Caustic Burno
Well-known member
I had ancestors fighting in that Civil War as well. The Scots-Irish were born fighting as Senator Webb wrote.
A great man
- Thread starter Ryder
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
Silver
Well-known member
I think if we've been on this side of the water long enough we all have ancestors that fought in both of those wars and the ones that followed.
sim.-ang.king
Well-known member
Some didn't swim over soon enough, and missed all the fun.
Caustic Burno
Well-known member
Our hypocrisy is pretty thick here. As a country we have provided assistance to other countries Civil Wars and secession from each other.
This is goose gander .
HDRider
Well-known member
TexasBred
Well-known member
And you would think the same of Benedict Arnold??
TexasBred
Well-known member
I do believe the very war we are discussing settled that point.
RDFF
Well-known member
In NO WAY am I suggesting that I believe slavery is acceptable or ought to be tolerated, EVER.
However, the central issue over which the Civil War was fought was NOT primarily slavery, (if it truly was, then why did Lincoln's emancipation proclamation only intend to free the slaves that were held by those rebelling States under the Confederacy? Economic crippling is a standard tactic in war against your enemy. The emancipation proclamation was an act of war by the Union against the Confederacy...
Emancipation Proclamation (pbs.org).....
Understanding States' Rights and the 10th Amendment (thoughtco.com))..........
The Civil War was fought by the South over the sovereignty of the States over and against that of the Federal government, where the Constitution reserved rights and authority to them under the 10th Amendment... States rights.
This issue had been simmering since the Constitution was written, but had begun to reach a boiling point in the 30 years preceding the Civil War... brought about at that time through federally imposed tariffs (think now about why the Revolutionary War was fought... unfair tariffs...) ...which unfairly impacted the agriculturally based economies of the southern states in favor of the industrially based economies of the northern states. Lee believed in States rights... and was willing to fight... and die if necessary, to maintain, enforce and protect the higher authority of the States, and to reign in what he saw as the oppressive hand of a burgeoning central federal authority. THAT is the reason that he famously could not fight for the federal government "AGAINST his Virginia". Essentially, the Civil War was fought by the South for the same reason that the Revolutionary War was fought over against the British. Power, and freedom from oppression. Remember too, that this was a time not THAT far removed historically from the end of that first great war in our nations history, where famous phrases like "Give me liberty, or give me death" had been enshrined. These issues were intrinsically and inseparably embedded in the DNA of these men. Honorable men like Lee saw the growing danger in this increasing "centralizing of power", and were willing, just as those who came before them, to die in order to preserve the authority of the individual States, granted to them through the efforts of the Revolutionary War, and the Constitution. Because the Confederacy was ultimately forced into surrender through military power, that oppressive hand of the federal government remained and became entrenched in history, continues to this day, and currently is viewed almost universally by our citizenry as the "higher authority".
One way that the federal government maintains this "control" over the States is the same way that it has grown to find "control" even over its citizens.................... MONEY (remember the statement I made above... "economic crippling [or dependency] is a standard tactic of war against your enemy". Federal "handout programs".... make people.... AND STATES.... beholden to the government, and dependent upon it, and it thereby wins power and control.
Be careful what you wish for. And think long and hard about all those bail outs and subsidies.
However, the central issue over which the Civil War was fought was NOT primarily slavery, (if it truly was, then why did Lincoln's emancipation proclamation only intend to free the slaves that were held by those rebelling States under the Confederacy? Economic crippling is a standard tactic in war against your enemy. The emancipation proclamation was an act of war by the Union against the Confederacy...
Emancipation Proclamation (pbs.org).....
Understanding States' Rights and the 10th Amendment (thoughtco.com))..........
The Civil War was fought by the South over the sovereignty of the States over and against that of the Federal government, where the Constitution reserved rights and authority to them under the 10th Amendment... States rights.
This issue had been simmering since the Constitution was written, but had begun to reach a boiling point in the 30 years preceding the Civil War... brought about at that time through federally imposed tariffs (think now about why the Revolutionary War was fought... unfair tariffs...) ...which unfairly impacted the agriculturally based economies of the southern states in favor of the industrially based economies of the northern states. Lee believed in States rights... and was willing to fight... and die if necessary, to maintain, enforce and protect the higher authority of the States, and to reign in what he saw as the oppressive hand of a burgeoning central federal authority. THAT is the reason that he famously could not fight for the federal government "AGAINST his Virginia". Essentially, the Civil War was fought by the South for the same reason that the Revolutionary War was fought over against the British. Power, and freedom from oppression. Remember too, that this was a time not THAT far removed historically from the end of that first great war in our nations history, where famous phrases like "Give me liberty, or give me death" had been enshrined. These issues were intrinsically and inseparably embedded in the DNA of these men. Honorable men like Lee saw the growing danger in this increasing "centralizing of power", and were willing, just as those who came before them, to die in order to preserve the authority of the individual States, granted to them through the efforts of the Revolutionary War, and the Constitution. Because the Confederacy was ultimately forced into surrender through military power, that oppressive hand of the federal government remained and became entrenched in history, continues to this day, and currently is viewed almost universally by our citizenry as the "higher authority".
One way that the federal government maintains this "control" over the States is the same way that it has grown to find "control" even over its citizens.................... MONEY (remember the statement I made above... "economic crippling [or dependency] is a standard tactic of war against your enemy". Federal "handout programs".... make people.... AND STATES.... beholden to the government, and dependent upon it, and it thereby wins power and control.
Be careful what you wish for. And think long and hard about all those bail outs and subsidies.
TexasBred
Well-known member
I see you've been reading the "lost cause" B.S. The confederacy was fighting to not only maintain slavery but extend it into any new states coming into the union. The union was fighting to preserve the union.
TexasBred
Well-known member
Mainly to foreign sympathizers as in "CSA".
ismith
Well-known member
No but I bet the loyalists would have. To them, the founders of this country were traitors guilty of sedition against the crown.
Muletrack
Well-known member
He exhibited a noble post-war humility.
Slavery has been around for thousands of years. In fact, it has never not been practiced in some corner of the world or other. Today is no exception.
Silver
Well-known member
I've listened to a few of his lectures over the last year. He is worth listening to in my opinion.
TexasBred
Well-known member
Your point??
I won't judge modern day Egyptians for enslaving the Hebrews.
Lee VanRoss
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2020
- Messages
- 2,392
- Reaction score
- 2,682
George III signed with 13 States as Individual Entities thus recognizing 13 nation states. Whether intended or not the act served to give the lesser
states equality with the likes of New York and Virginia. The dispicable act of declaring a slave as half a man was a recipe for political , social and
economic disaster. Would we have succeeded as a Republic had we followed a different course? Was, is there a purpose of tieing this nation of
free men together with the blood of slaves? The brevity of time set for me and my position in the affairs of man does not allow me to answer.
That table has been set and the meal consumed. It is time to reset the table and give praise as one voice for the bounty before us. LVR
states equality with the likes of New York and Virginia. The dispicable act of declaring a slave as half a man was a recipe for political , social and
economic disaster. Would we have succeeded as a Republic had we followed a different course? Was, is there a purpose of tieing this nation of
free men together with the blood of slaves? The brevity of time set for me and my position in the affairs of man does not allow me to answer.
That table has been set and the meal consumed. It is time to reset the table and give praise as one voice for the bounty before us. LVR
Agree! Civil war had little todo with slavery. Same as today. Problem is federal intervention.
Caustic Burno
Well-known member
Last l read Houston is the capital of the US slave trade today.
