Monuments To The Confederacy

I can see that. Quit now while you think you're ahead.

 

Your premise is wrong - it was not solely about slavery. Slavery was not even the primary issue for the vast majority of people. Listen to the songs from that time, they don't sing about "preserving slavery". Read the diaries of officers from that time, they record their motivations, in many slavery is not even mentioned (fore example, Confederate General E.P. Alexanders memoirs, not intended to be published but were published long after his death).

Think about it - would you enthusiastically go to war so Exxon could get cheap oil and make huge profits? Big plantations had slaves, few middle class people in the South owned slaves, and no lower class people had slaves. Nobody was going to go to war so the millionaires of the day could keep their slaves, just like you won't go to war for Exxon.

That's a sophomoric attitude. He could have stayed home, but since the war was in his home he could not avoid the war.

 

I see that logic. Do as you did for that reason.

 

Read the secession ordinances of Virginia and Texas, for example. They align themselves with "slave holding states", and many support slavery, because that's how the economic division was labeled. The North had slaves, just like the South, but the North was more industrialized and did not rely on slavery as the South did - but the North did not abolish slavery until after the Civil War.

If slavery was the great moral dilemma, why did the North retain slavery? Because it was not about slavery, it was about economics and monopoly.

That's the "Cornerstone Speech" by Alexander Stephens. Read the entire speech and note the attitude he presents was shared by many in the North and South.

 

True but if a person votes Democrat, they still are not likely to get it. I have excellent books detailing slaves with their officer masters and when said officer was shot, the slave took care of the master and was very upset if the master died.

Democrats would all be rich if BS was priced by the letter on the internet.

 

What did General Washington and his army do? Captured crown property and seized assets of the crown.

How can a state depart under the rules of the voting public yet allow the past government to remain there as an authority?

 

in this case, the British started hostilities.

during the Civil War, the Confederates started hostilities.

peaceful withdrawal from the Union was never their objective

 

South Carolina noted in its Address to the Slaveholding States that the entire Union was a compact of slaveholding States as all but one had slavery in the beginning.

 

Read all the posts. It was Abe Lincoln who called up a 75,000 man army intending to invade. And invade he did.

I believe Washington started it with England. Matter of fact, during the Civil war, millions wanted the freedom craved by the states in the South but from the same government started by slave owner Washington.

Nobody in the South invaded the North prior to Abe the outlaw invading in VA.

 

only after the CSA attacked

 

One major reason the war was not over Slavery is that it was legal in all states I believe. Could be a state or two made it illegal. Been too long since I studied that precise part of the history.

 

full stop.

every decleration of secession says it was primarily due to slavery.

and the Vice President of the CSA said this:

Our new government is founded upon exactly [this] idea; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery -- subordination to the superior race -- is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth

 

By attack, you mean using cannon, firing harmless cannon balls at a powerful wall So powerful it stood up to the cannons that actually had short ranges. We vastly improved cannons by WW-1. And of course after first warning said CO to depart in safety. Which he turned down.

 

harmless cannon balls?

 

You confused leaving the union with Abe invading VA.

Ask me why they left and I agree. They felt the need to retain the then legal slavery. Do not forget that Abe the Outlaw went after them over a very legal issue.

 

If you have something to say and something to back it up the say it and paste in the parts that back you up and then we can discuss them, I don't go chasing blind links, to many dead-ends.

What don't you understand, the South just wanted to be left alone. The South did not want to fight the Union. It did not want to send troops into Union territory and take Union territory. It was Lincoln who pressed war, invaded the South to take those states back into the Union. Lincoln could have said fine secede and the Confederacy would have existed in with it's slavery and the Union with it's slavery. And BTW lots of business in the Union relied on that slave labor just as did the European countries who traded with us.

 

Check the history of the Fort. As I long ago checked it out. See that the balls did little damage given the time they were firing. I then checked the range of the cannons use and the powder used and learned why the cannon balls were so feeble. A modern 105 howitzer could do serious damage to the fort. They did not then have the modern cannon.

 

so if I shoot you and miss, it doesn't matter?

 

Slavery had been outlawed in some states before the war and, of course, the formula in place was to admit new States as 1 free, 1 slave so as to not upset the legislative balance. Admission of new States going forward with the Republicans was what really lit the fire of secession. There were federal fugitive slave laws that made it illegal to harbor runaway slaves, even in free states, however.

Robert, a very good site about slavery in the various states, especially in the northern ones, is SlaveNorth.com . Lots of very good, we'll referenced info there. Definitely worth checking out.

 

History is a tough subject for Democrats. As they get the Reagan era history totally wrong, they get civil war history wrong too.

I never understood why Democrats adored war in the 40s when in a single day, Roosevelt would lose far more troops than Bush and Obama lost in all 16 years. But they do not mind those lost by Obama yet deeply resent those lost by Bush. FDR could lose in one day more than two other presidents yet he is their beloved leader. I don't get that at all.

 

Anderson knew the purpose of that fort so he scooted into it for protection. And it worked. Not one of his men was harmed by the South.

 

Thanks and will check it out. My problem is that i started arguing this in the 1990's with forums and over time got to know more and more. I have excellent books on all of this but have not cracked open any recently. After I peruse your site, I will let you know how I enjoy accurate history.

 

I think you'll enjoy it and come across some info you likely haven't seen before. Yes, let me know what you think of it.

 

I once was shot at. I did not commence a war.

 

if you shoot at me, you started the conflict