Posted on 02/20/2020 9:13:10 PM PST by Pelham
Thomas Fleming talked about his book, A Disease in the Public Mind: A New Understanding of Why We Fought the Civil War, in which he portrays the Civil War as a tragedy that American leaders foresaw and struggled to prevent.
He spoke about how public opinion and propaganda helped spark the war, and the longstanding tensions between the North and South. He also discussed events that heightened fear of a slave rebellion in the southern states. The Pritzker Military Library hosted this event.
>>jmacusa wrote: “Men can and do fight courageously for an evil cause. It doesn’t change the fact they are fighting for an evil cause.”
True. The Union Army fought for an evil cause, but fought courageously.
***************
>>jmacusa wrote: “And by the way I have an ancestor who served with The Army of The Potomac.”
My ancestors served on both sides. Some migrated South from Pennsylvania during the mid 1750’s and settled in Virginia and western North Carolina.
Mr. Kalamata
>>Bull Snipe wrote: “Don’t forget the greedy slaveocracy that ruled from Richmond. It take two to have a war.”
That is revisionist history by omission. Lincoln was the invader. When a nation is invaded, like the Confederacy, they either fight, or be enslaved.
Mr. Kalamata
The Confederate Army fought for an evil cause, but fought courageously.
>>Bull Snipe wrote: “The Confederate Army fought for an evil cause, but fought courageously.”
You have a strange concept of what is and is not evil. Lincoln was an evil thug who declared war on the Confederacy during his inaugural address. Self-defense is not an evil cause, except in the playbook of the thug.
Mr. Kalamata
Would think that the perpetual enslavement of 3.5 million people as one of your Constitutional requirements would be considered evil by some.
Like making up your own history,don’t you?
>>Bull Snipe wrote: “Would think that the perpetual enslavement of 3.5 million people as one of your Constitutional requirements would be considered evil by some.”
It didn’t matter to your hero, Abraham Lincoln; why should it matter to you? You do know that in Lincoln’s so-called “Emancipation Proclamation” he made it crystal clear that it was okay for you to own slaves, as long as you were loyal to the Union. He even promoted a Constitutional Amendment to make slavery permanent in the existing slave states, just so he could “save the Union” and continue the flow of crony-capitalist revenue from protective tariffs (the Confederate Constitution’s free-trade articles would have diverted much of the New England shipping to the Southern ports.)
How do you feel about the New England states, for over a century, getting rich on the slave trade? How do you feel about many of the Northern slave-masters selling their slaves to Southern plantations, rather than emancipating them? How do you feel about New England self-proclaimed abolitionists getting rich selling pianos that contained imported piano-key ivory from brutal slave plantations in Africa? (. . . sorta reminds me of the wealthy Leftists of today getting rich on the backs of cheap foreign laborers working in slave-like conditions . . . )
How do you feel about many Northern abolitionists not wanting free blacks to migrate to their respective states, preferring they settle somewhere else? How do you feel about the Black Codes in the Northern states, some of which banned the migration of free blacks into their states by legislation, including Lincoln’s home-state, Illinois?
Talk about hypocrites! Sanctimonious anti-Southerners are all a bunch of hypocrites.
Mr. Kalamata
>>jmacusa wrote: “btw it was the South who was the aggressor and started the war, not Lincoln.”
That is pure, 100%, revisionist baloney. Lincoln declared war on the Confederacy in his First Inaugural speech if they didn’t submit to his rules
Mr. Kalamata
They should have. The South would have kept their slaves and saved 600,000 lives.
"In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow-countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The Government will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath registered in heaven to destroy the Government, while I shall have the most solemn one to "preserve, protect, and defend it." - Abraham Lincoln.
Lincoln was right. The South could not have a war without starting one. Which they did.
Talk about hypocrites!
So you believe that it is perfectly ethical to own a person as one would own a dog, horse, or sheep. You see no injustice, evil, or moral issues with the enslavement of 4.2 million people.
Bull Snipe wrote: “So you believe that it is perfectly ethical to own a person as one would own a dog, horse, or sheep. You see no injustice, evil, or moral issues with the enslavement of 4.2 million people.”
I see injustice in all oppression and repression of mankind. I am not a hypocrite, like you, who believes it is okay to kill a million people — including women, children, old men, and slaves — while plundering, pillaging, raping, and burning your way to victory, all in the phony name of “preserving the Union.”
Mr. Kalamata
your hero, Abraham Lincoln;
Don’t believe in heros.
“How do you feel about the New England states, for over a century, getting rich on the slave trade?”
It was legal until 1808. The New Englanders got rich because unlike their southern countrymen. they were willing to build the ships and crew them.
“How do you feel about many of the Northern slave-masters selling their slaves to Southern plantations.”
It was legal to sell property.
How do you feel about New England self-proclaimed abolitionists getting rich selling pianos that contained imported piano-key ivory from brutal slave plantations in Africa?
It legal to import ivory into the United States.
The pianos were most likely sold to rich Southern plantation slave masters.
“How do you feel about many Northern abolitionists not wanting free blacks to migrate to their respective states, preferring they settle somewhere else?”
By the definition of the term “racist” in use today, 95% of the citizens of the United States would be labeled racist.
Laws that limit free blacks in states does not seem out of the ordinary. In Slave states, it was illegal for a freed slave to live in the state.
Black codes existed in Northern States and Slave states.
as I said, 95% of the people in this country were racists,
by todays standards.
>>Bull Snipe wrote: “They should have. The South would have kept their slaves and saved 600,000 lives.”
Spoken like a true Lincoln cultist. Why not government-subsidized emancipation, like the civilized nations of that era?
Why not? Because Abraham Lincoln was an uncivilized tyrant. His agenda was not about slavery, but making himself and his crony friends filthy rich.
Mr. Kalamata
In war, there are two options, you win or you lose. Had the Southerners decided not to go to war. They would have been able to keep their slaves and avoided “million” deaths.
The South lost the war.
Because Jefferson Davis was an uncivilized tyrant. His agenda was all about slavery, plus making himself and his crony plantation, slave owning friends filthy rich.
>>Bull Snipe sniped: “Because Jefferson Davis was an uncivilized tyrant. His agenda was all about slavery, plus making himself and his crony plantation, slave owning friends filthy rich.”
Drive-by Bull snipes again. Will he ever contribute anything but snipes to the conversation? Probably not.
Mr. Kalamata.
again stop with the inane comments.
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.