Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
Thanks for clearing up the total number of slaveholders from your previous post. Makes a lot more sense to me now.
I'll get back to you on the percentages and see if we have any big disagreements there.
Sincerely,
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
"do you maintain that they expressed it before they were assaulted by the secessionists in April 1861"
Before or after - does it matter?
Yes, I would say a normal reaction to having your nation being attacked was to be angry about it. Therefore, I would think it makes a major difference.
Now, once againdo you maintain that they expressed it before they were assaulted by the secessionists in April 1861? Please answer with a simple yes or no instead of the constant evasions you like to use.
Also, I repeat the other request you have avoided responding to in the same message: "That sounds like you have a hard and fast number to share with us. We know it was not President Lincoln, so please be kind enough to tell us what percentage of the elected Congress expressed this view in 1861-65, and/or what percentage of his appointed Cabinet did." Do you have numbers to show what you are referring to? Please answer yes or no, and then (if you do have them) please post them so the people on the board can see them.
If your interested, I found another very interesting percentage in this source..."75% of the white population had no slaves..." he states that "the South was unique in that the majority had no direct economic connection with nonwhite servitude..."
Thats from George M. Fredrickson's Comparative Study of American and South African History (1981).
The majority will have to defend themselves. The rest of us contend that if we didn't fight for slavery consciously, we didn't fight for it at all.
Not only did the majority consciously fight for slavery, but because the objective of the confederacy was the preservation of slavery, those who didn't consciously fight for slavery in fact did fight for slavery, whether they realized it or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by larry_cockerham
The southern soldier aimed to protect his family by killing the invading army.
The invading army wouldn't have been there in the first place if they hadn't seceded in order to protect slavery, and besides, the invading army wasn't after civilians. The major threat to their families, in their eyes, was freedom for the slaves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by larry_cockerham
Slavery was not an issue with many of the Southern soldiers. Can't seem to get some of you to understand that. Guess we don't like being pushed into the barrel with the rest of the crackers.
We can't understand it because it's not true. Slavery was an issue for the vast majority of the confederate soldiers. It may have not been an issue for a few soldiers, but the evidence we have indicates even those few soldiers agreed that slavery should be maintained, even if it wasn't an issue for them.
And I'm equally certain that many of them had other primary reasons for being in the CS Army, conscription, adventure, camaraderie, etc.
I'm glad you used "many" it can mean almost anything except "most" or "all." More than a few, less than most -- sounds about right. In spite of evidence that claims "most" fought with the preservation of slavery foremost in their minds, "many" did not.
Sounds like a reasonable point to settle on.
Ole
Settle. I like that word. My many CS soldiers need a rest.
__________________ Ancestors in US Army: 13th TN Cav; 10th TN Cav; 3rd NC Inf
Ancestors in CSA Army: 48th VA; 63rd VA, 5th NC Cav; 37th NC
Wife and Grandson's CSA: 15th AL, 51st GA, 41st TN; 36th TN; GA Mil 1197 Dist
That's hogwash Cash. You're blind as a bat and unwilling/unable to see the truth.
Nope. Unlike you I understand the reality of what slavery was. You've embedded yourself in the lost cause mythology of slavery not being so bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozark Iron John
They were compensated for their labor. Massar gave 'em room, board, clothing, education, training, healthcare, and substantial retirement. Alls day had tadoo wuz pick dat cotton.
I suppose you think beatings and whippings were part of the fringe benefits, eh? Rape of slave women was a perk in your opinion?
One thing I lose patience very quickly with is the ignorant defense of slavery I see so often. It sickens me.
Room and board? Bull! The slaves built their own shacks and grew their own food--after they took care of Massa's and Massa's family's needs.
Clothing? Bull! They got the cheapest that could be gotten.
Education? You lie. It was AGAINST THE LAW to educate slaves, because an educated slave was dangerous to the white supremacist power structure.
Health care? Bull! You don't know what you're talking about. The "health care" slaves got was just enough to get them back into the fields. There's a reason why the slaves' life expectancy was so much lower than whites'.
Substantial retirement? You are truly ignorant of the reality of slavery. Very few slaves lived to "enjoy" this so-called "retirement." And they still had to work for Massa during this so-called "retirement." Just not in the fields.
"Slavery was about domination, and of necessity it rested on coercion. The murders, beatings, mutilations, and humiliations, both petty and great, were an essential, not incidental, part of the system. To be sure, one could dwell upon the wild, maniacal sadism of some frenzied slave owners who lashed, traumatized, raped, and killed their slaves; the record of such lurid tales is full. But perhaps it would be more instructive to underscore the cool, deliberate actions of, say, Robert 'King' Carter, the largest slaveholder in colonial Virginia, who petitioned and received permission from the local court to lop the toes off his runaways; or William Byrd, the founder of one of America's great families, who forced an incontinent slave boy to drink a 'pint of pi$$'; or Thomas Jefferson, who calmly reasoned that the greatest punishment he could inflict upon an incorrigible fugitive was to sell him away from his kin. Without question, the history of slavery is the story of victimization, brutalization, and exclusion; it is the story of the power of liberty, of a people victimized and brutalized." [Ira Berlin, "Coming to Terms With Slavery in Twenty-First Century America," in James O. Horton and Lois E. Horton, eds., _Slavery and Public History: The Tough Stuff of American Memory,_ p. 6]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozark Iron John
Some of 'em had it pretty good compared to the poor whites you claim "supported the slave system". Some of 'em had it better.
That's a crock of bull-oney.
If the slaves had it so good, why didn't the poor whites offer themselves up to be slaves themselves?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozark Iron John
Compared to them that ended up in places like French Guyana and/or Brazil, they had it dang good and I don't remember NONE of 'em wantin' to go back to Africa.
If you had ever read any real history you might have come across something called "Liberia."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozark Iron John
I ain't saying slavery was a good thing sir. It was bad, all the way around. But them was tough times, all the way around. You all that want to harp on how evil Johnny Reb was cause he enslaved the black man need to find another tune to sing. I ain't dancin' to it no more.
Those who actually know their history will disagree with you. Those who don't know their history will no doubt agree with you.
"In view of the vast increase of the forces of the enemy, of the savage and brutal policy he has proclaimed, which leave us no alternative but success or degradation worse than death, if we would save the honor of our families from pollution, our social system from destruction, let every effort be made, every means be employed, to fill and maintain the ranks of our armies, until God, in his mercy, shall bless us with the establishment of our independence."
[Robert E. Lee, commenting on the Emancipation Proclamation in a letter to Secretary of War James Seddon, 10 Jan 1863]
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
oops! 
Linear Mode
