Slavery; THE Cause? - Page 13

hawglips · #**121** 10-29-2004, 03:45 PM

It affords to our whole people the complete and crowning proof of the true nature of the design of the party which elevated to power the present occupant of the Presidential chair at Washington and which sought to conceal its purpose by every variety of artful device and by the perfidious use of the most solemn and repeated pledges on every possible occasion....

Neil, is your point that the "true nature" of the cause of the North's war to thwart democracy is not best judged by what they said at the time?

Hal

johan_steele · #**122** 10-29-2004, 04:53 PM

Hal, "the North's War to thwart Democracy" Are you refering to Secesion over the result of a legal election?

The War of Northern Aggresion, The "North's War to thwart democracy", I think both titles are creative interpratations of the truth. Who won a legal national election, who opted to leave the Union and opened fire upon a US Installation, illegally imprisoned US Regulars, seized military installations, looted armories, treasuries etc? All have answers that can be contested... And what if anything does that baited term, "North's War to thwart Democracy" or the "South's War to thwart Republic" have to do w/ slavery as a cause of the War of Rebellion?

I think history has shown proof positive who attempted to thwart the results of a democratic election... it was not the Republican Party of 1860.

I want to thank Neil for getting me digging on this subject... I think he has the one root cause down.

I might suggest some titles to this subject that I think lend credence:

Brown Richard, Slavery in American Society
Buchanan, Allen Secession
Fogel, Robert Without Consent or contract: the Rise and Fall of American Slavery
Freeling, William THe Road to Disunion: Secessionists at Bay, 1776-1854
Kolchin, Peter American Slavery
Lence, Ross Union and Liberty: the Political philosophy of John C Calhoun
Mathews, Don Wealth and it's distribution in the Antebellum South: Where do we stand and why does it matter
Ransom, Roger Conflict and Compromise: the Political Economy of Slavery, Emancipation and the American Civil War
Wayne, Michael THe reshaping of Plantation Society Revisited

unionblue · #**123** 10-30-2004, 12:22 AM

Hal,

The South went to war on account of slavery. South Carolina went to war as she said in here secession proclamation, because slavery would not be secure under Lincoln. Don't you think South Carolina ought to know why it went to war?

Unionblue

mobile_96 · #**124** 10-30-2004, 10:18 AM

Would like to add another book to that list of Shane's, one I am presently reading.
Plain Folk and Gentry in a Slave Society, White Liberty and Black Slavery in Augusta's Hinderlandsby J. Willian Harris. LSU Press
Here, Harris explores two great ironies of American history-the South's commitment to a liberty supported by slavery and its attempt to maintain the status quo with a war that undermined southern society.
Lots of interesting material to mull over.
Interesting fact: Stephens 'cornerstone' speech was not the 1st time the term had been used. The South Carolina governor, George McDuffie "laid out the many political benefits of slavery in his address to the state legislature in 1835, climaxing it with the declaration that slavery, far from 'being a political evil, is the cornerstone of our republican edifice'"
Chuck in Il.

johan_steele · #**125** 10-30-2004, 11:34 AM

Mrs. Thea states in her posts 1404 this: "Since the WBTS the South has never been allowed to be on equal footing again and is treated like a wayward step-child. After over one hundred forty years, does anyone on this board feel that the hostility is over? A Union forced on sovereign states cannot be kept intact at the end of a bayonet or a bomb. Now it is kept intact by three fourths of the industries in this country being located anywhere but the South, by so-called "guidelines" for Southern schools, etc. that have been in place for over forty years, with Federal interference in every conceivable phase of state government."

I will respectfully disagree w/ the above statement as it ignores states like Florida & Texas etc and cities like Charlotte, Dallas Ft Worth, Atlanta, San Antonio, Miami which are all world class cities far wealthier and better off than their closest equivelant in the Upper Midwest. And so far above any equivelant in Europe, Africa etc. That I wonder how one can believe that "140 years of being held back" somehow is a state of the old south. I wonder what someone from abroad might think of such a statement. Or for that matter closer to home in Idaho, Utah etc.

Thea is absolutely correct about interference at the point of a bayonet... Brown Vs the Board of Education comes to mind off hand. Having seen the quality of Public School Education in SC... I think minimum standards and guidelines are a bloody good idea. That said SC Public schools were no worse off than those I experianced in Iowa, Wisconsin or South Dakota.

Brown vs Board of Education, the Civil Rights movement and countless other actions were all throwbacks to slavery. Slavery's impact was felt well into the 20th Century and the Emancipation Proclomation had to be enforced at the point of a bayonet. If slavery wasn't the root cause... it has certainly been the cause associated w/ the root cause of Rebellion ever since despite the best efforts of apologists and the neo confederate movement.

I am so sick and tired of being told that all of the evils in the world are the US's fault and now in addition it is really only the Northern regions fault in particular. The South is NOT an occupied territory, it is NOT a financial ruin, it is NOT a poor downtrodden culture.

Frankly, the old south is doing quite well for itself. I'll take a Columbia or Charleston SC and compare them favorably w/ quite a few other cities throughout the world. The poorest Counties, highest unemployment rates in the US are NOT in the old South, they are in fact in South Dakota.

thea_447 · #**126** 10-31-2004, 12:10 AM

To the previous poster, I do not have time tonight to go into further detail about all aspects brought up in the above post. But I would take this opportunity to point out that we've had this discussion before on another thread and the poorest counties, as I have pointed out are indeed located in the SOUTH.

I would draw your attention to:

Volume 1, Number 2
Fall 2003

U.S. Poverty in Space and Time:

Its Persistence in the South

by
Ronald C. Wimberley
North Carolina State University
Libby V. Morris
The University of Georgia

Poverty in the United States is not randomly distributed across the country in an even or fairly even pattern. Places with the worst poverty levels tend to cluster together. In fact, U.S. poverty is concentrated in certain regions and subregions and is located mainly in the South (Wimberley and Morris 1997; Allen-Smith, Wimberley, and Morris 2000; Wimberley and Morris 2002).

Locations of poverty also change very little from one decade to the next. Rather, poverty tends to persist in the same geographic places decade after decade. Poverty, like the conditions with which it is associated, appears entrenched and enduring. Not only is U.S. poverty located mainly in the South, it is also persistently located there. Within the South, poverty is primarily in the Black Belt subregion, a roughly contiguous set of counties that stretch through parts of the 11 Old South states where it has persisted for decades.

These findings underlie analyses contributed by the authors to a 2002 study of persistent poverty sponsored through Senator Zell Miller of Georgia with additional support from Georgia businessman Benjy Griffith. This 2002 study of persistent poverty study was conducted by scientists at the University of Georgia, Tuskegee University, and North Carolina State University. The study came in response to a line of recommendations by Wimberley, Morris, and Bachtel (1991) and Wimberley and Morris (1997) that a federal regional commission be established to comprehensively address the long-standing impoverishment of the Black Belt South in a manner similar to that done by the Appalachian Regional Commission for the Upper South and Northeast regions of the United States.

Some of the questions raised by the Miller Study were whether poverty persists in the Black Belt and other areas of the South and whether this region could or should be targeted by a federal regional commission. The general findings of the Miller Study are reported in Dismantling Persistent Poverty in the Southeastern United States and at www.cviog.uga.edu (Carl Vinson Institute of Government 2002).

In Space

To measure poverty, the authors used U.S. Census data for the 1980, 1990, and 2000 decennial censuses. Cross-sectional data were mapped for all U.S. counties at each census period. Counties were shaded on the maps to show whether they were in the worst quartile of poverty at each census, in the second worst quartile, or in the lower half of poverty.

The first map shows poverty data from the 2000 U.S. Census. Counties falling into the worst quartile of poverty are colored in red. The second worst quartile is colored yellow. As the map reveals, census 2000 poverty concentrates in central Appalachia, various counties in the Northwest, the Southeast, and the South. Relatively little poverty is shown in the Northeast and North Central Regions.

Because the counties in the western half of the United States are much larger than counties in the eastern half, the visual effect of larger geographical counties in the West can be deceiving. If shrunken to the size of eastern U.S. counties, they would all easily fit into a couple of the southern states.

As it turns out, the South is the most populated region of the country, and the South's poverty counties contain larger populations of the poor. The South, defined as a region containing 16 states and Washington D.C. by the U.S. Census Bureau, contains 100 million of the country's 281 million population in year 2000, and accounts for 36 percent of the U.S. population. That compares to 23 percent of the U.S. population found in the in the Midwest, 22 percent in the West, and 19 percent in the Northeast.

In terms of regional poverty, the South's 13.6 million poor represent a 40 percent share of all U.S. poverty. Not only is this disproportionately higher than the South's 36 percent of the nation's population, it is higher than the share of poverty contained in the other major U.S. regions. Of these, the Northeast has 17 percent poverty, the Midwest 19 percent, and the West 24 percent of the U.S. poverty.

Therefore, the largest region of U.S. poverty is spread across the South and is observed from the map to be densely concentrated in the Black Belt subregion that forms a crescent of the eastern and lower South from Virginia to East Texas and up the Mississippi Delta.

Whether in the South or elsewhere, poverty is concentrated in certain locations. The geographic pattern of U.S. poverty is by no means random. The high-poverty counties tend to coincide with disproportionate populations of various ethnic groups: Appalachian whites, Northwest Indians, Southwest Hispanics and Indians, and Southern blacks. Furthermore, most of these counties are nonmetropolitan. In brief, the 2000 map of U.S. poverty *as would be observed in earlier decades as well is regional, racial, and rural.

http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/v2/wimmor.htm

(Message edited by thea_447 on October 31, 2004)

#**127** 10-31-2004, 07:56 AM

Thea,

Here are some more studies on showing that there is far more Southern poverty than the rest of the nation that apparently is all wrong. Gee, sure is lucky we have arrogant, perspicacious people to correct our misconceptions what it is like of where we live every day and our families have lived for countless decades. There are numerous studies that have gone on since the depression that I know of. All just as meaningless as what we can see with our own eyes I suppose.

http://www.scjustice.org/pdfs/WorkingPoorReport.pdf

http://www.cviog.uga.edu/poverty/

http://srdc.msstate.edu/publications..._zimmerman.pdf

BTW, The GDP is often used to establish that the South is much better off than they were pre-civil war. This is a blatant distortion of the facts. This is a response to such allegations I wrote in 2003. I changed it a bit. Altering the Y word so as not to offend or anger others.

“The fact is the south did not even get close to parity with the rest of the US in economic terms until 1960. (when the northerners started moving south BTW) The reason the south's current GDP is high as it is, is NOT from the benevolent endearment and the ideal system of the north or what the north dictated to the south. It is mostly from the simple fact the Higher-Latitude-Placed-Persons-Living-On-Continent-Of-North-Americans are moving into the south in ever increasing numbers. They brought their wealth. Nashville was recently rated in the top 5 wealthiest cities. (Tennessee has no state income tax) Yet the fact is, that was because Belle Meade was in the metro area and the people living there are extremely wealthy. But the majority of those living there are not in fact southerners. As well as it is just a biased statistic. If you have 10 people with an average net worth of 50 billion dollars yet all but 1 have an annual combined income of 100K would you say life is good for the masses? The margin of difference between the ““Opulent Minority”” and the general populace is greater than ever before in history.

So saying the south never had it so good and the reconstructionists fixed everything because it's economy is so great is asinine when you consider the fact that southerners themselves are STILL poorer than the northerners. In fact they have basically just become servants to rich transplanted northerners.

Using the fact that filthy rich Higher-Latitude-Placed-Persons-Living-On-Continent-Of-North-Americans have decided to use the south as their personal playground and retirement community and thereby raising the economic parameters as proof the south is rich is insulting.

I would also like to point out that if you seem to base the quality of life and the love of a culture only on the love of and the grasping, clawing need for more money. It seems that the use of economic well being as a basis of being right is insulting. I believe Hitler also made that very valid claim for Germany. I find that sad as well as disgusting.....for an excellent example of how the GDP is not really an indicator of the quality of life I suggest you read ““If the GDP is Up, Why is America Down?”” http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ecbig/gdp.htm

Pay attention to Bennet’’s view on how the GDP goes up as society declines.(not that I agree with almost anything this man says, in fact I loathe him) ....i.e.. the things that help drive up the GDP such as divorce [Growth can be social decline by another name. Divorce, for example, adds a small fortune in lawyers' bills, the need for second households, transportation and counseling for kids, and so on. Divorce lawyers alone take in probably several billion dollars a year,
and possibly a good deal more. Divorce also provides a major boost for the real-estate industry. "Unfortunately, divorce is a big part of our business. It means one [home] to sell and sometimes two to buy,"a realtor in suburban Chicago told the Chicago Tribune.]

Florida’’s hurricanes alone boost the GDP ....oh joy. “

I'm sick of people telling me the South is something it is not when they have no clue what they are talking about. I'm sick of people thinking dissent is treason and that we should all kneel at the alter of Northern righteousness. Please sir, may I have another.

johan_steele · #**128** 10-31-2004, 10:20 AM

Mrs Thea, I thank you for your post, the next time I travel onto any of the reservations in SD I'll make a point of letting them know how much better they have it than the South. I shall also make a point of keeping my mouth shut when I travel to Atlanta, Dallas Ft Worth & San Antonio... I wouldn't want to tell them how bad they have it in comparison to say... Kansas City or Omaha.

Mr Aphillbilly, thank you... I haven't been referred to as Arrogant etc in quite some time. A pity I have actually lived in the South... I left for a variety of reasons few of them positive. Though I am quite happy to no longer have to deal w/ fire ants and to see a white Christmas.

Perhaps I should qualify my experiance, I have visited nearly every town w/ an economy large enough to have a mini mart in SC and Northern Georgia as part of my job (I average approx 1000 miles per week). I have done jobs in said towns and dealt w/ the unwashed masses that reside there.

The succesful people were those who pulled themselves up by their bootstraps and refused to whine, moan and belabor the point of how bad things were. I guess I just have a different view of poverty than some. I consider a roof over the head, food on the table and a satellite dish on the wall as signs that you are NOT in a state of Poverty. A computer in most homes, cable or Dish TV, Literate chlildren and decent job availablity if you are willing to work help as well. I was willing to volunteer with poor children in the bottoms of Sumter SC and frankly in comparison to the Reservations of SD... that is not Poverty.

My wife is black, a lifelong resident of SC, except the stint where her father was stationed in Crete and when she moved North w/ me. Her mother lives and works in Columbia SC as does her twin sister. Her father is buried in Kingstree, SC and her grandmother lives in the bottoms of town there w/ a set of railroad tracks going through her front yard. This is a family descended from slaves and the stories are interesting indeed. I suppose this isn't enough experiance of the Old South for some to think that I have a right to an opinion. Trust me, you really don't want my wife to make comments to you on this subject, you may not like what you hear or be able to drown out the honesty of her convictions towards slavery. Her views of the "good ol boy" systems are... intriguing. My most sincere apologies that my experiance doesn't coincide w/ what you want those who have not lived or worked in the South to believe.

Please let me know exactly what credentials I need to be able to comment intelligently upon what I have seen.

Does your response mean I have a right to be irritated by individuals who have no military experiance at all and do in fact have nothing but contempt for said instituion when they tell me how inept or evil the military is/was?

Dissent is not treason, aid and comfort to the enemy is...

#**129** 10-31-2004, 11:00 AM

http://www.scjustice.org/pdfs/WorkingPoorReport.pdf

http://www.cviog.uga.edu/poverty/

http://srdc.msstate.edu/publications..._zimmerman.pdf

Heh

thea_447 · #**130** 10-31-2004, 01:30 PM

To the poster of Oct. 30, 11:34 a.m. who states:
I am so sick and tired of being told that all of the evils in the world are the US's fault and now in addition it is really only the Northern regions fault in particular. The South is NOT an occupied territory, it is NOT a financial ruin, it is NOT a poor downtrodden culture. I would HEARTILY encourage you to fully read and comprehend the study that I have presented on this thread and ALL of the sites that Aphillbilly has presented. We are not making up these figures and facts out of whole cloth. These are national studies that have been done by experts which prove our point about the South, despite what said poster has seen. I suggest that you not visit Charlotte, Dallas Ft Worth, Atlanta, San Antonio, Miami, which are huge cities boasting rich populations of transplanted Northerners. Try instead the rural areas of Alabama, Mississippi, etc. or any of the small towns or even Montgomery, Alabama if you want a better idea of the poverty. And I'm quite certain you will find those rural areas compare and could be twins to reservations in South Dakota. They both can boast poverty and the same Federal interference.

As for said poster's return to a pet theme: If you haven't served in the military, you have no right to an opinion, I say pish posh! This country was not founded on the idea that the military are somehow more "entitled" to an opinion than the average person. Rather, the military in this country are here to aid and protect the average citizens, but that doesn't necessarily make the military more intelligent.

And frankly, I'm getting a bit tired of something too. I'm getting tired of being told in so many words that I'm unpatriotic. Dissent is NOT treason in this country, unless of course somehow the laws have been changed. I fully support our US soldiers in their EVERY endeavor. I'm getting fed up with having to defend myself on this issue and will not do so again. What amazes me is that this subject seems to be "forced" into every thread on this board. We should stick to the subject at hand.

I've said all I want to about poverty in this country. To have patronizing words (from the post of Oct. 31, 10:20 a.m.)thrown back like I consider a roof over the head, food on the table and a satellite dish on the wall as signs that you are NOT in a state of Poverty I consider flaming. Further adding, A computer in most homes, cable or Dish TV, Literate chlildren and decent job availablity if you are willing to work help as well. I was willing to volunteer with poor children in the bottoms of Sumter SC and frankly in comparison to the Reservations of SD... that is not Poverty just demonstrates to me that this poster did not bother to read any of the sites that Aphillbilly had posted, or the site that I had used, but rather relied on a rather rigid biased opinion.

The poverty I am talking about is three to four generations deep and these people might dream of a computer, but they certainly don't own one!

It is also apparent when said poster mentions leaving the South for various reasons, few of them positive, what his opinion of the South is.

As for me, I love the South, she has a lot of problems, but I love her anyway. We in the South are working double-time to correct the things that are wrong and we could do it a lot faster without the help of the Jesse Jacksons of the world or Federal intervention.

If I have said anything here that could be considered contentious I apologize by saying I feel that I was justified. All I ask is that posters read the material available before attempting to slay dragons. There aren't any dragons here. We are all here on a quest for history, but sometimes we get side-tracked.

That being said, I'm off to Fantasy Football where I'm REALLY ready to rumble! <grin>