Author Topic: Could the South have won?  (Read 19577 times)

elmerfudd

  • Guest
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #30 on: March 02, 2012, 11:19:31 AM »
And Lincoln was a closet racist...........why else do you think he sugeested Liberia to the leader of the black race at the time.

Slavery was not high on his list of things to eliminate.

Not much in the closet.  Slavery was, indeed, not high on his list.

But it was item number one on the secesh lists.  READ THE SPEECHES.

elmerfudd

  • Guest
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #31 on: March 02, 2012, 11:20:38 AM »
That is what you say.

So read the speeches, take the test, and let's see what you say. 

Offline Shooterman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2813
  • Gender: Male
  • Draft Jan Morgan for President
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #32 on: March 02, 2012, 12:30:02 PM »
So read the speeches, take the test, and let's see what you say. 

The test? That you concocted? Muhahaha!

What you fail to understand, Elmer, is whatever the reason, and slavery is not why the bulk of the Confederates fought, the South still had the right to secede.
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

elmerfudd

  • Guest
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #33 on: March 02, 2012, 01:09:37 PM »
The test? That you concocted? Muhahaha!

What you fail to understand, Elmer, is whatever the reason, and slavery is not why the bulk of the Confederates fought, the South still had the right to secede.

I do understand that.  I fully understand that slavery is not the reason the bulk of the Confederacy fought.  Never said it was.  I said otherwise, in fact. 

What I did say is that absent the perceived threat to slavery, the southern states would not have seceded.  History from the founding of this country up to the Civil War bears this out.  The secession speeches themselves bear this out.  No one but a close minded person could possibly assert otherwise. 

Absent secssion, there would have been no war.  That's all I have said. 

And I fully agree that, IMO, the states had the right to secede.  Unfortunately for them, that point was rendered rather moot by the following four years. 

Offline Shooterman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2813
  • Gender: Male
  • Draft Jan Morgan for President
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #34 on: March 02, 2012, 01:26:56 PM »
I do understand that.  I fully understand that slavery is not the reason the bulk of the Confederacy fought.  Never said it was.  I said otherwise, in fact. 

What I did say is that absent the perceived threat to slavery, the southern states would not have seceded.

There is absolutely no way that can be stated for certain and you know it.
Quote
History from the founding of this country up to the Civil War bears this out.

Simply not so. People had advocated secession from the founding. Jefferson said if that was what they wanted, to go in peace.

Quote
The secession speeches themselves bear this out.  No one but a close minded person could possibly assert otherwise.

The speeches and writings were political expediency mouthings at best, much as the DOI was.

Quote
Absent secssion, there would have been no war.  That's all I have said.

To a point- but, and there is always a but, the South had continued to be bullied by the Yankees and their rightful share of tariffs not stolen from them, then they probably would not have wished to secede. In effect, the Fourth Branch of government was denied under the Southern states and continues to be denied today. 

Quote
And I fully agree that, IMO, the states had the right to secede.  Unfortunately for them, that point was rendered rather moot by the following four years. 

This we can agree on. Force made overwhelming might, but not right. We are still paying the price for the malfeasance of Lincoln and the Radical Republicans.
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

elmerfudd

  • Guest
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #35 on: March 02, 2012, 01:56:05 PM »
There is absolutely no way that can be stated for certain and you know it.
Simply not so. People had advocated secession from the founding. Jefferson said if that was what they wanted, to go in peace.

The speeches and writings were political expediency mouthings at best, much as the DOI was.

To a point- but, and there is always a but, the South had continued to be bullied by the Yankees and their rightful share of tariffs not stolen from them, then they probably would not have wished to secede. In effect, the Fourth Branch of government was denied under the Southern states and continues to be denied today. 

This we can agree on. Force made overwhelming might, but not right. We are still paying the price for the malfeasance of Lincoln and the Radical Republicans.

I am only going to differ with you on the first point. There is absolutely a way that can be stated for certain and I do know it.  I can also state this for certain: there will always be people who deny the connection between slavery and the war of northern aggression.  So be it.  But don't you think they might have said SOMETHING about those tariffs in those speeches if they really were that big a deal? Why would it be politically expedient to give a false reason for secsding?

I know I can't convibce you.  Go in peace my brother. 

Offline Shooterman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2813
  • Gender: Male
  • Draft Jan Morgan for President
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #36 on: March 02, 2012, 02:06:35 PM »
I am only going to differ with you on the first point. There is absolutely a way that can be stated for certain and I do know it.  I can also state this for certain: there will always be people who deny the connection between slavery and the war of northern aggression.

[/quote]

Never said there was no connection. It just wasn't the main reason.
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

Offline hokiewoodchuck

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 638
  • Gender: Male
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #37 on: March 02, 2012, 02:11:47 PM »
Very true shooterman.......especially when very few owned slaves.

I think Elmer is comin' 'round.
I thought I was wrong one time but I was mistaken.

Offline Shooterman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2813
  • Gender: Male
  • Draft Jan Morgan for President
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #38 on: March 02, 2012, 02:53:45 PM »
Very true shooterman.......especially when very few owned slaves.

In the early days of the union, before it became a Nation under Lincoln. The people fought for their family, homes, communities, states, or countries and lastly the union. The union, though revered by such as Calhoun, Lee, and Jefferson Davis among many others, was no more than a entity created by the Compact we call the Constitution. Unlike today, after the War of Northern Aggression, and 150 years under the thumb of the Feds, the union was no more than a coalition the States united in America. Nationalism had been beaten down in the Constitutional Convention, and more importantly, in the State ratifying conventions.

Quote
I think Elmer is comin' 'round.

We'll see in the fulness of time.

There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

elmerfudd

  • Guest
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #39 on: March 02, 2012, 05:23:23 PM »



Never said there was no connection. It just wasn't the main reason.

You're so funny.  Not the main reason. Just the only one mentioned in the secession speeches.  The only one related to the Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850. The only one that resulted in numerous fisticuffs and canings in the Congress.  The only one that resulted in bloodshed in Kansas and Harper's Ferry. But not the main reason. 

Too funny. 

elmerfudd

  • Guest
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #40 on: March 02, 2012, 06:06:47 PM »



Never said there was no connection. It just wasn't the main reason.

I’ve been trying to conjure up a scenario to support the theory that tariffs were the main reason for secession rather than the perceived threat to slavery.  This is the best I can do.

The leaders are all sitting around contemplating the grave matter of secession.  One of them finally says “Boys, we all know that we’re talkin’ ‘bout secedin’ because of them stinking tariffs.  100% of our people are affected by the tariffs.  Only 4% of us own nigras.  Even though everybody in this room is among that 4% and 85% or better of our wealth is tied up in nigras, we still know it’s got nothin’ to do with nigras.  That Missouri Compromise, Compromise of 1850, Bleedin’ Kansas, Harpers’ Ferry, that dang book Uncle Tom’s Cabin is just red herrings.  It’s clearly about tariffs.  However, I’m kinda thinkin’ we oughta say it’s about the nigras when we make our secesh speeches. And not say nothin' 'bout tariffs.   Somethin’ tells me that’s the smart thing to do. Whatchall think?

They all ponder this and, the speaker being a guy renowned as a deep thinker, they all figure he must be right.  So they go along with him.

And this happened in EVERY STATE!  I mean, what are the odds, really?

Is that kind of what you think must have happened?

Offline Shooterman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2813
  • Gender: Male
  • Draft Jan Morgan for President
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #41 on: March 02, 2012, 08:13:56 PM »
I’ve been trying to conjure up a scenario to support the theory that tariffs were the main reason for secession rather than the perceived threat to slavery.  This is the best I can do.

The leaders are all sitting around contemplating the grave matter of secession.  One of them finally says “Boys, we all know that we’re talkin’ ‘bout secedin’ because of them stinking tariffs.  100% of our people are affected by the tariffs.  Only 4% of us own nigras.  Even though everybody in this room is among that 4% and 85% or better of our wealth is tied up in nigras, we still know it’s got nothin’ to do with nigras.  That Missouri Compromise, Compromise of 1850, Bleedin’ Kansas, Harpers’ Ferry, that dang book Uncle Tom’s Cabin is just red herrings.  It’s clearly about tariffs.  However, I’m kinda thinkin’ we oughta say it’s about the nigras when we make our secesh speeches. And not say nothin' 'bout tariffs.   Somethin’ tells me that’s the smart thing to do. Whatchall think?

They all ponder this and, the speaker being a guy renowned as a deep thinker, they all figure he must be right.  So they go along with him.

And this happened in EVERY STATE!  I mean, what are the odds, really?

Is that kind of what you think must have happened?


It appears you're now in competition with Stephen King.:) :laugh:
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

elmerfudd

  • Guest
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #42 on: March 03, 2012, 12:33:54 PM »
It appears you're now in competition with Stephen King.:) :laugh:

I would say that an assertion that secession was over tariffs, not slavery, is worthy of the kind of fantasy Stephen King writes, too. 

Offline hokiewoodchuck

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 638
  • Gender: Male
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #43 on: March 03, 2012, 02:05:20 PM »
Aw hell...lets just say it. We here in the south can't stand that yankee accent and still don't and THAT is what started it......and keep scratchin' that itch and we will be doing it all over again......just sayin'.
I thought I was wrong one time but I was mistaken.

Offline Shooterman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2813
  • Gender: Male
  • Draft Jan Morgan for President
Re: Could the South have won?
« Reply #44 on: March 03, 2012, 02:25:32 PM »
I would say that an assertion that secession was over tariffs, not slavery, is worthy of the kind of fantasy Stephen King writes, too. 

Why, Elmer, did it take two years to sign the Emancipation Declaration? Two years to decide if the issue was slavery? Give me a break!
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

 

Powered by EzPortal