14

Seven Things You Didn't Know About The Civil War

Posted by $ allosaur 9 years, 10 months ago to History
56 comments | Share | Flag

I recall reading that there was a large number of black slave owners. But over 3,000? Yikes!
Lincoln turns out to be a worse tyrant than I previously thought, but what I really did not know was that Lincoln was one of those "Send 'em all back to Africa" kinda guys.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    This is the place to discuss anything. A philosophy, in order to be relevant and useful should be able to be applied to every aspect of life, and with history, it is very important to see it through the lens of a rational philosophy. In doing so, many contradictions are revealed which lead, often, to conclusions contrary to what was the general understanding.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by gcarl615 9 years, 10 months ago
    Perhaps those 7 points should be posted on the walls of the Lincoln Memorial?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by blackswan 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The first gold rush, in the 1820s, was in Georgia and the Carolinas, which led to the trail of tears.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Biggest threats are that we will become weak from the inside (the rotten trunk in atlas shrugged) and then the Russians will threaten us with nuclear destruction and our illustrious government will capitulate and give them all the NSA information on us and we will be unable to resist
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The great compromiser maybe. - emancipator is a stretch but given the parties were at best loose coalitions....easy to see what the Southern Democrats killed him though. It brought Andrew Johnson to power and the war continued until well into the next century. He was also the first to violate the Constitution setting a trend for Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Clinton and now Obama. Not the legacy I expected from my school boy days.

    Great is a relative term. He qualifies as leader of the Emancipators although that is dicy . Deal Maker might work.

    If not here then where. Good idea I'll have a new discussion post ready later today .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I've read as much and I agree.
    Just hope we are not also overrun with "barbarians" (Russians? Chinese? North Koreans? Hispanics?
    Muslims?) as was ancient Rome.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Delete function doesn't work on the inexplicable second posting of the above put remarks here maybe the website can figure it out.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I would say that our constitution did stand at least somewhat in the way of human beings being as savage as lions on the africal plain. I did read somewhere that on the average, greatcivilizations last about 250 years before they hve a tendency to collapse from the people forgetting what made their civilization great. We are at that point now, and the prediction seems to be coming true
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The easy to read fact double spacing and all the work put into the above post is appreciated.
    Thanks.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 10 months ago
    The article makes strong but unsupported statements. I prefer MichaelAarethun's version, given on this thread.

    I also would like to suggest that we resist the demonization of famous men. It is not accurate to whitewash Lincoln as a saint; it is also not accurate to tear to shreds someone who was both fallible and a politician...but who is a lot better than the politicians we have on top today.

    Jan
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And the fact that southern reps continued to try to negotiate with him until the last minute and he refused shows exactly the opposite.
    The southern leaders knew that the tarriff was a disaster and that war was a disaster. Secession bills were one of the few political tools they had to show how serious the situation was, and they believed war could be avoided. They misjudged Lincoln's complete utter disregard for human life and his sociopathic fascism. Lincoln created the situation and caused the war.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The article is a bit stream-of-consciousness, but it does review a lot of relevant research. I would say that 'race' exists, but not the way we think of it: it exists on a genetic level.

    There are clusters of genes that are identified with one place-of-origin or another. These genes could be labeled Black or Asian if one wanted to trumpet the race linkage. Each of these genes drifts around the world separately. So it is possible that a British man could have 'one gene' that is Black in origin - and that gene could have a medical consequence.

    So, while it is technically better to just call the genes by their names, it would be possible for someone to accurately claim that 'these genes are Black' (such as the genes that relate to the unknown hominin). If you have one of those genes, then ultimately it came from a Black ancestor.

    Jan
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Blacks were largely Republican voters up until Teddy Roosevelt's time. Ignored by both parties until FDR then became Democrat supporters.

    Democrats were pro slavery, pro segregation and Jim Crow Laws, and anti civil rights up until LBJ voted 70-30 for 1965 Civil Rights as opposed to GOP 80-20 as a percentage of memberships The old southern style democrats Gore, Byrd, and Erwin opposed ERA. Of states voting to ratify 2 Independent, 27 Republican, 6 Democrat. It failed by 3 votes after two extensions.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I think your suspicion is worthy of consideration.
    Let's not overlook the plight of the American Indians (yes, some could be very savage) with such incidents as The Trail Of Tears and gold found in their sacred treaty-protected Black Hills.
    The human lust for power and riches can warp anything. That includes early Christianity.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Esceptico 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    This is not the place to discuss Lincoln, than in passing. For a couple of good books I suggest "The Real Lincoln" with an forward by Dr. Walter Williams and "The South Was Right" by two historians. I, too, never had reason to challenge the "Great Emancipator" myth until doing research on a book I am writing.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Flootus5 9 years, 10 months ago
    Wow. Actually much of this I did know being a history addict. But the post is well timed when certain considerations are entertained. The Civil War led to the 3 amendments in its aftermath "officializing" the emancipation and protecting rights of those emancipated. But then, gee, our illustrious Supreme Court decides to "interpret" in the soon to follow Slaughterhouse Cases the 14th Amendment as extending the federal Bill of Rights to the States as well. Effectively cementing federal hegemony by war and judicial proclamation. Which leads to our recent high level judicial activism of undefining marriage and ramming that across the 50 States.

    Another interesting read on this topic is Jeffrey Hummel's book "Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men".
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 10 months ago
    Fact Check Time...

    Republicans formed from three smaller parties all of whom held varying anti-slavery positions.

    1860 - Republicans nominate Lincoln. Party takes a free-soil stance on slavery by opposing expansion into the territories. However recognizes the institution's legality in the South.

    (Democrats split into three sectional factions over slavery Southern Democrats want Congress to enact a slave code to protect the institution in the territories. Copperheads were Northern Democrats who favored a negotiated settlement, supported slavery, and were against Lincoln’s violations of the constitution.

    Lincoln assumed strong executive powers in suppressing [anti-war sentiment], including arrests, suppression of the press, suspension of habeas corpus, and censorship.”

    These things are not points of dispute–they happened.

    Northern Democrats prefer territorial residents decide the slave question. Southern Democrats were pro slave in the territories. Republicans went for one slave state for one free state.

    Abraham Lincoln wins a plurality of popular vote, an electoral college majority.

    December 1861 - Lincoln urges the border states (slaves states still in the Union) to voluntarily emancipate their slaves.

    March 1862 - Lincoln proposes a formal plan of gradual, compensated emancipation. Congress passes a resolution in favor. None of the border states agree.

    April 1862 Congress abolishes slavery in the District of Columbia, with financial compensation to former slave owners.

    June 1862 - Congress bans slavery in the territories, no compensation citing cost.

    July 1862 -
    President Lincoln plans to issue an emancipation proclamation. Secretary of State Seward convinces him to wait until after a major Union victory.

    September 1862 - Union forces repel Confederate General Robert E. Lee's invasion of the North at Antietam, Maryland. Lee retreats to Virgina. Lincoln announces the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation - with an offer. If the Confederacy does not surrender by January 1, 1863, the president will free all the slaves in Confederate territory. If the Confederate states do surrender, their slaves will not be freed.

    January 1, 1863 - The Emancipation Proclamation goes into effect. All the slaves in Confederate territory are declared free. The policy does not apply to the border states or to Southern territory held by the Union before January 1 nor any of the Northern States.

    December 1863 - Lincoln announces his reconstruction plan. Offers general amnesty to white Southerners who take an oath of future loyalty and accept wartime measures abolishing slavery. Whenever 10% of the number of 1860 voters take the oath in any state, those loyal citizens can then establish a state government. In 1864 the governments of Louisiana, Arkansas, and Tennessee are reconstructed under the"Ten Percent Plan." Congress refuses to recognize the governments or seat the delegates.

    June 1864 - Congress repeals the Fugitive Slave Law

    July 1864 - Wade-Davis bill. Requires a majority of 1860 voters to take a loyalty oath, but only those who swear an "ironclad" oath of never having fought against the Union can participate in reconstructing their state's government. Requires the state constitutions to include bans on slavery, disfranchise of Confederate leaders, and repudiate Confederate state debts. After Congress adjourns, Lincoln uses "pocket-veto" The plan fails.

    November 1864 - Lincoln wins reelection against the Democratic presidential nominee.

    January 1865 - 13th Amendment banning slavery in the entire United States passes.

    April 1865 - Lincoln assassinated, Southern Democrat VP Andrew Johnson becomes President.(and proceeded to veto every attempt until his impeachment by the anti-slavery Republicans and refusal to renominate by the reunited Democrat Party.

    There after Democrats became the anti civil rights party and the Republicans pro civil rights up until. the turn of the century when they lost interest. At that point socialism entered the picture starting with Wilson who was anti civil rights and pro segregation. Democrats did not change to any extent until FDR saw blacks as votes and brought them in the party.

    Republicans began supporting civil rights providing a higher percentage of their party than did Democrats for the 1965 Civil rights Act. The remains of the Southern Democrat redeemeer philosophy blocked or voted against civil rights measures up through 1965 LBJ passed that one with the help of Republicans. although he was quoted as saying give them something to shut them up for a few decades (cleaned up version)

    Voila Democrat announce they are now the party of the people with Clinton) and change their spots. Inexplicably they are joined by Republicans.

    And both support the suspension of the Bill of Rights in the Patriot Act.

    The 1787 Democratic Republicans and Federalists become federalist Democratic Republican Government Party 213 years later. (short version)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 10 months ago
    It's true that I always thought that there was more to Lincoln than we were taught in school. Doing a little of my own research, I found that he was a sorta 2nd class dictator. Not quite as far as this article goes. History is usually fact, myth reality and falsehood all tangled up in a Gordian knot which takes years of research to untangled -- if ever.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 9 years, 10 months ago
    I have always suspected the civil war was all about the north wanting the riches of the south, and using slavery as an excuse. The north was doing the same things Russia does today- taking over any and all peoples who cant defend themselves. It was OK for us to do it, but not Russia. We may have had a constitution, but we didnt (and dont) live by it
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Could be. I'm thinking he could not sign on to anything until after he was elected.
    Still, people knew what they were getting, though.
    But that didn't seem to work with Obama . . .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I'm not going to attack you, though I may have been moved to argue three or four years ago.
    Americans are taught in elementary school that Lincoln is the Great Emancipator.
    I recall being a kid who looked up in awe at his giant statue on a virtual throne in Washington D.C. A gigantic ancient statue of the nonexistant Zeus obviously had the same effect.
    I also being taught early on (in an Alabama school) that the South would have been treated better if Lincoln had not been assassinated.
    For anyone to state that "Lincoln was not good" goes against a heck of a lot of serious preconditioning.
    Just stick to facts. Old Dino is here to learn. So are others.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Esceptico 9 years, 10 months ago
    Every time I mention Lincoln was not good, I get attacked. Even here in the Gulch. It is refreshing to have others point out at some of the terrible things Lincoln did. The victors write the history, which always paints the victor as the knight in shining armor who rescures the damsel. It makes no difference if the history is true or false, right or wrong. Those of us with more enthusiasm for truth must dig deeper.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo