Restricted Debate More silly guys who worried that slavery would tear the country apart


(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
3,070
Location
Austin Texas
I don't think its good to trivialize the events as merely a way to save slavery; unless your aim is to dehumanize the South (which was no doubt the aim of her enemies). What was under attack and worthy of preservation (among other things) was the whole social order.. Destroy a nations social order and you threaten to destroy a nation.

Dehumanization of their slaves is what made the social order of the South possible. Destroying slavery did eventually destroy that social order.
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Messages
113
Dehumanization of their slaves is what made the social order of the South possible. Destroying slavery did eventually destroy that social order.
I disagree. There were of course instances of dehumanizing abuse; but such instances were not unique to slavery; but were rather characteristic of the time. I could cite sources explaining how its good to physically discipline your wife, or your children etc etc. The world still is very cruel in many ways despite making progress. I'll repeat what I've repeatedly said elsewhere, blaming slavery for social ills is a cough out -- and that slavery is not inherently evil or wrong.
 
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
3,070
Location
Austin Texas
I disagree. There were of course instances of dehumanizing abuse; but such instances were not unique to slavery; but were rather characteristic of the time. I could cite sources explaining how its good to physically discipline your wife, or your children etc etc. The world still is very cruel in many ways despite making progress. I'll repeat what I've repeatedly said elsewhere, blaming slavery for social ills is a cough out -- and that slavery is not inherently evil or wrong.
“If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.”
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,502
No real need, the sources, for the most part, are part of this blog all one needs is to search. For example, a rebuttal to the idea that the FSL 1850 was just about slaves, which I am led to believe is the received wisdom here can be found by searching for "The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850: Symbolic Gesture or Gesture or Rational Guarantee?" using the forum search feature. Obviously inspired by Abbeville Institute research, this article notes that if we assume that the FSL1850 was about slaves, then there are several logical inconsistencies but if we look at it as a measure of if the Northern guarantee to the South of equality in the Union. then and only thing does everything falls into a logical order.
Thanks for your response.
So your source that will allow us to learn real history is a paper introduced into this Forum, a paper by the Independent Institute's Jeffrey R. Hummel and Gerald Weingast giving a different view of the Fugitive Slave Act? I'll read it: perhaps it will help explain the FSL. But what about the other deficiencies in my understanding of the antebellum and secession? Do you recommend other works by Dr. Hummel? or should we just search our own Forum?
 
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
731
“If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.”
Yes, wrong for thousands of years and still around today. Amazes me how northerners quickly forget just a generation or two they were removed from slavery, that they had the largest part in the Atlantic slave trade with their ships and ports, and the processing of slaves fattening their bank accounts in northern ports. How quickly they forget , but do not forgive. The entire US was responsible, not just 4 years of the csa. Hypocrisy 101
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,502
If anything is wrong its that kind of thinking -- but I digress.
You disagree with Lincoln's statement? Does that mean you believe that the practice of slavery is acceptable behavior?
One would think that that particular statement would be universally accepted, at least in Western civilization.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,502
Yes, wrong for thousands of years and still around today. Amazes me how northerners quickly forget just a generation or two they were removed from slavery, that they had the largest part in the Atlantic slave trade with their ships and ports, and the processing of slaves fattening their bank accounts in northern ports. How quickly they forget , but do not forgive. The entire US was responsible, not just 4 years of the csa. Hypocrisy 101
How did you interpret Lincoln's simple statement to be a hypocritical claim that only Southerners were involved in slavery and the slave trade?
 
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
3,070
Location
Austin Texas
Yes, wrong for thousands of years and still around today. Amazes me how northerners quickly forget just a generation or two they were removed from slavery, that they had the largest part in the Atlantic slave trade with their ships and ports, and the processing of slaves fattening their bank accounts in northern ports. How quickly they forget , but do not forgive. The entire US was responsible, not just 4 years of the csa. Hypocrisy 101
If you agree with the other poster that “that slavery is not inherently evil or wrong” just come out and say so.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,502
I disagree. There were of course instances of dehumanizing abuse; but such instances were not unique to slavery; but were rather characteristic of the time. I could cite sources explaining how its good to physically discipline your wife, or your children etc etc. The world still is very cruel in many ways despite making progress. I'll repeat what I've repeatedly said elsewhere, blaming slavery for social ills is a cough out -- and that slavery is not inherently evil or wrong.
Cruelty among free people is quite another thing than treating humans like beasts of burden. Slavery was not some simple societal ill: it was the ultimate offense. Once one creates a system where other humans are at best equivalent to farm animals, at worse vermin all kinds of evil and inhumanity are possible.
Slavery most certainly IS inherently evil.
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2018
Messages
816
I disagree. There were of course instances of dehumanizing abuse; but such instances were not unique to slavery; but were rather characteristic of the time. I could cite sources explaining how its good to physically discipline your wife, or your children etc etc. The world still is very cruel in many ways despite making progress. I'll repeat what I've repeatedly said elsewhere, blaming slavery for social ills is a cough out -- and that slavery is not inherently evil or wrong.
Please share your personal experience as a slave that informs your opinion that slavery is not inherently evil or wrong. Since you are willing to state an opinion that far outside of what most people believe, you surely have sufficient experience that leads you to that unusual conclusion. So, what is your experience as a slave?
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,502
...lol, slavery is definately wrong my friend. Just pointing out the sin of the nation, in which many of us, north and south, have ancestors which indulged in the peculiar institution.
Some here accept that and move on. Others seem to think it necessary to twist facts to absolve their ancestors. We would all be better off if we recognized that our ancestors' sins were theirs and theirs alone; they are not ours.
 
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
3,070
Location
Austin Texas
...lol, slavery is definately wrong my friend. Just pointing out the sin of the nation, in which many of us, north and south, have ancestors which indulged in the peculiar institution.
Your are not the only one in this conversation descended from slave owners. Some of us are yet unable to see slavery as wrong. Sad to see them trolling this forum. Glad you are not one of them.
 
Joined
Jun 8, 2019
Messages
100
Some here accept that and move on. Others seem to think it necessary to twist facts to absolve their ancestors. We would all be better off if we recognized that our ancestors' sins were theirs and theirs alone; they are not ours.
I agree in most part.

Some call it history.

In the South of the antebellum period, slavery was socially acceptable. To comprehend that is difficult. To look without flinching or judging at a man selling his son by a slave woman as an acceptable act devoid of modern sensibilities is difficult to impossible. Is secession about slavery-simplicity so, but dig deeper and one finds a compact that existed in Southern minds that existed since the founding in danger of being broken, the fear of political, economic and social loss. The grace of Abbeville is that it trains minds to look for complexities and moving parts while the revisionists simply say slavery.

Winning makes all right. That has been true since one caveman grabbed a stick and told another "do it my way". History glorifies the winners, the losers are silent because they are mostly dead. Secession became illegal not in Congress or SCOTUS, but by the sword. Once won the there is a simple path one can point to and say "see it was always illegal". Yet cast your imagination back to Washington DC just after Fort Sumter-Will the Nothern States rally to Lincoln or say we have better things to do with our blood and taxes let them go. Or after Lincoln called up the troops but none have arrived and DC is defended by a scattering of office dwelling clerks hurriedly armed with obsolete muskets. Is the path so simple? The wine is going to my head and soon I will prove the oppression of the South started with the 1856 election of Lincoln. Therefore I take my leave.
 
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
3,070
Location
Austin Texas
I agree in most part.

Some call it history.

In the South of the antebellum period, slavery was socially acceptable. To comprehend that is difficult. To look without flinching or judging at a man selling his son by a slave woman as an acceptable act devoid of modern sensibilities is difficult to impossible. Is secession about slavery-simplicity so, but dig deeper and one finds a compact that existed in Southern minds that existed since the founding in danger of being broken, the fear of political, economic and social loss. The grace of Abbeville is that it trains minds to look for complexities and moving parts while the revisionists simply say slavery.

Winning makes all right. That has been true since one caveman grabbed a stick and told another "do it my way". History glorifies the winners, the losers are silent because they are mostly dead. Secession became illegal not in Congress or SCOTUS, but by the sword. Once won the there is a simple path one can point to and say "see it was always illegal". Yet cast your imagination back to Washington DC just after Fort Sumter-Will the Nothern States rally to Lincoln or say we have better things to do with our blood and taxes let them go. Or after Lincoln called up the troops but none have arrived and DC is defended by a scattering of office dwelling clerks hurriedly armed with obsolete muskets. Is the path so simple? The wine is going to my head and soon I will prove the oppression of the South started with the 1856 election of Lincoln. Therefore I take my leave.
Note that in the wake of the secession of South Carolina in December 1860, no Federal sword was raised. Indeed for months secession went on and on, never having to contend with arms of any kind. Not until after the CSA lined up the Artillery and fired on Fort Sumter was armed resistance of any kind mounted by the USA.

Some folks today will claim this was not rebellion, yet 150+ years ago the CSA fighting man proudly and universally called himself Johnny Reb.



“1856 election of Lincoln”. Might want to fact check that one.
 



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top