It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Did the leniency after the Civil War lead to our present North/South dynamic???

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Thanks for the link, it's a sobering reminder of what came next.

Sharecropping.




posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Treason is when you betray your country and try to overthrow the government. The CSA seceded because they didn't like what the government was becoming. They wanted to secede and leave it at that. That's why it's referred to, as the gentleman below your OP stated, the War of Northern Aggression.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:39 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: ezramullins
a reply to: JoshuaCox



It is always helpful to educate oneself before entering into a debate.
Minnesota, Iowa, and yes the land of Lincoln Illinois, as well as surrounding territories,
hated Lincoln and the Republicans for the same abuses suffered by The South. Those states had what was termed The Western Confederacy.
Their men were conscripted, their wealth taken, and their land occupied by outsiders, in order to
put that rebellion down.
So your North/South dynamic thingy is just like your opinion, man.




Same with every single draft and conscription in human history...

But here's the thing..

They didn't rebel killing 10's of thousands of US service members.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:42 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:43 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:44 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Treason is when you betray your country and try to overthrow the government. The CSA seceded because they didn't like what the government was becoming. They wanted to secede and leave it at that. That's why it's referred to, as the gentleman below your OP stated, the War of Northern Aggression.



The south was soverign US soil...


If you take over a piece of a country but don't try to take the whole thing over. It is still treason...

Literally by definition..



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Floridagoat

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Floridagoat
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Nice deflection trying to determine I'm a racist. Fail.

You're the clueless human making a complete mockery of yourself over something that happened over 160 years ago, While more then one person has told you of your ignorant OP you continue to shine a light on your pervasive lack of knowledge.

Good going, it's not easy being so cheesy huh?



What?!? Do you even read the posts?!?!

I said you were the only one race baiting..not the only racist...

If you read the posts you might actually be on topic...



Nothing I said was race baiting, now you're just grasping at straws dwindling down into that leftist hell hole called propaganda.

Good going showing your true colors.




Your the only one who even mentioned race. And or slavery..

The only one.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: LSU0408
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Treason is when you betray your country and try to overthrow the government. The CSA seceded because they didn't like what the government was becoming. They wanted to secede and leave it at that. That's why it's referred to, as the gentleman below your OP stated, the War of Northern Aggression.



The south was soverign US soil...


If you take over a piece of a country but don't try to take the whole thing over. It is still treason...

Literally by definition..



Your comprehension skill is seriously low, as was pointed out to you on page one "states right's" if you can't graps that with your "the south was sovereign US soil" there's no helping you form a logical conclusion because your perpetuating propaganda and straight up lies!



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Floridagoat

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Floridagoat
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Nice deflection trying to determine I'm a racist. Fail.

You're the clueless human making a complete mockery of yourself over something that happened over 160 years ago, While more then one person has told you of your ignorant OP you continue to shine a light on your pervasive lack of knowledge.

Good going, it's not easy being so cheesy huh?



What?!? Do you even read the posts?!?!

I said you were the only one race baiting..not the only racist...

If you read the posts you might actually be on topic...



Nothing I said was race baiting, now you're just grasping at straws dwindling down into that leftist hell hole called propaganda.

Good going showing your true colors.




Your the only one who even mentioned race. And or slavery..

The only one.


And you're the only one that's hung up on it because your version of reality is obviously flawed!



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Floridagoat

What State Rights, exactly?


This should be good.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   
I think your idea of US history is a little clouded.

See, the United States did not exist in the way it does today before the war. The Federal government wasn't the all-powerful foe it is today. At the time, it was a collection of states with a VERY small Federal government. Power remained in the States hands.

If you understand it from that perspective, you'd realize that your duty and honor were to your state, not an agreement of union.


*Edit

The reason Lincoln pardoned everyone was not benevolent. He did this because he HAD to as the Federal Government was now going to take over as the supreme law of the land and the supreme power.

Before the war the citizens would've laughed if the Feds "pardoned" them of anything as it had no real power. After the war, it had to demonstrate it's now far-reaching grasp and it did so by pardoning the freedom fighters.

Like today, it was all a show.
edit on 30-11-2016 by Tempter because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Floridagoat
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Do you care to acknowledge how old you are?

It's like playing cards with your brother's kids, p-o-i-n-t-l-e-s-s....



35 Mississippi born and raised... Vicksburg exactly.. you know the "key to the war" with I bet a better grasp of the historical account of the civil war than most in the thread.


Hell I have walked a lot of the battle sites.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

What should be good?

Google it homeboy, you've got all day to teach yourself some new tricks!



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tempter
I think your idea of US history is a little clouded.

See, the United States did not exist in the way it does today before the war. The Federal government wasn't the all-powerful foe it is today. At the time, it was a collection of states with a VERY small Federal government. Power remained in the States hands.

If you understand it from that perspective, you'd realize that your duty and honor were to your state, not an agreement of union.



So the south was not sovereign US soil pre civil war???


And I'm who doesn't know history?!?!

Lol



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: TheAlleghenyGentleman
You mean the war of northern aggression?

Actually, I'm just marking my place because I want to answer more serious when I have time.




No I mean when a bunch of traitors rejected the United States of America, disavowed the US constitution (and wrote their own) while trying to annex a third of US sovereign soil.


By ANY definition from an American POV the south were traitors who commited treason.


They literally went line to line checking all the treason boxs they could find.

PS I'm a MS boy born and raised who might not exist if they had executed all the sympathizers.


Lincoln was the actual traitor. He broke the LAw/constutution. The 10th used to allow a state to secceed if it wanted to. but after Lincoln won he had it changed to suit his and the norths needs.
He illegally passed laws and amendments going against th e law by not allowing the souther representatives their legal right to challenge the bills in congress and the senate.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Floridagoat
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Do you care to acknowledge how old you are?

It's like playing cards with your brother's kids, p-o-i-n-t-l-e-s-s....



35 Mississippi born and raised... Vicksburg exactly.. you know the "key to the war" with I bet a better grasp of the historical account of the civil war than most in the thread.


Hell I have walked a lot of the battle sites.



Good for you, I have 12 Men from one side of my family that fought for the confederacy.

Let me ask you clueless northern aggression sympathizers one question.

1.Do you think that 99% of the south inhabitants were fighting for the rights of the 1% whites in the south that owned slaves?

2.Did you know that in 1858 28% of blacks in all states owned slaves? And the number was even higher for the 13 confederate states.

I mean do seriously delude yourself with school text book propaganda that hides the fact we of all colors were made slaves to the system thanks to northern aggression.

Please answer question one because of the 3 times i've asked this question on ATS it's been avoided like the plague.




posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox





edit on 30-11-2016 by ezramullins because: pearls before swine



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Very interesting and timely topic! I re-learned something earlier this year, in light of what it did to Reconstruction efforts.

1877 Compromise

Immediately after the presidential election of 1876, it became clear that the outcome of the race hinged largely on disputed returns from Florida, Louisiana and South Carolina–the only three states in the South with Reconstruction-era Republican governments still in power. As a bipartisan congressional commission debated over the outcome early in 1877, allies of the Republican Party candidate Rutherford Hayes met in secret with moderate southern Democrats in order to negotiate acceptance of Hayes’ election. The Democrats agreed not to block Hayes’ victory on the condition that Republicans withdraw all federal troops from the South, thus consolidating Democratic control over the region. As a result of the so-called Compromise of 1877 (or Compromise of 1876), Florida, Louisiana and South Carolina became Democratic once again, effectively marking the end of the Reconstruction era.


And this was an interesting read. One of the ideas: "Liberty" has a different meaning in the context of the different North/South economic systems.

Conservative Southern Values Revived: How a Brutal Strain of American Aristocrats Have Come to Rule America


The Civil War was, at its core, a military battle between these two elites for the soul of the country. It pitted the more communalist, democratic and industrialized Northern vision of the American future against the hierarchical, aristocratic, agrarian Southern one. Though the Union won the war, the fundamental conflict at its root still hasn't been resolved to this day.


I know we are still dealing with all this.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join