

HOLD ON!

is that what you want people to believe?

 

[Hawkeye10]

is that what you want people to believe?

Why do I find you asking me stupid questions?

 

[Nickyjo]

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-...votes-to-remove-confederate-plaque-from-state

Texas officials unanimously voted on Friday to remove a Confederate plaque from the state Capitol that claims slavery was not the root cause of the Civil War.

The Preservation Board, which is in charge of historical monuments at the Capitol, voted to take down the “Children of the Confederacy Creed,” The Dallas Morning News reported.
=================================================
This plaque, has been on display in the Capitol since 1959, pledges "to study and teach the truths of history (one of the most important of which is, that the War between the States was not a rebellion, nor was its underlying cause to sustain slavery)."

I thought I was in George Orwell's Ministry of Truth for a moment, watching them methodically rewrite or 'correct' the past in order to make it more truthfull in relation to the present.[/QU do we need plaques? the tariff act of 1828 caused the civil war. is what should be written. if a plaque is needed . and lincoln supported secession . before he became president.

It's pretty well established that the war was about the South's "peculiar institution," slavery. That's what five of the seceding states said in their declarations upon leaving the union. It's V.P. stated that slavery was the "cornerstone" of the new nation. Friend of mine who teaches Confederate history says a major contributing factor in secession was the fear that westward expansion would bring too many non-slave states into the union and eventually lead Congress to abolish the practice. Larger question is why the myth that it was about something other than slavery still persists. Would there have been war if slavery didn't exist? Doubt it.

Other questions are how long slavery would have lasted if the South were allowed to secede or had won, and in retrospect, were the lives lost, the decades of lynching and segregation worth it all.

 

[Nickyjo]

One point that is missed in this discussion is the Confederacy was run by the Democrats. The Confederacy was the Democrat party. The Democrats were the party of slavery and the party that tried to divide the country. Even today California Democrats follow this tradition of dividing the country. They still threaten to leave the union. All those evil statues and plaques were dedicated to Democrats. Yet the Democrats are not manning up, but acting like innocent by standers who are outraged.

The Democrats are conspiring to hide their shady past by getting rid of all reminders. The educational system teaches revisionist history, blaming all whites for slavery, when in fact, Democrat whites were the party in favor of slavery.

Picture if the Nazi party, after WWII was not dissolved, like the Democrat party, after the Civil War, was not dissolved. Instead, like the Democrats, they got to retain co-political power in Berlin. Since they don't want to change the name, there is no regret about the past. They are consciously maintaining a continuity with its own shady history of power.

Times change, so they can no longer persecute the Jews in the old obvious way. But since this persecution was a trade mark of being a Nazi, they will need to be more subtle and clever. They may also need to find a way to disguise their connection to their shady past less people see parallels in the present. They can blame the other political party for their own evils.

For example, Blacks in large Democrat controlled cities; Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, etc., have some of the worse living conditions, even though the same Democrats parade compassion and sell themselves as the friends of blacks. The blacks are in the same place, as under old school Democrat. The difference is the Democrats are not being obvious in terms of the parallel to their past. They blame the Republicans for the state of the Blacks in Democrat controlled cities.

Do you believe a new Nazi party, in power in Berlin, would be totally different than in 1930's, especially of they decide to retain the name? The same is true of the Democrats party. Both have very shady beginnings and neither apologize for it, other than try to spread out the blame.

Instead of removing statues and plaques we need to get rid of the name Democrat party. The Democrats were the original Nazi party of the West. They even taught the Nazis of the East, how to use legal means to persecute Jews, based on how the Democrats did it with the blacks for many years after the civil war. Now segregation is done via the scam called diversity, where people segregate themselves. the Democrats have gotten more sinister.

Congrats! You probably set some record for most straw men created in one post.

 

[Nickyjo]

Democrats claim republicans want to rewrite the past. That is ironic in light of the fact that democrats do not want to focus on the fact that southern democrats started the civil war in an effort to maintain slavery, and when they lost the war they started the KKK to stop republican influence after the war.

Read your history. Those democrats are now republicans. They turned to the GOP, as LBJ predicted, after civil rights laws were passed by northern democrats and republicans. It was Goldwater, remember, who opposed the Civil Rights Act Johnson supported... And then there was Nixon's "Southern Strategy" to pull segregationist democrats towards the Republican Party. True, it's not like you brought up the Federalists.

 

[yankintx]

Thoughts and prayers for the defaced memorials to the traitors.

They can honor their dead, so they should, but not the immoral cause they died in vain for.

 

[marke]

Read your history. Those democrats are now republicans. They turned to the GOP, as LBJ predicted, after civil rights laws were passed by northern democrats and republicans. It was Goldwater, remember, who opposed the Civil Rights Act Johnson supported... And then there was Nixon's "Southern Strategy" to pull segregationist democrats towards the Republican Party. True, it's not like you brought up the Federalists.

Ah. Modern republicans are to bear the iniquity of racist democrat sins of the past because modern democrats say it is the modern republicans who should be blamed for the past sins of the democrats?

 

[hado117]

It's pretty well established that the war was about the South's "peculiar institution," slavery. That's what five of the seceding states said in their declarations upon leaving the union. It's V.P. stated that slavery was the "cornerstone" of the new nation. Friend of mine who teaches Confederate history says a major contributing factor in secession was the fear that westward expansion would bring too many non-slave states into the union and eventually lead Congress to abolish the practice. Larger question is why the myth that it was about something other than slavery still persists. Would there have been war if slavery didn't exist? Doubt it.

Other questions are how long slavery would have lasted if the South were allowed to secede or had won, and in retrospect, were the lives lost, the decades of lynching and segregation worth it all.

friend is wromg, if the south formed a new nation anyone who owned slaves wouldnt have been protected by the constitution. meaning they wouldnt have the guarantee of self governance

 

[marke]

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-...votes-to-remove-confederate-plaque-from-state

Texas officials unanimously voted on Friday to remove a Confederate plaque from the state Capitol that claims slavery was not the root cause of the Civil War.

The Preservation Board, which is in charge of historical monuments at the Capitol, voted to take down the “Children of the Confederacy Creed,” The Dallas Morning News reported.
=================================================
This plaque, has been on display in the Capitol since 1959, pledges "to study and teach the truths of history (one of the most important of which is, that the War between the States was not a rebellion, nor was its underlying cause to sustain slavery)."

I thought I was in George Orwell's Ministry of Truth for a moment, watching them methodically rewrite or 'correct' the past in order to make it more truthfull in relation to the present.

Modern leftist commie dummies claim their fathers of yesteryear were stupid lying racists who are worthy of disrespect, unlike themselves, for whom they have the highest respect imaginable.

 

[hado117]

well well. it seems someone at dp wont allow certain info to be posted

 

[Nickyjo]

friend is wromg, if the south formed a new nation anyone who owned slaves wouldnt have been protected by the constitution. meaning they wouldnt have the guarantee of self governance

Not sure I understand you. He said the South saw westward expansion as a long term threat for slavery in Congress. As it happened, slaves remained slaves when the South did form the new nation.

 

[Terryj]

Was the secession of the Confederate State over slavery, in a sense yes, but it was more so over States rights and the violation of Article 4 of the Constitution by both the Federal Government and Northern States. The Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case in 1857 upheld slavery. One has to look at this through the eyes at the times instead of judging their action base on today's values. The Southern States claimed that the violation of the Constitution by the Federal Government constituted a corrupt government and therefore they have the right to abolish it and form another. That slave holding State were having their sovereign powers trampled on by the Federal Government, for nowhere in the Constitution was slavery prohibited. By the Federal Government refusal to enforce Article 4, constituted a breach of contract, therefore allowing the secession of the slave holding States.

 

[pinqy]

Was the secession of the Confederate State over slavery, in a sense yes, but it was more so over States rights and the violation of Article 4 of the Constitution by both the Federal Government and Northern States. The Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case in 1857 upheld slavery. One has to look at this through the eyes at the times instead of judging their action base on today's values. The Southern States claimed that the violation of the Constitution by the Federal Government constituted a corrupt government and therefore they have the right to abolish it and form another. That slave holding State were having their sovereign powers trampled on by the Federal Government, for nowhere in the Constitution was slavery prohibited. By the Federal Government refusal to enforce Article 4, constituted a breach of contract, therefore allowing the secession of the slave holding States.

The only right of the states that the seceding states claimed were violated were those directly related to slavery.

 

[Terryj]

The only right of the states that the seceding states claimed were violated were those directly related to slavery.

Sure it was related to slavery, but slavery wasn't the cause, it was the violation of States rights under Article 4 of the Constitution, I suggest you read it.

You need to look at slavery through the eyes of those in 1850's - 1860's, not judge them with today's values.

 

[pinqy]

Sure it was related to slavery, but slavery wasn't the cause, it was the violation of States rights under Article 4 of the Constitution, I suggest you read it.

You need to look at slavery through the eyes of those in 1850's - 1860's, not judge them with today's values.

I am quite familiar with Article IV. And the states right to slavery is what you’re referencing.

 

[Fledermaus]

well well. it seems someone at dp wont allow certain info to be posted

Like?

 

[DH Kirkwood]

Democrats claim republicans want to rewrite the past. That is ironic in light of the fact that democrats do not want to focus on the fact that southern democrats started the civil war in an effort to maintain slavery, and when they lost the war they started the KKK to stop republican influence after the war.

Republicans are not conservatives, and Democrats are not liberal. It's more accurate to say that most conservatives who identify a party, identify with the Republican party, and that liberals who identify with a party, are more likely to indentify with the Democratic Party. These organizations have morphed so much over the last several decades that they really aren't the same entities any more. Yes, the Democratic Party used to be far more econmically populist than it is now, and it used to be far, far, far more conservative on social issues. That's pretty common knowledge.

In short, it's completely irrelevant that the Democrats were racist back in the day. In a conversation about which one is more racist, or which one is re-writing the past, or whatever accusation one could fling, it is simply not productive to mention what a party did decades ago. If you want to compare the two parties, then compare them within their own decade, at least.

 

[TheParser]

Yes, take down that plaque.

And while they are at it, why not rename the capital city of Austin?


After all, Mr. Austin defied the Mexican government and introduced slavery into that Mexican territory.