Best takedown of Gen'rul Lee that I've seen

Drowning-Man

Drowning-Man

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Dude, nearly 1/3 of all families owned slaves. To put it into perspective, participation rate of kids in Texas high school football is 3%* yet nearly every family has some connection to this sport. Try banning football in Texas and see how it goes over. I don't know why you even try to deny that slavery was a reason for the Texas Civil War dead.

Does it bother you to think that the people of Texas were committed to maintaining the tradition of slavery?

*165,000 student athletes, source: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/football-top-sport-us-1088158-high-school-players

5.4 million high school students, source: file:///C:/Users/Larry%20Owner/Downloads/enroll_2016-17.pdf
Click to expand...
Yes of course its shamefull the atrocities our ancestors commited. Lets make sure we dont let history repeat its self
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Drowning-Man said:
I wish i had a time machine so i can talk some sence into them. Wonder if it would make a difference
Click to expand...
I doubt it. Slavery was very profitable. But it would make a good story. Just don't change the future when you go back there, please.
 
DiogenesTheWiser

DiogenesTheWiser

Well-Known Member
Drowning-Man said:
The war wasnt really about slavery. And slavery or not the states had every right to leave. I dont support slavery just saying.
Click to expand...
If the American Civil War was not about slavery, then how do you account for several of the seceeding states' declarations of secession that clearly stated the desire to protect slavery was the reason for their departure from the union?

If the Civil War was not about slavery, then why did the commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces issue an Emancipation Proclamation and push for an amendment to the Constitution barring slavery?

If the war was not about slavery, then why did the Confederate States of America put out an order than any fugitive slave discovered fighting for the United States would be returned to their owners?

If the Civil War was not about slavery, then why did some 180,000 blacks--many of whom were fugitive slaves or ex-slaves who had legally secured their "freedom"--fight for the United States against the Confederacy?

If the Civil War was not about slavery, then why did Kansas bleed in the late 1850s?

I don't think that present-day attempts to divorce slavery from the Civil War does anything to assist our understanding of that time in American history.
 
DiogenesTheWiser

DiogenesTheWiser

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Divergent economic situations were a big driver, in part due to the slavery plantation system. The north industrialized and grew both the economy and population (immigration) faster than the cotton slave plantation economy could. The northern industries benefited from tariffs while tariffs stifled cotton exports through reciprocal tariffs from trading partners. The slave based cotton economy was bottled up in southern states and couldn't expand westward. Mining and building railroads could have been done by slave labor instead of immigrants and the southern elite saw laws against westward expansion as an unfair cap on their own economic growth. On the other hand, the more populous north wanted those railroad and mining jobs to go to their burgeoning population. And the north had the money and numbers to make legislation go their way. Without the ability to expand into the west, the slave states were capped to an agricultural economy. And tariffs hurt the south while they helped the north.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/civil-war-economic-causes-issue

So, yeah, slavery was the foundation on which conditions that led to war grew to crisis levels. But it wasn't the immorality of slavery and concern over human suffering that led to the civil war. It was disparity in economic growth and the constraints on growth of wealth among the southern elite. That said, the south was insane to think it could defeat the north in a war. There was no real reason why a smart wealthy southerner couldn't divert wealth into industrial activity instead of land and slaves and so this idea of stifling southern economy is a stilted one. So maybe it was the inability to accept facts that was the real cause of the civil war.
Click to expand...
The Mexican War and the territory the U.S. acquired as a result is what pushed the states to fisticuffs by 1861. The Mexican War precipitated the fall of the Whigs and the formation of the Republican Party--the territory acquired because of that conflict and what to do with that territory fundamentally altered American politics at that time.

Many in the South wanted that territory to be formed into various states, and south of a certain line, be eventually admitted as slave states, thereby increasing southern political voting blocs in Congress. Many former Whigs, new Republicans, Free-Soilers, and Know-Nothings believed in previous laws banning slavery from any future western territory gained by the U.S. Enter Stephen Douglass and the concept of "popular sovereignty" was an attempted compromise--that led to bleeding Kansas and catapulted John Brown and his ilk to terrorist status. He then led his failed plan to emancipate by force Virginia's slaves, was captured and then executed. All across the North, people in sympathy for Brown rang out church bells, and almost the entire South was aghast that northerners would celebrate such a lawless cutthroat.

By the time that Lincoln emerged as frontrunner in the upstart Republican Party's ticket in 1860--a candidate that did not appear on the ballot in the southern states--the political system that existed in an earlier period all but ended. Four viable political parties vied for the presidency, which enabled the upstart GOP to win. At that point the die was cast, and shortly after the election, South Carolina met and voted to leave the American Union.

Why were Republicans anti-slavery? Why was Lincoln so hated in the South? These points are difficult to explain so long after the fact, but Lincoln abhorred slavery. Growing up in Kentucky and Illinois, right on the border between slave and free United States, he saw first hand how slaveholders, usually absentee landholders, held an undue competitive advantage over folks either too poor to own slaves, or morally opposed to it. A team of slaves could move into newly purchased land, clear it, and put it into agricultural production faster than a family of homesteaders could do. And that angered anti-slavery people like Lincoln.

But the Republicans and Lincoln were merely anti-slavery, not abolitionists. The GOP built its party on resisting slavery and its undue competitive advantages in the newly acquired western territory gained by virtue of victory in the Mexican War. They didn't want to end slavery where it already existed. Rather, put it on the path toward reduced influence in American politics and to equal out the playing field in the West. The South was having none of this and recognized that its political influence in national politics was hinged to enabling newly formed states to enter the American Union as slave states.
 
Sir Napsalot

Sir Napsalot

Well-Known Member
MPC's current issue of the "General Lee" does not include the confederate flag decal for the top, so now the older ones have jumped in value



The old kit:

 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Sir Napsalot said:
MPC's current issue of the "General Lee" does not include the confederate flag decal for the top, so now the older ones have jumped in value



The old kit:

Click to expand...
LOL The Battle Flag of the Army of Virginia was too much but "General Lee" was acceptable. Lee killed a lot more union soldiers than that flag ever did.

I wonder how many General Lees they went through after all those stunts.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
LOL The Battle Flag of the Army of Virginia was too much but "General Lee" was acceptable. Lee killed a lot more union soldiers than that flag ever did.

I wonder how many General Lees they went through after all those stunts.
Click to expand...
Dozens. Many dozens.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
they say the same things over on white power websites and forums.
Click to expand...

I've never been to one, but I'll take your word for it.

Are you denying that FDR was a racist and incarcerated American citizens (without trial) and stole part of their lives ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top