I Never Knew That Abraham Lincoln Ordered The Largest MASS HANGING IN US HISTORY, Or Why He Did It

The Daily Check ^ | May 29, 2017

[plain talk]

People think that Abe Lincoln was such a benevolent President. He was actually a bit of a tyrant. He attacked the Confederate States of America, who seceded from the Union due to tax and tariffs. (If you think it was over slavery, you need to find a real American history book written before 1960.)

This picture is of 38 Santee Sioux Indian men that were ordered to be executed by Abraham Lincoln for treaty violations (IE: hunting off of their assigned reservation).

So, on December 26, 1862, the “Great Emancipator” ordered the largest mass execution in American History, where the guilt of those to be executed was entirely in doubt. Regardless of how Lincoln defenders seek to play this, it was nothing more than murder to obtain the land of the Santee Sioux and to appease his political cronies in Minnesota.

[dsc]

I am old enough to remember when history books reported the causes of the civil war correctly.

Your position is revisionism.

Although you do restate the opposing position as an unreasonable absolute.

[SSS Two]

Not "the" reason to secede. Those who say it "wasn't about slavery" and those who say it was "all about slavery" are both wrong.

Texas listed 12 reasons it was seceding in its Declaration of Causes impelling the state to secede. Eleven of the causes related to slavery. The 12th reason was that Texas felt the federal government was not spending enough money to deal with Indian savages.

None -- absolutely zero -- of the reasons had to do with taxes and tariffs. (I do believe that Georgia and Louisiana did mention tariffs, but again, the thrust of the reason to secede in those states was slavery.)

[dsc]

“So no history book prior to 1960 considered slavery a factor in the Civil War? At all?”

Of course they discussed the role of slavery, but accurately. They didn’t present it as the sole cause, any more than honest historians dismissed it completely.

[fungoking]

Agreed that there were multiple reasons on both sides.
What gets left out is the role of politics. If Lincoln had said the war was for freeing the slaves, how many northern white mothers and fathers would have sent their sons to die for black freedom?
Likewise, if the south had said this is a war to keep slavery, how many poor white southerners would have gone and fought to keep something they couldn't afford to have?
Like they said, “rich mans war, poor man's fight.”

[ConservativeMind]

It looks like your name should be “plain lies.”

[Trumpet 1]

SSS Two, You are mostly right. Texas is way far away from South Carolina. SC was much more concerned about taxes and tariffs. And of course SC was very much wanting to keep slavery. South Carolina was very much concerned about Lincoln and his ax to grind against the South.

[American in Israel]

Hung for hunting white people? Kinda like how hunting Congressmen will end.

[higgmeister]

higgmeister, in case you do not know, the slave states were doing subjugation and oppression to the slaves. It is amazing that the slavers of north west Georgia thought it was OK to do oppression and subjugation to the slaves yet it was not OK for the Union armies to do the exact same thing to the Slavers. One other thing...the Cherokee Tribe was living in north west Georgia and was co-existing with the whites. And look at what the slavers did to the Cherokee. Subjugation and oppression. Stole their land. As a West Rome Chieftain I too know about the history of North West Georgia.

You still have the story a little mixed up. Cherokee Chief Joseph Vann held at least 200 Black slaves and there is anecdotal evidence that he was violently cruel and vicious to them. You'll find out more details if you visit New Echota and the Chief Vann House in Chatsworth,GA.

Also, the very last CSA General to surrender after the Civil War was the Cherokee Chief Stand Waite.

The Slavers did not transport the Cherokee tribe to Oklahoma. That was done by the US Military on the order of President Andrew Jackson.

As for the Cherokee coexisting with Whites, that wasn't exactly accurate either.

Cherokee Nation v. Georgia

Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 30 U.S. (5 Peters) 1 (1831), was a United States Supreme Court case. The Cherokee Nation sought a federal injunction against laws passed by the U.S. state of Georgia depriving them of rights within its boundaries, but the Supreme Court did not hear the case on its merits.

My wife went to East Rome High School but neither of us stayed in Rome to graduate from there. Both of our families moved back there a year after we graduated though.

[TexasTransplant]

bkmk

[TheNext]

98% of whites did NOT own slaves.

Secession declaration said slavery was the reason for war.

The Civil War was for the benefit of only 2% of the people.
Sounds like present day Globalism.

[Celerity]

” A novel has more than one chapter.”

While I’m not the first one to tackle this problem, teaching history to my daughter has been given to me.

I suppose the best I can do is teach her “This source says this, but this source says this”. All conflicts have at least two sides.

With our upcoming Civil War, I’ll have to explain to her why daddy’s parents thought one thing, and mommy’s parents thought another.. and why people may die because of what is in the middle.

With a second US civil war, the same result. The right-wing WILL win. The victors will write the history, and in 100 years someone will tell their kids “Yeah.. but what history doesn’t tell you is that President Trump was illegitimate, beat women and was a russian spy”.

History is something to be very, very careful with. Before learning history we should all learn how to learn history.

[jeffersondem]

“Texas listed 12 reasons it was seceding in its Declaration of Causes impelling the state to secede. Eleven of the causes related to slavery. The 12th reason was that Texas felt the federal government was not spending enough money to deal with Indian savages.”

Kind of reminds me of what some other folks said when they dissolved “the Political Bands which have connected them with another . . .”

“He has excited domestic Insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the Inhabitants of our Frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages . . . “

[Bulwyf]

It’s clear to anyone with a moderate degree of intellect that Lincoln wanted to subjugate the south. Slavery was simply the method to garnish public support.

Then civil war was the beginning of the end. The US has gone downhill since.

There were a few sunlit moments, but Lincoln served power above all else, and now we have what we have.

The wrong side won.

As a disclaimer, I’m not a southerner.

[IronJack]

They weren’t hanged for “hunting off the reservation.”. They were hanged for their roles in the Mankato Massacre.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

I stopped reading at he attacked the CSA.

[sargon]

Lincoln undoubtedly was the worst president ever.

There's lies, and there's damn lies, and that's a damn lie.

[sargon]

Lincoln was America’s Hitler.

History has made its judgement on Abraham Lincoln, and, oddly enough, it doesn't agree with your asinine and delusional statement...

[Gene Eric]

The slavery component was introduced long after the war began to help foster moral support for Lincoln’s goals.

[Baynative]

This is how liberals are working to rewrite history.

[central_va]

The slavery component was introduced long after the war began to help foster moral support for Lincoln’s goals.

Sorry but the support came from the conscription act and not the Emancipation Executive Order.