Yet another example of Republican Christofascism.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-07-2017, 06:11 AM
RE: Yet another example of Republican Christofascism.
(01-07-2017 11:59 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Read my entire post. They were forced to fight. The average soldier didn't own slaves or land. They didn't give a damn. The rich people were running the show.

Facts again, my friend. Check your facts.

While it's true that there was conscription in the South, the vast majority of Southern soldiers were volunteers.

From Encyclopedia.com - The Confederate Army

Quote:The white male population of the eleven Confederate states, aged fifteen to thirty‐nine, was approximately 1 million. The best estimates of total Confederate enlistments range from 850,000 to 900,000. Less than 2,000 men served in the regular army; nearly all were in the Provisional army, a force intended to be disbanded at the end of the war.

At the outset, the South had more volunteers than it could arm and equip, forcing the army to turn away some 200,000 volunteers that it would soon sorely miss. In June 1863, the army peaked at almost 475,000 men...

...only 82,000 were actually conscripted.

So less than 1 in 10 (82,000 out of at least 850,000 enlistments) were conscripts. The rest were volunteers. But it is true that the majority of them didn't own land or slaves. They did, however, fall for the propaganda that the Southern way of life was at risk and the only recourse was to take up arms.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Heath_Tierney's post
03-07-2017, 10:56 AM
RE: Yet another example of Republican Christofascism.
(01-07-2017 11:14 AM)morondog Wrote:  No sense of irony with this guy, eh? I mean... He's calling for people who want to remove monuments dedicated to slavery... to be lynched? Rolleyes

Hey BlkFnx, why were the South so damn keen on slaves that they went to war over it, if slavery was such a non-issue? Do *please* correct my misconceptions of history Smile

To answer your question the war between the north and the south was not about slavery. Actually read the emancipation proclamation. The war was about the tariffs placed on importing manufacturing equipment to the south. Consider the question of why slavery was ended everywhere else in the western world without a war, and yet in the Americas we had to fight a war? So what finally ended slavery elsewhere? Industrialization.

If the south had not been prevented by northern monopolies from industrialization it is not unreasonable to presume that slavery would have ended with far less bloodshed. Especially when you read the personal journals of slave owner's who admit owning slaves was wrong, but that they feared ending the evils of slavery only to be left with the evils of poverty. I am not saying that i think their objections were valid(i don't), it doesn't mean i don't understand the concern.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-07-2017, 11:04 AM
RE: Yet another example of Republican Christofascism.
(01-07-2017 11:59 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(01-07-2017 11:46 AM)TheBear Wrote:  Correct. It's a battle flag. Question for you to think about is - What were they battling for?

Read my entire post. They were forced to fight. The average soldier didn't own slaves or land. They didn't give a damn. The rich people were running the show.
Your also leaving out entire slave regiments that fought on the side of the south.

Question: why would you give a slave a gun? Is there some historical perspective which we in the modern world are missing that might answer this question. No serious think about the question. Your a slave your master gives you a gun. What do you do?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-07-2017, 12:59 PM (This post was last modified: 03-07-2017 01:28 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Yet another example of Republican Christofascism.
(01-07-2017 11:09 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  This is a yankee misconception. It's like saying that the "rebel" flag is a racist flag, or a symbol of racism. I find this particularly humorous when Yankee's see black southerners with a confederate flag https://www.youtube.com/embed/snGlGGvsB0s . or when they learn about Jim Limber Davis or about blacks who fought for the south.

I am in no way making a justification for slavery. I am however sick and tired of this narrative that all or even most southerners owned slaves. This is in itself a bigoted view, and a distortion of history.

The monuments are not about the glorification of slavery, rather it's about honoring those who died defending their homes. Again most of those who fought and died did not own slaves.

They were defending a system which demanded that slavery be continued, at a time the entire world was rejecting it. Slavery WAS the primary cause of the Civil War. Trying to re-write history as something else, is dishonest.

http://www.livescience.com/13673-civil-w...myths.html

The monuments are glorifying a political system and the people who sought to SAVE that system, which approved of the enslavement of other human beings.

I also think taking down the monuments is bad. Not for the reasons generally given but because trying to re-write history and pretending these events never happened, and trying to forget how HEINOUS slavery was, and its APPROVAL by these states' governments is shameful, and should never be forgotten.

BTW, the war between the North and the South WAS about slavery.
All one has to do is actually READ the secession documents from the states. SLAVERY is named in them as the primary or one of the primary, causes for secession .

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Bucky Ball's post
03-07-2017, 01:27 PM
RE: Yet another example of Republican Christofascism.
So this guy is trying to say that the slave regiments that were as they were slaves forced to fight for a confederacy are somehow justification for his sick position ? He can fuck right off in my opinion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-07-2017, 01:49 PM
RE: Yet another example of Republican Christofascism.
(03-07-2017 12:59 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(01-07-2017 11:09 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  This is a yankee misconception. It's like saying that the "rebel" flag is a racist flag, or a symbol of racism. I find this particularly humorous when Yankee's see black southerners with a confederate flag https://www.youtube.com/embed/snGlGGvsB0s . or when they learn about Jim Limber Davis or about blacks who fought for the south.

I am in no way making a justification for slavery. I am however sick and tired of this narrative that all or even most southerners owned slaves. This is in itself a bigoted view, and a distortion of history.

The monuments are not about the glorification of slavery, rather it's about honoring those who died defending their homes. Again most of those who fought and died did not own slaves.

They were defending a system which demanded that slavery be continued, at a time the entire world was rejecting it. Slavery WAS the primary cause of the Civil War. Trying to re-write history as something else, is dishonest.

http://www.livescience.com/13673-civil-w...myths.html

The monuments are glorifying a political system and the people who sought to SAVE that system, which approved of the enslavement of other human beings.

I also think taking down the monuments is bad. Not for the reasons generally given but because trying to re-write history and pretending these events never happened, and trying to forget how HEINOUS slavery was, and its APPROVAL by these states' governments is shameful, and should never be forgotten.

BTW, the war between the North and the South WAS about slavery.
All one has to do is actually READ the secession documents from the states. SLAVERY is named in them as the primary or one of the primary, causes for secession .

Yes Bucky I agree. I think the monuments should stay up but with different plaques underneath the statues explaining what happened and why slavery was such a horror for the people who endured it. (of course that opens another can of worms in regards to the wording on a plaque) It should be in the same vein as holocaust memorials. We shouldn't forget history or bury it.

The Civil War was about states rights....states rights to own slaves.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-07-2017, 08:29 PM (This post was last modified: 03-07-2017 08:42 PM by epronovost.)
RE: Yet another example of Republican Christofascism.
(03-07-2017 10:56 AM)BlkFnx Wrote:  So what finally ended slavery elsewhere? Industrialization.

Actually, slavery did ended through armed conflict in other places, especially in Africa. More than industrialization, its revolutions that brought the end of slavery. While not as dramatic as the American Civil War, these were violent conflicts. Industrialisation severely weakenned slavery as an economical structure, but never destroyed it completly. Changes to fundamental political and economical structures were always necessary and these changes are almost always violent. It's true though that economical disparities between Northern and Southern States are extremely important in how slavery came to an end (officially) in the US.

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-07-2017, 08:55 PM
RE: Yet another example of Republican Christofascism.
I am against any and all attempts to wipe out history.

Destroying historic buildings/statues or whatever deprives future generations of tangible remnants of times gone by.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Dom's post
03-07-2017, 09:07 PM
RE: Yet another example of Republican Christofascism.
(03-07-2017 08:55 PM)Dom Wrote:  I am against any and all attempts to wipe out history.

Destroying historic buildings/statues or whatever deprives future generations of tangible remnants of times gone by.

That's the only argument I can agree with, but obviously the "LYNCH EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES" comment was way too far.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2017, 12:47 AM
RE: Yet another example of Republican Christofascism.
(03-07-2017 08:55 PM)Dom Wrote:  I am against any and all attempts to wipe out history.

Destroying historic buildings/statues or whatever deprives future generations of tangible remnants of times gone by.

I think the symbolism is important. No one would argue that it's necessary to keep every statue placed by the third reich for example. Or every statue of Saddam. They have their place in a museum, but not necessarily in a place of honour?

I used to think as well, that the history was important to preserve, but it's not like anyone's gonna forget that it happened anytime soon.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: