Steve V. 
Member since Mar 2, 2013


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Recent Comments

Re: “If the Confederacy had won, slavery would have continued in the South

In response to "Roark," I'm just as bored listening to people who read "Uncle Tom's Cabin" in grade school and assumed everything in it is the absolute truth. The untaught reality is that the book's author never went farther south than Cincinnati, Ohio.

In any case, the reason for southern secession was economic, and yes, the underlying economic reality was that slavery underpinned the southern economy and the south wanted it to continue. However, it's crystal clear that Lincoln invaded not to free the slaves, but to keep the south from leaving the union. Doubters should ask themselves this simple question: if Jefferson Davis had immediately freed all the slaves when the south seceded, do you think Lincoln would have let the south go in peace?

That should create some cognitive dissonance in your self-righteous little brains.

8 of 8 people like this.
Posted by Steve V. on September 23, 2013 at 3:48 PM

Re: “If the Confederacy had won, slavery would have continued in the South

Mr. Green's thesis is simply wrong. Yes, slavery was a divisive issue of the time, but not the reason for Lincoln's invasion of the south. After decades of economic abuse by the industrial north, the agrarian south realized that it would be unable to obtain significant political power in the union and would continue to be bled dry via harsh tariffs. Northern corporate-crony lawyer Lincoln's election was "the straw that broke the camel's back" and the southern states said "we're done." As is well-documented, they had every right to secede. Lincoln attempted to resupply Ft. Sumter, goading the south into firing on it, and this "they attacked us first!" tactic worked, drumming up support for his invasion to keep the union together by force, in the process destroying it in a philosophical sense. (By the way, what kind of "great leader" says "if you leave the union, we'll kill you"?)

In contrast to Mr. Green's assertion, I believe that if the south had won the war, slavery would have petered out over time. If nothing else, advancements in agricultural technology would have made paying wages more economical than purchasing, feeding, housing and otherwise supporting slaves at some point. I also believe that whites' attitudes would have changed over the years, especially after every other country in the world abolished slavery.

(Note: I'm not from the south and the idea of slavery is anathema to my beliefs.)

6 of 10 people like this.
Posted by Steve V. on March 2, 2013 at 11:58 AM
Classified Listings

Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2016, Charleston City Paper   RSS