The vast majority of southerners during the civil war era were poor owned no slaves. All those men didn’t pick up guns and go fight, in some instances brother against brother, over slavery. It was about states rights, taxation, and federal overreach. As you see now, a looming, overreaching federal government controls ALL. Our founding fathers were wary of government control which is why they gave the states all the rights that they did. Plenty of northerners owned slaves and/or had just ended slave ownership in the decades prior to the civil war. Over time the south would have followed suit and abolished slavery as well, especially as new technology was invented.
The idea that the North was full of do-good heroes ending slavery while the south loved slavery is preposterous and is modern propaganda. Plenty of slaves were brought in through the north and transported to the south as well.
Slavery is evil, and it is a good thing it was ended, but American slavery is just one instance of it throughout world history, including Africa where they still enslave their own today, and across America where thousands are entrapped in sex slavery today. The civil war was much more complex than “slavery”... but encouraging states and individuals to stand up to government overreach isn’t something the federal government is likely to promote. I’ve always said I would have helped along the Underground Railroad if I could have, that is how wrong I believe “ownership” and abuse of another human is. But I can believe that wholeheartedly while still understanding the truth and nuance of something like the civil war.
What is more preposterous than comparing the bad people in the north to those is the south as you mention, is the notion that "white men" are collectively guilty, esp. given the number of people who were in fact white, who fought to end it since the beginning of the settlement of the colonies . . .
I did not post in order to debate the nuances of the Civil War, but to attack the prevalent pounding narrative being taught to our kids and shoved down our throats . . . 1619 project, CRT etc. which are clearly and demonstrable FALSE.
Logically as well as historically, the main issue of the Civil War was slavery and I believe the truth is a source of powerful red pills. Our strength is that we think and read and search for truth. Amongst all that, we each find red pills that resonate more with some than others.
At the peak, 1 - 3% of people owned slaves. Just think for a minute. Why would endless youth risk their life for something they didn't even do in the first place (own slaves?)
Add that to Lincoln's quote stating that the war was not about slavery and that it could be taken off the table to resolve the conflict, if an agreement could be made.
You see that the present narrative is 100% false... why accept that historical narrative is true when it's much less provable than the present, which is a lie?
"Add that to Lincoln's quote stating that the war was not about slavery and that it could be taken off the table to resolve the conflict, if an agreement could be made."
Catch 22: AH! but it was about slavery in the south and they were not going to rejoin the growing Union in which slavery was inevitably squeezed out. Note the 1850 Republican Party platform.
Read the docs of succession from those southern states. It was about slavery. Yes those elite 2-3% controlled the power, money, and narrative in their states.
Of course the Civil war was all about Slavery. There is no way in the world it was about taxes and the way the south had to paid about 75% of all taxes in America.
Come on, we all know that all people in the south were willing to lay their lives on the line to keep slavery going.
We also know those same people were more than happy to pay 3x the taxes that the north was paying.
States' Rights was the primary causation, not slavery, slavery was on the way out already.
IF the War of Northern Aggression was all about slavery why then did the North refuse to free slaves until after a couple years of war?
Slavery was a part of it, yes, but the larger issue was States' Rights, the north had been foisting illegal tariffs and such on the South for decades before war broke out.
Slavery was and is still a fact of human governance, all throughout history continuing until today. America went to great lengths to resolve it, to end it here, and yet we still have it in Africa and Asia, in South America and indeed right here in the States. The chains are now welfare checks and vax passports but yeah. Or the chains are your family held captive in Mexico or china, but yeah.
Fun fact... at the outbreak of war most of the slaves in the New Orleans area were owned by blacks, and the first case of slavery in our courts was a non-black who sued his black master for his release.
Most slaves went to the Caribbean and South America, not many actually came here. Kamala Harris' family was one of the largest slave-holding families in Jamaica, and was noted as the harshest, they were brutal to their slaves.
My point is few Southerners actually owned slaves, not all of our Families did, and many blacks owned slaves too. Slavery has always been a part of the Human condition and America did spill a lot of blood trying to end the practice.
Looking around at the world, it was a failed attempt but that's because only America represents Freedom.
"The new Republican Party arose in the 1850s. Its platform opposed the expansion of slavery. When Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, won the election of 1860 with commanding majorities in both houses of Congress, Southern states panicked, worried that the federal government would not only stop the expansion of slavery, starving them of new markets for slaves, but also abolish slavery in the South, which they saw as an assault on their states' rights. These fears caused South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee and North Carolina to secede and form the Confederate States of America."
When you say that, they say "The parties flipped". The correct response is this "When did this happen? Show me.". It'll be a neat trick if they can pinpoint when this happened, because I've been looking for a long time and I cannot find an instance where the 'rats n Reps changed permanent allegiances in relation.
So follow their logic. The Republicans back then DID end slavery, squash the KKK etc., so dems now claim that legacy as something they are proud of? okay . . . then how are all whites to be blamed for slavery & the KKK etc.?? you too?? ha. hoist on their own petard.
We need to press until their brains explode from cognitive dissonance.
This is not completely accurate. Before Lincoln won, the democrats split into two factions (northern and southern) the northern was pro-slavery + pro states rights. They wanted the states to choose. The southern democrats wanted all new states to allow slavery. It was only the Republicans that wanted slavery abolished. Most Republicans were in the north but it is an over simplification to say it was north vs south. Really it was democrats vs Republicans. In fact the northern democrats candidate was the same guy who struck down the document that would have made Texas a free state after the war. Democrats used state rights as a reason for war but this is illegitimate since slavery is an abomination and makes a person property, taking away many of their God-given rights. Therefore is not a state right.
That isn't what was meant by 'States' Rights', the term refers to the fact that only the few duties responsibilities and authorities as named in the Constitution belong to the Federal Government, all else is States' Rights.
Since slavery was not delegated to the Feds it remained a question for the States to settle.
Lincoln was not a good president, he was a tyrant. Civil asset forfeiture, indefinite detentions of dissidents, confiscating land, trying to divvy up our country part and parcel to the Brits and Frenchies........he made deals. He was the Obama of the 1860's. It was NOT about slavery. Put down the Houghtin Mifflin/Addison Wesley govt funded (fake) history books.
Just like blue states do to red states today, the South got tired of being ass-raped out of their wealth to subsidize B.S. they didn't agree with. "Slavery" didn't even come into the picture until 2 years into the War of Northern Aggression. It was a "hearts and minds" tactic. No one in the North died to free slaves and no one in the South died just to keep them. Lies.
It's time to unlearn almost everything you think you know. Also, let it be known, the North kept their slaves long after the South gave theirs up.
If you want to know true history, stop letting the govt give it to you. Read the books written in the actual era. The story is completely different. Like, 180° out.
You are enormously misinformed. Everything you just typed in your headline is a lie. Did you get the Houghton Mifflin / Addison Wesley education? Sure sounds like it.
With all due respect Armylady, JohnnyMagnum357 is totally correct. Southerners are deeply offended by this notion that our ancestors fought a war on the premise of slavery. Those of us who had families who were around for the civil war know exactly what Southerners felt so compelled to fight for, and slavery had nothing to do with it. This is the reason why elders are so important, you can rewrite history and change narratives but you can't change facts told through generations with many who can and will corroborate these stories based on principles you know in your heart to be truth. I have been guilty of peddling the propaganda history taught in schools unaware of the misinformation and blatant lies written in my history books. Luckily I spent many summers with my Grandfather, wisest man I ever met, who taught real history and the dangers one may fall into by watching the one eyed devil (television) instead of having engaging conversations with people to discover that they are full of wisdom from their years of life. Great discussions would have been lost to time otherwise.
So, why did the North keep their slaves after the South gave theirs up? That is historical fact. Not Addison Wesley, govt-funded-education fact, of course. But the winners get to write the history, right? Now start digging through books that were actually written circa 1860.......
The vast majority of southerners during the civil war era were poor owned no slaves. All those men didn’t pick up guns and go fight, in some instances brother against brother, over slavery. It was about states rights, taxation, and federal overreach. As you see now, a looming, overreaching federal government controls ALL. Our founding fathers were wary of government control which is why they gave the states all the rights that they did. Plenty of northerners owned slaves and/or had just ended slave ownership in the decades prior to the civil war. Over time the south would have followed suit and abolished slavery as well, especially as new technology was invented.
The idea that the North was full of do-good heroes ending slavery while the south loved slavery is preposterous and is modern propaganda. Plenty of slaves were brought in through the north and transported to the south as well.
Slavery is evil, and it is a good thing it was ended, but American slavery is just one instance of it throughout world history, including Africa where they still enslave their own today, and across America where thousands are entrapped in sex slavery today. The civil war was much more complex than “slavery”... but encouraging states and individuals to stand up to government overreach isn’t something the federal government is likely to promote. I’ve always said I would have helped along the Underground Railroad if I could have, that is how wrong I believe “ownership” and abuse of another human is. But I can believe that wholeheartedly while still understanding the truth and nuance of something like the civil war.
Re: Why did poor southerners fight in the Civil War?
https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/why-non-slaveholding-southerners-fought
What is more preposterous than comparing the bad people in the north to those is the south as you mention, is the notion that "white men" are collectively guilty, esp. given the number of people who were in fact white, who fought to end it since the beginning of the settlement of the colonies . . .
I did not post in order to debate the nuances of the Civil War, but to attack the prevalent pounding narrative being taught to our kids and shoved down our throats . . . 1619 project, CRT etc. which are clearly and demonstrable FALSE.
Logically as well as historically, the main issue of the Civil War was slavery and I believe the truth is a source of powerful red pills. Our strength is that we think and read and search for truth. Amongst all that, we each find red pills that resonate more with some than others.
Let's defeat and destroy their false narratives!
The owners of slaves was a small percentage, even in the south as you point out.
The nuances of the Civil War can be intelligently debated.
My reason for these posts is to destroy the "white man evil" narrative such as Critical Race Theory etc., which is very dangerous.
So for that purpose, we need easily explained facts and memes, the truth of which cannot be denied --- try though they will.
Let's not pretend this wasn't a thing.
https://prologue.blogs.archives.gov/2010/12/01/lincoln-to-slaves-go-somewhere-else/
The great emancipator fighting for equality, lol. What a myth.
While we are here, when did DC become it's own city state outside the US?
What debts were accrued during the war?
Who started the conflict? Who benefited? Who? Whooooooooooo?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GI5OOuyL4gQ
So white man baaaad??
https://www.britannica.com/place/Liberia
At the peak, 1 - 3% of people owned slaves. Just think for a minute. Why would endless youth risk their life for something they didn't even do in the first place (own slaves?)
Add that to Lincoln's quote stating that the war was not about slavery and that it could be taken off the table to resolve the conflict, if an agreement could be made.
You see that the present narrative is 100% false... why accept that historical narrative is true when it's much less provable than the present, which is a lie?
"Add that to Lincoln's quote stating that the war was not about slavery and that it could be taken off the table to resolve the conflict, if an agreement could be made."
Catch 22: AH! but it was about slavery in the south and they were not going to rejoin the growing Union in which slavery was inevitably squeezed out. Note the 1850 Republican Party platform.
Read the docs of succession from those southern states. It was about slavery. Yes those elite 2-3% controlled the power, money, and narrative in their states.
Of course the Civil war was all about Slavery. There is no way in the world it was about taxes and the way the south had to paid about 75% of all taxes in America.
Come on, we all know that all people in the south were willing to lay their lives on the line to keep slavery going. We also know those same people were more than happy to pay 3x the taxes that the north was paying.
Let's face it, you are a racist if you think the civil war was fought for any other reason than slavery. https://dixieoutfitters.com/2020/06/22/how-taxes-caused-the-civil-war-not-slavery/
http://ashevilletribune.com/archives/censored-truths/Morrill%20Tariff.html
This was a good read, thanks.
The majority have always thought slavery bad. We fought that and most other wars because of the ROTHSCHILDS. It has always been about power and money.
They have pretty much claimed it throughout history too.
The elites have always funded BOTH sides of EVERY war EVERY conflict. While our children pay the price. ENOUGH.
States' Rights was the primary causation, not slavery, slavery was on the way out already.
IF the War of Northern Aggression was all about slavery why then did the North refuse to free slaves until after a couple years of war?
Slavery was a part of it, yes, but the larger issue was States' Rights, the north had been foisting illegal tariffs and such on the South for decades before war broke out.
Slavery was and is still a fact of human governance, all throughout history continuing until today. America went to great lengths to resolve it, to end it here, and yet we still have it in Africa and Asia, in South America and indeed right here in the States. The chains are now welfare checks and vax passports but yeah. Or the chains are your family held captive in Mexico or china, but yeah.
Fun fact... at the outbreak of war most of the slaves in the New Orleans area were owned by blacks, and the first case of slavery in our courts was a non-black who sued his black master for his release.
https://www.history101.com/first-legally-slaveholder-black-man/
https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/johnson-anthony-1670/
Most slaves went to the Caribbean and South America, not many actually came here. Kamala Harris' family was one of the largest slave-holding families in Jamaica, and was noted as the harshest, they were brutal to their slaves.
https://freebeacon.com/politics/kamala-harriss-ancestors-owned-slaves/
My point is few Southerners actually owned slaves, not all of our Families did, and many blacks owned slaves too. Slavery has always been a part of the Human condition and America did spill a lot of blood trying to end the practice.
Looking around at the world, it was a failed attempt but that's because only America represents Freedom.
https://files.catbox.moe/pausp4.jpg
https://files.catbox.moe/oj9y2r.jpg
"The new Republican Party arose in the 1850s. Its platform opposed the expansion of slavery. When Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, won the election of 1860 with commanding majorities in both houses of Congress, Southern states panicked, worried that the federal government would not only stop the expansion of slavery, starving them of new markets for slaves, but also abolish slavery in the South, which they saw as an assault on their states' rights. These fears caused South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee and North Carolina to secede and form the Confederate States of America."
And since the end of the civil war we've seen the erosion of states rights, proving their fears true.
When you say that, they say "The parties flipped". The correct response is this "When did this happen? Show me.". It'll be a neat trick if they can pinpoint when this happened, because I've been looking for a long time and I cannot find an instance where the 'rats n Reps changed permanent allegiances in relation.
Exactly!!
So follow their logic. The Republicans back then DID end slavery, squash the KKK etc., so dems now claim that legacy as something they are proud of? okay . . . then how are all whites to be blamed for slavery & the KKK etc.?? you too?? ha. hoist on their own petard.
We need to press until their brains explode from cognitive dissonance.
This is not completely accurate. Before Lincoln won, the democrats split into two factions (northern and southern) the northern was pro-slavery + pro states rights. They wanted the states to choose. The southern democrats wanted all new states to allow slavery. It was only the Republicans that wanted slavery abolished. Most Republicans were in the north but it is an over simplification to say it was north vs south. Really it was democrats vs Republicans. In fact the northern democrats candidate was the same guy who struck down the document that would have made Texas a free state after the war. Democrats used state rights as a reason for war but this is illegitimate since slavery is an abomination and makes a person property, taking away many of their God-given rights. Therefore is not a state right.
That isn't what was meant by 'States' Rights', the term refers to the fact that only the few duties responsibilities and authorities as named in the Constitution belong to the Federal Government, all else is States' Rights.
Since slavery was not delegated to the Feds it remained a question for the States to settle.
https://files.catbox.moe/pausp4.jpg
I agree completely that it was Republicans vs Democrats.
Lincoln was not a good president, he was a tyrant. Civil asset forfeiture, indefinite detentions of dissidents, confiscating land, trying to divvy up our country part and parcel to the Brits and Frenchies........he made deals. He was the Obama of the 1860's. It was NOT about slavery. Put down the Houghtin Mifflin/Addison Wesley govt funded (fake) history books.
Just like blue states do to red states today, the South got tired of being ass-raped out of their wealth to subsidize B.S. they didn't agree with. "Slavery" didn't even come into the picture until 2 years into the War of Northern Aggression. It was a "hearts and minds" tactic. No one in the North died to free slaves and no one in the South died just to keep them. Lies.
It's time to unlearn almost everything you think you know. Also, let it be known, the North kept their slaves long after the South gave theirs up.
If you want to know true history, stop letting the govt give it to you. Read the books written in the actual era. The story is completely different. Like, 180° out.
You are enormously misinformed. Everything you just typed in your headline is a lie. Did you get the Houghton Mifflin / Addison Wesley education? Sure sounds like it.
With all due respect Armylady, JohnnyMagnum357 is totally correct. Southerners are deeply offended by this notion that our ancestors fought a war on the premise of slavery. Those of us who had families who were around for the civil war know exactly what Southerners felt so compelled to fight for, and slavery had nothing to do with it. This is the reason why elders are so important, you can rewrite history and change narratives but you can't change facts told through generations with many who can and will corroborate these stories based on principles you know in your heart to be truth. I have been guilty of peddling the propaganda history taught in schools unaware of the misinformation and blatant lies written in my history books. Luckily I spent many summers with my Grandfather, wisest man I ever met, who taught real history and the dangers one may fall into by watching the one eyed devil (television) instead of having engaging conversations with people to discover that they are full of wisdom from their years of life. Great discussions would have been lost to time otherwise.
So now Southerners are "offended." Sheesh.
They are trying to divide us, I get it.
So, why did the North keep their slaves after the South gave theirs up? That is historical fact. Not Addison Wesley, govt-funded-education fact, of course. But the winners get to write the history, right? Now start digging through books that were actually written circa 1860.......
The point of my post is that not all whites were evil. DUH!!!
That is the narrative we all should be dispelling with truth.