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

Skip to comments.

Virginia’s Black Confederates
CNS News ^ | 11/4/2010 | Walter E. Williams

Posted on 11/04/2010 3:13:46 AM PDT by markomalley

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 221-224 next last
To: manc
what’s the betting that obama never told his daughters on his trip over to Africa about Johnson or how blacks caught blacks and then sold them to whites in Africa.
Johnson was so mean to his slaves that one of them ran away and asked the white neighbour to let his stay with him. It was that time that Johnson went to court and had slavery legalised.
Funny how many teachers do not tell their kids this on Black history month or in history


Uh ooh, you just told a HATE TRUTH.
101 posted on 11/04/2010 9:33:21 AM PDT by algernonpj (He who pays the piper . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep

You said, “Because the economic sectors of those states reliant on slavery didn’t have sufficient political power to lead their states into rebellion. Every state that seceded had greater than 25% of its population as slaves. None of the four slave states that remained loyal to the United States had more than 20%, and the average of the four was more like 11% slave. Even the order in which the states seceded, with a couple of exceptions, almost directly reflects their percentage of slave population.”

My point was more that these states within the union were still allowed to even have slaves which proves that this war was not about freeing slaves and abolishing slavery.


102 posted on 11/04/2010 9:37:32 AM PDT by Elyse (I refuse to feed the crocodile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
Indeed, four states (Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee and Arkansas) resisted joining the Confederacy until invading union armies crossed their borders.

Wrong. Those states seceded in reaction to Lincoln calling for troops after the south fired on Ft. Sumter, and long before any US forces stepped foot into their territory. Of course, this was exactly the reason that the confederate states chose to fire on Sumter in the first place, to push the wavering states into their camp.

103 posted on 11/04/2010 9:37:45 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: central_va
One of my coworkers, a black gentleman from Mississippi (don't call him African-American, he'll jump all over you and tell you that his skin might be black but he's 100% American), has a huge Confederate flag in the back window of his pickup. His great-great-grandfather and all of his great-great-uncles served in the Confederate Army, with a number being captured at Vicksburg and one great-great-uncle dying during the Battle of Nashville.

David is extremely proud of his heritage and has stated several times that his ancestors were fighting for Mississippi and to protect their families back home.

104 posted on 11/04/2010 9:44:22 AM PDT by Stonewall Jackson (Democrats: "You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villany.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
Sorry, but you don't know much about old Abe. Have you ever read about the jailing of journalists who wrote critical articles about him? How about the rushing of troops to Kentucky before to war to preempt them from succeeding?

Slavery would have ended and was phasing out. Lincoln knew that. The war wasn't about slavery. It was suppressing an Revolution of Independence.

105 posted on 11/04/2010 9:46:53 AM PDT by FreeAtlanta (Hey, Barack "Hubris" Obama, what are you hiding? Release your Birth Certificate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Elyse
My point was more that these states within the union were still allowed to even have slaves which proves that this war was not about freeing slaves and abolishing slavery.

Who said it was? Certainly not Lincoln. On the other hand, there are certainly plenty of southerners who said that their rebellion was because of the threat to slavery that they perceived.

The fact is that abolishing slavery throughout the United States would have required a constitutional amendment, and the slave states were numerous enough to insure that would never happen. And even when the war was underway, Democrats held enough seats in congress to block an amendment, although Lincoln kept pushing for one. It was only after the election of 1864, when the Republicans increased their seats, that they had sufficient votes to send the 13th amendment to the states.

106 posted on 11/04/2010 9:51:07 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: rockrr
Slavery wasn't practical and it offended many slave owners who did it just to be competitive. Most paid their slaves a small salary and many free slaves bought their own freedom with those wages. Automation was coming on strong - the cotton gin, steam engines and soon to come combustion engines. Good people were looking for a better way. There were more good people than bad, so generational slavery was doomed.

Now, unfortunately, we have slavery to credit card and mortgage companies, slavery of hookers to their pimps, and slavery to our masters the federal government. Do you support the revolution that happened Tuesday and will continue over the next few years? Are you a rebel?

107 posted on 11/04/2010 9:54:17 AM PDT by FreeAtlanta (Hey, Barack "Hubris" Obama, what are you hiding? Release your Birth Certificate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Senator John Blutarski

Good question.


108 posted on 11/04/2010 9:54:40 AM PDT by apocalypto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta
How about the rushing of troops to Kentucky before to war to preempt them from succeeding?

Wrong. It was the confederates who first violated Kentucky's neutrality by occupying the town of Columbus, which had the effect of discrediting the secessionists in the state.

109 posted on 11/04/2010 10:02:21 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta
Slavery would have ended and was phasing out. Lincoln knew that.

Then surely you won't have any trouble pointing to some quotes from Lincoln and from southern political leaders saying as much.

110 posted on 11/04/2010 10:03:55 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta
So is that a "no" to providing a link to evidence in support of your contention ("but it would have happened before 1900 without a bloody failed second war of Independence")?

Automation was coming on strong - the cotton gin, steam engines and soon to come combustion engines.

You do realize that the advent of the cotton gin heightened the interest in, and the utilization of slaves, not diminished it, right?

Now, unfortunately, we have slavery to credit card and mortgage companies, slavery of hookers to their pimps, and slavery to our masters the federal government. Do you support the revolution that happened Tuesday and will continue over the next few years? Are you a rebel?

This is irrelevant to the conversation, but as you answered my question, I will answer yours. I reject your characterization of the use of the term "slavery" in these contexts as I believe them inappropriate (except, perhaps, or the hooker & pimp although I fail to see the propriety of including that!). Did I support the electing of conservatives? Absolutely. Am I a rebel? In some ways, yes.

111 posted on 11/04/2010 10:07:55 AM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: algernonpj

LOL Shame on me hey.

Some lefty, smelly, slackers knickers are getting in a twist as they read that post I bet.


112 posted on 11/04/2010 10:08:22 AM PDT by manc (Homosexuality is a mental disorder as is liberalism. Anyone supporting this needs mental help)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Lincoln, the Illinois Butcher™, freed the slaves when he ran out of Irishmen to send to the slaughter. Out of necessity, he emancipated a fresh new batch of meat, a little darker but more temperate.

I suppose that's the same reason why Davis finally agreed to allow blacks into the ranks in 1865? Having slaughtered almost all of that part of his available white population that hadn't already deserted he was getting kind of desperate?

113 posted on 11/04/2010 10:08:49 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep
The firing on Ft. Sumter was a South Carolina problem. It didn't bring the four northern Confederate States into the fold. Lincoln's reaction of calling for a full scale invasion of the south was what brought them into the fold.

Had Lincoln chosen a measured response, such as sending a contingent of marines to invade and recapture the island on which Sumter was located or even to occupy Charleston's harbor area, I doubt you would have gotten the same response.

Substantial areas of the south (what is now West Virginia and populations on both sides of the Appalachians, especially eastern Tennessee) didn't ever warm to the Confederacy, or did so only late in the conflict in reaction to the Union Army's deprivations.

The first major shooting battle of the war was a direct reaction to the Union Army's invasion of Virginia.

114 posted on 11/04/2010 10:10:09 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta
Slavery wasn't practical and it offended many slave owners who did it just to be competitive.

So it wasn't practical, but it was competitive?

Automation was coming on strong - the cotton gin, steam engines and soon to come combustion engines.

Cotton was a hand labor-intensive crop, and it wasn't automated until the 1940s, when the first practical cotton picking machines came onto the market and when herbicides developed as a by-product of WW2 research ended the need for hand chopping and weeding. Would slavery have persisted until until then? Coincidentally, that was about the time that sharecropping, the labor system that replaced bond slavery with debt peonage, faded away.

Moreoever, not every slave was working on a plantation. Many were household help in the towns and cities. Why would automation make owning your housekeeper less attractive?

115 posted on 11/04/2010 10:12:26 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta
Have you ever read about the jailing of journalists who wrote critical articles about him?

No. Why not tell us all about it?

How about the rushing of troops to Kentucky before to war to preempt them from succeeding?

A few minutes on Google would have shown you that the U.S. didn't send any troops into Kentucky until after Leonidas Polk had violated their neutrality by sending in rebel troops.

Slavery would have ended and was phasing out.

Another good one! Pray tell how was it being 'phased out'?

From the rebel standpoint it was all about slavery.

116 posted on 11/04/2010 10:12:36 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Stonewall Jackson

There’s a black guy(not African American as Africans can be white too) near where I live who has a rebel flag on his truck.

I bumped into him at a flying J off I-95, near me and we got talking.
Just at that time near the main entrance a couple of college kids from up north came through the doors and had parked to get Gas next to the black guy’s truck.

We heard them talking about the flag and one of them saying , “well we’re downn south now with the rednecks and racist”

They all laughed at the stupid bigoted remark.
The black guy turned to them and said “hey that’s my truck you got a problem with it?”

They all looked at each other, couple of them laughed nervously and then look totally confused .
They then walked into flying J with heads down totally confused.

The looks of their face was a master card moment and never to be forgot.

Both of us laughed like crazy over the incident and every time we see each other we still talk about it.

Incidentally he also went to the Tampa rebel flag’s raising(biggest rebel flag to be flying in the world right now)


117 posted on 11/04/2010 10:21:04 AM PDT by manc (Homosexuality is a mental disorder as is liberalism. Anyone supporting this needs mental help)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta
Slavery wasn't practical and it offended many slave owners who did it just to be competitive. Most paid their slaves a small salary and many free slaves bought their own freedom with those wages. Automation was coming on strong - the cotton gin, steam engines and soon to come combustion engines. Good people were looking for a better way. There were more good people than bad, so generational slavery was doomed.

I'm sorry but that whole paragraph is flat out ridiculous.

118 posted on 11/04/2010 10:21:43 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
The firing on Ft. Sumter was a South Carolina problem.

It was ordered by the confederate government in Montgomery, not by the South Carolina government.

Had Lincoln chosen a measured response, such as sending a contingent of marines to invade and recapture the island on which Sumter was located or even to occupy Charleston's harbor area, I doubt you would have gotten the same response.

So let's see. Ft. Sumter is in a harbor, surrounded by enemy batteries that have just forced it to surrender. And your plan is to chug some boats into that harbor, under the enemy guns, land some marines and then what? Wait for them to be shelled into submission, too?

119 posted on 11/04/2010 10:22:03 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: rockrr
Read Eugene Genovese. He's a socialist (if not a commie) but a respected historian just the same. His thesis was that slavery would have fallen of its own weight as soon as the Industrial Revolution got a good foothold in the South. He wrote a whole book on it, with facts and figures.

That was not my area of concentration (I wrote my thesis on the military side, really) but I read the book. It was 30 years ago, so I don't remember the title, but I know it was by Genovese.

120 posted on 11/04/2010 10:23:47 AM PDT by AnAmericanMother (Ministrix of ye Chasse, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 221-224 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