Skip to comments.
Slaveowners in the North
AJC ^
| 03/02/2003
| Mike Toner
Posted on 03/02/2003 7:59:22 AM PST by groanup
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-64 next last
Posted for discussion purposes only.
1
posted on
03/02/2003 7:59:22 AM PST
by
groanup
To: groanup
Oh brother, more neo-Confederate "everybody did it therefore the civil war wasn't about slavery and Lincoln was like Hitler or Stalin."
Well, it was the north and Lincoln that abolished slavery. The south fought to maintain slavery.
2
posted on
03/02/2003 8:03:41 AM PST
by
jlogajan
To: groanup
There were also many white indentured servants (essentially slaves), probably far exceeding the number of black slaves in the North.
The article seems to imply that all Northern slaves were black.
To: stainlessbanner
Ping! This could prove to be an interesting development. Wonder how the yankee apologists will try to spin it.
4
posted on
03/02/2003 8:12:26 AM PST
by
sweetliberty
("To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it.")
To: sweetliberty
Everybody ready for more pathetic hand-wringing and wailing about the nasty old slaveowners?
5
posted on
03/02/2003 8:15:17 AM PST
by
szweig
To: groanup
"strayed from the history books" Imteresting and appropriate turn of a phrase.
6
posted on
03/02/2003 8:15:25 AM PST
by
sweetliberty
("To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it.")
To: groanup
"Some states did take action, enacting bans one by one, so that by 1863 the practice was illegal in most of the North." And I firmly believe that the practice would have eventually been banned in all states, north and south in fairly short order had the invasion from the north not occurred.
7
posted on
03/02/2003 8:18:47 AM PST
by
sweetliberty
("To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it.")
To: Republic If You Can Keep It
That could make for an interesting reparations argument.
8
posted on
03/02/2003 8:23:46 AM PST
by
sweetliberty
("To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it.")
To: jlogajan
The south fought to maintain slavery. Well, several of my discendents fought for the South, and they didn't own a single slave. The notion that the North was 'fighting to abolish slavery' came as an afterthought to Northern Politicians. It was used to fire up the population against the South seperating from the Union. No amount of Yankee historical BS can convince me otherwise.
And I don't think Lincoln was like Hitler or Stalin, I'd compare him to Saddam Hussein or Kim Jong Il, because they, like Lincoln during the Civil War, imprisoned people that disagree with them.
9
posted on
03/02/2003 8:27:31 AM PST
by
Pern
(It's good to know who hates you, and it's good to be hated by the right people - Johnny Cash)
To: groanup; 4ConservativeJustices; billbears
oh my! and they found the largest graveyard for slaves on...Wall Street ten years ago, or so???
And, those rumors that some of slaves were of European-American descent??? This internet is crazy...
10
posted on
03/02/2003 8:31:47 AM PST
by
Ff--150
(that we through His poverty might be rich.)
To: jlogajan
"Well, it was the north and Lincoln that abolished slavery"
So it says in most government school history books.
11
posted on
03/02/2003 8:40:10 AM PST
by
groanup
To: jlogajan
"Well, it was the north and Lincoln that abolished slavery." BS. If it wasn't Lincoln's goal at the beginning of the war then it certainly was not his main purpose. It only became a popular plank once the North felt assured of victory.
12
posted on
03/02/2003 8:44:10 AM PST
by
fightu4it
(allyourbasearebelongtous!)
To: groanup
"Slaveholding plantations, usually thought of as uniquely Southern institutions..."
Usually thought of by whom? Those who believe propaganda?
And slavery is alive and well today, especially in Asia, Africa, and the Muslim world. Don't forget that.
"...a chapter of America's past that written histories have either ignored or forgotten."
Correction:
"ignored, forgotten, or intentionally obfuscated
.""Most Northern states abolished slavery before the Civil War"
Yes, New York abolished slavery
32 years before the Civil War.
Ever heard of Sojourner Truth? Born into slavery in New York.
When the U.S. was formed, slavery was legal in every state. That was 84 years before the Civil War.
"Historians are stunned by some of the evidence"
So much for the
quality of these particular
"historians". If they had wanted to know, they could have known long before now--and they would not be quite so stunned.
"It's hard to believe that such a significant and pervasive part of the past could be so completely erased from our history."
No it's not. Rewriting history is a lot easier than it might seem.
And denial is available to everyone--including "historians".
Say, does anyone besides me see a connection between "historians" and "journalists"?
To: jlogajan
I hope you are being sarcastic. The south did not fight to maintain slavery. There were more significant reasons for the Civil War.
To: jlogajan
Well, it was the north and Lincoln that abolished slavery
Lincoln ONLY abolished slavery in the seceding states NOT the northern states
And he only did to try and bring the seceding states back into the union
15
posted on
03/02/2003 9:03:34 AM PST
by
uncbob
( building tomorrow)
To: jlogajan
My great grandfather was a blockade runner for the Confederacy.
He refused to own slaves. He considered it evil.
He was right.
If I suddenly found myself in antebellum America, I would be working for the Underground Railroad. Most of us would.
"Written history is always subject to a kind of cultural amnesia. Some of it is deliberately forgotten and some of it is inadvertently lost"
Exactly.
Slavery is one of the most hideous evils ever to afflict mankind. Its evil exists in the world today! It must be abolished.
Lincoln was one of the greatest presidents America ever produced. The Gettysburg Address is a sacred document.
Nothing is more dangerous than self-deception--denial.
To: groanup
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg
-- Abraham Lincoln
17
posted on
03/02/2003 9:15:39 AM PST
by
Peoria
To: Savage Beast
A little touted FACT is that blacks also owned slaves.
To: All
A little history humor.
Q: What did Lincoln say after his 3-day drunk?
A: I freed WHO?!
19
posted on
03/02/2003 9:59:00 AM PST
by
Pern
(It's good to know who hates you, and it's good to be hated by the right people - Johnny Cash)
To: groanup
If there was less slavery in the North, one of the reasons for that was the fact that the Northwest Ordinance forbade slavery in the new territory. That serves as proof positive that the federal government was already taking steps toward ending slavery. While many people in the North were against slavery, they were also against negros setteling in their area. That is why the underground railroad we hear so much about ended in Canada and not the Northern States. Also one must not forget that even after Lincoln's emancipation there was still the "Black laws" that dealt with land ownership and the right to vote.
The reasons for much of what happened can be laid at the feet of the families along the Hudson and their dreams of empire. An empire who's bright future would be dashed to pieces once north and south were two seperate countrys. Which also explains why the north brought such devestation on the southern economic base. They wanted to make sure the south could not ever mount such a challange to their quest again. The family names that are written large on the industrial revolution that followed the war are proof of the success of their planning.
20
posted on
03/02/2003 10:02:04 AM PST
by
fightu4it
(allyourbasearebelongtous!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-64 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson