"Jefferson owned slaves...should we take down his memorial?"

[User Name]

The Confederacy fought to keep slavery. Why you are proud to wave that flag?

 

[shagster01]

You said the congressman said it. Either way, idiocy.

The interviewer asked if we should also ban statues of Custer and he said no, because groups like the KKK don't carry statues of Custer around.

 

[Nazaroo]

There are some serious problems with the slant in these statements below.

One of the problems is a fundamental misunderstanding of history,
namely historical trends and forces.

The problems also perpetuate racial problems,
by making excuses which are irrelevant and inaccurate:

.According to http://powderedwigsociety.com/true-cause-of-the-civil.../..........."Lincoln said he supported the Corwin Amendment and said if the southern states rejoined the Union that the Corwin Amendment would pass and be ratified. The Corwin Amendment would have kept slavery legal in the south forever under the Constitution."

Whether or not Lincoln might have allowed slavery to continue for a time,
had various business deals and economic agreements been made is irrelevant.

Ever since the early 1800s,
Christian men in Britain and throughout the Empire
had already begun a campaign to end slavery,
mainly over the brutality and injustice of practical implementations,
and especially over the obvious incompatibility with fundamental Christianity.

This itself was a fallout from the Reformation, and the increasing awareness
of the violation of human rights that government by force,
hierarchy and privilege, institutionalized religion, and 'divine rights' of kings
created when not guided by true Christian principles and beliefs.

The fall of slavery was inevitable in an age of progress in communication,
education, interest in political options and where styles of government
were put under the public light and critical eye of scientific thought.

It is likely that Lincoln in the early years had not seen nor worked out
the implications of progress in treatment of workers, indentured servants,
and slaves, but it is also inevitable that the ramifications would become
evident as these significant issues were brought into the public view.

Slavery must come to an end, as progress advances.

Britain Ended Slavery worldwide

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NoWIZv96KU

The South had to pay high prices to get manufactured goods which for the North were protected from foreign competition. The South produced less stuff from factories and was an an economic disadvantage relative to the North, in addition to the large difference in favor of the North in population.

The larger population of the North would inevitably mean
more political power, and economic power.
That is precisely how a democracy SHOULD work.

Votes are counted.
The majority should have the greatest impact in policy.

There is no reason to expect or demand that the South should have
some kind of 'divine right' to "equality" with the North.
Equality of individuals does not magically transfer to states, regions,
or square miles of farmland.

So the answer to the above is, So what?

Later in the war, January 1863, Lincoln issued his Executive Order freeing black slaves only in territories controlled by the Confederacy, and not in states of the Union then or in parts of the South taken by the federals. Lincoln did this as a military move hoping it would cause an uprising of the slaves in the Confederacy, not necessarily to free slaves since Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware were Union states that still had slaves even as late as 1865.

In the end it doesn't matter what order or how slavery was ended.
Tactical considerations may have caused Lincoln to end it in the South first.
But the Union of all the states required slavery to end in all states rather quickly.

This was inevitable, because even the Southerners could see that
if slavery had to end, it must end everywhere, not just in the South.
There could be no special 'privilege' for some people to continue
a barbaric and cruel practice, which was being outlawed in any case,
everywhere else in the world.

The Confederacy had a population disadvantage relative to the North and had to rely on slaves to grow food, while so many able bodied men were in the Army.

Nothing could be more tragically absurd and evil than a statement like this.

Slavery was necessary, because the South was at war?
If so, then why was it necessary when the South was at peace?

And if slavery was necessary to win the war, but the war was lost,
then obviously it wasn't necessary, or even effective.

This is a classic case of lies being used to perpetrate the fuzzy thinking
and rationalization of slavery in the first place.

The word of God teaches that "if you don't work, you don't eat."
If white Southerners thought they would starve without slaves,
maybe they should have been put to work and learn a mandatory Bible lesson.

The issue of the unfair Tariffs the Northern controlled Congress and President imposed on the South was one reason why the South withdraw from the Union.

Maybe this is true historically.
But so what.

If you don't like somebody's prices, don't buy their stuff.
If the North started a war, it was obviously to create a larger territory.
Kingdoms come and go, along with the kings. Who cares?

Christians have to temporarily tolerate governments,
but eventually Jesus will be the government.

The reason for the war and bloodshed was the invasion of the South by the federal government.

Probably. But then again, who cares?

Its obvious God used the North to end slavery.

Who cares if they were really a bunch of opportunistic criminals?

God is not mocked, and He gets done what He wants done.

The South lost for the same reason Hitler lost.
They were both jerks.

They were not on the same page as the Master of the Universe.

Cry me a river.

river

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aclqs1Lxm8M

 

[tetelestai]

It was not until 1913 that another man from the South was elected President, Woodrow Wilson,

"The white men were roused by a mere instinct of self-preservation—until at last there had sprung into existence a great Ku Klux Klan, a veritable empire of the South, to protect the Southern country.” - Woodrow Wilson

 

[rougueone]

Southerners played an important role in the founding of the U.S., in creating the Constitution, and in formulating our political ideology

The First 12 Presidents:

Washington, George, Virginia
Adams, John, Massachusetts
Jefferson, Thomas, Virginia
Madison, James, Virginia
Monroe, James, Virginia
Adams, John Quincy, Massachusetts
Jackson, Andrew, South Carolina
Harrison, William Henry, Virginia
Van Buren, Martin, New York
Tyler, John, Virginia
Polk, James K., North Carolina
Taylor, Zachary, Virginia

Zachary Taylor was the 12th President and the last of the Southern Presidents of the 19th century. Andrew Johnson (1808-1875) was from North Carolina, but he was Abraham Lincoln's vice-president, and did not represent the Southern political tradition.

Of the first twelve presidents nine were from the Southern states. The Three presidents of the first 12 who were not Southerners were John Adams, from Massachusetts, Martin Van Buren from New York and John Quincy Adams from Massachusetts.

Zachery Taylor was President from 1849 until 1850. Following Zachery Taylor was Millard Fillmore from New York.

The Southern domination of the Executive Office ended in 1850. So, eleven years before the beginning of the 1861-65 war the political power and rule of the South ended and the North took over the political rule of the nation.

It was not until 1913 that another man from the South was elected President, Woodrow Wilson, and he was not in the political tradition of Jefferson, Madison and Monroe nor of that of Andrew Jackson and James K. Polk, the Scotch-Irish Presidents from the South.



As the balance of political - and economic - power shifted from the South to the North, the two elites - the Northern New England money power versus the Southern plantation large scale slave owning elite - came into conflict with one another.

.

Later in the war, January 1863, Lincoln issued his Executive Order freeing black slaves only in territories controlled by the Confederacy, and not in states of the Union then or in parts of the South taken by the federals. Lincoln did this as a military move hoping it would cause an uprising of the slaves in the Confederacy, not necessarily to free slaves since Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware were Union states that still had slaves even as late as 1865. The Confederacy had a population disadvantage relative to the North and had to rely on slaves to grow food, while so many able bodied men were in the Army.

Deleted. I had a change of heart. Your cited source is correct. And Nazaroo, overall is correct.

 

[musterion]

The Confederacy fought to keep slavery.

They did? That was their #1 reason for going to war with the North?

Why you are proud to wave that flag?

Who is "we"? I don't own one.

 

[Granite]

"The white men were roused by a mere instinct of self-preservation—until at last there had sprung into existence a great Ku Klux Klan, a veritable empire of the South, to protect the Southern country.” - Woodrow Wilson

Screened Birth of a Nation at the White House--big fan, from what I understand.

 

[tetelestai]

Screened Birth of a Nation at the White House--big fan, from what I understand.

Birth of a Nation was a silent movie from 1915

Some of the texts that were inserted on the screen during the movie, were actually published by Woodrow Wilson earlier in 1902.

You do know Woodrow Wilson was a Democrat, and is considered by many to be the grandaddy of Progressive Liberalism?

Screened Birth of a Nation at the White House

Yes, in 1915

100 years later, in 2015, Obama invited black director Ava DuVernay to the White House to screen the movie Selma.

That's just one of the reasons I think tremendous progress has been made in this country, but at the same time, there's still a long way to go.

 

[Granite]

Birth of a Nation was a silent movie from 1915

Some of the texts that were inserted on the screen during the movie, were actually published by Woodrow Wilson earlier in 1902.

You do know Woodrow Wilson was a Democrat, and is considered by many to be the grandaddy of Progressive Liberalism?

I know he was a rabid racist and arrogant son of a gun. I also know the Republican and Democratic parties from a century ago bear next to no resemblance to what we have today. Let's stop with that shtick already.

 

[tetelestai]

I also know the Republican and Democratic parties from a century ago bear next to no resemblance to what we have today.

I think both parties are still the same, just more extreme than they used to be.

However, all the bigots and racists have left the Democrat party and jointed the Republican party, while most of the blacks have left the Republican party and joined the Democrat party.

 

[Granite]

I think both parties are still the same, just more extreme than they used to be.

However, all the bigots and racists have left the Democrat party and jointed the Republican party, while most of the blacks have left the Republican party and joined the Democrat party.

I'm not sure what point there is to this other than one side trying to make themselves feel better about lever they pull in November. Yes, the migrations you mention are quite real, but I think the history of each party--or maybe the label itself--is less relevant than a lot of people seem to think. I mean, if we want to be consistent, let's reach back and see what the Democrats and GOP had to say about suffrage, Prohibition, joining the League of Nations, and changes to the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

[northwye]

Political correctness sets up a dialectic with the Old Confederacy, the Old South, Racism, and Black Slavery on the one side and the absolution movement plus rule over the people and the states by an all powerful federal government on the opposite side.. In such a dialectic, meaning opposition between two opposing positions, the differences between the positions are often exaggerated.

The Old South played important roles in winning the Revolutionary War and in setting up the Constitutional Republic. In a true Democracy the north could dominate and exploit the South. But in a Constitutional Republic there are safeguards and checks and balances which would make this exploitation more difficult.

James Madison and his Committee in the House created the Bill of Rights, a big part of the Constitutional Republic. Madison was from Virginia.

The Bill of Rights is involved in the dialectic that political correctness has set up. Race and other stereotypes are used by political correctness to diminish important parts of the Bill of Rights, now the First and Second Amendments, and the Fourth also.

In personality-social psychology there is a concept called predilection for single orderings.

This means that many people are unable to deal with a complex set of oppositions. For example, Black Slavery Is Good versus All Slavery is Bad is a single ordering, that most people can understand.

But when you create a dialectic that is more complex than such a single ordering many people cannot deal with that.

The dialectic which political correctness has created is such a complex ordering.

This is because Black Slavery and the Old South having played an important role in the creation of the U.S. in the Constitutional Republic and in the Bill of Rights versus Opposition To All Slavery associated with the Present Day National Security State all-powerful government is a complex ordering. Many people can only focus on one part of the ordering at a time, which means emphasis can be made on the Old South being racist because they had Black slavery.

Since the purpose of political correctness is to diminish that Constitutional Republic even more, and especially diminish the first two Amendments of the Bill of Rights, then the dialectic itself has to be exposed for what it is, a manipulation.

Again, political correctness presents the deception of a single ordering in the opposition, Racism and Black Slavery, Confederacy versus Opposition to Slavery and the Old South.

It begins with the Second Amendment, linking gun rights to racism, but in the opposition to racism and the political correctness animosity to the Old South, political correctness attacks the First Amendment also, and in a less than subtle way.

Reality is more complex than the single-ordering mind can understand. It happens that the Old South played a strong role in establishing U.S. political ideology, probably the best in the world in 1776, and at the same time the states of the Old South were slave states, some more so than others. And - accuracy and truth is served by showing that the Lincoln Administration did not invade the South and start the war of 1861-65 to end Black slavery. There are some parallels between what the Lincoln administration did and what is happening now.