• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

When will Northerners learn the truth about the Civil War.

Debunker9145, I think you need to review your facts a little closer with regard to the disproportionate amount of slaveholders in relation to taxes. Yes, taxes were a major issue, but specifically in relation to slavery and its expansion. This is only one link to which there are many others.

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/194876.html
 
I know! I had a friend up here who was marvelling at all the old buildings. "We don't have anything that old in Atlanta" he said. "Ya'll burned it down".

Never mind that the buildings in question probably dated only to the 1890s or so, and that most of Chicago burned to the ground in 1871.

I once worked with a person from Alabama who had trouble with the concept of revolving doors.
 
Love this comment:

"One night, late into the night, at the war college, we talked about Gettysburg. To this day I don't know why God let the north win."
 
Love this comment:

"One night, late into the night, at the war college, we talked about Gettysburg. To this day I don't know why God let the north win."
Meade got the terrain he needed, and if you recall Lincoln's great frustration, he failed to follow up his victory with an energetic pursuit. The war should have been over during the slaughter at the Potomac River crossing after Gettysburg, July 1863.

But Meade lost track of where he had placed his testicles.

So, Lincoln fired him and got him a general who would fight.

Grant.

DR
 
Another odd belief the NeoRebs hold: That the Cornfederacy fielded black troops. I've seen one of them swearing & declaring that "2 hunnerd thousan" blacks fought for the South.

Two hundred thousand-some-odd black troops wore blue, as it happens. Maybe the NeoJohnnies latch onto numbers and turn them around, like captured cannons?

My great-grandaddy stopped a minnie ball with his knee at Shiloh. He was in the First Ohio Volunteers, and went to war thinking he was fighting slavery. Damn fool shoulda stayed home and lobbied against those CRUELLY UNFAIR! taxes.
 
Parky- my statement was "Meanwhile the North had some states that allowed slaves which included Indiana, Conneticut, and New York." I never said when slavery in these states were abolished. Also i forgot to mention that lincoln was not on the ballot in the southern states the year he got elected.

Doesn't that make his victory all the more impressive, then?
 
What do you think of it? We have a sort of generic dislike of links with no comments or opinion, 'round here.

If you're making a point, make it. Otherwise it's a music video and should be in the Arts/Entertainment section.

My mistake. I like it. It really displays what the south was fighting for.

I appologize i thought i said that. :(
 
Just scanned over it. I seem to see the word slavery quite a few times.



Yes it said the word "slavery" alot, but like i said Slavery was not the main cause of the war. At least not on the south side. THe south wanted to be an independant state, and the North was ignoring the 10th amendment. Like I said just because slavery was legal does not mean most of the populace supported slavery or even own slaves. Only 1% did.
 
My great-grandaddy stopped a minnie ball with his knee at Shiloh. He was in the First Ohio Volunteers, and went to war thinking he was fighting slavery. Damn fool shoulda stayed home and lobbied against those CRUELLY UNFAIR! taxes.


My great-great grandfather was a Missouri rebel captured at Pea Ridge. I never met the man, but the family stories say that he thought he was fighting to keep his slaves. I guess there was a lot of ignorance on both sides.
 
I am a history buff myself. I know the causes of the civil war, and i know slavery was a very small cause of it if at all.
You do realize this is the JREF, and this kind of coffe shop talk is going to get you no where. Thus far, what you've posted as fact is conjecture, mostly gleaned from the web, I assume.

Please list the books from which you have gleaned your knowledge. I'll be able to tell by the titles and authors just how much you might know.

Or is it all from googling and finding Friends of Lew Rockwell posts?
Are you on the mailing list for those apologists and South Will Rise Again nutjobs masquerading as Libertarians - the Mies Institute?

If what you are posting is your version of that knowledge, then you know nothing about the Civil War.

Before you go claiming to be a Civil War or history buff, maybe you could check out the link Checkmite provided. There are some folk around here with major league knowledge of this topic, quite a few of us from the deep south, so knowing the topic from both sides.
 
Yes it said the word "slavery" alot, but like i said Slavery was not the main cause of the war. At least not on the south side. THe south wanted to be an independant state, and the North was ignoring the 10th amendment. Like I said just because slavery was legal does not mean most of the populace supported slavery or even own slaves. Only 1% did.

BTDT - check out the posts in the thread linked by Checkmite.
 
BTDT - check out the posts in the thread linked by Checkmite.

"
A declaration of the causes
which impel the State of Texas to secede
from the Federal Union
The government of the United States, by certain joint resolutions, bearing date the 1st day of March, in the year A. D. 1845, proposed to the Republic of Texas, then a free, sovereign and independent nation, the annexation of the latter to the former, as one of the co-equal States thereof,

The people of Texas, by deputies in convention assembled, on the fourth day of July of the same year, assented to and accepted said proposals and formed a constitution for the proposed State, upon which on the 29th day of December in the same year, said State was formally admitted into the Confederated Union.

Texas abandoned her separate national existence and consented to become one of the Confederated States to promote her welfare, insure domestic tranquillity and secure more substantially the blessings of peace and liberty to her people. She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them?

The controlling majority of the Federal Government, under various pretenses and disguises, has so administered the same as to exclude the citizens of the Southern States, unless under odious and unconstitutional restrictions, from all the immense territory owned in common by all the States on the Pacific Ocean, for the avowed purpose of acquiring sufficient power in the common government to use it as a means of destroying the institutions of Texas and her sister slave-holding States.

By the disloyalty of the Northern States and their citizens and the imbecility of the Federal Government, infamous combinations of incendiaries and outlaws have been permitted in those States and the common territory of Kansas to trample upon the federal laws, to war upon the lives and property of Southern citizens in that territory, and finally, by violence and mob law to usurp the possession of the same as exclusively the property of the Northern States.

The Federal Government, while but partially under the control of these our unnatural and sectional enemies, has for years almost entirely failed to protect the lives and property of the people of Texas against the Indian savages on our border, and more recently against the murderous forays of banditti from the neighboring territory of Mexico; and when our State government has expended large amounts for such purpose, the Federal Government has refused reimbursement therefor, thus rendering our condition more insecure and harassing than it was during the existence of the Republic of Texas.

These and other wrongs we have patiently borne in the vain hope that a returning sense of justice and humanity would induce a different course of administration. "


These are a few of the reasons why Texas seceeded. The word "Slavery" is only mentioned twice if i am not mistaken.
 
Last edited:
Why do you think nothing has happened yet? There are not enough people. I once was like all yall,

I'm not an american northern or otherwise.

but then i realized that the civil war was not all aobut slavery and the union was more at thought.

If it han't been about slavery the south would have freed the lot during the war. Would have given them at least a faint chance of some of the european powers backing them.

People are becoming more and more disenchanted by the federal govt everyday.


Compared to how the left felt about it during the Bush years? Not really.

I am not a secessionist. ALl i want is for the north to give states their rights.

It did. The supreme court confirms this.

But i am afraid that seccession is an unavoidable possibility.

Trivialy avoidable.

More and more people will begin to talk about the possibility, until it all hits the fan. That moment will come when/if the dollar collapses.....

If the dollar collapses then people will be too worried about how to survive to worry about luxuries such as pretending that seccession could be a meaningful propsol.
 
This is only tangentially related to this thread but it's one of the most fascinating videos I have found (to me anyway) on youtube. It's a guy who finds and defuses old Civil War ordnance he finds. I don't know how much longer he survived after this was made in 1974 :p:



eta: I guess he died in 1987, don't know how: http://www.civilwarartillery.com/dickey.htm
 
Last edited:

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom