|user created polls & quizzes|
Vote on the ballot listed to the left, and rate the ballot below.
Submitted by : freesouthron
Submitted on : Jan 24,2004 12:12:48 pm
Do you honestly believe the War for Southern Independence (Civil War for northerners) was a war to free slaves?
I think that is the first reasonably intelligent comment I have seen you make. I don't say that to be offensive or condescending. Whether you know it or not, I believe you hit the nail on the head. The Confederates tried to break up the geography of the US of A because of sectional, political, and economic reasons. Mr. lincoln wanted to destroy the nation men like Washington, Jefferson, Henry, etc fought for. By creating a Whig empire, Lincoln proved to be the Great Centralizer who illegally changed the Constitution to make it fit his political aims.
< Two sides believed in two ideas and one was too weak to keep going... >
Also correct. Our generals abided by the accepted rules of war. We considered war a thing to be settled among soldiers only. Despite this, men like Sherman, Grant, & Sheridan waged "Total War." By murdering women, children, and seniors, and by burning down the houses of innocent civilians, they coerced our leaders to capitulate. Lee surrendered freedom and sovereignty for the lives of Southern civilians. When you pause to consider the CSA was outnumbered & outgunned, and that they had to create a government, munitions plants, manufacturing, etc., it is incredible the Confederacy lasted so long.
I realize you are young and given to blindly follow what teachers and peers tell you, but if you want to read a good book about Lincoln, read "The Real Lincoln" by Thomas DiLorenzo
A REAL STRONG WHITEMAN:
++++ Ok I'm sorry but all that was bullshit. Lincoln was a prince and the real Adolf Hitler of the Civil War was that son of bitch Jefferson Davis. ++++
Despite your eloquence, you lack a proper understanding of history. The prince Lincoln said there was no room in America for black men. Mr. Davis did not violate the Constitution. Davis and the Confederate government outlawed international slave trading. This is something Lincoln didn't do.
++++Think about if your ass was a blackman living down south during and even after the Civil War, you would be in fear of being lynced, killed, wife raped, children burned and all types of sick torture by southerners. ++++
This is ridiculous. The most strict "Black Codes" were in Northern states. During the NY Draft Riots it was Black people who were beaten and lynched. To place culpability for the Black experience in America solely upon the shoulders of White Southerners is not only an egregious mistake, but a serious injustice. White men of the North and South share the guilt for slavery in America. Along with the Africans who sold them into slavery and the Black slave owners here in the US. Not all blacks in America were slaves. To claim such a thing is to lie without shame.
++++ Don't ever look up north or to the east or west to point your stinking fingers of hypocrisy and blame cause you are ripe with your own filth and blind to your guilt. ++++
I will gladly pay you $1,000 for every slave I have owned. $1,000 X 0 = $0. That sums up my guilt for an institution I never perpetuated, defended, or abused. Judging by your use of the word hypocrisy, I am uncertain you have a proper grasp of its meaning. Its only practical application here is as a definition of the contrast between your words and intentions. By attempting to paint all Southerners as slave owners, racists, etc. you have shown you are not about tolerance, but about promoting hatred for Southerners. You have claimed I am ripe with filth. This is a very intolerant stance for someone who does not know me.
++++ The only reason the south lasted so long is because the North fought the entire war with one hand behind its back ++++
Again, you have demonstrated an unfamiliarity with history. "Total War" can hardly be considered "one hand behind the back." When you begin killing innocent bystanders, children, women, etc. and when you begin "freeing" slaves and forcing them into your army, and when you begin burning down entire towns, you begin to wage Total War.
++++ plus it had to conquer a territory that was about 1/3 the size of Europe. ++++
What does that have to do with anything? It was not the geographical size of the CSA that prolonged the War for Southern Independence. Size would have been of little consequence if there were no resistance.
++++ You people call us slaves to our real history books but you never bother to look at your own southern generals and "heroes". ++++
I don't believe I called anyone a slave. Furthermore, I have looked at my generals. Many were opposed to slavery. They were also opposed to reckless manumission. Consider Lee. Now consider Grant who, when asked why he waited so long to free his slaves, is reported to have answered "good help is so hard to find these days."
++++ You will find that your heroes killed any black or white union soldiers that were found together. ++++
Do you realize that more than 65,000 Black men were soldiers for the CSA? Do you further realize more volunteered to join? The Confederate army had integrated units, particularly partisan units. They also had the first Native American general, Stand Watie. ( This was while Lincoln, the prince, was slaughtering Native Americans for land. ) Yes, Lincoln ordered the largest mass executin in American history. It was the murder of 39 Sioux who were tried in a kangaroo court. Entire units of Cherokee and Creek sprung up in defense of Dixie. Your comment above shows a misunderstanding of history and facts. The northern units were segregated, just like everything else up there.
++++ War of southern independence??? B.S. More like the war of Southern treason. ++++
You fail to understand what treason is. Your ignorance of the facts lends to your own treasonous sentiments. Yes, I have called you a traitor. You are not a traitor to the current Constitution, but to the one formed by Jefferson and his kinsmen. The 9th and 10th amendments were tossed aside and you agree with the decision to deny 10 million people their civil rights. Further, you have completely discounted the Declaration of Independence which claims governments derive their just power by the consent of the governed. When the South seceded, they took that consent away, therefor, the Union government had NO RIGHT to try to govern. Moreover, the DoI says, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish a government that has ceased to be beneficial to its constituents. You would deny the sovereignty of 10 million people, 1/3 of the US population at the time. That makes you a despot and a traitor to the founders of this nation.
++++ Get your heads out of your ass and see the real world. ++++
Spoken like a true champion of egalitarianism. You would deny people the right to govern themselves. you attempt to stifle the freedom of speech through vulgarity and posturing. You would label millions of people you do not know as terrorists, etc. Who is the enemy of liberty? Who is the REAL terrorist?
A STRONG WHITEMAN:
So as to facilitate your reading this, I will break your arguments (and my responses) into several posts.
++++CIVIL RIGHTS??!! WHAT THE HELL? where in the world do you learn your short sited history? What rights were confederate traitors denied?++++
I showed you which two amendments were denied the people of the South. The 9th and 10th. These expressly state that what has not been explicitly given to the central government shall remain a right of a state. The right of secession was named in several state constitutions as a right they retained. The framers of the Constitution thought this was silly as everyone knew you couldn't compel a state to remain by force. Moreover, if you deny the right of secession, then you must also deny the Constitution. It was the northern states who first seceded from the Articles of Confederation. After leaving, they formed a new compact. My 'short sited' (shortsighted) history has come from the reading of primary source materials on both sides of the issue and the employment of higher level cognitive skills.
A STRONG WHITEMAN: --------
++++You know what that right was? THE RIGHT TO OWN SLAVES!!! ++++
The only way you will ever see the truth is if you stop being the Empire's lapdog. Consider this...
Lincoln said he was "in favor of our new territories being in such a condition that white men may find a home ... as an outlet for free white people everywhere, the world over."
Ebony magazine's Lerone Bennett Jr. said in his book Lincoln "was a racist who opposed equal rights for black people." Another interesting quote from an article on Bennet says < Lincoln blamed blacks for the Civil War. "But for your race among us there could not be a war," he said, "although many men engaged on either side do not care for you one way or another." >
++++++You deceivers. You wanted to own slaves and couldn't stand that the United States wanted to abolish slavery.++++++
Have you graduated high school yet? The US Constitution did not abolish slavery until the 13th Amendment. This was proposed Jan 31, 1865 and passed Dec. 6, 1865. By the time it passed, the War was over. If the goal was to abolish slavery, why did they not propose this Constitutionally? Why did the US resort to the bloodshed of more than 600,000 people?
A STRONG WHITEMAN: ---------
++++++What's that I hear, most confederates didn't own slaves? Well then how come there were about 4 million slaves down south? ++++++
The number of slaves down South has little to do with the number of owners. This is pure misdirection. Consider the wealth of this country. Somewhere around 90-95% of this nation's wealth is held by 5-10% of the population. Can we run around saying all Americans are rich because 10% are? There are a couple of other key components you fail to consider: Black slaveowners and Slaves in the Union before, during, and after the War.
++++++You still refuse to believe that the Union fought for one of the most nobilist causes in all HISTORY!! THE FREEDOM OF MAN.++++++
No, sir, I refuse to believe a lie. I do not doubt for one moment that some Yankees fought to abolish slavery. Nor do I doubt some Southrons fought to preserve slavery. However, these were the exception, not the rule. And the positions of abolition and preservation were certainly not the official positions of the governments. You talk of freedom, but consider this quote from Lincoln: < I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation...Let us be brought to believe it is morally right, and, at the same time, favorable to, or, at least, not against, our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime, and we shall find a way to do it, however great the task may be. > Lincoln did not want to free slaves and allow them to be Americans. He wanted them out of North America. His goal was to ship them all back to Africa or South America. This is hardly a benevolent gesture.
+++++ not some fake war of the freedom to own slaves but the preservation of this great nation and the freedom of other Christians and fellow man. +++++
As I have already demonstrated through quotes of Lincoln, he was a racist (like most people at the time). Unlike men like Lee who believed in the education and manumission (emancipation) of slaves, Lincoln believed there was no room in this country for Blacks, regardless of their Christian conversion. Lincoln stated numerous times America was for Whites only. Why would I worship a man like that?
A STRONG WHITEMAN: ----------
++++++ These confederate Liars wanted to tear this nation apart. ++++++
When this nation was formed after the Revolution, each state was a sovereign state. At that time, the states were, basically, independent nations. We were comparable to the current European Union. Although the participating nations have granted certain powers to the central governing body, each state retains its sovereignty. Now, to be certain, our Declaration of Independence states "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it." At the time of secession, the south constituted 1/3 of the nation's population, yet paid 80% of the country's bills. An unfair tariff system was used to milk the South dry of funds that would be used for "improvements" up north. In short, northern companies were on corporate welfare and the South was footing the bill. If the Confederate states did not have a right to secede under these conditions, neither did the original colonies. Perhaps we should toss ourselves beneath the umbrella of British imperialism once more. Of course not. We won the war.
As for the native americans...well what land did you settle on? If it is also Native American land don't you dare try to point the finger.
I have not settled on any land. I was born in this nation which had already been settled, just as I presume you were. I will continue to point the finger because it is a subject which must be addressed. People in this country try to make racism a Black-White issue when it is not solely Black and White. In the mid 1940's Native Americans were being kidnapped by the federal government and shipped to boarding schools in the Northeast to strip them of their culture. The Empire saw this as the best way to destroy Native Americans once and for all. The idea was extermination through assimilation. As for my family, one portion was on the Trail of Tears. They eventually escaped.
A STRONG WHITEMAN: ---------
++++ If you couldn't accept blacks you sure as hell won't accept the red man. ++++
This statement demonstrates your misunderstanding of history. Consider these quotes from Alexis de Tocqueville (an outsider). "Whoever has inhabited the United States must have perceived that in those parts of the Union in which the Negroes are no longer slaves they have in no wise drawn nearer to the whites. On the contrary, the prejudice of race appears to be stronger in the states that have abolished slavery than in those where it still exists; and nowhere is it so intolerant as in those states where servitude has never been known." AND "White carpenters, white bricklayers, and white painters will not work side by side with the blacks in the North but do it in almost every Southern state." ------- You talk of an unwillingness to "accept" Blacks. They were much more accepted in the South than North. Moreover, because many Southrons have Native American blood pumping through their veins, they have always had the tendency to accept the "red man" as you put it. As for my opinion, one proud Black Southron is worth 20 anti-Dixie Yankees.
+++++ Now I am not no damn leftist liberal or athiest, I am a Christian American and know what our troops fought for in that war. +++++
I cannot comment on your political or religious leanings, but I can certainly say you do not know what Yankee troops fought for. As I have shown through quotes, Lincoln didn't want Black people in this country. We also see the resulting riots up north when people thought it was for slavery. We have seen that Grant owned slaves and said he would fight for the Confederacy if he thought the war was over slavery.
++++++ Do you have any idea of how many blacks were killed down south?
And yet you can sit there and tell me about the riots up North. Let me tell you something you people hanged or shot more blacks in one day that than the North did in all 5 years. ++++++
Do you have any idea how many? You are tossing propaganda but no hard numbers or fact. I would like you to consider something before answering. Slaves were considered property. They were rather expensive to buy plus had to be housed, clothed, fed, nursed, etc. and they had to be cared for after they passed their prime. That is, as a form of "retirement," it was illegal to free a slave because he couldn't work. Now, considering how much money they put into their slaves, why in the world would they kill them? Your argument is as silly as claiming the best way to fix a Lexus with a dead battery is to smash the car up with a hammer.
Something I find amusing is that although Yankees and scalawags talk about inequity and poor race relations in the South, the majority of Race Riots occur outside of the South. Tulsa, LA, Detroit, NY, Chicago, Cincinnati, etc.
++++ You hanged John Brown for a traitor ++++
Mr. Brown was tried for several things. He was a murderer. He took hostages (kidnapping) at Harper's Ferry and murdered some. He had also committed murder in other states. He was tried for treason against the State of Virginia. This could be used to prove a point made earlier, that states were considered sovereign entities. Surely, one cannot commit treason against a province without being treasonous against the nation. Therefore, Virginia was recognized as an independent country in compact with a federal government.
+++++yet you fired on government troops. +++++
Once the South withdrew their consent to be governed, the US government had no authority. The moment Maj. Anderson moved from Moultrie to Sumter, he commited an act of war. That being the capture of land/property. All the same, under President Buchanan, there was a truce between the government of the US and SC. The capture of Sumter by Anderson was in violation of this truce. But this didn't start the War. The government of the South met with the US government and offered to pay for all lands, forts, etc. that were formerly under Federal control. If President Buchanan saw no need to invade the South, why did Lincoln? Part of the truce with the northern government stated that the north would not attempt to reinforce Sumter. When Lincoln sent armed troops as reinforcement, the South Carolinians had no choice but to defend themselves against blatant hostilities.
A STRONG .....
+++++You shot Lincoln because he actually was responsible for freeing his fellow man. +++++
You presume to hold me accountable for the actions of one man? By the same logic, you are a murderer, because somewhere up in Jersey a person killed another. How silly. We have already seen that Lincoln was a white supremacist. He did not see them as his "fellow man." He saw them as his inferior.
+++++ You are willing to criticize everything he said but cannot even cry about the things he did. +++++
What should I cry about? I am not a proponent of slavery. I am not a proponent of a "White America." I am a proponent of "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" as promised me in the Declaration of Independence. If I weep, it is because Lincoln destroyed the Constitution and changed the nature of this nation.
+++++ He and 300,000 other troops were responisble for finally destroying the left over Tyranny in this nation. +++++
Again, you have demonstrated a lack of historical knowledge. More than 600,000 people died during the War. There were millions on each side who fought for their respective countries. Usage of the word tyranny is hilarious. Read up on Clement Larid Vallandigham. Deporting a government official for disagreeing with the president? If that isn't tyranny, I don't know what is.
++++++ If you are so sure how blacks were treated nicely down south well then look at the hell they went through after the Civil war. ++++++
Given your demonstrated lack of understanding in other areas of history concerning the events under discussion, I doubt you have a grasp on the nature and politics of Reconstruction. Carpetbaggers and Scalawags, as well as the Blacks who followed them, were all targets for abuse when caught alone or in the dark. It can be reasonably argued that many of the ills in the South today are the direct result of Reconstruction.
+++++ There was still lynchings and burnings. Don't Lie and say there wasn't or talk about how we didn't. +++++
(There *were*...) Nowhere have I claimed there were not lynchings. You have not shown me where Blacks were set on fire. As for what you did, I don't know. I cannot argue with a partial thought. I can say I think you would easier find Whites who were lynched in the South prior to the War.
++++++ Listen buddy your response was the most ignorant ones I ever saw. ++++++
Because it was backed by fact? Ignorance is the absence of fact. You have shown yours by making blanket statements against the South based upon silly stereotypes. I would hate to see what you say about Blacks and other minorities when you are with people who will not take offense.
+++++ Are you confedys to stupid to see what the hell is going on around you. Shit you don't even have to turn on the news just look at this board. You are more willing to call your fellow country men a damn Yank more than some Europeans on this board are. +++++
Didn't you tell me you are a Christian? Hmm, do you talk to your pastor like that? I will call a Yankee a Yankee. That's what they were known as. "I'm a Yankee Doodle Dandy..." There is even a song about it. The term is not a pejorative, the way "redneck" or "N" word is. As for my countrymen, my countrymen are White, Black, Native American, etc. My countrymen are first Southrons and second Americans. When those outside Dixie stop treating Southrons as second class citizens, I may consider myself an American above all.
+++++ As for me being a traitor...no no my dear your hands are thick with blood and treason. +++++
Again, you do not understand the nature of treason. I have shown you how your side destroyed the Constitution and suspended Liberty.
+++++ You betray the memory of old colonial ancestors who fought for independence and freedom and you are only willing to fight for the lies of the past. +++++
My ancestors fought for that independence also. One joined the revolution at the age of 16 in 1778. His grandchildren all fought for the CSA.
+++++ I pray your heart will fall from the twisted lies of the past and see what is really going on +++++
I can make the same petition for you. By perpetuating myths and stereotypes about the South, you further promote racial strife in this country.
+++++ More Lies. Forget yoyr nagging about some 9th or 10th ammendment. You didn't accept the divine right for a man to live free so in what way are still talking about the restrictions of the rebels? +++++
There were slaves up North during and after the War. Your government did not see Blacks as fully human (3/5 law). I don't mean to come off sounding condescending, but what grade are you in?
+++++ It don't make no freakin sense! Your still romanticized by the Birth of a Nation crap. Why won't you listen?!! +++++
Why won't you read and use high level cognitive skills? Read "The Real Lincoln" or "Lincoln Takes Command" for some insight on the president and his war. It has nothing to do with a movie. It has everything to do with common sense and legitimate right to secede.
+++++ And empires lapdog? First of all buddy don't you dare be talking about my country the United States like that. You as an American should be damned ashamed of yourself for selling us out like that. +++++
What I find shameful is that the American people find it acceptable to heap insults and pejoratives upon Southerners. I find it equally shameful they feel somehow justified in treating Southerners as second class citizens. And more shameful than that is the continuance of institutionalized racism through the erasure of the sacrifice many Blacks willingly made for the Confederate States of America.
God damn i can't keep up! I'll just sit here and watch from the sidelines. But come on man. The south didn't realize that the world was dawning into a new era and that slavery was wrong. America's choice was to abolish slavery. And because the south didn't like it and believed in "freedom" They said "Hey ya'll this is the land of the free... blah blah blah" So they decided to form there own nation. Nothing wrong with that right. But the thing is is that was still Treason against America no matter what any constitution can say, So America had to put down the rebellion. (I personally think Lincon wasn't the best president around but the dude freed the slaves. Thats a good acomplishment.)
Plus the good thing about america is freedom. If the rednecks held their "Confederate" flag u in the air in china or something. They would be stripped of their property and probaly killed for it.
++++As for some bullshit magazine calling Lincoln a racist, Well actions speak louder than words. ++++
Yes, indeed. Please read the Emancipation Proclamation, which was issued 2 years after the start of the War. You will see that Lincoln refused to free the slaves in the Union states and Union held territories of the CSA.
++++ Lincoln only said such things because he was afraid that ignorant pro-confederates like yourself would kill him if he showed any respect to the black man. ++++
There were no "pro-confederates" in 1858.
++++ Don't dare to compare him with that sonofabitch jeff davis. I challenge you to tell me about Jeff Davis or the confederate actions toward blacks before and after the civil war. ++++
Gladly. Jim Limber. Though that should suffice, I will explain. Jim Limber was an abused Black orphan. Jefferson Davis and his wife adopted Jim. The way you paint Mr. Davis, you would think he should have joined in the abuse, rather than rescue the child. Robert E. Lee was against slavery. Stonewall Jackson tutored Black children. After the War, many former slaves stayed on at the plantation. Men like 10 Cent Bill (Bill Yopp) were loyal to the Confederacy even after the War. Many slaves were given personal areas to farm and chickens to raise. They were allowed to sell these goods for their own profit. After the war, a good many ex-slaves actually lent money to their former owners. As for Davis, he freed most of his 72 slaves in 1852. Many southern generals, politicians, and slaveowners were proponents for the education and emancipation of slaves. What they were opposed to was the freeing of slaves who could not take care of or provide for themselves. They saw that as pure cruelty. As for *after* the War, the camps were mixed. Many ex-slaves tried to move North and were beaten, jailed, murdered, or run out of town. Because of that, there was a large migration of Blacks out West. Some Blacks came home as War heroes. Yes, many Blacks willingly fought for the CSA. Many free Blacks enlisted to preserve their country. Many slaves volunteered to go and fight for Dixie also. They fought in integrated partisan units. Many also fought with officially organized units, but were listed as cooks, body servants, etc. Yet other Blacks were mistreated because of Reconstruction. Blacks were allowed to vote in the South, but only as long as they voted the way Republican Yankees told them to. In the Slave Narratives, you will read the story of Blacks who tried to vote Southern Democrat and were beaten, tortured, or lynched... all by Carpetbaggers and other Blacks. The use of Blacks as pawns by the victorious Yankee government as a means of punishment against the South created a great amount of friction. The remnants of which can still be seen today.
++++ And yes there where millions of blacks down south, You just admit it! ++++
Why would I not admit it? There were between 3.5-4 million Blacks in the South. The majority of which were slaves. There were, however, free Blacks and Black Slaveowners. Even so, today, the concentration of Blacks in America, tends to be down South. It is laughable that we have the majority of African-Americans down here and yet the race riots tend to be outside of Dixie. Is it possible we generally get along until some group standing to profit through hate like the SPLC stirs up some problems? I know Black men who carry around Confederate Battle Flag keychains. One once told me anyone who wanted to take it from him would have to kill him for it.
++++ And yes actions do speak louder than words. The slaves were freed by lincoln not by davis! Case Closed! ++++
I will ask again. Why did the Emancipation Proclamation not free slaves in the North? Please read it. Then we will discuss it. I will not address the topic of emancipation by Lincoln again until you are familiarized with the manuscript. As for the CSA, the Constitution forbid international slave trading. That was the first step to true emancipation, rather than the inequity the Union brought about. African Americans have still not fully recovered.
++++ And don't you dare worship Lee. ++++
As a Christian, I worship no man.
++++ Because of him hundreds of thousands of americans died. ++++
Are you implying Lee, who was opposed to slavery, started the war? Let me ask you something. When the rest of the world was ending slavery through non-violence, why did Lincoln feel the need for war? I mean, many (but not all) of the northern states ended slavery without violence.
++++ Because Lincoln millions of Americans were freed. ++++
The end result is thus. Lincoln, however, was not concerned with the wellbeing of the Black man in America. Have you ever wondered why Blacks in South and Central America, as well as the Carribean, don't tend to have the same racial problems they are faced with here in the US? Could it possibly be due to the violent way in which they were freed?
By your logic, though, I will assume you are for the war in Iraq. Since the end result is the freedom of Iraqis, it must be a justified war. When will you be travelling to Mauritania to wage war? You know slavery still exists over there, right? When shall you depart for the Sudan?
++++ I'm glad you said that because we did abolish a destructive government...The Confederate States of America. ++++
Do you now accept the legitimate right of the Southern people to govern themselves? What you have said here implies as much and makes claims that you were justified in your Imperialist invasion of the South.
++++ Why do you also forget the true southern Patriot. Kingdom of Jones ring any bells. I suppose not. ++++
Without a government, you can hardly consider Jones Co, MS a country unto itself.
++++ I mean down south they hanged southern abolishonist or southern unionists. Either that or shot them. You can honestly sit there and say no. Hey buddy I got the proof, so don't start. ++++
Are you familiar with what a straw man argument is? This is a textbook example.
++++ And by the way I got native american in me too...Oppps better withdrawl your statement. ++++
There is no need to withdraw anything I have said. It is a historical fact that the US government waged a war of genocide against Native Americans. It is also a fact that while men like Pope were slaughtering the Sioux, the Chrokee and Creek were fighting for the CSA.
++++ And by the way one southern Patriot, no matter his color, is more than all off you anti-american traitors. ++++
I have addressed this before and will not address it again until you can show what is unAmerican about believing we should not have an overgrown, bureaucratic government that taxes its citizens to death. I don't know how much you make, but if you (or your parents) are middle-class around 1/2 of your income goes to some form of tax. Between Federal, state, county, city, & sales taxes plus taxes on things such as gasoline, oil, freon, driver's licenses, etc. the greater part of your income has gone to bloated politicians who tax without truly representing their constituents.
++++ One more thing about that British umbrella that you seemed to talk about from the Revolution. Well, the confederates were aided by the British and wanted them to come in and invade the north. can you say...Torie? And anything you did to the slaves surpases anything under the so called British umbrella.
Again, you demonstrate a flawed version of history. The British did not help the CSA. The US government set up blockades to prevent Britain from trading with the South (this is a constitutional violation, *unless* the CSA was a legitimate nation). Furthermore, Lincoln was afraid Britain would side with the CSA, hence the Emancipation Proclamation. Even the most liberal historian will admit it was a ploy to prevent Britain from joining the South in their quest for freedom. (It is spelled Tory). A Tory (as used during the Revolution) was loyal to Britain. Your analogy is as ridiculous as the CSA was not loyal to Britain.
What exactly did I do to the slaves?
++++The south didn't realize that the world was dawning into a new era and that slavery was wrong. ++++
The CSA recognized this. If not for moral reasons, economics were soon to do away with slavery. It was the understanding of the impending death of slavery that caused the Confederate states to outlaw international slave trade. Many in the governemnt and social circles believed blacks should be educated and then freed. They viewed the freeing of slaves who could not provide for themselves as cruelty. After all, if one couldn't provide for himself or family, they would all starve to death. This is also why it was illegal to emancipate a slave who was old, sick, or lame unless you could prove he was trained in a skill and could provide for himself and family.
++++ America's choice was to abolish slavery. ++++
America's choice was *not* to abolish slavery. Most Union soldiers fought because they were drafted. Many believed in White supremacy and did not care one iota for the Blacks.
Look at some of the Black Codes Illinois had:
< No Black or Mulatto person may live in Illinois unless they have some document signed by a judge or clerk with the seal of that court that states their freedom. >
< It is against the law to bring anyone into this state that is a slave for the purpose of setting them free. >
< No negro, mulatto or Indian can purchase any servant other than their own complexion. If they buy a white servant the person will immediately become free. > (White Supremacy at its finest)
< If a servant is ten miles from the masters house the servant will be whipped unless they have a note from their master. >
After the EP, many Union troops refused to fight, saying they had no desire to free Blacks.
++++ And because the south didn't like it and believed in "freedom" They said "Hey ya'll this is the land of the free... blah blah blah" So they decided to form there own nation. ++++
Actually, since slavery was protected by the Constitution and upheld in the Supreme Court, there was no reason for them to form a new nation over the issue of slavery. there was, however, reason to form a new nation over the issue of unfair taxation.
++++ But the thing is is that was still Treason against America no matter what any constitution can say, So America had to put down the rebellion. ++++
What you have just said contradicts itself. It cannot be treason if the Constitution permits it. Do you realize the northern states almost seceded twice? They were opposed to the LA Purchase and the War of 1812. If these Constitutional Rights existed for them at those times, what changed it when the South seceded?
++++ I personally think Lincon wasn't the best president around but the dude freed the slaves. Thats a good acomplishment. ++++
The 13th Amendment, which freed the slaves, was not ratified until Dec. 06, 1865, eight months after Lincoln died. Please, read the EP. You will see he did not free any of the slaves he had the ability to free. It would have been far cheaper and easier for the North to begin a reimbursement plan for Southern states as they did up north if they wanted to bring about a speedy end to slavery.
+++Saying the war wasn't about slavery is kind of like saying the holocaust really wasn't about jews, too. +++
Are you calling Lincoln a liar? How can you justify the enslavement of people in the north during the war?
Actually, saying the war wasn't about slavery is like speaking unadulterated truth. Slavery was protected by the US Constitution. Why war over it? However, comparing the American institution of slavery, abused by northerners and Southrons alike, to the Holocaust is nothing short of tossing salt in the wounds experienced by European Jews during the 30's and 40's.
Why do you keep changing your name? You already hide behind a guest status, so why do you feel the need to use different names? Is it because you hope to make it appear more people are responding? Or is it an admission that you are ashamed of the NYC public education that has left you incapable of distinguishing between their, they're, and there?
In any case, Frederick Douglass said, "There are at the present moment many Colored men in the Confederate Army doing duty not only as cooks, servants and laborers, but real soldiers, having musket on their shoulders, and bullets in their pockets, ready to shoot down any loyal troops and do all that soldiers may do to destroy the Federal government and build up that of the rebels."
Louis Steiner said, "Over 3,000 Negroes must be included in this number . These were clad in all kinds of uniforms, not only in cast-off or captured United States uniforms, but in coats with Southern buttons, State buttons, etc. These were shabby, but not shabbier or seedier than those worn by white men in the rebel ranks. Most of the Negroes had arms, rifles, muskets, sabers, bowie-knives, dirks, etc.....and were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederate Army."
Do you know who HK Edgerton is? Bill Yopp?
Why do you try to minimalize Black Southrons and the contributions they made? I would not doubt one bit if you try to minimalize *all* Black contributions to this country.
+++ are you on another planet or just massively stupid? +++
Is this a demonstration of your intellectualism and mental prowess?
You have espoused your ethnocentrism on various polls here. You have, basically, pronounced your intellectual superiority. I would expect someone with the "Master-Race" mentality such as yourself, should be able to dazzle us with your brilliance. I am probably expecting too much since I did have to point out the differences between their, they're, and there.
Well freesouthern I am fucking speachless. Appeariently I have spent too much time playing football and readin about foreign countries and conqurers when I should really brush up on my american history. But about the whole southern deal as long as they have the belief that people from the north(yankees) are wimps, I say to hell with them all. About the civil war what I do know it is true that Union soldiers and generals pillaged and destroyed the south. Much like the Mongols(not as much as the mongols did though) and Huns. But because we won we wrote the history books. All that stuff isn't mentioned in the text books and shit because it was an organized war by our government. To tell u the truth presidents like lincon and them were just paper-pushers. He or Bush, Nixon...ect. They all had no experience in war and simply put their singnatures on Papers. It is the generals who fought that deserve the real credit. Like Grant and the other dudes.
Yea yea, theres so much damn critisisim on spelling at this site man...
"by the way southron I am a Christian and don't worry about how I talk to my pastor when you are on the war path against your own nation."
I am not worried about how you talk to your pastor, but I do have two points to this statement.
1.) My point was that people who profess the name of Christ should also try to live the example he set for us.
2.) I am not on a warpath against any nation. I abhor the ethnocetrism that is balkanizing this nation.
++++ To set the record Southron...I don't buy your stuff. I just don't, ++++
No need to set it. It is fairly obvious.
++++ you still didn't answer my question straight off. You merely directed your answer and led it off in an entirely different direction. Lincoln was our greatest since Washington. That is a fact. ++++
That is *not* a fact. That is pure opinion. Some will claim JFK was the greatest ever. Others will claim Clinton was the best since Washington. Time named Hitler "Man of the Year" at some point. Does that make it true? No.
++++ No other president could have held this nation together. ++++
Considering the options between the incumbent Buchanan (who had a truce with the South) or the opponent, Douglas (who favored a peaceful resolution to the situation), I will agree that no other president could have dragged the Southern states back into the Union. That the CSA seceded does not require they remained an independent body of sovereign states forever. It simply means they exercised the one check that states had against an abusive federal government. It is highly possible a peaceful solution would have been found and the Southern states would have rejoined the Union willingly. This would have spared them the pain of Reconstruction.
++++ REMEMBER THE CONFEDERATES FIRED ON FORT SUMTER. THAT IS AN ACT OF WAR MY FRIEND, and I don't care what is written on paper. ++++
To be quite honest, I don't believe you care much for facts. You are interested in forcing your opinion on people who disagree with you. It is true that the South fired upon Sumter. By attempting to reinforce the fort, Lincoln violated the truce that existed between the Federal and Confederate governments. The facts can be found in the Official Records of the War of the Rebellion. John Shipley Tilley wrote "Lincoln Takes command" demonstrating Lincoln's purposeful breach of this truce.
When a state secedes from a republic, it is necessary that the federal forces depart from the region. Consider the loss experienced by the USSR as the satellite states declared independence from the Soviet government. Unlike the South, these countries did not offer to reimburse their former government. With the logic you have used, however, over the course of conversation, you believe countries like Poland had no right to secede.
++++ It's about time you finally admit. ++++
This is a strawman. I have never denied there were slaves.
+++So talk about us. By the way there were no slaves up North read the right history book. ++++
Slave states during the War included the 11 CSA states, KY, DE, MD, and MO.
Here are some quotes from the encyclopaedia.
< President James Buchanan, in the last days of his administration, declared that the federal government would not forcibly prevent the secessions. >
< The population of the territory loyal to the Union was about 22 million, including about 500,000 slaves. >
When you tell me to "Read the right history book" it smacks of Hitler burning books that were in conflict with his thoughts of supremacy.
Let us discuss a couple of other things about northern slavery. Are you familiar with Sojourner Truth? She was a slave in New York until 1828. She was not unique. Who do you think did most of the clearing of the land and building of the roads, houses, & buildings?
According to "Memoir of Quamino Buccau," one slave in Poughkeepsie, NY set his master's barn on fire. After being tried and found guilty, he was tied to a stake and slowly burned to death.
Moreover, free Blacks had to worry in NY. If an employer claimed a Black man was his slave (even if free), the Black man had to provide proof or be turned over as a slave to the employer.
Consider this quote from a Columbia website:
< Most New Yorkers, including many who have grown up or lived in the city most of their lives, don't realize slavery existed here. >
< It could be said, in fact, that from the time of the Dutch, when it was called New Amsterdam, virtually until the end of the American Revolution, New York City was the slavery capital of Colonial America. >
This is just one northern state where slavery existed. This is why I find claims of Northern moral superiority objectionable. Both regions of the nation held slaves. The north then found it more lucrative to traffic in human flesh than to keep it in bondage. Just as there is no moral superior in the drug dealer-drug user relationship, the same holds true between the slave traffickers and slave owners.
++++ By the way don't be sore about reconstruction. That just proves to me how darkhearted you can be. ++++
I am not sore about Reconstruction. I cannot change it, so why bother fretting?
++++ Here these men in blue . . . they come down like the most humane people to help you rebuild, but what happens you treat them like nazis. ++++
You really have no clue about Reconstruction, do you? The Carpetbaggers did not come down to help. They came to gloat and exploit the circumstances. Reconstruction was also a means of keeping Southern Democrats from voting. Just about all white southerners were disenfranchised. Blacks who were to vote Democrat were also threatened, beaten, & lynched. They were also disenfranchised. Reconstruction was an attempt to punish Southerners.
++++ Why the hell would reject somebody who trying to help me out despite the things I did to him. ++++
I have shown you President Buchanan promised peace. With his own version of the Gulf of Tonkin Lincoln provoked the War. Sherman's men raped women and young girls (both Black and White). Are you familiar with Sherman's kidnapping of women and children in places like Roswell and Manchestere?
++++ Your so greedy over states rights well buddy my state belongs to you as much as it belongs to me. I'm not going to kick you out of it because you come from some other state. ++++
You will not kick me out. Instead, you will call me a "redneck", a "f***ing moron," a "backwoods freak," etc. You will treat me and my neighbors as second class citizens that belong somewhere beneath you because we do not agree with the Northern political ideals or social mores. You will deride, chide, chastise, and belittle the millions of people who live below the Mason-Dixon because of where they live or were born. It would be more humane of you to simply deny us access to your state and leave us alone. At the bare minimum, treat us as equals, but forbid us entry.
As for States' Rights, I don't think you fully comprehend the notion.
++++ I'll be damned if I'm going to live under some Confederate Tyranny. ++++
No one asked you to. More than that, had the War never happened or had the South won, you still would not be living in the CSA. What you do not realize is that NYC actually talked about seceding from the Union at the same time. They planned on setting up an independent area much like Vatican City. It would have been a 3rd nation here.
++++ You see there was a law called the fugitive slave law where the south wanted all escaped slaves who looked for freedom to be returned down south. So in other words, these future confederates tried to impose their laws on the North, invade northern states with this crap and capture both whites(with black mothers) and black slaves to return them to bondage. John Brown KIDNAPPING? .Maybe you want to look at your info better man. ++++
The Fugitive Slave Act (FSA) was a Federal Law. It was not an imposition of Southern Law upon Northern states. In fact, though, since you brought it up, let's discuss it briefly. Since the FSA was a law enacted by Congress and upheld in the Supreme Court, it was the legitimate law of the land. By ignoring this law, the Northern states were violating it. Many Southerners viewed this refusal to abide by federal law as a nullification of the compact between the states. They believed they had no reason to feel compelled to remain in a Union with northern states that only abided by the laws that benefitted them.
You suggest I look at my info better. I would suggest the same to you. I have been a proponent of States' Rights. You have slammed them. You have applauded Lincoln for saving the Union and have claimed it was Constitutional. yet, here you have made an argument for States' Rights, basically claiming the nullification of the FSA was the right of states who wished to make void any federal law.
++++ John Brown KIDNAPPING? ++++
What would you call the taking of hostages? Before you answer, let us consider a definition of Kidnap-- To seize and detain unlawfully and usually for ransom.
Hmm... Kidnapping. By the way, I never implied he was tried for kidnapping. I simply called it what it was. I did explicitly say he was tried for Treason against the State of Virginia.
++++ ahh...the myth of black confederate soldiers; what a lie. ++++
At what point was Frederick Douglass lying? When he wrote his autobiography or when he talked about the many Blacks in the Confederate army who carried guns, knives, etc?
++++ "...to employ negroes in war against the Confederate States...inconsistent with the spirit of those usages which in modern warfare prevail among civilized nations...(a) violation of the laws or usages of war among civilized nations." - resolutions of CSA senate and house in 1863. ++++
This is a misquote, purposely truncated to misguide your audience. Temple of Democracy also misquoted, so I can only assume you got it from there. In any case, the quote is referring to the US policy of adbucting or drafting slaves, or freeing them for the purpose of inciting them to rebel and wage a true Civil War within the borders of the CSA. Since a civil war is a contest of two factions for control of the same government, a "servile war" would have been a civil war. Since the CSA actually declared independence and did not attempt to stay within the union and capture control of the government in DC, it was actually not a civil war. This is why the official records from the North call it the War of the Rebellion. The Southerners called it a war for Southern Independence.
++++ Slaves forced to load cannons and serve their masters on the battle field aren't soldiers, moron. ++++
Then I suppose one can say the majority of people in Artillary divisions are not soldiers. But consider the following:
National Park Service historian, Ed Bearrs, stated, "I dont want to call it a conspiracy to ignore the role of Blacks both above and below the Mason-Dixon line, but it was definitely a tendency that began around 1910." Historian, Erwin L. Jordan, Jr., calls it a "cover-up" which started back in 1865. He writes, "During my research, I came across instances where Black men stated they were soldiers, but you can plainly see where soldier is crossed out and body servant inserted, or teamster on pension applications." Another black historian, Roland Young, says he is not surprised that blacks fought. He explains that "...some, if not most, Black southerners would support their country" and that by doing so they were "demonstrating its possible to hate the system of slavery and love ones country."
++++ All the 200,000+ Confederate soldiers captured by Union troops were white. Why no blacks, eh? ++++
Because the rules of war would have prohibited the Union government from keeping them as pointed out in the full mss of your quote above. Instead of being called "soldiers," the Yankee government called them "contraband." As contraband, they were property which could be taken and impressed (forced) into service for the Union army.
++++ In March 1965, the CSA house and senate narrowly approved the use of black soldiers. When the new black soldiers marched in Richmond in uniform, whites through mud at them. None of them fought; Lee surrended on April 9, 1865. ++++
The War, technically, did not end with the surrender of General Lee. Men like Col. Mosby were still fighting for a short while after. And President Davis wasn't captured until May 10. Either way, both Union and Confederacy had conscription acts (the draft), though GA had invoked its right to exclude Georgians from the draft in '63. Despite this, it was illegal to draft slaves in the CSA. Blacks mostly fought in partisan groups. Partisan groups rarely kept muster rolls, especially at the beginning of the war. Some of my ancestors fought in these partisan groups from '61-'63 without a single muster roll of the group until '64 or '65.
A common cry from both sides around late 1863 was "rich man's war, poor man's fight." Africana website says:
< They cried, "Rich man's war, poor man's fight," but their anger soon turned against New York's African American population. Before they were through, at least 2,000 black men, women, and children had been slaughtered. > (I believe this number is high compared to many other estimates of mortality.)
The "20 Slave" law in the CSA said that males with more than 20 slaves were exempt from the draft.
In March of '65, the Congress of the CSA passed a law that would allow the drafting of slaves into armed service.
A stark difference between Yankee and Confederate forces is the way they treated the Black soldiers. Even if you want to claim that the CS soldiers who were "cooks, musicians, etc" were not "soldiers," they still drew the same pay as White privates. Black soldiers in the Union ranks were paid less than their white counterparts.
++++ You are clueless, you dumbass. ++++
Here is a quote I thought you would enjoy, also from Africana, a Black website. Lincoln was
"afraid of losing the support of the four slave-owning border states that remained tenuously loyal to the Union, as well as of alienating the North's large number of proslavery... Democrats. Lincoln assumed that both the border states and Democrats would have seen the enlistment of black troops as a sign that the North meant to abolish slavery, which was not an original aim of the war."
++++ I don't believe this, your still decieving, your still speaking like a hypocrite. ++++
Do you know what a hypocrite is? The definition of hypocrisy is: < The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness. >
I have not professed anything that I do not believe. Moreover, I haven't professed anything I don't live. In other words, I have not advocated hatred for anybody. Instead, I have pointed out the hypocrisy in those who will continually make stupid and uninformed comments about Southerners based upon stereotypes.
++++ I can't begin to correct all your errors. ++++
You have yet to try.
++++ Ok are familair with Gettyburg and "honest lee's" invasion of the north? ++++
By the time Lee crossed into the North, the war was already begun. By application of your example, we invaded Germany and Japan during WW2. It is perfectly within the international rules of war to invade the land of an invader. It is most often called a counterattack.
++++ Lee's troops robbed the citizens of Gettysburg of food and money, he kidnapped any black people he saw and returned them to slavery. ++++
The practice of foraging has been an accepted practice of war. Even Vattel's papers during this era discuss this. However, there is a point to how far a military can forage. Sherman crossed that point. As Lee was opposed to slavery and saw it as evil, I will dispute this point with you. As some of your other thoughts, I see this one pops up on temple of democracy. Perhaps it is just a fluke. In any case, let's look at the man who proposed this idea, Alan Nolan. One review says < Nolan is thought of by many as a trailblazing revisionist ... > and < a brilliant journalist and a man with serious anti-South passions ... not to the degree of Mencken...certainly anti-Confederate. >
Nolan has said "I find almost nothing in the Confederate culture or tradition to admire or celebrate."
To me, this notion is like having Goebbels defend Hitler.
++++ The famous raids in the border states by confederate horsemen did what huns did in Gaul. They stole, killed and plundered CiVILIANS!!! ++++
I should very much like to see your documentation for this. As the most prominent men up North were Col. Mosby and his rangers. I think you have your facts confused. Lee refused to wage the same type war on civilians that Sherman was waging in Georgia. There was an international code of conduct of war (Vattel) which was adhered to by the CSA, but not the 3 main US generals. Also, the 1st Geneva convention had met and drawn up rules before the war was over.
++++ WHO THE HELL SAID THIS??? WAS IT ME? NOO!!! ++++
If it wasn't you, I apologize. For some reason I thought it was you between here and another board.
++++ You got the nerve to this junk to me, when every southerner I met I treated as I would any man and not discrimate against him. But when I travel down to your Mason-Dixon some asshole comes up and calls me a damn Yank, talks strait constant shit about president Lincoln, or some asshole will come spit at my back and then walk away like he didn't do it, or some little runt will run his shopping cart into me on purpose and you got the damn nerve to say this about me? ++++
I have said little about you save comments upon what I have seen. I cannot excuse the actions of people I do not know, nor can I defend those I know nothing about. I have seen many Yankees come down South and start talking about how backwards everyone is; about how the South sucks; about how they need this and that to be more like NY, etc. etc. I don't call them names or spit on them. I just say "If NY is so great, go back." One of my best friends is a NY'er who has not stopped trash-talking Southerners for the almost 20 years I have known him. I just tell him to go back, too.
++++ What's wrong with YOU!? You make bigoted comments like there is no tommorow about people who don't know about from stuff you probably get from only watching TV. Right there you proved to me that you already steriotype an entire people. ++++
What bigotted comments have I made? I have not succumbed to stereotypes. I have been and lived all over this country, including a good many years up north. I have seen all sorts of prejudice. I was constantly harassed by cops up north for having a car tag from the South. Including getting pulled over for doing 26 in a 25. I was also kicked off a beach up north because of my race.
++++Since when did I do this shit? I don't get it you don't even know what you are talking about anymore.++++
Actually, for some reason I thought you were the same as the one who posted as "south=backwards." I apologize again for this error.
++++ If you want to hear about someone being rejected and bigoted against talk to me, I went through, I have hated because of my race, because of my nationality and because of my religion. ++++
You are not unique. I don't mean to be callous, but it is true. Even I have been the object of many insults, attacks, descrimination, etc. because of my race and religion. Millions of people have. Racism, ethnocentrism, and religious persecution abound. It is not simply a white-male on non-white male activity. I was verbally assaulted by several professors when I was in college because I am a Christian.
++++ You hit a nerve ending in me and I will never look at you the same. ++++
With all due respect, then, you are handicapped for the remainder of your life. However, it is not because of me, but because of you. Judging by your e-mail account, I will guess you are young (18-21). Your whole life you will have people disagreeing with you. It doesn't get any better as you get older. Your boss will push down on you. Your spouse will push back. Your children will push back. Your friends will push back. Some of my closest friends come from Haiti, Dominica, etc. A few minutes with them will remind you how blessed everyone in this nation is, regardless of color.
That said, when my options are between truth and the perpetuation of myths and stereotypes, I will take truth every time. Like many other people who find themselves the objects of stereotypes, I have grown weary of putting up with it and now will vigorously defend the truth. I encourage you to do the same, regardless what stereotype you must overcome.
++++ by the way keep in mind freesouthron when you are reading my post above that my mother is from down south, you don't know jack about me before you open your mouth. ++++
It makes no difference to me where your mother is from. I have not used any pejoratives while talking about you or your family (I don't think this was ever addressed). I have questioned your knowledge of history, but that is not an insult.
There are a good many lies and hypocrisies floating around this country. Among them is the seemingly political correctness of verbally abusing Christians, Southrons, and Republicans. Look at this website and the countless number of people who simply blather about the aforementioned with no practical experience in any of them. They cannot document, site, or counter argue-- they simply toss out pejoratives, stereotypes, and insults. It is truly disappointing.
"One of my problems with you is that you are more willing to fight your own country men, who you ironically call yankees, when you got guys of other nations who will you call you the same thing and much worse."
I'd prefer not to fight with either. I am, however, very tired of feeling like a second class citizen because of preposterous stereotypes that flourish online, in our media, and in our society as a whole. Just as it is socially unacceptable to use pejoratives when describing minorities, homosexuals, etc. it should be socially unacceptable to use pejoratives to describe Southerners.
**My ass, a Scalywag to you is a person who fought or had anything to do with being pro-Union. **
No, a scalawag is exactly what I said it was. The dictionary defines scalawag as A white Southerner working for or supporting the federal government during Reconstruction. Scalawags came after the war. During the war, those who were loyal to the Union were called Unionists.
**Hey! Don't get me started on you southerners about who is ashamed of someones past, you got alot of nerve buddy. **
I have no clue about what you are talking. Unless you are referring to the altar of perpetual penance all Southerners are called to kneel before.
**Without being rude, your words are really full of it. You don't fool nobody with your "Why are you such a bigot and I am so open minded" **
I dont believe I claimed to be open-minded. My claim is that many people are very bigoted against Southerners. They use ethnically charged terms and stereotypes that would be unacceptable if applied with the same vituperation to any minority.
**KKK, Many Southern Generals, most of the Confederate anti-lincoln populus, all had black or probably did have black or native american blood in them, and many times it was denied. As a matter of fact I think most KKK have black blood in them, just like Hitler had jewish blood in him but he hated jews likewise to the KKK and many confederate Generals. You may claim not be as racist as them, but many of the rebel generals you worship are like that. **
The majority of this is silly beyond belief. It is poor scholarship revealing an agenda. Despite that, I will address one point, the generals.
General Stand Watie was the first Native American General on North American soil. To my knowledge, he remains the only full blooded Native American general this nation has seen. There were 8 batallions of Native American Indians in the CSA. Many generals, such as Lee and Jackson, were opposed to slavery. I believe I have shown quotes on Lincoln's feelings towards Blacks in America. His goal was to send them all to Liberia or central America.
** Ok Southron, I will cure your curiosity about my heritage, I would like you more than anyone to hear my story. Just post your email in your profile or here. If you want it to be more discrete you make up an account off of yahoo.com and I'll send you my IM and email address so i can tell you. We have to clear some stuff up about each other. **
it is posted
no it was over states rights 90% of it, slavery for free labor was a minor issue but the blacks made it a big issue they use it as a cop out for being oppressed so the govt gives them free handouts/welfare etc for something done to their ancesters when the africans sold out their own ppl when the english came over to kidnap shiploads of africans over 200 yrs ago, pres bush appoligized to them recently on the issue so they should have no issues on the matter since he did that they shouldnt be using that excuse anymore saying the white man put them down etc crap etc ...just some are too lazy to work either on welfare or sell drugs even though he didnt need to cause the united states had nothing to do anything with it...it was the orig 13 colonies and the confederated states that did slavery which for a long time no longer exist since the current govt came into power the native american indians went through much more hellish conditions like the trail of tears. being forced from their lands many died from the the march the trail of tears they were more as you call it "oppressed" i am part blackfoot (1/2 cherokee 1/2 algonquin mostly from great lakes and canada and part cherokee) my great great great grandmother on mom side was 1/2 cherokee nuff said, btw george washington had both white and black slaves but treated them good and fair never abused them he eventually let them go free no strings attached, just stating the facts if you research you will find all of this true so no flaming lol just being honest and truthfull here what history and all shows