Were the Confederates traitors

[Unkotare]

Good analysis.

Nothing in the Constitution says that joining the Union is an irrevocable act. One could argue that the states who seceded had a right to do so, and that the Union had a right to bring them back, if for no other reason than the assumption that there were a significant minority of southerners who preferred to remain U.S. citizens.

Once the war was over, however unfair the supporters of the Confederacy thought it was, they accepted it, re-joined the Union inj law and in spirit. Descendents of those who fought bravely and well against the Union under Davis, Lee, Jackson, and Stuart, went on to fight bravely and well for the Union in every war since.

Democrats tell Blacks that they fought to "end racism" by renaming military posts. They have to tell them something, because what the Hell else are Democrats doing for Blacks?

Well, we know IM2 isn't doing squat shit.

 

[Mushroom]

First of all, the Union was no longer perpetual. Where do you get that? Maybe in the Articles of Confederation. But that Union got tossed out the window in Philadelphia. So much for the 'perpetual union'. And the Constitution we are under today, the one of 1787, the framers were more careful not to make such a stupid statement, since it was they that tossed the other union away.

The South was not attempting to destroy the United States. The United States would still remain in tact. The South just seceded peacefully and left that Union. It is the North that pursued the War as she would not let the South go.

Quantrill

Tell me when it was ever repealed or overthrown. It was never "tossed out the window", a new government simply replaced the old one. But it is the same government, the same one that has existed since 1776.

 

[Unkotare]

...

The South seceded peacefully and walked away. The North forced the war. ...

Lies.

 

[Mushroom]

Robert E Lee who owned hundreds of slaves and fought to ensure slavery would exist forever

Yes, blacks should be offended

The Confederacy was 40 percent slave, but the south honors those who fought to keep them as slaves not those slaves who were liberated by that war

Wrong again, as usual.

He owned no slaves. Now granted, there were 200 at Arlington house, but he owned neither the slaves or the house. That was part of the Custis estate, which was the property of his wife. And while his father-in-law's will ordered their manumission, Colonel Lee was unable to do so as by then a law was enacted in Virginia that prohibited freeing slaves.

However, once the war broke out he found a loophole that about 50 took advantage of. Where he could free them, so long as they worked for the Army of Virginia.

 

[Unkotare]

...

No, the North abandoned the South. And the South seceded as a result. ...

The South took up arms after they seceded peacefully b...

Lies.Ridiculous lies.

 

[longly]

Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

That would be Jane Fonda, right?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Carson, Meade and Sherman fought to defend the United States

Southern soldiers were not patriotic.
They took up arms against our country

Not responsive to my point.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Robert E Lee who owned hundreds of slaves and fought to ensure slavery would exist forever

Yes, blacks should be offended

The Confederacy was 40 percent slave, but the south honors those who fought to keep them as slaves not those slaves who were liberated by that war

George Washington owned slaves and Abraham Lincoln expressed a desire that they be slaves forever if that would help re-unite the Union.

Should nothing be named after them?

 

[whitehall]

You could make a case that states were as important as the federal government and the Confederacy was as legitimate as the Union at the time. You can make a case that Lincoln's advisers who told him a Civil War wouldn't last a single summer were traitors. You could further make a case that the New England whalers who converted their ships to hold slaves were traitors and the New England factories that made millions off slave grown cotton were traitors.

 

[rightwinger]

No, they fought to force the Southern States back into the Union.

The South seceded peacefully and walked away. The North forced the war. Your country were the traitors to the Constitution.

Quantrill

The South listened to the hotheads and voted to secede

Then they listened to the hotheads and attacked Ft Sumter

They got what they deserved

 

[Seymour Flops]

Wrong again, as usual.

He owned no slaves. Now granted, there were 200 at Arlington house, but he owned neither the slaves or the house. That was part of the Custis estate, which was the property of his wife.

You have to be kidding.

No response about Lincoln?

No sympathy for the black performers invited to appear at the Lincoln Center?

 

[rightwinger]

Wrong again, as usual.

He owned no slaves. Now granted, there were 200 at Arlington house, but he owned neither the slaves or the house. That was part of the Custis estate, which was the property of his wife. And while his father-in-law's will ordered their manumission, Colonel Lee was unable to do so as by then a law was enacted in Virginia that prohibited freeing slaves.

However, once the war broke out he found a loophole that about 50 took advantage of. Where he could free them, so long as they worked for the Army of Virginia.

Allegations of Beating and Harsh Treatment

• There is a widely cited 1859 newspaper account (originating from the New York Tribune) that alleges Lee ordered the whipping of several runaway enslaved people who had been captured after trying to escape from his Arlington estate.
• One of the alleged runaways, Wesley Norris, later gave a detailed statement claiming that Lee ordered them whipped and stood by watching, even instructing the overseer to “lay it on well.”
• The account also claimed brine was poured into their wounds afterward—an especially cruel act designed to increase pain.

 

[Unkotare]

You could make a case that ... the Confederacy was as legitimate as the Union at the time. ...

No, you couldn't. The so-called "confederacy" was NEVER legitimate.

 

[Unkotare]

Toward the end of the war, the southern traitors sensed the end was near and actually entertained the idea of freeing their slaves themselves in a last-ditch effort at bolstering their numbers as more and more southerners figured out "**** this shit" and bailed on the traitorous mistake. Unfortunately for them, the south was forced to tuck tail and surrender before they had a chance to vote on it.

 

[longly]

25 percent of our Army is black

Yet we tell those patriotic soldiers to report to an Army base named after someone who was not patriotic, fought against our country and fought to maintain the institution of slavery

That's true—Blacks are overrepresented in the Army, but they're underrepresented in combat arms, and that's where it really counts. I feel those in combat arms make a greater contribution to any mission than those who don't carry a weapon and face the enemy. Now, all services are valuable, but those at the tip of the spear—they're the ones who deserve the most consideration.

 

[whitehall]

No, you couldn't. The so-called "confederacy" was NEVER legitimate.

Who could say? The Union was as corrupt as the Confederacy when it came to slave labor. Slavery lasted for more than a hundred years in the North and the last northern state to outlaw slavery was New Jersey a scant 15 years before the Civil War. States rights and state loyalty was an important political issue in the mid 19th century. Some legal experts might say it was legal for states to opt out of the Union which was barely 100 years old at the time but the victors write the history books. Lincoln should have done everything in his power to prevent a Civil War but his advisers gave him bad advice and he had personal problems that apparently prevented him from giving the specter of Civil War his full attention until it was too late.

 

[longly]

Right-winger said that the Confederates turned tail and surrendered: That’s not quite the right interpretation. The fact is, they were simply overwhelmed. As it turned out, Lee’s prediction—made in Texas—was correct. He said it was unlikely they could win. He also said and I'm paraphrasing, if you did win, you lost, because you’d end up with a weaker country than when you started.

I've said it, and I will repeat it: wars are won and lost before the first shot is ever fired. We're setting ourselves up to lose another war. I think it's on the horizon. It may come after I'm gone, but it will still affect those I love.

This country should be preparing to fight that war, but I don't see the preparations. Ukraine has shown that you still need a large army to fight a war, and we simply don't have the numbers.

 

[FoghornLeghorn]

The Demoncraps sent hundreds-of-thousands of young, southern, men to their deaths to advance and protect the interests of the Demoncrap elites. The real question is - are Demoncraps traitors? The answer is a resounding YES!

 

[longly]

Who could say? The Union was as corrupt as the Confederacy when it came to slave labor. Slavery lasted for more than a hundred years in the North and the last northern state to outlaw slavery was New Jersey a scant 15 years before the Civil War. States rights and state loyalty was an important political issue in the mid 19th century. Some legal experts might say it was legal for states to opt out of the Union which was barely 100 years old at the time but the victors write the history books. Lincoln should have done everything in his power to prevent a Civil War but his advisers gave him bad advice and he had personal problems that apparently prevented him from giving the specter of Civil War his full attention until it was too late.

But the biggest mistake came after the war, when they chose a harsh policy they called “Reconstruction,” but which was, in fact, an occupation. Bitter, angry Union commanders in many places allowed their troops to murder, abuse, and possibly even rape former Rebels. On top of that, they made an even worse decision: tight press censorship.

It may have only been a small number of abuses committed by the Army, but through rumor and silence, those acts were magnified. This fueled an insurrection—an insurgency, really—that in effect ended up winning. You won’t find this in official documentation, because the Army did a very good job of controlling the narrative. But you know what happened. It happens in every war, after every war, unless the military takes very strong action to prevent it.

Instead of choosing military occupation, they could have expanded the U.S. Marshal Service, used federal marshals, and even recruited ex-Confederates to serve—of course, under supervision. That approach could have avoided much of the hostility, resistance, and perhaps even the insurrection. And we might be in far better shape today when it comes to race relations in this country.

A similar mistake was made in Germany after World War I, and the result was Hitler and World War II.

Remember this, if nothing else: revenge is almost always a bad idea.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Today, the political left considers the rebels who participated in the American Civil War—also known as the War Between the States—as traitors.

My opinion is that people think this way because they are not true Americans; they are imperialists. They believe in the right to rule and own other people.

Our country is different from most others in the world in that sovereignty does not rest in a king or a government, but in the people. In our country, the people are sovereign.

In the United States, the people are organized in two ways: by states and as a collection of states forming a nation. The nation itself is sovereign. The government of the United States is sovereign because it derives its sovereignty from the people.

Likewise, the people of each state are sovereign, and the state governments are sovereign because they also derive their authority from the people.

I believe—though I’m likely in the minority—that the treason clause in the Constitution refers to individuals, not states. After all, the Founders did the same thing with the Declaration of Independence, and I don't believe they saw themselves as traitors. For the Declaration to be accepted, it had to be ratified by a majority of the states—each a sovereign unit. States cannot commit treason because they are sovereign, and the Founders, acting as agents of those sovereign states, were not traitors. I don't think the Founders saw themselves as traitors.

Likewise, the individuals who voted for secession were not traitors, because as a collective—acting as sovereign states—they were exercising a sovereign right.

You can’t be a traitor against yourself.

Of course they were. Traitors to the USA.

They were Americans who turned their back on America.

"Traitor" is a negative word. You might think what they did as a positive thing or not, but still, the word stands.