725 replies to this topic

[Rob Randall]

I'm not sure I want to know what you guys are getting at.

[Victoria Watcher]

that history especially relatively ancient history in terms of modern civilization is hard to figure out.  don't believe everything you read from one historian.  

 

we think communicate and socialize so differently than anybody in 1865 why even pretend to know what they thought.  

 

but if you do want an insight read their letters their own words.

 

i mentioned earlier these were not regular fill-time forces - told to go to war for this specific reason or that - most were militia and mercenary men that signed up once things got going and for an amazingly vast variety of reasons - both north and south. slavery issues being one for some.  excitement/action being also a big motivator in war. that's why 90% of WW1 recruits signed up.  action, adventure.  blowing up things, firing guns.  young men love that stuff.  paycheck too?  sign me up.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 21 August 2018 - 07:05 PM.

[Benezet]

I will soon read what I didn't to make sure I haven't missed anything.
...
Guns: now who invented those again? The Chinese we are told invented gunpowder, but then did nothing much with it.

Looking forward to discussing zebra domestication with you. Also, thanks for inspiring me to read up on the history of gunpowder.

[North Shore]

Looking forward to discussing zebra domestication with you. Also, thanks for inspiring me to read up on the history of gunpowder.

 I found this book fascinating: 'Gunpowder: Alchemy, Bombards and Pyrotechnics' by Jack Kelley

 

Also Stephen Bown does a great job on Dynamite in: 'A Most Damnable Invention'

[Jason-L]

I believe most of the “Slave South” who were in power were Democrats.

It was Democrats who advocated for slavery, not Republicans.

You understand of course that the Democratic Party underway a major shift in support and direction in the 1940s and 1950s, culminating in the bulk of the Southern Democrats shifting to Republicans in the 1960s over the Civil Rights and school integration and revoking Jim Crow laws and such? Also that political parties undergo policy shifts over time, and rarely are the same entity after two hundred years.

 

And that should be Slave South, no quotes.  The Southern states of the United States were slave-holding, and fought a treasonous war in defense of slavery, so it's not a euphemism or an ironic designation.

Edited by Jason-L, 22 August 2018 - 06:55 AM.

[spanky123]

You understand of course that the Democratic Party underway a major shift in support and direction in the 1940s and 1950s, culminating in the bulk of the Southern Democrats shifting to Republicans in the 1960s over the Civil Rights and school integration and revoking Jim Crow laws and such? Also that political parties undergo policy shifts over time, and rarely are the same entity after two hundred years.

 

And that should be Slave South, no quotes.  The Southern states of the United States were slave-holding, and fought a treasonous war in defense of slavery, so it's not a euphemism or an ironic designation.

 

The problem with your argument is that several Northern states allowed slavery as well. 

[dasmo]

I think you can remove individual soldiers from the debate. It’s a given that they aren’t evil, even if they are fighting for evil....

[Jason-L]

The problem with your argument is that several Northern states allowed slavery as well. 

Except they didn't fight a treasonous war in defense of slavery.

[RFS]

The Southern states of the United States were slave-holding, and fought a treasonous war

Kind of a minor detail but was it actually treason? They regarded themselves as a new country and had renounced USA citizenships and in fact went to war against USA as a foreign nation. If it was treason then so was the American rebellion against the british

[Victoria Watcher]

I think you can remove individual soldiers from the debate. It’s a given that they aren’t evil, even if they are fighting for evil....

 

i indicated though these were not career soldiers.  they signed up for the most part.  that's totally different than contemporary 1st-world war.  so you do have to think about individual motivations.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 22 August 2018 - 08:27 AM.

[dasmo]

i indicated though these were not career soldiers. they signed up for the most part. that's totally different than contemporary 1st-world war. so you do have to think about individual motivations.

And as you said, motivation will be all over the map so some individual letters are interesting to personify those involved but it’s meaningless to a debate about what the war was about... For that you need to look at letters from the war makers....

[todd]

The guy directing me to the security lineups at the airport the other day ask me what city I was going to I reply "victoria" he said “that's where they're removing the statue” I replied “i don't really know what to think about that” I don't really want to talk about it after that.

[Cassidy]

You understand of course that the Democratic Party underway a major shift in support and direction in the 1940s and 1950s, culminating in the bulk of the Southern Democrats shifting to Republicans in the 1960s over the Civil Rights and school integration and revoking Jim Crow laws and such? Also that political parties undergo policy shifts over time, and rarely are the same entity after two hundred years.

 

And that should be Slave South, no quotes.  The Southern states of the United States were slave-holding, and fought a treasonous war in defense of slavery, so it's not a euphemism or an ironic designation.

OF COURSE I UNDERSTAND, did not the very fact that I had this little nugget of information tucked away in my head indicate to you that I was aware of the Republican/Democrat relationship to slavery?

 

And "yes" I will continue to put "slave South" in quotes, as it is indeed a euphemism for animalistic, brutal, inhuman, egotistic treatment of human beings for no reason other than the colour of their skin.

 

Now ... a correction for you. 

The Civil War had nothing to do with treason, they were secessionists. They weren't trying to overthrow the government of the Union, they had seceded and formed their own government, had their own flag, and declared their own independence ... you know, just like the United States of America did with the British when they perceived the British were treating them badly.

 

If you're going to try and give folks history lessons ... please do take the time to learn the history first.

[Sparky]

Ok let's dial this down a little please. It's a nasty topic that is drifting away from the intent of the thread and creating emotions that although are understandable, perhaps should be vetted elsewhere. 

[Victoria Watcher]

culminating in the bulk of the Southern Democrats shifting to Republicans in the 1960s over the Civil Rights and school integration and revoking Jim Crow laws and such? 

 

You need to read more detail.  only 3 switched over.  helms, godwin and thurmond.  not the bulk.

[Wayne]

https://www.huffingt...oll_a_23518102/

'Fifty-five per cent of those polled said the statue shouldn't have been removed. Twenty-five per cent were in favour of the decision, while 20 per cent were unsure.'

[Victoria Watcher]

so those that would keep it outnumber the others 2-1.  

[tjv]

I believe most of the “Slave South” who were in power were Democrats.

It was Democrats who advocated for slavery, not Republicans.

yes very true, Lincoln, a Republican, ran on an anti-slavery ticket

 

You understand of course that the Democratic Party underway a major shift in support and direction in the 1940s and 1950s, culminating in the bulk of the Southern Democrats shifting to Republicans in the 1960s over the Civil Rights and school integration and revoking Jim Crow laws and such? Also that political parties undergo policy shifts over time, and rarely are the same entity after two hundred years.

 

And that should be Slave South, no quotes.  The Southern states of the United States were slave-holding, and fought a treasonous war in defense of slavery, so it's not a euphemism or an ironic designation.

Perhaps you should listen to the most famous Democrat speech of the 1960's by George Wallace

 

Yes there was a slave south at one point, just as there was a slave north and a slave Canada too.  Even the Canadian First Nations practiced slavery

[tjv]

I'd also like to see Helps and Council removed in the same way the Sir John A statue was removed, and then when they are done put the statue back

[Bingo]

I'd also like to see Helps and Council removed in the same way the Sir John A statue was removed, and then when they are done put the statue back

 

The place to put the homeless Sir John A.statue could be in the next homeless tent city.

Edited by Bingo, 09 September 2018 - 03:56 PM.