Gov. Barbour: Slavery Not Significant

[OL FU]

So where is your thread condemning Confederate History Month then in the first place? The war ended 150 years ago. Civil Wars continue to this day across the globe. Why obsess over a bunch of traitorous, bigoted people whose primary reason for rebellion was KEEPING SLAVES.

Source: 1860 US Census

Oh Christ. Not this again. Accoriding to the 1860 Census, about 1.5% of the ENTIRE us population held slaves. Also, an estimated .015% of the population held 20-30% of the slaves. Also, the % of blacks in slavery in 1860 was about 14% as compared to 16% in 1850, 17% in 1840, 18% in 1820 andn 1830 and 19% in 1790, 1800 and 1810. Mechanization was making slavery obselete(as it had done in other countries). I understand that slave holders were in politics, but you also have to remember, that slavery was king closer to the coasts. Geographically speaking, the further in you went, the less likely you were to come across slave owners, especially in Mountainous areas (like West Virgina, Tennesee and upstate South Carolina/Georgia/North Carolina). So, to say that these people fought to maintain slaves they didn't have or cared about, is inaccurate. I'm not defending slavery, it was horrible. But if you think the primary reason was b/c 1.5% wanted to keep slaves, then you are ignorant to the facts of history and should continue study beyond high school and what the US Gov't (the victor) has told you. There was an economical issue. Economics is why wars are fought (oil in Iraq) BUT you use an ideology to get the majority population to agree to it (free the slaves, free the Iraqis).

And the slavery issue was about economics. The slaves owners controlled the vast majority of wealth in the south. As I said, most southerners fought the war to 'protect the homeland". But the economic interest of the slave holders ws the reason for secession. Maybe we are saying the same thing.

[Ibanez]

Yes, the Confederate soldiers were duped. Your IGNORANCE, whether real, or the result of slanted education or willful disregard, is very disturbing.

Why did the states not secede until an ABOLUTIONIST was elected President if the underlying condition was not SLAVERY?

Secession was about many issues, but the main one was slavery. Any doubts? Read South Carolina's secession documents. They give lots of high sounding reasons for secession (and some were probably legitimate) but if you read the entire document the picture is clear. South Carolina was protecting it's wealth, human capital.

http://facweb.furman.edu/~benson/docs/decl-sc.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am certain that the vast majority of confederate soldiers fought for their homeland, just like most soldiers do.

That's true, but when people think of Confederate history, they think all the whites held slave and all the whites wanted to keep blacks in bondage, when really it was less than 1% of the population. That's the real issue, that the average Southerner didn't own slaves and sure as hell wouldn't fight for one.

[Ibanez]

Source: 1860 US Census

Oh Christ. Not this again. Accoriding to the 1860 Census, about 1.5% of the ENTIRE us population held slaves. Also, an estimated .015% of the population held 20-30% of the slaves. Also, the % of blacks in slavery in 1860 was about 14% as compared to 16% in 1850, 17% in 1840, 18% in 1820 andn 1830 and 19% in 1790, 1800 and 1810. Mechanization was making slavery obselete(as it had done in other countries). I understand that slave holders were in politics, but you also have to remember, that slavery was king closer to the coasts. Geographically speaking, the further in you went, the less likely you were to come across slave owners, especially in Mountainous areas (like West Virgina, Tennesee and upstate South Carolina/Georgia/North Carolina). So, to say that these people fought to maintain slaves they didn't have or cared about, is inaccurate. I'm not defending slavery, it was horrible. But if you think the primary reason was b/c 1.5% wanted to keep slaves, then you are ignorant to the facts of history and should continue study beyond high school and what the US Gov't (the victor) has told you. There was an economical issue. Economics is why wars are fought (oil in Iraq) BUT you use an ideology to get the majority population to agree to it (free the slaves, free the Iraqis).

And the slavery issue was about economics. The slaves owners controlled the vast majority of wealth in the south. As I said, most southerners fought the war to 'protect the homeland". But the economic interest of the slave holders ws the reason for secession. Maybe we are saying the same thing.

We are saying the same thing. Think about it, The USA had cheap raw materials from the south. They were cheap b/c slaves weren't paid. NOw, you have a foreign country that will not only pay a tarriff, but will charge you more. I've said it time and again, Economics is the reason we fight wars, 500 years ago and today.

[Ibanez]

I've spent the last 9 years of my life studying slavery and the Civil War. Not just from the side of the CSA, but from the vantage point of the North, from it's poor to the industrialists as well as its politicians. I don't care about slavery, but secession is an inalieable right when you are a free state and join a union. If I join the Knights of Columbus, I have every right to leave.

[native]

Bruce Catton (I think most of us can agree that he was probably the most objective Civil War historian out there) once said that the Civil War had many causes. However, there was one cause that had it not been present, the war would likely not have happened. That cause was slavery.

I can't really argue with that. However, this whole latest flap caused what's his name at CNN to call Confederate soldiers "terrorists". That, along with the continual chronic condescension of our Yankee neighbors is what puts Southerners in a fighting lather to begin with. Jon, your ignorance is so astounding I don't know where to begin in terms of what books to suggest to you, other than ones that have big letters, pretty pictures and come with crayons. Really.

I see absolutely nothing wrong or improper in commemorating Confederate war dead. They were some of the finest soldiers ever seen in this hemisphere. The Army of Northern Virginia is still considered on both sides of the pond to be the best mobile army prior to major industrialization. This was primarily due to the private Confederate infantryman, who, almost 100% of the time never owned a slave nor profited from others' ownership of the same. Those soldiers fought because once the ball started rolling, the only choices were fight or be subjugated in the predicted manner that was proven true in Atlanta and Columbia. (The third choice was face the noose for draft evasion).

good points. Another regarding confederates as traitors. I am one of those that partially buys into the argument of don't judge 18th century men by 21st century standards. I say partially because in the 18th century there were people that understood that slavery was an abomination, (some of those men were probably slave owners ) so if some could understand why not others. However, it is tossed around in many of these discussions and ignored by many, but certainly people in the 1860s, especially southerners, regarded themselves as citizens of their state first and the United States second. Lee is a good example as he would have certainly been the commander of the union troops if Virginia had not joined the confederacy. We can apply our modern patriotism to this all we want, but it simply did not exist, at least in the south, as we know it today in 1860.

Two superior posts.

[dbackjon]

Bruce Catton (I think most of us can agree that he was probably the most objective Civil War historian out there) once said that the Civil War had many causes. However, there was one cause that had it not been present, the war would likely not have happened. That cause was slavery.

I can't really argue with that. However, this whole latest flap caused what's his name at CNN to call Confederate soldiers "terrorists". That, along with the continual chronic condescension of our Yankee neighbors is what puts Southerners in a fighting lather to begin with. Jon, your ignorance is so astounding I don't know where to begin in terms of what books to suggest to you, other than ones that have big letters, pretty pictures and come with crayons. Really.

I see absolutely nothing wrong or improper in commemorating Confederate war dead. They were some of the finest soldiers ever seen in this hemisphere. The Army of Northern Virginia is still considered on both sides of the pond to be the best mobile army prior to major industrialization. This was primarily due to the private Confederate infantryman, who, almost 100% of the time never owned a slave nor profited from others' ownership of the same. Those soldiers fought because once the ball started rolling, the only choices were fight or be subjugated in the predicted manner that was proven true in Atlanta and Columbia. (The third choice was face the noose for draft evasion).

You agree with my point, but then call me ignorant? What you drinking over there...What the hell do they teach you at the Citadel?

I have a GREAT UNDERSTANDING of the Civil War, thank you very much. The War was about Slavery, no ifs, ands or buts, no matter how the hopeless Southerners try to spin it.

[Ibanez]

Bruce Catton (I think most of us can agree that he was probably the most objective Civil War historian out there) once said that the Civil War had many causes. However, there was one cause that had it not been present, the war would likely not have happened. That cause was slavery.

I can't really argue with that. However, this whole latest flap caused what's his name at CNN to call Confederate soldiers "terrorists". That, along with the continual chronic condescension of our Yankee neighbors is what puts Southerners in a fighting lather to begin with. Jon, your ignorance is so astounding I don't know where to begin in terms of what books to suggest to you, other than ones that have big letters, pretty pictures and come with crayons. Really.

I see absolutely nothing wrong or improper in commemorating Confederate war dead. They were some of the finest soldiers ever seen in this hemisphere. The Army of Northern Virginia is still considered on both sides of the pond to be the best mobile army prior to major industrialization. This was primarily due to the private Confederate infantryman, who, almost 100% of the time never owned a slave nor profited from others' ownership of the same. Those soldiers fought because once the ball started rolling, the only choices were fight or be subjugated in the predicted manner that was proven true in Atlanta and Columbia. (The third choice was face the noose for draft evasion).

You agree with my point, but then call me ignorant? What you drinking over there...What the hell do they teach you at the Citadel?

I have a GREAT UNDERSTANDING of the Civil War, thank you very much. The War was about Slavery, no ifs, ands or buts, no matter how the hopeless Southerners try to spin it.

It isn't spin if its fact. To the ordinary fighting man the was was not about slaves. Why would anyone, in 1861 or 2010 volunteer to fight something they have no vested interest in? You don't. You fight for Gay Rights b/c you have a vested interest in it. They fought for what they believed was an oppressive government, not some Rich man's plantation and his 25 slaves. Slaves meant nothing to the majority of Southerners. Look at my post from the 1860 Census, 1% of the ENTIRE US POPULATION held slaves. Remember, the USA has its spin on its history as well, the truth is in the middle.

[OL FU]

To the ordinary fighting man the was was not about slaves.

Wars are fought by ordinary folks, but they are rarely about ordinary folks.

[mainejeff]

Slavery was still more significant than the State of Mississippi.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

You agree with my point, but then call me ignorant? What you drinking over there...What the hell do they teach you at the Citadel?

I have a GREAT UNDERSTANDING of the Civil War, thank you very much. The War was about Slavery, no ifs, ands or buts, no matter how the hopeless Southerners try to spin it.

It isn't spin if its fact. To the ordinary fighting man the was was not about slaves. Why would anyone, in 1861 or 2010 volunteer to fight something they have no vested interest in? You don't. You fight for Gay Rights b/c you have a vested interest in it. They fought for what they believed was an oppressive government, not some Rich man's plantation and his 25 slaves. Slaves meant nothing to the majority of Southerners. Look at my post from the 1860 Census, 1% of the ENTIRE US POPULATION held slaves. Remember, the USA has its spin on its history as well, the truth is in the middle.

and the beating continues.

Great posts Ibanez you got it and your victim is clueless.....