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

[Lonestar_logic]

Your concession is duly noted.

So now you are trying to suggest that the reports and articles of this speech are figments of the reporter's imagination???...stop being a willfully dumb ass.

Not at all, I'm saying that it wasn't as accurate as some believe, Stephens himself said the reporters article was inaccurate in some of the things he said. To better understand what Stephens was speaking about is to better understand the man himself. He actually voted against secession in the convention, he believed that whites were superior and subordination was natural and normal. He believed it was the duty of the superior race to provide work, food, and housing for blacks. Almost every one of his slaves chose to remain working for him after emancipation for little or no money and these servants stayed with him until his death.

Link...to the bolded.
Slaves too afraid and ignorant to live freely says nothing of the benevolence of slave holders...any other suggestion is plain stupid.
If I beat a dog enough times for running from it's cage and then finally decide to set it free, what will it do???

It's been linked to already in one of my previous posts.

You're equating slaves to dogs? How liberal democratic of you.

Yes I'm equating their treatment to that of dogs...your ignorance of the treatment of chattel slaves is mind numbing...how Republican of you.
Now back to that Cornerstone speech...

How many dogs have you beaten? Did they stay or run away?

 

[reconmark]

Not at all, I'm saying that it wasn't as accurate as some believe, Stephens himself said the reporters article was inaccurate in some of the things he said. To better understand what Stephens was speaking about is to better understand the man himself. He actually voted against secession in the convention, he believed that whites were superior and subordination was natural and normal. He believed it was the duty of the superior race to provide work, food, and housing for blacks. Almost every one of his slaves chose to remain working for him after emancipation for little or no money and these servants stayed with him until his death.

Ooops! Stephens not only said they were fighting over slavery, Stephens actually doubled down on his cornerstone speech. His issue was was not with the reporter. He was concerned that it made it seem like he speaking badly about the founding fathers. You stay looking like an idiot.

Alexander Stephens Reinforces The Cornerstone CIVIL WAR MEMORY




Here is where he doubles down on saying slavery was the reason the losers went to war.

"The order of subordination was nature’s great law; philosophy taught that order as the normal condition of the African amongst European races. Upon this recognized principle of a proper subordination, let it be called slavery or what not, our State institutions were formed and rested. The new Confederation was entered into with this distinct understanding."

They will also try to tell you that there is absolutely nothing racist about the idea of "proper subordination" or the flags that flew for that cause. These fools have themselves completely twisted up trying to spin this.

The US flag flew over slave states as well. Want to ban that flag too?

The U.S. Flag was never the standard for idiots attempting to cede from the union in a quest to maintain chattel slavery...not even a nice try on your part.

Now back to your lies concerning the cornerstone speech...

Wow..... another idiot that thinks that ninety percent of southerners would go to war to benefit the ten percent of slaveholders.

Wow...another failed attempt at deflection.

 

[reconmark]

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Ooops! Stephens not only said they were fighting over slavery, Stephens actually doubled down on his cornerstone speech. His issue was was not with the reporter. He was concerned that it made it seem like he speaking badly about the founding fathers. You stay looking like an idiot.

Alexander Stephens Reinforces The Cornerstone CIVIL WAR MEMORY




Here is where he doubles down on saying slavery was the reason the losers went to war.

"The order of subordination was nature’s great law; philosophy taught that order as the normal condition of the African amongst European races. Upon this recognized principle of a proper subordination, let it be called slavery or what not, our State institutions were formed and rested. The new Confederation was entered into with this distinct understanding."

They will also try to tell you that there is absolutely nothing racist about the idea of "proper subordination" or the flags that flew for that cause. These fools have themselves completely twisted up trying to spin this.

The US flag flew over slave states as well. Want to ban that flag too?

The U.S. Flag was never the standard for idiots attempting to cede from the union in a quest to maintain chattel slavery...not even a nice try on your part.

Now back to your lies concerning the cornerstone speech...

Wow..... another idiot that thinks that ninety percent of southerners would go to war to benefit the ten percent of slaveholders.

Wow...another failed attempt at deflection.

Truth is a deflection? Only to a liberal moron.

 

[reconmark]

They will also try to tell you that there is absolutely nothing racist about the idea of "proper subordination" or the flags that flew for that cause. These fools have themselves completely twisted up trying to spin this.

The US flag flew over slave states as well. Want to ban that flag too?

The U.S. Flag was never the standard for idiots attempting to cede from the union in a quest to maintain chattel slavery...not even a nice try on your part.

Now back to your lies concerning the cornerstone speech...

Wow..... another idiot that thinks that ninety percent of southerners would go to war to benefit the ten percent of slaveholders.

Wow...another failed attempt at deflection.

Truth is a deflection? Only to a liberal moron.

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.

 

[Asclepias]

"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. [Applause.] This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. "
-Alexander Stephenson

We'll never know what is exact words were. What you presented was a reporters take on what was said.

Here are his exact words prior to the cornerstone address.

"The great truth, I repeat, upon which our system rests, is the inferiority of the African. The enemies of our institutions ignore this truth. They set out with the assumption that the races are equal; that the negro is equal to the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be legitimate. But their premises being false, their conclusions are false also."
-Alexander Stephens April 23 1861 before the Virginia Seccession Convention

Here are his words after the cornerstone address where he clarified he had no issue with the reporter.

"I did not say, nor do I think the reporter represented me as saying, that there was the slightest change in the new Constitution from the old regarding the status of the African race amongst us."
-Alexander Stephens

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.

The opinion that blacks not being equal to the white man was shared by many during that time. That of course doesn't make it right, but you do have to understand the times.

Africans sold other Africans into slavery, that is an irrefutable fact. Of course ignorant people like to think that whites went and kidnapped these poor souls out of their mud huts.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. [Applause.] This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. "
-Alexander Stephenson

We'll never know what is exact words were. What you presented was a reporters take on what was said.

Here are his exact words prior to the cornerstone address.

"The great truth, I repeat, upon which our system rests, is the inferiority of the African. The enemies of our institutions ignore this truth. They set out with the assumption that the races are equal; that the negro is equal to the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be legitimate. But their premises being false, their conclusions are false also."
-Alexander Stephens April 23 1861 before the Virginia Seccession Convention

Here are his words after the cornerstone address where he clarified he had no issue with the reporter.

"I did not say, nor do I think the reporter represented me as saying, that there was the slightest change in the new Constitution from the old regarding the status of the African race amongst us."
-Alexander Stephens

I've already acknowledged he believed blacks to be inferior. Try to keep up.

 

[reconmark]

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.

The opinion that blacks not being equal to the white man was shared by many during that time. That of course doesn't make it right, but you do have to understand the times.

Africans sold other Africans into slavery, that is an irrefutable fact. Of course ignorant people like to think that whites went and kidnapped these poor souls out of their mud huts.

Wow...yet another failed attempt at deflection...

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.[

 

[Asclepias]

"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. [Applause.] This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. "
-Alexander Stephenson

We'll never know what is exact words were. What you presented was a reporters take on what was said.

Here are his exact words prior to the cornerstone address.

"The great truth, I repeat, upon which our system rests, is the inferiority of the African. The enemies of our institutions ignore this truth. They set out with the assumption that the races are equal; that the negro is equal to the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be legitimate. But their premises being false, their conclusions are false also."
-Alexander Stephens April 23 1861 before the Virginia Seccession Convention

Here are his words after the cornerstone address where he clarified he had no issue with the reporter.

"I did not say, nor do I think the reporter represented me as saying, that there was the slightest change in the new Constitution from the old regarding the status of the African race amongst us."
-Alexander Stephens

I've already acknowledged he believed blacks to be inferior. Try to keep up.

You've also acknowledged you were ignorant. What does that have to do with the fact that Stephens himself admitted he had no issue with the reporters representation of what he said?

 

[MikeK]

Yes, it was about slavery. The confederacy wanted to secede from the union - willing to fight against their own country, fellow citizens, even family - in order preserve what they percieved as their right to keep slaves.

Try thinking about this from the perspective of an average Union Army soldier. Do you believe these very ordinary individuals chose to wear a uniform, to endure the miseries of life in the field, and to tolerate the imposing risk of death or dismemberment for the sake of abolishing slavery in the South? Do you truly believe more than a tiny percentage of individual Union soldiers were actually willing to leave their homes and hearths to free the slaves?

Would you do it? If so, then you are among a very tiny minority of fanatical idealists. If you doubt that, try calling for a vote from this forum's male participants and project from the percentage.

 

[reconmark]

Yes, it was about slavery. The confederacy wanted to secede from the union - willing to fight against their own country, fellow citizens, even family - in order preserve what they percieved as their right to keep slaves.

Try thinking about this from the presumptive perspective of the average soldier in the Union Army. Do you believe these ordinary individuals chose to wear a uniform, endure the miseries of life in the field and tolerate the imposing risk of death or dismemberment for the sake of abolishing slavery in the South? Do you truly believe more than a tiny percentage of individual Union soldiers really and truly were willing to leave their homes and hearths to free the slaves?

Would you do it? If so, then you are among a very tiny minority of fanatical idealists. If you doubt that, try calling for a vote from this forum's male participants and project from the percentage.

Not very clever of you...simply a little bait and switch.
The question is the fact that the South went to war to maintain and expand the institution of chattel slavery.
It's plainly a matter of fact and record.

 

[Asclepias]

Yes, it was about slavery. The confederacy wanted to secede from the union - willing to fight against their own country, fellow citizens, even family - in order preserve what they percieved as their right to keep slaves.

Try thinking about this from the presumptive perspective of the average soldier in the Union Army. Do you believe these ordinary individuals chose to wear a uniform, endure the miseries of life in the field and tolerate the imposing risk of death or dismemberment for the sake of abolishing slavery in the South? Do you truly believe more than a tiny percentage of individual Union soldiers really and truly were willing to leave their homes and hearths to free the slaves?

Would you do it? If so, then you are among a very tiny minority of fanatical idealists. If you doubt that, try calling for a vote from this forum's male participants and project from the percentage.

Thats a weird question seeing that soldiers have gone overseas to fight wars and fight in conflicts. Why would soldiers go fight in the Korean war for instance?

The average solider in the loser confederate army was white trash. Therefore there is no doubt in my mind they would fight for slavery until they had to confront their cowardice.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.

The opinion that blacks not being equal to the white man was shared by many during that time. That of course doesn't make it right, but you do have to understand the times.

Africans sold other Africans into slavery, that is an irrefutable fact. Of course ignorant people like to think that whites went and kidnapped these poor souls out of their mud huts.

Wow...yet another failed attempt at deflection...

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.[

You think repeating yourself is going to make a difference?

Fact is, slavery was an acceptable practice at one time. While there were those that disagreed with the practice, it was perfectly legal. Deal with it.

 

[Asclepias]

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.

The opinion that blacks not being equal to the white man was shared by many during that time. That of course doesn't make it right, but you do have to understand the times.

Africans sold other Africans into slavery, that is an irrefutable fact. Of course ignorant people like to think that whites went and kidnapped these poor souls out of their mud huts.

Wow...yet another failed attempt at deflection...

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.[

You think repeating yourself is going to make a difference?

Fact is, slavery was an acceptable practice at one time. While there were those that disagreed with the practice, it was perfectly legal. Deal with it.

Your concession has been noted for now the 3rd time.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.

The opinion that blacks not being equal to the white man was shared by many during that time. That of course doesn't make it right, but you do have to understand the times.

Africans sold other Africans into slavery, that is an irrefutable fact. Of course ignorant people like to think that whites went and kidnapped these poor souls out of their mud huts.

Wow...yet another failed attempt at deflection...

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.[

You think repeating yourself is going to make a difference?

Fact is, slavery was an acceptable practice at one time. While there were those that disagreed with the practice, it was perfectly legal. Deal with it.

Your concession has been noted for now the 3rd time.

The only person conceding is you. Face the fact, your people were the first slave owners. Assuming you can trace your people back more than one generation.

 

[Asclepias]

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.

The opinion that blacks not being equal to the white man was shared by many during that time. That of course doesn't make it right, but you do have to understand the times.

Africans sold other Africans into slavery, that is an irrefutable fact. Of course ignorant people like to think that whites went and kidnapped these poor souls out of their mud huts.

Wow...yet another failed attempt at deflection...

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.[

You think repeating yourself is going to make a difference?

Fact is, slavery was an acceptable practice at one time. While there were those that disagreed with the practice, it was perfectly legal. Deal with it.

Your concession has been noted for now the 3rd time.

The only person conceding is you. Face the fact, your people were the first slave owners. Assuming you can trace your people back more than one generation.

Your concession has now been summarily accepted. Good day.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

The opinion that blacks not being equal to the white man was shared by many during that time. That of course doesn't make it right, but you do have to understand the times.

Africans sold other Africans into slavery, that is an irrefutable fact. Of course ignorant people like to think that whites went and kidnapped these poor souls out of their mud huts.

Wow...yet another failed attempt at deflection...

Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the “storm came and the wind blew, it fell.” Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.[

You think repeating yourself is going to make a difference?

Fact is, slavery was an acceptable practice at one time. While there were those that disagreed with the practice, it was perfectly legal. Deal with it.

Your concession has been noted for now the 3rd time.

The only person conceding is you. Face the fact, your people were the first slave owners. Assuming you can trace your people back more than one generation.

Your concession has now been summarily accepted. Good day.

Your ignorance as well as your stupidity is once again on full display. Congratulations!

 

[MikeK]

Not very clever of you...simply a little bait and switch.
The question is the fact that the South went to war to maintain and expand the institution of chattel slavery.
It's plainly a matter of fact and record.

That is absolute nonsense.

If it is as you say a "matter of fact and record," document that absurd statement. Show us that record.

 

[PredFan]

And this:

Here's a question you MAY be intelligent enough to answer.
Where in ANY African culture was "Chattel" slavery practiced???
Where in the American south was chattel slavery NOT practiced???

That is irrelevant.

Of course you would think it's irrelevant when it makes your prior post an exercise in ignorance...

No moron, it's irrelevant because it has nothing to do with my post. That is what "irrelevant" means idiot.