Replies

marron,

Thank you so much for your thoughtful response @ 132! I have read much of American history, including Jim Crow, that curls my hair.

No Lincoln wasn’t perfect, nor was the Union, much less the Confederacy. No person or entity is ever perfect. The issues I take are with those who choose to ignore aspects of America’s collective history, which don’t promote the myth that only the South was bad and solely guilty for everything that happened. Individuals were indeed virtuous, and those not so virtuous, on both sides of that conflict. Political parties are a different story!

We do need to stop letting the dumocrats get away with rewriting their history. We must figure out a way to put the reality of it all front and center.

As far as this thread, I don’t watch tv. However, my daughter and my better half do. They give me Beck reports, on a regular basis, b/c I always liked Beck when I did watch tv:) The impression both of them have is that Beck is painting the South as pretty rotten. It blew my mind when my daughter relayed to me that he stated that slavery in the North was better/different than in the South. They tell me he even adopts a typical, derogatory, southern stereotype, including voice and mannerisms, when he is referring to those he finds dumb or ignorant. This particular habit of his I witnessed in shows he did last year. I don’t appreciate any of it. I admire the work he does, but again, I take issue with those who present a one-sided view of our history and see fit to denigrate the South. From what my family is telling me, Beck is going down the road of perpetuating a version of our history that I know to be innacurate/incomplete.

I am not one that has ever denied the connection between slavery and the Confederacy. Nor do I close my eyes to the fact of slavery that was still existant in the Union. I have no problem with Beck discussing slavery and the Confederacy/South, but believe it helps no one if the whole of our history isn’t relayed.

I don’t agree with why some states chose to secede, but do believe they had the right to do so. There’s a paradox: I don’t defend slavery but do defend states rights! I also recognize the states which seceded due to Lincoln’s order for troops and those which seceded for refusing to assist in coercing other seceded states back into the Union.

I’m also thankful you mentioned the abolishionists, I’m one that sees all the groups who were trying to end slavery as abolishionists. That thought brings me to a historical tidbit I think you might appreciate, please see below:

The Manumission Intelligence & The Emancipator
LOCATION: West Main St., Jonesborough, TN, 37659
The Manumission Intelligence & The Emancipator were the nation’s oldest publications dedicate to the abolition of slavery. Publication began in 1819.

Pretty cool, huh? Some of the earliest groups against slavery were actually in the South. I don’t know how that fact got buried over the years.

I can’t disagree with the abolisionists purpose, but I do believe the radical tactics that were employed, starting in the early 1830’s, demolished the possibility of the South releasing her slaves. The best of intentions often lead to unintended consequences.

And so it goes.

I sincerely appreciate the conversation and goodwill.

Sunshine