question about linclon and slaves
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-07-2015, 03:20 PM
question about linclon and slaves
My mom was telling me that Lincoln freed the slaves in the south but refused to free them in the north. Is this true?

I don't think it is as it doesn't make sense to have half a country free and the other half not.

Thanks
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2015, 03:23 PM
RE: question about linclon and slaves
(17-07-2015 03:20 PM)purpledaisies Wrote:  My mom was telling me that Lincoln freed the slaves in the south but refused to free them in the north. Is this true?

I don't think it is as it doesn't make sense to have half a country free and the other half not.

Thanks

The Emancipation Proclamation only freed the slaves in still rebellious areas. So yes that is true.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
17-07-2015, 03:23 PM
RE: question about linclon and slaves
(17-07-2015 03:20 PM)purpledaisies Wrote:  My mom was telling me that Lincoln freed the slaves in the south but refused to free them in the north. Is this true?

I don't think it is as it doesn't make sense to have half a country free and the other half not.

Thanks

Well, yes and no. Read this.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
17-07-2015, 03:31 PM
RE: question about linclon and slaves
(17-07-2015 03:23 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(17-07-2015 03:20 PM)purpledaisies Wrote:  My mom was telling me that Lincoln freed the slaves in the south but refused to free them in the north. Is this true?

I don't think it is as it doesn't make sense to have half a country free and the other half not.

Thanks

Well, yes and no. Read this.
Thank you very much
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2015, 04:01 AM
RE: question about linclon and slaves - The Blog of Sincerity
That seems rather unusual. Slavery was not prominent in the North anyway - most were freeman. When Lincoln "Freed slaves", his intention was to free them all.

The Blog of Sincerity

He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression.
-- Thomas Paine,
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2015, 01:52 PM
RE: question about linclon and slaves
Slavery was not abolished until the thirteenth amendment was ratified in December, 1865. Lincoln was long dead by the time that happened.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Minimalist's post
17-08-2015, 06:27 PM
RE: question about linclon and slaves
(17-08-2015 04:01 AM)Forthright Atheist Wrote:  That seems rather unusual. Slavery was not prominent in the North anyway - most were freeman. When Lincoln "Freed slaves", his intention was to free them all.

The Blog of Sincerity

Not really unusual at all. Slavery was the pillar holding up the agriculture based economy of the South. The emancipation proclamation was designed to attack the South at its core, both politically and economically. It also had an intended goal of encourage rebellion among the Southern slaves.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BryanS's post
20-08-2015, 06:15 AM
RE: question about linclon and slaves
Here is an interesting article that delves into the mindset of Lincoln and the motives for his actions. You may be surprised to discover that Lincoln was racist. . .

http://atlantablackstar.com/2015/05/05/n...ck-people/

(22-08-2015 07:30 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  It is by will alone I set my brows in motion it is by the conditioner of avocado that the brows acquire volume the skin acquires spots the spots become a warning. It is by will alone I set my brows in motion.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2015, 08:56 AM
RE: question about linclon and slaves
(20-08-2015 06:15 AM)Octapulse Wrote:  Here is an interesting article that delves into the mindset of Lincoln and the motives for his actions. You may be surprised to discover that Lincoln was racist. . .

http://atlantablackstar.com/2015/05/05/n...ck-people/

Not really, I'm always amazed how much people want to project modern sensibilities back 150 years. For the time he was a progressive, kind of silly to hold him to current standards when 3/4 of the republicans running for president right now would fail that.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
20-08-2015, 10:16 AM (This post was last modified: 20-08-2015 10:21 AM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: question about linclon and slaves
(17-08-2015 06:27 PM)BryanS Wrote:  
(17-08-2015 04:01 AM)Forthright Atheist Wrote:  That seems rather unusual. Slavery was not prominent in the North anyway - most were freeman. When Lincoln "Freed slaves", his intention was to free them all.

The Blog of Sincerity

Not really unusual at all. Slavery was the pillar holding up the agriculture based economy of the South. The emancipation proclamation was designed to attack the South at its core, both politically and economically. It also had an intended goal of encourage rebellion among the Southern slaves.

This is correct, though he also feared that the border territories (e.g. Missouri) would join the South, and he only made the Proclamation after Congress had already done two such proclamations, in the two prior years (1861 and 1862), and a Union general had made his own Proclamation, which Lincoln was forced to order rescinded; once it was clearly too late to worry about appearing politically neutral and just "keeping the country together" (not a quote), he also wanted to bang a drum for a Cause to rally dwindling support for the war effort, which everyone thought would have been over by the time he made the Proclamation. Instead, the South had handed him a string of pretty disheartening defeats, so he waited for a victory at Antietam (or as we call it in the South, Sharpsburg) to make the announcement.

Lincoln was extremely progressive-thinking, for his day, but he was still at his core a politician and a lawyer. He was much more in favor of gradual, legal emancipation, believing that even though it was morally wrong, the solution would be found in economics and laws that favored a non-slave economy, not forcing people to give up their slaves (the slaveholders' property and productive "equipment") at gunpoint, even rhetorical gunpoint. Once it became obvious through the war that his solution was not viable, he changed tactics to turn Abolitionism into a cause the Yankee public could be made to rally behind (for the South, it was always about slavery, no matter what revisionists say). He was a progressive thinker, but a pragmatic political moderate, who just happened to become the leader during radical times that allowed for little moderation.

Edit to Add: Lincoln also changed his mind about making the EP when the South began to make some headway toward getting support for their war effort from European nations that stood to benefit from the cotton and other agricultural products of the South, which the US Navy had been interdicting/blockading; by linking the US government with an anti-slavery stance, he highlighted for the Europeans (who had laws outlawing slavery, already) that they could not recognize the Confederacy as a legitimate government without violating their own laws.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: