White without Apology

TooGoodReports ^ | 08/13/03 | Bernard Chapin

[wardaddy]

I have been to a Juneteenth dinner actually.

I liked the food....just like grandma's.

[rdb3]

The grand effort at full black emancipation that occured from 1861-1970s was and still is a vast social effort (experiment) that does indeed entail many aspects of at a minimum socialism.

Minimum? I think it's full-blown, just under different names.

You are right.

Thank you, Battle Pop.

[dwd1]

I can not confirm or deny whether I agree with you. I hate sleeping on the couch (or the curb) to much.

You have to admit though, that woman can have a very stabilizing influence in politics also. Depends on the issue... Some take us to the other side of Venus while men are trying to keep it Martian and there are times when we all forget that we are stuck here on Planet Earth...However, I am glad they are here. I don't think my poetry would be half as good (not that it is that good in the first place) without them...

And you have to admit the beauty industry, the recording industry, the clothing manufacturing business, the jewelry business...What would they do? (Open mouth...Insert shoestore)

[wardaddy]

Oh...I love women...too much.

I just don't like the way most vote.

My wife like most FReeperettes is the exception.

[justshutupandtakeit]

I'll bet you hang around the Shedd Aquarium tossing bits of raw meat into the Shark Tank don't you?

[Lazamataz]

I'll bet you hang around the Shedd Aquarium tossing bits of raw meat into the Shark Tank don't you?

Kittens.

I throw mewling, cuddly kittens.

[Ditto]

So, you see that the Emancipation Proclamation really did nothing: it was a fraud, for all intents and purposes. The only states it was supposed to apply to were not affected by it, because they had already seceded and Lincoln had no authority over them. Slavery wasn't abolished until the passage of the 13th Amendment in 1865.

You are simply wrong about that. Between Jan of 1863 when the EP took effect and Dec. of 1865 when the states ratified the 13th Amendment, over 3 million slaves were freed by the EP. Nearly 100,000 of those freed slaves served in the US Army. Look up Juneteenth to see how every slave in Texas were freed by the EP with the arrival of Union troops in Galvaston.

"The people of Texas are informed that in accordance with a Proclamation from the Executive of the United States, all slaves are free. This involves an absolute equality of rights and rights of property between former masters and slaves, and the connection heretofore existing between them becomes that between employer and free laborer."
-- Major General Gorden Granger, USA.
June 19, 1865, Gavalston Texas.

Read about this stuff instead or relying on Marxist propaganda that attempts to paint Lincoln as some sort of demon.

[dwd1]

And wardaddy is about to be sacked...But wait..he gets rid of the ball just in time...Touchdown!!!....

[dwd1]

I am very sure you are right about the Juneteenth... Many younger people in Texas think of it as a chance to eat some BBQ and homemade potato salad, but if one knows the history, it is a day of very special meaning... I think Cinco de Mayo, Bastille Day, Victory in Europe day, and the day the Wall came down in Berlin...same feeling and significance...

[Ditto]

It's just that these damn myths (actually left-wing lies) about Lincoln and the EP drive me nuts. The real history is so damn easy to check but millions rely on race-bating Marxist propaganda instead. I even see it repeated here nearly every day which is very sad.

The bottom line is that the EP freed millions.

[dwd1]

As I have said before, "You can be wrong about your opinion but not your facts." Well stated post.

Thank you....

[billbears]

bump

[LexBaird]

The Emancipation proclaimation was in effect only over the areas in rebellion, because those were the only areas that Lincoln had direct authority to issue against. They were under military law, and he was CIC.

He could not issue the proclaimation in the North. Had he done so, it may have pushed the loyal slave states, such as Missouri, into joining the Confederate states. Emancipation in these places had to be done by Constitutional amendment, which Lincoln pushed for. It did not pass until after his murder by a Southern radical.

In short, President Licoln attempted to free those whom he had no control over and leave those in chains that he did.

Exactly the opposite. To his way of view, he had legal authority to free the slaves in the rebelling territories, but the freeing of slaves in the non-rebellious states was up to the legislatures of those states, or the establishment of a Constitutional provision to do so.

[dwd1]

Sounds like he had good advice when he was pursuing his goal... He did his best to achieve his aim based on the law and he did not try to exceed his legal authority... Always glad we are a nation of laws and not men

[headsonpikes]

"I hadn't realized Lew Rockwell was actually a black grocery store clerk..."

LOL!!

[BraveMan]

Let us all take a breath of reality and realize that we are on our way to becoming an established interest and with the education and opportunity provided to us recently, we have an opportunity to secure our future by joining the conservative movement...

Entire generations (black & white) have become accustomed to the soft, sweet, do-nothing life afforded to them via the socialist support network spawned by FDR and cultivated in the fields of LBJ's "Great Society". These souls will continue to find little incentive to pick themselves up by the bootstraps. Lets face it; its easy to be a victim these days. Pity the person who becomes comfortable with their status as a victim.

Institutional racism continues to exist today; of that I have no doubt. However, its form and presentation is not the same; handouts disguised as hand-ups. Not everyone has a conscience (or a work ethic). The institutional racism prevalent today in its present form panders to that. It becomes all the more insidious by virtue of its disguise . . .

[dwd1]

100% agreement...

[wardaddy]

Then why not free the slaves in rebellious states in areas that were under Union control?

On Jan. 1, 1863, U.S. President Abraham Lincoln declared free all slaves residing in territory in rebellion against the federal government. This Emancipation Proclamation actually freed few people. It did not apply to slaves in border states fighting on the Union side; nor did it affect slaves in southern areas already under Union control. Naturally, the states in rebellion did not act on Lincoln's order. But the proclamation did show Americans-- and the world--that the civil war was now being fought to end slavery. Lincoln had been reluctant to come to this position. A believer in white supremacy, he initially viewed the war only in terms of preserving the Union. As pressure for abolition mounted in Congress and the country, however, Lincoln became more sympathetic to the idea. On Sept. 22, 1862, he issued a preliminary proclamation announcing that emancipation would become effective on Jan. 1, 1863, in those states still in rebellion. Although the Emancipation Proclamation did not end slavery in America--this was achieved by the passage of the 13TH Amendment to the Constitution on Dec. 18, 1865--it did make that accomplishment a basic war goal and a virtual certainty.

The above italicized is from a Lincoln admirer and presents some flaws in your argument that Lincoln only acted "constitutionally". Lincoln acted pragmatically, strategically and politically. He freed the slaves when and where he did simply beacuse he wished to, to sate the Radicals, and most importantly to try to damage the infrastructure of the South at which he was at war.

[LexBaird]

The only states it was supposed to apply to were not affected by it, because they had already seceded and Lincoln had no authority over them.

Authority belongs to the one with the power to make it stick. You can assert anything you please, but if you can't walk the walk, all you've got is talk.

My 7 year old claims I have no authority to send him to bed. I assert I do. We fight it out, and, lo and behold, my kid's secession from my authority is found to be imaginary, and my authority was found to have been valid all along.

So, you see that the Emancipation Proclamation really did nothing: it was a fraud, for all intents and purposes.

So, you see, the secession of the slavocrats did nothing; it was a fraud for all intents and purposes. They proved not to have the ability to impose their authority. Who says war never solves anything?

[WhiskeyPapa]

The Emancipation Proclamation freed almost no one. See my earlier post.

But slaves that chose to free themselves had a place to go closer than Canada or Mexico. And many did.

The EP weakened the rebellion. Your sophistry is moot.

Walt