Author Topic: The South and Civil War  (Read 702 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1251
  • Darwins +90/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #29 on: March 05, 2014, 10:19:19 AM »
Oh for fcks sakes, really?  Do you really think I think living in the south puts a stank on DNA?

On a site where people claim that a homophobic super being made a man out of mud the genetic "stank of the south" claim isn't that out there.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12248
  • Darwins +662/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #30 on: March 05, 2014, 10:27:36 AM »
States' rights was a major issue from the start.

ipse dixit. 

I cited sources that said your hypothesis is completely wrong.  It is not just that LTCo Robert Bateman, who holds a degree in history and specializes in the American Civil War, says your hypothesis is wrong.  It is that the articles of confederation of at least four states completely contradict your hypothesis.  You repeating your apparently wrong hypothesis will not make it right.  If you want to convince me that your hypothesis is anything other than completely wrong, you are going to have to pony up something compelling. 

I understand where you are coming from.  I know that when I was in high school the history books said it was about "states rights".  They downplayed the slavery angle.  In fact, I was even taught - by teachers who should know better - that slavery wasn't all that bad![1]  And this is in the North!  But all that is Southern propaganda that started on approximately May 11, 1865.

That is the point LTCo Bateman was making.  The South was successful in rewriting history, which is unusual since they were the losers.  But part of the reason that is so is because the North took it easy on the South in the hope that they would be made happy little Americans again and not continue to fight a guerilla war, which some of them wanted to do.  They let them tell their comforting lies about their treason.  They allowed them to continue to fly the flag of traitors everywhere.  Heck, South Carolina Mississippi still has the stars and bars on their state flag.  The nation has let the South delude themselves and confuse the issue for the rest of us for about 140 years in order to assuage their tender feelings and delicate pride.  Without this, Gone With the Wind would never have been digestible.  It is like a film looking back romantically at the Third Reich, conviently glossing over the whole Holocaust thing.  In fact, it is exactly like it. 

So, your mistaken hypothesis is understandable.  You have been lied to, as I have been.  But it is nevertheless wrong.


edit: correct Mississippi for SC.
 1. edit - let me also add, we were taught John Brown, an abolitionist leader, was insane. No kidding.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2014, 10:51:56 AM by screwtape »
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12248
  • Darwins +662/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #31 on: March 05, 2014, 10:28:23 AM »
On a site where people claim that a homophobic super being made a man out of mud the genetic "stank of the south" claim isn't that out there.

If that claim came from one of them, I would get it.  But it didn't.  So I don't.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12248
  • Darwins +662/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #32 on: March 05, 2014, 10:37:55 AM »
Here screwtape, read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_American_Civil_War

Educate yourself.

Gladly. I like reading about new things.  What exactly is it that you hope for me to get out of this?  It seems you think I have a mistaken view on... something and this link will help me correct it.  What exactly is it?  And does this say what you think it says?

edit: let me just add this link from the wiki page you wanted me to read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Cause
This is almost verbatim what I was taught in history in school.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2014, 10:47:14 AM by screwtape »
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1251
  • Darwins +90/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #33 on: March 05, 2014, 10:42:07 AM »
If that claim came from one of them, I would get it.  But it didn't.  So I don't.

nah me neither. Just saying its not the weirdest thing I've heard on here.

Are you sure you haven't become a theist by osmosis?

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4880
  • Darwins +559/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #34 on: March 05, 2014, 10:44:32 AM »
Oh for fcks sakes, really?  Do you really think I think living in the south puts a stank on DNA?
No matter how obvious some piece of satirical writing seems to you, you shouldn't be surprised if some people take it seriously.  Especially when you admitted to hating the South and, by and large, southerners, in your OP.  I've heard people come up with weirder things to justify their feelings about something than "the Stank of the South".

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #35 on: March 05, 2014, 10:44:53 AM »
  But part of the reason that is so is because the North took it easy on the South in the hope that they would be made happy little Americans again and not continue to fight a guerilla war, which some of them wanted to do.

Nathan Bedford Forest's little organization comes to mind.


  Heck, South Carolina still has the stars and bars on their state flag. 

Actually, It doesn't.  I think you are thinking of Georgia. They readopted the Confederate flag as a way of protesting against equal treatment of black people as enforced by the Federal Government in 1956, it was removed in 2001.

The intent of racism is explicit and clear.
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12248
  • Darwins +662/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #36 on: March 05, 2014, 10:50:36 AM »
Actually, It doesn't.  I think you are thinking of Georgia. They readopted the Confederate flag as a way of protesting against equal treatment of black people as enforced by the Federal Government in 1956, it was removed in 2001.

my bad.  Thank you for the correction.

Actually, Mississippi still has it.  And several other states' flags - Alabama and Florida - are based on the confederate battle flag.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HR84DF35jt4/TzGhw8UUKqI/AAAAAAAAGCE/JoGSDsahmn8/s1600/IMG_0003.jpg


edit - also Arkansas
« Last Edit: March 05, 2014, 10:53:44 AM by screwtape »
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12247
  • Darwins +270/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #37 on: March 05, 2014, 11:20:43 AM »
Oh for fcks sakes, really?  Do you really think I think living in the south puts a stank on DNA?
No matter how obvious some piece of satirical writing seems to you, you shouldn't be surprised if some people take it seriously.  Especially when you admitted to hating the South and, by and large, southerners, in your OP.  I've heard people come up with weirder things to justify their feelings about something than "the Stank of the South".

To add on this, Screwtape, your posts that contained the satire were not purely satirical.  A large chunk was serious.  And there was no clear division between the two.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12248
  • Darwins +662/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #38 on: March 05, 2014, 11:58:34 AM »
Unless you were actually convinced that I thought people could get "Stank" on their DNA, I reject that argument. 

Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12247
  • Darwins +270/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #39 on: March 05, 2014, 12:00:04 PM »
Oh hell, I knew you were kidding.  But then I'm Canadian and have no reason to get emotionally defensive about it.  That can get in the way for folks who do, such as Nam.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4880
  • Darwins +559/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #40 on: March 05, 2014, 12:48:44 PM »
I couldn't really tell for certain.  I didn't think you would believe something like that, but as I just said, I've heard stranger things than that, and the fact that someone is overall rational is no guarantee that they might not hold a belief like that.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #41 on: March 05, 2014, 12:56:58 PM »
Actually, It doesn't.  I think you are thinking of Georgia. They readopted the Confederate flag as a way of protesting against equal treatment of black people as enforced by the Federal Government in 1956, it was removed in 2001.

my bad.  Thank you for the correction.

Actually, Mississippi still has it.  And several other states' flags - Alabama and Florida - are based on the confederate battle flag.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HR84DF35jt4/TzGhw8UUKqI/AAAAAAAAGCE/JoGSDsahmn8/s1600/IMG_0003.jpg


edit - also Arkansas

I really don't give a flip if it vaugely, sort of, is based. That could really just be history. Fine.

Hell I didn't even understand Maryland, My Maryland...MD's State Song was intended as Southern Sympathy. At least Geogia's doing better than my State in that matter.

But Mississippi's flag. No..that's a different matter.
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12248
  • Darwins +662/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #42 on: March 05, 2014, 01:50:36 PM »
I couldn't really tell for certain. 

Then it looks like I need to work on my reputation as a rationalist.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #43 on: March 05, 2014, 02:19:52 PM »
I couldn't really tell for certain. 

Then it looks like I need to work on my reputation as a rationalist.

We all have some subject or another where we are not rational beings. It is part of the human condition. I thought it was a possibility we had stumbled on one of yours.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2014, 02:22:32 PM by Hatter23 »
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12248
  • Darwins +662/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #44 on: March 05, 2014, 03:17:53 PM »
^That would be a good thread.  "Post your irrationally held beliefs". 
Views: 137
replies: 0




Onto serious matters.

In the forum, as in real life, I tend to overstate position.  I feel a specific way about a specific thing and I get carried away with it.  And as in real life, it gets me in trouble. 

I have done that here in my OP and have been smacked around for it. 

So let me clarify and ammend.  I said I hated the South and southerners.  That is an overstatement.  I should not have said that. 

What is true is I do dislike the South.  It is hot.  I dislike the bugs and snakes.  I dislike the religiousness.  I dislike their attitudes and Culture of Honor.  I dislike their policies and politics.  I dislike that they recieve more tax dollars than they pay.  I dislike Nascar and all school football. 

I am biased against southerners.  But I would not characterize it as a hatred or a strong bias.  It would not prevent me from making friends with someone from the south.

What I do hate are Lost Cause arguments and those who push them.  That was what the article I linked was about, that was what this thread was about and that was what I had on my mind when I wrote it.  I should have been more measured.  I am sorry I was not. 

And I apologize to Nam for saying southerners are inferior and he had a Stank in his DNA. I do not believe he is inferior or that he has Stanky DNA.

Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #45 on: March 05, 2014, 03:22:43 PM »
^That would be a good thread.  "Post your irrationally held beliefs". 

It would, except it would be used as ammunition by the trolls.
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Boots

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1288
  • Darwins +95/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Living the Dream
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #46 on: March 05, 2014, 04:03:54 PM »
And I apologize to Nam for saying southerners are inferior and he had a Stank in his DNA. I do not believe he is inferior or that he necessarily has Stanky DNA.

Corrected  ;D
* Religion: institutionalized superstition, period.

"Many of my ultra-conservative Republican friends...have trouble accepting the idea God is not a Republican. " ~OldChurchGuy

"We humans may never figure out the truth, but I prefer trying to find it over pretending we know it."  ~ParkingPlaces

Offline Mooby

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1196
  • Darwins +71/-24
  • So it goes.
    • Is God Imaginary?
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #47 on: March 05, 2014, 08:49:48 PM »
I cited sources that said your hypothesis is completely wrong.
Ok, evidence that states' rights was an issue from Day 1:

The Great CompromiseWiki and 3/5 Compromise were early constitutional disputes over how to manage each state's individual influence in the government.  The Supremacy ClauseWiki was added to stop states from using states' rights, yet interpretation of this clause to prevent nullification didn't happen until 1958.

Of course, the first mention of secession of a southern state was after the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts: Jefferson advocated nullification and at one point drafted a threat for Kentucky to secede.Wiki  This, of course, had absolutely nothing to do with slavery.  However, when slavery became a major issue, the northern states cited Kentucky and Virginia's resolutions during this crisis as a precedent for ignoring the fugitive slave laws: Years later, the passage of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 led anti-slavery activists to quote the Resolutions to support their calls on Northern states to nullify what they considered unconstitutional enforcement of the law.Wiki  The consequence? The long-term importance of the Resolutions lies not in their attack on the Alien and Sedition Acts, but rather in their strong statements of states' rights theory, which led to the rather different concepts of nullification and interposition.Wiki

Later, during the War of 1812, much of New England threatened secession: American prosecution of the war suffered from its unpopularity, especially in New England, where anti-war speakers were vocal[. . .]The failure of New England to provide militia units or financial support was a serious blow. Threats of secession by New England states were loud, as evidenced by the Hartford Convention.Wiki  This, too, had nothing to do with slavery.

Secession was brought up once again during the Nullification Crisis. This, of course, was completely about slavery.  Just kidding!  It was about taxes.Wiki  South Carolina declared the taxes unconstitutional, and threatened to secede: The convention declared that the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 were unconstitutional and unenforceable within the state of South Carolina after February 1, 1833. They said that attempts to use force to collect the taxes would lead to the state’s secession.Wiki and In the public debate over the Nullification Crisis the separate issue of secession was also discussed. James Madison, often referred to as "The Father of the Constitution", strongly opposed the argument that secession was permitted by the Constitution.Wiki

This was a game-changer for states' rightsWiki (these are all quotes):
  • Nationalists such as Calhoun were forced by the increasing power of such leaders to retreat from their previous positions and adopt, in the words of Ellis, "an even more extreme version of the states' rights doctrine" in order to maintain political significance within South Carolina.
  • "I consider the tariff act as the occasion, rather than the real cause of the present unhappy state of things. The truth can no longer be disguised, that the peculiar domestick [sic] institution of the Southern States and the consequent direction which that and her soil have given to her industry, has placed them in regard to taxation and appropriations in opposite relation to the majority of the Union, against the danger of which, if there be no protective power in the reserved rights of the states they must in the end be forced to rebel, or, submit to have their paramount interests sacrificed"
  • In July 1831 the States Rights and Free Trade Association was formed in Charleston and expanded throughout the state. Unlike state political organizations in the past, which were led by the South Carolina planter aristocracy, this group appealed to all segments of the population, including non-slaveholder farmers, small slaveholders, and the Charleston non-agricultural class. Governor Hamilton was instrumental in seeing that the association, which was both a political and a social organization, expanded throughout the state.
  • Forest McDonald, describing the split over nullification among proponents of states rights, wrote, “The doctrine of states’ rights, as embraced by most Americans, was not concerned exclusively, or even primarily with state resistance to federal authority.” But, by the end of the nullification crisis, many southerners started to question whether the Jacksonian Democrats still represented Southern interests.
  • Richard Ellis argues that the end of the crisis signified the beginning of a new era. Within the states’ rights movement, the traditional desire for simply “a weak, inactive, and frugal government” was challenged. Ellis states that “in the years leading up to the Civil War the nullifiers and their pro-slavery allies used the doctrine of states’ rights and state sovereignty in such a way as to try to expand the powers of the federal government so that it could more effectively protect the peculiar institution.” By the 1850s, states’ rights had become a call for state equality under the Constitution.

During the crisis, President Jackson hit the nail on the head.  On May 1, 1833, Jackson wrote of nullification, "the tariff was only a pretext, and disunion and southern confederacy the real object. The next pretext will be the negro, or slavery question."Wiki

Of course, when the issue of slavery did rise to prominence, the first to propose secession were northerners!Wiki  It wasn't until a few years later that the idea began to gain traction in the south.

Yes, the states that seceded cited slavery in their resolutions.  However, if states had seceded over the Alien and Sedition Acts, they would have cited the Alien and Sedition Acts.  If states had seceded over the War of 1812, they would have cited the War of 1812.  Had states seceded over the Tariff of Abominations, they would have cited the Tariff of Abominations. 

Again, saying the Civil War was only about slavery is like saying the American Revolution was only about taxes and tea.  The truth is that states' rights and secession were ongoing issues from Day 1, and the creation of the CSA (and subsequent war) was simply the only time that anyone succeeded.
"I'm doing science and I'm still alive."--J.C.

Offline mrbiscoop

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 939
  • Darwins +31/-2
  • Faith is not a virtue!
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #48 on: March 05, 2014, 10:00:51 PM »
  Nearly everyone has their prejudices. Very few have the guts to voice them. Personally I am not a misogynist, anti-Semite or anti any other specific group of Homo Sapiens, I consider myself  a misanthrope.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2014, 10:03:21 PM by mrbiscoop »
When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me.
              -Emo Philips

Offline Willie

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 635
  • Darwins +72/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #49 on: March 05, 2014, 11:52:53 PM »
  But part of the reason that is so is because the North took it easy on the South in the hope that they would be made happy little Americans again and not continue to fight a guerilla war, which some of them wanted to do.

Nathan Bedford Forest's little organization comes to mind.


  Heck, South Carolina still has the stars and bars on their state flag. 

Actually, It doesn't.  I think you are thinking of Georgia. They readopted the Confederate flag as a way of protesting against equal treatment of black people as enforced by the Federal Government in 1956, it was removed in 2001.

The intent of racism is explicit and clear.

I got curious about this and looked up the Georgia flag as well as the Confederate flag. It appears that all Georgia flags since 1879 have had at least some vestige of the Confederacy. As you mention, they got rid of this one in 2001:



It was replaced with this one:



This flag is almost Confederacy-free, except for some small thumbnail images of earlier Georgia flags. Then, in 2003, Georgia replaced that flag with this one:



For comparison, this is the Confederate first national flag:


As you can see, Georgia's current flag essentially is the Confederate first national flag, differing only by the addition of a decoration from earlier Georgia flags placed in the middle of the ring of stars. Of all of Georgia's flags, the one they have now is the one with the closest resemblance to an actual Confederate flag.

According to the Wikipedia article about the Confederate flags, using "stars and bars" to refer to the crossed blue bars with white stars that appears on some Confederate battle flags and on a corner of some later Confederate national flags, is a common misnomer. The phrase actually refers to the Confederate first national flag, the one that Georgia's current flag is based on. Adopting the stars and bars only two years after dumping their former controversial flag seems like figuratively flipping the bird at those who had sought to put Georgia's racist past behind it. It is, in spirit, rather like the flag that appears in this Onion item from 1998:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/georgia-adds-swastika-middle-finger-to-state-flag,8998/?ref=auto

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12248
  • Darwins +662/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #50 on: March 06, 2014, 09:08:00 AM »
Ok, evidence that states' rights was an issue from Day 1:

Finally, a little effort out of Mooby.  I have to say, Moob, one of the things I thoroughly dislike about you is the way you withhold opinions and information.  We have to twist your arm to drag out even the tiniest bit of information.  It is always a frustrating and unsatisfactory experience discussing anything with you for that reason.  You'd suck a lot less if you were more forthcoming.


Also, your first link - the great compromise - is not found on wiki.

Otherwise, good post.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Mooby

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1196
  • Darwins +71/-24
  • So it goes.
    • Is God Imaginary?
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #51 on: March 06, 2014, 12:40:50 PM »
I have to say, Moob, one of the things I thoroughly dislike about you is the way you withhold opinions and information.  We have to twist your arm to drag out even the tiniest bit of information.  It is always a frustrating and unsatisfactory experience discussing anything with you for that reason.  You'd suck a lot less if you were more forthcoming
I gave you all of the information.  I just didn't give you the citations because I was reciting it mostly from memory and thought that most of it was common knowledge, since I learned it all in elementary/high school.  Plus I was probably on my way to work or something, as I am with this post.  I don't always sit down to spend an hour on a reply, especially when I know something off the top of my head.

Looks like the forum BBC doesn't handle redirected pages well.  Try just Wiki searching "Great Compromise" since I'm out of the edit window on that post.
"I'm doing science and I'm still alive."--J.C.

Online Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12156
  • Darwins +311/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #52 on: March 06, 2014, 05:42:05 PM »
  Nearly everyone has their prejudices. Very few have the guts to voice them. Personally I am not a misogynist, anti-Semite or anti any other specific group of Homo Sapiens, I consider myself  a misanthrope.


I consider myself an assanthrope. ;)

-Nam
A god is like a rock: it does absolutely nothing until someone or something forces it to do something. The only capability the rock has is doing nothing until another force compels it physically to move.

The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously - Humphrey

Online Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12156
  • Darwins +311/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #53 on: March 06, 2014, 06:06:02 PM »

You can't reason with a bigot.

-Nam

I could easily say you can't reason with whatever is an opposing viewpoint. While, yes, the whole 'stank' thing was more than a little bit distasteful, and bigoted. Lets not ignore the basic fact that slavery was listed by several states as their reason for succession. If slavery hadn't existed, the war wouldn't have happened. Sure there's various other underlying socio economic and philosophical differences, but none that would have resulted in armies being assembled. Just some bitter elections, and perhaps the occasional pocket of violence.



That's not my problem. Southerners know that slavery was a major issue then and now[1], screwtape is basically stating, "by and large", southerners are Holocaust deniers[2] and either doesn't realize or actually know that it was Northerners who spread such propaganda about those in the South[3] to garner excessive support in the North to go to war.

I have lived in the South for 35 years. In that whole time I have only heard racists deny that slavery wasn't a major issue. And, though there are a lot of racists in the South they do not represent the majority, even the racists who agree that slavery was a major issue. Yes, they do espouse a point-of-view of State Right's (minus slavery, or not to the extent), and the expansion out west as a causation as being of a higher degree of reasoning--but they're racists, that's what they do: try not to come off as racist.

I get screwtape doesn't like southerners, and frankly: I don't care; I only care when he voices it. Just like I don't care racists are racist: I only care when they voice it, or try to enact laws based on it.

-Nam
 1. in that they knew it was a major issue not that slavery is an issue now--at least here
 2. figuratively speaking
 3. such as Petroleum Nasby
« Last Edit: March 06, 2014, 06:08:45 PM by Nam »
A god is like a rock: it does absolutely nothing until someone or something forces it to do something. The only capability the rock has is doing nothing until another force compels it physically to move.

The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously - Humphrey

Online Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12156
  • Darwins +311/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #54 on: March 06, 2014, 06:23:58 PM »
Here screwtape, read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_American_Civil_War

Educate yourself.

Gladly. I like reading about new things.  What exactly is it that you hope for me to get out of this?  It seems you think I have a mistaken view on... something and this link will help me correct it.  What exactly is it?  And does this say what you think it says?

edit: let me just add this link from the wiki page you wanted me to read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Cause
This is almost verbatim what I was taught in history in school.


What you were taught, and what I was taught were based on the histories of those places, which could be fabricated and/or expanded on in what was/is true or not. The history book, from when I was in school, stated the South didn't actually lose the war[1] and I didn't believe it because it didn't make sense. The textbooks were from the 70's and I was in school in the 80's[2]; that was the education some Southerners got in the more rural areas, as I did[3]. But it, or anyone else never denied slavery wasn't a major issue. We were taught often about the great Confederate leaders, and anything they ever said, and slavery was always a topic at hand.

Where's your evidence that the vast majority of Southerners deny slavery then, or now, wasn't a major issue? The link I produced shows that slavery was a major issue which is a part of the "State Rights" they espoused.

Quote
As many of you know, I hate the South and, by and large, southerners.  One of the things I particularly hate about them, is their spin on the Civil War.  Besides calling it the War of Northern Aggression, they also say it was not about slavery (oh, no, not at all), but about States Rights. 

Where are the links to those who are the "by and large" who state that it wasn't a major issue? Where are those links?

-Nam
 1. I shit you not
 2. speaking of grammar school
 3. though 10 miles away Orlando was
A god is like a rock: it does absolutely nothing until someone or something forces it to do something. The only capability the rock has is doing nothing until another force compels it physically to move.

The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously - Humphrey

Online Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12156
  • Darwins +311/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The South and Civil War
« Reply #55 on: March 06, 2014, 06:44:27 PM »
Actually, It doesn't.  I think you are thinking of Georgia. They readopted the Confederate flag as a way of protesting against equal treatment of black people as enforced by the Federal Government in 1956, it was removed in 2001.

my bad.  Thank you for the correction.

Actually, Mississippi still has it.  And several other states' flags - Alabama and Florida - are based on the confederate battle flag.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HR84DF35jt4/TzGhw8UUKqI/AAAAAAAAGCE/JoGSDsahmn8/s1600/IMG_0003.jpg


edit - also Arkansas

No, on Florida's flag. Where do you get this shit from? Do you make it up or believe everything you read?

Florida's flag used to be just a white background. A governor from the late 19th century to early 20th century added the red saltire to signify St. Andrew's Cross -- if anything: it's a Christian flag.

Might as well say Scotland's flag, though blue and white, is modelled after the Confederate Battle Flag.

Fuckin' idiot.

-Nam
A god is like a rock: it does absolutely nothing until someone or something forces it to do something. The only capability the rock has is doing nothing until another force compels it physically to move.

The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously - Humphrey