Confederate History Month - April

6,261 Views | 82 Replies | Last: 21 days ago by Redbrickbear
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Johnny Bear said:

CammoTX said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

Slavery was terrible, no doubt.

The fact that the U.S. has been having to babysit the dysfunctional descendants of slaves for 180 years who cann seem to get their **** together is almost as bad.

We should have sent them all back to LIberia and saved us the headaches.


Well we made it so easy for them to prosper after they were freed, right?

Actually for the last half century plus it has been made relatively easy for them to prosper - at least for those intelligent enough to make wise decisions (and joining a gang, dealing drugs, dropping out of school, getting pregnant out of wedlock as a teenager, and being satisfied to live off of the taxpayer dole are examples of bad ones). It's just that sadly statistically few of them take advantage of it.

For 50+ years the Democrats have trained and encouraged blacks, whites, and minorities in general to make those mistakes. Under slavery and Jim Crow (designed to maintain as much of slavery as possible), blacks were acculturated to be that way. Those blacks who managed to escape the system were often derided by the dominant culture (ie Clarence Thomas or any black Republican today). It's a complicated mess.

The sins of the fathers are being visited upon their descendants gif multiple generations.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
TWD 1974
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thee University said:

Porteroso said:


Yeah, it was actually a few corners of the world, and the culture of the rest was forcibly repressed. It is worth remembering that most Confederates simply answered a call to protect their home. But theirs was a way of life sustained by slave labor. I am sad that the war happened in te first place, but glad that the South lost it.

Sustained by slave labor???? The vast majority of Southerners did not own slaves and were dirt poor just scraping by on their own accord.

Lincoln started the war and sacrificed around 750,000 Americans and new, off the boat immigrants.

Every statue, monument, road and likeness of Lincoln needs to be wiped off the face of the US of A.
Estimates of the market value of the Slave Population in 1860 ranges from $3billion to $4billion: the entire US economy at the time was slightly over $4b. That fact that many southerners held no slaves does not mean that the Southern economy was anything less than wholly dominated by slave agriculture. The maintenance, enforcement of slaves, and enormous debt the Planter class accrued in acquiring them, debilitated the South in developing a diverse, modern economy.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TWD 1974 said:

Thee University said:

Porteroso said:


Yeah, it was actually a few corners of the world, and the culture of the rest was forcibly repressed. It is worth remembering that most Confederates simply answered a call to protect their home. But theirs was a way of life sustained by slave labor. I am sad that the war happened in te first place, but glad that the South lost it.

Sustained by slave labor???? The vast majority of Southerners did not own slaves and were dirt poor just scraping by on their own accord.

Lincoln started the war and sacrificed around 750,000 Americans and new, off the boat immigrants.

Every statue, monument, road and likeness of Lincoln needs to be wiped off the face of the US of A.
Estimates of the market value of the Slave Population in 1860 ranges from $3billion to $4billion: the entire US economy at the time was slightly over $4b. That fact that many southerners held no slaves does not mean that the Southern economy was anything less than wholly dominated by slave agriculture. The maintenance, enforcement of slaves, and enormous debt the Planter class accrued in acquiring them, debilitated the South in developing a diverse, modern economy.

Certainly...the Southern upper class was heavily invested financially in Slavery.


And another reason why Lincoln and the Northern political leadership did NOT wish to interfere with slavery as a economic matter.

They just wanted the Southern States to stay in the Union and keep paying taxes.

"During the 1850s, tariffs amounted to nearly 90% of federal revenue. And Southern ports paid 75% of tariffs in 1859"

"They want to keep the slave-States in for their benefit to foot the bills, to pay the taxes."
-Sen Lane (D-OR) 3/2/1861

[Lincoln's July 4th Message to Congress: "Finding this condition of things and believing it to be an imperative duty upon the incoming Executive to prevent, if possible, the consummation of such attempt to break the Federal Union, a choice of means to that end became indispensable. This choice was made, and was declared in the inaugural address. The policy chosen looked to the exhaustion of all peaceful measures before a resort to any stronger ones. It sought only to hold the public places and property not already wrested from the Government and to collect the revenue, relying for the rest on time, discussion, and the ballot box." President Lincoln was referring to the federal sales tax on imports to Southern States under the Morrill Tariff Act of 1861]

"The Northwest (Midwest) was as agricultural as the South; the Republicans were vigorous in disclaiming abolitionist tendencies and were willing to leave slavery alone where it was...the problem of why these sections went to war lies deeper." -Prof Craven

[Before President elect Lincoln held his hand up to be sworn in, almost half of the normal Treasury Revenue 'Expected' had been diverted to the new CSA. Newspapers all over the country, in the hundreds and hundreds of stories brought this most serious issue to the readers - "Lincoln would not be able to run the Government, without some way of collecting the revenue going to Southern Ports." Politicians and newspapers advocated in February - the blockade of Southern ports, and making war on the seceded Southern government, due to "lost revenue."]
Limited IQ Redneck in PU
How long do you want to ignore this user?
historian said:

Only a tiny number of wealthy southerners owned slaves but those wealthy elites controlled southern society, culture, economy, & politics. Somewhat like today.

Slavery was the driving force of the antebellum south, underpinning everything they did.
I think only 1% owned over 200 slaves, while 20% owned at least 1. Not sure what the number "tiny" means. No one in my family owned slaves but I lost two distant uncles at Shiloh. Had I been born around 1840 I would have fought for the south because I would have been from Texas
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KaiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

historian said:

Only a tiny number of wealthy southerners owned slaves but those wealthy elites controlled southern society, culture, economy, & politics. Somewhat like today.

Slavery was the driving force of the antebellum south, underpinning everything they did.
I think only 1% owned over 200 slaves, while 20% owned at least 1. Not sure what the number "tiny" means. No one in my family owned slaves but I lost two distant uncles at Shiloh. Had I been born around 1840 I would have fought for the south because I would have been from Texas
Not sure even 20% of southerners owned at least one slave as the vast majority of whites were cash poor.

And a slave field hand cost approximately 800 to 1100 dollars; in a time when a skilled white tradesman was fortunate to earn 4 dollars a DAY.

My family was still in Northern Ireland in 1860.

However if I had been born in the US in1840, would have moved to California and opened a miners supply company.

Thee University
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Speaking of Confederate history..........................You boys who either grew up or live today down around Port Arthur, Orange or Beaumont might like this. We are approaching the 161st anniversary of the Battle of Sabine Pass on Sunday.

The Battle of Sabine Pass is an amazing story of how 47 men of the Jeff Davis Guards fought off an armada of 4 gunboats, 22 transports and 5,000 men, capturing 2 of the gunboats and 350 prisoners without losing a man. Jefferson Davis later wrote that he considered Sabine Pass the most remarkable battle in military history.

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/civil-war/battles/sabine-pass

47 Texans, in 35 to 45 minutes kIcked that Yankee @$$ and ran what was left of their 5,000 men, back out into the Gulf of Mexico.

"So often times it happens that we live our lives in chains And we never even know we have the key"
Limited IQ Redneck in PU
How long do you want to ignore this user?
My source was from Duke University but the actual paper was written by a black woman to so it might be biased. My point was I think slavery was more widespread than the poster implied.. The maternal side of my family got here from Ireland in the 1830's and helped on a tobacco plantation in Virginia till they saved enough to buy a few acres near Moody Texas. They grew cotton and corn. Never owned slaves but several of the men fought for Texas and the South.
I have found theres only two ways to go:
Living fast or dying slow.
I dont want to live forever.
But I will live while I'm here.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

My source was from Duke University but the actual paper was written by a black woman to so it might be biased. My point was I think slavery was more widespread than the poster implied.. The maternal side of my family got here from Ireland in the 1830's and helped on a tobacco plantation in Virginia till they saved enough to buy a few acres near Moody Texas. They grew cotton and corn. Never owned slaves but several of the men fought for Texas and the South.



Unless someone had never investigated the matter at all…everyone knows slavery was disbursed over a large area…but concentrated in the counties that made up the modern Black belt and the Chesapeake

0.5% of Southerners owned more than 50 slaves (the true land owning aristocracy), 21% owned at least 1 slave, 79% of Southern Whites owned no slaves at all.





historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In some counties of the Deep South, blacks outnumbered whites. That was also true of the entire state of South Carolina in 1860.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
historian said:

In some counties of the Deep South, blacks outnumbered whites. That was also true of the entire state of South Carolina in 1860.


It's still true of certain counties today.

(Or another way of saying it…a minority of Southern counties held the vast majority of slaves)


KaiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thee University said:

Speaking of Confederate history..........................You boys who either grew up or live today down around Port Arthur, Orange or Beaumont might like this. We are approaching the 161st anniversary of the Battle of Sabine Pass on Sunday.

The Battle of Sabine Pass is an amazing story of how 47 men of the Jeff Davis Guards fought off an armada of 4 gunboats, 22 transports and 5,000 men, capturing 2 of the gunboats and 350 prisoners without losing a man. Jefferson Davis later wrote that he considered Sabine Pass the most remarkable battle in military history.

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/civil-war/battles/sabine-pass

47 Texans, in 35 to 45 minutes kIcked that Yankee @$$ and ran what was left of their 5,000 men, back out into the Gulf of Mexico.




Been there twice.

The most amazing victory of either side during the entire war.

Jefferson Davis ordered victory medals for every Southern soldier involved.

Was the only time the cash strapped Confederate government ordered such a medal.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Though a child of the North, and not blind to the faults of the South, we have always personally preferred southern to northern society. Its superiority was proved in the civil war, in which the South showed a unanimity, an energy, a hardihood, a spirit of endurance, and a power of sacrifice, that we found not in the North. The federals had as much military science and skill as the confederates, but their armies were less efficiently commanded and handled. The confederate armies were organized under their natural leaders, while it is the misfortune of the North to have no natural leaders, no natural aristocracy; or if it has them, it does not recognize them. A manufacturing and shopkeeping people appreciate only the talent that succeeds in the business world,- a talent of no account in military command or in statesmanship. We doubt if our republic could stand without the southern element; and hence we regard the policy that would destroy that element, and yankeeize...the South, no less hostile to the Union and the stability of the republic, than secession itself." - Orestes Brownson of Vermont, Brownson's Quarterly Review, 1873

 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.