Slavery, would it have died out in the US without the war?

[unionblue]

Tommy,

That's one view, but it doesn't make her words any less true in the 1830's or the 1860's.

Slavery was a National sin, not just a local one in the South. Attitudes in the North contributed to the problem. Those that ignored it since it did not touch their everyday lives and those that could not stand the idea of Free Negroes in their own States to threaten their own jobs and standards of living.

But again, attitudes in the North had very little to do with the South giving up the institution voluntarily. If anything, attitudes hardened in the South over the idea. That you do not want to give up, well, you get the idea.

Sort of what you are saying about slavery today and the indifference of people and governments in the world. Like you say, hard to figure...

You are up late tonight. Can't sleep? Or are you dealing with another bought of pain or doctor's stupidity?

Take care,
Unionblue

Yeah, I agree it was a National problem. Which is really why you see the word hpocracy a lot when debating the issue. Not that the south was blameless in the hypocracy arena. I think though that the Sewards etc used people like Garrison, Garrit etc for political reasons, which is never good for the citizenry. While the ones like Garrison were so out of touch with reality. That all they could do was harm. All Garrison and Garrit et al did was further sectionalise the nation, at which point politicians took advantage.

As to Child, she was the rarity in the north. Her own "people" were offended. Which leads me to believe a lot of so called abolitionist were not what they pretended to be.

One thing I remember reading about when I was doing research on wage slaves was that parts of the Underground Railroad were used to import runaway slaves to work. They'd be paid nothing, treated horribly etc, all with the full knowledge that they could not complain. Much like the Illegal immigrants today.

I am up waiting on my meds to kick in. I have to take fairly high doses and if I take them all at once I tend get violently ill. So I take one every half hour or so.

As to Doctor's stupidity, I swear sometimes I look around and I don't think health care has come all that far after all.

2000 B.C. - Here, eat this root.
1000 A.D. - That root is heathen. Here, say this prayer.
1850 A.D. - That prayer is superstition. Here, drink this potion.
1940 A.D. - That potion is snake oil. Here, swallow this pill.
1985 A.D. - That pill is ineffective. Here, take this antibiotic.
2000 A.D. - That antibiotic is artificial. Here, eat this root.

[unionblue]

Tommy,

I am a bit puzzled over Garrison causing harm. He advocated no government involvement to overthrow slavery, was generally considered a crack pot and please show me the resources on where the Underground Railroad was used to enslave runaway slaves.

And if Seward used Garrison for any political objective with the latter's knowledge, I'll buy swamp land from you in any State you name.

I very much like the 'medicene chant' you created. Very funny and I am afraid, very true.

And I thought my medication schedule was a pain in the butt. What the heck are you taking that requires half hour intervals? Raw opium?

Take care of yourself, my dear and much debated friend. I want to argue with you for a long, long time.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

Neil,
I'm taking Vicoprofen, Neurontin, Cipro, Flomax and Potassium right now. I also have to use Voltaren Opthalmic drops in my eye for occular erosion....Boy I hop around the room when I put them in. Whoooo eeee talk about burn. I make more noise than a crippled goat in a gully.

Before you go looking Neurontin up to find out what it it, no, I'm not epileptic. lol. While it was designed to treat seizures it has become a widely used med to treat chronic neuropathic pain. But 3600 MG a day sure leaves me in loopy land.

Your asking me for info on Underground Railroad is not unexpected. lol...yes...I KNEW when I wrote it I was going have to try to remember where I read it. Right now all I can remember is it was in Conneticutt or Mass. I think the slaves that ran away the second time ended up in the slums of New York rather than Canada. But putting in various words in the search engine brought up nothing. No...actually it brought up too much. Like finding needle in a haystack. Gimmee a while to find it. Ok I just had a thought and looked some more....My God there are a lot of sites regarding the Underground Railrod. I show 360,000 on my yahoo search engine. That is more sites about it than there were slaves that used it isn't it?

YMOS
tommy

[unionblue]

Tommy,

I'm surprised you remember any dam thing with THAT much drugs pounding through your body! Must be something close to a chemical river!

I myself am scared to death to have anything effect my vision. If I couldn't read, both books & computer screen, I would be in a real pit of dispare.

Yeah, search engines are great, and the flip side of that, a real curse when you are looking for a very specific item or report. Too much information or not being smart enough to out smart the search engine is the problem for me. I usually can't keep the search simple enough to make it work or arrange the phrase to make it happen for me.

But, happy hunting, and try and get some rest and I will think good thoughts for your health. (Remember, as a good friend has told me, DEEEP breaths.)

Take care,
Unionblue

[johan_steele]

Aphillbilly... I am speechless... Quite a feat I might add.

1st the Franks were NOT Gauls... they were descendents of the Romans and closer in history to the French than to the Gauls. From that factor alone I'm tempted to completely discount your reasoning. That kind of blatant mistake would get a person an F in any history class I ever attended. Incidently, Clovis was 7-8th Century IIRC... Slavery was well and prospering in France well into the 16th Century. You mention China abolishing Slavery in 1886... umm perhaps you might think about some research into Mao's various economic experiments. My point was that it took the violent overthrow of those nations to eliminate slavery.

2nd comparing soldiers to slaves... That is actually quite offensive to me and any veteran I know. I had to take some time to cool down before I responed to that.

As to Conscription being equated to slavery.... Again, NO. Slaves weren't typically paid a set salary. Though I suppose you could make the argument that CSA conscripts were akin to Slaves as many were NEVER paid by the govt that conscripted them and many were Unionists and against the CSA in general.

Prisons equating to Slave labor... ok maybe... then again it seems like your reaching. What does this have to do w/ if the CW had not happened would slavery in the US ceased to exist? Consideriing the cost of feeding & housing prisoners... most of those work is going to pay for their food & found. Incidently where were most of the chaingangs and really harsh prisons? I think you'll find them south of the Mason Dixon. Frankly when it comes to criminal... I'm all for a tall tree & a short rope... but that isn't exactly politic.

Wage slaves... perhaps you had best do some research on the conditions in which field hands lived in the 1830's-1860's... concentrate on the Carolinas & Georgia. Minimum Wage a slave does NOT make.

As to the blame for the CW being cast on the North and the North being painted as the bad guy... I've grown used to it but comparing slaves to soldiers in the same breath... Frankly, I'm stunned past words... I'd strongly suggest you not make that comment in the presence of a Veteran or Active Duty soldier.

Shane,

Glad you cooled off. I never said that once slavery was abolished and then later the country changed hands slavery did not reappear in some form. So the fact China abolished slavery in 1886 remains just that. A FACT. Regardless what you think Mau did later. And it was without violent overthrow. Nor with the franks.

As to "discounting my reasoning," well, I never seen you do anything else so I'm not shocked or dismayed. And as to you grading me...well you are not my teacher. Nor in such a position of power over me to the point your grades matter to me. I do find it interesting you presume such a position "over" me though. Nice allusion of superiority on your part though.

But that said I submit, first, the word Frank means Free.
Also...
"Clovis inherited his father's kingdom in 481, at which time he unified the Salian and Ripurian Franks. In 486 he defeated the Roman general Syagrius who ruled northern Gaul out of Soissons. By 493 he married the Burgundian princess Clotilda. In 496, after defeating the Alamanni, he was baptized, thus becoming the first Christian ruler of post-Roman Gaul. By 506 the Alamanni were subdued, and the next year Clovis finished his expansion by taking Aquitaine from the weak Visigothic king Alaric II. On Clovis' death in 511, the kingdom was split between Chlodomer (Orleans), Childebert (Paris), Chlotar (Soissons), and Theuderic (Metz).

Granted Clovis II was born a hundred years later but the area was still considered Gaul. Anything else is just semantics.

As to wage slaves. I have done that research. Many times. And in depth. I can promise you this. You will never find evidence to contridict fact that more wage slave's children literally starved to death than field hand's did. More wage slaves died on the job, more children maimed in factories. More died of disease from horrid living conditions. All during the same period. As well as long after the war. Yet still, they were free. Because they got paid "money." Money validates anything. So there is no valid comparison. Ooooooo k.

As to conscription not being slavery cause they were paid money. Interesting capitalist view of slavery. To me slavery is about freedom not money.


If I am reaching with prisons and slavery, so are a lot of other people higher up the education ladder than I.

As to equating military with slavery. Just FYI, it just so happens I first got the idea from a soldier. A 23 year veteran. As to your suggestion not to make such a comment around an active duty soldier....it is interesting idea that we are supposed to honor soldiers who are there to supposedly defend our liberty but I should not have free speech?? I should have fear in me if I do. Interesting notion. I should be afraid to speak my mind. Hmmmmmmmm I thank you for your suggestion. You are probably right. And that is sad.

Yet I see it is such an idea impossible to grasp and apparently too upsetting emotionally. Beyond what can be handled emotionally. So for respect of ya'll's sensibilities I shan't mention or comment upon it again.


YMOS
tommy



(Message edited by aphillbilly on September 11, 2003)

(Message edited by aphillbilly on September 11, 2003)

[johan_steele]

In refrence to your sig line... good quote though I've always prefered "There are three kinds of lies: Lies, **** lies and statistics." Mark Twain


I had to reread one of your posts, you are correct. I misread the statement about the abolition of slavery. You are right, several nations abolished slavery, only to be made slaves when they were conquered.

Money does not validate everything or anything for that matter... as to the death rates of Wage Slaves vs field slaves... you might think about checking the average life expectancy of a black man in the US circa 1860. I won't refute them though as I have no documentation handy. So in other words you are proposing that Slavery persisited after the Civil War in the US? We just paid the slaves? Those textile mills wouldn't happened to have been... never mind. You are right in a sense I suppose, you could equate the mills & mines w/ slavery. But you know what, a mill worker or a miner could walk off the mill and not worry about being hunted down w/ dogs or being whipped... Or having his family sold down the river. Most of the wage slaves were allowed to learn to read... in fact, IIRC, most mills had a company school. A healhty or nice place to work? Helllll no! I'll take a farm in rural Iowa or Wisconsin any day.

I've grown used to your attitudes and opinions and generally respect them. I've always felt it is important to see various views and fully realize that the victor writes the history. Though I don't hold with the Lost Cause view you hold so dear, I think I can understand it... Let me clarify my position toward the Lost Cause. I respect the Confederate soldier as a fighting man... they fought well and lost. The same can be said for the Waffen SS. I respect them as fighting men, but not their politics or motivations.

As to my superiority over you... I don't think so. I frankly think I'm superior to noone. I try to judge every man by his times and not by the color of his skin, his nationality or the creed of his religion. It's a habit that has left me in good stead so far. I don't know you, though from your opinion of Soldiers and the career of Soldiering... I doubt we would get along. I know some soldiers are not proud of their service... but if after 23 years your friend still wasn't proud of what he was doing... he should have left for another calling.

I have served my time, 7 years actually. I've known many many soldiers, from several other nations as well as the US for that matter, both before and after my enlistment. By and far the majority are proud of their service to their country and I can't say as I've ever met a soldier or ex soldier who would agree w/ your 23 year veteran on a soldier being the same as a slave. And I think if you would have suggested such a thing to any soldier, North or South, in 1863 you would have had a very... interesting conversation.

For the duration of my military career I defended democracy, I didn't practice it. I also helped to guaranteed your Free Speech... However, neither the Bill of Rights nor the Constitution guarantee both Free Speech and an ignore the consequences attitude. I suppose you could hoist a Nazi Flag or burn an American one in front of your nearest Legion Hall as a representation of Free Speech... though I wager there would be some consequences.

Frankly I'm not certain what is sadder that you think you should be afraid to speak your mind or the thought that you might believe you can say whatever you want with no consequences.

As it is I bid you good day.

Shane,

Yep, Mark Twain was a splendid philosopher.

Lets see if I can answer your stuff in some order. If it isn't please forgive me.

Yes, I am proposing slavery existed after the war. Today is after the war I believe. 50,000 slaves a year are smuggled into this country. That is a Dept of Labor statistic....wonder how twain would feel? thing is these numbers are people. People completely ignored today. Even by those who lambast the south of 140 years ago. At least it was the zeitgeist in 1800's. What excuse now I wonder?


As to wage slaves, mill workers, miners etc being able to leave the job. I suggest you look into company towns. You did not leave them. You have to escape. Or go to jail. Then there was bonded labor (often hand in hand with company towns, the first debt as it were to hook you, most hooked could not read and few could even speak english)
As for mills. More than one mill locked it’s doors to keep the children from running away. One went so far as to take their shoes and scattered broken glass around his sweatshop. And for mills having schools.....there were far more used children til they were crippled unto death.

As to being whipped, well, they were imprisoned, executed and murdered often enough.
Federal troops killed and wounded 130 in Chicago 1877
The Bayview Massacre, 8 dead, including a baby, shot by state militia, 1886
35 black workers shot in Louisiana by Militia, 1887
Federal troops kill 34 Railway Workers 1894
Lattimer Pa. 55 killed and wounded 1897
New York City, 147 people, mostly women and children, burn to death in locked sweatshop.
Ludlow Massacre, 5 men, two women and 12 children shot and burned alive.
This list pales in the actual number of people killed, imprisoned, deported illegally etc.
.

Do I say wage slave was Worse? Equal? Better? No....I didn’t. I am pointing out there isn’t a lot of difference. And what difference there is is one thing, but to constantly ignore the simalarities is another.

Ah yes...the inevitable comparison of the Confederate soldier to the Nazi. Never fails. Rebs and the SS.
First off, Unlike some, I have absolutely zero respect for the Waffen SS. Or any SS. None. If I was one who admired Sherman, then perhaps I could. But I can’t.....
I do however have great respect for the Wehrmacht, Volksgrenidiers, Volkstrum, Luftwaffe (both air units and ground combat units, although my mother was shot at by a Luftwaffe fighter) Parachute Divisons, Panzergrenidiers, and Panzers...all those plus medical corps, I respect...even admire....but the SS has garnered no respect from me. But like I said, if I admired Sherman, perhaps my respect for the SS would rise. But I don't and I can't. It just ain't in me.


As to his being not being proud of his 23 years service in the military and should have left etc.... Thank you for telling me what he should have done. I appreciate it. Yet I never said he was not proud. After 3 wars, two wounds, countless travels and never ending PTSD he never once wavered from the belief he was doing an invaluable service. (if he were still alive, you could have asked him about the difference between Wehrmacht and SS as many in his battalion were shot down less than 10 miles from Malmady by the same SS that did that later)He was very and justifiably proud. I never said he was not proud. I said he said the military was akin to slavery.. (Especially when drafted) He was the one pointed out the similarities. And they are undeniable in their existence.

As to your sadness for me personally, no need. I am always prepared to accept consequences. (not just mine but any) I may not like them, they may sadden me, appall me, sicken me, scare me or whatever but I am prepared to accept them as consequences.

Yet, as I also said. The topic obviously unduly upsets ya'll so I will not mention it again. (hint hint) In fact I see no good could come of it and I regret even mentioning it since it was not my point to upset anyone. (I accept misunderstanding as consequences as well) Just an exchange of thoughts and ideas. For any undue aggravation it may have caused you, you have my sincere apology.


YMOS
tommy

I'd consider it a favor if you could over look typos etc.

[unionblue]

Friends,

To bring the issue a bit more back on track, that is, would slavery had died out if there had not been a Civil War, I think one has to look at one angle in particular. Money.

In other words, was slavery profitable? Did it make money? A LOT of money? And since most I have crossed swords with in debate have argued the idea that money had a lot to do with the war and slavery less, how about examining the main issue from this angle? Was slavery a profitable institution in the South prior to 1861?

Now I have heard it said that the panic of 1857 really effected the North, and did so right up until the war. I have also heard it said that the South was relatively unaffected by this financial depression. Why?

Well, Senator Toombs of Georgia said because the South had a superior system of labor and income, slavery and cotton, or did I read that wrong?

Checking out some sites on the sale of and prices of slaves, a good going price during the year before the war was $1,200 to $1,500 for a prime field hand. And the price for slaves was going up, not down. Does that not indicate a boom market? Or that things were going so well in the plantation system that more slaves were needed to have even more increased profits? There was even talk of re-opening the African slave trade, in spite of the fact slave sellers in the Upper South were against the idea, as it would lower the prices of the slaves they were trying to sell.

Curious to hear your views,
Unionblue