South Seceded over White Supremacy and Slavery

Discussion in 'Education' started by CatholicAtheist, Jul 22, 2008.

  1. CatholicAtheist
    Offline

    CatholicAtheist Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    6
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    I noticed a debate about the civil war and I only read the first post in which the poster stated the war was fought over taxes. Which is pure balderdash and revisionist history peddled by various organizations in order to legitimize their cause.


    The fact is tariffs and taxes played little part if any in the reasoning behind the secession of the slave states. A tariff authored by a Southerner actually passed in 1857 and was hence known as the Tariff of 1857. The South found this very advantageous and this negates the argument that tariffs played any significant role in the secession of the slave states from the Union. In fact it was such a minor factor that South Carolina voted against mentioning it in their Ordinance of Secession. So that myth can be put to bed.


    Another myth is the states rights myth. One can only argue this position knowing full well that the South was a huge proponent of suppressing states rights when it interfered with the institution of slavery. One can only say the states rights argument must be meant in the context of protecting the states rights to chattel slavery and the imposition of laws that made this secure in perpetuity.



    The facts are the South left the union for two reasons. One was the perceived threat to chattel slavery with the election of a party that favored abolition and white supremacy by a party they referred to as "black Republicans". If one does any research at all, just a little research, you can read the words of the secessionist commissioners sent out to various legislative bodies throughout the South to spread to give reasons for secession. These men did not allude to unjust taxes, instead they explicitly referred to the threat of the white race to "amalgamation and equality with the inferior negro race", the spoke of the "unimaginable horrors upon our women" if the "black republicans" came to power to give "equality to negroes".
    This fear was hammered home repeatedly and it was unmistakably clear, secede from the union or to be forced to live with the black race on equal terms, which was simply unthinkable. This along with their reliance on chattel slavery and the threat to this "peculiar institution" were the factors that caused the South to leave the Union.


    I dare anyone to read the words of Ordinances of Secession for southern States and the words of the commissioners of secession and deny that white supremacy and chattel slavery were the reasoning behind secession.
     
  2. Epsilon Delta
    Offline

    Epsilon Delta Jedi Master

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Messages:
    2,687
    Thanks Received:
    363
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Central America
    Ratings:
    +364
    I'd agree the biggest reason was slavery. Thankfully they lost, otherwise they might've gone ahead and turned all of us south of Rio Grande into slaves, which would've SUCKED, I must say.
     
  3. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Agreed.

    One in four families in the South had slaves, folks.

    Human flesh was the largest capital investment in the South.

    That's why, when the South felt threatened that the Northern industrialist masters might limit its expansion into the new territories, and worse, might eliminate it in the South altogether, they rebelled.

    Follow the money, and history always makes sense.

    Now imagine that you'd been born into that system, and imagine that you and yours were going to be financially ruined with the stroke of a pen in Congress.

    While I loathe slavery, and I am not amused by today's revisionists who are trying to elevate the motives of the folks who committed treason to something loftier than what it really was, I can definitely understand why the South weren't thrilled with the prospect of the entire economy being ruined, either.

    Sins of the Floundering Fathers, folks.

    They knew without a doubt that slavery was wrong, but they were not prepared to destroy the South (and therefore not get the constitution enacted) in 1789.
     
  4. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Y'all are about as full of shit as it gets; especially, the originator of this thread. Every crap-ola point he tries to make has been debunked.

    The most basic being blacks were not given equality until the Civil Rights Act. They were given freedom. Then treated like 2nd class citizens by this NATION, not just the South, for a century.

    You can try and sell the US Civil War as some noble cause, but it certainly was not. It was about control of government, power, and money by the wealthy powerbrokers of both sides.

    I see those same powerbrokers are STILL playing the ignorant for fools.
     
  5. coolgeee
    Offline

    coolgeee Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    102
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    NYC Area
    Ratings:
    +6
    At least someone else seen through the B.S. of the this thread starter...
    What history books are you reading?

    Every war is fought for profit, power, and the furthering of ones own cause.

    Lol...to free the blacks from slavery. What a fairytale story...
     
  6. Epsilon Delta
    Offline

    Epsilon Delta Jedi Master

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Messages:
    2,687
    Thanks Received:
    363
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Central America
    Ratings:
    +364
    Just to clear up: I don't believe that the North was being altruistic or anything at all, they didn't go to war to 'protect' the slaves, they went to war to keep the south. Just saying that the Southern States did secede because of the slavery issue, which was an ENORMOUS part of their economy. And they had a history of 'probing' south to see if they could claim some new fresh slave land (See William Walker). Just saying.
     
  7. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617

    Hey!

    He did not say the war was fought to FREE the slaves.

    He said the war was STARTED to insure that they'd remain slaves.

    Nice try reframing the issue, though.
     
  8. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    48,682
    Thanks Received:
    7,223
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +20,707
    :clap2:

    A flash of brilliance. ;)
     
  9. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Thank you.

    Hardly a conclusion I can take much credit for, though.

    This debate is a well known one, and I am hardly the first person to arrive at the conclusion that the "The south fought the war for States' Rights" argument is little more than a misleading Southern apologist's revisionist history.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2008
  10. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    48,682
    Thanks Received:
    7,223
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +20,707
    Now sit ubu sit. :D
     

Share This Page