Poll: Many discount slavery as main cause of Civil War

[Battalion]

Originally Posted by larry_cockerham

Many, if not all, of the folks in Africa, who made it to the British colony known as America were already in bondage. Not a good thing, regardless of it's location. Shelter in Africa was perhaps not so necessary as shelter in north America. Life 'back home' was in most cases no bed of roses. A more or less kindly plantation owner at least offered food and some level of physical care. To be free you have to have a sense of not being free. That may well have been a remote concept for many folks hauled to north America aside from their very real creature discomfort, if any, at the time. Certainly being hauled into the Jamestown settlement in 1619, right before gx12 grandpa carried out his raid, was no bed of roses. A lush rice plantation in South Carolina, assuming a kind master, might have been an improvement over a starving village in west Africa. Servitude by any evaluation gets a big thumbs down. Blacks living on small farms in the mountains in the late 1700s were well on their way to normalcy, if not defacto freedom. If one takes Alex Haley's ROOTS as gospel, and I have not particular reason to suspect otherwise, aside from an attempt to create a marketable story, then this was a quasi-brutal time. Freedom for blacks and other minorities in this nation was a slow and painful process. American Indians fared not too much better than blacks, they were just strong enough to put up a far better fight. (Irish and Italian immigrants had had more practice cracking heads back home, hence were better equipped for the challenge of dealing with the yankees.) Around here Andrew Jackson and Abe Lincoln are not looked upon as heros by everyone.

Be careful Larry...you might be accused of being 'pro-slavery.'

Remember the board Rule is- the slavery which existed in the Southern states of North America was the most brutal form of slavery in the history of the known universe...anywhere, anytime...

...diverting from this may get you banned.

Exhibiting facts such as a comparison of mortality rates of free (1.3%) and slave (1.6% -1850 Census) is not allowed...it would undermine the Rule

[Baggage Handler #2]

The circumstances of an immigrant's life in their native land do not make him or her less of a human in the United States.

For example the potato famine era Irish can be described in essentially the same terms. Indentured servitude was a means for many Europeans to leave the old country and take a chance on a better life.

I'm not sure why that isn't relevant but the pre-immigration plight of some others is. Is someone attempting to say that because a person has been victim of two other bad things (unwilling captive at home, unwillingly transported across the sea) that the third thing is "not such a bad deal."

Regardless, by 1860 who is claiming that 100% or even 50% of the slaves were immigrants?

Does it matter?

The point I was making is that claims that the "people of the south" were engaged in fighting and supporting a war over something other than slavery take into account only 60% - much less than that in some states - of "the people of the south."
It is poor math and even worse logic to dismiss the thoughts, hopes, and fears 3,950,000 people as if they did not exist at all.

I appreciate Larry Cockerham's post, or at least the intent & the tone. And while I certainly agree with some of his points, I'm not certain I'd agree with all.

[unionblue]

Originally Posted by larry_cockerham

Many, if not all, of the folks in Africa, who made it to the British colony known as America were already in bondage. Not a good thing, regardless of it's location. Shelter in Africa was perhaps not so necessary as shelter in north America. Life 'back home' was in most cases no bed of roses. A more or less kindly plantation owner at least offered food and some level of physical care. To be free you have to have a sense of not being free. That may well have been a remote concept for many folks hauled to north America aside from their very real creature discomfort, if any, at the time. Certainly being hauled into the Jamestown settlement in 1619, right before gx12 grandpa carried out his raid, was no bed of roses. A lush rice plantation in South Carolina, assuming a kind master, might have been an improvement over a starving village in west Africa. Servitude by any evaluation gets a big thumbs down. Blacks living on small farms in the mountains in the late 1700s were well on their way to normalcy, if not defacto freedom. If one takes Alex Haley's ROOTS as gospel, and I have not particular reason to suspect otherwise, aside from an attempt to create a marketable story, then this was a quasi-brutal time. Freedom for blacks and other minorities in this nation was a slow and painful process. American Indians fared not too much better than blacks, they were just strong enough to put up a far better fight. (Irish and Italian immigrants had had more practice cracking heads back home, hence were better equipped for the challenge of dealing with the yankees.) Around here Andrew Jackson and Abe Lincoln are not looked upon as heros by everyone.

Larry,

For some reason, the entire above post strikes me as a recent funeral did.

The service is not for the body in the coffin. It's too late for that unfortunate.

The memorial service is for the living at the service, to make them feel better about the person passing from this life to the next, to ease their suffering.

You'll forgive me if I still feel the body is the one who got the raw deal, no matter how comfortable the coffin.

Unionblue

[ole]

I'm getting a bit too emotional to continue piping in on this thread. I hold Larry in the same regard I hold my brothers, and when he disagrees with me or I disagree with him, it is at least disturbing.

We'll get to mending that fence later. Meanwhile, auf wiedersehn.

ole

[unionblue]

Originally Posted by Battalion

Be careful Larry...you might be accused of being 'pro-slavery.'

Remember the board Rule is- the slavery which existed in the Southern states of North America was the most brutal form of slavery in the history of the known universe...anywhere, anytime...

...diverting from this may get you banned.

Exhibiting facts such as a comparison of mortality rates of free (1.3%) and slave (1.6% -1850 Census) is not allowed...it would undermine the Rule

Battalion,

Not so much the non existent Rule you speak of, as I have yet to encounter such here at this forum.

But the continuing, on-going, eternal struggle to excuse the South (of the 19th century) for the cause of the war.

And for some reason, this must be done by any means necessary, at the expense of historical fact, new research, new books, and documentation, new sources and most importantly, the truth.

The only Rule that should be enforced here is history.

And yet, it is the one Rule that is broken the most in order to make some here in the 21st century feel good about what one's ancestors did in the 19th century.

That's not history. It's an attempt at personal window dressing.

Unionblue

[Battalion]

Originally Posted by unionblue

Battalion,

Not so much the non existent Rule you speak of, as I have yet to encounter such here at this forum.

But the continuing, on-going, eternal struggle to excuse the South (of the 19th century) for the cause of the war.

The North caused the war. They invaded the South.

[trice]

Originally Posted by Battalion

The North caused the war. They invaded the South.

Let's be clear here: you have been shown time after time that this is false. You have no excuse for making this blatantly false statement.

Tim

[unionblue]

Originally Posted by Battalion

The North caused the war. They invaded the South.

Not wanting to repeat myself, see my above post #95.

Unionblue

[larry_cockerham]

Originally Posted by ole

I'm getting a bit too emotional to continue piping in on this thread. I hold Larry in the same regard I hold my brothers, and when he disagrees with me or I disagree with him, it is at least disturbing.

We'll get to mending that fence later. Meanwhile, auf wiedersehn.

ole

You northern gentlemen have partially missed my point, as sometimes happens. Slavery is not now nor ever should have been condoned in any fashion. We all agree on that. Please allow me a couple of posts to share some information from one of my own family files showing the relationships that actually existed. I ain't makin' this stuff up. This is the real South, not the stuff in northern history books.

[larry_cockerham]

At the time William Bourne settled here, there were no mills nearer than over the Blue Ridge in North Carolina, at the foot of the mountain, then called 'Over the Hollow'. The grain to be ground for bread had to be carried in sacks on horses. There was only a bridle path across New River and mountain - frequently on the old Indian trails. William Bourne would make these trips with his negro men, each with as sack of grain to have ground for bread (mostly corn). At one time, on their return from the mill, one man caught his sack of flour against a limb near the path on the mountain, tore the sack, and spilled some flour. From that circumstance, the place was called Flour Gap. It still bears that name. It is the only place for crossing the Blue Ridge. The first road across that part of the Ridge was at this place; trimmed out in a straight course up and down the mountains.

These trips to the mill had to be made in the fall of the year; and, at one time, when the men had gone, there fell a deep snow, and kept them longer than usual, and the family was without something to eat. Rosa Bourne got up early one morning, called a negro woman and said to her, 'We must get something to eat.' They took the rifle gun and butcher knife, and started out; and soon found a large deer, sleeping in the snow under a fallen tree top. Rosa raised her gun and fired; the deer jumped up, struck his head against a limb, and broke its neck. She, with the negro woman, ran with the butcher knife and cut the deer's throat, dragged him to the house on the snow, and the family lived on venison and hominy until the men returned with meal and flour.