Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Hmm ... The Civil War Was Never Really About Slavery?

A very interesting piece at NYT, "Celebrating Secession Without the Slaves."

Immediately upon seeing this I figured I'd clicked over to Little Green Footballs, and what do you know?

For Civil War 150th, Neo-Confederates Consign Slavery to the Memory Hole."

I don't really see a passage worth quoting at the Times, although one paragraph comes awfully close to merging the Sons of Confederate Veterans with the tea parties. And then of course there's the obligatory quotation from Mark Potok, who's cited as "the director of intelligence at the Southern Poverty Law Center." I used to trust the SPLC, mainly because I don't discount the lingering existence Jim Crow racism, however residual. But whatever amount of that there is in fact, it's been superceded by the more problematic race-baiting industry that's killing free speech in America. William Jacobson's written on this quite a bit recently. See, "
Southern Poverty Law Center Completes Its Descent Into Madness," and "SPLC Demonizes Supporters of Traditional Marriage." Moreover, my knowledge of the South is based on textbook learning, which is fairly deep as far as 20th century civil rights goes. Less so on the Civil War however. But Robert Stacy McCain and Stogie at Saberpoint are very good friends of mine, and both had ancesters who fought for the Confedracy. You learn a lot from people with direct experience, and these interactions blow away the rank stereotypes that are used to brand and destroy people. This is Charles Johnson's stock-in-trade nowadays, and look how that's turned out.

In any case, I skimmed over Jefferson Davis'
Wikipedia entry as I was looking around for a picture to go with this post. He doesn't seem that impressive of a guy, but his reputation after the war was rehabilitated, and today he represents some of the more noble sentiments of the Old South. I know lots of folks on the left will reject the possibility of anything noble about that Anti-Bellum society, but I'd suggest that people keep an open mind on these things, lest they be poisoned by the likes of SPLC and their race-baiting brethren.

Jefferson Davis


Seeker said...

The Civil War was not about slavery?

Well, the Southern leaders, including Davis, screamed it was about slavery -- at the time.

Their own Declarations of War (Causes) their own Ultimatums, all said they were going to war about SLAVERY.

The North however, were not going to war over slavery. Lincoln was not out to destroy slavery at the start of the war, because he did not see how he could.

But all you need to do is read what the SOUTH said at the time. Read the South's own Ultimatums.

Did you even know the Southern leaders issued Ultimatums in March of 1861?

Of course you didn't. You didn't have a clue.

DId you know that Jefferson Davis said slavery was the "cornerstone" of the Confederacy, and that the "intolerable grievance" that made secession necessary is that Lincoln, as a private citizen, spoke against the Dred Scott decision?

No, you didn't know that.

I suggest you read the Southern Ultimatums, for starters. Try to grasp who wrote their ultimatums.

The same men who founded the Confederacy -- the EXACT same men -- issued the Five Ultimatums. In fact, they issued the Five Ultimatums at the same time they created the Confederacy. Same men, same time.

Gee - wonder why the South does not show their own ultimatums now?

The Southern newspapers at the time shouted with joy about the Ultimatums. The headlines in Richmond were "THE TRUE ISSUE!!"

SO your leaders issued these ultimatums, your newspapers shouted with joy about them.

And you don't have a clue about them.

Well, all give Ultimatums are about slavery.

The first Ultimatum was that the North had to force slavery into Kansas.

Do you know anything about Kansas?

I doubt it. Kansas had just been in a bloody 4 year war about slavery --and kicked slavery out. The people of Kansas voted 98%-2% to reject slavery FOREVER.

Kansas was of course the topic in all the papers in the South, everyone knew Kansas people hated slavery.

So it tells you a lot about the Southern leaders that their first war ultimatum was that the North force the people of Kansas to "accept and respect" slavery.

This -- according to Southern newspapers -- was "the true issue". Southern Leaders considered it so important, that they issued it as an ULTIMATUM. And when Lincoln refused to obey it, they attacked.

That is how critical the Ultimatums were.

But you never heard of them.

And that is just the start. The Ultimatums didn't spring up ten minutes before the war. This was the whole matter for 40 years.

All five ultimatums are about slavery.

Learn real history. Start with the Southern Ultimatums, and then work backwards. Read Southern Declarations, Southern speeches, and Southern newspapers of the time.

Only a complete and utter moron would not fully realize it was very much about slavery -- the spread of slavery -- to the SOuth

Paul Zummo said...


Though you're in the right about slavery being the real cause of the Civil War, I'm not sure why you feel the need to rant. Did Donald actually say that the Civil War wasn't about slavery? Sure, the title is a little vague, but it seems to me your little venting was much ado about nothing.

And there is nothing wrong with honoring confederate veterans, even if they were on the wrong side of history.

Anonymous said...

Seeker, you are an ignorant ass, forgve the vulgarity but seriously, read a tad bit of history before you utter things that are patently false.
First of all, Davis sad VER clearly that the South was NOT fighting for slavery, he was apalled that such an accusation was made frankly.

And the quote about slavery being the cornerstone of the Confederacy was NOT MADE BY DAVIS! It was made by the VP of the Confederacy, Alexander Stephens, a, man who was pretty much ono-existent in the Confederate government.

Davis, believe that the Constitution, was the SUPREME law of the land, and he believed that the States did, under that Constitution retain their sovereignty. An example. Davis did believe that territories could NOT forbid slavery, because they were not States. Once a territrory became a State, Davis fully suported the ideal that that State COULD forbid slavery. See Seeker, Davis held a principled position, and no amount of ranting about "five ultimatums" can change that!

Davis was NOT in favor of secession,he did his damndest to avert such a course. If you had studied Davis you would know that.

And you might, if you can stop ranting like a spoiled child, read the ordinances of secession of Vrginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, or Arkansas. Slavery is NOT MENTIONED in those ordinances. Those States left AFTER Lincoln called for troops to put down tghe "rebellion". They left because they no longer wished to be a part of a union of States where the Federal government could force States to remain in it at the point of bayonet.

Dennis said...

One has to recognize that Seeker is a graduate of the school system in this country and therefore did not get a very good education especially in American history.

Dan Walker said...

Go read the South's own Ultimatums, in their own words.


There is the link. Five Southern Ultimatums -- celebrated in Southern newspapers, at the time.

All five Ultimatums by the Southern leaders were about the SPREAD of slavery.

Nothing else -- the SPREAD of slavery.