Respect for the Confederacy?

Why do you fight proven history?

Have you forgot that Abe massed troops at DC and sent them to war at The area called Manassas?

You make comments yet do not try to prove them. I know this history very well.

I have been to a good many actual Civil War battle sites and listen to the experts as well as have a bevy of excellent history books

 

What are your plans to express true history? So far you have refused to make your case including proof.

 

They are apologizing for what Abe Lincoln did to this nation. And doing a lousy job of apologizing for his transgressions.

 

The American flag at half staff is honoring somebody. The battle flag of VA is not flying half staff since it is not honoring some human.

 

Abe Lincoln was clearly a white supremacist. A white supremacist fighting others of like mind.

 

My claim was that the South seceded over slavery. I've provided sources. I can provide more. Where are you still confused?

 

Kk. Care to actually address the post? We both know the answer is no.

 

Because I admitted that slavery was an issue, but that economics also played a role, which you denied.

Duh.

 

He didn't want to free the slaves. He wanted to send them back to Africa.

You were good with that solution?

 

You are waging a war against yourself. Nobody says they did not secede due to wanting to preserve slavery. Everybody knows that.

So we must examine what were Abe's plans over slavery.

Historian Donald Herbert the top historian of that era reports that Abe wanted to dump slaves out of the USA at various locations. And he wanted to borrow money to buy slaves so he could get rid of them.

 

Also Abe was willing to deport Slaves to Central America plus some of the Caribbean islands. This is history.

 

I admitted that economics played a role IN THE SLAVERY CONCERN, slavery receiving top billing and economics only showing up as a concern ABOUT slavery.

I'll try to dumb this down as much as possible:

* Slavery was the main issue.
* There were many concerns about slavery (the main issue). Some of those were economic.
* There were economic concerns, but those were about slavery.
* There were more slavery concerns than just economic ones, but the economic concerns were about slavery.

Please repeat the above until it sinks in, then try drawing a Venn Diagram. (Hint: big circle "Slavery," little circle inside slavery "Economics"). Most of us learned how to do this by middle school.

 

Liberia was the destination for blacks under Lincoln.

Back on the ships, black folks.

 

If you would bother to read the thread, then you would see that yes, in fact, people have denied this. That's who I'm debating. Understand now?

 

This thread seems to be about not condemning the confederacy.
Can anyone tell me why anyone would want to praise the confederacy?

 

Blah blah blah.

Economics was the main issue. Otherwise, southerners would have given up slavery for a tractor.

 

This seems to be about bashing the confederacy. Can anyone tell us why we'd want to praise the north when they wanted to take all the blacks and send them to Liberia?

 

Due to the massive death toll it is fair to blame Lincoln. Abe had the authority and power to simply refuse to invade VA.

 

Already disproven. Slavery was the main issue. They said it was the main issue (a fact you still have yet to address). Economics only played a role BECAUSE slaves were ther primary economic issue.

Pop quiz, what did the Confederates call the "Cornerstone" of the Confederacy, economics or slavery?

 

You've only disproven yourself.

 

You've only proven your refusal to read, despite having been asked to read multiple times, despite refusing to read even the sources you've requested. This explains where the whole Lost Cause movement comes from: an unwillingness to learn.

 

Quote a single contradiction. Just quote. Simple request. You've asked for research that you refuse to read, but you can't even cite posts from THIS THREAD.

 

Scroll up. Your posts are full of them. The civil war was ONLY about slavery. The civil war was about economics AND slavery, etc.

You've taken about every different side of this discussion you can, lol.

 

Yes! Tear down the Lincoln Memorial. And the Jefferson memorial too. Neither one of them did enough apologizing for slavery. And while we're on the subject how are those reparations payments coming Nancy and Chuck? We need to get it done while we control both houses of the legislature.

 

Secession was about slavery. There were economic concerns about slavery . . . which would mean they are still about slavery. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to put that together, just someone who can draw a Venn Diagram.

You've accused me of contradicting myself and I've asked you, repeatedly, to quote me doing so. When you asked me for citations for my claims, I obliged . . . and you refused to address said citations. Now I'm asking you for citations for your claims, which I'd be glad to (unlike you) actually address, but you refuse. You can make up bull **** about "different sides" all you want, but you've been challenged to produce evidence for your claims, and you run away every time. Would it kill you to be intellectually honest for even one post?