Replies

I find the Texas Declaration particularly interesting for those who claim secession had "nothing" to do with slavery or racism. Apparently somebody forgot to tell the Texans.

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government *all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights* [emphasis in the original]; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.

I love the echoing of the form of the Declaration of Independence while utterly rejecting its content.

Since you posted the link, do you seriously stand behind the notion that the above reasons justify secession and war?

I might also note that "all Christian nations" did NOT recognize African slavery as mutually beneficial to both bond and free. Quite the opposite. By the time this was written, almost all Christian nations recognized the exact opposite.

for those who claim secession had "nothing" to do with slavery or racism

More mischaracterization, but your last tidbit explains the moral superiority of the unionist spin...

First issue: The common government was to take no preference between states but treat them equally. The territories were owned by all the states and the common government could not pass laws in preference to some states at the expense of others with respect to those territories.

Second issue: The common government on behalf of the States could not usurp rights not specifically delegated to it by the states. Secession, abolition of slavery, etc. found in the declarations were among those rights.

Final tidbit: "racism" - and therein lies the myth that lincoln, abolitionists, unionists, et al, somehow viewed the black race at that time as equals to white.

I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races (yada, yada) and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.

"free soil, free speech, free labor, and free (white) men."

Nothing racist there. "Apparently somebody forgot to tell the" Lincolnites!

Racism per today's standards was nearly uniform in both northern and southern whites, and both claimed superiority over the black race. Racism was uniform, slavery was legal, the common government could not prefer some states over others, but a party was formed and a president elected to do just that. But it was the South's fault...

Re: "all Christian nations" is in reference to scriptural context of slavery. Object as you may on a theological level, even Pope Pius acknowledged the legitimacy of the Confederacy and their effort to leave the union, and the scriptures say what they do regardless of how objectionable the words may be.