Posted on 04/18/2013 2:14:07 PM PDT by Epsdude
Sorry for this unusual post. I'm probably the youngest one this site so you can imagine I've got a lot to learn in politics, but one thing has always puzzled me.
I know that Republicans broke away from the Whigs to oppose the pro-slavery Democrats but the change in party demographics since then has perplexed me.
I recently saw this picture: http://manwiththemuckrake.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/slavery-2012.jpg
I'm just curious, what caused such a radical shift in the solid south? Some people accredit this to an 'ideological party switch' but that seems rather implausible to me. So what did cause this arbitrary shift and, also why did the black vote slowly drift over to the Democrats?
Thanks.
They were so against it they proposed a constitutional amendment to make it legal forever. And so against it they continued funding, insuring, equipping, and running the trans-Atlantic slave trade until 1884.
The Republican Party ran the trans-Atlantic slave trade?
I don’t think so.
Yankees ran the trans-Atlantic slave trade after the 1830’s. The Republican party, which dominated American politics for decades after the war tolerated and sheltered it. Do you think those northern banks, insurance companies, and shippers were run by Democrats in the 1870’s and 1880’s?
I think you are spinning out of control, the Republican Party did not “” they continued funding, insuring, equipping, and running the trans-Atlantic slave trade until 1884.””.
American Revolution: English parliament pretended authority to tax colonies, which power was given to the local governments under their charters.
There was resistance to English taxation, and the taxes were repealed, except for tea. Tea was either not unloaded, not sold (Charleston tea shipment sat abandoned in a warehouse). In Boston, British officials refused to return the tea to Britain (where it could be sold with English paying the tax) and response to that, it was into the water.
Britain in response to the destruction of the tea, passed the Coercive Acts, which ended local self government and stopped all Boston commerce. Colonists offered to pay for the tea, but such offers were turned down.
The British then invaded the countryside outside of Boston in an attempt to capture militia cannon and leaders. Shooting started at Lexington, and after the war started, the Declaration of Independence was written.
By contrast, in 1860 there was no attempt by the national government to deny southern representation, nor to begin a war. It was the south that began a war, as they needed Virginia, the most populous slave state, and the war begun by the slave power brought them in.
Rather, anti slavery in the territories. Slavery was a bad thing, and it was thought that if slavery could be constrained to where it was, it would die. Slavery depended on slaves being kept ignorant, and that meant only simple methods of agriculture could be used, so land would soon be exhausted. New lands were required, and denying those lands would lead to poorer results for southern agriculture. Eventually cheap land in the territories would not support bad agricultural practices required for slavery, and slavery would be put back onto a path of eventual extinction.
It wasn’t anti-Negro, since it asserted that Negros in northern states should be protected from southern kidnappers.
It wasn’t anti Southern since the south would have been left to run their own affairs, just not everyone else’s. The hope was that the gentlemen of the south would see a path to virtue, and find a way to end slavery as soon as it was in their best interest.
One Alabama coach, Bear Bryant by name, arranged a series of games between Alabama and USC. Alabama did poorly, in part because USC had many large and athletic gentlemen from Alabama.
Bear was asked why he lost so often to USC. and he stated it was because so many student athelets from Alabama went to college at USC. They were black, and not permitted to attend Alabama.
And so, eventually Alabama, to remain competitive, changed its admission practices.
Roll Tide!
Not so much against Negros, as free Negroes were not concerned. It was the institution of slavery, where any man could be kidnapped, and sold with forged papers that offended. That, and raids by slave owners against free communities.
One noted person, a brilliant man known for his knowledge of sheep raising, was able to defend Lawrence Kansas against a slaver raid. Out numbered 7 to one, he fought off the slavers. You know him as John Brown.
It was started as the Anti Nebraska party, opposed to slavery in Nebraska.
There was no secession from the Articles of Confederation. The representatives of the states to the US under the A of C voted to transfer their authority to the new Constitution, and the last president of the US under the A of C stood next to G. Washington at the inauguration of George Washington.
We know what George Washington though about Insurrection. He quickly put down the Whiskey Rebellion, with forces gathered from a state not in insurrection. It is just sad that R.E. Lee didn’t follow the example of Light Horse Harry in that regard.
The United States Congress passed the Slave Trade Act of 1794, which prohibited the building or outfitting of ships in the U.S. for use in the slave trade.
On 22 February 1807, twenty years after he first began his crusade, and in the middle of Britain’s war with France, Wilberforce and his team’s labors were rewarded with victory. By an overwhelming 283 votes for to 16 against, the motion to abolish the Atlantic slave trade was carried in the House of Commons. The United States acted to abolish the slave trade the same year.
The last country to ban the Atlantic slave trade was Brazil in 1831. However, a vibrant illegal trade continued to ship large numbers of enslaved people to Brazil and also to Cuba until the 1860s, when British enforcement and further diplomacy finally ended the Atlantic trade.
So according to you, the Yankees ran the slave trade after 1860, but the slave trade didn’t exist after 1860.
I have no idea why you are posting that stuff to me, why not post it to the guy who believes that the republican party was not anti-slavery, or that thinks that the party ran the trans-Atlantic slave trade until 1884?
George Bone is a personal friend of mine
Alabama and Notre Same solicited my father with cash and gifts etc in 1951..football
He chose VMI for only a scholarship
Drafted by Giants in 55
Chose USAF tac fighter commission instead....7 years
I like Obama and LSU
Blathering idiot.
Brazil banned slavery in 1884. There are pictures of slave ships in the 1880's online. Google is your friend. Your imagination is not.
And the US and Britain patroled the sea lanes, stopping the slave trade. Since 1794 no US ships were permitted to be outfitted or equipped for the slave trade.
Britain’s diplomatic efforts cut off most of the slave trade at the source, the African tribes that sold slaves.
I presume you don’t mean George Drummon Bone. He would be perhaps before your time.
And they are not allowed to put anything on the internet that isn’t true....
Between 1970–1979, the Crimson Tide was one of the most dominant teams in college football. During the decade the program posted a record of 103-16-1, winning eight SEC titles and three national championships.[6] The very first game of the decade was notable, as the team was thoroughly defeated by the USC Trojans in Birmingham 42–21. This is the game that is generally credited as the catalyst to end segregation in college football.[32] The following season, John Mitchell, an African-American transfer from Eastern Arizona Junior College, played in the rematch, a game that Alabama won 17–10 at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum. In that game, Mitchell became the first black player to start for the Tide.
Per Wikipedia....
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.