Southerners looking to share their Confederate holiday

Hartford Courant ^ | March 22, 2009 | Dahleen Glanton

[central_va]

Why are these Civil War threads irresistible?

[nufsed]

Where’s the “You lost, get over it” banner?

[Colonel Kangaroo]

They’re a great way to forget the troubles of the day and they also provide nice avenues for mutual venting for those of us on both sides of the issue. There are real differences on the Civil War, but they pale compared to the gulf that separates all conservatives from the acme of wacky leftist policies now residing in the White House.

[central_va]

The problem is that conservatives want a strong federal government also, they have forgotten what a Republic is themselves. I look at the Civil War as the end of the Republic. Because it “was about slavery”, the fact the the Federal Monster was created as a result of the war, is lost on all it seems. States are a joke. Everyone knows where the power is. It wasn’t always so, we truly were a Republic at one time.

[Ultra Sonic 007]

If it was about slavery, then the Southerners were fighting for slavery right? Making all of them evil bigots. The Yankees were fighting against slavery right? Making all of them hero's. You can't clap with one hand? Let's make sure I have been properly trained: For the South, it wasn't about stopping a federal invasion or states rights, it was all about slavery. You said so. I have been schooled now. Thank you. You really straightened me out.

You keep missing my point. Again, I direct you to post 46. Certainly, I would be willing to bet the farm that out of all the Confederate soldiers fighting, a vast majority of them fought for their state and not for slavery. My argument is not 'oh dur hur those EVIL Southerners are all oppressing the slaves! Go UNION WOO'. Not even close.

Here is my argument in a nutshell: the social and economic facets of the Civil War are rooted in the effect slavery had on them and political discourse throughout the antebellum years, REGARDLESS of the personal feelings of the soldiers fighting and dying in the actual war. One can certainly look at the words, thoughts, and letters of the multitude of noble men on both sides and come away with the conclusion that 'hey, this isn't about slavery!'. However, slavery's role in affairs leading up to that point in time was not insignificant. Nor is it something that one can ignore and just wonder, 'okay, if this one little thing in the Civil War was different with the slave issue, what would've happened?'. You can't do that, because you'd have to make an appropriate change in the events leading up to then, and soon you're off an entirely different tangent.

Are we clear now?

[jtill]

I’m hoping that there Georgia state representative - Tyrone Brooks - gets thrown out of office for his egregious definition of the Confederacy.

I’d bet he did get his American history education in a government operated public school, cause he ain’t got no learnin.

[central_va]

Here is the question I have, was the evil destroyed, slavery, worth the cost of destroying a functioning Republic in the process? Why was that the only choice? I have no answers.....

[jla]

The Civil War did not create the "fed monster" - that beast made its appearance many decades earlier. The critical juncture was when the opposing factions solidified their respective sides - Jefferson and the republicans who favored states rights vehemently vs. the Hamiltonian federalists who urged more centralization in managing the country.
What we are experiencing today is a direct result of ignoring the prescient warnings from Jefferson.

[Non-Sequitur]

You may call yourself a conservative but you'll always be a arrogant SOB Yankee to me.

The two are not mutally exclusive.

Now, go and read the confederate constitution. The one that Light Brigade wants to bring back.

[Non-Sequitur]

I lay the current state of the republic and the socialism coming at us at the feet of every GD Yankee that crushed the Confederacy.

I'm sure you would. That's far easier than admitting that Jeff Davis was a big government semi-socialist who would have set the confederacy on the road towards banana republicism had he won his rebellion.

[Non-Sequitur]

Now HERE is an example of a plausible scenario; how would things have turned out had the Emancipation Proclamation included all states, and not just those of the South?

Legally it could not. The Emancipation Proclamation got its authority from the Confiscation Acts passed in 1861 and 1862 and which allowed the government to seize without compensation private property being used to support the rebellion. Since slave holders in Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, and Delaware were not supporting the rebellion then their slaves could not be freed.

[cowboyway]

Other than that I'm not quite sure what the relevancy of your remark is.

Virginia is not Southern anymore. You're a yankee state. Get used to it.

[Birmingham Rain]

Ping that might take your interest - some posts, anyway.

[cowboyway]

no such thing as a conservative Yankee.

Bears repeating.

[Birmingham Rain]

Thanks for the ping, 007!

[jla]

Feck off

[cowboyway]

Feck off

Obonga carried your state.

YOU f@#k off.........

[jla]

Feck off and try something different - such as reading a book.

[mtnwmn]

This is what is so infuriating. Historians are as biased as the media today. Personally I agree with Boonie, but I'm from the south. Southern bred and southern born. FWIW a “Yankee” is someone north of the Mason-Dixon line.

[Madame Dufarge]

How is a direct quote "parsing?"

You apparently missed my point that there were honorable, principled men on both sides of the issue.

Oh well, have fun with the "yankee" hating if it gives you some comfort.