Romanticization of the Civil War

POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Tuesday, August 4, 2026 09:53
VIEWED: 15839
PAGE 7 of 13

PREV PAGE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT PAGE

MAL4PREZ

Monday, April 12, 2010 12:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Why the Northeast? I don't get how that happened, anyone know? It doesn't seem logical, unless influx of ex-slaves into the area created racism that survives to this day?

As I hear it and witnessed a bit, there's a bit of historic turf war between the various factions in Boston. Certainly, the Irish, the Italians, and the African-Americans (and others?) have been bottom rung at various times. Sets up a bit of a rivalry.

Interestingly, I heard this theory once but never again - Bostonians don't want to talk about this - but one possible factor in the Red Sox not winning for so long was racism. The old management did not want the "coloreds" on their team. I'm talking 60s and 70s here, maybe later but I don't really know the history.

This is truly hearsay and I won't swear any of it to be true, but after 9 years in Boston I will tell you that there is a big ole color divide in the city.

It didn't bother me as much as the Midwest though. Out there, everyone was lilly white and ignorance was through the roof. That's where the really scary ideas take hold and sink deep.

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

GEEZER

Monday, April 12, 2010 1:07 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
I think I pointed out your unconscious bias pretty clearly about 10 posts ago, when you forgot to account for slavery deaths. At the time, I said it could only be an unconscious or deliberate... er... whitewashing of southern history. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by saying it was unconscious.

And as noted I believe that your perception owes more to your preconceptions than to my statements. I know what I meant, and your conclusion is incorrect.

Bob McDonnell's insensitive declaration is considered stupid by most folk I know, black and white. I'd suspect most folks around here consider Gov. Barbour's statements about the same. Unfortunately, politicians tend to be be well behind the curve in stuff like this.

Quote:
But if you're going to reach back 150 years for your heritage, maybe you should accept the baggage that comes with it?

I can only reiterate what I said before. "I will tell you that folks in the South do recognize the brutality of slavery. They don't deny it. The folks whose ancestors held slaves often try to reconnect with their descendents and apologize for their forebearers actions. Many historical museums in the South have sections documenting the inhumanity of slavery. Folks - white folks - recognize it was an evil and are glad it's gone."

I feel bad about slavery, but I'm not gonna feel guilty about something that occurred almost a hundred years before I was born, and over which I had no control.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

SIGNYM

Monday, April 12, 2010 1:15 AM

Geezer, you asked for examples and I gave you examples... three from the last two weeks alone! And not examples of individuals with no accountability, but well-known elected officials who are presumably accountable to the people who elected them... the majority of voters. You may want to shrug them off as being aberrant, peculiar individuals but that argument really doesn't work.

Quote:
I know what I meant, and your conclusion is incorrect.

Well, you think you know what you meant, but I think it was unintentionally revealing. I'm giving you friendly insight.

PIRATENEWS

Monday, April 12, 2010 3:01 AM

Quote:

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it."
-President Abraham Lincoln Rothschild

“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races [the crowd applauds] – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people, and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the black and white races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”
-Abraham Lincoln Rothschild, Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858 (The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume III, pp. 145-146.)
http://magicnegrowatch.blogspot.com/2009/01/abe-lincoln-didnt-care-abo
ut-black.html

"Nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger... nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger... nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger... nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger... nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger...nigger..."
-Abraham Lincoln Rothschild

Abraham "Lincoln" Springstein was a jew Rothschild assassinated by his jealous opium-addicted First Lady
http://usa-the-republic.com/items%20of%20interest/abraham%20lincoln.ht
ml
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/slavery.htm

“The Non-Jews have been created to serve the Jews as slaves.”
-Jewish Babylonian Talmud, Midrasch Talpioth 225

“Everywhere they (the Jews) come, they will be the princes of the lords.”
-Jewish Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 104a

“Just the Jews are humans, the Non-Jews are no humans, but cattle.”
-Jewish Babylonian Talmud, Kerithuth 6b page 78, Jebhammoth 61a (goyim = human cattle)

Johnny Rebel Loves Black People
http://undercoverblackman.vox.com/library/audio/6a00cd970f81104cd50109
81191576000c.html

MORE ABOUT OLE ABE!

Abraham Lincoln "was a racist who opposed equal rights for black people, who loved minstrel shows, who used the N-word, who wanted to deport all blacks," a veteran journalist and historian says.

Where did this come from you say…… Well the other day at work a co-worker showed me an old picture of a black family during the civil war era and they were gathered around the fireplace and a picture of Ole Abe with two candles flanking it as they gazed lovingly at it.

I thought is this a fucken joke?

Even as a little kid I never understood why American history looked so favorable at Lincoln. In school I was hardly a good student. I got D’s in history constantly (except when dealing with current event or political stuff). But even as the only black in many of my classes and hearing the history teachers speak so eloquently about ole Abe I was thinking myself that fucker Abe did not give a rats ass about Slaves or Blacks. But nobody even today seems to want to acknowledge that.

Below is some stuff you won’t see in history books nor come out of the mouth of historical scholars.

*Lincoln publicly referred to blacks by the most offensive racial slur. In one speech, Lincoln said he opposed the expansion of slavery into the territories because he didn

GEEZER

Monday, April 12, 2010 12:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Well, you think you know what you meant, but I think it was unintentionally revealing.

Siggy, if you have to believe that, then you will. I know it's not true so I won't argue about it any longer.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

CANTTAKESKY

Monday, April 12, 2010 2:19 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Lincoln didn't free the slaves, he made us ALL slaves, his debt ridden bitches, to fill the coffers of his corporate masters.

Hahahahahahaaaa. Once again, THANK YOU Fremmeister. You just have that knack for getting to the core of the matter.

As someone who lived in Alabama for 15 years, I have come to appreciate a different view of the story. You know, they don't call it the "Civil War" down there. They call it "War Between the States" or "War of Northern Aggression."

If you've ever seen the movie Gettysburg, you might notice a line in which someone said, "We should have freed the slaves first, THEN seceded from the Union." That would have made clarified why the South was fighting.

The Confederate flag flies partly as a memorial to the soldiers who died for that flag. It represents the collective suffering and pain the South experienced at the hands of the Damn Yankees, fighting for the right to self-determination.

See, both sides were fighting for freedom--just different kinds of freedom. Both sides were fighting for slavery, different kinds of slavery. One side is not nobler than the other.

-----
"I was aiming for his head." -- Richard Castle, Season 2, Episode 18, "Boom"

HERO

Monday, April 12, 2010 2:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
But Geezer, help me out here.. What WAS the Confederate cause?

State's rights? Rights to... what?

No matter how I bang it, the nub of the division seems to come down NOT to the practice of slavery in the Old South, because that was already a settled issue... but expansion of slavery westward

There were many causes. Most Southerners who fought did not own slaves, they fought because they didn't want the Yankees telling them what to do. Many fought because they didn't want to free the slaves. Many others, like Lee, fought out of a sense of duty to their native states.

Lee owned no slaves, Jackson was an abolitionist.

On a more fundamental level the causes of the Civil War are many and complex. The institution of slavery, international relations and trade(the European anti-slave movement and the competition for northern factories from Britain for textiles manufactured with Southern cotton), the domestic slave trade including the expansion of slavery into the west, etc.

In the end it all came down to economics.

I note for the record that the first American President to call for an end to slavery was Thomas Jefferson. He warned the South that if it did not find its own means to end slavery, then at some point it would be forced upon them.

A why do many of us love the South and the Confederacy? Because of romantic figures like Lee and Jackson. Because of the amazing acts of courage and sacrifice by American soldiers on the battlefield. Because we sympathize with our fellow Americans and the loss they suffered even if we disagree with their Cause. Because the only reason they lost is because their enemy had more money, more supplies, and more men. Because man for man they outfought the North time and again. Because the history of the South belongs to all of us. And because...I love BBQ and biscuits.

The South shall rise again (and in many ways, it already has).

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

SIGNYM

Monday, April 12, 2010 3:44 PM

Geezer, at one point my hubby was at a week-long manufacturer's class on computers. It pulled in people from around the world. Being very long, and having packed light, my hubby started gathering up his laundry mid-week to head to the nearest laundromat. His roommate, a guy from the Philippines, was startled by that, and blurted out Why are you doing laundry? People in my country don't do laundry!

HE knew what he meant, too. But what he implied is those who do laundry aren't people. What you said was:

Quote:
Good question. Is it worth sacrificing 600-700 thousand people to free 4 million? I'd probably choose the one that kills the least; trusting that if given the chance, folk will eventually figure the right thing to do.

Somewhere, the idea that slavery ALSO killed people slipped your mind. Because slave deaths are in a different category- a category not pulled up in the context of "the cost of/ benefit to human lives due to the Civil War".

It's not that you don't understand the brutality of slavery, it's just that death due to slavery didn't come up in this context.

Basically, human thinking is highly contextual. Groups of thoughts tend to occur together, other thoughts tend not to cross that boundary. That is what keeps humans from being fully "rational". Ratio, to compare relative amounts.

Now, in MY thinking, when someone points out an obvious illogic on my part... a glaring factor that I've overlooked for whatever reason... I tend to get a little irritated with myself, but I'm extremely grateful to the person who pointed it out. So if I remove the word "bias" and say that your thinking was "overly contextual", does that change anything for you?

In any case, I'm glad that you are no longer challenging that fact that this kind of irrationality occurs in the romanticization of the south.... or the War of Independence, the "winning" of the west, the Founding Fathers, Abraham Lincoln, Bush II, the war in Iraq, or any other topic we care to think critically about.

SIGNYM

Monday, April 12, 2010 3:50 PM

Quote:
There were many causes. Most Southerners who fought did not own slaves, they fought because they didn't want the Yankees telling them what to do. Many fought because they didn't want to free the slaves. Many others, like Lee, fought out of a sense of duty to their native states.

Just like people today defend capitalism although they're not capitalists and never will be, and get screwed over by the system at every turn? Or soldiers who got winkled into the Vietnam/ Iraq wars out of a sense of duty?

There were a lot of reasons for the Civil War, and apparently neither the immorality of slavery nor the lack of benefit to most free white men weren't sufficient counterweights to those reasons.

I understand that people are illogical. They don't accurately weigh the costs and benefits to themselves, but tend to get pulled along by others. Humans are neither rational nor individualistic- we are social creatures who tag along with "our" group, however we define that to be, even if our position on that group is "peon". So people make errors in judgment. That is to be forgiven, not celebrated.

SIGNYM

Monday, April 12, 2010 4:08 PM

Quote:
If you've ever seen the movie Gettysburg, you might notice a line in which someone said, "We should have freed the slaves first, THEN seceded from the Union." That would have made clarified why the South was fighting.

Yes, they should have. But they NEVER WOULD, because slavery was the foundation of Southern wealth, and the wealthy... plantation owners, cotton merchants, steamboat operators, politicians and generals who depended on that wealth... would not have allowed that to happen. Freeing the slaves wouldn't become a natural possibility until mechanized cotton-planting and cotton-picking. But the mechanical cotton-picker wouldn't come into use until 1935!

http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/holley.cottonpicker

PREV PAGE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT PAGE