Why so much hate for the Confederacy.? It can't be about slavery.

[Boss]

Jesus Christ. You little brain only imagines slaves can be used for picking cotton?

Well mainly, yeah... that;'s what slaves were used for. Cotton, tobacco and sugar cane. None of it grows in the fucking desert!

They SAID they wanted to expand it not only Westward, but into Cuba and Mexico. Pick up a fucking history book.

Who the hell is "they" here? Some obscure plantation owner? There were already slaves in Cuba and Mexico. Anywhere there was agriculture and crops that needed harvesting by manual labor. That's how white people did that back then, you see?

In fact a confederate state would not be allowed to *not* have slavery.

No, their Constitution specifically said the issue of slavery was to be determined by the states. You quite simply cannot have a "Confederacy" without such a provision. This was at the very core of why the CSA declared independence.

Oh, and they were paying damn good money for bounty hunters to bring back the runaways.

And WHO established that law and upheld it with their Supreme Court for 87 years?
Hint: Wasn't the CSA!

Never mind the law at the time was also that FREE blacks were not even citizens, and not provided "any rights the white man was bound to obey."

And WHO established this law and upheld it with their Supreme Court for 87 years?
Hint: Wasn't the CSA!

Thank dog the Union forced the human traffickers to give up their barbarous human rights violators.

There was no "human" anything in 1861. US LAW, SCOTUS, CONGRESS... ALL said slaves were property owned by their property owner. They ALL said slaves were not humans with rights. This WAS the LAW... for 87 years before the CSA existed.

It did not end with the Civil War. The Constitution of the United States of America had to be amended!

 

[Hutch Starskey]

There is no defense for slavery today. I agree that historically people had different views on slavery but that has all changed. Slavery viewed with today's standard can't be seen as anything but the physical practice of racism. Why would we then want to laud that part of our history by having that flag over statehouses? For people whose history doesn't include pride or heritage but servitude and oppression followed by another century of segregation and institutional discrimination, that flag is a painful reminder of a past that needs to forgotten. It's utterly ridiculous that this is even a debate still today.

I agree there is no defense for slavery today. But that is part of the problem here... we are SO far removed from the mindset of 1861, we can't relate to it. It's difficult to imagine men sitting on a Supreme Court and actually ruling that a "slave" was legitimately-owned property with a value only as a property asset. Furthermore, to say that even if you didn't agree, you were obligated to return property to it's owner or face criminal charges. This was the Law of the Land in 1861.

We have a deplorable history as a NATION when it comes to slavery and equality for black people. That cannot ever be erased by making a scapegoat of the South or their symbols. I'm only part black so I can't speak for all black people but I view these symbols as reminders of how far we have come. I have ancestors who were slaves and I also have some who were worse off than slaves. Imagine being so worthless you aren't even wanted as a slave? Thousand of my relatives were killed because they simply weren't of any value to anyone. They just happened to be on the land some white European wanted. Before that, they came from where they were run off their land by a king who wanted it. So we all have a history and our ancestors have been through a lot. Slavery wasn't born in the South.

I don't believe the removal of that flag in any way is scapegoating anyone. The slave history of that flag is very real while the "pride or heritage" has been completely fabricated since the war. Any Ire the south receives nowadays I believe comes only from the fact that there are still those who want to use that flag even today. It's hard to be in favor of that flag while the Klan is all over the tv using it to push their fucked up agenda.

 

[reconmark]

If anyone is so ignorant as not to know that the south wanted to expand slavery into the Western territories , they should immediately STFU!!! and receive a fifth grade education.

 

[Boss]

There is no defense for slavery today. I agree that historically people had different views on slavery but that has all changed. Slavery viewed with today's standard can't be seen as anything but the physical practice of racism. Why would we then want to laud that part of our history by having that flag over statehouses? For people whose history doesn't include pride or heritage but servitude and oppression followed by another century of segregation and institutional discrimination, that flag is a painful reminder of a past that needs to forgotten. It's utterly ridiculous that this is even a debate still today.

I agree there is no defense for slavery today. But that is part of the problem here... we are SO far removed from the mindset of 1861, we can't relate to it. It's difficult to imagine men sitting on a Supreme Court and actually ruling that a "slave" was legitimately-owned property with a value only as a property asset. Furthermore, to say that even if you didn't agree, you were obligated to return property to it's owner or face criminal charges. This was the Law of the Land in 1861.

We have a deplorable history as a NATION when it comes to slavery and equality for black people. That cannot ever be erased by making a scapegoat of the South or their symbols. I'm only part black so I can't speak for all black people but I view these symbols as reminders of how far we have come. I have ancestors who were slaves and I also have some who were worse off than slaves. Imagine being so worthless you aren't even wanted as a slave? Thousand of my relatives were killed because they simply weren't of any value to anyone. They just happened to be on the land some white European wanted. Before that, they came from where they were run off their land by a king who wanted it. So we all have a history and our ancestors have been through a lot. Slavery wasn't born in the South.

I don't believe the removal of that flag in any way is scapegoating anyone. The slave history of that flag is very real while the "pride or heritage" has been completely fabricated since the war. Any Ire the south receives nowadays I believe comes only from the fact that there are still those who want to use that flag even today. It's hard to be in favor of that flag while the Klan is all over the tv using it to push their fucked up agenda.

But it is a completely ignorant viewpoint that the flag represents any agenda. The slave history belongs to the United States, not the Confederacy. We still fly the American flag proudly. I know a TON of Southerners since I am from here and basically everyone I've ever known was from here... I don't personally know of anyone who waves that flag to promote racial hate. I'm sure there are some of those people around here, I see them on TV like you do. I don't associate with them, nor do any of the thousands and thousands of typical southern people who don't view that flag as something racist.

These same people used to burn crosses... are we going to ban all crosses next? The Klan used the American flag for over a hundred years... why aren't we banning it too? Well, it's because the American flag doesn't symbolize racial hate for most people... the same is true of the rebel flag according to a recent survey. You are giving the racists a victory by surrendering a symbol to their ideology! Regardless of the fact you're doing it for political advantage and to scapegoat the South.

 

[paperview]

Jesus Christ. You little brain only imagines slaves can be used for picking cotton?

Well mainly, yeah... that;'s what slaves were used for. Cotton, tobacco and sugar cane. None of it grows in the fucking desert!

They SAID they wanted to expand it not only Westward, but into Cuba and Mexico. Pick up a fucking history book.

Who the hell is "they" here? Some obscure plantation owner? There were already slaves in Cuba and Mexico. Anywhere there was agriculture and crops that needed harvesting by manual labor. That's how white people did that back then, you see?

In fact a confederate state would not be allowed to *not* have slavery.

No, their Constitution specifically said the issue of slavery was to be determined by the states. You quite simply cannot have a "Confederacy" without such a provision. This was at the very core of why the CSA declared independence.

Oh, and they were paying damn good money for bounty hunters to bring back the runaways.

And WHO established that law and upheld it with their Supreme Court for 87 years?
Hint: Wasn't the CSA!

Never mind the law at the time was also that FREE blacks were not even citizens, and not provided "any rights the white man was bound to obey."

And WHO established this law and upheld it with their Supreme Court for 87 years?
Hint: Wasn't the CSA!

Thank dog the Union forced the human traffickers to give up their barbarous human rights violators.

There was no "human" anything in 1861. US LAW, SCOTUS, CONGRESS... ALL said slaves were property owned by their property owner. They ALL said slaves were not humans with rights. This WAS the LAW... for 87 years before the CSA existed.

It did not end with the Civil War. The Constitution of the United States of America had to be amended!

Thank dog the Union intervened and put an end to that crazy beloved Southern legal Human Trafficking shit for good, eh?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

There is no defense for slavery today. I agree that historically people had different views on slavery but that has all changed. Slavery viewed with today's standard can't be seen as anything but the physical practice of racism. Why would we then want to laud that part of our history by having that flag over statehouses? For people whose history doesn't include pride or heritage but servitude and oppression followed by another century of segregation and institutional discrimination, that flag is a painful reminder of a past that needs to forgotten. It's utterly ridiculous that this is even a debate still today.

I agree there is no defense for slavery today. But that is part of the problem here... we are SO far removed from the mindset of 1861, we can't relate to it. It's difficult to imagine men sitting on a Supreme Court and actually ruling that a "slave" was legitimately-owned property with a value only as a property asset. Furthermore, to say that even if you didn't agree, you were obligated to return property to it's owner or face criminal charges. This was the Law of the Land in 1861.

We have a deplorable history as a NATION when it comes to slavery and equality for black people. That cannot ever be erased by making a scapegoat of the South or their symbols. I'm only part black so I can't speak for all black people but I view these symbols as reminders of how far we have come. I have ancestors who were slaves and I also have some who were worse off than slaves. Imagine being so worthless you aren't even wanted as a slave? Thousand of my relatives were killed because they simply weren't of any value to anyone. They just happened to be on the land some white European wanted. Before that, they came from where they were run off their land by a king who wanted it. So we all have a history and our ancestors have been through a lot. Slavery wasn't born in the South.

I don't believe the removal of that flag in any way is scapegoating anyone. The slave history of that flag is very real while the "pride or heritage" has been completely fabricated since the war. Any Ire the south receives nowadays I believe comes only from the fact that there are still those who want to use that flag even today. It's hard to be in favor of that flag while the Klan is all over the tv using it to push their fucked up agenda.

But it is a completely ignorant viewpoint that the flag represents any agenda. The slave history belongs to the United States, not the Confederacy. We still fly the American flag proudly. I know a TON of Southerners since I am from here and basically everyone I've ever known was from here... I don't personally know of anyone who waves that flag to promote racial hate. I'm sure there are some of those people around here, I see them on TV like you do. I don't associate with them, nor do any of the thousands and thousands of typical southern people who don't view that flag as something racist.

These same people used to burn crosses... are we going to ban all crosses next? The Klan used the American flag for over a hundred years... why aren't we banning it too? Well, it's because the American flag doesn't symbolize racial hate for most people... the same is true of the rebel flag according to a recent survey. You are giving the racists a victory by surrendering a symbol to their ideology! Regardless of the fact you're doing it for political advantage and to scapegoat the South.

No. Slavery belongs exclusively to the south.
There were only slave states and free states. The slave states were in the south and most of them chose to secede rather than capitulate to the rising tide of abolition.
If you bothered to understand the history and causes of the CW you would understand this.

There is no escaping the fact that the Klan has used that flag for more than 80 years now.Your oversimplified understanding and explaination of it's use is the ignorance you spoke of. There is no scapegoat or political advantage moron when it was two southern Repub governors and a Repub legislature that removed those flags. It was not the Dems. It could only happen if it were Repubs. Your whole understanding is childish and undereducated.

 

[Boss]

Jesus Christ. You little brain only imagines slaves can be used for picking cotton?

Well mainly, yeah... that;'s what slaves were used for. Cotton, tobacco and sugar cane. None of it grows in the fucking desert!

They SAID they wanted to expand it not only Westward, but into Cuba and Mexico. Pick up a fucking history book.

Who the hell is "they" here? Some obscure plantation owner? There were already slaves in Cuba and Mexico. Anywhere there was agriculture and crops that needed harvesting by manual labor. That's how white people did that back then, you see?

In fact a confederate state would not be allowed to *not* have slavery.

No, their Constitution specifically said the issue of slavery was to be determined by the states. You quite simply cannot have a "Confederacy" without such a provision. This was at the very core of why the CSA declared independence.

Oh, and they were paying damn good money for bounty hunters to bring back the runaways.

And WHO established that law and upheld it with their Supreme Court for 87 years?
Hint: Wasn't the CSA!

Never mind the law at the time was also that FREE blacks were not even citizens, and not provided "any rights the white man was bound to obey."

And WHO established this law and upheld it with their Supreme Court for 87 years?
Hint: Wasn't the CSA!

Thank dog the Union forced the human traffickers to give up their barbarous human rights violators.

There was no "human" anything in 1861. US LAW, SCOTUS, CONGRESS... ALL said slaves were property owned by their property owner. They ALL said slaves were not humans with rights. This WAS the LAW... for 87 years before the CSA existed.

It did not end with the Civil War. The Constitution of the United States of America had to be amended!

Thank dog the Union intervened and put an end to that crazy beloved Southern legal Human Trafficking shit for good, eh?

No... Actually, smart ass... Thank God for the South revolting and causing a war in which the issue of slavery had to be resolved by the United States government who couldn't seem to do it without a war.

 

[Boss]

No. Slavery belongs exclusively to the south.

No slavery doesn't belong exclusively to the South, but thank you SO much for proving that you are a bigot who hates the South and probably a racist who wants to hang racism on the South so you can continue to be a racist without guilt. It is nice of you to confirm that for us.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Boss]

There were only slave states and free states. The slave states were in the south and most of them chose to secede rather than capitulate to the rising tide of abolition.

Slaves were in the South because that's where cotton grows. If cotton grew in Boston, there would have been slaves in Boston.

The slave states were NOT ALL in the South. Delaware, Maryland and Kentucky were all slave states who belonged to the Union. In fact, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation did not apply to the slaves in those states. I bet you can't tell me why.

In 1863... middle of the Civil War, the war you claim was about slavery... The United States of America accepted into the Union, the SLAVE STATE of West Virginia. In 1861, there had been no abolition to capitulate to... you keep claiming it, but slavery did not become illegal in America until passage and ratification of Constitutional amendments, well AFTER the Civil War.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

There were only slave states and free states. The slave states were in the south and most of them chose to secede rather than capitulate to the rising tide of abolition.

Slaves were in the South because that's where cotton grows. If cotton grew in Boston, there would have been slaves in Boston.

The slave states were NOT ALL in the South. Delaware, Maryland and Kentucky were all slave states who belonged to the Union. In fact, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation did not apply to the slaves in those states. I bet you can't tell me why.

In 1863... middle of the Civil War, the war you claim was about slavery... The United States of America accepted into the Union, the SLAVE STATE of West Virginia. In 1861, there had been no abolition to capitulate to... you keep claiming it, but slavery did not become illegal in America until passage and ratification of Constitutional amendments, well AFTER the Civil War.

The entire premise for secession was slavery. The fact that four slave states chose to stay with the United States doesn't change that. It certainly doesn't mean that the union in any way supported slavery. The entirety of the confederacy ( as well as the banners that flew for their cause) was centered around that issue.There is no getting around that. There absolutely was a rise in abolition policies or there would have been no urgency to secede. Slavery was and remains the primary reason for the confederacy.

The idea that slaves only worked cotton is also ridiculous. They were used for anything and everything. Lumbering, ranching ( the word cow-boy comes from African cattle herders), textile mills, production of gunpowder, etc.

 

[paperview]

...
In 1863... middle of the Civil War, the war you claim was about slavery...

lol. The South claimed it was about slavery. Over and over and over.
Geeze.

... slavery did not become illegal in America until passage and ratification of Constitutional amendments, well AFTER the Civil War.

Six months later is not "well after" long.

In addition, The EP was at the time in effect, freeing millions of slaves.
Also, too: See Confiscation Acts

The Confiscations Acts, passed by Congress freed the slaves.

The 13th Amendment embedded it in the Constitution.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

It's hard to be in favor of that flag while the Klan is all over the tv using it to push their fucked up agenda.

HAHAHA. You gullible fool. The klan is govt-controlled and has been for a hundred years.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[
No. Slavery belongs exclusively to the south.
There were only slave states and free states. The slave states were in the south and most of them chose to secede rather than capitulate to the rising tide of abolition.
.

HAHAHA. You just contradicted yourself. You just said slavery was exclusively in the south and then you say some of the slave states did not secede and supported the north - which is true. THINK

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[
The slave states were NOT ALL in the South. Delaware, Maryland and Kentucky were all slave states who belonged to the Union. In fact, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation did not apply to the slaves in those states. I bet you can't tell me why.

Also missouri. It too was a slave state that went with the union. And yes, the EP did not apply to the 4 Union states that practiced slavery. It only applied to the south, a country lincoln had no control over!! The EP didn't free anyone. It was just a PR stunt.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

[
No. Slavery belongs exclusively to the south.
There were only slave states and free states. The slave states were in the south and most of them chose to secede rather than capitulate to the rising tide of abolition.
.

HAHAHA. You just contradicted yourself. You just said slavery was exclusively in the south and then you say some of the slave states did not secede and supported the north - which is true. THINK

A simpleton would think so.

 

[paperview]

[
The slave states were NOT ALL in the South. Delaware, Maryland and Kentucky were all slave states who belonged to the Union. In fact, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation did not apply to the slaves in those states. I bet you can't tell me why.

Also missouri. It too was a slave state that went with the union. And yes, the EP did not apply to the 4 Union states that practiced slavery. It only applied to the south, a country lincoln had no control over!! The EP didn't free anyone. It was just a PR stunt.

Idiot.

Learn your history.

Literally tens of thousands were freed immediately by the Emancipation Proclamation.

It was a brilliant tactical measure

And it had a profound affect.

Part of the EP also included an invite to those slaves -- telling them 'come on over' -- and escape the tyranny of the confederates to go fight for the Union.

And indeed, nearly 200,000 black troops helped in the Union cause.

You might also want to bone up on the Second Confiscation Act

 

[Asclepias]

Jesus Christ. You little brain only imagines slaves can be used for picking cotton?

Well mainly, yeah... that;'s what slaves were used for. Cotton, tobacco and sugar cane. None of it grows in the fucking desert!

They SAID they wanted to expand it not only Westward, but into Cuba and Mexico. Pick up a fucking history book.

Who the hell is "they" here? Some obscure plantation owner? There were already slaves in Cuba and Mexico. Anywhere there was agriculture and crops that needed harvesting by manual labor. That's how white people did that back then, you see?

In fact a confederate state would not be allowed to *not* have slavery.

No, their Constitution specifically said the issue of slavery was to be determined by the states. You quite simply cannot have a "Confederacy" without such a provision. This was at the very core of why the CSA declared independence.

Oh, and they were paying damn good money for bounty hunters to bring back the runaways.

And WHO established that law and upheld it with their Supreme Court for 87 years?
Hint: Wasn't the CSA!

Never mind the law at the time was also that FREE blacks were not even citizens, and not provided "any rights the white man was bound to obey."

And WHO established this law and upheld it with their Supreme Court for 87 years?
Hint: Wasn't the CSA!

Thank dog the Union forced the human traffickers to give up their barbarous human rights violators.

There was no "human" anything in 1861. US LAW, SCOTUS, CONGRESS... ALL said slaves were property owned by their property owner. They ALL said slaves were not humans with rights. This WAS the LAW... for 87 years before the CSA existed.

It did not end with the Civil War. The Constitution of the United States of America had to be amended!

Thank dog the Union intervened and put an end to that crazy beloved Southern legal Human Trafficking shit for good, eh?

No... Actually, smart ass... Thank God for the South revolting and causing a war in which the issue of slavery had to be resolved by the United States government who couldn't seem to do it without a war.

That was weird how you blamed the south not wanting to give up slavery on the US government.

 

[cnm]

You think white supremacy is false???

Are we to take it you are a white supremacist?

 

[cnm]

You support affirmative action and that makes YOU the racist. I'm the anti-racist.

So now you're not a white supremacist?