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.
It is indeed, them fellers that bear most of the blame for kicking off a shooting war instead of hashing out the diffences in the forums provided in the Constitution.
I'll have to admit, though, that were I in their position, I might have had the same attitude, if not reacted in the same way. I'm inclined to watch the status quo changed through some natural progression of events. I would not be inclined to go immediately to a nationalized health care situation, for example,without trying a few interim steps or at least trying to fix the way things are. It would seem, however, that the slaveocracy is not interested in progress in any form -- they wanted the clock to stop where it was so they could continue to enjoy the good life in the manner to which they had become accustomed. A selfish attitude for which an entire region suffered and, in the opinion of a few, still suffer.
Just a thought.
Ole
My old friend (only small pun intended) Ole and his yankee buddies can't ever seem to remember that only a very SMALL percentage of southerns owned slaves or gave a hoot in hades for those who did. You keep harping on a minority faction of the populace. Please move on.
__________________
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
I agree Ole, I suspect that if I had be born in the south at that time, I would have been of the 'fire eater' variety of southerner. But I like the think that I would have been proudly calling for a rebellion as guaranteed to me by the Declaration of Independence.
We are .... the 98% fighting over 2% of the wealth.
Please don't count me in that 98 percent --I'd like nothing more than being in the 2 percent, and I suspect you would, as well. I was dealt a decent hand and didn't play it as it might have been played. That's hindsight. But my playing my hand poorly doesn't diminish my respect for the many who did.
I'd very much like to see the ratio as more like 25/75 percent, but history tends to sharply divide the categories and the cream always rises to the top -- as does scum. It is for the scum that we have representative government. Or is it because of it?
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
The government's right to coerce its citizenry. The government's right to tell the People, what we may and what we may NOT do.
My ancestors did as much for the founding of this Republic as ANY of your'n and more than most.
MY Founding Fathers set up a limited form of national government with tight restrictions and plenty of checks and balances becasue they knew first hand the hazards of a strong national government. The Constitution doesn't grant US rights, it limits our national government's rights. EVERYTHING ELSE to the States and the PEOPLE.
When Lincoln's minions saw fit to violate the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, Lincoln became a Tyrant and it was their/our Duty to Resist. Duty to Rebel. DUTY to Seccede!
When Fremont sent them Radical Black Republicans from Illinois and Iowa to INVADE Missouri .....
When Lane sent them Jayhawker killers to INVADE Missouri .....
It was their/our Duty to Resist. Duty to Rebel. DUTY to Seccede!
I don't expect any of you all to understand that either.
What I do understand is what actually happened. Seven states seceded on Lincoln's election, BEFORE he took office, and they stated that they did so because they perceived a threat to the institution of slavery. After the firing on Fort Sumter, when it was clear a war had started, four other states seceded in order to fight on the side of slavery.
The idea of Lincoln becoming a tyrant as justifying secession is nothing more than baloney.
Missouri remained a part of the Union, by the way.
My old friend (only small pun intended) Ole and his yankee buddies can't ever seem to remember that only a very SMALL percentage of southerns owned slaves or gave a hoot in hades for those who did. You keep harping on a minority faction of the populace. Please move on.
A third of the families in the seceded states owned slaves. That's not "very small." In places like Mississippi it was fully 50% of the families who owned slaves.
Johnny Reb knew full well he was fighting to keep slavery, and he was glad to do that fighting to keep slavery. During the confederate debate on arming blacks at the end of the war, Private Grant Taylor of the 40th Alabama wrote, "To think we have been fighting four years to prevent the slaves from being freed, now to turn round and enlist them is outrageous." [Pvt Grant Taylor, 40th Alabama, to his wife, 11 Jan 1865]
My old friend (only small pun intended) Ole and his yankee buddies can't ever seem to remember that only a very SMALL percentage of southerns owned slaves or gave a hoot in hades for those who did. You keep harping on a minority faction of the populace. Please move on.
Move on to what, Larry? That minority faction held all the political power in the south. I'll agree that your average non-slaveowning southerner could give a rat's patoot about the cares and concerns of the slaveowner. But that non-slaveowning southerner made up the majority of the CS armies.
You seem to be hung up on the idea that your ancestors -- none of which ever owned a slave -- could not possibly have fought for slavery. I'll submit that it doesn't matter all that much, except to you. Recent scholarship is showing that slavery or the subjugation of a race was a greater motivation for Johnny than many would like to believe. But I'll admit that it wasn't all of them, so you can take personal comfort that your antecedents weren't among the majority -- they were responding to invasion.
Does this mean that we can't get together at your choice of restaurants south of Nashville that serve beer and have a chat? My treat. On the 14th?
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
I think it had a whole lot to do with their dad's and their grand dad's having fought a War of Rebellion themselves.
Naaah, John. That made nice copy, but it gave them nothing more than a claim on posterity. Come to think of it, a great many minor players had ancestors in the rebellion. The Rebs were not fighting for principles established by their antecedents. Most of them were unaware of those principles. They were fighting for what they were told they were fighting for .... including the lofty principle of the Declaration of Independence. (Ignoring, of course, the idea that all men are created equal.)
The entire idea of returning to the original intent of the original principles of the original idea of the Declaration of Independence was just so much postwar smoke.
But I remain, respectfully,
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
Move on to what, Larry? That minority faction held all the political power in the south. I'll agree that your average non-slaveowning southerner could give a rat's patoot about the cares and concerns of the slaveowner.
No argument here that a minority group coincidentally slave owners held the majority of political power in the south during the period prior to the war. Big deal. (ducking here for an impending bombardment) I still contend the majority of the population, that's a numerical thing, weren't involved in the slave industry one way or the other, aside from the fact that it existed in our territory just as in the north. That obviously didn't make it moral, no argument there.
But that non-slaveowning southerner made up the majority of the CS armies.
Doesn't that agree with my contention that the majority wasn't hung up on slavery?
You seem to be hung up on the idea that your ancestors -- none of which ever owned a slave -- could not possibly have fought for slavery.
Hold a sec here, please. Going back in my own family lines to seventh great grandparents there were folks in Grayson County, Virginia and Wilkes County, North Carolina who were slaveowners in small numbers. We (they) weren't rich. (Don't appear that's in any danger of changing.) Prior to that several more. The civil war started with respect to me with great great grandparents (I'm getting older by the minute.) By then most of the area near the aforementioned counties was getting scarce on slaves. Same was true of black folks in general, mostly due to the weather and a lack of jobs.
I'll submit that it doesn't matter all that much, except to you. Recent scholarship is showing that slavery or the subjugation of a race was a greater motivation for Johnny than many would like to believe.
I'm one of those who would like to be counted in the not believing category as it relates to the majority of Confederate soldiers, not the politicans or large plantation owners who were a different story. I don't even defend N.B. and the brothers Forrest on that account.
But I'll admit that it wasn't all of them, so you can take personal comfort that your antecedents weren't among the majority -- they were responding to invasion.
I do. Three of my guys decided to uphold the notion that the Union was worth preserving, not a completely dishonorable position in my opinion. As for invasion, that happened to a number of unfortunate families. Even N.B. Forrest's men stole a hog or two. The war was not a pleasant interlude in American history.
Does this mean that we can't get together at your choice of restaurants south of Nashville that serve beer and have a chat? My treat. On the 14th?
Nope, I'm not ashamed to be seen in public with a gentleman of your slightly warped perspective. You said something about comparing guts and hair quantity. That would be interesting. Are we talking May 14? How far south of Nashville? I'm game.
__________________
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
June 14th. I'll be at Spring Hill. Anywhere between that and south of Nashville that serves beer is your call. Don't gimme Pizza Hut. Make it early, I'm not fond of driving in the dark.
I'll rely on your local knowledge of who puts up a good feed for the buck. I am fond of a good piece of beef. That might be available in your piece of Tennessee?
By the way, I've been working on the gut. Not much I can do about the amount of hair except to say that its scarcity can perhaps be overcome by its location and length. I'm working on my Ruffin persona. Following that is my summer buzz-cut and clean chin.
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
