LOGIN | REGISTER

Page 13 of 41 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 405
  1. #121
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Wilmington, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    667
    Quote Originally Posted by Erock View Post
    To set the record straight on this BS slavery/secession conversation:

    1) Secession was an economic decision to protect an established industrial system on which the South's entire economy was based, whoever says it was because the South wanted to oppress Black People need to read with both eyes open and think with more than half their brains. Bottom line it doesn't matter what color the slaves were or where they came from, any ethnicity could have been substituted and the end result would have been the same.

    2) How the Civil War ended was inevitable, and again was based in economics at its root. The Southern States knew they couldn't survive without the Northern States buying all the food, cotton and tobacco they were producing. Likewise the Northern States knew they could not survive without having direct, cheap and unencumbered access to food, cotton and tobacco. Any Northerner who tries to claim some moral high ground because their American (I say this because almost every American is linked to a slave owner or a slave somewhere in their ancestry, but since the argument cherry picks the beginning point of history at America's inception I have to go on that basis) ancestors didn't directly own slaves is full of chitt. Slavery would not have existed if there wasn't a market for the goods it produced... ahem...

    3) People who keep beating this dead horse seem to conveniently ignore the fact that a)Many of the slaves stolen from Africa also enslaved people from other tribes they conquered and b)American slavery was small potatoes compared to what was going on in the Caribbean.

    People don't realize that in order for the slave situation to have changed in AMerica SOMEONE would've had to REVOLT against the USA. Slavery was enshrined in the constitution. If the Slaves wouldve revolted as many abolitionists wanted...they would've been mowed down by the US Army only following orders. So no Northerner has any high ground here. the troops wouldve went South had there been a White led revolution OR a Black lead one in 1861. FACT

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Wilmington, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    667
    Quote Originally Posted by babybabygrand View Post
    People don't realize that in order for the slave situation to have changed in AMerica SOMEONE would've had to REVOLT against the USA. Slavery was enshrined in the constitution. If the Slaves wouldve revolted as many abolitionists wanted...they would've been mowed down by the US Army only following orders. So no Northerner has any high ground here. the troops wouldve went South had there been a White led revolution OR a Black lead one in 1861. FACT

    The Civil War was all about Power...never about Rights. A bigger bully pushing a smaller bully around. the civil rights of blacks never entered the mind of these power hungry megalomaniacs.

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    In a state of flux
    Posts
    3,304
    in fact, there is some evidence to suggest that Lincoln had plans to ship the freed slaves out of the country when the war was over.

  4. #124
    Quote Originally Posted by rcarter View Post

    Come on Jr. You go to one semester of school, drop out then rehash one of the most overused reason for the war like you are a history prof with a PHD? States rights were only one of many reasons for the war.
    actually rcarter, i did civil war reenactments for 7 years.. i think if theres anyone who knows what its like to actually live during that time its me unless theres someone else here who' done em. but still the history books are written by the winner hence the war was about slavery. but that just isn't it, is it? there are way too many factors to specifically say what the main cause of the war was. therefore its easier to label it with a broader title hence the war was about states rights… thats what it comes down to.

  5. #125
    Quote Originally Posted by aka pumpmaster View Post
    in fact, there is some evidence to suggest that Lincoln had plans to ship the freed slaves out of the country when the war was over.
    I've heard about that.. pretty sure the united states purchased land in africa for it too (correct me if I'm wrong) imagine how different life would today

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Wilmington, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    667
    Quote Originally Posted by Erock View Post
    The Southern States knew they couldn't survive without the Northern States buying all the food, cotton and tobacco they were producing. Likewise the Northern States knew they could not survive without having direct, cheap and unencumbered access to food, cotton and tobacco.
    this is half true/logical...The Southern States always had markets awaiting for them in Europe, but as always The Feds at that time were protectionist with Commodities and other Ag by-products and it hurt Southern exports to foreign buyers. The Feds just wanted to ratchet up control on more and ever more economic activity in all corners of the growing Empire. The South eventually didn't like what was coming down the pipe with regards to growing Federal power and shrinking States Rights. They chose to get out and try their own brand of theft and slavery and weren't allowed to by Lincoln. he wanted to keep all those slaves for the USA.

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Hammonton, NJ
    Posts
    1,557
    Images
    7
    I am not a descendant of any slave nor slave owner. And I am not full of any excrement.

    Any color of slaves would have suited the southern man ....keep your head ..don't forget what your good book said....southern man.....oh sorry, I get possessed by Neil Young at times....Anyways, the south's slaves were African, and they were that way not because of availability but because they were considered subhuman.

    Soooooo, what other issues besides slavery were the southerners rebelling against? People keep trying to say that slavery had nothing to do with the civil war, but, yes, yes it did. THE WHOLE DAMN SOUTH WAS INFLUENCED BY IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER....

    Southern change...gonna come at last now your crosses are burning fast...southern man.......OK Neil enough already already...I'M TRYING TO PARTAKE IN DISCOURSE ON A SURF PREDICTIN' WEBSITE FORUM !!!

    And yes, besides his right wing leanings, PUMP is always right......Lincoln isn't the great humanitarian hero the nation makes him out to be. He felt Africans were a lower species of man and wanted to send them to Panama. That's a true story.

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Wilmington, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    667
    Quote Originally Posted by aka pumpmaster View Post
    in fact, there is some evidence to suggest that Lincoln had plans to ship the freed slaves out of the country when the war was over.
    Liberia...he was not an abolitionist. he was for settling blacks in Liberia

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wilmington
    Posts
    2,340
    Sugar was too good a business back then... they would have been shipped straight to the Caribbean and/or the public told they were taken back to Africa when, in fact, they were taken to the Islands to slash sugar cane.

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Wilmington, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    667
    Quote Originally Posted by EastCoastBoast View Post
    I've heard about that.. pretty sure the united states purchased land in africa for it too (correct me if I'm wrong) imagine how different life would today
    Liberia was the Country! And Lincoln wrote about how it was only right to pay slave owners for their "loss of property". I kid you not. wow sure makes the devil sound like a Saint

Tags for this Thread