Confederate Veteran John Mosby Knew the Lost Cause Was Bull

War is Boring ^ | May 1, 2017 | Kevin Knodell

[C19fan]

John S. Mosby, known as the “Gray Ghost,” was a Virginian who became legendary for his leadership of Mosby’s Rangers—a band of Confederate guerrilla fighters that harassed the Union Army and went toe-to-toe with George Armstrong Custer in the Shenandoah Valley.

Mosby is still highly regarded as a strategist and tactician and is studied to this day by practitioners of unconventional warfare. He lived a long life, dying early in the 20th century, and was also a lawyer, a diplomat and author who wrote about his experiences during the war.

[jeffersondem]

“As for US Constitution, it recognized slavery in two respects: forbidding termination of slave importation before 1808; and limiting the political power of the slave states by discounting the number of slaves credited toward seats in the US House.”

Then there is Article IV, Section 2. Fugitive slave provision.

This is part of what enshrined slavery in the U.S. constitution (”shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.”)

[x]

That end consumer was the Southern Producer of the export goods, because his money had to return to him in goods or services, else he would stop sending exports.

Nonsense. The end consumer is the end user -- the person who consumes the product. Consult a dictionary.

For a person who participates on a conservative website, you certainly don't seem to have a grasp of the basic economics involved.

Don't say arrogant stuff like that when you are the one who can't even be bothered to look something up.

[DiogenesLamp]

As for US Constitution, it recognized slavery in two respects: forbidding termination of slave importation before 1808; and limiting the political power of the slave states by discounting the number of slaves credited toward seats in the US House. These provisions reflected compromises but did not make for an “enshrining” of slavery into the Constitution.

You left out a third example of where the Constitution recognized slavery. By requiring the explicit return of slaves who escaped their masters. (They couched it innocuous sounding words.)

Article IV, Section II, third sentence.

"No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

The Northern States agreed that all slaves held by the laws of another state, would be returned to their masters.

And then they routinely ignored that constitutional provision.

[jeffersondem]

“Please quote the language in the Declaration that you refer to.”

See post 139. He beat me to it.

I also encourage you to search “excited domestic Insurrections.”

[DiogenesLamp]

Nonsense. The end consumer is the end user -- the person who consumes the product. Consult a dictionary.

I don't need a dictionary to understand that the money must come back to the exporter or there will be no exports. Mankind operates on profit.

This makes the exporter the eventual consumer when the circle is completed.

The Circle is always completed because nobody exports value without some returned recompense.

The money may transition into many different forms before it returns to the exporter, but regardless of whatever numerous transformations the value may make, it eventually comes back to him as some form of value.

[jeffersondem]

“For the North, the Civil War began as a fight to preserve the union, but the scale of the effort and sacrifice that demanded made it into a larger contest to end slavery.”

That is a straightforward answer. Thank you.

Let's review.

The Union constitution recognized human bondage and included protections for the practice.

Lincoln swore an oath to protect the Union's pro-slavery constitution.

At some point, Lincoln decided it was in his best interest to overthrow the Union's pro-slavery constitution through the use of men with guns, or if you prefer, "made it into a larger contest to end slavery."p>

What is the word for overthrowing the constitution with violence?

[jeffersondem]

“Here are some quotes from the South Carolina Ratification Convention debates: . . .”

OK. South Carolina supported slavery during and after the ratification convention.

Does that justify northern states supporting slavery during this time, and voting to enshrine slavery into the U.S. constitution?

Maybe it does. Is that your argument?

[jmacusa]

Two plus two makes five for you, doesn’t old boy?

[Pelham]

John Mosby, close friend of the Patton family.

Young George grew up listening to Mosby's tales of guerilla fighting in northern Virginia.

[jeffersondem]

“Young George grew up listening to Mosby’s tales of guerilla fighting in northern Virginia.”

Wow! I did not know this.

Thanks for sharing.

[DiogenesLamp]

Two plus two makes five for you, doesn’t old boy?

You are using the wrong numbers. I said the government of England was 1,000 years old when we broke away from it citing "nature and nature's God" as our authority to do so. (actually older)

I cited "four score and seven years" (1863-1776) which is the number "87". (Funny that Lincoln refers to the Declaration and not the Constitution.)

So if you look at the numbers, the English had 913 years more authority to demand our allegiance than did the Union in 1863.

[jmacusa]

Dude, you’ve become a crashing boor here and everyone knows it. Have you no self-respect?

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

Does that justify northern states supporting slavery during this time, and voting to enshrine slavery into the U.S. constitution?

It's weird how the moral weight of slavery only falls on the north in your view. It's as if you believe that by going along with slavery under the threat of disunion is somehow worse than actually owning slaves or making those threats of disunion.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

Mankind operates on profit.

Unless it's a middleman. Then it's just skimming.

[RegulatorCountry]

It’s as if you believe the only slaves in the Articles of Confederation era were in the south.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

It’s as if you believe the only slaves in the Articles of Confederation era were in the south.

And by 1804, every northern state was at least on the way to ending slavery. 50 years later, though, the southern states were willing to start a war to protect it.

[RegulatorCountry]

And by 1804, every northern state was at least on the way to ending slavery. 50 years later, though, the southern states were willing to start a war to protect it.

"At least on the way?" Sort of disingenuous. Almost only counts in horseshoes. You're also splitting hairs with "northern" I suspect. Are you including every future Union state? I'd say not, but perhaps you can elaborate.

"Starting a war" is also one of those iffy locutions. Was Ft. Sumter continuing on largely as it had in the past, in those tense days leading up to the war becoming more than mere words?

While I'm at it, when were Union slaves freed, by the way, and why didn't the Emancipation Proclamation free them, since that was the glorious cause behind the war according to you? Shouldn't they have at least been freed before the north marched off to war to free them elsewhere?

Doesn't that strike you as just a tad bit odd if not hypocritical? Or, maybe it's just that the prettied up revisionist history doesn't mesh very well with the facts on the ground at the time.

[jeffersondem]

“It’s weird how the moral weight of slavery only falls on the north in your view.”

The myth that Lincoln and the north “had” to sacrifice, “had to kill” for some high moral cause - like “freeing the slaves - has become a graven image before which every knee shall bend, and every head shall bow.

No thanks.

I have for some time been where Trump apparently is today, asking why wasn’t the sectional differences settled without war? And like Trump, I expect to be criticized.

[x]

“While I think as badly of slavery as Horace Greeley did I am not ashamed that my family were slaveholders, it was our inheritance—neither am I ashamed that my ancestors were pirates and cattle thieves,” Mosby wrote to Chapman in 1907. “People must be judged by the standard of their own age.”

Smart guy. He wasn't ashamed of what happened, but he also didn't feel as though he had to justify or defend it.

Maybe it's a little more complicated and people judge past figures both by the standards of their day and by the standards of ours and reach a mixed verdict. Maybe it can't be all one way or all the other.

[rockrr]

That’s a great quote and a keeper.