Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don't see this as an affront to soliders in general. I see it as an affront to culture, history, states rights, etc. This is meant to galvanize zombie nation.
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states......
Slavery was no secret when the Constitution was signed by the various parties.
You're right, slavery was no secret and was practiced by just about every rich person around when the Constitution was signed.
But, we have evolved as a nation and now recognize that all people are equal, and that slavery was wrong.
But then again, back when the Constitution was signed, people generally heated their houses with wood stoves and fireplaces. We've evolved to the point where most have A/C or central heat and air.
Evolving as you put it, does not mean that there was no nobility to the South. Ninety-four percent of Southerners were not slave holders. Clearly, they were fighting for values despite the neanderthal narrative that it was all about slavery.
'nobility'?
We have no nobility in the United States silly rabbit.
The Confederate states were formed to protect the institution of slavery. Did the common Southerner fight to protect slavery? Probably not- though it was a common hope to own slaves- and even the poorest whites knew they were socially superior to any slave.
I don't see this as an affront to soliders in general. I see it as an affront to culture, history, states rights, etc. This is meant to galvanize zombie nation.
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states......
Slavery was no secret when the Constitution was signed by the various parties.
You're right, slavery was no secret and was practiced by just about every rich person around when the Constitution was signed.
But, we have evolved as a nation and now recognize that all people are equal, and that slavery was wrong.
But then again, back when the Constitution was signed, people generally heated their houses with wood stoves and fireplaces. We've evolved to the point where most have A/C or central heat and air.
Evolving as you put it, does not mean that there was no nobility to the South. Ninety-four percent of Southerners were not slave holders. Clearly, they were fighting for values despite the neanderthal narrative that it was all about slavery.
Are you telling me that only six percent were slave owners? Link to back up your bullshit, because there were slaves for a lot more than just plantations.
I don't see this as an affront to soliders in general. I see it as an affront to culture, history, states rights, etc. This is meant to galvanize zombie nation.
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states......
Slavery was no secret when the Constitution was signed by the various parties.
Nope
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states....
What do you mean, "nope"? You think if you just rewrite history, you can ignore the ramifications thereof?
Who is rewriting history?
What do I mean by 'nope'- I was agreeing with you that slavery was not a secret when the Constitution was written- just the opposite- issues regarding slavery are in the Constitution.
I am not attacking anyone for owning slaves- as repugnant as that was- it is indeed a part of our history. Just because George Washington and Thomas Jefferson owned slaves does not take away from what they did for the United States.
But I am fine with monuments being removed that celebrate a failed attempt to break up the United States, monuments to those who fought against and killed American Army soldiers.
In the end it should be the local communities decision. Not a mobs, not a bunch of Confederate fan boys.
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states......
Slavery was no secret when the Constitution was signed by the various parties.
You're right, slavery was no secret and was practiced by just about every rich person around when the Constitution was signed.
But, we have evolved as a nation and now recognize that all people are equal, and that slavery was wrong.
But then again, back when the Constitution was signed, people generally heated their houses with wood stoves and fireplaces. We've evolved to the point where most have A/C or central heat and air.
Evolving as you put it, does not mean that there was no nobility to the South. Ninety-four percent of Southerners were not slave holders. Clearly, they were fighting for values despite the neanderthal narrative that it was all about slavery.
Are you telling me that only six percent were slave owners? Link to back up your bullshit, because there were slaves for a lot more than just plantations.
I've seen six percent cited. It was but a strong minority of slaveholders either way; that's common knowledge.
Slavery was no secret when the Constitution was signed by the various parties.
You're right, slavery was no secret and was practiced by just about every rich person around when the Constitution was signed.
But, we have evolved as a nation and now recognize that all people are equal, and that slavery was wrong.
But then again, back when the Constitution was signed, people generally heated their houses with wood stoves and fireplaces. We've evolved to the point where most have A/C or central heat and air.
Evolving as you put it, does not mean that there was no nobility to the South. Ninety-four percent of Southerners were not slave holders. Clearly, they were fighting for values despite the neanderthal narrative that it was all about slavery.
Are you telling me that only six percent were slave owners? Link to back up your bullshit, because there were slaves for a lot more than just plantations.
I've seen six percent cited. It was but a strong minority of slaveholders either way; that's common knowledge.
If you have seen it cited, you know where you read it. Link please.
You're right, slavery was no secret and was practiced by just about every rich person around when the Constitution was signed.
But, we have evolved as a nation and now recognize that all people are equal, and that slavery was wrong.
But then again, back when the Constitution was signed, people generally heated their houses with wood stoves and fireplaces. We've evolved to the point where most have A/C or central heat and air.
Evolving as you put it, does not mean that there was no nobility to the South. Ninety-four percent of Southerners were not slave holders. Clearly, they were fighting for values despite the neanderthal narrative that it was all about slavery.
Are you telling me that only six percent were slave owners? Link to back up your bullshit, because there were slaves for a lot more than just plantations.
I've seen six percent cited. It was but a strong minority of slaveholders either way; that's common knowledge.
If you have seen it cited, you know where you read it. Link please.
Don't play games, dude. I already said it's not about getting hung up on a number. Most Southerners didn't own slaves either way.
Evolving as you put it, does not mean that there was no nobility to the South. Ninety-four percent of Southerners were not slave holders. Clearly, they were fighting for values despite the neanderthal narrative that it was all about slavery.
Are you telling me that only six percent were slave owners? Link to back up your bullshit, because there were slaves for a lot more than just plantations.
I've seen six percent cited. It was but a strong minority of slaveholders either way; that's common knowledge.
If you have seen it cited, you know where you read it. Link please.
Don't play games, dude. I already said it's not about getting hung up on a number. Most Southerners didn't own slaves either way.
I'm not the one that pulled the six percent figure out of my ass, you are. You said that only six percent of the South actually owned slaves. I told you that number sounded low and asked you to provide a link. You then told me that you'd seen the six percent number cited, and I stated that since you have seen the information, I would like you to provide a link. Now, you are telling me to not get hung up on numbers.
Just like I thought, you pulled a number out of your ass hoping to not be challenged on it, but when you were, you said it's not about the numbers. You sir are truly an idiot.
I don't see this as an affront to soliders in general. I see it as an affront to culture, history, states rights, etc. This is meant to galvanize zombie nation.
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states......
Slavery was no secret when the Constitution was signed by the various parties.
Nope
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states....
What do you mean, "nope"? You think if you just rewrite history, you can ignore the ramifications thereof?
I don't see this as an affront to soliders in general. I see it as an affront to culture, history, states rights, etc. This is meant to galvanize zombie nation.
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states......
Slavery was no secret when the Constitution was signed by the various parties.
Nope
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states....
What do you mean, "nope"? You think if you just rewrite history, you can ignore the ramifications thereof?
That's what the Lost Cause movement thought by putting up all these statues and monuments. And by writing "The Clansman" and minstrel show songs and Jim Crow laws and filming "Birth of a Nation".
And for way too long --- they were right; you could indeed ignore those ramifiations and have segregated restaurants and bomb black neighborhoods and commit lynchings and ban blacks from baseball. Now those chickens are back to roost.
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states......
Slavery was no secret when the Constitution was signed by the various parties.
Nope
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states....
What do you mean, "nope"? You think if you just rewrite history, you can ignore the ramifications thereof?
That's what the Lost Cause movement thought by putting up all these statues and monuments. And by writing "The Clansman" and minstrel show songs and Jim Crow laws and filming "Birth of a Nation".
And for way too long --- they were right; you could indeed ignore those ramifiations and have segregated restaurants and bomb black neighborhoods and commit lynchings and ban blacks from baseball. Now those chickens are back to roost.
You're naming a bunch of sh** that was created or embraced by DNC, brah.
Slavery was no secret when the Constitution was signed by the various parties.
Nope
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states....
What do you mean, "nope"? You think if you just rewrite history, you can ignore the ramifications thereof?
That's what the Lost Cause movement thought by putting up all these statues and monuments. And by writing "The Clansman" and minstrel show songs and Jim Crow laws and filming "Birth of a Nation".
And for way too long --- they were right; you could indeed ignore those ramifiations and have segregated restaurants and bomb black neighborhoods and commit lynchings and ban blacks from baseball. Now those chickens are back to roost.
You're naming a bunch of sh** that was created or embraced by DNC, brah.
uh...nnnnnnnnnnnno. This isn't even a political thing. It's a cultural movement. Lost Cause of the Confederacy
"Cultural movement" means you write novels and theater plays, you film outrageous movies, you rewrite history textbooks, you write racist vaudeville songs, you produce a radio show called "Amos 'n' Andy", you produce a cartoon called "Song of the South" --- and you put up hundreds of statues and monuments as propaganda transmitters, carefully placed in public squares and in front of city/county government buildings so that they look legit.
That's how you get those sensibilities into the public mind, to such an extent that you can keep blacks out of baseball for sixty years. For one example. And the end result of that mass brain wash is the Jim Crow laws, and the record-setting riots, and the lynchings. Oddly though, those repercussions don't have monuments.
Only people who commit treason by swearing an oath at West Point. Then fighting against the gov they swore an oath toThe mayors, governors, and other politicians who are calling for, and removing statues of former military generals, are soldier haters - pure & simple. Example - in Baltimore, statues of Robert E. Lee and Thomas Stonewall" Jackson were removed in the middle of the night, the mayor knowing there would be anger and opposition. So much for representitive government.
These actions are a disgrace, and an abusive insult to every soldier serving in the military, and every military veteran in America (if not the whole world). The often heard (idiotic) excuse that the statues represent hate, racism, and bigotry, is ludicrous, and an insult to everyone's intelligence.
The mayor of Tampa, Florida, Bob Buckhorn has said this same thing, and even donated $1,000 to have a Civil War monument removed, which has statues of 2 low ranked soldiers in it. Problem with the mayor's ridiculous excuse, is that whatever racism or bigotry existed, it came from POLITICIANS. But statues being removed in Tampa, Charlottesville, Lexington, KY and other places, are not of politicians. They are statues of SOLDIERS. They were people who made no policies of any kind. They simply followed orders, and did the toughest job anyone could do. Many lost their lives. They had nothing to do with the policies of slavery, secession, confederacy, etc. In fact, many of these soldiers (especially the generals) served in the military for many years before the Civil War even started.
These statue removals are despicable acts perpetrated by military and soldier haters, most of whom never served themselves. They are dishonoring these fine, courageous heroes, who went to war, defending their states, counties, and towns from attackers. These governors, mayors, etc should be voted out of office, or recalled if possible. Soldier haters have no business to be holding political office.
For every one of these soldiers whose statues are removed, 3 of theirs should be put up in response. Make the statue removing, soldier haters pay for their bad behavior.
Are you telling me that only six percent were slave owners? Link to back up your bullshit, because there were slaves for a lot more than just plantations.
I've seen six percent cited. It was but a strong minority of slaveholders either way; that's common knowledge.
If you have seen it cited, you know where you read it. Link please.
Don't play games, dude. I already said it's not about getting hung up on a number. Most Southerners didn't own slaves either way.
I'm not the one that pulled the six percent figure out of my ass, you are. You said that only six percent of the South actually owned slaves. I told you that number sounded low and asked you to provide a link. You then told me that you'd seen the six percent number cited, and I stated that since you have seen the information, I would like you to provide a link. Now, you are telling me to not get hung up on numbers.
Just like I thought, you pulled a number out of your ass hoping to not be challenged on it, but when you were, you said it's not about the numbers. You sir are truly an idiot.
Whatever, you have google; use it if it's that important to you.
I've seen six percent cited. It was but a strong minority of slaveholders either way; that's common knowledge.
If you have seen it cited, you know where you read it. Link please.
Don't play games, dude. I already said it's not about getting hung up on a number. Most Southerners didn't own slaves either way.
I'm not the one that pulled the six percent figure out of my ass, you are. You said that only six percent of the South actually owned slaves. I told you that number sounded low and asked you to provide a link. You then told me that you'd seen the six percent number cited, and I stated that since you have seen the information, I would like you to provide a link. Now, you are telling me to not get hung up on numbers.
Just like I thought, you pulled a number out of your ass hoping to not be challenged on it, but when you were, you said it's not about the numbers. You sir are truly an idiot.
Whatever, you have google; use it if it's that important to you.
Cool. I DID use Google, and found out the figures you were pulling came straight out of your ass. It wasn't six percent as you claim, but significantly more.................
(unless otherwise noted, all data is as of the 1860 census)
Total number of slaves in the Lower South : 2,312,352 (47% of total population).
Total number of slaves in the Upper South: 1,208758 (29% of total population).
Total number of slaves in the Border States: 432,586 (13% of total population).
Almost one-third of all Southern families owned slaves. In Mississippi and South Carolina it approached one half. The total number of slave owners was 385,000 (including, in Louisiana, some free Negroes). As for the number of slaves owned by each master, 88% held fewer than twenty, and nearly 50% held fewer than five. (A complete table on slave-owning percentages is given at the bottom of this page.)
For comparison's sake, let it be noted that in the 1950's, only 2% of American families owned corporation stocks equal in value to the 1860 value of a single slave. Thus, slave ownership was much more widespread in the South than corporate investment was in 1950's America.
On a typical plantation (more than 20 slaves) the capital value of the slaves was greater than the capital value of the land and implements.
Slavery was profitable, although a large part of the profit was in the increased value of the slaves themselves. With only 30% of the nation's (free) population, the South had 60% of the "wealthiest men." The 1860 per capita wealth in the South was $3,978; in the North it was $2,040.
Selected Statistics
I showed you where it was significantly MORE than just the six percent you claimed.
Nope
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states....
What do you mean, "nope"? You think if you just rewrite history, you can ignore the ramifications thereof?
That's what the Lost Cause movement thought by putting up all these statues and monuments. And by writing "The Clansman" and minstrel show songs and Jim Crow laws and filming "Birth of a Nation".
And for way too long --- they were right; you could indeed ignore those ramifiations and have segregated restaurants and bomb black neighborhoods and commit lynchings and ban blacks from baseball. Now those chickens are back to roost.
You're naming a bunch of sh** that was created or embraced by DNC, brah.
uh...nnnnnnnnnnnno. This isn't even a political thing. It's a cultural movement. Lost Cause of the Confederacy
"Cultural movement" means you write novels and theater plays, you film outrageous movies, you rewrite history textbooks, you write racist vaudeville songs, you produce a radio show called "Amos 'n' Andy", you produce a cartoon called "Song of the South" --- and you put up hundreds of statues and monuments as propaganda transmitters, carefully placed in public squares and in front of city/county government buildings so that they look legit.
That's how you get those sensibilities into the public mind, to such an extent that you can keep blacks out of baseball for sixty years. For one example. And the end result of that mass brain wash is the Jim Crow laws, and the record-setting riots, and the lynchings. Oddly though, those repercussions don't have monuments.
You just cited all those political forces and then say it's not a political thing.
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states......
Slavery was no secret when the Constitution was signed by the various parties.
You're right, slavery was no secret and was practiced by just about every rich person around when the Constitution was signed.
But, we have evolved as a nation and now recognize that all people are equal, and that slavery was wrong.
But then again, back when the Constitution was signed, people generally heated their houses with wood stoves and fireplaces. We've evolved to the point where most have A/C or central heat and air.
Evolving as you put it, does not mean that there was no nobility to the South. Ninety-four percent of Southerners were not slave holders. Clearly, they were fighting for values despite the neanderthal narrative that it was all about slavery.
'nobility'?
We have no nobility in the United States silly rabbit.
The Confederate states were formed to protect the institution of slavery. Did the common Southerner fight to protect slavery? Probably not- though it was a common hope to own slaves- and even the poorest whites knew they were socially superior to any slave.
I wasn't using nobility in a formal sense, obviously.
The point is, is that states rights was what this country was founded on. The north's impatience with the slavery issue does not absolve them. Frankly, slavery would have eventually ended without the war as it had in other places around the world.
"impatience with the slavery issue".
You do realize it was the Confederate Slave States that expressed their 'impatience with the slavery issue' by deciding to form their own country to protect their right to own slaves.
And the Confederacy didn't believe that slavery would eventually end- their Constitution was set up to make it permanent.
What do you mean, "nope"? You think if you just rewrite history, you can ignore the ramifications thereof?
That's what the Lost Cause movement thought by putting up all these statues and monuments. And by writing "The Clansman" and minstrel show songs and Jim Crow laws and filming "Birth of a Nation".
And for way too long --- they were right; you could indeed ignore those ramifiations and have segregated restaurants and bomb black neighborhoods and commit lynchings and ban blacks from baseball. Now those chickens are back to roost.
You're naming a bunch of sh** that was created or embraced by DNC, brah.
uh...nnnnnnnnnnnno. This isn't even a political thing. It's a cultural movement. Lost Cause of the Confederacy
"Cultural movement" means you write novels and theater plays, you film outrageous movies, you rewrite history textbooks, you write racist vaudeville songs, you produce a radio show called "Amos 'n' Andy", you produce a cartoon called "Song of the South" --- and you put up hundreds of statues and monuments as propaganda transmitters, carefully placed in public squares and in front of city/county government buildings so that they look legit.
That's how you get those sensibilities into the public mind, to such an extent that you can keep blacks out of baseball for sixty years. For one example. And the end result of that mass brain wash is the Jim Crow laws, and the record-setting riots, and the lynchings. Oddly though, those repercussions don't have monuments.
You just cited all those political forces and then say it's not a political thing.
Correct. Novelists and newspaper writers and playwrights and film directors and revisionist historians and Vaudeville songwriters and Al Jolsons and Walt Disneys and Amos & Andys and Major League Baseball and the United Daughters of the Confederacy are not political things. They're cultural shapers. And that can be a lot more influential.
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states......
Slavery was no secret when the Constitution was signed by the various parties.
Nope
And by 'culture, history, states rights' that means the 'culture, history and states rights' of the rebel slave states....
What do you mean, "nope"? You think if you just rewrite history, you can ignore the ramifications thereof?
Who is rewriting history?
What do I mean by 'nope'- I was agreeing with you that slavery was not a secret when the Constitution was written- just the opposite- issues regarding slavery are in the Constitution.
I am not attacking anyone for owning slaves- as repugnant as that was- it is indeed a part of our history. Just because George Washington and Thomas Jefferson owned slaves does not take away from what they did for the United States.
But I am fine with monuments being removed that celebrate a failed attempt to break up the United States, monuments to those who fought against and killed American Army soldiers.
In the end it should be the local communities decision. Not a mobs, not a bunch of Confederate fan boys.
Fair enough. I personally do not defend slavery either; but I get tired of people seeing it through a lens lacking historical perspective. The reality is that most slaves even worked on merit systems. Of course, it was an artificially inhibited market value; though, the same could be said for today's grunt.
