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

To: wastoute
Pish-posh. That was all bout political negotiations and jockeying to do southern states out of power. It is better to deal in facts rather than what you think they "wanted"--the north and abolitionists had few economic stakes in slavery. At one time or another, several prominent northern Founding Fathers owned slaves. That they abandoned the practice was probably due more to do with economics than shame.

If any of us could go back to 1810 and see the conditions under which our American ancestors lived, we would be shocked at the discomfort, poverty and squalor. The modern middle class is purely an American creation, and is fading rapidly. I visit historical plantations and listen to the tourists go tsp-tsk over the slave cabins. It is very likely that their own ancestors never knew such comfort!

34 posted on 06/25/2015 4:39:30 AM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: Mamzelle

Well of course it is nonsense. So to raise the 3/5ths issue is nonsense. Unless one’s intention is to attempt to “score debating points” with an irrelevancy. To raise the issue indicates to me one is either 1) uninformed or 2) insincere.


35 posted on 06/25/2015 4:44:10 AM PDT by wastoute (Government cannot redistribute wealth. Government can only redistribute poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]

To: Mamzelle

I wouldn’t say the north and abolitionists had “no stakes in slavery”. My wife majored in history decades ago and Civil War was a particular interest to her. At the time I was working evenings putting her through college. When she had a particularly good professor she would insist I go hear a “special lecture”. I particularly remember one. It was the last lecture of the semester on the Civil War. The guy made a 60 minute compelling case that the Civil War was fought over a railroad.

He talked fast for an hour with facts, figures, and footnotes. (I swear I missed my calling, shoulda been a Southern Baptist preacher). Before the war the South was where the money was. The industrialists of the North had really yet to rise. In fact, it was probably arming the North (at a nice profit) that gave the Northern Industrialists the boost they enjoyed later. The real point of contention from an economic standpoint was where would the rails be laid to exploit the new resources in the west? The Southern politicians who held the money and power insisted that those rails start in Atlanta. The Northern politicians new they had neither the money or power to cause any other outcome. So they found a way to negate the political power and money of the South. End result? The rails started in Ohio and Chicago. And the rest, as they say, is history. From an economic standpoint 600,000 soldiers and who knows how many civilians died to decide where a railhead would be.


36 posted on 06/25/2015 5:01:26 AM PDT by wastoute (Government cannot redistribute wealth. Government can only redistribute poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]

To: Mamzelle

You are correct, most rural whites lived in cabins just like the slave cabins on plantations. My ancestors built such a cabin in east Texas in the 1820 or 1830.s and I was able to see it many years ago when I was about 12 .

Since I was so young I didn’t know where it was exactly and I couldn’t find it again when I was older and looked for it.

It was called a “ dog trot” cabin. There were 2 rooms joined together by a open roofed area between the rooms.


50 posted on 06/25/2015 10:25:38 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]

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