Forums | MacLife

oatmeal wrote:

Very interesting.  It's still not a link to any proof of your "woulda freed the slaves claim."

I learned the very same thing that Mars quoted and  I understand the arguments of both sides. Many in the South understood that slavery was a doomed institution that would necessarily end. The South proposed a plan that would gradually free slaves while softening the economic and social blow. The North demanded the freedom of all slaves: Now.

The analogy is that if a court determines new evidence proves a convicted criminal is indeed innocent, then you let him go: Now, not over time.

Anyway, my argument here is not about Southern heritage, the 'real' reason for the Civil War, slavery versus states rights, or racism. The only argument I have posited is against flying enemy flags over US government and public buildings.

Last edited by Robert B. (2005-07-07 10:52 am)

That was, of course, a statement worded in a general manner in regards to one group, one plan, when in fact there were several groups and several proposed plans, not all of which were focused on freeing slaves.

Don't take me for a Southern apologist.

Robert B. wrote:

Don't take me for a Southern apologist.

I don't. I am merely asking, since you seem to be knowledgeable on this little known issue, if this '10-year plan' was at all a popular idea in The South or if it was viewed as stupid and traitorous by most people. In other words, the plan may have existed and even put forward by some Southerners, but if the South as a whole would have refused to adhere by it anyway...

Less that 7% of the population in the Sputh owned slaves, yet the north equates all of the southerners as slave owners.

Funny how that works when MANY of the large plantations were owned by northerners who actually owned the slaves too brought in from Rhode Island.

How about the north was so sanctimonious that didn't release their slaves until the passing of the 13th amendment either.

Despite the fact that the Civil War was orchestrated by rich slave holders, The average Johnny Reb was a poverty-stricken dirt farmer and didn't own slaves. It was another case of poor men fighting on the behalf of rich men for causes they didn't fully comprehend.

Props to most people on the thread!  It is wonderful to see that our education systems are working.  NokX's latest campaign to replace reality with nonsense is falling flat on its face. 

Robert was wondering why we keep seeing these attempts to distort the history of the Confederate flag.  Because the 'ain't nuthin' wrong with that there flag' rubric is the camel's nose.  If the falsehoods about it are successfully sold, the whole retrograde package of neo-Confederates, including segregation and even secession, becomes more acceptable.  I don't expect either to happen, but keeping the notion we can turn back the hands of time alive thwarts progress.

Mars_Attacks wrote:

Why is there no mention of the South's 1865 plan of over 10 years to free the slaves and slowly integrate them into society?

The North's unthinking voting block demanded immediate release regardless of the economic or social consequenses, just out of spite.

Because it isn't true, as Oatmeal suspects.  Near the end of the Civil War (this Southerner prefers that name)  the South was desperate.  Some of the leaders briefly considered making slaves soldiers or claiming that they also intended to free slaves to stop the massive escapes of slaves from the plantations.  But, nothing came of those late musings.  The one attempt to field a group of slave soldiers was laughed off the streets of Richmond.  The people were right.   The cornerstone of the Confederacy was slavery.  But for the goal of maintaining slavery, the South would never have seceded from the Union in the first place.  A Confederacy without slaves would have been pointless.  Robert E. Lee, during his years at Washington and Lee, wrote some revisionist memoirs in which he claimed not to ever have believed in slavery and mentioned vague intentions to free slaves eventually (which often means never).   

Nor is it remotely true that only seven percent of Southerners owned slaves.   At least 30 percent of Southern families owned slaves at the time of the Civil War.  Others had owned at least one slave at some point or leased slaves.  The degree of ownership varied by state:

Mississippi 49%

Louisiana 29%

Kentucky  23%

S.Carolina  46%

Texas 28%

Arkansas  20%

Georgia 37%

N. Carolina  28%

Missouri 13%

Alabama 35%

Virginia 26%

Maryland  12%

Florida 34%

Tennessee 25%

Delaware 3%

http://members.aol.com/jfepperson/stat.html


The misinformation Mars_Attacks posted is propaganda from the Sons of Confederate Veterans.  Reading it, you will discover that the North was responsible for slavery, racism and the Civil War.  (Apparently, Southern whites were sitting around polishing their halos.)  If you are a fool, you will believe what you have discovered is true. 

http://www.scv674.org/SH-3.htm

I'm sure that Mars_Attacks can find a book that says many inaccurate things about slavery, the Civil War and Reconstruction.  There is a small, but much hyped 'library' of neo-Confederate apologia, most of it published by a few small presses set up for that purpose.  One is called Apologia.

One People's Project has a good primer on H.K. Edgerton, the mentally disabled black man who is used as a mascot by the neo-Confederates.  It includes the photo I referred to above.  The fact that NokX selected Edgerton as an African-American to be praised is rather telling.



Good caption:  White supremacists Kirk Lyons, left and Neill Payne, right pretend they are Klansmen along with Edgerton, who is giving the term handkerchief head whole new meaning.

http://www.onepeoplesproject.com/index. … ;Itemid=29

Last edited by Podesta (2005-07-08 3:38 pm)

Ribotorus wrote:

So basically, NokX's original post is based on a well known propaganda effort by supremasists, and Mars Attack's notions of slavery ownership and the goodwill of the South to free the slaves in their own good time according to some plan, is bogus.

Exactly, Rib.  But let's give'em an E for effort.

Last edited by Podesta (2005-07-07 5:45 pm)