I can't, because the readers need to see which of your points I'm replying to.
This was 2 years before and of course at odds with what he said in the US Senate prior to secession, to the Confederate Congress in his first inaugural address and directly to Union representatives as well as in correspondence with Confederate Congressmen as I've posted several times already.
I know they tried to put a pretty face on the Confederacy, but he, his VP, the declarations of secession, and many others said it was about slavery. They were even hestitant to allow blacks to enlist because it would show that "our whole theory of slavery is wrong", their words, in 1865.
4. South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, Texas.
5. Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia.
Do I really need to spam you with all of the comments saying it was not about slavery again?
No, because it would be a waste of FR bandwidth. I have their statements that it was about slavery and their actions backing that up. Their poor attempts at PR are meaningless.
You obviously fail to understand that something can be awful, horrible, cruel, inhuman, a crime, a crime against humanity, without being an act of war. Act of War is a legal term which has a specific meaning.
I know, but if those tribes considered themselves sovereign entities then the term act of war applies, regardless of any proxies used to get them.
I'm waiting for everyone accept my invitation to chime in saying they agree with you on this.
Trump did not trample upon people's constitutional rights. Lincoln did.
Like the constitutional right to own slaves?
They were of course not that. They were people who questioned the war. They were people who questioned the tyrant Lincoln's unconstitutional censorship or his unconstitutional suspension of Habeas Corpus. They were American citizens.
One of them assassinated President Lincoln. Why? Because Lincoln called for equality for blacks.
I mean the rights they were due as American citizens. No matter how much you and I might not like it today, slaves were not considered citizens.
I see. Make slavery legal and it's legal, so there.
Also, some didn't have any particular sympathy for the CSA. Some merely thought going to war to impose government rule on people who did not consent to it to be tyrannical, contrary to the intent of the Founding Fathers, unconstitutional, or simply folly. Others questioned the unconstitutional trampling upon of civil liberties by Lincoln and his jackbooted federal thugs.
Like the legal right to own slaves?
OF COURSE they were biased. All media is biased. Nevertheless, President Davis was harshly criticized by the free press in the Southern States. Feel free to research it yourself.
According to you, they were critical of his handling of the war, not of slavery.
Here you show your titanic ignorance once again. I am not tying slavery to the modern right.
You're trying to tie the Confederacy to the modern right. In most people's eyes, that is synonymous with slavery.
That is of course absurd. The Confederacy was hardly synonymous with slavery any more than the USA was. Both still permitted it at that time.
There was a big difference, in that the Confederacy was formed in part to preserve slavery. They said so themselves.
The Nazi dictatorship is not comparable to a democracy which had a constitution which protected individual rights.
Um, slavery.
We would call them all of the first 16 US presidents.
That was a good answer, but slavery was protected by the Constitution (although I'm not sure how) so they couldn't have abolished it by themselves even if they had intended to.
That was until Lincoln and the Republicans got enough votes to pass abolition in 1865, just nine years after they said they would, and the states ratified it.
You can stop posting lies and BS. Its easy.
I know they tried to put a pretty face on the Confederacy, but he, his VP, the declarations of secession, and many others said it was about slavery. They were even hestitant to allow blacks to enlist because it would show that "our whole theory of slavery is wrong", their words, in 1865.
He specifically said secession and the war were not about slavery. He said so many times. So did several other Southern political and military leaders as well as leading newspapers. And of course the original 7 seceding states turned down slavery forever by express constitutional amendment.
5. Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia.
Virginia did not issue a declaration of causes. If you want to argue otherwise, provide the link to Virginia's Declaration of the causes of secession.
No, because it would be a waste of FR bandwidth. I have their statements that it was about slavery and their actions backing that up. Their poor attempts at PR are meaningless.
You mean it would be a waste of bandwidth to show you once again their statements that it was not about slavery and their actions backing that up. The poor attempts by Union propagandists and PC Revisionists are meaningless.
I know, but if those tribes considered themselves sovereign entities then the term act of war applies, regardless of any proxies used to get them.
If those tribes themselves considered themselves to be sovereign entities. So a tribe can declare itself sovereign but not a state? Also you do realize that European and American slave traders did not show up and go into the jungle to capture Africans to enslave them right? That would not have been economical. No. They BOUGHT THEM from their BLACK AFRICAN slavemasters who were quite happy to sell them.
Like the constitutional right to own slaves?
Lincoln didn't interfere with that one. In fact he was supported a constitutional amendment that would have expressly protected slavery forever.
One of them assassinated President Lincoln. Why? Because Lincoln called for equality for blacks.
Firstly John Wilkes Booth was an individual. The 38,000 or so American Citizens imprisoned in federal gulags without charge or trial for disagreeing with government policy were unique individuals who bear no responsibility for Booth's actions. Secondly, Booth's big failing was in waiting too long to kill the tyrant. He might've saved many lives had he killed Lincoln years earlier.
I see. Make slavery legal and it's legal, so there.
Nobody considered slaves or Indians for that matter to be citizens at that time. The mid 19th century was not the 21st century. People in the past did not have the same views we do today.
Like the legal right to own slaves?
Like the right to disagree with government policy and/or criticize politicians.
According to you, they were critical of his handling of the war, not of slavery.
according to anybody who has bothered to read them.
You're trying to tie the Confederacy to the modern right. In most people's eyes, that is synonymous with slavery.
I'm not tying the Confederacy specifically to the modern right. I DO note that the South is the heart of the modern conservative movement. I also note that the South's longstanding support of decentralized power, limited government and balanced budgets lie at the heart of conservatism. The Confederacy is only synonymous with slavery to complete ignoramuses.
There was a big difference, in that the Confederacy was formed in part to preserve slavery. They said so themselves.
The Confederacy was not formed to preserve slavery. Slavery was not threatened in the US. If anybody thought it was, the North was only too happy to offer protection of slavery effectively forever by explicit constitutional amendment. The original 7 seceding states turned down that offer.
Um, slavery.
ummmm the US had slavery for 80 years. Does that make the US from the time of its founding until 1866 akind to Nazi Germany in your view?
That was a good answer, but slavery was protected by the Constitution (although I'm not sure how) so they couldn't have abolished it by themselves even if they had intended to.
They presided over a country that had slavery. Until very late in the war, Lincoln like the other 15 before him showed no inclination to abolish slavery.
That was until Lincoln and the Republicans got enough votes to pass abolition in 1865, just nine years after they said they would, and the states ratified it.
Neither Lincoln nor the Republicans campaigned on nor supported abolition. In fact they condemned it publicly and repeatedly until very late in the war. They even supported protection of slavery effectively forever by express constitutional amendment.