It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Recording of Confederate (General) Julius Howell gives his fist person account of the Civil War.

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 11:09 AM
a reply to: Cancerwarrior

If your a civil war buff you should know who Shelby foote is...

Basically the biggest , confederate historian on the planet.. or was till he passed away..

If you've ever watched a civil war documentary he was in it..

I live in Memphis (his home town) and was lucky enough to get to meet him a handful of times, once got to talk to him for a couple hours where he told me the story of the civil war..

So I literally got it from the most reputable source on the planet...

Not some northern or lost cause propagandist.. literally from the most distinguished pro confederacy southern historian.... in person..

He was more than happy to throw both sides under the bus for their BS.. but being a confederate historian he took the lost cause propagandists more personally..

The north and Lincoln don't deserve credit for ending slavery, and the south doesn't deserve the cop out of states rights..

The abolitionists and black soldiers won emancipation.. not the American government..

edit on 26-8-2017 by JoshuaCox because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 11:26 AM
a reply to: Cancerwarrior

No you just copied half of the state that mentioned slavery as the cause the least's document...

"The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

This stipulation was so material to the compact, that without it that compact would not have been made. The greater number of the contracting parties held slaves, and they had previously evinced their estimate of the value of such a stipulation by making it a condition in the Ordinance for the government of the territory ceded by Virginia, which now composes the States north of the Ohio River."

"The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General "

Sure was honest of you to leave those parts out of South Carolina 's declaration of Causes...

So is that a bald face lie, or did you just get tired of reading half way???

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 11:31 AM
a reply to: MisterMcKill

Your absolutely right..

This is actually remembering your history, not pushing this weeks political propaganda..

This all didn't go down in ancient Babylon, we still have all the records..

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 12:30 PM
Joshua… seriously, dude? South was because of “White Supremacy”? Again, you need to put on those big boy pants.

Abraham Lincoln thought best way to end racism was to send them back to Africa or Central America. Segregation until time of Kennedy was direct cause from Abraham saying blacks shouldn't be elected official or jurors, go to same schools, or intermarriage. He also thought the slaves would always revolt the nation for its slavery and wouldn't grow up and put their big boy pants on. He just thought US constitution applied to them, however, it's fact he just moved slaves from South to help colonize the growing Midwest.

When you say “all southerners fought for white supremacy” is a bigot way of saying “everyone in south is racist” “everyone in south voted Bush” “Everyone in the south went to war because of oil interest and not terrorism”. I believe this is called McCarthyism.

Yeah, EVERYONE knows South had slaves, THE RICH. That doesn't make up for the 1000s of non slave owning volunteers who wanted to secede because a variety of reasons.

Taxes, recession, depression, usury, Inflation, and crooked ass Wall Street.
Tariffs for the past 70 or so years. There was so many laws and tariffs on south it was impossible for most southerners to make ends meet.
Irish was sick of being railroad slaves to Northern Industrialist and treated like second rate citizens and despised the North.
State Rights to secede from the government when it becomes too greedy and too corrupt.
Heritage and Culture, if you look at the South it is still very much still confederate in a lot of ways because it's from our right wing views of how a Republic should be run. We throw Tea Parties and OathKeeper movements, End the Fed rallies, this isn't only south's opinion but it's deeply rooted through our culture and heritage. Banks=bad, IRS=bad, Federal Reserve=bad, Wall Street=bad.

To learn about the Civil War you must understand a.) The time b.) The people c.) what was going on pre-war d.) what was going on after. I don't think you have any of that in your “theory”. You just want to say they are all racist white KKK members and didn't want to give up slaves. Yeah, the rich had influence in politics- didn't mean rest of south who didn't own slaves thought Union was a bunch of crooks!

Union is full of them who wanted to Tax Slave profits to their own brokers and banks in wall street while saying “oh, we don't have slaves because we're so liberal!” while taxing us all to death and starvation and using the tax to steal from slave owners. It's looking good while waiting for that slave money to come in. THEN you free SOME SLAVES and migrate rest of slaves to Midwest to start building the up the West. Get over yourself.
Yeah, south is responsible for a lot of bad stuff like Racism, KKK, and slavery. Only one of those was invented here. Doesn't mean that's what we all stand for. It's like saying every Republican is a white supremacist.

"Bamboozled"... LMAO

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 12:33 PM
what an amazing recording and wow the change and life that guy must have experienced

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 12:35 PM
a reply to: toysforadults

Horse and buggy to ww2..

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 12:38 PM

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Cancerwarrior

Those are totally debunked propagandists...

There is no question it was fought over slavery..

People like him pretend that since the north wouldn't have invaded to stop slavery, that means that the south didn't rebel for fear of losing it..

Those things can and are both true...

They take the fact the north likes hijack the moral high ground and pretend "they fought a war to end slavery."

When they couldn't care less about the slaves..

So in return the south has decided to pretend it wasn't about slavery at all..

Surprise , suprise. They both are lying...

The civil war (or succession) was caused by a dozen or so southern politicians and businessmen who had plans to reinstate the international slave trade . So they could be who provided the new western states with slaves..

Lincoin had promised to make all new states free states.. which would steal the slave state majority and hypothetically give the federal government the political will to abolish slavery..

Something there was zero will to do nationally..

So the " fire eaters" hyped up succession and (I think) set Jeff Davis and other figure heads up as scape goats to take the blame if it failed.

Look you guys don't know what your talking about, South Carolina especially had been flirting with succession over several issues spanning the entire time of the union.

Many states were flirting with succession prior to the civil war, the catalyst was South Carolina succeeding and the following 10 states each had varying reasons.

Stop with your propaganda already.

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 01:05 PM
My interpretation of the civil war being named such that it is...

It was the civilized against the savages.

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 01:44 PM
a reply to: loveguy

Classy. Your father's taught you to be a business man, while ours taught us to live off the land. I guess all whites, blacks, and Indians in south are just savages living in some of poorest states in the country.

Heritage Not Hate.

Some people forget all the black lives lost and burried with that flag. You'd be surprised how much money blacks donated to the Stonewall Jackson statue.

“Blacks could have escaped to nearby union lines but few chose to do so, and instead remained at home and became the most essential element in the southern infrastructure to resisting northern invasion”
-Professor Edward C Smith

edit on 26-8-2017 by Iostsheep because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 01:49 PM
a reply to: Iostsheep

are you mad about something that was said during the Civil War?

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 02:33 PM
a reply to: toysforadults

No, just after. How people can say it's a symbol of hate and "White Supremacy" is a slap to the face to the thousands of African, Latino, Chinese, Indian, and Jewish Confederates who lived and died for Dixie.

When I think of left wing "everyone is a slave loving nazi white supremacist" I think about black guy who was ran off road and died for honoring the Confederate flag and it's right to fly high. A lot of Indians, Latinos, Blacks, and Asians in the South still wave Dixie. You can call the south whatever, but proof is the equal mindset in the South. Unless you're apart of it, probably will never understand it.
edit on 26-8-2017 by Iostsheep because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 03:09 PM
a reply to: Iostsheep

I realize my writings are open to interpretation and I do try to 'steer' in the 'right' direction.
To those that misinterpretted my intent I would ask that you start from the end and work backwards to the beginning, (is how my mind works).

edit on (8/26/1717 by loveguy because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 03:59 PM
a reply to: Iostsheep

All sides were white supremacists at the time.. I wasn't pointing the finger at the south for that specifically..

One of the major talking points for the south was that the north was going to make blacks equal.

To which the federal government replied: "that's ridiculous every one knows blacks shouldn't be equals.. "

Something doesn't have to be true, for a population to be demagogued into thinking it is..

Ask Germany..

Please quote where I said All soldiers fought for white supremacy......

I said that ALL the states sited protecting white supremacy as a reason for succession..

Your equating the reason your average joe soldier fought, and the reasons the elite politicians making decisions ,made theirs...

If you had actually read any of my posts you wouldn't feel the need to include the norths opinuon. Of race relations..

"The north fought to free the slaves" is as big a lie as "the south fought for states rights..."

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 05:26 PM
a reply to: JoshuaCox

You stated it was states declaring racism, then ramble on how racist the soldiers are in their letters to prove your point.

You're saying the North didn't care about slavery, but the South was worried he would end it.

If the States was seceeding and no "Declaration of War" had been filled by the North, yet advanced on the South because they're fighting civil disorder, the Civil War was fought for States Rights. It's saying "Oh, they can't form another country.. lets get them." Despite what the actions of the politics to seceed were the entire war was based on their right to do that.

MANY PEOPLE died trying to fight for their sovereigned right, to die for Dixie- not for a handful of capitalist. You can't "What if" their purpose of seceeding if North never even acknowledges them seceeding. lol If South attacks Fort in SC because of Union Occupation and blindness to States Rights, because they DON'T acknowledge their movement,then begins to push Union troops to stop civil disorder and reunite the South into the Union, it OBVIOUSLY has nothing to do with slavery at that point.

Sure if they DID seceed, sure if they did reopen the slave trade.. but they never got too. Not because of what they are, was, or going to do, but because the North failed to acknowledge the South becoming independent.

Yea, people feared loosing their slaves, yeah they planned to open the slave trade.. what they was going to do has nothing to do with what happened. Its like saying the South didn't have news of anything to do with North, or what was going on. South knew very well.. if it was JUST about slavery.. no where NEAR the amount of people would have died.. the ones who didn't have slaves could careless.. they fought to keep the yanks out of the South and bossing them around. That's why Hillbillies and Indians took up arms.

Yea, slavery was protected and their main reason doesn't explain EVERY ONES reasoning for wanting sovereignty from Union. It's saying that they would totally ignore other Southerners reasons because only thing that matters is we have slaves. You completely ignore fact that they picked up guns because they hated...

Abraham Lincoln, Wall Street, Taxes, Tarriffs, State Rights, among many things.

Everyone knows a little secret political coup can talk about their own interest, but they never fight the war themselves. The people who do have other motives and views and their reasoning has nothing to do with any of it- they have THEIR OWN REASONS.

Like 9/11. Sure, Bush could of done it and only for oil interest... doesn't mean everyone signed on to have lower oil prices and kill Muslims because we're racist fascists. In fact I would say NO ONE would even sign up to risk their lives if that's the cause. Bush can talk oil all he wants, but it isn't why the troops fight.

"Oh war in middle east is ONLY about Oil" No.. it's about freedom, safety, our rights to be safe, it's combating terrorism, it's freeing people who are oppressed, it's stoping dictators and nut jobs. They didn't risk their lives for oil dude, they shed it for those who died on 9/11.

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 08:11 PM
a reply to: Iostsheep

The south took up arms and demanded that the US army vacate all the forts below the mason Dixon line and leave behind all armament...

Armaments and forts in most cases paid for with US tax dollars.....

The US didn't invade until after the confederacy all that and didn't fire until after the firing on fort sumner..

Lake almost every war in history no one wants to be the one who fires first, so they play a game of chess to see who does..and Lincoln out played them..

They were all flaming racists... north and south..humanity in general..

Your average abolitionists from then would make a modern day KKK member blush...

Why the soldier in Iraq choose to serve , says nothing about bush and cheneys motivation..

posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 08:50 PM
Wow, what a fantastic recording, thanks for posting it.

Incredible to think that a 101 year old chap in 1947, has more knowledge, intelligence, dignity and conviction, that all the AntiFa idiots put together.

Current Antifa and associated groups, are clear evidence of human Devolution, not advancement......

Love his accent....very British undertones, with pronunciations of certain words just like we Australians, without the modern characteristic Amerrrrrrican, Rrrrrr emphasis.....(which was an Irish and Birmingham influence).

Love the comments for the video, mentioning the "Indentured Servants" accents from England in the Colonies........

By the time they sailed to the Aust. Colonies (the original British ones) in the late 1700s, these "Indentured Servants" became know as Convicts....

Yes USA, you had 100s of 1000s of British Convicts, before Australia.....

posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 03:57 PM
a reply to: gort51

Indentured servants are not even remotely chattle slaves..

You cannot legally execute an indentured servant, nor do you own an indentured servants kids or choose who they marry..

You basically just get to decide where they work, and they go to debtors prison if they fail to pay back their contract..

Which was ubber disgusting.. but not even remotely chattle slaves..

You gotta compare American slavery to Roman or Persian slaves to be anywhere near accurate.

The only thing unique to American slavery is they reversed the dynamic..

With most slave owning cultures EVERY social group EXCEPT yours could be enslaved..

The romans could enslave anyone who wasn't a roman..

American slavery flipped that.. here you could enslave only enslave Africans..

Which I think is its own special level of evil due to the pile on effect..

posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 03:01 AM
Interesting. I have seen some very old black and white videos of Union and Confederate veterans getting together and shaking hands and talking. They were very old when the film was recorded but seeing these folks meet and talk was awesome. There seemed to be no hate. They were perhaps too mature to be bothered by negative things and would rather enjoy their lives.

It could be argued to Civil War started with the Constitution. Remember we were under the Articles of Confederation first. This proved to be too weak of a government and we would have failed without change. The debate was between the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist. One side wanted a very strong federal government and the other wanted the federal government less strong. They had some incredible debates and we got the Federalist Papers during this time.

I am not going to say slavery was not an issue in the war, because it was. I will say it is a very complicated subject and it is never about just one thing. The Southern states wanted a weaker federal government all along. The federal government had no desire to outlaw slavery. Lincoln wanted to stop it's expansion though. Keep in mind culturally the North and South were way different at that time. People in the South were getting more and more angry at the feds. They never wanted a strong federal government to begin with.

I have read and listened to many historians who said slavery was on its way out, even with no Civil War. International political pressure was strong and more and more people learned the the inferior race argument was a lie. I am not saying everyone, but. combined with the political pressure it was enough to see slavery was in its last years in America.

Many of the big power in the South knew this as well, but they were trying to hang on. Others knew that to make slavery illegal suddenly would collapse the economy. I wish people would have been smarter. I don't think the Southern states expected a Northern invasion to unify the union. They felt it was their constitutional right to leave the union.

posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 03:59 AM
a reply to: JoshuaCox

That is like asking an American soldier why they are fighting in Iraq.... how many answer proudly to help secure American access to the worlds oil reserves.....

You go boy!

I will say a couple kinda got dragged in, others it was about overreach, then you have the rest like south carolina who swears its their god given duties to have slaves and for blacks to serve whites.

posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 07:42 AM
a reply to: cenpuppie

To be fair EVERYONE, north and south felt that way...

Except maybe your extremely rare exception like john brown..

Hell that likely includes half the slaves.. when for generations you've been raised to think you are inferior, I'm sure some start to buy it.. Stockholm syndrome and all.

That the northern white were any better about race relations is as big of a lie as "states rights."
edit on 28-8-2017 by JoshuaCox because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in