Posted on 06/28/2017 11:20:43 AM PDT by Sopater
“Just FYI...Every Nation on Earth recognized Slavery at the time.” In 1860, the following nations In Europe had outlawed slavery: Britain France Spain, Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Austria,Prussia, Poland, Lithuania, and Russia. In Asia: China and Japan. In Latin America: Chile, Uruguay,Peru, Mexico, Bolivia, Venezuela.
While they may have “recognized slavery” it was illegal in the countries listed. The other thing that every nation on did recognize was that the Confederate States of America was not a real country.
Lee and others took an oath of loyalty to country and constitution and then led armies against what had been the US.
If Southern officers in the army and navy had made it clear from the beginning that they weren't going to take up arms against the United States, the country they'd sworn an oath of allegiance to, it would have taken the wind out of the movement for unilateral secession and the country's problems could have been resolved peacefully and amicably.
But they were too hungry for military glory. Or perhaps they were so used to not thinking about politics that at the one time when they needed to make a clear statement they couldn't do it.
As it was, plenty of Southerners in the navy and marines stayed in, notably David Farragut and Lee's cousin Samuel Phillips Lee. So did generals Winfield Scott and George Thomas.
According to today’s standards most Americans were white supremacist’s in the 1860’s. Abolitionist who believed in equality between the races were a very small minority. However, there is a huge moral chasm between Abraham Lincoln’s views on slavery and the southern leaders views on slavery.
As far as your second point, and I can’t believe I’m saying this, I actually agree that it is shameful that the north, and the Republican Party, abandoned the freedmen to the tender mercies of southern whites. It would take over 100 years for blacks to finally be able to exercise their basic constitutional rights.
“Lincoln was trying to counter an unconstitutional secession.”
That is an interesting comment. Can you cite the constitutional provision prohibiting secession?
“. . . there is a huge moral chasm between Abraham Lincoln’s views on slavery and the southern leaders views on slavery.”
Southern leaders wanted the pro-slavery U.S. constitution enforced. Lincoln took an oath - twice in fact - to uphold the pro-slavery U.S. constitution.
Arguably, Lincoln took up arms to overthrow the U.S. constitution but he did pay lip service to it.
“In 1864, the Confederate States began to abandon slavery.”
That’s a pretty major claim.
That's one reason I don't think voters are going to respond to any Republican strategies to Play the Race Card. It is a bad idea.
Trump's current strategy calling out the Dems about their real-time failures will work much better.
Only to an idiot.
You're the only one I know who says that.
"When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States." - Texas v. White (74 U.S. 700)
Your attempts to smear Lincoln with the racist card will fail as well. As bad as his opinions were when compared to today's standards, they were still better than any Southern leader you care to name.
Robert E. Lee.
Lee supported slavery, Lincoln did not.
You didn’t answer the question. The battle cry was “freedom”. Freedom for who?
Yes, the Civil War began because the North was determined to impose its will on the South. And one of the things it wished to impose was that you can’t own human beings. But you go ahead and keep thinking that slavery had nothing to do with it....
While there’s really no point in engaging you after that pointedly ignorant answer, I’m going to point out that Robert E. Lee inherited the slaves that he held and freed them years before the war began. I’ll also point out that the Federal government offered him command of their army, which he refused because he could not take up arms against his family, friends and neighbors. He was an honorable man.
Regarding Lincoln, there are more than a few cites and quotes that highlight the error of your statement. He believed black people to be inferior. He said he’d keep slavery if it meant keeping the Union together. The Emancipation Proclamation was a military document, intended to foment insurrection in the “rebel” states of the Confederacy, it did not free any slaves outside of it in Union states. Is this the behavior of an opponent of slavery? No, it is not.
Oh I do love it when the denizens of FreeRepublic decide to keep fighting the Civil War. The war where Democrats decided they wanted to keep owning human beings, and tried to break the country in half to retain that right. Ahhh.... the good ol’ days, right fellas?
“Can you cite the constitutional provision prohibiting secession?”
In response to that question, you reply Texas v. White.
Texas v White was a Supreme Court ruling that occurred in 1869 - after 300,000 Southern soldiers had been safely buried.
Victors’ Justice.
Again, can you cite the constitutional provision prohibiting secession?
“You’re the only one I know who says that.”
Then we can forever dismiss the notion that the North fought for some high moral cause like “freeing the slaves.”
There are a great number of myths and historical injustices that continue to be perpetuated on these threads and so I’ll continue to respond to correct them. That’s where I’m coming from. Are you sure you really intend to ping me to this somewhat silly reply?
The last slave Lee’s had control of, was freed in December of 1862. Hardly “years before the war began.”
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.