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.

 

Confederate states movement?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 04:38 AM
link   
As a non-American, my knownledge of American politics is pretty vague to behonest. I have been reading around the internet on American politics and parties, i cannot help but notice that there is a movement of rebuilding The Confederate States of America. Does this movement have potential or is it some unrealistic aim that will not happen? some groups, or leagues, claim that it will happen in afew decades. But is this likely?

Enlightenment would be much welcome




posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 04:41 AM
link   
I haven't heard anything about that...some people have been saying "The South Will Rise Again!" ever since the end of the civil war, I doubt it'll happen or has any real support.



posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
I haven't heard anything about that...some people have been saying "The South Will Rise Again!" ever since the end of the civil war, I doubt it'll happen or has any real support.


And that's been for like 140 years.

I firmly believe the North was in the right (I had at least two ancestors in the Union Army), and that Lincoln was in the right--but given the situation these days, if they want to secede again, I say go for it.



posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst
I firmly believe the North was in the right (I had at least two ancestors in the Union Army), and that Lincoln was in the right--but given the situation these days, if they want to secede again, I say go for it.


Well, the winner is always right, but the civil war itself was a tragedy.

This man should be dug up and his corpse put on trial.


[edit on 9-10-2005 by RANT]



posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
This man should be dug up and his corpse put on trial.



Huh? No way, we should build a huge golden monument to him in Central Park...

Oops, that's already been done:






posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 08:02 AM
link   
Know what, RANT, let me retract a part of that. I believe Lincoln was in the right. I agree, the whole thing was a tragedy.

The Vatican was responsible for the Civil War. I've been reading up on it. The Vatican had plants on both sides, inflaming the slavery issue. The intent all along was to split up the United States, as it was perceived as a threat. Divide and conquer. Lincoln knew about this plot, as Samuel F. B. Morse (the Morse Code guy) had told him about it--he'd been in Rome and had overheard a few things.

The South wasn't conquered. Lincoln succeeded in bringing the USA back together.



posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst
Lincoln knew about this plot, as Samuel F. B. Morse (the Morse Code guy) had told him about it--he'd been in Rome and had overheard a few things.


As you do...those secret plots people talk about openly and in public. Where did you get this information from?

As for the States? I think they need more rights. I would hate to see them begin to loose even more...hopefully, it'll be a lesson to the E.U. as well.



posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   
What I love is Republicans say Lincoln was a Republican, yet Lincoln supported Fed over State, a clear Democrat.

Before Abortion, before Iraq/War for Oil, before Women were more then property, the basis of DemvsRep was Fed over State, Dems for Fed, Reps for State, and Lincoln supported Fed, therefor he was a Dem.(Guess who stayed awake last year for history class?)

Also would love to see the south leave, the Union IQ goes up 20 points average, and we can finally stop them from invading class rooms to get flat earth/center earth/ID taught in science class by making all republicans move south. Also would leave them to deal with the illegal aliens from Cuba and some from Mexico. And they would have to deal with the KKK as all the dems leave the south, so no more Blacks or Jews or Gays for the KKK to go after. Hmmm, "You don't worship King George enough, we know you only spent 27 hours last week worshipping him, time to lynch you!"



posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 05:07 PM
link   
I don't know about the rightness or wrongness of Sherman's actions but I'm always sure to use this image


when people on message boards start talking pro-confederate garbage and waving the battle flag.



posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 06:02 PM
link   
Thank you for straightening out the picture. I know what is meant to a certain group in the first picture posted by Rant.
Appreciate it..thank you,

Orangetom



posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Full Metal
What I love is Republicans say Lincoln was a Republican, yet Lincoln supported Fed over State, a clear Democrat.


uh he was republican....



posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Except he wasn't! He was as much a republican as Ted Kennedy and Billary Clinton! He supported Fed over State, therefor he was a DEM! The base of the two parties were Fed vs State, Dems for Fed, Reps for State. Thereofr when Lincoln said Fed over State, he was a democrat.

Before Abortion, guns, war for oil, it was Fed(Dem) vs State(Rep) That is thee base of the parties. Therefor you support Fed over State you are a dem.

Also, what did he do that was so bad? Sherman just made the war a horror for the south. The south committed treason on a grand scale and were punished.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 10:48 AM
link   
The confederates were stupid. They'll never rise again, because the majority of people are smart enough to know that racism is completely ridiculous. They tried to hide under the guise of "We just want state rights!", but they really just wanted to keep their slaves.

They won't rise again.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Herman
The confederates were stupid. They'll never rise again, because the majority of people are smart enough to know that racism is completely ridiculous. They tried to hide under the guise of "We just want state rights!", but they really just wanted to keep their slaves.

They won't rise again.


LOL You are joking right...


Never rise again, eh? What are the fastest growing states in America? Guess what...we already have.

Fastest Growth in Red States

Besides your contention, of the root causes behind the 2nd War of Independence, are sophomoric at best. The War was the apogee of the Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist arguments, the oldest continuing conflict in American politics. Sure racism and slavery played a large part but it was not the root cause behind the conflict. The ground work for the confrontation was laid before the Constitution was ever signed.

/lives in the South
//born in the North
///seen as much racism in the north as the south.




[edit on 10-10-2005 by Imperium Americana]



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Republican and Democrat meant opposite things back then. Sort of anyway. The civil rights issue flipped them.

The Confederate States will never rise again. People make secession claims over and over again, it's stupid. The government has a much greater ability to control the states than it did back then, through the military, trade, power, etc. There's no chance.

PS - It doesn't necessarily have to be them that secede.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Imperium Americana
/lives in the South
//born in the North
///seen as much racism in the north as the south.


Yep.

The whole slavery issue is blown way out of proportion. The major issue, and cause for secession, was with states' rights. You'll notice that slaves weren't federally freed anywhere, until after the war had started, and even then, only in the South (causing huge economic problems that have resulted in a lot of backwards customs and lifestyles that you still see today in some older, rural areas).

Lincoln only freed southern slaves in his Emancipation Proclamation for reasons that I'm sure were more political than moral at the time. Great Britain was considering joining the war on the side of the Confederates (and by this time, the North was getting slaughtered mercilessly enough anyway) until Lincoln freed the slaves in the South and made slavery a real political issue of the war (the Brits wanted nothing to do with appearing to support slavery). Until then, slavery was not so much an issue at all, and certainly no major cause for the war's initiation.

The sad truth is that both the North and South were still plenty racist at this point in time. We all know very well that even after the Civil War, in the North as well as the South, African Americans still bore the burden of being treated horribly, still denied many freedoms and equalities. There's no question the feeling was more intense in parts of the Deep South because of the relation to the economic situation there, but it was nonetheless just as present in the North, and the North was by no means the great moral crusader of the day just because of Lincoln's war-time move.

Even though I'd rather such a split in our country be averted, and even though the Confederate States failed horribly during the war years to assemble any kind of consistent and reliable form of federal government to properly manage itself, the fact that these states stood up and seceded to protect their rights isn't anything to mock or put down, especially today when the exact same thing needs to happen ASAP before we go into the Fourth Reich.

The idea of the South rising again, though, I think is stupid. Besides, the Southern States are the more politically problematic states, anyway, with the zealously anti-gay, pro-church and pro-war Republicans popping out so often from down here.


Full Metal
Also, what did he do that was so bad? Sherman just made the war a horror for the south. The south committed treason on a grand scale and were punished.


So it's ok to slaughter a city full of civilians simply because they live in a state that has decided that it doesn't want to be a part of your country anymore?

It's a shame that the British didn't slaughter more of us evil, treasonous civilians during the Revolution, or the War of 1812. We really deserved it back then.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 03:54 PM
link   
LOLLERSKATES!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Dear god I hope no confederate redneck fantasy happens.

I really don't see it happening, specially not in Texas, we've got a huge hispanic population. And some how I don't see the Dirty South being cool with that.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Whoa guys! generally I think of the folks here as being somewhat higher than normal intellect and better informed then the general populace- but on the subject of the civil war apparently 99.999999% bought the Union line "hook line and sinker" and even those that seem to normally be better informed are spouting the same party-line rubbish- oh how much is lost just due to the passage of a few years!

Yes, history is written by the winners of the conflicts- but the Civil War was such an atrocity it cannot be totally rewritten and covered up. I encourage you to look because there are books that did survive that actually talk about what was going on- not what the winners wanted us to believe. Look in some of the Southern universities in the archives sections- these books are so rare you will not be able to check them out.

First and foremost- slavery was the LEAST of the issues that sparked the Civil war- at least the concept of slavery most refer to i.e. African descendants under the 'employ' of European descendants working on some plantation. This type of slavery did not become a real issue until the war was well underway out of desperation of the North to finally subdue the South. The North needed those slaves even more than the South did.

What really sparked the Civil War?? Well you are probably wondering why I mentioned TYPES of slavery??? Take a look at where 98% of the industry was at the beginning of the war. Take a look at where 99.99% of the raw materials came from for that industry. Where is still 95% of the industry TODAY? What happened after the war? Why such a little change in industry percentages??? Indeed the entire South was in slavery to the North. The North industrial base was desperate for the supply of raw products to keep flowing and to keep the machines alive. The Union was not very popular with most of Europe and were suffering embargos. The South wanted to break free and start their own industrial base because the North took their raw goods and sold back finished products at inflated rates. African slaves were already being released from some plantations and paid wages in the South!!!

You want a conspiracy- no need to look much further than the Civil War and just what the Union did to the South and the pillaging that still goes on today.

Someone previously accused the South of committing treason. Get a clue buddy. Who invaded who? Who caused more of their countrymen to die than the combination of every war since? All for $$$! Ever read the US Declaration of Independence? Do you know from the Southern perspective the North committed more heinous acts that the King of England did?? If the political objectives of the Union did not suit the South anymore than why must they still be forced to play the "game"? We allow divorces when each spouse swore to remain in the marriage until death but allowed to divide at any time with little or no repercussions- but none of the States swore to remain indefinitely- the arrangement was for as long as political ideologies were similar. The North forced the South to remain in the union against their collective will and supply the Northern economy with the raw goods. That my misguided cretin is SLAVERY.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 06:10 PM
link   
no doubt slavery was the cause of the problem that led to the southern states to secede. remember that as the U.S. was expanding, states from the North which was anti slavery and the south which was for slavery, fought each other to wat the new territories should be a slave state or not, etc. these kinds of problems not to mention Lincoln's against slavery cause the southern states to secede wen they threaten if Lincoln is voted in office.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 06:42 PM
link   
detla boy there you go spouting the party line again. try to look beyond that as not every Southern state was a slave state.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join