It sure as hell didn't start with reconstruction. This is from 1861, before the Civil War started:
The fact that you can't see that southerners aren't pointing out slaves in the North to JUSTIFY slavery tells me all I need to know about how you view this subject.
There is no JUSTIFICATION for Slavery. Southerners are simply pointing out the ignorance in this silly northern version of history that the civil war was about the evil evil racist slave holding south vs the good, noble, everyone is equal north.
The suggestion that it "wasn't as bad" or "they weren't as racist" (with no evidence of such) is actually a pathetic attempt at justifying the "goodness" and "awesomeness" of the North in this fictional history story that people like to tell.
Read the history. New York was a marketplace. Even when their slavery numbers were 'only' around 20k, they were still handling ships until the end of that practice was forced on them, and sales until that also was forced to be stopped.Why did you say, "New York was the main hub for slavery"? Were you trying to suggest that the north had more slaves than the south or something?
So you really had nothing to say, just felt like you had to lash out?
Why did you say, "New York was the main hub for slavery"? Were you trying to suggest that the north had more slaves than the south or something?
Pointing out another of the fallacies of modern history that make Lincoln out to be this awesome good honest leader man.....
He was nothing of the sort..... And had it not been for the ending of slavery (which happened after he died btw)..... Lincoln would have been known as the guy who nearly turned us back into a country ruled by a tyrant.
Did you know that pointing out that the north had slaves was an argument used by the south to justify slavery?The fact that you can't see that southerners aren't pointing out slaves in the North to JUSTIFY slavery tells me all I need to know about how you view this subject.
There is no JUSTIFICATION for Slavery. Southerners are simply pointing out the ignorance in this silly northern version of history that the civil war was about the evil evil racist slave holding south vs the good, noble, everyone is equal north.
The suggestion that it "wasn't as bad" or "they weren't as racist" (with no evidence of such) is actually a pathetic attempt at justifying the "goodness" and "awesomeness" of the North in this fictional history story that people like to tell.
If there's no justification for slavery, there's no justification for the Confederacy. If there's no justification for the Confederacy, there's no justification for its flag.
In your rush to emotion, you effectively nullified your own argument.
Are you still not getting it....
The numbers don't matter.
1 Slave and 20 Slaves are equally immoral.
Is that what that said?Yes, you're right. Secession had nothing to do with Lincoln or slavery :roll:
I don't recall claiming that the Confederacy was right......or that Slavery was right....
The Flag is A) Part of our nation's history and B) Part of our region's history.
There are plenty of "Regional Symbols" throughout the US. This one happens to be the one for the south.
It would be like the Yankees baseball team changing their logo, and people who love being a New Yorker (because yes, the NY Yankees logo is often used as a "symbol" of New York by non baseball fans) being told their old Yankees hat or "flag" offends everyone because its the symbol the Yankees used during the days when blacks weren't allowed in baseball or some such nonsense.
I don't recall claiming that the Confederacy was right......or that Slavery was right....
The Flag is A) Part of our nation's history and B) Part of our region's history.
There are plenty of "Regional Symbols" throughout the US. This one happens to be the one for the south.
It would be like the Yankees baseball team changing their logo, and people who love being a New Yorker (because yes, the NY Yankees logo is often used as a "symbol" of New York by non baseball fans) being told their old Yankees hat or "flag" offends everyone because its the symbol the Yankees used during the days when blacks weren't allowed in baseball or some such nonsense.
Is that what that said?
Please, show me that it was an argument "used by the south to justify slavery" and not just an argument used by those in the south (.)Did you know that pointing out that the north had slaves was an argument used by the south to justify slavery?
Anyone who knows anything about history knows that the Civil War was not fought to end slavery.Well, slavery is evil. So it stands to reason that those who fought for slavery were more evil.
I can you show a whole list of the South's denials, excuses, blaming and demonizing the North...
Lost Cause of the South - RationalWiki
Well it was in response to my assertion that Lincoln's election was part of secession. So either you disagree with that Or you learned a whole bunch of new emotional arguments that you had to try out.
Anyone who knows anything about history knows that the Civil War was not fought to end slavery.
The confederate flag can fly over a historic civil war battle ground.
It can used at a museam.
But.....
The confederate flag can not fly at any state capital, or at any position of the government.
The flag of the confederacy is that of a foreign country.
What?!?! Are you being sarcastic?!!
There was only ONE reason for the civil war: the south knew that the north was going to push for an end to slavery across the entire country.
Said another way, the south would rather commit TREASON for the sake of maintaining slavery. And the confederate flag is a symbol of that desire!!
You keep going back to that illogical leap that says since there are overall 'other' considerations, it must therefore mean it is OK or that people are 'defending' slavery.
The flag does not represent 'slavery'. You can make it MEAN slavery if you like, but that is not what it means to the vast majority of people that grew up with it as parts of our lives. IF the people of any state wish to choose to stop flying the flag at their state buildings then that should be the choice they make and they should do it for the right reasons and NOT because a bunch of race bating morons from DC have created this 'cause' to stir **** up with. WHen you look across the country at the problems black America faces and you come to the conclusion that what you REALLY need to get spun up over is a flag and a TV show...that speaks volumes about you.
Read the history. New York was a marketplace. Even when their slavery numbers were 'only' around 20k, they were still handling ships until the end of that practice was forced on them, and sales until that also was forced to be stopped.
Ive never suggested they had more...only that if you are looking at HISTORY vs the hysteria so many of you apply, then you will see...no one comes out unscathed.
And BTW...since you insist on applying that stink to all southerners that support the flag of the Confederacy, didnt YOU at one time live in California? Are you a native?
Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.Please, show me that it was an argument "used by the south to justify slavery" and not just an argument used by those in the south.
Anyone who knows anything about history knows that the Civil War was not fought to end slavery.
And what dose that have to do with me?
G'Day,mate. There are many flags that flew representing countries whose record on equality left much to be desired. The fundamental difference between those countries and the Confederate States of America, is that they did not make the slavery of another race a fundamental clause in their instrument of government, while the Confederacy made it integral to their Constitution.
G'Day,mate. There are many flags that flew representing countries whose record on equality left much to be desired. The fundamental difference between those countries and the Confederate States of America, is that they did not make the slavery of another race a fundamental clause in their instrument of government, while the Confederacy made it integral to their Constituion.
Between 1761 and 1808, British traders hauled 1,428,000 African captives across the Atlantic and pocketed $96.5 million – about $13 billion in value today – from selling them as slaves.
From 1500 to 1860, by very modest estimations, around 12 million Africans were traded into slavery in the Americas. In British vessels alone, 3.25 million Africans were shipped. These voyages were often very profitable. For instance, in the 17th century, the Royal Africa Company could buy an enslaved African with trade goods worth $5 and sell that person in the Americas for $32, making an average net profit of 38 percent per voyage.
Slave-owning planters and merchants who dealt in slaves and slave produce were among the richest people in 18th-century Britain, but many other British citizens benefited from the human trafficking industry.
With over 1,600,000 enslaved Africans transported to the West Indies, France was clearly a major player in the trade. Its slave ports were a major contributor to the country’s economic advancements in the 18th century. Many of its cities on the west coast, such as Nantes, Lorient, La Rochelle, and Bordeaux, built their wealth through the major profits of triangular slave trade.
Between 1738 and 1745, from Nantes, France’s leading slave port, 55,000 slaves were taken to the New World in 180 ships. From 1713 to 1775, nearly 800 vessels in the slave trade sailed from Nantes.
The Dutch West India Company, a chartered company of Dutch merchants, was established in 1621 as a monopoly over the African slave trade to Brazil, the Caribbean and North America.
WIC had offices in Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Hoorn, Middelburg and Groningen, but one-fourth of Africans transported across the Atlantic by the company were moved in slave ships from Amsterdam. Almost all of the money that financed slave plantations in Suriname and the Antilles came from bankers in Amsterdam, just as many of the ships used to transport slaves were built there.
Many of the raw materials that were turned into finished goods in Amsterdam, such as sugar and coffee, were grown in the colonies using slave labor and then refined in factories in the Jordaan neighborhood.
Revenue from the goods produced with slave labor funded much of The Netherlands’ golden age in the 17th century, a period renowned for its artistic, literary, scientific, and philosophical achievements.
Slave labor created vast sources of wealth for the Dutch in the form of precious metals, sugar, tobacco, cocoa, coffee and cotton and other goods, and helped to fund the creation of Amsterdam’s beautiful and famous canals and city center.
Portugal was the first of all European countries to become involved in the Atlantic slave trade. From the 15th to 19th century, the Portuguese exported 4.5 million Africans as slaves to the Americas, making it Europe’s largest trafficker of human beings.
Slave labor was the driving force behind the growth of the sugar economy in Portugal’s colony of Brazil, and sugar was the primary export from 1600 to 1650. Gold and diamond deposits were discovered in Brazil in 1690, which sparked an increase in the importation of African slaves to power this newly profitable market.
Its not just you but yes...there are a whole lot of people that are twisted over this fabricated outrage. It gives you a cause to help you feel all better about yourself. Its the equivalent of being worked up over the Redskins team name while you completely ignore the vast social ills infecting the American Indian population. Precisely the same thing.Can you fly a Confederate flag (or any flag) right now in front of your house? Yes? Then what are you getting all "spun up" for?
I did not create this thread. I am just talking about the subject matter. I am not getting spun up by a flag or some TV show. What TV show are you talking about? I never mentioned any TV show in this thread.
I think that you are just making up **** and trying to make me argue for it.
Do you believe that California residents that proudly fly the bear also bear the brunt of racism that permeated California for decades as directed towards Asians?So pointing out that slavery occurred in the north somehow diminishes slavery in the south? It just looks like your trying to water down slavery in the south so they won't look so bad.
California was brought into the union as a free state. Yes, I lived there for some time, but I wasn't born there.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?