Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Confederates are taken for granted! (Like conservatives today?)
Nolan Chart ^ | March 16, 2012 | Mark Vogl

Posted on 03/21/2012 7:21:07 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-203 next last
To: All

I had realtives on both sides and they all fought in the Trans Mississippi West and at the battle of Prairie Grove, against each other. Great family stories and I’ve managed to get records of my Confederate Great-great grandpa.


21 posted on 03/21/2012 9:14:37 PM PDT by navymom1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

“Yes, the slavemasters were the worst kind of statists because they wanted to use the brute force of government to enforce human slavery.”

Evidently you have your own personal definition of ‘statist’ to suit your argument.

So, are you consistent enough to condemn George Washington as a statist? Two years before his death he tried to recover his slaves, Oney Judge and Hercules, who had run away while Washington was at the President’s House in Philadelphia.

“All of the Founding Fathers, including George Washington, believed the Union to be perpetual. “

Of course Founding Fathers such as Patrick Henry, George Mason, and Richard Henry Lee and the rest of the Anti Federalists didn’t believe any such thing. Their argument against ratification and consolidated government warned that it would destroy state sovereignty and lead to the destruction of freedom. And nothing in the Constitution states that the union is perpetual.

“BTW, the term “State’s Rights” was not much used until the segregation controversy of the 1950’s”

Which is a comment without merit since the philosophy of State’s Rights goes go back to the founding generation. The Virginia and Kentucky Resolves of 1798 penned by Madison and Jefferson are classic arguments in favor of state’s rights. The Nullification/ Tariff of Abominations controversy of 1832 was based in state’s rights. And John Calhoun’s defense of states rights beginning in 1840 played a major role in leading to secession. Claiming that the idea of State’s Rights wasn’t significant until 1950... you need to study more.


22 posted on 03/21/2012 9:56:57 PM PDT by Pelham (Marco Rubio, la raza trojan horse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: lovecraft

I’m an American. Not a “Northerner’’ or a “Yankee’’. I’m an American. What are you?


23 posted on 03/21/2012 11:38:29 PM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I’ll tell you what 2nd. I bloody sick and tired of “Rebs’’, ‘’Yankees’’ “Southerners’’ and “Northerners ‘’, I’m bloody sick and f**King tired of “Bonnie Blue,’’ “Dixie’’ and the bloody “Battle Hymn of the Republic’’ too!. I’ve been mixing it up here with Johnny Reb wanna-bes living in their parents basements and their love of the bloody’’ Stars and Bars’’ and to Hell with Old Glory. I’ve had my life threatened on Civil War threads here, I’ve been cussed and done my own share of cussing, Lord forgive me and I say ENOUGH!! And you know something? THEY”RE NOT MY ENEMY!! OBAMA IS!! The f**king war is over! One hundred and fifty years already, it’s OVER! Who really won, huh? Who won? We’re all in the same boat now, aren’t we? This little douche bag in The White House is going to have us ALL in chains and he’s laughing his ass off that we’re still at each others throats over this. The Johnny Reb wanna-be’s call me a ‘’socialist Lincoln butt-boy’’. An “Obama-lover’’ as if I voted or would EVER have voted for the little Marxist s.o.b! I HATE HIM!! Do we want war between the States again? OKay, fine. Only this time lets not march at each other North and South, but lets march North and South TOGETHER and head straight for DC, as AMERICANS AND THROW THE LITTLE BASTARD OUT!!! Sorry 2nd. This is nothing to do with you. Just had to get this off my chest. Been a long day for me and not a good one. Probably shouldn’t have said this but there it is.


24 posted on 03/22/2012 12:01:04 AM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lovecraft
The war was foght over economics and power...just like every other war.

True enough.

Of course, the South started the war as a pre-emptive strike against what it saw as a future existential threat to $3B worth of property, somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 of the value of all property in the South, including land, houses, etc.

What would we do today if someone threatened that kind of economic disruption to us? For purposes of comparison, the recent economic downturn resulted in a loss of property value of around 10%.

The power issue over which the war was fought was slaveowners' ultimate power over their "property." Slavery is at its root and core the ultimate antithesis of American values.

That this ultimate power was held by individuals rather than by the state as such is irrelevant. State power was, of course, required and used to ensure that the slaveowners retained this power.

Humans were never meant to have such power over other humans. The vast majority of us are incapable of exercising it wisely and fairly, and none of us has the moral right to do so. The moral principle by which we oppose expansion of federal power is exactly the same one that makes slavery repugnant to any real American.

The man who defines his own right to freedom in terms of denying that same freedom to others has no right to the proud name of American.

As a Southerner, you have to fight half the people here on FR over CW stuff.

I was born in MO, which was one of the Confederate states, or at least the Confederacy said it was. The state fought its own internal civil war, as well as a border war with KS during the larger war. I have ancestors who fought for the South, and others who fought for the Union.

Liberals would love nothing more than to tar all conservatives with support for the Confederacy and all its racist baggage. Racism was endemic in the whole country at the time, to be sure, but only the Confederacy proclaimed it to be its Cornerstone.

As long as Jim Rob allows, I will respond on such threads in such a way that no honest person reading the thread will be able to come away saying that all conservatives are Confed sympathizers.

As Grant said, Confederates fought with enormous bravery and honor. Unfortunately, the cause for which they fought was one of the worst in history.

25 posted on 03/22/2012 1:21:56 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lowell1775
The South should have freed the slaves and THEN declared independence as Longstreet says in Killer Angels.

Which was impossible for the rebels after they adopted their constitution.

Article I Section 9(4) - No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

In other words, slavery can never be abolished. Not by the confederate government, not by the individual states.

This constitution was adopted on March 11, 1861. On February 19, 1861 Alexander II abolished serfdom in the Russian Empire - not, I might note, a bastion of progress in the 19th Century. Someone was going in the wrong direction, and it wasn't the Russians.

26 posted on 03/22/2012 3:31:53 AM PDT by Cheburashka (If life hands you lemons, government regulations will prevent you from making lemonade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: rockrr

Protection of NE industry by tariff which was retaliated by European tariff on agricultural products.

Money talks. Did then too.


27 posted on 03/22/2012 4:47:07 AM PDT by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
What would we do today if someone threatened that kind of economic disruption to us?

Like when re-elected the Commie Quisling residing at 1600 Penn. Ave. by Executive Order "nationalised" the Oil Industry? Yep, it was about money & property (horrible definition)

28 posted on 03/22/2012 4:55:30 AM PDT by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill
In 2007, Dixie College in St. George, Utah changed its name from the Rebels to the Red Storm and discontinued the use of the Confederate flag.

In 2007 Dixie College in St. George, Utah applied for State University status as part of an expansion effort which includes a campus in..Hurricane Utah.

What conservative principle would you cite that prevents them from changing their team name to the Red Storm?

29 posted on 03/22/2012 5:34:50 AM PDT by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pelham

Nice. Disagree with the neo-confeds and you’re labeled (or libeled - your pick) “hard core South hater” and further slandered with insinuations of being a marxist. All of which is the same as saying that you support the treasonous actions of the insurrectionists therefore you must be getting your information from NAMBLA.

So, are you a charter member?


30 posted on 03/22/2012 6:26:21 AM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

Tariffs were cited by the seceding states, but subordinate or attendant to slavery. And with the south dominating both Congress and the White House for most of the years preceding the Civil War the best that could be said of it (or the worst against it) was that this was all part of the give & take between states and regions of the country and to say that tariffs were responsible for the insurrection would be tantamount to saying that they rebelled because they didn’t like the drapes.

Slavery, especially in the context of expansion into the territories was at the heart of the souths reason to rebel.


31 posted on 03/22/2012 6:34:46 AM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
What conservative principle would you cite that prevents them from changing their team name to the Red Storm?"

What's conservative about a Red Storm?


32 posted on 03/22/2012 6:58:30 AM PDT by Fiji Hill (Io Triumphe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill
In other words, when asked a serious question relating to which conservative principles buttress about your complaint about the college's decision to change its team name...you reach for a box of crayons.

I thought at least you could have launched into a soliloquy about tradition and long times gone but not forgotten.

Thanks for playing anyway.

33 posted on 03/22/2012 7:46:01 AM PDT by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
What conservative principle would you cite that prevents them from changing their team name to the Red Storm?

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that that they should have been prevented from changing their name.

I'm too busy to re-fight the War of Southern Independence with you. If you're happy with political correctness, then so be it.

34 posted on 03/22/2012 11:44:55 AM PDT by Fiji Hill (Io Triumphe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet; rockrr
The north can prosper from the war, but the South...nope.

Sounds like that's their choice. Either the war was too painful a memory, or Southerners don't want to be typecast as Jubilation T. Cornpone Confederates.

And it makes sense, doesn't it? If you've got climate, new roads, low taxes, and less expensive housing, are you really going to want to identify your state with our bloodiest war?

But I suspect Pennsylvania presents Gettysburg as just one of many historical and scenic areas. Virginia does the same thing. Push Williamsburg, and people who have other historical interests will visit them as well.

One thing this guy doesn't mention, though. It's not 1890 or 1930 any more, not a question of the poor South and the arrogant rich Yankees. Some Southerners who harp on past poverty are pretty quick to put down Northern cities and states that they've outstripped economically.

35 posted on 03/22/2012 2:56:08 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: x

Fortunately there are fewer LCL “Fergit, Hell!” types with each successive generation.


36 posted on 03/22/2012 5:45:27 PM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Cheburashka

Howdy Cheburashka,

Re-read Mr. Longstreet’s fictional sequence of steps.....free the slaves THEN declare independence.

Then for kicks, read the book I suggested....The 11 Nations of North America....and the few others it mentions as well like Albion’s Seed.

The slave masters of the deep south were just one of three “nations” that seceded in 1860/1. Each national culture(the Tidewater Elite, parts of the Appalachians, and the Deep Southern) each seceded for its own reasons. Only the slave masters for slavery.

My mothers family in WV fought for the Reb’s purely because they hated meddling Yankees and still do. My father’s Unionist family in WV hid runaway slaves and smuggled in English manufacture from Canada via their hardware business to beat the tariffs.

The families lived 7 miles apart. There are a million similar stories.

Both sides were right and both were wrong. 600,000 died and we are all still struggling with the results.

Histories, like people, are never simple.

Za Rodinu ee svaboda!


37 posted on 03/22/2012 6:01:39 PM PDT by Lowell1775
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Lowell1775
Re-read Mr. Longstreet’s fictional sequence of steps.....free the slaves THEN declare independence.

The key word being fictional, as in no chance of it happening. If they freed the slaves before independence there would be no point to independence, certainly not for the slaveholders, who would be bankrupt and no longer an economic factor. The slaveholders had no interest in freeing the slaves, they wanted to expand slavery into the territories, they dreamed of annexing Mexico and the Caribbean to add to slavery.

In any case the confederate constitution was specifically crafted to make the abolition of slavery impossible.

38 posted on 03/22/2012 7:18:29 PM PDT by Cheburashka (It's legal to be out at night in spacesuits, even carrying a rag dolly. Cops hauled us in anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: rockrr

NAMBLA? That must be a group you have on your mind for you to bring it up out of the blue like that. It fits you.

As for “hard core South haters” I didn’t mention any names. But the hit dog howls.


39 posted on 03/22/2012 7:55:38 PM PDT by Pelham (Marco Rubio, la raza trojan horse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Pelham
But the hit dog howls.

Exactly what I thought when you brought up marxists. The subject fits you perfectly.

40 posted on 03/22/2012 9:01:13 PM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-203 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson