Posted on 06/25/2018 3:28:41 PM PDT by Mariner
Republican Senate nominee Corey Stewart said that he doesn’t believe that the Civil War was fought over the issue of slavery, arguing that it was mostly about states’ rights.
In a Monday interview with Hill.TV’s “Rising,” Stewart, who recently won the GOP nomination in the Virginia Senate race, said that not all parts of Virginia’s history are “pretty.”
But he said he doesn’t associate slavery with the war.
“I don’t at all. If you look at the history, that’s not what it meant at all, and I don’t believe that the Civil War was ultimately fought over the issue of slavery,” Stewart said.
When “Rising” co-host Krystal Ball pressed him again if the Civil War was “significantly” fought over slavery, Stewart said some of them talked about slavery, but added that most soldiers never owned slaves and “they didn’t fight to preserve the institution of slavery.”
“We have to put ourselves in the shoes of the people who were fighting at that time and from their perspective, they saw it as a federal intrusion of the state,” he said.
Stewart also said he doesn’t support a Richmond elementary school named after a Confederate general deciding to rename it after former President Obama.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
More immigrants came to the North rather than the South and had far more immigrants in its army. Democrats were prone to violence back then, too.
Bullshit
You insinuate yourself into southern business always have
Totally oblivious to your own social injustices and the unintended consequence of your self righteousness
It’s always been like this
And it’s destroyed everything in its self applauding part
You South haters are the problem same as Antifa or black lives matter
Two to tango my ass
Are we invading you or commanding how you treat your history?
No
We tried to break off from you cause you’re insufferable
And here we go again but much differently this time
Pity
Lara Ingraham however flawed is better on Dixie
David speaks southern as did Rushbo momma
General Lee freed his slaves and thought the institution odious. He was right.
Grant acquired a slave through his wife. He soon got rid of him.
Any slaves held by McClellan were trivial and he, like Grant, was not fighting to end slavery. Both were defending the Union.
You mean people who question the taught propaganda? I guess some people think for themselves.
Though I agree with you that it was stupid politically. He can kiss that seat goodbye.
Both were defending the Union.
Which was split because the south thought there would be more free states added to the union in the western territories and in order to protect their economic interests (trade and slave ownership) they suceeded. Do you see that if the north fought to save the union they were fighting for an end that would eliminate slavery? and they knew of the possibility slavery would end soon with more free states.
I give more leeway to the side fighting an invasion against the aggressor with four times their population.
No they weren’t. In order for the secession to be legitimate, ALL of the states had to agree on the separation. Since the rebel states chose not to take their case to Congress, the resulting secession was not legal, valid, or enforceable.
Why didn’t lincoln and mcclellen ride down to Richmond and say, we really don’t want to free slaves, ya’ll come home now.
The first practical cotton harvesting machine did not come about until the 1920s. Southerners were already using slaves in their manufacturing operations. Over many years, before the war started, Southerners tried to start textile manufacturing in the South. Most of these businesses failed, as did most other manufacturing ventures in the South. During the war, the South had to import uniforms for the Confederate Army.
Passion has nothing to do with it. When you are ordered to strap on a gun and go invade other people who have done you no wrong, you do so because you are forced to do so, not because you are concerned about the well being of people you hate anyway.
In this context, the only right that matters is the right to be independent, which is asserted in the Declaration of Independence. If natural law gave us the right to secede from the United Kingdom, it gave the Southerners the right to secede from the Unite States.
“The group of writers of this book state that it was the firing on Fort Sumter that got every one fighting mad.”
I’m sure that they wouldn’t want to start with the guerilla terrorism of John Brown. Financed by Boston elites and venerated with religious fervor throughout the North. That might muddy up their morality tale a bit.
There had been decades of hatemongering of the South that began as early as the election of Jefferson- he was the first Slave Power President according the angelic sorts of Massachusetts.
One of the best books on what led up to war is Thomas Flemings’ “A Disease in the Public Mind”.
I felt like I was listening to the gospel according to Glenn Beck.
The Civil War was about European trade, and the loss of 200 million dollars per year to Lincoln's New York wealthy backers.
If the South was allowed to remain independent, that 200 million in trade with Europe would have left New York and the taxes on it would have left Washington DC.
The War was about money, and nothing else.
Immigrants made up about 25% of the Union Army. Germans followed by the Irish made up most of the immigrants in the Union Army.
If the war was about slavery, the Union would have conquered Maryland. Their supply lines would have been really short.
German ‘48ers were a big factor. Played a big role in the Union Army and in the Radical Republican politics in general.
They had been leaders and soldiers of the failed 1848 Revolutions in Europe. Included the likes of Marx and Engels and while they didn’t come to the States their friends did.
The first thing the Union did was to throw up a blockade, it didn't send troops to free any slaves.
Trade with Europe was the cause of the war. Slavery was the made up after the fact excuse for invading the South to prevent the loss of that trade.
They make for interesting reading. They certainly were firm in keeping the “rights” found in the U.S. Constitution.
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.