Abolitionists who went on to oppose the war/Union

uaskme

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Location
SE Tennessee
Slavery split the country not the Republican Party. The Chinese were not banned as they came in large numbers after the ACW. The Democratic Party was not in favor of Asian Immigration until the modern era. The ethnic cleansing of the Indians occured even before the US was a nation. Southern whites enthiasicaly participated in fighting Indians well before during and after the ACW. The Confedrate Army fought Indians and killed Indian civilians during the ACW and I have a thread in that. Southern whites were always in favor of racial superiority before during and well after the ACW.
Popular Sovereignty led to violence in Kansas but the thanks to John Brown for giving Abolitionists a spine the Abolitionists won.
Leftyhunter

Northerners had less than a 1% Black Population in 1860. All States added to the Union post 1860, were Northern States and had a less than 1% Black Population. Lincoln declared the Territories should be left for White Families. Lincoln was for Colonization. He rejected Abolition. All of this is why the Northern White Racist voted for him. Blacks emigrated in 1920s to the North, out of necessity. Yankee led Federal Government purposely rejected Black emigration. Even MA, the great Abolitionist State reject Black refugees during the War.

Chinese were Banned. Chinese exclusion act. Republicans called them Slaves. 2/3 of the women were sold into some type of Slavery. worked as prostitutes openly in lefty America. This went on until the 1920s in Slave California.

Sherman, Sheridan, Grant and Yellow Hair propagated a Race War during this Period against Native Americans. This went on until the next Century.

Republicans played on Northern Negrophobics fear of living with Blacks by rejecting Popular Sovereignty. There were less than 2 dozen Blacks in the Territories. 1 was too many for White Northerners. KS had no fear of Slavery. Brown like many Northerners wanted a Race War. They got one. Not in the South with Blacks. But one in the West with Northern led Federal Government. .

All of this leads to the Truth, that Northerners rejected all minorities of Color. Sad but true.
 

leftyhunter

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
los angeles ca
Northerners had less than a 1% Black Population in 1860. All States added to the Union post 1860, were Northern States and had a less than 1% Black Population. Lincoln declared the Territories should be left for White Families. Lincoln was for Colonization. He rejected Abolition. All of this is why the Northern White Racist voted for him. Blacks emigrated in 1920s to the North, out of necessity. Yankee led Federal Government purposely rejected Black emigration. Even MA, the great Abolitionist State reject Black refugees during the War.

Chinese were Banned. Chinese exclusion act. Republicans called them Slaves. 2/3 of the women were sold into some type of Slavery. worked as prostitutes openly in lefty America. This went on until the 1920s in Slave California.

Sherman, Sheridan, Grant and Yellow Hair propagated a Race War during this Period against Native Americans. This went on until the next Century.

Republicans played on Northern Negrophobics fear of living with Blacks by rejecting Popular Sovereignty. There were less than 2 dozen Blacks in the Territories. 1 was too many for White Northerners. KS had no fear of Slavery. Brown like many Northerners wanted a Race War. They got one. Not in the South with Blacks. But one in the West with Northern led Federal Government. .

All of this leads to the Truth, that Northerners rejected all minorities of Color. Sad but true.
So your argument is that slavery and Jim Crow were far more humane? The war against the Indians started in the 1600s. African Americans lived in North well before the ACW. Popular Sovereignty was an attmpt to bring slavery to Kansas not a Southern attempt to bring about racial equality.
No Southern politican or civic group advocated for open Chinese immigration to the US or for the rights of Indians. Many Confedrate officers such has Lee were happy to fight Indians when they were in the US Army.
Leftyhunter
 

DanSBHawk

1st Lieutenant
Joined
May 8, 2015
Location
Wisconsin
Northerners had less than a 1% Black Population in 1860. All States added to the Union post 1860, were Northern States and had a less than 1% Black Population. Lincoln declared the Territories should be left for White Families. Lincoln was for Colonization. He rejected Abolition. All of this is why the Northern White Racist voted for him. Blacks emigrated in 1920s to the North, out of necessity. Yankee led Federal Government purposely rejected Black emigration. Even MA, the great Abolitionist State reject Black refugees during the War.

Chinese were Banned. Chinese exclusion act. Republicans called them Slaves. 2/3 of the women were sold into some type of Slavery. worked as prostitutes openly in lefty America. This went on until the 1920s in Slave California.

Sherman, Sheridan, Grant and Yellow Hair propagated a Race War during this Period against Native Americans. This went on until the next Century.

Republicans played on Northern Negrophobics fear of living with Blacks by rejecting Popular Sovereignty. There were less than 2 dozen Blacks in the Territories. 1 was too many for White Northerners. KS had no fear of Slavery. Brown like many Northerners wanted a Race War. They got one. Not in the South with Blacks. But one in the West with Northern led Federal Government. .

All of this leads to the Truth, that Northerners rejected all minorities of Color. Sad but true.
So many strawmen, just to avoid responsibility for initiating a war over slavery.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
So your argument is that slavery and Jim Crow were far more humane? The war against the Indians started in the 1600s. African Americans lived in North well before the ACW. Popular Sovereignty was an attmpt to bring slavery to Kansas not a Southern attempt to bring about racial equality.
No Southern politican or civic group advocated for open Chinese immigration to the US or for the rights of Indians. Many Confedrate officers such has Lee were happy to fight Indians when they were in the US Army.
Leftyhunter
Touching you think the south was the ultimate authority on everything in our history.................why else anytime a thread refers to the North or US doing something.....your response is the South did it too.......as if that made it right apparently......
 

uaskme

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Location
SE Tennessee
So your argument is that slavery and Jim Crow were far more humane? The war against the Indians started in the 1600s. African Americans lived in North well before the ACW. Popular Sovereignty was an attmpt to bring slavery to Kansas not a Southern attempt to bring about racial equality.
No Southern politican or civic group advocated for open Chinese immigration to the US or for the rights of Indians. Many Confedrate officers such has Lee were happy to fight Indians when they were in the US Army.
Leftyhunter
Abolitionist nor any Northerner including Lincoln advocated Civil Rights. By the end of Reconstruction, the Majority of Abolitionist rejected it. Civil Rights were never enforced. Most thought the Blacks were given more than they rightfully deserved. Thought Southern Whites should Govern.

We are talking about the Civil War.

Seems as though many have swallowed the revisionist history that the Yankee were equalitarian? The Yankee's Wrong Cause. A cause they never advocated.
 

uaskme

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Location
SE Tennessee
Back to the OP. their was a lot of Thought that neither Section wanted to be Slave to the Other. This was the Slavery that both sides fought for. Political Control. The South didn't want to be dominated by the North. That was the impetus of Secession. Northerners wanted to subdue Southerners to the South including the Blacks, especially Blacks. Northerners didn't want to be Slave to the South. Reconstruction is further evidence of continuing the War so as to not give White Southerners political influence. Whites were excluded from voting when necessary. Blacks were given voting rights, initially in the South, because they voted Republican. They would never of been given voting rights to vote Democratic. In the end the scheme didn't work. This was the failure of Reconstruction. It had nothing to do with Black Rights. Blacks only got Rights when it aligned with what the War Victors, the Republican Party benefit.
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
Back to the OP. their was a lot of Thought that neither Section wanted to be Slave to the Other. This was the Slavery that both sides fought for. Political Control. The South didn't want to be dominated by the North. That was the impetus of Secession. Northerners wanted to subdue Southerners to the South including the Blacks, especially Blacks. Northerners didn't want to be Slave to the South. Reconstruction is further evidence of continuing the War so as to not give White Southerners political influence. Whites were excluded from voting when necessary. Blacks were given voting rights, initially in the South, because they voted Republican. They would never of been given voting rights to vote Democratic. In the end the scheme didn't work. This was the failure of Reconstruction. It had nothing to do with Black Rights. Blacks only got Rights when it aligned with what the War Victors, the Republican Party benefit.

Back to the OP?

"A lot of thought?" Whose thoughts? Yours, mostly, and little mention of anyone else. I see what YOU are having thoughts about, but the OP?

Where is there any mention of abolitionists who went on to oppose the war?

Unionblue
 

leftyhunter

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
los angeles ca
Abolitionist nor any Northerner including Lincoln advocated Civil Rights. By the end of Reconstruction, the Majority of Abolitionist rejected it. Civil Rights were never enforced. Most thought the Blacks were given more than they rightfully deserved. Thought Southern Whites should Govern.

We are talking about the Civil War.

Seems as though many have swallowed the revisionist history that the Yankee were equalitarian? The Yankee's Wrong Cause. A cause they never advocated.
The Yankees put in a Constitutional Amendment to abolish slavery and give African Americans the right to vote. It wasn't Yankees that lynched people of color that were asserting their civil rights.
Leftyhunter
 

Fairfield

First Sergeant
Joined
Dec 5, 2019
In Maine, Civil Rights were not only advocated but they were practiced and enforced. Voting rights for blacks was granted in 1783 and Maine's black citizens have been prominent. One of the state's early physicians was Dr. Antonius Lamy (a black who arrived in 1671). John Brown Russwurm (who grew up in Jamaica) was a graduate of Bowdoin College (1826); Mr. Russwurm-who became a journalist--was cofounder of the first black journal in America. Robert Benjamin Lewis was an inventor and the author of America's first Afro-centric history (Light and Truth, 1836). Phoebe Ann Jacobs was such an esteemed member of the community of Brunswick that her pallbearers included the governor of Maine and the president of Bowdoin College. Macon B. Allen, who had been admitted to the Maine Bar in 1844, was the first black attorney in the United States. James Healy was a Roman Catholic priest and bishop. As time has gone on, there have been more black citizens who have a credit to us all.
 

John Hartwell

Major
Forum Host
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Location
Central Massachusetts
More than a few took the position that Southerners were the ones who were defending the Constitution.
If so, why is "Lysander Spooner" the only name anyone has come up with in 33 posts?

Spooner was the most prominent, but I'm sure there were a few others (but certainly no more). Who were they? What were their stories?

Probably, like Spooner, they believed that the Constitution and its Union the Republicans were fighting for were not antislavery enough. Which looks very much like, in their view, the Republicans were not using slavery to divide the country.
 
Last edited:

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Laurinburg NC
Back to the OP. their was a lot of Thought that neither Section wanted to be Slave to the Other. This was the Slavery that both sides fought for. Political Control. The South didn't want to be dominated by the North. That was the impetus of Secession. Northerners wanted to subdue Southerners to the South including the Blacks, especially Blacks. Northerners didn't want to be Slave to the South. Reconstruction is further evidence of continuing the War so as to not give White Southerners political influence. Whites were excluded from voting when necessary. Blacks were given voting rights, initially in the South, because they voted Republican. They would never of been given voting rights to vote Democratic. In the end the scheme didn't work. This was the failure of Reconstruction. It had nothing to do with Black Rights. Blacks only got Rights when it aligned with what the War Victors, the Republican Party benefit.
Well said.
 

uaskme

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Location
SE Tennessee
If so, why is "Lysander Spooner" the only name anyone has come up with in 33 posts?

Spooner was the most prominent, but I'm sure there were a few others (but certainly no more). Who were they? What were their stories?

Probably, like Spooner, they believed that the Constitution and its Union the Republicans were fighting for were not antislavery enough. Which looks very much like, in their view, the Republicans were not using slavery to divide the country.
Study the Republican Party and I think you might change your mind. Lincoln and the Republicans had to separate themselves from the Northern Democrats. Douglas didn’t want Slavery Expansion. That’s about all Lincoln advocated. Said he wasn’t a abolitionist. Would of NEVER been elected if he had. Elections are Political. Republicans had to convince Northerners that Southerners were a bigger threat to their economic prosperity than Immigrants and Catholics. Had to coalesce the Nativist into the Republican Party.

Post #10 explains Spooners analysis of the Radical Republicans.

Most Garrisons were anti War and anti Politics, until the War began anyway.

Seems as though you have some interest in Abolitionist who were anti War. Your welcome to participate.
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
Study the Republican Party and I think you might change your mind. Lincoln and the Republicans had to separate themselves from the Northern Democrats. Douglas didn’t want Slavery Expansion. That’s about all Lincoln advocated. Said he wasn’t a abolitionist. Would of NEVER been elected if he had. Elections are Political. Republicans had to convince Northerners that Southerners were a bigger threat to their economic prosperity than Immigrants and Catholics. Had to coalesce the Nativist into the Republican Party.

Post #10 explains Spooners analysis of the Radical Republicans.

Most Garrisons were anti War and anti Politics, until the War began anyway.

Seems as though you have some interest in Abolitionist who were anti War. Your welcome to participate.

Still a pretty short list without much supportive data.

We have Spooner, then "most Garrisons," whatever that is supposed to mean.

How about some info on other abolitionists who might have been against the war?

Frederick Douglass maybe? Or Harriet Tubman? John Brown? Or maybe some of the "Secret Seven" who supported him? What about Thaddeus Stevens or Charles Sumner?

Are those abolitionists who opposed the coming of the Civil War so thin in history that no others can be found?

Hmmmm...

Unionblue
 
Top