Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Museum of the Confederacy Considering Name Change
The Richmond Times-Dispatch ^ | 20 February 2006 | Janet Caggiano

Posted on 02/20/2007 6:31:57 AM PST by Rebeleye

The Museum of the Confederacy will likely drop the word "Confederacy" from its name when it moves its collection to a new home.

(Excerpt) Read more at timesdispatch.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: chattel; confederate; museum; propertyrights; richmond; slavery; statesrights; virginia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-140 next last
To: groanup
LOL. Quote games:

I can play.

"What was the reason that induced Georgia to take the step of secession? This reason may be summed up in one single proposition. It was a conviction, a deep conviction on the part of Georgia, that a separation from the North was the only thing that could prevent the abolition of her slavery." -- Speech of Henry Benning to the Virginia Convention

81 posted on 02/20/2007 12:20:52 PM PST by Non-Sequitur (Proud Owner, 10,000th post on the 'Anna Nicole Smith has died' thread.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
One problem is that people always want to boil down that causes and reason for war to a single issue, when usually there are multiple issues, and even on the each side different people go to war or support the war for different reasons. Also, the politicians, in explaining the war, tend to focus on the issues they think people care about the most. For example, why did we go to Iraq? WMD's? To free the iraqis? To try to plant a democracy in the middle east not so much that we cared about the iraqis but to destabilize all of facist islam? All three? Some more than others? Perhaps some supported the war for some reasons but not others? Also, reasons change over time. There is no single reason shared by all people. Same holds true for the civil war. On the Northern side, for example: Some clearly wanted to go to war to free the slaves. Others just to preserve the Union. Someone supporting the war might give different reasons depending on his audience. Also, reasons changed over time. Lincoln was apparently not overly concerned about the slave issue at first, but it became important to him, and the North as a whole, later.

On the Southern side: For some it was only slavery. That is, they would not have even wanted to leave the union if they were sure slavery would be preserved. For others, they maybe didn't care about slavery, but wanted to be free from the North. To others, it was a mixture of both. Some politicians i.e. Davis focused on the freedom angle when rallying people. Others, like the VP, focused solely on the slavery angle when rallying people. Now, slavery was of course an important issue.

But my main point is that the reasons for going to war are diverse, are different for different people, and change over time.

82 posted on 02/20/2007 12:26:51 PM PST by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
I can play

Probably a lot more endlessly than I can.

"The Northern onslaught upon slavery was no more than a piece of specious humbug designed to conceal its desire for economic control of the Southern states." Charles Dickens, 1862.

83 posted on 02/20/2007 12:27:15 PM PST by groanup (Limited government is the answer. What's the question?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King
It would have been nice if the Federal Government tried to pay for the legal (albeit immoral) property it was trying to take away.

Had Lincoln tried compensated emancipation, and he did float several ideas during his presidency, such plans would have required three things which were missing. One was the $4 billion or so a buy out plan would have required. Second, such a plan would have come from the federal government and would mean Washington was telling the Southern slave owners they had to give up their chattel. Hardly respectful of state's rights, which you all claim was the big bone of contention in the first place. Finally, any emancipation plan, compensated or otherwise, would have required the Southern slave owners be willing to give up their slaves in the first place. I'm not aware of any interest in that being present in the South prior to the rebellion.

84 posted on 02/20/2007 12:28:13 PM PST by Non-Sequitur (Proud Owner, 10,000th post on the 'Anna Nicole Smith has died' thread.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

Another Freeper who forgets that three slave states stayed in the Union, that there were Southern grievances against Federal tariff policies that played into the decision to seceed, and that the Emanicipation Proclamation was a war-measure intended to provoke a slave rebellion in the Confederate states, and left the slaves in Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri still in bondage.

If the war had been a noble abolitionist crusade, the North would have freed the slaves in the Union in 1861, not after the war ended.


85 posted on 02/20/2007 12:31:23 PM PST by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
which you all claim was the big bone of contention in the first place

Please, try reading what people write. This does not have to be a crevo/evo thread where everyone arrives with immovable positions.

Since you think that Sumter was the cause of the civil war, do you think that the first shot at Lexington was the "cause" of the revolutionary war? Was the first bomb dropped on Baghdad the "cause" of the current Iraq war? Was the first artillery piece lobbed into Poland that "cause" of ww2?

86 posted on 02/20/2007 12:33:30 PM PST by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: groanup
Probably a lot more endlessly than I can.

And from people who were actually in the South at the time. One would think that they would know the why's and wherefore's better than foreigners like Dickens and Mills.

"This new union with Lincoln Black Republicans and free negroes, without slavery, or, slavery under our old constitutional bond of union, without Lincoln Black Republicans, or free negroes either, to molest us.

If we take the former, then submission to negro equality is our fate. if the latter, then secession is inevitable..." -- Address of William L. Harris of Mississippi

87 posted on 02/20/2007 12:34:49 PM PST by Non-Sequitur (Proud Owner, 10,000th post on the 'Anna Nicole Smith has died' thread.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
If the war had been a noble abolitionist crusade, the North would have freed the slaves in the Union in 1861, not after the war ended.

-----------------------------------------------

Did I write that the North fought to end slavery? No. I wrote that the south fought to retain slavery.

88 posted on 02/20/2007 12:35:52 PM PST by wtc911 (You can't get there from here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

The South will rise again! We're on the verge now.


89 posted on 02/20/2007 12:40:14 PM PST by wolfcreek (Please Lord, May I be, one who sees what's in front of me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King
But my main point is that the reasons for going to war are diverse, are different for different people, and change over time.

Especially if it starts to drag on.

90 posted on 02/20/2007 12:42:21 PM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
"The Museum Formerly Known as the Museum of the Confederacy That Now Has a Candy-A$$ Left Wing Low Down Yankee Dog Running It"
91 posted on 02/20/2007 12:47:36 PM PST by quark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
Museum of the Southern Rebellion?

Museum of the Rebel Slavers?

Johnny Reb Memorabilia?

92 posted on 02/20/2007 12:48:03 PM PST by Alter Kaker (Hard headed brainwashed trained monkey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
And from people who were actually in the South at the time

Like the good General?

"Although the South would have preferred any honourable compromise to the fratricidal war which has taken place, she now accepts in good faith its constitutional results, and receives without reserve the amendment which has already been made to the constitution for the extinction of slavery. This is an event that has long been sought, though in a different way, and by none has it been more earnestly desired than by citizens of Virginia." Gen. R.E. Lee, 1866.

93 posted on 02/20/2007 12:59:06 PM PST by groanup (Limited government is the answer. What's the question?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: groanup
Like the good General?

Changed his mind, did he?

"Considering the relation of master and slave, controlled by humane laws and influenced by Christianity and an enlightened public sentiment, as the best that can exist between the white and black races while intermingled as at present in this country, I would deprecate any sudden disturbance of that relation unless it be necessary to avert a greater calamity to both. I should therefore prefer to rely upon our white population to preserve the ratio between our forces and those of the enemy, which experience has shown to be safe. But in view of the preparations of our enemies, it is our duty to provide for continued war and not for a battle or a campaign, and I fear that we cannot accomplish this without overtaxing the capacity of our white population." -- Robert Lee, 1865

94 posted on 02/20/2007 1:02:49 PM PST by Non-Sequitur (Proud Owner, 10,000th post on the 'Anna Nicole Smith has died' thread.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Changed his mind, did he?

Touche'. A mind is a terrible thing to change.

"Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right-a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own so much of the territory as they inhabit." Abraham Lincoln, 1848.

95 posted on 02/20/2007 1:14:07 PM PST by groanup (Limited government is the answer. What's the question?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: groanup
Good thing a lifelong resident of England was such an expert on why the American Civil War occured. Do you check with the Australians to find out the "real" reason behind the Spanish-American war too?
96 posted on 02/20/2007 1:20:56 PM PST by BillyBoy (Don't blame Illinois for Pelosi -- we elected ROSKAM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: groanup
Touche'. A mind is a terrible thing to change.

Indeed.

"As an American citizen, I take great pride in my country, her prosperity and institutions, and would defend any State if her rights were invaded. But I can anticipate no greater calamity for the country than a dissolution of the Union. It would be an accumulation of all the evils we complain of, and I am willing to sacrifice everything but honor for its preservation. I hope therefore, that all constitutional means will be exhausted before there is a recourse to force. Secession is nothing but revolution. The framers of our Constitution never exhausted so much labor, wisdom and forbearance in its formation, and surrounded it with so many guards and securities, if it was intended to be broken by every member of the Confederacy at will. It was intended for 'perpetual union' so expressed in the preamble, and for the establishment of a government, not a compact, which can only be dissolved by revolution, or the consent of all the people in convention assembled. It is idle to talk of secession. Anarchy would have been established, and not a government by Washington, Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison, and the other patriots of the Revolution. . . ." -- Robert Lee, January 1861

97 posted on 02/20/2007 1:29:47 PM PST by Non-Sequitur (Proud Owner, 10,000th post on the 'Anna Nicole Smith has died' thread.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
Another Freeper who forgets that three slave states stayed in the Union...

Try four. Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, Delaware.

...that there were Southern grievances against Federal tariff policies that played into the decision to seceed...

Like?

...and that the Emanicipation Proclamation was a war-measure intended to provoke a slave rebellion in the Confederate states...

Which is why it says, "And I hereby enjoin upon the people so declared to be free to abstain from all violence, unless in necessary self-defence; and I recommend to them that, in all cases when allowed, they labor faithfully for reasonable wages." That must be code for "Rise at dawn and kill all de white folk", huh?

...and left the slaves in Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri still in bondage.

And Delaware. You keep forgetting Delaware. But in any case that's what the 13th Amendment was for.

98 posted on 02/20/2007 1:36:43 PM PST by Non-Sequitur (Proud Owner, 10,000th post on the 'Anna Nicole Smith has died' thread.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: ishabibble

"Did you know that there is a black Confederacy group for the descendants of black Confederate troops? They wear the uniforms and have drills, and everything! What do they have to say about this"?




The "black confederates" who are looney enough to support the CSA need to meet up with these guys from "Neturei Karta", I have a feeling they'd get along spendedly:


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1600586/posts

A group of anti-Zionist rabbis has visited the Palestinian parliament to pledge their support for the prospective Hamas-led government.

The rabbis from the small ultra-Orthodox movement Neturei Karta, which this month sent a delegation to Iran, travelled to the West Bank town of Ram Allah to express their support for the Islamic group.

The group rejects the existence of the state of Israel as contrary to Jewish law and believes the land should be returned to Palestinians.

"We came to express our complete support for the Palestinian people. We consider ourselves Palestinians and, like them, we regard ourselves as under Zionist occupation."




http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1595616/posts

LONDON, March 13 (IranMania) - Members of a radical Jewish sect have met with top Iranian officials in Tehran to show support for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's call for the destruction of Israel, media reported.

Leading rabbis of Neturei Karta, an 'anti-Zionist' group of ultra-Orthodox Jews who consider the existence of Israel an abomination, met with Vice President Gholamreza Aghazadeh, the top-selling Yediot Aharonot reported.

Ahmadinejad has said the Jewish state "must be wiped off the map" or moved as far away as Alaska, comments that have provoked anger in the West and condemnation from the UN Security Council.

The group's spokesman, Rabbi Dovid Weiss, was quoted as supporting Ahmadinejad's call during an interview on Iranian television last week.

Although all of the rabbis who visited Iran live in either New York or London, there are some 400 Neturei Karta families living in Jerusalem who refuse to recognize Israel's authority, according to AFP.


99 posted on 02/20/2007 1:40:59 PM PST by BillyBoy (Don't blame Illinois for Pelosi -- we elected ROSKAM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: jbwbubba
"Museum of the Other Guys??"

Got some news for ya. You blue-zone yankee liberals ARE the 'Other Guys'.

100 posted on 02/20/2007 1:43:09 PM PST by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-140 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson