Posted on 04/15/2010 1:16:02 PM PDT by wolfcreek
Ten years ago, I received an e-mail from a reader who signed him or herself "J.D." "I am a white racist," wrote J.D., "a white supremacist and I do not deny it."
From that, you'd suspect J.D. had nothing of value to say. You'd be mistaken. J.D. wrote in response to a column documenting the fact that preservation of slavery was the prime directive of the Confederacy. "I was most pleased to see you write what we both know to be the truth," the e-mail said. "I never cease to be amazed at the Sons of Confederate Veterans and similar 'heritage not hate' groups who are constantly whining that the Confederacy was not a white, racist government ..."
That argument, noted J.D. with wry amusement, plays well with "white people who want to be Confederates without any controversy."
(Excerpt) Read more at news-record.com ...
bump
Excuse me, but aren’t you the one sanitizing history? Ownership of slaves was not illegal under the US Constitution at the time of the Civil War.
Yawn, black Americans just can’t get past the fact that America doesn’t view them as slaves anymore and are completely capable of standing on their own two feet.
And the UnAmerican Democrat party doesn’t like it one bit!
So he likes this JD because JD endorses the theory that Pitts wants endorsed.
Big surprise.
It was Eugene Robinson yesterday saying the same thing.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2492974/posts
I bet there are many others.
Oh and BTW: you’d be wrong and current events are providing the proof.
What federal encroachment are we talking about?
And why exactly did the states want to secede?
Your question should really be, "Why didn't all the slave states secede?" And the answer to that is, the felt secession was a worse option than remaining part of the United States. But as a matter of fact, out of the 25 states loyal to the United States, 20 had outlawed slavery before the war. One, West Virginia, entered as a slave state (the legacy of formerly being part of Virginia), but quickly outlawed it. Two more outlawed it during the war. The 13th amendment abolished slavery throughout the United States, but it took the election of 1864 to get enough Democrats out of congress to allow it to pass.
For some, slavery was an issue. If you would have asked a typical Union soldier he was fighting to free the slaves, he would of said, Hell no! You would have gotten the similar answer from the typical Confederate soldier if he were asked, Are you fighting to own slaves? The attempt to pain the Union as an army on a moral and spiritual mission is pure fantasy. The reason for going to war was to “save” the Union. Only about 5% of whites owned slaves in the South. The other 95% never owned a slave and lived in worse economic conditions than many slaves. They had no vested interest in slavery, but they wanted to keep their Southern culture.
“... it was an issue of the southern states attempting to exert their sovereignty as states against increasing federal encroachment.”
I am always amused by this argument.
I too am amused. The follow on question is: Over what issue were the “southern states attempting to exert their sovereignty as states against increasing federal encroachment?” Slavery!
When I was growing up my mother didn't drive. We had one car and it was titled in my father's name. You could truthfully say that only 20 percent of the family owned a car. But 100% got benefit from that car ownership. The same is true with slave ownership. It may be true that only 5% of all Southerners owned slaves. But if all of them were married then suddenly 10% of all Southerners derive benefit from that slave ownership. Add a couple of kids and the percentage goes up. The more accurate comparison would be to look at the number of slave owners and the compare it with the number of families listed in the 1860 census. Look at that and you see that in states like Mississippi half of all families owned slaves. In the confederacy as a whole between one-third and one-quarter of all families had slaves. Look at it in those terms and it's easy to see why they would fight for it.
...and lived in worse economic conditions than many slaves.
Nonsense.
They had no vested interest in slavery, but they wanted to keep their Southern culture
A culture built on slavery.
A black caller to Rush’s show this morning confirmed what you say. He said that he was a conservative (right!) but was concerned when Tea Partiers (read: whites) say that they want to return to our nation’s roots.
“Doesn’t that mean a return to slavery?” (I’m paraphrasing here).
Nothing that Rush did or could say could penetrate the obdurate skull that insists on equating conservative republican governance with racism. The caller sees ghosts that do not exist.
The FedGov’s current overreaching/overtaxation/overmandation.
The CW was more about money/power/political will than it was about slavery.
It took over 10 years of squabbling before any shots were fired in anger.
Which is the Real ‘Racist’ Party: Fifteen Questions for Democrats
Great Moments in Democrat Racist History - FDR
http://theblacksphere.blogspot.com/2009/04/great-moments-in-democrat-racist.html
After the South chose to begin the war by bombarding Sumter into surrender. Having chosen war then they alone were responsible for keeping war away from them. They failed in that. Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind and all the rest.
You mean that it was probably written by some SPLC intern? Well yes, that’s par for the course.
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.