Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Poll: 4 in 10 Southerners Still Side With Confederacy

page: 1
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Source


In the South, 38 percent of respondents said they sympathize with the Confederacy, which lost the bloody war. More than 600,000 American soldiers on both sides were killed. Overall, the number from all geographic areas who said they still side with the South is less than a quarter.


I really, honestly wonder as to why 38 percent sympathize with the Confederacy. Is it pride? Racism? Ignorance? I'm not saying that they have no right, rather I'm just curious.

I was born and raised in "the south" and I think I already know the answer, only based on my experiences however. But if that number is correct...well...I dont know. It is terribly hard to pass judgement without knowing why.

Perhaps there are some ATS members who fall into that percentage who can, in a civil manner, shed some light on the subject for me.

Some additional info.


The poll also reveals divisions over what Americans see as the reason the Civil War was fought. Overall, 54 percent of respondents said they believe the war was over slavery, and 42 percent said that wasn't the main reason. Those percentages didn't change substantially when it comes to Northerners versus Southerners. But the issue of slavery was different for respondents from opposing political parties, and different races.

Sixty-five percent of respondents who described themselves as Democrats said they believe the Civil War was fought over slavery, while 45 percent of Republicans said so. The belief was strongest among nonwhite Americans as well. Some 66 percent of nonwhite respondents said they believe slavery was the main reason for the war, while about half of white people thought so.

edit on 4/13/2011 by Juston because: Clairity




posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:37 AM
link   
I think its pride and the culture of the south and the Confederacy was/is a major part of their culture.



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Being from new orleans I really wasn't taught rebel pride. Yes alot of people are racist down there but the civil war isn't brought up very often. The further you go into the sticks the more rebel flags you see.

I thought states had the right so secede if they wanted to according to the constitution, regardless of what the president thought was right or not. . Many other countries got rid of slavery without having to have a civil war.


+44 more 
posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Juston
 


First off... The war WAS NOT about slavery! Not even a little bit!

Secondly the supposed "hero" in the entire drama (lincoln... no I won't capitalize his name as he doesn't deserve it) was the purveyor of the FIRST patriot act, otherwise known as the sedition act... Lincoln was a bigot through and through who only made the emancipation proclamation out of sheer desperation.

The civil war was about states rights pure and simple.... anyone trying to tell you different has an AGENDA.

edit to add: It is telling how "siding with the confederacy" is tantamount to being a "racist" or wanting to "own slaves" in the mind of most. Speaking as someone who has family who owned a plantation in virginia I have a couple things to say:

1. The narrative that is now being applied to slavery is in most regards a blatant fabrication! I have read the family plantation journals (which were meant to be a sort of guidebook of best practices for the next generation to use when their parents died, usually fairly young) when I compare what i read there and in other HISTORIES it doesn't add up to what pop culture tries to portray.

2. slavery was ONLY a southern thing... helpful hint here many of our ancestors came over as indentured servants. which was SLAVERY plain and simple.

The civil war was not about slavery, and those that sympathize with the confederacy/south are not "racists". The civil war was wholly caused by business interests that were locked out of the south's economic windfall by family run farms, plantations, etc agitating to set the events in motion that led to the civil war in order to gain control of the crops that they were buying at rates they didnt want to pay to make into goods in their factories.

Also... people should look into the carpet baggers that flooded south post war and took over land working the former owners to death alongside their former slaves on tiny share cropping lots. Anyone who has read the history and really GETS what they are reading gets an uneasy feeling that the civil war has DIRECT EFFECTS on the battles we are fighting today 150 years later!

It was the beginning of the federalist iron fist, as well as the beginning of government looking after the interests of a FEW big businesses over the wellbeing of the MANY citizens of this nation. It is sad how many do not realize the south was not a bunch of evil black hating rednecks.
edit on 13-4-2011 by roguetechie because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Why is racism connected with having pride with where a person is from?
As you can see in my name here I am a Confederate sympathiser. If you want to know the answer to your question I suggest you study the real history of the war instead of asking for opinions. There are several Pro-Southern sites that have nothing to do with race.
The South is adored by those who know about her, thats why so many men (blacks included) fought for her to be free from the overlord that the fed govt was (and is).
Read about the Morrill Act as the cause of the war, slavery as the reason is one of the biggest lies there has ever been.
Southerners who still have the fire of the Old South in them understand, people who hold to the "new" south will never have a clue why Southrons love their land and it can never be explained to them so unless you truely want to know you could possibly be wasting your time,, but I do hope you want to.
We have pride in who we are and who we come from and where we come from.
Long Live Dixie



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by roguetechie
reply to post by Juston
 


First off... The war WAS NOT about slavery! Not even a little bit!

Secondly the supposed "hero" in the entire drama (lincoln... no I won't capitalize his name as he doesn't deserve it) was the purveyor of the FIRST patriot act, otherwise known as the sedition act... Lincoln was a bigot through and through who only made the emancipation proclamation out of sheer desperation.

The civil war was about states rights pure and simple.... anyone trying to tell you different has an AGENDA.


this, lincoln only wanted to preserve the union, the confederate had to fight the trade tariffs on un-manufactured goods and was being robbed by the north, the union. while general lee was "ecstatic" to see slaves set free.



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by roguetechie
 


Yes, states rights. And what was the one and only right they were trying to defend? Slavery. Saying the Civil Was wasn't about slavery is like saying the Revolution wasn't about independence.

Can you name any other rights that don't come back to slavery they were fighting for? Maybe us Yankees were just too aggressive for you?

I also think it is funny how an institution that was treasonous and anti-American can be put on such a high pedestal by so many "real Americans." kind of ironic, don't you think?
edit on 13-4-2011 by DarkKnight76 because: (no reason given)


+3 more 
posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   
The civil war was not about slavery, and the confederate flag is not a symbol of slavery or oppression. I get sick of reading this stuff all the time. I have lived in the south my whole life, and really wouldn't want to live anywhere else. So chalk that up to another instance of the winner writing the history.

I wasn't raised with "southern pride" (although come on, SEC rules in football)
I wasn't raised to be racist
I wasn't raised to hate yankees(just the damn ones that relocate and wont leave)
I wasn't raised on grits
I don't have 3 hunting dogs and 4 unused cars(the jeep is broke and the transmission is a bird bath, but hey)
I have never slept with any relatives

I was raised with manners
I was raised with respect for other people, their viewpoints, religious and beer tolerance
I was raised to respect a lady and treat her right.

I am proud of where I live, the mountains, the lakes, the breathtaking scenery, the wildlife. So yes, I suppose that could be a form of southern pride.

The civil war happened over 100 years ago, its over, get over it. We get our revenge on Saturdays in the fall.


+2 more 
posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by roguetechie
 


I'm the same way about capitolising. You'll notice alot of names and such that are lower case, its on purpose.
People should read the truth about what lincoln and the north did during the war, raping murdering starving, some of the worst war crimes in history but people still want to hold him up as special, I spit on lincoln and those in govt around him including sherman and grant and his generals.
Once a person starts learning about the truth of the War its almost unfathomable what they did to the Southland, all because of money.



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Call me a conspiracy theorist, but what if this CNN poll (no bias there
) conducted this to aid sympathy for a president who is not afraid to use the race card.

Just a thought. . . . .



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by NeoConfederate
reply to post by roguetechie
 


I'm the same way about capitolising. You'll notice alot of names and such that are lower case, its on purpose.
People should read the truth about what lincoln and the north did during the war, raping murdering starving, some of the worst war crimes in history but people still want to hold him up as special, I spit on lincoln and those in govt around him including sherman and grant and his generals.
Once a person starts learning about the truth of the War its almost unfathomable what they did to the Southland, all because of money.


Spoken like a true Southerner...I would be willing to bet that civilized America would be happy to let the welfare-ridden South go at this point. I mean you do realize that the Southern states get more federal assistance per capita than most other states, AND pay the least into the system. So as far as I am concerned you guys can take your ball and go home and cry in your cereal. The north won. I think its you who need to get over it.


+3 more 
posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by DarkKnight76
 


WRONG
States rights meant not having to pay the vast majority of taxes so that the greedy northeners could get rich.
The Confederate Constitution made it illegal for any slaves to be brought into the Confederacy, if you had em you got to keep em but no more could be brought in PERIOD. It was dying out and neither Davis or Lee or the majority of the leaders of the South liked slavery but it was ingrained and couldnt just simply be stopped on a dime.
IF slavery was the reason all the South had to do was quit fighting and rejoin the north because they didnt end slavery until AFTER the WAR was OVER. Why is that since the north was hellbent on setting slaves free?
AFTER the War Grant (famous NORTHERN general) went back to his father in laws plantation as an OVERSEER of the SLAVES.. smells like hypocrisy to me.
Slavery was war tactic that lincoln needed to get re-elected, he said publicly many times that he had no intention to free the slaves.
I know thats the only arguement northeners have, but its a poor one once you learn the history of the War.
Long Live Dixie



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by roguetechie
reply to post by Juston
 



I'm not saying it was because of slavery. The people who were polled said that.

Furthermore,

I'm very much aware as to the underlining reasons as to why the Civil War was fought.

Nor am I accusing southerners who do still support the Confederacy as being racist. All I said was that while growing up in a small town in central Texas, I saw first hand why some people loved to chant "The South will rise again."


Originally posted by NeoConfederate
...instead of asking for opinions.


Why not? As I said, I was interested in hearing why people still had these feelings.

And seriously, more power to you all who are stating why you hold your posistion, and that it dosen't relate to slavery.

See?

Y'all are disproving the poll, which to many could have been seen as racists southerners being butthurt over slavery. You guys are showing otherwise.

edit on 4/13/2011 by Juston because: (no reason given)
edit on 4/13/2011 by Juston because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:10 AM
link   
On the TCM (Turner Classic Movie) channel, they are featuring films that concern the civil war era and a very controversial film, The Birth of a Nation (1915) which was based on a very racial perspective of how events happened, especially post war reconstruction era. It has some very shocking portrayals of African-Americans and glorifies a hate group that deserves no mention here.

It actually spurred me into digging a bit deeper into the period, and even though I have just started to scratch the surface, I actually lean towards POLITICS being the main reason for so much resentment still being held.

From my understanding, it was the Republicans that were force feeding a radical Reconstruction, one that would swiftly organized the recently freed slaves into a major voting block and also have elected representatives as well.

At the same time, putting some strong restrictions on the whites who wanted to vote.


en.wikipedia.org...

The first critical step … was the registration of voters according to guidelines established by Congress and interpreted by Generals Sheridan and Charles Griffin. The Reconstruction Acts called for registering all adult males, white and black, except those who had ever sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and then engaged in rebellion.… Sheridan interpreted these restrictions stringently, barring from registration not only all pre-1861 officials of state and local governments who had supported the Confederacy but also all city officeholders and even minor functionaries such as sextons of cemeteries. In May Griffin … appointed a three-man board of registrars for each county, making his choices on the advice of known scalawags and local Freedman's Bureau agents. In every county where practicable a freedman served as one of the three registrars.… Final registration amounted to approximately 59,633 whites and 49,479 blacks. It is impossible to say how many whites were rejected or refused to register (estimates vary from 7,500 to 12,000), but blacks, who constituted only about 30 percent of the state's population, were significantly overrepresented at 45 percent of all voters.[73]


If you look further down the page linked above you can see the results in the charts that shows African-American representation during this period. This surprised me, but as I said earlier, am just starting to learn about the period of time.

It would be foolish to think that racism didn't exist prior to this reconstruction period, but I wonder if these political moves by the Republicans of the era, didn't help to incite the division so soon after the war?

Another event to check out is the:

Compromise of 1877

The Compromise of 1877, also known as the Corrupt Bargain,[1] refers to a purported informal, unwritten deal that settled the disputed 1876 U.S. Presidential election and ended Congressional ("Radical") Reconstruction. Through it, Republican Rutherford B. Hayes was awarded the White House over Democrat Samuel J. Tilden on the understanding that Hayes would remove the federal troops that were propping up Republican state governments in South Carolina, Florida and Louisiana. Consequently, the incumbent President, Republican Ulysses S. Grant, removed the soldiers from Florida before Hayes as his successor removed the remaining troops in South Carolina and Louisiana. As soon as the troops left, many Republicans also left (or became Democrats) and the "Redeemer" Democrats took control.


This was basically the Republicans abandoning the southern African-Americans so soon after inciting racial hatred in the radical reconstruction efforts.

I wonder how history would have been different if an honest (non political) attempt was made to try and usher in a new post war era with all men being free? While I do believe it would have been a bumpy road, it could have been handled in a much better manner than it was.

I may be oversimplifying on some accounts, since I have just begun trying to understand this period of time, but to this day, I still see the use of racism as a political tool to try and lock down voter blocks, which is disheartening, it seems that it has been a tool in their chest for a long long time.

Will we ever learn from our past?



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by DarkKnight76
 


Please please please tell them to let us go.. I can only dream about it
Just as long as we get to kick every lying northener out and make em stay out.
I would love love love to have Dixie clean again.
Please i'm asking you nicely with all the Southern charm I can manage
Tell them to let us go
*crossing fingers for luck*



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Reply to post by DarkKnight76
 


Judge Andrew Napalitano is from NJ (obviously not a racist Southerner). His video is on YouTube showing the war was not just about slavery.

State rights? How about nullification of unfair tax laws? Google it.

As for secession being a treasonous act, explain to me how Thomas Jefferson supported nullification and secession, and helped write a majority of the Constitution.

America seceded from England. The crown considered that treasonous. So for the colonies, it was fine, but never again?

Tell me, would you prefer committing what an over-bearing government says is treason to gain freedom, ultimately? Or would it be better to live under tyranny?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 

edit on 4/13/2011 by Lemon.Fresh because: (no reason given)
edit on 4/13/2011 by Lemon.Fresh because: (no reason given)
edit on 4/13/2011 by Lemon.Fresh because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by JacKatMtn
 


I agree that The Birth of a Nation is a very racial charged film but even today how often do you see Southrons in a good light in any kind of film. The whole race "war" has to be sustained and the best way to do it is by making Southrons look like severe racists. I dont claim that there arent racists here but they are everywhere, yes in the north too, and a growing number of em are black racists (naacp, black panthers, etc)
The northern people have to be reminded how evil the Southeners are and the best easiest way to do it is with film, its used to keep a population behind a cause. During the War the northern people were gettin tired of the fightin and not wantin to keep it going and just let the South go so thats when lincoln decided to use the slave (race) card.
Yall do know that he wanted to ship all the blacks to south america right?
he wasn't any kind of liberator he was just a politician like all the others who will lie and murder to get re-elected



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by JacKatMtn
 

If you are interested there is a sideline about reconstruction . During reconstruction Tennessee had a governor appointed named Parson Brownlow. you might want to read up on some of his exploits .He held the Tennessee legislature at military gun point to achieve a favorable vote to confiscate over 800,000 acres of land for redistribution .
He is still considered a devil in Tennessee.



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by DarkKnight76
 


You do realize the south has to have more federal assistance because of things such as SHERMANS MARCH TO THE SEA!

And the next hundred YEARS of corporate greed keeping the south a backwards dirt poor place that was PURPOSEFULLY kept from industrializing so that they couldn't rearm and fight again!

Or that after the war northern business interests came south in droves and bought for pennies on a dollar land seized from it's rightful owners... then forcing it's former owners and the former slaves to work side by side share cropping on TINY parcels of the land that was still theirs by right and had been illegally taken!

My family is from the south, and yes I am proud of that fact! No I am not a southerner though I was actually raised for the first 10 years of my life in northern california. I am not even the SLIGHTEST BIT racist,, sexist, or etc. the fact that you can't let your argument stand on it's merits and must instead bring veiled inuendo's of racism and bigotry to bear against me says it all....

But thanks for playing.



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Juston
 


Youre right, i'm glad that you actually want to know why people feel the way we do. We are a proud people (Southrons) and we come from a long line of proud people, Irish and Scottish for the most part.
The history of the South is alot better than the northeners allow to be taught in classrooms. We come from the same breed of people that gave us strong leaders like WIlliam Wallace, he didn't win either but he sure did put a fight and died for what he believed. We come from the resistant Irish, a hardy people.
All peoples have their great and their weak but with a background like what we Southeners have theres no wonder that the men of this country (CSA) were willing to leave women and children behind to go fight the War. The northern army had to burn women and children out of the homes and property to feel like they were accompishing anything. On the battlefield the South was usually outnumbered, sometimes 3 - 1 and they still won the battle. Thats Southern Pride.
Long Live Dixie





new topics

top topics



 
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join