More Black Confederates...

[OpnDownfall]

As noted in other posts and threads and boards, Blacks fighting for the Confederacy, is one of the fig leafs, southrons have 'discovered' (After, they lost the war) to reinforce their 'Lost Cause' myth.
It is one of the minor supports used in southern hagiographer's efforts to discount (if not completely eliminate, altogether) slavery as the major (if not, the only) cause for the CW.

[larry_cockerham]

Originally Posted by Dred

I saw this post yesterday but wasn't sure of its purpose, since it wsa just a bunch of names and such. Now that others have commented first I might understand what Batallion was getting at. Neo Confederates are always trying to put forth that since slaves and blacks did serve for the confederacy the war couldn't possibly have been fought over the slavery question... "Look how this black man loved us and fought for us!" Well.. maybe HE did.. but maybe he wasn't working day in day out in a cotton field in 100 degree weather harvesting a crop that he will never get any returns on.

The other popular tactic I have seen is showing that since the north had slaves also, that they weren't entirely pure and just as culpable as the southerners for keeping slaves. The north had slaves for a time, true. But they owned up to it. You don't see them hiding behind a couple black guys that were free at the time. Maybe the south just needs to man up to it instead of trying to justify what was done by hiding behind testimonies of a VERY small percentage of southern blacks of the time. There were 3.9 million slaves at the outbreak of the war. You gave testimonies from about 10.... now lets hear from the other 3, 999, 990.

This was more an act of desperation than any feelings of equality between the southerners and the blacks. They needed an army and they needed it fast. Obviously even this last act of desperation wasn't enough to save the glorious south in the end.

There must be some logic in this message somewhere, but I find it difficult to uncover. What, pray tell, is a NEO Confederate? There is no such thing as a Confederate, only a few thousand of us Southerners trying to preserve the memory of a few hundred thousand Confederates who are long gone, but not forgotten completely. Slaves really didn't serve anyone except their owners (in a sense), themselves and their God. Slavery was a factor in the war. Even Neil will agree to that. (--) Very few slaves left the cotton fields to serve either side unless they were awol. In the South, that meant death or worse on capture, so lots of men obviously went north. I can't think of an instance when any Southerner has ever denied there were slaves in the southern states. Seems to me, they were rather obvious. Certainly none of us hayseeds have hid behind anyone in our general dislike for an invading army, even if it was our own army, composed of kin and neighbors. I don't believe desperation entered into the thoughts of the Confederate hierarcy until the war was essentially lost. Even then, certainly no one expected much help from African southerners. There were a few black men voluntarily assisting with the Southern effort, certainly not to perpetuate slavery. How can the concept of fighting for one's home be so alien? Have we lost something somewhere? Any sense of equality between the races was scarce as hen's teeth on both sides of the Mason-Dixon line. We're all still working on that one, albeit slowly.

There wasn't all that much glorious about the South or North in 1861. It was simply home. A home that was about to be stained forever.

Please avoid the silly arguments about Southern folks hiding behind anything. We ain't. Several folks I know about were Unionists. Can you imagine that?

[Dred]

well.. it must be pick on the new guy day or something. It seems to me I wasn't the first person to bring up the "neo-confederate" in this thread. I was only trying to ascertain the purpose of this thread since all it had was some names and dates with no explanation.

The Logic I was getting at is that a few testimonies from a handful of blacks that served the confederacy is not an adequate example of the black man's feelings fo the time. 65,000 Blacks were in the CS Army out of almost 4 million. Even if every single one was a die hard fighter for the southern cause that's still only 1.5%. Hardly enough of a percentage to put to claim that blacks fought for the rebs and therefore must have been happy with their circumstantces



As far as what a neo confederate is.. well... I haven't been on this forum very long and haven't really seen anybody I would call on yet. I wasn't calling Battallion one I was merely using the term to descrbe the types of individuals I usually hear this particular argument from.

[Battalion]

Originally Posted by Dred

The Logic I was getting at is that a few testimonies from a handful of blacks that served the confederacy is not an adequate example of the black man's feelings fo the time. 65,000 Blacks were in the CS Army out of almost 4 million. Even if every single one was a die hard fighter for the southern cause that's still only 1.5%.

65,000 (Confederate) + 170,000 (Federal) = 235,000 Total

65,000 / 235,000 = 28%

[larry_cockerham]

By the way, Dred, welcome to the board. You stumbled into a long, over discussed argument. Your different approach and particular phrasing caught my eye as being a little different and I was in a talkative mood, so I hopped on. Nothing personal, aside from my own ego. We're a mixed lot of yanks and rebs and inbetweeners like me. Many of these men and ladies, you'll discover, are extremely well read and knowledgeable. In the couple of years I've been reading their shared abundance of information I've learned much in a very positive sense. I even changed a notion or two that I found wasn't exactly defensible. A couple more have been reinforced. All of us look forward to your input. Please share your thoughts!

[Dred]

Originally Posted by Battalion

65,000 (Confederate) + 170,000 (Federal) = 235,000 Total

65,000 / 235,000 = 28%

Just a thought here... Can you lump the northern blacks fighting for the US with the southern blacks fighting for the CS? The 65,000 for the CS were more than likely from that region, I couldn't imagine a free black man migrating south to fight for the CS. On the other hand how many of the northern blacks in the US army had escaped or migrated to the north? It would be intresting to see how many came from each state, north and south. To be fair.. if the north had 170,000 colored soldiers like you say, and they had about 330,000 free black men that is 51% o the black population. Not counting slaves that were in the border states though, that's only free blacks in northern states, territories, and border states... In order ot be totally fair I would have to take into account slaves form border states as well but then the question is what side would you count them as?


Thanks for welcoming me to the board Larrry. I found this board when I googled for some answers to a question I had and found so much input I had to join! I do tend to get a bit defensive at times so I apologize in advance.. but I also don't hold a grudge. I look forward to picking your brain

[unionblue]

Battalion,

Don't change the formula given by Dred.

65,000 (Confederate What? Cooks, laborers, etc?) + 4,000,000,000 SLAVES (no guess work involved).

What's the percentage then, by your 'new' math method?

The Confederate government did not want slaves as soldiers. The Confederate States did not want slaves as soldiers. The majority of the Southern soldiers did not want slaves as soldiers, nor did the majority of the Southern people want slaves as soldiers. Their words speak louder than mine or yours ever could.

Were there exceptions? YES.

Was it embraced and welcomed by the majority of the South? NO.

Do the small number of black slaves/freemen who took up arms, for whatever reason in service of the South, deflect, detract, distract or diminish the historical fact that the South left the Union primarily in order to secure and protect the institution of slavery?

NO WAY, NO HOW.

Unionblue

[gary]

A lot of slaves were impressed (and their owners paid wages for their slaves' labor) to build fortifications. I suppose if 65k is correct, it would include a lot of impressed labor, factory workers and those involved in the war industry. This # could be reduced if we knew who was involved in the war industry at any particular time. It's like saying we had 500,000 soldiers, but only 100,000 at any given time. Thus, relying on 500k is not a reliable show of strength.

Now, as to the prisoner issue, can anyone clarify where it says that a prisoner has to be a soldier? Japanese took American, Australian, British, Belgian (and later French) civilians as prisoners during WW II. This included women & children and their status as prisoners didn't make them soldiers.

[larry_cockerham]

Neil, thank you very much Sir for your recent use of the word PRIMARILY. Some of us poor southerners didn't have slaves, we just didn't care much for yanks taking our pigs.

[matthew mckeon]

I can't believe we're going down this road again.