Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Battle flag uproar

Yep.



In their OWN WORDS, the major freedom they were concerned about was the freedom to keep one third of their population in chattel slavery and the freedom to expand that system.



And half a million Americans were willing to die to preserve the Union, even if it meant doing those things. I would have been among that number.




Yet no outrage at all that a small proportion of the Southern population were able to pervert so much, so that all of those Southern soldiers wre dying for a document as foul as the Southern Constitution?

Ya know, there are all sorts of "rich people", heck your average American IS rich compared to most of the World's population.

More power to 'em, rich people provide jobs and can accomplish much good.

More irony here... Implicit in your statement is an assumption that the wealthy plantation society of the Antebellum South typified "rich people" everywhere.

An absurdity of course.




Few "support" these things, not even a Lincoln, the old status quo was restored as soon as possible. Another irony being had not a certain degenerate Southerner assassinated Lincoln, Reconstruction would have been less onerous.

As for the rest, what WE would do today?

Two things would have to happen......

About twenty states would have to initiate a system where one third of their population was held in absolute degradation supported by a specifically rewritten "Constitution" .

and....

They would all have to decide to leave the United States.

Birdwatcher

I always get this cliche too

I grew up in a still all-White England, lived for three years in an all-Black Africa, and have spent nearly the last thirty in a place where eight out of ten folks (Hispanics) are genetically mostly American Indian.

It has been my experience that one of the things that makes people all alike is the universal conviction that they themselves are somehow different.

I think racial pretensions are among the most pathetic of our vanities, and I'm dead-set against race-based anything; quotas, affirmative action, "hate" crimes legislation, the works....


OK, what else ya got?

Just agree to disagree, since no amount of dialog or the citing of data from that long ago time is going to change anyone's mind. And, since the American Civil War was decided over 150 years ago, nothing said or done today will change the out come or all things, both good and bad, that came out of it.

Regardless of what you believe to be the "real" truth, you're right.

Or so it seems to me.

No, the absolutely appalling stat is that one in three Southerners was enslaved by the other two-thirds.

And the recent link I provided states that HALF of all Southerners were either a slave, or from a slave-owning family.

Nothing except you are liberal and not worth any more time and consideration on my part.

You find it necessary justification to speak in absolutes when it suits you? But in exception when needed.

1/2 the population were either slaves of from a slave owning family, which, given 1/3 were slaves, that must mean 1/6 of the south were slave owning families.

That leaves a 3 to 1 ratio of whitey's that didn't have slaves, and yet, again, it was all about slavery....

BIRD WATCHER

you disparage the south over slavery, yet lincoln, us grant, the northern and the non rebellion states get a pass.
You also must think blacks were treated as a whole far worse than indians...

Lets see blacks who were enslaved in africa by blacks, sold to live here vs indians living free here, made to leave their native land and massacred by the thousands...

So which was worse?

Does old glory have any room to throw stones at the battle flag or does it too live in a glass house? And if so, wont the "offended" come calling for it in the future as well....?

I'll answer all three at once.

RWE, Mexico is not the United States. The United States is my country, Mexico is not.

Now for the American Indian versus slave question...

Who was better off?

There are numerous cases of slaves running off to join the Indians, not many of Indians running off to join the slaves (a few IIRC in the Eighteenth Century, back East, but only in the last stages of desperation).

Worth noting is the role of Black Seminoles in the Seminole War. In that conflict at least a few hundred former slaves or descendants of the same actually bore arms against the forces of the United States. Even more remarkable yet, they were allowed to remove to the Indian Territory WHILE STILL BEARING ARMS. The closest thing to a successful slave insurrection in our history.

As to the treatment of "the Indians".... "the Indians" themselves did not see themselves as such, rather on the whole they were members of their own tribe, who's members were not necessarily all "Indians".

If being killed is the ultimate denial of one's rights, the sad truth is that up until the very end of our Frontier period more Indians died at the hands of other Indians then were ever killed by Whites (and disease and starvation offed far more than both those).

As for treaties, the Frontier Period encompasses a very long time, and many disparate locations. A typical pattern was a treaty being initially made in good faith, but rapid demographic changes in the form of an exploding White population changing everything.

Many treaties were made cynically, using a few compliant drunks as signers, but one of the biggest frauds was perpetrated by the Iroquois who, in order to divert White settlement from their own lands, in the Mid-Eighteen Century, sold West Virginia and Kentucky out from under the feet of the tribes who actually lived there.

So, while their ain't much to be proud of in our treatment of the Indians, I'm not recalling they were enslaved en masse on a scale remotely like that of our African slavery.

In fact, lots of Indians even owned slaves, tho not often under the absolute terms of American chattel slavery....

Birdwatcher

Irrelevant, as is governed by the first premise.



Irrelevant. Lincoln had no legal authority to take those measures and the right of a people to break away from a gov't that no longer represents them governs the point.



Irrelevant and completely off point.



Irrelevant. The right to self-determination governs; there was no legal authority in existence then to supercede the same.

Where do we invade next, "for the children"?

Your position is logically, factually, and fundamentally unsound; it is indefensible as a matter of consistency or logic and is based entirely upon revisionist justifications and "moral judgment" over the rule of law and the basic freedoms of self-determination.

As stated time and again, you have no intellectual honesty on this position because such a trait requires both consistency and logic.

But blacks that ended up here, were going to be enslaved in africa or elsewhere

Also i think black population here has increased in the last 150 years, have the indians?

Which slavemasters treated their slaves worse than the indians at the trail of tears or wounded knee?

Point of interest; in Africa I lived among the Ashantis, who made a fortune capturing and exporting their neighbors, and once a friend and I crossed ninety miles of roadless bush on foot over Ghana's Afram Plains, an area still depopulated as a result of prior slave raids.

My closest friend in my village was a WWII Veteran who had fought the Japanese in Burma (the British Gold Coast Regiment). His mother had been captured by the Ashantis as a slave.

Look, moral equivalency is irrelevant here.

We are not talking subjugation of the Indians here (tho actually too, lots of Frontier Whites were subsequently displaced as ruthlessly as any Indian), or child labor in Vietnam, or sex -slavery in Thailand.

We are talking about the War Between the States.

Birdwatcher

Really? an opinion not supported by facts...

4agers, you're endlassly swinging and missing.

I am being as concise as possible. PLease do the same.

I have been extremely concise and on point, as well as logically consistent.

You have not, and it shows.

Based upon your premise, what sovereign nation do we invade next "for the children", and how soon do you enlist and support drafting others to effect that total war invasion?

Hell, you've agreed with the logical summation of your position that I posted!

My point is its hard to tell the battle flag "youre bad", without saying equal to old glory

Certainly supported by Faith. See on Judgement Day, the fact that I used to be genetically Irish Celt will be totally irrelevant, for Eternity, and since Eternity is for a very long time, it makes everything here sorta irrelevant in the big picture, or so I believe.

As for the rest, I have met Africans who were decidedly smarter than me (many here will believe that not hard, I know ), and I have met Asians who seemed dumber (so far the Jews are doing pretty good).

Its that whole Bell Curve thing, and overlap, and deciding where one race leaves off and another begins, and the fact that while I have met lots of individuals, I have never yet met a "race".

Pertinent to this thread, the Virginia Planter Thomas Jefferson penned a principle well-worth dying for We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Not surprisingly, he was pressured by his fellow slave-owning Southerners to remove it

Jefferson's phrase to me is America in a nutshell, our founding principle, why you and me were able to come here and enjoy the lives we have had...

..and marry Germans if we want.

Birdwatcher

Jorge...opinions unsupported by facts..... that is your specialty.

Bricktop who is really Robert Brown who lives at 830 Willment Place in Edmond OK and is also using Miles Massey in his nasty attacks on members who have serious physical illnesses accompanied by 4ager who is Sean Clarkson who is using John Hopkins University computers to post here while he should be working. Brickhead is no bigshot at Oklahoma University, in fact they have never heard of him and 4ager ..... well another member whom he has attacked with lies, slander and threats is letting his misuse of JHU computers slip to the appropriate people there.
The net is closing on the lead troll, FOestology aka cat taco man. He really flipped out when it was revealed that yet another group of members have retained a P.I. to run him to ground. When the cold, hard light of truth is shown upon these cowards, they will go to ground faster than a gopher who just had it hair parted by a 22-250.
100s of active user I.D.s in place. You wimps can ban until HE double L freezes over and you still will be outed as fast as the information is acquired. THEN when you make your threats to harm other members (the last refuge of a yellow belly scum sucking dog) you will find actions have consequences.
You dolts started this fight but you will not ever finish it.
Quick now, run to Mr. Post Count aka Bin and get this user ID banned,
You have had so many banned, you have lost track. What you are too stupid to realize is that you have thrown a lot of innocents under the bus in your quest to have absolute control of the site. So instead of a few poed folks you now have a dozen plus linked by email and phone who are cooperating to ensure your miserable lives only become moreso.

We're here, (you think) we're queer, get used to it you racist, homophobic, women hating azzwipes.

So, we've added "God told me to", to the "for the children". Yep, we're on a Crusade now.

Which country do we invade next, and drive down those "infidels" all "for the children"?

You can't even follow your own argument any longer; there's no logic, no consistency, and no contemplation of the implications. I'm doing my best to summarize things for you, but be damned if you are perpetually self-blinded.