I saw a bumper sticker in Tenn. that read...Don't blame me, I voted for Jeff Davis!!

LOL

Author: RICKAMAVEN Date: 01/13/2005 05:34 PM Reply

EI and USAHOG

slavery was a peripheral issue, state's rights was part of the reason they seceded.

when lincoln submitted the emancipation proclamation it was a bit of propoganda.

Partly true. Lincoln actually freed the slaves in order to gain support for a war that most northerner were becoming weary of and were ready to call it quits. It was a way to rally the north on a common cause.

Most people in the north wanted to end the war and allow the south to become a separate nation.

Lincoln had previously stated that if he could find a way to end the war with the south he would not be opposed to the south keeping their slaves

As for the tax situation. The south thought they were getting a raw deal.

Most of the industry and railroads were in the north and the south was considered just a source of raw materials for the industrial machine in the north.

Even though the south payed as much if not more in taxes they got less of a return on their money

The whole argument that the civil war wasn't about slavery but was about economics or this or that is about as preposterous and racist as the logic that the holocost of WWII is overblown. Both events are well studied f

OOps, hit the wrong button. To continue... the arguments that the civil war wasn't about slavery or the holocost never happened are fantastical rationlizations by inexplicable racist fanatics. Of course the civil war was about economics and taxes, that's the whole point of enslaving people into forced labor to profit off of one of the most lucrative textiles of that time, king cotton! It doesn't take a PhD in history to locate the link with slavery to the American civil war or the link with Jewish genocide to Hitler's expectations of empire. The trouble folks go to to try and deny those two obvious facts of history is almost as remarkable and repugnant the historical facts themselves. Spin never rests.

It doesn't take a PHD to also know there was no comparison to the Holocaust in Nazi Germany during WWII to the Civil War and Slavery... the war in WWII was not fought for the facts of the Holocaust victims...It wasn't known what Hitler and Nazi Germany were doing until later in the War thus the same can be argued with the Civil War.. although Slavery was an issue before the war started... Slavery did not become an issue during the war until later as EI points out and the History books and History that is left un corrupted with the PC world points out!!!!! grab a 1950's history book or Encyclopidia and look it up!!!!

Hog

Additionally, it shouldn't go without mention that the state's rights argument was also about, you guessed it, slavery. Secession states vehemently argued for state's rights to justify and maintain slavery. Slavery was a big issue not only to the southern states whose economy (slavery and economics was near synonymous in the context of many southern states) was based upon the free labor of African Americans, but also to the federal government in the north who experienced pressure from Europe, (Canada and South America then were represented by France and Spain), to end this abominable practice. Slavery wasn't the sole issue, but it was too large and pervasive a factor to be dismissed as peripheral.

Hog, you're full of guacamole. Hitler clearly outlined in Mein Kampf his intentions for the Jews and other undesirables. And in fact, many Americans and other white Europeans saw nothing radical with Hitler's stated intentions, as the combination of white supremacy and the then new sciences of genetics and statistics were accepted as justifications for ethnic cleansing. More than a few founding fathers of Harvard university, including science professor Loius Agassiz, and Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, saw nothing outrageous about keeping "dumb" genes in check; only at that time we Americans limited ourselves to incarceration or sterilization methods, rather than outright extermination.

" Slavery wasn't the sole issue, but it was too large and pervasive a factor to be dismissed as peripheral."

you said it yourself... in your last post

Slavery wasn't the sole issue... it also was not the main issue as the PC world would want it to be today and forget any and all of the main issue's that brought Americans against Americans.....

btw that BS racest card your trying to pull out of your A$$ isn't going to work... it's been tried way to many times on this forum... when the thread isn't going the way you want it to... some other tactics are tossed on the floor mat... throw enough **** on the wall something's bound to stick!!!!

Hog

"Hog, you're full of guacamole. Hitler clearly outlined in Mein Kampf his intentions for the Jews and other undesirables. And in fact, many Americans and other white Europeans saw nothing radical with Hitler's stated intentions, as the combination of white supremacy and the then new sciences of genetics and statistics were accepted as justifications for ethnic cleansing. More than a few founding fathers of Harvard university, including science professor Loius Agassiz, and Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, saw nothing outrageous about keeping "dumb" genes in check; only at that time we Americans limited ourselves to incarceration or sterilization methods, rather than outright extermination."

Again whole different Issue, whole different thread, whole different Era....

Hog

Hog, once your cortex gets used to having blood supply from use you'll find that many historical and political issues are related and share common threads of meaning that synchronously connect across diachronic time. It'll be like the scales falling away from your eyes. The original thread was about state's rights to seceed. States seceeded because of economic conflicts based on racial grounds, namely the politics of slavery. The moral and scientific justifications used during those times gave rise to the climate and thinking paralleled in America as related to their obliquely concomitant manifestation in WWII and recently in Bosnia, among other places. The same connections can be seen in the Pacific with other English colonizations; in the slavery and genocide of Tasmania for example: the list goes on. Slavery and the culture of racial superiority still had a profound influence in America up untill the Civil rights act (or, the liberal entitlement act as Limbaugh would probably call it) of 1964, and persist even today. Surely you're not so daft as to not see the connection? You think the crusades of the 13th century or WWII have no relation to European-America's actions of today in Iraq? This country didn't pop up in some parallel universe, it emerged from English culture, German culture (the refugees from the peasant wars of Germany in the 19th century), and many other still active etiological influences. Slavery and genocide didn't begin or end in America, but certainly played a major role in the history of our culture as well as the world at large, and still do. Look at the big picture, don't take easy refuge in the safe compartmentalization of a 'thread.' You have a very simplistic view of this issue as having arose de novo without precedent or consequence.

So is the welfare system of today the new slavery?

It was instituted by southern democrats argueably in order to keep the lower class (mostly blacks) under the power and control of a master (the government)

It does affect and include lower class whites the same as slavery did in the south.

Low class whites were not able to get paying jobs on plantations because of slavery

Did this make them worst off than the slaves?

Also who had it worst during the time of slavery?

Blacks in the south or the Irish in the north.

Both were treated as sub human and not worthy to be considered equal to "white people"

note that these questions are posed only for debate and upon facts of what transpired at the time and do not indicate a racist idealogy

To just discount such questions as racist, only obfuscates the issue and show a lack of thought and inablity to debate on the part the person throwing the race card.

"you'll find that many historical and political issues are related and share common threads of meaning that synchronously connect across diachronic time."

CP, I totally understand this above... that was not the issue or intention of this thread... you have a fasinating way of taking one or two issue's and mixing them into a Huge pot for brewing...

you talk about all these other country's who are still using slavery today as though we're going to change this? or even genocide's going on in these country's relating it also to slavery... OK... we have changed many... but I want your input on how were going to change them all??

How is these United States going to stand up to the whole world and tell them to knock the **** off??? are we not already making a difference with this?? IE: Iraq

Afghanistan have pretty much been a major start... and even Bosnia, but that is just a small start for the OLD USSR area... and from what I hear it's starting all over again in that area...

America is still learning from the mistakes made in History and using these learnings to assist other country's with simular situations...

But if we take the History as it was and twist it to become Politically Correct for this day and age... we are going to be right back in the same swamp we started from!!!!

Hog