Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
It was a war over a way of life, a way of life that was archaic and
fundamentally wrong in many of it's aspects, and bound to crumble
at some point in time.
Too bad it cost thousands of lives for the process to evolve.
Such inculturated ideas always die the hardest death, and the
civil war was an extreme example.
Study history with a biased mind and you learn only what you wanted to know. Study with an objective approach and you quickly learn that history is about things that are told to future generations, not about what happened. Further, history changes with the re-telling to suit the expectations of the day.
I started studying the Civil War from a military perspective but found too many unanswered questions. I then looked at the War from a political angle. The truth of why the South seceded and why the North went to war to prevent it is all there in the words of those who were there. And, it's the only truth; anyone writing about the War after-the-fact has other motives.
Here's a few teasers ... all supported by documented facts;
1. The South did not secede to keep slavery; neither did the North go to war to prevent it.
2. The South did not start the War at Ft. Sumter. Why would it attack the North when it already had all it wanted?
3. The "Great Emancipator" Abe Lincoln never freed a single slave. Not one.
4. The War's ending did not free the slaves.
5. Robert E. Lee did not own slaves; Ulysses S. Grant did by way of marrying a woman from a slaveholding family.
6. Only a small fraction of antebellum Americans ever owned a slave. Being black did not make one a slave even in slave states where many free blacks owned other blacks.
7. The last slave ship to ever dock in a U.S. port was Boston, and slave labor was used to build Brown University (Brown's Chancellor never made a mention of slavery until he left Brown for Vanderbilt in the South --- then he wanted to change the names of every "Confederate" sounding building on campus).
8. Four slave states stayed with the North (odd behavior to participate in a "war to end slavery").
9. Half of the Confederate states elected to stay with the Union when secession came; only seceding after the shooting started and Northern armies were being mobilized to invade them anyway.
10. The U.S. Capital Building was completed during the Civil War years ... by slave labor.
I could go on and on, but this is long enough. Anyone arguing the Civil War from a slavery perspective is wasting time.
Study history with a biased mind and you learn only what you wanted to know. Study with an objective approach and you quickly learn that history is about things that are told to future generations, not about what happened. Further, history changes with the re-telling to suit the expectations of the day.
I started studying the Civil War from a military perspective but found too many unanswered questions. I then looked at the War from a political angle. The truth of why the South seceded and why the North went to war to prevent it is all there in the words of those who were there. And, it's the only truth; anyone writing about the War after-the-fact has other motives.
Here's a few teasers ... all supported by documented facts;
1. The South did not secede to keep slavery; neither did the North go to war to prevent it.
2. The South did not start the War at Ft. Sumter. Why would it attack the North when it already had all it wanted?
3. The "Great Emancipator" Abe Lincoln never freed a single slave. Not one.
4. The War's ending did not free the slaves.
5. Robert E. Lee did not own slaves; Ulysses S. Grant did by way of marrying a woman from a slaveholding family.
6. Only a small fraction of antebellum Americans ever owned a slave. Being black did not make one a slave even in slave states where many free blacks owned other blacks.
7. The last slave ship to ever dock in a U.S. port was Boston, and slave labor was used to build Brown University (Brown's Chancellor never made a mention of slavery until he left Brown for Vanderbilt in the South --- then he wanted to change the names of every "Confederate" sounding building on campus).
8. Four slave states stayed with the North (odd behavior to participate in a "war to end slavery".
9. Half of the Confederate states elected to stay with the Union when secession came; only seceding after the shooting started and Northern armies were being mobilized to invade them anyway.
10. The U.S. Capital Building was completed during the Civil War years ... by slave labor.
I could go on and on, but this is long enough. Anyone arguing the Civil War from a slavery perspective is wasting time.
Study history with a biased mind and you learn only what you wanted to know. Study with an objective approach and you quickly learn that history is about things that are told to future generations, not about what happened. Further, history changes with the re-telling to suit the expectations of the day.
I started studying the Civil War from a military perspective but found too many unanswered questions. I then looked at the War from a political angle. The truth of why the South seceded and why the North went to war to prevent it is all there in the words of those who were there. And, it's the only truth; anyone writing about the War after-the-fact has other motives.
Here's a few teasers ... all supported by documented facts;
1. The South did not secede to keep slavery; neither did the North go to war to prevent it.
2. The South did not start the War at Ft. Sumter. Why would it attack the North when it already had all it wanted?
3. The "Great Emancipator" Abe Lincoln never freed a single slave. Not one.
4. The War's ending did not free the slaves.
5. Robert E. Lee did not own slaves; Ulysses S. Grant did by way of marrying a woman from a slaveholding family.
6. Only a small fraction of antebellum Americans ever owned a slave. Being black did not make one a slave even in slave states where many free blacks owned other blacks.
7. The last slave ship to ever dock in a U.S. port was Boston, and slave labor was used to build Brown University (Brown's Chancellor never made a mention of slavery until he left Brown for Vanderbilt in the South --- then he wanted to change the names of every "Confederate" sounding building on campus).
8. Four slave states stayed with the North (odd behavior to participate in a "war to end slavery").
9. Half of the Confederate states elected to stay with the Union when secession came; only seceding after the shooting started and Northern armies were being mobilized to invade them anyway.
10. The U.S. Capital Building was completed during the Civil War years ... by slave labor.
I could go on and on, but this is long enough. Anyone arguing the Civil War from a slavery perspective is wasting time.
Study history with a biased mind and you learn only what you wanted to know. Study with an objective approach and you quickly learn that history is about things that are told to future generations, not about what happened. Further, history changes with the re-telling to suit the expectations of the day.
I started studying the Civil War from a military perspective but found too many unanswered questions. I then looked at the War from a political angle. The truth of why the South seceded and why the North went to war to prevent it is all there in the words of those who were there. And, it's the only truth; anyone writing about the War after-the-fact has other motives.
Here's a few teasers ... all supported by documented facts;
1. The South did not secede to keep slavery; neither did the North go to war to prevent it.
2. The South did not start the War at Ft. Sumter. Why would it attack the North when it already had all it wanted?
3. The "Great Emancipator" Abe Lincoln never freed a single slave. Not one.
4. The War's ending did not free the slaves.
5. Robert E. Lee did not own slaves; Ulysses S. Grant did by way of marrying a woman from a slaveholding family.
6. Only a small fraction of antebellum Americans ever owned a slave. Being black did not make one a slave even in slave states where many free blacks owned other blacks.
7. The last slave ship to ever dock in a U.S. port was Boston, and slave labor was used to build Brown University (Brown's Chancellor never made a mention of slavery until he left Brown for Vanderbilt in the South --- then he wanted to change the names of every "Confederate" sounding building on campus).
8. Four slave states stayed with the North (odd behavior to participate in a "war to end slavery").
9. Half of the Confederate states elected to stay with the Union when secession came; only seceding after the shooting started and Northern armies were being mobilized to invade them anyway.
10. The U.S. Capital Building was completed during the Civil War years ... by slave labor.
I could go on and on, but this is long enough. Anyone arguing the Civil War from a slavery perspective is wasting time.
A rare voice of knowledge and reason! (Other than my own, of course!) thank you for your contribution, Major! Pay no attention to the pinheads. We tolerate them because they are fun to watch. Please expound. You sound like you know what you're talking about.
Howzabout some citations to accompany your statements? Or time stamps on your oddly unchronological list of factoids. seems to be a lot of "debate" over them.
I could go on and on, but this is long enough. Anyone arguing the Civil War from a slavery perspective is wasting time.
To say that the civil war was about more than slavery is one thing. To try and argue that slavery was not a fundamental part of the tapestry is foolish. WW-II was fought about more than the treaty ending WW-I, but that treaty was clearly a fundamental part of the road to WW-II in Europe.
But either way, the issue of trying to identify the single cause for the civil war has deflected the original two points:
--The confederacy tried to break away and lost. Since they lost, the interpretation of whether they had the right to break away defaults to the victors. You may not like it, but that is and always has been the spoils of war. Had the south won, secession would have been the "correct" interpretation. The south lost, so they were traitors.
--Slavery was an evil economic structure. Whether the civil war was fought largely about slavery or indirectly about slavery, it was still an evil economic structure.
To say that the civil war was about more than slavery is one thing. To try and argue that slavery was not a fundamental part of the tapestry is foolish. WW-II was fought about more than the treaty ending WW-I, but that treaty was clearly a fundamental part of the road to WW-II in Europe.
But either way, the issue of trying to identify the single cause for the civil war has deflected the original two points:
--The confederacy tried to break away and lost. Since they lost, the interpretation of whether they had the right to break away defaults to the victors. You may not like it, but that is and always has been the spoils of war. Had the south won, secession would have been the "correct" interpretation. The south lost, so they were traitors.
--Slavery was an evil economic structure. Whether the civil war was fought largely about slavery or indirectly about slavery, it was still an evil economic structure.
One failure does not condemn the entire philosophy. Had George Washington surrendered at Valley Forge would you blame us for trying again like India or China (two other countries that had unsucessful rebellions).
.
