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.

 

Col. Tye Seidule PhD Head of Dept Of History West Point "Was the Civil War About Slavery".. Yes

page: 4
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
When i say New World, I mean the Colonies populated with Europeans and culture.


What are you talking about? You distinctly said Europeans brought the practice of slavery to the New World, they did not, it already existed here in various forms.

Additionally, the source I provided specifically mentions British North America, i.e. 'the Colonies'.


So in your version of history, Europeans did not practice servitude and slavery?


I don't have a personal version of history, unlike you, I presented the facts.




edit on 19-8-2017 by AugustusMasonicus because: Armaments 2:9-21 And the people did feast upon the lambs, and sloths, and carp, and anchovies, and orangutans, and breakfast cereals, and fruit bats...




posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Lucidparadox


The problem as I see it...

If the lazy Southern farmer had not gotten into Tall Cotton and made a killing (pun intended) He wouldn't have had to import His labor force. I propose had these farmers grown Cannabis (not commercial hemp) they would have had volunteers.

Don't forget ALL the rejects and dregs from EVERYWHERE before somebody started counting.. Australia wasn't the only place of exile.



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Per usual, you attack the poster.



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 05:37 PM
link   
We all know how the north likes to rewrite history, I don't think some West Point Yankee is going to convince the south about his lies. Besides, 85% of the confederates who fought in the war didn't own farms or slaves. That's a fact.
edit on 19-8-2017 by CraftyArrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: namehere

I suggest you pick up a history book and learn about a group called abolishinist.Slavery, quickly falling out of favor in the Northern states, was abolished throughout in the North by 1804. So your belief their were slaves in the north us a myth but at least you learned something


You might want to re-check some of those dates in your history book. In Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri, West Virginia, Tennessee, and Kansas slavery was legal before, during, and after the Civil War.

You would think that if they were fighting a war to end slavery they would have started by ending slavery at home.


Oh i assumed everyone knew what the northern states where i guess i was wrong. So for you this is what was considered the north. Maine, New York, New Hampshire, Vermont,Massachusetts, Connecticut,Rhode Island, Pennsylvania,New Jersey, Ohio, Indiana,Illinois, Kansas, Michigan,Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa,California, Nevada, and Oregon. The states you listed where the south meaning of course slavery was legal. New Jersey was thr last northern state to ban slavery in 1804

It worries me we have people trying to remove history because it offends but yet we have people that know nothing about it. Abolishinist actually fought slavery by setting up the ubderground rail road lobbying politicians. Interesting side note women played a major role and this would later turn in to the women's suffrage movement.
edit on 8/19/17 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: CraftyArrow
We all know how the north likes to rewrite history, I don't some West Point Yankee is going to convince the south about his lies. Besides, 85% of the confederates who fought in the war didn't own farms or slaves. That's a fact.


And it's a fact that has nothing to do with proving anything. You need to look at history from a historical content. Southern feared what would happen if slAves were freed. I don't think you realize white's where outnumbered and they knew it. Go to a city like say charleston.

More than 4 million enslaved human beings lived in the south, and they touched every aspect of the region’s social, political, and economic life.  Slaves did not just work on plantations.  In cities such as Charleston, they cleaned the streets, toiled as bricklayers, carpenters, blacksmiths, bakers, and laborers.  They worked as dockhands and stevedores, grew and sold produce, purchased goods and carted them back to their masters’ homes where they cooked the meals, cleaned, raised the children, and tended to the daily chores.

If you visited charleston in that time you would swear blacks controlled everything as you would see very few white people. Throw in what happened in Haiti and southern were scared of a slave revolt. But that wasn't the entire story either. The other factor was media and churches and of course slave owners feeding them information and fear. Then there is the isolation southern felt they were under siege by the north this also led to support for slavery. And finally every southerner knew plantations was the source of their money. They bought produce equipment and payed for services.

You can't simplify this issue with a stupid statement of who owned slaves. You have to look into life in the south in the 1860s.



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

Your fudging numbers, have you looked at old maps?
The confederate army could of been defeated (by slaves) if the south had that many slaves, they would of been out numbered.
Haha you dont know what your talking about....after the war most of those slaves where moved to the south.
edit on 19-8-2017 by CraftyArrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

Exactly, it's rather more complex. Just as it can't be so simply claimed that the war of northern aggression was 'because of slavery'. There were vastly more political and social concerns which led to secession and the north's war.



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 07:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: CraftyArrow
a reply to: dragonridr

Your fudging numbers, have you looked at old maps?
The confederate army could of been defeated (by slaves) if the south had that many slaves, they would of been out numbered.
Haha you dont know what your talking about....after the war most of those slaves where moved to the south.


Have you ever picked up a history book in your life? At the start of the civil war there were about 9 million people in the south of which 4 million were slaves. The north was about 22 million do you want to make any other stupid statements or are you done?



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 07:27 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

So you think they didn't move slaves to south.

Maybe you should stop reading books written by the victor.



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing
a reply to: dragonridr

Exactly, it's rather more complex. Just as it can't be so simply claimed that the war of northern aggression was 'because of slavery'. There were vastly more political and social concerns which led to secession and the north's war.


Yes there was other problems but they all in some way were involved in slavery. It's fine if people want to say not all southerners were racist at the time. That's probably true after all there were people in the south working with the underground railroad. But don't try to rewrite history by claiming the war wasn't over slavery it was at least 90 percent of the reason.



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

Oh i assumed everyone knew what the northern states where i guess i was wrong. So for you this is what was considered the north. Maine, New York, New Hampshire, Vermont,Massachusetts, Connecticut,Rhode Island, Pennsylvania,New Jersey, Ohio, Indiana,Illinois, Kansas, Michigan,Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa,California, Nevada, and Oregon. The states you listed where the south meaning of course slavery was legal. New Jersey was thr last northern state to ban slavery in 1804

It worries me we have people trying to remove history because it offends but yet we have people that know nothing about it. Abolishinist actually fought slavery by setting up the ubderground rail road lobbying politicians. Interesting side note women played a major role and this would later turn in to the women's suffrage movement.


I assumed that when most people were discussing the Civil War that the term Northern States referred to states in the Union and Southern States referred to states in the Confederacy. Perhaps we could avoid the confusion by using the terms Free States and Slave States.

In that case, I think it's a little harder to argue that the Civil War was all about slavery, since you had Slave States fighting for the Union. If they were fighting to abolish slavery, they could have started within their own borders.

I agree with you about the removal of history and the general ignorance of it, but I don't blame the average person. I think there is a combination of politics and social conditioning directing what is discussed and what is omitted. I don't think it's limited to American history either.



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   
Some people are just stupid and some are in denial and some are sinister and want to maintain ignorance.


It’s not about who to blame for slavery in history it’s about an objective historical fact that the OP proves.


You hear this fantasy all the time that the civil war was fought over this or that but the 5 minute video conclusively proves the civil war was fought over SLAVERY.


Americans should be proud of this period in history and not bogged down in lies that want to distort history to defend the guilty



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

The border states confused many people. But often these would send military units to both the north and south. You could even end up with brothers fighting each other. Your issue is about these border states. The Union army took steps to make sure they would not succeed for example the entire Maryland legislature was arrested when they attempted to vote. Your confusing being forced to stay with aceptance of northern policies. In other words your point is invalid because these stated were forced to comply. But often as I said skirted the rules by providing military support to th south often in secrecy.



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
Per usual, you attack the poster.


Quit your moaning.

You said this:


Europeans brought the practice to the New world.


That is incorrect.



edit on 19-8-2017 by AugustusMasonicus because: Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I don’t know the answer here but will only say its amazing how Europeans want to most of the time accept that they brought good things to the “ new world” but rarely want to admit the bad things they may have brought.

That’s what’s most interesting...


Also since the very question of who was first to the “new world” is hardly conclusive then it stands to reason how we would know conclusively the answer to this question



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

Are you claiming that slavery didn't exists in the Americas before Europeans came?



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 09:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

The source I provided gives fairly well documented evidence that Native Americans practiced slavery in some form well before any Europeans came to the New World.






edit on 19-8-2017 by AugustusMasonicus because: I ♥ cheese pizza.



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 09:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimNasium
a reply to: Lucidparadox


The problem as I see it...

If the lazy Southern farmer had not gotten into Tall Cotton and made a killing (pun intended) He wouldn't have had to import His labor force. I propose had these farmers grown Cannabis (not commercial hemp) they would have had volunteers.

Don't forget ALL the rejects and dregs from EVERYWHERE before somebody started counting.. Australia wasn't the only place of exile.





American slavery predates cotton.. cotton and the gin just halted its decline earlier.



posted on Aug, 19 2017 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Willtell

The source I provided gives fairly well documented evidence that Native Americans practiced slavery in some form well before any Europeans came to the New World.







I don't think it was chattel slavery though..


A big percentage stayed with the tribe after their release..

I think their slavery was WAY closer to an indentured servant released after a set time passed.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join