Targeting Lost Causers

Old Virginia Blog ^ | 06/09/2009 | Richard Williams

[Davy Buck]

My oh my, what would the critics, the Civil War publications, publishers, and bloggers do if it weren't for the bad boys of the Confederacy and those who study them and also those who wish to honor their ancestors who fought for the Confederacy?

[4CJ]

The implication here is that, from the beginning, the Republican Party was a political crusade undertaken on a platform that included a secret war plank.

LG, you nailed it. The big government socialists, aka Whigs then Republicans, had to divest the federal congress of the true conservatives, aka Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans. True, given another 20-30 years with an ever increasing majority the northeast would have political controul of the Union, but Lincoln and his ilk were too impatient to wait, and too eager to despoil and plunder the country.

In that regard, Obama is most definitely following in Lincoln's political and socialist footsteps.

[BroJoeK]

"instead the Black volunteers served in state, militia,partisan ranger, home guards & "privately raised" formations."

And you can cite for us the names of their units, their commanders, and the battles in which they fought?

Seems to me this would be a matter of some interest to northern units fighting against them, and yet it was never mentioned, that I know of.

As you say, "defending their country" would be the reason for any free black soldiers in the Confederate Army. Since they were already free, and some even owned slaves of their own, the issue of slavery may not have been foremost for them.

But you seriously misunderstand Americans in general, let alone northerners, if you suppose them willing to fight and die just to support some elite cabal over trivial "economic interests" or some other non-vital reason.

Americans will ONLY knowingly fight and die in support of a Just Cause, and in 1861 - 1865 that cause was "to preserve the Union and abolish slavery." So, regardless of whatever the "elites" may have intended, the average American understood that when the war was over the Union would be preserved and slavery abolished.

And that's just what happened.

[4CJ]

wow, the way you glossed over how MOREE Black men fought against slavery than fought fo slavery...that is telling,t oo

wow, and three times as many WHITES fought FOR slavery and the union as it was ...

[stand watie]

actually, from the northern perspective, the war was about ONE main thing: preserving the union. (in 1861 you could not have found 10,ooo people in the country who were willing to die to "free the slaves".)

from the southern perspective, the war was about ONE main issue: FREEDOM for dixie.

it was only AFTER it was feared, by lincoln & his advisers, that the British & Canadians might "come into" the war on the CSA side, that "freeing the slaves" became "The GRAND Crusade" (fwiw, that's whats called a SELF-serving LIE.)

free dixie,sw

[BroJoeK]

"the "slavery was the cause of the war" MYTH!."

Slavery was the cause of the war: ABSOLUTE TRUTH.

The Republican party was the Party of Abolition, and Abraham Lincoln was their leading abolitionist.

In 1860, the South threatened that if Lincoln were elected, the South would secede, and seven states did, even before Lincoln's inauguration. They seceded for one reason only: to avoid the POSSIBILITY of abolition under President Lincoln.

From Wikipedia

"South Carolina adopted the "Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union" on December 24, 1860.

"It argued for states' rights for slave owners in the South, but contained a complaint about states' rights in the North in the form of opposition to the Fugitive Slave Act, claiming that Northern states were not fulfilling their federal obligations under the Constitution.

"All of the alleged violations of the rights of Southern states were related to slavery."

[stand watie]

actually, there are MANY unit operations reports that mention Blacks fighting against the union. LOTS.

also, what you asked me to do is called (on FR): assigning homework. (sorry, but i CHARGE people 60.oo a hour to do research.)

HINT: do a check of the older WBTS threads & you will find the numbers you want. "nolo chan" years ago listed those figures on FR.

free dixie,sw

[BroJoeK]

"also, what you asked me to do is called (on FR): assigning homework. "

I DID some "homework" on this, and the results do not support your claims. So, I'll conclude that your claims are bogus until you provide evidence to prove the contrary.

[MikefromOhio]

Don’t hold your breath for proof to his claims that actually comes from anyone reputable.

After all, this is the guy who always seem so to think General Forrest was a person to be emulated.

[stand watie]

you're welcome to believe ANYTHING you want to believe. = it's called: freedom of speech/expression/thought. - nonetheless, you are in error.

go do some more research into individual unit records & southern state pension records & you'll see that i'm correct. (for example of pensions paid out from KY, about 20% of pensions went to Black veterans and/or their widows. the pension records of other southern states are similar to KY's.)

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

i also note that you IGNORED the FACT that i said that MANY union army reports mention Blacks fighting against them, starting in 1861.= look at the unit reports in the OR & you'll see what i mean.

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

"anyone reputable" is, to a radical unionist, ONLY someone who agrees with their PREJUDICES& foolish/preconceived notions.

Forrest was FAR from the ONLY possible/competent guerrilla leader that the southland still had after Richmond fell.====> you have heard of BG Stand Watie, "Devil Anse" McNeil & LTC John S. Mosby, have you not??? there were MANY others who could have led guerrilla bands competently.

even one of my ancestors (BG Smith P. Bankhead) might well have made a fine guerrilla leader, if fighting "on his home ground", as he was a well-regarded CSA officer AND was a noted hunter, horseman & woodsman.

free diixe,sw

[Non-Sequitur]

as N-S knows, Dr. Blackerby in his book BLACKS IN BLUE AND GRAY states that 100,000 -150,000 Black VOLUNTEERS served as soldiers/sailors/marines in the southern military forces.

That's free Black VOLUNTEERS, isn't that your claim? So were's the book so you can post the page for all to see?

[stand watie]

are you still asking that same SILLY question??? (the first time you asked it, it was a HALF-smart question. every time since, you have just looked STUPID & filled with HATE.)

do you REALLY think that anyone (even the other DAMNyankee bigots) will believe ANYTHING that you post, after my friend scans the relevant pages of the book onto this forum & you are EXPOSED as a KNOWING liar???

tell us THE TRUTH: have you ever even SEEN a copy of Blackerby's book OR do you HOPE that people will continue to believe your LIES, after the pages are posted???

laughing AT you.

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

also, note to all readers: i see what SILLY, WEAK excuse that N-S is going to try to "get his tail out of the crack", that he did to HIMSELF.

BEWARE of "scheming LIARS" is my advice.

UNfortunately (for N-S) too many people here KNOW that he has REPEATEDLY denied what Blackerby said in his book.

PREPARE to LOL at him.

free diixe,sw

[Non-Sequitur]

tell us THE TRUTH: have you ever even SEEN a copy of Blackerby's book OR do you HOPE that people will continue to believe your LIES, after the pages are posted???

Does this look familiar?

Of course not. You've never seen it to begin with.

[Non-Sequitur]

Slave marriages were recorded three ways: First, in the Church. Second, in the records of the slave owner. Third, in the US Census.

Utter nonsense. Especially the census part.

[aruanan]

As you told someone else on the thread, "statistics, please." Go get your homework (you remember homework, don't you? -- such as you demanded so starchily from stand_watie?), and come show it to us. Show us how the vast, overwhelming majority of slave marriages ended in tears and forced separation at the hands of ruthless, snaggletoothed, pellagra-ridden, sweat-stained Hitchcockian crackerhead masters.

Look at Robert William Fogel and Stanley L. Engerman, Time on the Cross: The Economics of American Negro Slavery. Here is a review. The problem with pellagra came largely after the Civil War when material conditions for many in the South, especially the freed slaves, drastically deteriorated and didn't recover much until the period between the first and second world wars. The Civil War, compounded by the twisting of the electoral college titty by the South to get the Union troops withdrawn, was responsible for that many decades-long degradation.

[Colonel Kangaroo]

Marriages were encouraged. Infidelity was punished because of the turmoil it caused. Premarital chastity was carefully guarded by slave parents. As a result, the United States accounted for only about 6% of all slave imports into the new world. The lurid stories about slave breeding operations were just that, lurid stories concocted by abolitionists who, ironically, were almost uniformly about as racist as any cracker.

I know that not all slave owners were Simon Legree, especially in smaller scale situations. But apparently post war Southern papers were filled with classified ads submitted by freed slaves looking for long-separated family members. The evil of slavery was not that all or even most slave owners acted this way, but that under the unimpaired property rights in slavery position asserted in the CSA constitution, the slaveowner could do anything he wished to his human property just as if he/she was a plow or mule.

[Colonel Kangaroo]

We all, both rebs and yanks, sometimes lose ourselves in these heated discussions. But it’s still 1000x better than the pure hardcore hate that some among the liberals indulge in on the wayleft websites. The most yankee of the yankee statements over here will look like Robert E. Lee in their love of Dixie compared to some of the mad dog rantings I’ve read from leftyland.

[Ditto]

True, given another 20-30 years with an ever increasing majority the northeast would have political controul of the Union, but Lincoln and his ilk were too impatient to wait, and too eager to despoil and plunder the country.

Nonsense. Even with 50 states today, 15 slave states could block any amendment to end slavery.

You guys have gone from tin foil hats to full body Faraday cages.