Home Main Category Second Amendment/Politics

To inflame a beaten dead horse...State secession and slavery, circa 1860...

2

Replies

  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    But if you learn to avoid it in the future, then all is not lost.

    I have done that.

    The trouble is there more avoidance than future,


    Big Chief wrote: »
    :rotflmao::rotflmao:


    Watch it you.


    I have your number.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    I wonder if you locked an English Gentleman and an Arrogant German in a room together who would strangle whom first? :devil:
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,787 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    I want a discussion / debate. Not name calling.
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    Look at yourselves you blind hypocrites.

    Instead of making pronouncements about southerners and slavery, 150 years after its end, consider this:

    Southerners have been listening to self-righteous accusations against everyone south of the Mason-Dixon line for all of their lives, even though it has been several decades since anyone was alive who experienced slavery from either side. Consider also that roughly 12% of whites (in the south and the north) owned slaves in 1860. That being the case, there are very few families, today, whose standard of living, today, has been enhanced in any way by their ancestors having owned slaves...much less than the original 12%, because most slave owners lost everything in the war and its aftermath. Most, if not all of the actual slave owners were stripped of the gains they made as a result of using slave labor, and many who never owned slaves were treated exactly the same way.

    If you truly want a debate, somebody has to take the other side of the argument, and there is no need to get your panties in a wad over it.
  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    The English Gentleman, because the german was wearing leather shorts and being downright irritating.


    PS.

    And a very small moustache.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,105 Senior Member
    shush wrote: »
    The English Gentleman, because the german was wearing leather shorts and being downright irritating.


    PS.

    And a very small moustache.

    Not to be a nitpicker, but the German was also a lousy artist with no concept of perspective view principles as relates to art. Sayin'. :tooth:
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Not to be a nitpicker, but the German was also a lousy artist with no concept of perspective view principles as relates to art. Sayin'. :tooth:

    The tittle of this thread should read: "to beat a bloated dead horse"...
    I remember seeing bloated dead horses in the noon day Sun, waiting at a safe distance until BOOOOOM !!!!!! explosion & a mess !

    Was the German hawt ? joke. LoL. Ha ha..
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 7,996 Senior Member
    Sure, you can call slavery a root cause of the Civil War - how slavery would or would not expand into the western territories as they became states was a major point of contention. What those new states were going to look like was a hot button issue of the day.

    As Bisley says in post #2, the average Southerner picked up a musket over the right to determine their political issues locally, whether they had a dog in the slavery issue fight or not. It was about being governed by people who didn't understand the local problems that got people riled more than anything else.

    I've always seen that conflict as three-quarters of a million people getting killed and maimed over two great hypocrisies:

    1. On the South, you've got slavery in the land founded on "All Men Are Created Equal". That issue should have been sorted out in the 1780's, not the 1860's, and we can really blame the Founding Fathers for kicking the can to the next two generations.

    2. On the North, you've got keeping the States (which joined the Union independently) together at the point of a gun. Any of the Founding Fathers would have probably supported one state's right to bug out at any time.

    I tend to feel the North generally and Lincoln in particular was the probably bigger hypocrite, when you consider the commonly held beliefs and values of the day as concerned the black race. Slavery is an appalling concept to us NOW, but to the people of 1860, it was part of a landscape that had always been there. Industrialization was going to solve the problem by making slavery economically unsound eventually. How it would have played out WITHOUT four years of bloodletting is the "what if" I ponder most.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • KSU FirefighterKSU Firefighter Senior Member Posts: 3,249 Senior Member
    The last recorded occasion that I found of people being imported into the South as slaves that I found when doing a paper in college was April 1865. Americans have always been, and always will be talented at sneaking things past borders.
    The fire service needs a "culture of extinguishment not safety" Ray McCormack FDNY
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    Looks like the baker of this cake can't stand the heat of his oven- - - - -better slink out of the kitchen and apply a little burn ointment!
    :yesno: :jester:
    Jerry
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    It was about slavery to slave holders, but the individual state's right to decide for itself was probably what made the peons fight. It's very hard for me to believe that thousands of sharecroppers would charge the cannons to help some rich guy hold onto his slaves.

    Seems accurate to me, but the belief in slaves didn't necessarily mean that someone had to own them. And also realize that small scale slave ownership was prevalent in businesses or decently prosperous families who owned a maid maybe. Not all slave ownership was large scale.

    Regardless, it's like any issue -- there are plenty of supporters of things like free trade or restricted trade who aren't necessarily directly affected, but believe in those tenets nevertheless.

    On the general point, regardless of apologists, the Civil War and secession was rooted in slavery. The "states' rights" issue is correct, but it was the state's right to allow slavery for the most part. Jason is correct.

    I know there are those who defend the Confederacy to this day, some on this forum. But hey, if you really examine the causes, it was centered on slavery, which cannot be allowed to exist, period. Some may have emotional or old family ties to the Confederacy, but it was on the wrong side of true freedom. Sorry.

    I'm of course coming from a biased view, in that all my ancestors who were here at the time were strongly anti-slavery, pro Union, and REPUBLICANS. Caused a big split to my Sizemore side of the family, as well as the Boones (I'm from Kentucky). Like many families during this time, they were fragmented by opposing sides in the struggle. My great great whomever stuck to the Union and fought for it.

    And the entire Confederacy was, I remind you all, DEMOCRAT. Facts is facts.
  • RugerFanRugerFan Senior Member Posts: 2,193 Senior Member
    I was taught in MS history in college, by a black professor, that 70% of the population in MS did not own slaves. Of the 30% that did own slaves, 70 % own 5 or less. I suspect the percentages were similar in the other states.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,105 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »

    I know there are those who defend the Confederacy to this day, some on this forum. But hey, if you really examine the causes, it was centered on slavery, which cannot be allowed to exist, period. Some may have emotional or old family ties to the Confederacy, but it was on the wrong side of true freedom. Sorry.

    I'm of course coming from a biased view, in that all my ancestors who were here at the time were strongly anti-slavery, pro Union, and REPUBLICANS. Caused a big split to my Sizemore side of the family, as well as the Boones (I'm from Kentucky). Like many families during this time, they were fragmented by opposing sides in the struggle. My great great whomever stuck to the Union and fought for it.

    And the entire Confederacy was, I remind you all, DEMOCRAT. Facts is facts.

    I'll just throw this out there as Sam is having a selective memory. Political parties at the time weren't DEMOCRAT and REPUBLICAN as he suggests, and Tennessee was FIRMLY CONSTITUTIONAL UNION PARTY. As usual, painting with a broad brush makes one less than truthful. And Sam studiously avoids the fact that the SOUTHERN DEMOCRATS and NORTHERN DEMOCRATS split on who they wanted to run against Lincoln. That, and a 4th candidate assured the election of Lincoln.

    http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/nchist-antebellum/5421

    Graph showing political parties 1820-1860
    http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/uploads/2009/06/politics-antebellum.jpg

    Article from Wiki about the 1860 election. The North wasn't solid Republican as Sam states.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1860

    Sam's assertion that his forbears were Republican begs the question, of what party were they before 1854.

    http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/republican-party-founded

    Oh, what a tangled web we weave,
    When first we practice to deceive.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,787 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    I'm of course coming from a biased view, in that all my ancestors who were here at the time were strongly anti-slavery, pro Union, and REPUBLICANS. Caused a big split to my Sizemore side of the family, as well as the Boones (I'm from Kentucky). Like many families during this time, they were fragmented by opposing sides in the struggle. My great great whomever stuck to the Union and fought for it.

    I would like to know, with the same assurance you seem to have, what was in the heart of my great-great grandfather. But being a native southerner, it is simply not possible in either side of my family. Like many who are descended from generations of sharecroppers, burnt courthouses and Indian marriages prevent accurate family trees, much less any ability to determine which old-timers in the family were honest reporters of the facts, and which were just talented story-tellers.

    At a time when the idea of secession seems attractive to some, again, I would be hard-pressed to name one single issue that unites the proponents of it. Likely, it is not a single issue.
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,531 Senior Member
    The more I read the more confused on the topic I am, admittedly.

    I 100% believe Lincoln didn't go to war solely to end slavery. I'm just gray on all the rest.

    The established documentaries are a farce with no data that Mike has offered up. I guess I should be directing my frustration at a failed, miserable public education system...
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    I have no panties in a wad. And calling someone a hypocrite isn't "name calling", it's calling out a contradiction.

    My assertion has evolved to the basic statement:

    No matter what you defend the Confederacy for, a fundamental aspect of the fat cat agricultural economics of the south was slave owning plantations. And the super wealthy were the political powerhouse, like today. Defending the political position in any way of the Confederate States of America is a de facto defense for slavery.

    I'm only actually frustrated that no one is willing to make an admission to the aforementioned point. That's all.


    In light of the fact that no one here will agree with you, did you ever consider that maybe you're wrong?
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Hell man, the South couldn't attract enough Mexicans, so somebody had to pick the cotton for us!


    Donald Trump did not approve that message, I did solely on my own!



















    :jester::tooth::devil::devil: :spittingcoffee:

    Blast barriers and heat shields are up! :popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    The more I read the more confused on the topic I am, admittedly.


    It is all about perception.


    “A European says: I can't understand this, what's wrong with me? An American says: I can't understand this, what's wrong with him?
    I make no suggestion that one side or other is right, but observation over many years leads me to believe it is true.”
    ― Terry Pratchett

    :tooth:
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    Let me offer a distinctly biased account, one that I am as certain as I can be of its truthfulness. My great-grandmother emigrated to America from England as a 17-year-old in the late 1870's. After a short stay in New York, she and her father ended up in Nashville Tennessee, where she married a gentleman several years her senior. No, he was NOT a Confederate veteran, so the classic "young gold digger looking for a widow's pension" does not apply. He had been a merchant in Nashville during the war- - - -more about that later. His family owned a farm in Greenbrier Tennessee, about 20 miles north of Nashville. During the preparations for the Battle of Nashville, the union army camped on their property, where they slaughtered their livestock, harvested their crops, and generally impoverished a family of non-combatants. Once they captured Nashville, the man's tobacco store was looted down to the bare walls by rampaging union soldiers. Stories like this were commonplace throughout the south. At least none of the women in this particular family got raped- - - -maybe the soldiers should be commended for their restraint.

    The lady I mentioned passed away in the mid-1950's. She didn't need to read a biased book written by a bunch of liberals hellbent on rewriting history to pass on her opinions of the yankee occupation during what passed for "reconstruction". Got any snarky comments about her memories?
    Jerry
  • woodsrunnerwoodsrunner Senior Member Posts: 2,725 Senior Member
    This has been one of the more complicated and confusing Threads that we've had in some time IMO. We need to remember that at no time in the history of our Country has there been anywhere near total agreement on about anything. Perhaps we came the closest in December 1941, but even then there were dissidents about our involvement in the coming World War, though these were at a minimum in my opinion.

    Even here in the Deep South there has never been anywhere near total agreement on issues. Do your homework: Brush up on the history of the Regulators in North Carolina during the RevWar. Read about the conflicts between the Loyalists and the Patriots in South Carolina/Georgia during this time. The WBTS was no different, either. If my memory is right, research will show that about 165,000 Georgians fought for the Union, and maybe 260,000 fought for the Confederacy.

    In my own case I'm directly descended from fighters, all on the Patriot side of the RevWar, and all with the Confederacy during the WBTS. I was reared from the age of 14 months by a grandfather whose grandfather by whom he, too was reared, had been a surgeon in the 44th Georgia Vols. Regiment.,CSA. Family stories tell of this surgeon who would occasionally cross lines after battles to help, aid and assist wounded Yankee soldiers, working shoulder to shoulder with Yankee surgeons. (He was a 32nd Degree Scottish Rite Mason, by the way). The point that I'm making is simply that there has never been a case of pure black and white. Shades of grey have always been interwoven in our history. While I am weary and cautious of Vladimir Putin, I have more respect for him than I do for what we have at present in the Whitehouse....or is it now a
    Multi-Colored House!
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,531 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Let me offer a distinctly biased account, one that I am as certain as I can be of its truthfulness. My great-grandmother emigrated to America from England as a 17-year-old in the late 1870's. After a short stay in New York, she and her father ended up in Nashville Tennessee, where she married a gentleman several years her senior. No, he was NOT a Confederate veteran, so the classic "young gold digger looking for a widow's pension" does not apply. He had been a merchant in Nashville during the war- - - -more about that later. His family owned a farm in Greenbrier Tennessee, about 20 miles north of Nashville. During the preparations for the Battle of Nashville, the union army camped on their property, where they slaughtered their livestock, harvested their crops, and generally impoverished a family of non-combatants. Once they captured Nashville, the man's tobacco store was looted down to the bare walls by rampaging union soldiers. Stories like this were commonplace throughout the south. At least none of the women in this particular family got raped- - - -maybe the soldiers should be commended for their restraint.

    The lady I mentioned passed away in the mid-1950's. She didn't need to read a biased book written by a bunch of liberals hellbent on rewriting history to pass on her opinions of the yankee occupation during what passed for "reconstruction". Got any snarky comments about her memories?
    Jerry

    The more I read the more I am starting to understand.

    I went back and re-read every link in this thread and I do believe my thinking on this has been rewired compared to the falsely microscopic reasons for the War for Southern Independence. Slavery was an issue, yes. But as I read more about the--not stagnant as I was led to believe--very real and tense issues stemming from the late 1700s up until the 1850s and then eventually secessions before and after Lincoln's inauguration.

    Funny enough, if the Morrill Tariff is taught singularly alongside the growing norther abolitionist movements circa 1861 the tariff appears moot to the slavery matter.

    BUT, if you contextually refer to the tariff with regards to tariffs stemming from the early 1800s and the backstabbing of South Carolina (and the south) not only once, but twice with the eventual Morrill Tariff puts the matter in a truer light.

    You won't convince me the south didn't fight, in some regard, to keep slaves--they did. But this was a not a singular factor.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    ITS A JOKE, RELAX! :tooth:

    I know and so was my remarks about pickin cotton...................besides

    Like the Major told Maggot in the Dirty Dozen

    We Southern Boys Gotta Stick Together...................
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    Back in the 1960's, there was a pretty popular bumper sticker in our area:

    "If Grandpappy had known how much trouble they were gonna be, he woulda picked his own cotton!"

    Jerry
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,531 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Back in the 1960's, there was a pretty popular bumper sticker in our area:

    "If Grandpappy had known how much trouble they were gonna be, he woulda picked his own cotton!"

    Jerry

    Ironically, I think he may have been referring to the north...
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • KSU FirefighterKSU Firefighter Senior Member Posts: 3,249 Senior Member
    Ask someone from Vicksburg what they thought about the conduct of the war and the so-called "Reconstruction". Reconstruction as Lincoln, (supposedly), planned it was to heal the wounds and bind the Union back together. We will never know how that would have worked out. As implemented by his cabinet, it was a time of revenge for the Abolitionists. Carpetbaggers went South not to aid in the re-building of the infrastructure but to continue the pillaging that the troops started. Unfortunately that healed no wounds, but insured that tensions stayed inflamed for 100 plus years afterwards. Very similar to the conditions levied against Germany after WWI, which helped to tee up WWII.
    The fire service needs a "culture of extinguishment not safety" Ray McCormack FDNY
  • RugerFanRugerFan Senior Member Posts: 2,193 Senior Member
    Vicksburg did not celebrate the 4th of July until WWII.
  • woodsrunnerwoodsrunner Senior Member Posts: 2,725 Senior Member
    KSU, I think that you are totally correct in pointing out the similarities of WWI defeated Germany, and the economic woes forced on them, and the Reconstruction era (and beyond) of the American South. I have always said that, but few understood what I was saying! The Chicago Board of Trade was to blame for much of our problems, and I'm hard pressed to think of anything worth a damn coming out of Chicago since then!
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,105 Senior Member
    Here is a website with information you most assuredly didn't learn about in any level of schooling. This is only one article; there are many more to read in the left sidebar, and books for suggested reading at the end of each article. This article is a dirty side of the war that got little attention in history classes, but explains much.

    http://thomaslegion.net/civil_war_prisoner_of_war_prison_union_confederate_prisoners_and_prisons_.html

    I highly suggest reading a few more of the articles in the left sidebar. They are enlightening, and some of the links are collections of Civil War photos. Worth your time if you wish to learn about the war.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 7,996 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Let me offer a distinctly biased account, one that I am as certain as I can be of its truthfulness. . .Got any snarky comments about her memories?

    Snarky? Absolutely not. But it is inherent to the classic formula for fighting to actually WIN - the infrastructure, economy, and morale that supports the army you're fighting against has to GO. Nothing about the business is pretty, whether it's at the hands of William Tecumseh Sherman in 1864 or the 8th Air Force in 1943.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • woodsrunnerwoodsrunner Senior Member Posts: 2,725 Senior Member
    Bigslug, you've kicked the yellow jacket nest again! Destroy the ability to fight, yes! Break the spirit and desire to continue fighting, yes! But stomp the defeated enemy into the ground and continue stomping for 70 plus years, NO! And that's exactly what Reconstruction did for years! And I still see the remnants of it every day....drive through it on the way to town and back...n yankee plantations 3-4-8-15 thousand acres owned by the descendants of Crane Valve, US Steel, Chubb Insurance and a few family names that I won't mention... most tied to the Chicago Board of Trade... small tracts of a few hundred acres taken from original landowners for taxes and expanded upon to create large quail hunting plantations....and working their labor for minimum and below wages, Black labor and Mexicans, by the way! You don't believe this is true? It is....believe me!

    EDIT: Forgot to include Standard Oil, not that it makes much of a damn, because there are a number of additional yankee family groups still sitting on lands swindled from Southern families during Reconstruction. Check out the history of Thomasville, Georgia if you want to open your eyes to what took place in areas of the South where the soil was above average as it is in the Tallahassee Red Hills of Tallahassee, Fl.-Thomasville, Ga.-Albany, Ga. The Yankees are still sitting here, believe me!
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,531 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Here is a website with information you most assuredly didn't learn about in any level of schooling. This is only one article; there are many more to read in the left sidebar, and books for suggested reading at the end of each article. This article is a dirty side of the war that got little attention in history classes, but explains much.

    http://thomaslegion.net/civil_war_prisoner_of_war_prison_union_confederate_prisoners_and_prisons_.html

    I highly suggest reading a few more of the articles in the left sidebar. They are enlightening, and some of the links are collections of Civil War photos. Worth your time if you wish to learn about the war.

    So much good reading here. I've literally spent the last 3 hours reading and I'm not through half, I bet.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement