As we scramble to ease our "guilty conscience"

SouthernN'Proud said:
I ain't been confused for Nostradaumus anytime recently, but that's my guess.

And don't start the "moral" argument with me unless you're ready to learn a few things about The Great Dictator Lincoln and his morality during the 1860s and before.

The Confederate flag flew over legalized slavery for four years.

The United States flag flew over legalized slavery for 224 years, over every slave market in America, and from the bow of every ship transporting human beings from Africa to America to become slaves.

Which side bears the greater sin?
Click to expand...

The point is since the confederacy didn't win the war slavery was made illegal instead of slowly given up for financial reasons and ended up to 15 years earlier by your estimation thereby accelerating the advancement of human rights.

About the flags, didn't confederate states fly the us flag before the civil war?
 
Yes they did. And slavery wasn't made 100% illegal until the last state outlawed it, in 1901. Delaware (a Union state) coincidentally.

Gonz...slavery was practiced before 7/4/76 on this soil.
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
Gonz...slavery was practiced before 7/4/76 on this soil.
Click to expand...

Yessir, it was. That would have been primarily under the British, French & Dutch flags though.
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
Yes they did. And slavery wasn't made 100% illegal until the last state outlawed it, in 1901. Delaware (a Union state) coincidentally.

Gonz...slavery was practiced before 7/4/76 on this soil.
Click to expand...

so the confederate loss can still be considered a rapid acceleration of human rights and the decline of slavery.

Interesting->

Slave states and Free states
then_map_2.jpg


Red staes and Blue States
now_map_2.jpg
 
spike said:
so the confederate loss can still be considered a rapid acceleration of human rights and the decline of slavery.
Click to expand...

Many things can be considered many ways. You, like everyone else, will make your own determinations. If you choose to make them with less than accurate information, then you become a fool. It's inescapable. But take heart; you'll never be lonely.

I have one question for you. Think carefully before you answer.


Are you really sure you want to pick up this debate? Cuz lemme tell you, I can teach you some things about human rights in them precious blue states preceding, during, and since the 1860s. I will, however, only do so in PM, as these things have been beaten to death out here already and sam pays through the teeth for bandwidth. Hence, further discussion needs to be taken to PM.


Yer welcome, Leslie and Gonz. It's the least I could do. Now put down the bleach and have some punch and coookies. :p
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
Many things can be considered many ways. You, like everyone else, will make your own determinations. If you choose to make them with less than accurate information, then you become a fool. It's inescapable. But take heart; you'll never be lonely.

I have one question for you. Think carefully before you answer.


Are you really sure you want to pick up this debate?
Click to expand...

I enjoy debate but maybe this is sensitive issue for you. The determinations I'm making have really been based on your own predictions. Human rights in those years weren't great probably anywhere in the world.

The point I was making is simply this. The great majority of slaves were in the south. A confederate win would have extended their slavery for up to 15 years by your estimation and only ending then because of financial reasons.

So the confederate loss can be considered a very significant advancement of human rights. Human rights everywhere had a long way to go and still do.

I don't think there anything inaccurate about this but please let me know if there are or if you disagree with anything I've said.
 
chcr said:
Half of one, anyway. ;)

*Sometimes I crack myself up.*
Click to expand...

How sad. Actually, what's really sad is that that is exactly the comment I was gonna make. darn you and your evil jokes grandpa, darn you to heck. *shakes fist*
 
spike said:
then_map_2.jpg
Click to expand...


Ya know, it's kinda interesting. Considering that I was born & raised in Phoenix & upon looking at that map...who lived up north? :D
 
That's so awesome. Mount Holly is like 10 miles from me.

You should have told me that you were going to be passing through South Jersey, you could have gotten a real life tour and test drive of the land yacht.

SNP, take a joke man. I mostly agree with you. We already had this discussion. I am joking for the amusement of the people who get bored with the usual 'the south will rise again' rants. :p

Don't you get it? You rednecks are like Canada. We make fun of you, but at the end of the day, we all still live in America.
 
spike said:
The point I was making is simply this. The great majority of slaves were in the south.

I don't think there anything inaccurate about this but please let me know if there are or if you disagree with anything I've said.
Click to expand...

OK, I will.

Your statement above is wrong and another yankee myth. It was almost 50/50, and at certain times there were more up yonder than down here. Often, they were called "servents" or "maids" or "butlers" or whatnot so some could still feel superior to others, but a slave was a slave.

Every slave market of significance, if not every market period, was in Union territory. Was the act of keeping a slave a bigger sin than was the act of selling a slave?

Read the history of any major New England city you like...Boston, NYC, Hartford...and see where the wealth came from. See how the Adams (two presidents) made their fortune.

Now answer a question for me. One I already know the answer to, I just wanna see how honest you'll be.

Why is it that every time a person who is proud of their Southern heritage makes that attribute known, the discussion turns to slavery? You'd think that was all that was done here during that era. And yes, I am aware of the title of this thread...I started it after all. But various fingers could not wait to point. Why do you think that is? What is the root of the knee jerk?

spike said:
So the confederate loss can be considered a very significant advancement of human rights. Human rights everywhere had a long way to go and still do.
Click to expand...

It can be considered that, yes. It can also be considered a very significant advancement of overbearing federal government. It can also be considered the only time in American history that our federal government refused to allow a people freedom FROM oppressive government. It can be considered the death of democracy in America and the birth of a republic. It can also be considered the most glaring example of hatred, hypocrisy, and war crimes ever committed on this soil. It can also be considered the genesis of the most enduring, most frequently propogated, most widely held string of lies, misinformation, and cultural genocide in history. It can also be considered the only dictatorship in American history; the only American president to order and participate by proxy in mass execution (google Lincoln and Minnesota Indian hangings sometime...great reading). So yeah, it can be considered a lot of things, 99% of which your history textbook (edited and published in New England I wager) won't mention.

I suggest some reading. Take your pick...Mississippi congressional votes hijacked after the conclusion of the War of Northern Aggression, Oregon congress members locked out of congressional votes on emancipation, Mississippi timber sales to make financial reparations and their long term consequences on Mississippi's economy, Union soldiers' journals particularly in regard to which freed/kidnapped slaves survived...and how the others died, Sherman's war spoils, Lincoln's opinion of blacks, Ohio Massachussetts and Illinois (among others) laws regarding residency of blacks, Charles Dickens on secession, Grant and Lee's slave ownership before, during, and after Appomattox...I've read them all. I didn't adopt my beliefs overnight or lightly. Some of them hurt me like hell. But I would rather be historically accurate than politically correct. Others choose differently.

Oh, and while I'm at it, one more question. Anyone is free to answer this one.

Let us assume for one minute that you yourself become enslaved tomorrow. You are captured by armed soldiers, herded to the coastline, sold by your own peers, loaded onto a ship, are "lucky" enough to be one of the 30% to survive your voyage, led into an open air market in, oh let's say...Haiti, and sold into slavery. You are (borrowing from both history and myth here) beaten, separated from your family, whipped, tortured, forced to work mercilessly, half-starved, and generally treated by both your owner and his/her government as less than human. Then some all-conquering, glorious virtuous army comes and "frees" you. You. This is YOU I refer to. Would you stay where you were, or would you get as far away as possible as quickly as possible? Then look at your choice of US census statistics from any census from 1870 forward. Then tell me that what Mr. Whatshisname in 7th grade history class taught you the truth.
 
Altron said:
SNP, take a joke man. I mostly agree with you. We already had this discussion. I am joking for the amusement of the people who get bored with the usual 'the south will rise again' rants. :p

Don't you get it? You rednecks are like Canada. We make fun of you, but at the end of the day, we all still live in America.
Click to expand...

We live in vastly different Americas.

There's a feature on your control panel that allows you to ignore my posts. If you choose to remain misinformed, use it. It's free. I hear a dollar is real important up that way.
 
50/50? What was the distribution numbers of slaves at the time of the civil war? My point was that the confederate loss in the civil war advanced human rights considerably.

The discussion turned to slavery because your first post was "once again whites are trying to buy blacks".

You're branching this conversation away from my point and I'd rather not branch off until this one is covered. If there is anything to contradict that the confederate loss meant freedom from slavery for a huge number of people please tell me.

I will answer your last question. "Would you stay where you were, or would you get as far away as possible as quickly as possible? ". My guess it's the same reason homeless people don't go to warmer climates after enduring a NYC winter on the street.
 
I didn't ask about homeless people. I asked you.

Yes, 50/50. It fluctuated as all things do from year to year and decade to decade, but it's documented fact.

There are hundreds of reputable books, articles, essays, surviving first-hand accounts and other resources addressing the question you ask about advancement of living conditions. You should have little trouble finding them, but if you want I will dig out a few for you. Due to the complete loss of my home in January to fire, 90% of everything we have replaced is still packed away so unfortunately I cannot at this time reach three feet to my left and provide them for you. When I am able to access my library again I will be more than thrilled to provide exact titles for you. In their stead, allow me to paraphrase from memory a Union soldier's letter to his relatives, in part:

"We came upon a Georgia farm that had been destroyed. There were several Negroes there. We tried to explain to them that they were to come with us, but of course they were incapable of understanding this. We rounded them up, some by force, with the others and started back.

Naturally, we were only interested in the stronges of the men, and some of my company was quite interested in the prettiest of the females for a while. I could hear the screams of the women as a few of the others had their way with them. We would take the savages with us for as long as it took to separate the strong from the weak.

When we came to a river crossing, we would ford our way across then wait for the Negroes on the far bank. Their fuzzy, bobbing heads made great target practice for us as they struggled across the rivers and streams. After we had killed the undesirables, the rest made their journey in a subdued fashion.

I have several rings for you and the girls, and a pearl pin for you I hid from General Sherman. He is almost legendary in his thirst for plunder. Silver teapots, gold watches, most anything of value seems to find its way to him. His share of the haul from one day recently was over forty gold watches alone."




Now talk to me about advancing human rights.
 
I'm not trying to tell you about homeless people. I just said it's probably the same reasons.

I found some census data from 1860 and itdoesn't look like 50/50
http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html

Your story shows that there were bad men from the North and I imagine there were very many more. It doesn't dispute the idea that the confederate loss and freedom for slaves was a massive advancement of human rights though. Just that there was still a long way to go.
 
spike said:
I'm not trying to tell you about homeless people. I just said it's probably the same reasons.
Click to expand...

Now I call you on your same game. Answer the question. Last chance.

What would YOU...Y-O-U...do in the situation I described? No probablies, no kinda likes, no evading. Would you stay or would you get as far away as you could?
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
Now I call you on your same game. Answer the question. Last chance.

What would YOU...Y-O-U...do in the situation I described? No probablies, no kinda likes, no evading. Would you stay or would you get as far away as you could?
Click to expand...


Me? I would stick around looking for opportunities to kick some slavemaster ass. I may not be a good example of the norm though because I'm just vindictive like that.

So can I assume since you didn't reply to my other points that we don't have to deal with this 50/50 stuff or your opposition to the idea that the confederate loss was a huge advancement of human rights?

If that's the case I'd be glad to branch off to your other topics.
 
spike said:
Me? I would stick around looking for opportunities to kick some slavemaster ass. I may not be a good example of the norm though because I'm just vindictive like that.
Click to expand...

You aren't a good example of the norm. You have also failed to give proper consideration to the truth of the myths you have swallowed. If you had been treated as is so often described, there would be mental intimidation and heaven knows what else in your way. But, suit yourself.


So can I assume since you didn't reply to my other points that we don't have to deal with this 50/50 stuff or your opposition to the idea that the confederate loss was a huge advancement of human rights?

If that's the case I'd be glad to branch off to your other topics.
Click to expand...

I have already addressed in painstaking detail your assertaion about human rights. If you can't comprehend an opposing viewpoint, we're wasting time. As to the 50% statement, I clearly stated that it fluctuated decade to decade. You pull one and think that proves something. Nice try, but flawed.

Apparently, you're the one driving this car. I don't care what you believe or what you ask. I stated I'll discuss anything you like, and there are dozens on here who know I won't back away from this topic. That's because I'm right, whether you choose to rethink the lies you memorized for a diploma or not. I was fed the same line of crap to regurgitate. I since became an adult and learned to read for myself and draw conclusions based on fact, not myth. Others (many others) choose not to do so. Their loss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top