Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pitts: About the Confederate battle flag, remember this: Nazis have a heritage, too
The Salt Lake City Tribune ^ | 3 March 2008 | Leonard Pitts

Posted on 03/03/2008 10:37:49 AM PST by Rebeleye

They will tell you the Civil War was not about slavery. Remind them that the president and vice president of the so-called "Confederate States of America" both said it was. They will tell you that great-great grandpa Zeke fought for the South, and he never owned any slaves. Remind them that it is political leaders - not grunts - who decide whether and why a war is waged. They will tell you the flag just celebrates heritage. Remind them that "heritage" is not a synonym for "good." After all, Nazis have a heritage, too.

(Excerpt) Read more at sltrib.com ...


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: confederacy; confederate; confederateflag; dixie; ushistory
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 1,121-1,139 next last
To: xone

I don’t live in NYC.

I like in “America’s Most Liveable City.”

;-)


221 posted on 03/03/2008 1:16:02 PM PST by Emperor Palpatine ("There is no civility, only politics.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Emperor Palpatine

You all better not get me started!


222 posted on 03/03/2008 1:16:06 PM PST by jeffDavis1861
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Moose4

You are exactly right but slave holding is still a slave state . The Civil war was not fought over slavery but over the right of a state to secede among other things. Slave owners were few and far between so it is not reasonable to think all those men would fight and die to allow a wealthy slave owner to keep his property it just does not pass the smell test.


223 posted on 03/03/2008 1:21:53 PM PST by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep

As does Robert Byrd to this day.


224 posted on 03/03/2008 1:23:08 PM PST by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: ontap
This is a map of the nation during the Civil War if you will note there were five northern states who had slaves during the civil war. Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation did nothing to free these slaves.

That took the 13th Amendment to end slavery in those states not participating in the rebellion. And Lincoln, more than any single individual, was responsible for that, too.

Lincoln himself stated that he would accept slavery to preserve the union. So much for the civil war being fought over slavery.

But you aren't looking at it from the South's point of view. Since defense of slavery was by far the single, most important reason for their secession, and since they chose war to further their aims, then one can say that the was was indeed fought over slavery. From the South's point, at least.

225 posted on 03/03/2008 1:23:27 PM PST by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Well, no. The fact is that the small minority who went to the Hartford Convention advocating secession were voted down early on, and the declaration issued by the convention makes to threats of secession whatsoever.

Doesn't matter. What got everyone's emotions up was that there even were advocates of secession at the HC - during a time of war, no less.

Hyperbole? Or Southern hypocrisy?

Both, just like there was both hyperbole and hypocrisy on the part of New England and the Old Northwest when those sections opposed the later Southern secessionary movement.

226 posted on 03/03/2008 1:25:06 PM PST by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (Men fight well when they know that no prisoners will be taken.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20
I didn’t know that the South had starved, gassed and shot over 12,000,000 like Germans and Japanese did.

And?

Your original quote was "And do you think that invading the entire South with the intent of slaughtering and burning their cities to the ground was a proportionate response?" The South started the war, as did Germany and Japan. The South could no more control where the war went than could Germany and Japan. If bombing the cities of those two countries was an proportionate response to their war, why wouldn't it be a proportionate response to the confederacy's war?

227 posted on 03/03/2008 1:26:29 PM PST by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Since defense of slavery was by far the single, most important reason for their secession,

This simply is not a true statement. The war was fought over the states right to secede.

228 posted on 03/03/2008 1:26:31 PM PST by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: RedMonqey
Grant wasn’t a great General. But he knew how to win a battle by throwing countless men and machinery into a meat grinder until it was clogged and overwhelmed.

You need to take a look at Grant's western campaigns which featured lots of movement, flank marches & close cooperation with the Navy. There were frontal assaults like at Vicksburg, but there were good reasons to think that he might be able to punch through.

Grant's Overland Campaign in the east was indeed less creative in the area of battles, but no less innovative in the logistical planning. If the South had a lesser commander than Lee, Grant might have won in 1864 (in the sense that Richmond would have fallen 6 months earlier).

229 posted on 03/03/2008 1:27:01 PM PST by Tallguy (Tagline is offline till something better comes along...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: ontap

Famous southerner quote:

“Didn’t own any slaves... illiterate... couldn’t have much interest in the constitution... When asked what he was fighting for, he replied... Cause you’re down here...”


230 posted on 03/03/2008 1:27:13 PM PST by Locomotive Breath
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
Oh, prolly not.... OTOH, the South had actual laws about such things, and they tried like hell to hang onto 'em. It was a whole different level.

Not really. I mean, if you're constrained from something by law, or you're constrained from something by the fact that your neighbours will take matters into their own hands and kill you, run you out of the neighbourhood, etc. - the end result is the same.

IIRC, most Northern States had anti-miscegenation laws (mostly codified during the eugenics craze of the 1920s and 1930s). I don't recall how many, if any, might have had Jim Crow-style laws. Loving v. Virginia overturned them in every State that had them.

231 posted on 03/03/2008 1:30:12 PM PST by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (Men fight well when they know that no prisoners will be taken.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20

Lock and load,,

Wonder what folks would say if Montana tore up it’s “contract” with DC, due to a bad interpretation by the SCOTUS on the 2nd Add. ?


232 posted on 03/03/2008 1:34:25 PM PST by silentreignofheroes (I'm Southron,,and I Vote..,..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Emperor Palpatine
And IIRC before the war steam railroads and riverboats brought “King Cotton” north where they were exported from northeastern ports.

Actually, most of the cotton was shipped from Southern ports, while most of the imports into the country came through Northern ports. Southern shipping was geared almost exclusive towards agricultural export.

233 posted on 03/03/2008 1:35:24 PM PST by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (Men fight well when they know that no prisoners will be taken.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

"...segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation forever...." Gov. George Wallace

234 posted on 03/03/2008 1:35:30 PM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Thanks


235 posted on 03/03/2008 1:37:30 PM PST by silentreignofheroes (I'm Southron,,and I Vote..,..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: silentreignofheroes
Wonder what folks would say if Montana tore up it’s “contract” with DC, due to a bad interpretation by the SCOTUS on the 2nd Add. ?

IIRC, in response to a bad 2nd Amendment decision, wasn't Montana contemplating something more along the lines of a reversion to territorial status?

236 posted on 03/03/2008 1:37:58 PM PST by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (Men fight well when they know that no prisoners will be taken.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: ontap
This is a map of the nation during the Civil War if you will note there were five northern states who had slaves during the civil war. Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation did nothing to free these slaves. Lincoln himself stated that he would accept slavery to preserve the union. So much for the civil war being fought over slavery.

All that illustrates is that it wasn't about slavery for the North.

The South, on the other hand, made it very clear in its founding documents that their war was to preserve slavery.

237 posted on 03/03/2008 1:39:32 PM PST by highball ("I never should have switched from scotch to martinis." -- the last words of Humphrey Bogart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

That’s great, but it doesn’t answer the question I was asking, nor does it deal with the point I’m making. Please try to stay on task, eh?


238 posted on 03/03/2008 1:39:53 PM PST by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (Men fight well when they know that no prisoners will be taken.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: tom h

I can live with that.


239 posted on 03/03/2008 1:42:19 PM PST by Old Mountain man (Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: ChurtleDawg

OK,,though posting a picture with out any info leaves alot out.

(This sure beats reading about those two Dems.)

Now back to why the South was Right


240 posted on 03/03/2008 1:43:02 PM PST by silentreignofheroes (I'm Southron,,and I Vote..,..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 1,121-1,139 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson