Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Is the truth what we decide the truth is. Is the truth what YOU decide the truth is. Or is the truth what happened?
No, the OP said he was teaching the truth and not propaganda. I'm asking what the hell the truth is.
It's clearly not the latter.
gather as much valid evidence as possible and form your own opinion...one would be wise not to automatically believe what is written in any public school "history" books...
Is the truth what we decide the truth is. Is the truth what YOU decide the truth is. Or is the truth what happened?
No, the OP said he was teaching the truth and not propaganda. I'm asking what the hell the truth is.
It's clearly not the latter.
gather as much valid evidence as possible and form your own opinion...one would be wise not to automatically believe what is written in any public school "history" books...
Of course. You have to make your own opinion on things. What I'm suggesting is that the OP is simply giving what he thinks is right and not making his kids actually think. None of the so called "propaganda" is being given, when this might actually be worth giving to help form an opinion.
When did the carnage start?When did South Carolina secede?Lincoln took office in March 1861 and Confederates fired on Ft. Sumter on April 1861.Lincoln knew the crisis was coming but he was either too timid or too stupid try to keep the Union together before it fell apart. He should have made promises and wined and dined the Southern agitators and even bribed them if that's what it took to cool down the hot heads but he didn't. The fool thought the Civil War would only last a month. The fawning drooling "historians" had it backward. Lincoln was responsible for splitting the Union rather than keeping it together.
The south seceded before Lincoln even took office
If only South Carolina could have left federal property alone you'd probably have a very different history.His actions were to attack fellow americans who tried to peacefully and legally withdraw from the union.
Nearly every secession document and politician's speech contradicts that point.southerners and the southern leaders knew slavery was a dying practice. The industrial revolution had begun and there was no point in importing farm animals when there were machines that were more efficient and cheaper to maintain.
Desperate times call for desperate measuresLincoln knew the crisis was coming but he was either too timid or too stupid try to keep the Union together before it fell apart. He should have made promises and wined and dined the Southern agitators and even bribed them if that's what it took to cool down the hot heads but he didn't. The fool thought the Civil War would only last a month. The fawning drooling "historians" had it backward. Lincoln was responsible for splitting the Union rather than keeping it together.
The south seceded before Lincoln even took office
That is why he declared martial law in 1861 when he became President.
He would not have been a martyr but he would have done better than Johnson at reconstructionIf Lincoln hadn't been assassinated his legacy might have been discussed in a rational way but since he has been sanctified by the priests of history he is off limits to a reasonable discussion. After a hundred years of propaganda poured into the heads of kiddies who didn't have a freaking clue about history you can't even get a handle on Martin King so it's a waste of time discussing Lincoln.
Federal land to which all right and title had been ceded by the southern states.what was "no longer the souths property"?
Just about every secession document and politician's speech contradicts that point.The South essentially seceded because of unfair tariffs and Free Trade.
Desperate times call for desperate measures
Abe Lincoln was the right man for the job
All we need to know about Lincolns views towards slavery is that the south seceded rather than face a Lincoln presidency.
All we need to know about Lincolns views towards slavery is that the south seceded rather than face a Lincoln presidency.
Are you saying the the SOuth was right the Lincoln was going to be their enemy while in office, despite his promises otherwise?
All we need to know about Lincolns views towards slavery is that the south seceded rather than face a Lincoln presidency.
Are you saying the the SOuth was right the Lincoln was going to be their enemy while in office, despite his promises otherwise?
So what did the south do? They MADE Lincoln their enemy
By seceding, they accelerated the abolition of slavery by a decade or more.
All we need to know about Lincolns views towards slavery is that the south seceded rather than face a Lincoln presidency.
Are you saying the the SOuth was right the Lincoln was going to be their enemy while in office, despite his promises otherwise?
So what did the south do? They MADE Lincoln their enemy
By seceding, they accelerated the abolition of slavery by a decade or more.
I am sick of libs being vague and then accusing me of putting words in their mouth.
Your phrasing "so what did the South do" implies agreement that Lincoln was going to be the enemy of the South in the Oval Office, despite his promises otherwise.
But then you claim the South "made him their enemy by seceding.
IMO, Lincoln was a strong abolitionist who's later "pro-slavery" comments were lies made in a desperate attempt to avoid a war.
Do you agree or disagree? A yes and no answer would be good. You can add as much nuance as you want AFTER you clearly state your answer.
All we need to know about Lincolns views towards slavery is that the south seceded rather than face a Lincoln presidency.
Are you saying the the SOuth was right the Lincoln was going to be their enemy while in office, despite his promises otherwise?
So what did the south do? They MADE Lincoln their enemy
By seceding, they accelerated the abolition of slavery by a decade or more.
I am sick of libs being vague and then accusing me of putting words in their mouth.
Your phrasing "so what did the South do" implies agreement that Lincoln was going to be the enemy of the South in the Oval Office, despite his promises otherwise.
But then you claim the South "made him their enemy by seceding.
IMO, Lincoln was a strong abolitionist who's later "pro-slavery" comments were lies made in a desperate attempt to avoid a war.
Do you agree or disagree? A yes and no answer would be good. You can add as much nuance as you want AFTER you clearly state your answer.
Lincoln was willing to do whatever necessary to preserve the union without war. He had no power or intention to unilaterally end slavery. Best he could do was limit the expansion of slavery to new territories and maybe institute some long term solutions that would eventually lead to the end of slavery
By seceding....the South sealed their doom
The South could have gotten better terms if they had remained in the union. Slavery probably would have whimpered away rather than ending with the stroke of the pen. They also could have negotiated some compensation for the loss of their slavesAll we need to know about Lincolns views towards slavery is that the south seceded rather than face a Lincoln presidency.
Are you saying the the SOuth was right the Lincoln was going to be their enemy while in office, despite his promises otherwise?
So what did the south do? They MADE Lincoln their enemy
By seceding, they accelerated the abolition of slavery by a decade or more.
I am sick of libs being vague and then accusing me of putting words in their mouth.
Your phrasing "so what did the South do" implies agreement that Lincoln was going to be the enemy of the South in the Oval Office, despite his promises otherwise.
But then you claim the South "made him their enemy by seceding.
IMO, Lincoln was a strong abolitionist who's later "pro-slavery" comments were lies made in a desperate attempt to avoid a war.
Do you agree or disagree? A yes and no answer would be good. You can add as much nuance as you want AFTER you clearly state your answer.
Lincoln was willing to do whatever necessary to preserve the union without war. He had no power or intention to unilaterally end slavery. Best he could do was limit the expansion of slavery to new territories and maybe institute some long term solutions that would eventually lead to the end of slavery
By seceding....the South sealed their doom
I mostly agree.
What you describe is someone who was already the South's enemy.
I agree that it was unlikely he had some radical and immediate plan to eliminate slavery.
I agree that his most likely attack would be long term solutions that would weaken politically and economically the South so that in the medium term a future Abolitionist President would eliminate slavery.
THe pro slavery quotes that are being posted are IMO, weasel worded lies of a principled politician who was determined to end slavery wanted to do it without a war.
The South was thus Doomed regardless of whether they seceded or not.
If you call working against the spread of slavery to the new territories 'being the south's enemy'.Are you saying the the SOuth was right the Lincoln was going to be their enemy while in office, despite his promises otherwise?
If you call working against the spread of slavery to the new territories 'being the south's enemy'.Are you saying the the SOuth was right the Lincoln was going to be their enemy while in office, despite his promises otherwise?
edit...Oh I see that's been done already.
