rhomas
Banned
dukes_daddy, perhaps you should study the true history and facts behind the War of Northern Aggression. If you will, you'll find that in 1856, when Andrew Jackson was POTUS and John C. Calhoun was VP (both of them born in SC, and Calhoun still living and previously representing the state) secession was threatened over the tariffs and unfair taxes pushed on the cotton farmers by the Northern political powers. Southern growers were prohibited from selling cotton directly to European nations and were forced to sell it directly to Northern cotton brokers. These brokers were able to extort high tariffs and taxes from the growers through the forced monopoly created by the Federal government. It was Andrew Jackson who at the time threatened to send Union troops into his own birth state to enforce the Federal laws that were crippling Southern commerce.
When SC did secede, Fort Sumter, which belonged to the state of SC was invaded and taken over, illegally by Lincoln's orders, and thus the war was begun. The institution of slavery was already dying out in the South due to the invention of the cotton gin and other farm implements. Many of the slave holders were already granting acts of manumission to many of their slaves, and also giving them portions of land to live on and farm as share croppers prior to the war. Take into account the fact that most of the freed slaves assumed the last names of their former owners as an indication of how there was a bond and a relationship between master and slave. Also, remember that there was not a single Southern ship owner who ever transported a slave to the shores of this nation. That ignominious job was completely done by Dutch, English and Northern ship owners who first bought the slaves from the native African chiefs who sold many of their conquered enemies and their own people into slavery. Also take note that when Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation, the act did not extend to the Northern states that still had slave owners; but only to the Confederate states that at the time were not a portion of the Union. Actual abolition of slavery wasn't mandated until Andrew Johnson assumed the Presidency after Lincoln was assassinated and during Reconstruction.
Historians have studied the South and prior to the revisionist history that is being taught today, the conclusion is that if Lincoln had just left the South alone, slavery would have gone the way of the dodo bird, simply due to the economics of the time. Also remember that less than 1% of the Southern whites actually owned slaves in the first place. It's a fact that Harriet Beecher Stowe, stirred the abolitionist movement with her fictional novel "Uncle Tom's Cabin", it's also fact that she never set foot below the Mason-Dixon Line and had no personal knowledge of what actually was the truth about slavery in the South. The entire abolitionist movement was financed and supported by those same individuals who were making money hand over fist to exploit the cotton markets of Europe and deprive the Southern growers of huge portions of the profits........profits that not only were cut, but then heavily taxed as well!
For those individuals who actually believe that slave owners mistreated their slaves is ludicrous and unfounded. Just as a farmer today wouldn't abuse his $100,000.00 tractor, the slave owners didn't abuse their property that in antebellum times cost approximately the same as today's dollars! It's also fact that in the rare instances when plantation owners discovered that one of their overseers did mistreat any slaves, those overseers ( who in many instances were Northerners hired by the owners and even in some instances former slaves who had been freed) those overseers were terminated for mistreatment. (Again, even in Stowe's book, Simon Legree was a yankee overseer hired by the plantation owner.)
The simple fact is that people today can't grasp the concept of what life was truly like in the deep South, prior to the invasion by Union forces. Slavery as it was practiced wasn't the evil institution that it's been portrayed, and unfortunately today's modern slavery issues don't even get discussed in the media or any of the social commentaries that are prevalent in today's modern world.
When images of fascism are linked to the old South and to political conservatism, you are acting like the Harriet Beecher Stowe of the 1800's in perpetuating a false and misleading image in order to promote an anti-socialism agenda. Tea party adherents are actually anti-fascists if you get down to the facts and the issues they represent. Any other misrepresentation is the act of someone who is blinded by the Obama liberalism and the blatant socialism that is destroying the fabric of this nation today.
BTW, please provide evidence that any tea party protest or actions have in any way, shape, or form, created any situation of conflict and disruption of civil order. I believe you have the tea party confused with the occupy movement which is at the least a communist organization and at the most, the largest civil conflict inducing event of the last 40 or 50 years.
When SC did secede, Fort Sumter, which belonged to the state of SC was invaded and taken over, illegally by Lincoln's orders, and thus the war was begun. The institution of slavery was already dying out in the South due to the invention of the cotton gin and other farm implements. Many of the slave holders were already granting acts of manumission to many of their slaves, and also giving them portions of land to live on and farm as share croppers prior to the war. Take into account the fact that most of the freed slaves assumed the last names of their former owners as an indication of how there was a bond and a relationship between master and slave. Also, remember that there was not a single Southern ship owner who ever transported a slave to the shores of this nation. That ignominious job was completely done by Dutch, English and Northern ship owners who first bought the slaves from the native African chiefs who sold many of their conquered enemies and their own people into slavery. Also take note that when Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation, the act did not extend to the Northern states that still had slave owners; but only to the Confederate states that at the time were not a portion of the Union. Actual abolition of slavery wasn't mandated until Andrew Johnson assumed the Presidency after Lincoln was assassinated and during Reconstruction.
Historians have studied the South and prior to the revisionist history that is being taught today, the conclusion is that if Lincoln had just left the South alone, slavery would have gone the way of the dodo bird, simply due to the economics of the time. Also remember that less than 1% of the Southern whites actually owned slaves in the first place. It's a fact that Harriet Beecher Stowe, stirred the abolitionist movement with her fictional novel "Uncle Tom's Cabin", it's also fact that she never set foot below the Mason-Dixon Line and had no personal knowledge of what actually was the truth about slavery in the South. The entire abolitionist movement was financed and supported by those same individuals who were making money hand over fist to exploit the cotton markets of Europe and deprive the Southern growers of huge portions of the profits........profits that not only were cut, but then heavily taxed as well!
For those individuals who actually believe that slave owners mistreated their slaves is ludicrous and unfounded. Just as a farmer today wouldn't abuse his $100,000.00 tractor, the slave owners didn't abuse their property that in antebellum times cost approximately the same as today's dollars! It's also fact that in the rare instances when plantation owners discovered that one of their overseers did mistreat any slaves, those overseers ( who in many instances were Northerners hired by the owners and even in some instances former slaves who had been freed) those overseers were terminated for mistreatment. (Again, even in Stowe's book, Simon Legree was a yankee overseer hired by the plantation owner.)
The simple fact is that people today can't grasp the concept of what life was truly like in the deep South, prior to the invasion by Union forces. Slavery as it was practiced wasn't the evil institution that it's been portrayed, and unfortunately today's modern slavery issues don't even get discussed in the media or any of the social commentaries that are prevalent in today's modern world.
When images of fascism are linked to the old South and to political conservatism, you are acting like the Harriet Beecher Stowe of the 1800's in perpetuating a false and misleading image in order to promote an anti-socialism agenda. Tea party adherents are actually anti-fascists if you get down to the facts and the issues they represent. Any other misrepresentation is the act of someone who is blinded by the Obama liberalism and the blatant socialism that is destroying the fabric of this nation today.
BTW, please provide evidence that any tea party protest or actions have in any way, shape, or form, created any situation of conflict and disruption of civil order. I believe you have the tea party confused with the occupy movement which is at the least a communist organization and at the most, the largest civil conflict inducing event of the last 40 or 50 years.
Last edited:
