Here is a very interesting fact

And within two generations the Democrats will have airbrushed their evil history. Sometimes we need reminders of where they erred.

 

Good point. Demand that from the Democrats who brought all of that about.

 

Were they republicans/ If so they must have had an ulterior motive.

 

No, it won't be airbrushed. The truth will finally be told.

 

Democrats were not the only ones who oppressed African-Americans back in the day. Plenty of Republicans did too.

 

Well ignorance is bliss so they say Don't you have a statue of Southern Democrat to topple or something

 

And DO TELL, why were the Southern Democrats wanting to secede from the Union?

 

You think I want statues toppled? Yes...I guess ignorance really IS bliss...

Taking down statues is beyond asinine.

 

. . . Did you read the post you just quoted? Try again.

 

I got it right

​

 

Yes. If you'd like, I can tag you the next time I have a debate about this with someone on the far right. They prefer to bury this history and claim that slavery wasn't the primary cause of secession. I'll probably start a thread dedicated to it soon, if only so I can just link people to it when they engage in the usual historical revisionism. I've continuously cited primary sources, and they always run away and call me a dirty liberal for reporting historical facts.

 

No thanks, I made a point, you dodged it, good nuff for me

Carry on!

 

You made the exact same point that I made. That isn't a "dodge." That's just quoting someone and then being disingenuous about their post in order to claim credit for a point that they actually made to begin with. You are out of your league here, bud. I've spent a lot more time pushing this point than you have, and even when you lie and say I'm dodging the point, you do so while directly quoting me making the exact same point. Is basic honesty and literacy really too much to hope for? Apparently so. Agreed, if you can't be honest, then carry on.

It takes a special kind of desperate trolling to claim that someone "dodged" a question simply because they answered it before you actually asked it to begin with. Sad.

There is no one on this forum who has spent more time making the case that secession was about slavery than I have. None. Period.

 

Cotton farmers were angry at having to split revenues with a government they did not agree with. Overall the same was true for all Southern-made products. Economic independence over what they viewed as colonial oppression.

 

Funny how every primary source we have from the time period that goes into any specifics at all says that the primary issue was slavery. Yes, they viewed all threats to slavery as "oppression."

 

You need better sources. "Every primary source we have" tells me zilch. Nada.

 

The Declarations of Causes, letters from the secession commissioners, the Cornerstone Speech, the explicit white supremacist intent behind the design of the Confederate Flag, and this is also incontrovertibly implied by the Crittenden Compromise. Again, every time a primary source from the South at the time period goes into specifics, the explicit cause was slavery. Every time. We have no sources from the time period pointing to any other specific primary cause. None. There's a reason why the primary way that they chose to identify themselves was "the slave states" and not "the cotton states."

 

Sorry. Never heard of anything like those obscure references. But then again I am from Michigan, which strongly backed freedom from slavery. And we were also taught it was the economy. Odd how grievance-mongers accomplish nothing, blaming it on slavery.

 

Frankly, if you "haven't heard anything like [these] obscure references," then you haven't studied this topic at all.

Aside from the letters from secession commissioners, none of these are "obscure references." Everyone who has studied any primary source at all (and clearly you have studied none) regarding the causes of secession has studied these sources. The Cornerstone Speech was a speech by the Vice President of the CSA about the primary causes of the CSA; it is one of the most well-known pieces of Southern writing from the time period . . . if not the most well-known. The Declarations of Causes were . . . what the seceding states wrote in order to declare their causes for secession. Neither are remotely "obscure." They are well known to anyone who has bothered to study this subject at all. At least those willing to consult history instead of just repeat what a teacher told them. And no one can claim to have done any homework at all on the Civil War if they haven't read about the Crittenden Compromise . . . Congress's last-ditch effort to prevent further secession and avoid war after South Carolina left.

Also, how could the ****ing flag of the CSA itself be an "obscure source"?

I guess I should add another source: the Constitution of the CSA itself. Or is that too obscure as well?

What you were taught was a lie. The Southern states (who actually called themselves "the slave states") blamed it on slavery. The difference here is that you have apparently read nothing from the time period and are instead just repeating what your teacher told you, whereas I'm solely basing my opinion regarding the South's motives on what they actually had to say about themselves about their motives. Not sure why you would find that controversial.

The most "obscure" thing I mentioned were the letters and speeches of secession commissioners. These were people appointed by states who had already seceded in order to try to convince other states to secede. Most people haven't read them, so I guess you could call them obscure, but to claim that they don't matter is pure insanity.

 

He was killed. We all saw it.

An unarmed handcuffed man had a knee put on his neck for nearly NINE minutes while begging for his life...and he died because of it.

Just stop

 

Some people don't care about 8th Amendment violations, even when they pretend to care about other crimes. They are curiously selective about their supposed passion for the rule of law.

 

Interesting.

So since nobody now-a-days was a slave, then they have no qualms.

 

lol @ the left trying to distance themselves from the fact that historically Democrats have been absolutely awful to the blacks.

 

A larger part of the reason for the fighting was not about the slaves, but about the rights of the states to sucede from the union.