Further Response to Stogie at Saberpoint and 'Why the Civil War Was Not About Slavery...'

Okay, following up on my morning entry, "Response to Stogie at Saberpoint and 'Why the Civil War Was Not About Slavery...'"

Stogie commented at the post. Here's my response:

Stogie, I broke the commentary into two sections. Focus on section one, where I make three augments. You do not contest these? And you're arguing a straw man here. I never said Lincoln didn't think blacks were inferior. I also don't deny that the North was racist. You can't address what I actually said so you attack me as "unethical." Frankly, Livingston's argument is shoddy. It's shit. On top of that he's a crank. I entered into this discussion with good faith. You said you had nothing further to discuss until I read the Livingston piece. I've read it. It's a terrible attempt at historical analysis. Do you want to respond to the points I've actually raised?

And I left another response at Saberpoint:

Okay, Stogie, I've read Professor Livingston's piece and I find it to be a terrible piece of historical writing. Here, "Response to Stogie at Saberpoint and 'Why the Civil War Was Not About Slavery...': http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2015/06/response-to-stogie-at-saberpoint-and.html...

At your comment you don't respond to my substantive points. You don't respond to them at all. Livingston makes all kinds of juvenile logical fallacies. Frankly, he's arguing against straw men and phantoms. No one denies the North was racist. You yourself continue to point out the North's racism as if this exonerates the South. The entire country was racist. Further, I've never said Lincoln was anti-racist. I said at the post that Livingston completely decontextualizes Lincoln's positions on slavery, and he issues bald-faced lies about what Lincoln actually said (on the 1862 address to Congress, for example). You don't respond to these because you can't. You fall back to the same tired arguments about how racist the North was, to which all I can say is I agree with you. The difference is that the South seceded. It did not secede because of the tariff. The tariff was a smokescreen for the real issue, which was the freedom of Southerners to own slaves. It doesn't matter how well slaves were treated. It's against universal human rights, the inalienable rights of the Declaration of Independence, to keep and perpetuate chattel slavery. Also, I don't discount the Southern heritage argument and never have. The problem is that those honorable elements of Southern heritage cannot be hermetically sealed off from the deadly and immoral institution of slavery. I'll be glad to continue to discuss the issue. It's not personal to me, frankly. I have no investment in Southern honor. I do have an investment in defending conservatism against the left's diabolical attacks on the right. Why do you insist on helping leftists attack conservatives?

I think I know why Stogie's helping the left? He's proud. He's proud of his Southern heritage. I have no problem with that. I just don't think you can whitewash the South while hysterically demonizing the North and Abraham Lincoln as racist.