Yes, Honoring the Confederacy is Like Honoring Nazi Germany or Any Other Hate Group

confederate-flag-southI’ve lived in Texas my whole life, so it’s not at all uncommon for me to see decals on vehicles, t-shirts, hats or countless other pieces of paraphernalia depicting the Confederate flag. And while it’s not shocking for me to see a flag that represents the belief by some that they should have the right to own other human beings like property, often treating them with the utmost cruelty, it’s never made any sense to me how parts of this country still “honor” this flag and those who fought for it.


It’s not a “symbol for Southern pride” – it’s a symbol for hate, barbaric cruelty, racism, murder, oppression, abuse and shame.

In my eyes, honoring the Confederacy is like honoring Nazi Germany.

There is a big difference, however: Modern day Germany is ashamed of its horrific history, whereas millions of Americans honor those who fought to preserve their “right” to treat African-Americans like pieces of property.

It’s absolutely ridiculous.

Now, am I saying the two movements were exactly the same? No, of course not. But the ideologies of both groups (Nazis/slave owners) are similar in that they viewed a specific demographic of people like some sort of subhuman animals to be abused or slaughtered. While Nazi Germany was about genocide whereas the Confederacy was focused on slavery and basically treating people like farming equipment, it’s undeniable that both groups treated the people they abused/killed/enslaved like they weren’t human beings or equal to them in any aspect.

Now I’ve heard the ridiculous notion that the Confederacy wasn’t about defending slavery, it was about states’ rights. Right, and Nazi Germany was just about some Germans expressing their nationalistic pride.

The reason states’ rights were an issue prior to the Civil War is because of slavery. Abraham Lincoln opposed slavery into western territories while southern states wanted to expand the barbaric practice. Without going into every mundane detail that led up to the Civil War, it essentially comes down to these slave-owning states recognizing that their “right” to own slaves was in jeopardy, so before Lincoln was even inaugurated the Confederate States of America were created. Hell, Lincoln hadn’t even been president a month before the Confederacy fired the first shots of the Civil War against Fort Sumter.

Oh, by the way, the Confederacy was essentially a treasonous group that declared war against the United States government. You know, the government created by our Constitution and elected by the American people. Because nothing says “proud patriotism” and “Constitutional values” quite like seceding from the United States, opening fire on one of its military installations and trying to create your own nation – all because you don’t like the fact that your ignorant opinions about how things “should be” lie in the minority of what most Americans think.

Just think about that for just a moment – the Confederacy attacked a United States fort. If something like that occurred today, those responsible would be labeled domestic terrorists – not honored by millions of Americans in the South.


But here we are, in 2015, and there are several states where people can order license plates “honoring” the Sons of Confederate Veterans. Yes, a license plate honoring those who were fighting for the right to not only keep slavery – but expand it.

Here’s the intro from the website for the Sons of Confederate Veterans:

The citizen-soldiers who fought for the Confederacy personified the best qualities of America. The preservation of liberty and freedom was the motivating factor in the South’s decision to fight the Second American Revolution. The tenacity with which Confederate soldiers fought underscored their belief in the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. These attributes are the underpinning of our democratic society and represent the foundation on which this nation was built.

Today, the Sons of Confederate Veterans is preserving the history and legacy of these heroes so that future generations can understand the motives that animated the Southern Cause.

The highlights were added by me to point out the parts I found the most ridiculous.

So, the Sons of Confederate Veterans believes that those who fought to preserve slavery “personified the best qualities of America” and that “liberty and freedom” were the motivating factors.

They’re joking, right? Are they really trying to claim that fighting to ensure slavery would continue was about “liberty and freedom”?

What about “liberty and freedom” for the slaves they wanted to continue to own? 

Oh, then they have the gall to say that the Confederacy was fighting to underscore “their belief in the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.” Unless, of course, you were a slave, then you had no Constitutional rights – at least according to the Confederate States of America.

It never ceases to amaze me how people try to romanticize the Civil War by justifying their defense of a group of traitors who strongly opposed the ending of slavery by claiming they were just fighting against “government overreach” and “trying to preserve freedom and liberty.”

Sounds eerily familiar, doesn’t it? One group of people claiming to be fighting to preserve freedom… while trying to oppress, disenfranchise or discriminate against another group.

It’s amazing how much our country has changed since the 1860’s – yet how much still seems to remain the same. Maybe that’s why so many conservatives don’t believe in evolution, because it seems for quite a few, especially in the South, they haven’t evolved much in over 150 years.

The South does need to “rise again” – into the 21st century.



 

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • John

    Thank you so much for writing this. As someone who grew up in a Neo-Confederate household, I know firsthand all of the ridiculous arguments that they use.

    Acting like it was singularly about states’ rights is laughable. States’ rights to own slaves, perhaps, would be a better term. There is no defense for that.

    The fact that we even allow the flag to still be flown is mind-boggling.

    • apostateCourier

      I certainly don’t feel safe around people who fly the Confederate flag. They might be the sort that would kill a transperson like myself if they had the chance.

      • GeorgePurvis

        That statement could be true for anyone.

      • apostateCourier

        Hardly. The chances of having a violent altercation is much increased if the person in question is a confederate celebratist.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Prove it.

      • congero

        Which states have the most discriminatory laws against gays? Would it be the South and midwest?

      • GeorgePurvis

        Why don’t you provide some sources?

      • congero

        By the way I visited your website and I am sorry I did.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Thank you for the visit. Learned something did you? If you disagree with anything you are free to post in a civil manner.

      • congero

        No I didn’t learn a thing I hadn’t heard from southern bigots before.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Then you are simply engaging in willfull ignorance.

      • congero

        I went to your site and I assure you the ignorant one here is not me. Good day!

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlasS1ZDOUQ

      • GeorgePurvis

        Prove it. Post some facts.

      • congero

        Lol. Snippy remarks at this point is all you deserve.

      • GeorgePurvis

        That is because snippy remarks is all you have.

      • congero

        Not hardly but all you’ve got is a willful misreading of history.

    • GeorgePurvis

      Slavery was not the cause of the war. Money was the cause.

      • generalleeme

        Wow…another aggressive Lost Cause AND Neo-Confederate apologist.

    • Daniel Brizendine

      Actually both of you need to take an Old South or Civil War history class. As those of us that study this formally it is not as simple or black and white as you would like to make it.

      Lincoln was an abolitionist but supported the return of Africans to Africa and did not believe that they should have the right to vote or freedom of movement. The problem is too many people want to make this about one issue, but there were many issues involving the decade of the 1850’s among them slavery but also elections and westward expansion.

      Remember many of the people that fly the flag the battle jack of Confederate troops many of the them are trying to remember their own family and kinfolk.

  • Kipco

    Waving a Confederate flag is like farting in a crowd…you’re only doing it to be obnoxious.

    • GeorgePurvis

      Yes sort of like you.

      • Kipco

        Brilliant comeback there, ace. You must be a Texan!

      • GeorgePurvis

        Yes it was wasn’t it. You must be a yankee.

      • Kipco

        Actually it wasn’t…your sarcasm detector must be on the fritz..and yes, I am a proud Yankee. We won the war, after all, so why shouldn’t I be? 🙂

      • GeorgePurvis

        Actually it wasn’t…your sarcasm detector must be on the fritz..and yes, you are just a Yankee. Well you had a little help from the Germans, couldn’t even fight your own fight.
        You still smell like a bad fart.

      • Gary Menten

        Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses Grant, William Tecumseh Sherman, Phillip Henry Sheridan, George Henry Thomas, David Glasgow Farragut, David Dixon Porter, George Gordon Meade, Winfield Scott Hancock, John A. Logan, Francis Preston Blair , James Birdseye McPherson, John H. Sedgewick,James McMurtrie Gregg, Ranald Slidell Mckenzie, John Buford, …yeah there’s a bunch of German names for you (snark)

        But as long as we’re talking about not fighting your own fight, then’s how about mentioning that from beginning to end, Southern strategy depended on forlorn hope of British and or French intervention on behalf of the Confederacy.

        Yeah…that’s what happens when you start war against an opponent with three times your numbers, three times your money and all you have to go to war with are cotton, slaves and arrogance. You have to snivel up to a foreign power and hope that their craving for cotton is somehow stronger than their public distaste for slavery. Oops…it wasn’t.

      • GeorgePurvis

        LOL LOL LOL Than you you gave me an opening I needed.

        “The Confederate Veteran (long published in Nashville, Tenn.) states: “In the Confederate Army and Navy in 4 years there were 605,000 men. In the Union Army and Navy in 4 years there were 2,778,000 men. When we entered the World War in 1917 our Government was sending across to Germany $83,000 a year in pensions. Of this sum $67,000 was for Civil War pensions paid to aliens hired to subjugate the South. If this sum was still being sent 52 years after Appomattox, how much more must have been sent to these hirelings 10 or 15 years after the struggle ended?

        One of my former students was placed in charge of teaching the illiterates at Camp Lee in World War I. At their first meeting a crowded room was asked “who is this Camp named for? And then, what did General Lee do?”

        [T]hen a lanky mountaineer rose and said: “He’s the chap that licked the Huns the other time.”

        When you consider the facts listed above you realize that there was more truth than error in that ignorant reply. With 75,000 more mercenaries, and many of them Germans, in the opposing force than the total enlistments in all the army and the navy of the South, “Lee was the chap that so often licked the Huns the other time.”

        (Some Things For Which the South Did Not Fight, Henry Tucker Graham, Bowman Printing, 1946, pp. 10-11) Back to top

        ******************************
        You forgot the name Hitler. Look it up

      • John

        As a Southerner, really not sure why you’re defending the confederacy. I’m not ashamed of the South, but I think we can all mock the silliness of the Confederacy and the Neo-confederates.

        Also, what does 1860’s Germany have to do with the Third Reich…?

      • GeorgePurvis

        Why shouldn’t I defend the Confederacy? is there something about the truth that offends you?
        Mock on bud, I will prove you wrong everytime
        Well these 1860’s Germans were the ancestors of the 1939 Nazi. Not all of course but at least some.

      • Artist in Resonance

        So now THIS is what you do with your life?

        That war has now been decidedly OVER for a century and a half now. The Union was preserved, slavery was abolished and YOU WEREN’T THERE! You never were there and you never will be. You have obviously never accepted that reality, George. It’s not your personal history.

        Get a damn grip. dude. You do not live in the C.S.A. THERE IS NO SUCH PLACE!

        YOU live in the U.S.A. THIS is your country. Look at your money, dummy. Get real. What does it say?

        Get a purpose, George, something saner and more manly than blaming history you didn’t make for the life you did. The only person denying you the life you want is YOU by nursing a grudge that isn’t even yours instead of YOU living YOUR life HERE and NOW. How many shots at life do you get???

        DON’T FUCK THIS UP.

      • GeorgePurvis

        What I do with my life is my business, what you do is your business. Beside you are doing the same thing I am just not as well, so what is your beef?

        Ok so does your views apply to the author of this article and all those who replied as well? If not why not?

        I never said it was my history, but it is the history of my ancestors and I want the truth to be told. Not some bigoted, biased lies but the actual truth which YOU do not know!!!!

        I have a purpose and it is to make fools of people like you using true historical fact, sorta like the one below.

        Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable – a most sacred right – a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world.mlin166489.html#3088fcuyhi5mWzLB.99

      • Erdman West

        George and his kind a SICK SICK SILK BRAINWASHED AND FULL OF FEAR AND BLIND HATE.
        NOT PENETRABLE!!

      • Artist in Resonance

        Yeah, I know… It’s still fun the throw Hammers of Truth at ’em though.

      • GeorgePurvis

        I notice you haven’t posted one “hammer of truth” when do you start?

      • Artist in Resonance

        It helps a little to want to see.

      • GeorgePurvis

        but you can’t prove me wrong. All you can do is attack with insults. LOL LOL LOL what an idiot

      • John

        Again, not sure what you’re getting at with the Germans. If my grandson becomes a mass murderer, does that make me a mass murderer or someone who supports that? Of course not. It’s a bit strange to lump the grandfathers of evil men together with their grandchildren.

        Anyway, I simply see no reason to defend the Confederacy. They fought against my country, and thankfully were soundly defeated. Confederacy =/= modern day south. While the South does have *a lot* of things currently wrong with it, I’m not ashamed of it and I’m glad to here live here. But we shouldn’t defend a dark time in our history.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Because of the title of this article.

        The truth ought to be told about the cause of the war and some of the myths and lies told about the war should be corrected. I don’t know about The Confederacy fighting against your, perhaps in some sort of view that might be correct. The Confederacy simply defended against an invasion, nothing more, nothing less. They didn’t start the war, slavery was not an issue, Anderson and his men were not starving and the Confederates did not fire the first shot at Sumter, unless you mean the actual fort.

        Last but not least, the United States Flag carries more baggage than the Confederate flag. That fact is easily proven by a simple internet search. therefore when you have a trashy article titled “Yes, Honoring the Confederacy is Like Honoring Nazi Germany or Any Other Hate Group” which is written by a bigoted, history challenged idiot, then I am obligated to stand up and defend the Confederacy with facts, as all Americans should

      • sevengray

        If there were no slaves how would the south finance their secession?

      • GeorgePurvis

        Well without the South how was the North supposed to finance themselves?

        Your question. I am not sure where to go with it. With secession, the South still had their slaves, The federal even passed the 13th Adm, to protect slavery if the seceded states would come back to the Union. The newly formed Confederate states refused.

        The war was about money, the collection of revenue, plain and simple. Buchanan said it, Lincoln said it and Johnson said it after the war.

        As an example —

        Edited for length
        War of the Rebellion: Serial 001 Page 0117 Chapter I. CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. – UNION.

        These were the last instructions transmitted to Major Anderson before his removal to Fort Sumter, with a single exception, in regard to a particular which does not in any degree affect the present question. Under these circumstances it is clear that Major Anderson acted upon his own responsibility, and without authority, unless, indeed, he had “tangible

        Page 118

        evidence of a design to proceed to a hostile act” on the part of the authorities of South Carolina, which as not yet been alleged. Still, he is a brave and honorable officer, and justice requires that he should not be condemned without a fair hearing.

        ————–On the very day, the 27th instant, that possession of these two forts was taken the palmetto flag was raised over the Federal custom-house and post-office in Charleston; and on the same day every officer of the customs, collector, naval officer, surveyor, and appraisers, resigned their offices. And this, although it was well known from the language of my message that, as an executive officer, I felt myself bound to collect the revenue at the port of Charleston under the existing laws.

        With great personal regard, I remain, yours, very respectfully,

        JAMES BUCHANAN.

      • sevengray

        Ok lets try another route ….(shakes head)

        AHOW DID THE SOUTH GENERATE ITS MONEY?

      • GeorgePurvis

        Well they worked. How did the slave traders of New England repair their slave ships and pay their crews? Where did most of the money to the US government come from?
        Shake head twice

      • Gary Menten

        The North had nearly three quarters of the bank deposits in the country, dumb-ass.

      • GeorgePurvis

        gee look how smart we are disputing a United States document by the sitting president of the United States. no wonder haven’t a clue about history

      • Gary Menten

        I certainly have a better clue about history than you do, not to mention spelling, sentence structure and punctuation. Keep dreaming of that plantation house George.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Really, you don’t prove it with your facts. keep dreaming you actually know something
        Thank you for putting your ignorance on public display.

      • Gary Menten

        Don’t get me going about your so-called “facts” Jughead. You don’t know the meaning of the word.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Wow I am really scared.

        yes I can see how I don’t know the meaning of “facts” when I post something from a sitting president and you dispute it. How stupid can you get???your bigoted sources,, that will sooth your bruised ego.

        And here is more just to send you on your way —

        War of the Rebellion: Serial 123 Page 0185 UNION AUTHORITIES.

        BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

        Whereas, in and by the second section of an act of Congress passed on the seventh day of June, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and sixty-two, entitled “An act for the collection of direct taxes in insurrectionary districts within the United States, and for other purposes,” it is made the duty of the President to declare, on or before the first day of July then next following, by his proclamation in what States and parts of States insurrection exists:

        Now, therefore, be it known that I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States of America, do hereby declare and proclaim that the States of South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, North Carolina, and the State of Virginia – except the following counties: Hancock, Brooke, Ohio, Marshall, Wetzel, Marion, Monongalia, Preston, Taylor, Pleasants, Tyler, Ritchie, Doddridge, Harrison, Wood, Jackson, Wirt, Roane, Calhoun, Gilmer, Barbour, Tucker, Lewis, Braxton, Upshur, Randolph, Mason, Putnam, Kanawha, Clay, Nicholas, Cabell, Wayne, Boone, Logan, Wyoming, Webster, Fayette, and Raleigh – are now in insurrection and rebellion, and by reason thereof the civil authority of the United States is obstructed, so that the provisions of the “Act to provide increased revenue from imports to pay the interest on the public debt, and for other purposes,” approved August five, eighteen hundred and sixty-one, cannot be peaceably executed, and that the taxes legally chargeable upon real estate under the act last aforesaid lying within the States and parts of States as aforesaid, together with a penalty of fifty per centrum of said taxes, shall be a lien upon the tracts or lots of the same, severally charged, till paid.

        In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

        Done at the city of Washington this first day of July, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and sixty-two, and of the Independence of the United States of America the eighty-sixth.

        ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

      • Gary Menten

        What absolute twaddle! The overwhelming majority of foreign-born soldiers serving in the Union armies were immigrants to the United States. Of these, many were of German origin, yes. But there were also Irishmen, Swedes, Italians, Hungarians….

        As to those thousands of foreign volunteers who specifically came to America to fight on the Union side, they were not “recruited” by the US government and I quite assure that not single one of them paid the trip at his own expense to fight across the sea for $16.00/month. They came because of the cause or for the adventure or both. If the average Northerner was fighting to restore the Union and could care less about slavery, the same was not true of many of the foreigners fought on the Union side. That so few foreigners chose to fight for the Confederacy (and there were some) is a roaring tribute to the worthlessness of the Confederacy’s cause. If the cause were worth anything, it should have been attracting as many foreigners as the North did. Why didn’t it?

        Thanks for your recital of Confederate myth, new and old. It’s always very entertaining.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Well then they took the money and went back to Germany and became the ancestors of future German soldiers who killed Americans.
        I would say the same races fought for the CSA, just not hired killers, at least none that I have found.

        Slavery was not a cause to the start of the war. Neither side really cared about them one way or the other.

        I noticed you posted no source to dispute my post. just your opinion. Thanks for coming here and verifying yankee bigotry.

      • Gary Menten

        Wrong, wrong wrong. Northerners didn’t care much about slavery. Southerners cared very much about slavery and its extension into the territories. This was THE right that the hotheads in SC were most interested in protecting and its high time you come to accept this fact. You can re-write history; you can’t rewrite the facts. If the issue was not on people’s minds and controversial, why then was it absolutely forbidden for cadets at West Point to even discuss it?

        As to German veterans of the Civil War being the grandfathers of future Germans who killed Americans in the World Wars, it is sheer idiocy to so suggest they were responsible for what their great grand children did 60 or 80 years later almost as it’s idiocy to suggest that Germans today are responsible for what their grandfathers and great grandfathers did in the 1940’s.

        As to my Yankee bigotry….You got it wrong again sparky. But why should that surprise anyone as you haven’t gotten a single thing correct to date. I’m Canadian, but thanks for the epithet. You really need to educate yourself more in your own history. Incidentally, do you mind answering the question I posed earlier? Why is it no foreigners volunteers flocked to take up the Confederate cause?

        As to sources:

        McPherson, James M.
        “The Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era”

        Foner, Eric.
        “Free Soil, Free Labour, Free Men: The Ideology of the Republican party in the 1850’s”

        Elkins, Stanley
        “Slavery: A Problem in American Instutional and Intellectual Life.”

        Genovese, Eugene D.
        “The Political Economy of Slavery”

      • GeorgePurvis

        Southerners may have cared about slavery, but it still was not the cause of the war. If you think so bring some documents that prove your point. Your opinion is meaningless.
        Well if as the article implies the Confederate flag is the same as Nazi Germany’s flag, then the German vets who fought for the Union are responsible for the Nazi’s
        Oh so fizzle,, you’re Canadian, gee am I supposed to be impressed.. You still pull the yankee bigotry rope. As for my education in American history, I will match you any day on facts, all you have to is bring some.
        Your sources are crap. They are biased and one sided in their views. It is nice to know you need a biased persons persons views to tell you about the war.
        My sources are James Buchanan, Abe Lincoln, The congressional Globe, Official Records of the war of Rebellion and of course the Confederate veteran. maybe you have heard of some of these?
        And Fizzle you still haven’t brought any sources disputing the posted figures.

      • Erdman West

        You have NOTHING AND PROVE IT EVERY TIME. WHERE ARE YOUR BOOKS?
        [Not hate propaganda bullshit either.]

      • GeorgePurvis

        They are on the bookshelf. No I don’t loan them.

      • Annie

        George – Have you read the Confederate States’ declarations? – they are all about slavery and nothing else. And the constitution of the Confederacy guarantees that slavery will continue forever and cannot be changed.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Yes I have read them and I fully understand them. Did you notice the section In the Texas declaration about Indian raids? How about this from the Mississippi doc — It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.

        Regardless of the reasons for secession, none of these docs are declarations of war.

        Also if the issue was slavery the seceded states could have simply rejoined the Union under this amendment passed by Congress–

        The Thirteenth Amendment —
        “No Amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any state, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.” –Joint Resolution of Congress, Adopted March 2, 1861

      • Annie

        George – you say elsewhere you are 12, if this is true it is very sad that children today are still being taught that the confederacy was not about owning slaves.

        As far as the Corwin Amendment – it was never ratified (thank goodness) and it was a failed attempt to get the seceding states to return to the union.

        Here is the start of the Mississippi declaration:

        “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery– the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.”

        Your quote was one on the list “justifying” slavery.

        Read newspapers from 1860 and 1861 – the slaveholding states were very clear that they were seceding and fighting because of the fear that the north and the federal government was planning to abolish slavery.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Annie,
        Do you really believe I am 12. Even if I am everything I have said is historical fact that not one person has been able to prove wrong.
        The Corwin amendment was passed and on the way to ratification. All the states that had left the Union could have simply come back and kept their slaves.is law. The ratification process was stopped because Lincoln sent an invasion fleet to Charleston, thus starting the war.

        This is also part of the Miss. declaration why didn’t you post it????

        ” It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.”

        On what list? What makes you think your cherry picked quote is more important that mine???? These docs in no way are declarations of war.

        Why don’t you post one document by any notable Confederate leader that says we are fighting for the Institution. Why don’t you post one Confederate government document that says the same???Who was going to abolish slavery Not Lincoln. He says this in his first inaugural — “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so”

        .
        Also remember Lincoln’s EP did not free the slaves of loyal slave owners and That West Virginia came into the Union as a slave state. Now with that being said show me something that states the Federal government went to war to free the slaves.

      • Erdman West

        You ROCK Annie. It is painful to listen to people like George Purvis who are truly brainless [seriously] but we have to call them out or they start murdering helpless people in church!!!

      • Adolf Skroatler

        Edman West, are you serious, you think someone is going to start murdering helpless people in church if you don’t call them out? You are a special kind of stupid.

      • Anandakos

        That is not the “Thirteenth Amendment”. It’s a bill to amend the Constitution passed by the outgoing lame-duck Congress just before the new Republican majority was about to take office.

        No state ever ratified it, because those who would have declared themselves independent of Congress.
        Here’s the real Thirteenth Amendment:
        Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
        Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

      • CoolBreeze

        You are wrong. Three states did ratify, the Corwin Amendment to the US Constitution: Ohio, Illinois, and Maryland.

        While it was before the new congress, it was without the 7 Deep South States. This would easily tip the balance of power to the Republicans generally, and Yankees specifically.

        And, the day after passage, Lincoln endorsed it in his Inauguration Speech.

        —Abraham Lincoln said:

        “I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution—which amendment, however, I have not seen (sic)—has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service…. [H]olding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.”

        He not only lends his support, but is stating that he believes it does nothing but restate what is already guaranteed in the Constitution. He believes it is Redundant, therefore is happy to have it if it makes others happy.

        The South could have easily had the Corwin Amendment, had it been willing to remain in the Union. The nail in the coffin of that hope was delivered the day after Fort Sumter, when the President illegally demanded that the States turn over their Militias for punitive expeditions against their sister States. The Four Upper South States of VA, NC, TN & AR, accounting for fully half of the Citizenry of the Confederacy, most of the industry, and legitimacy to observers in Europe through Virginia’s leading role in its continued contribution of Statesmen and Military Leaders since the founding of the US. These State all felt their Neighbors were overreacting, and could still be brought back into the fold peacefully. This changed immediately as they were ordered to mobilize their Militias to be handed over to Federal Command to invade their Neighbors. They replied almost in unison that the Federal Government would receive not one soldier to oppress another State, but they would pledge their entire State to another’s Defense. Yet, they did not yet Secede until the the announcement that their States were declared part of the Blockade of Confederate Ports. Not yet Confederate, it became obvious the North was going to War with them as well, whether they wanted it or not, so they joined the Confederacy.

        Driven to war by Abraham Lincoln.

      • Gary Menten

        My sources are well-researched academic publications sparky.

        The fact that you may not like what they say is as irrelevant as your lunatic opinions.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Fizzle I don’t give a crap about your biased and bigoted sources. You still haven’t proven me wrong. So why do you keep dodging the question of money sent to Germany.
        I have never studied the nationality of Confederate enlistments, I am sure the naval blockade and amount of bounties had something to do with the numbers
        Anyway –Thank you for proving my point, I said the Yankees couldn’t win the war by themselves. Good job.

      • Erdman West

        George is indoctrinated to the point of shere IDIOCY. Notice all other sources are “biased”. Typical RW and said so many are programmed that way!!!

      • GeorgePurvis

        If my sources are biased what are yours???

      • Gary Menten

        Sources are not biased and bigoted because you disagree with them and accusing people of bigotry when they disagree with you is just indicative of your mental laziness.

        As to Yankees couldn’t win the war by themselves, consider the words of the late Shelby Foote, hardly a Yankee.

        “I’ve often said the North fought the war with one hand behind it’s back. If things had ever gotten really tough, they would have just brought out the other hand. The South never had a chance.”

        Put in another way, your opinion is bullshit. The South, after trying unsuccessfully for a decade to seize foreign territory through purchase or filibustering, for the precise purpose of expanding slavery, tried to secede illegally, and fired the first shots in a war that most Southerners were too stupid to know they could never win. They rolled the dice and lost big time, 150 years ago. Deal with it. You’ll never own that plantation you crave….

      • GeorgePurvis

        Sure your sources are biased and bigoted, especially Forner. Mine however are documents of the United States government, and even these do not tell the whole truth, so I use secondary sources, letters, newspaper accounts of the day etc.
        Well we can discount Foote, after all you provided some figures that support the claim that the Yankees could not win by themselves. Add your figures to my figures and we have quite a group of soldiers don’t we?
        I never said the South could win, I said the North couldn’t win by themselves. I do think however that the war, conducted by Americans would have come too a stalemate, had Lincoln been willing and the country would have been United WITHOUT all the bloodshed. That is an opinion.
        Let’s put your comments in the proper context, yes the south lost, I have no need to own a plantation, the war wasn’t about slaveryfe, thisis what I do, I see you do the same thing— nearly, and if YOU KNEW ANY REAL HISTORY YOU COULD DEBATE WITHOUT THE INSULTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • Erdman West

        Lee knew it was hopeless and wrong he fought for his state and said this!!!:

        We failed, but in the good providence of God apparent failure often proves a blessing.

        Robert E. Lee
        Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/r/robert_e_lee.html#0uzIkzzA7XeTRPFi.99

      • Erdman West

        BRAVO!!!!!!

      • Erdman West

        Are you a 12 yr old? Well?

      • GeorgePurvis

        Yes I will be 13 in a few months. Ir is a shame that as young as I am, I am still smarter than you. I am well thank you –and you?

      • Erdman West

        Here is some TRUTH> What say you?:

        Vex Arcana https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Tappan_Thompson
        The very man who designed the Confederate flag, William Tappan Thompson
        called it “The White Man’s Flag”. he also elaborated on that theme when
        he said about the flag: “As a people we are fighting to maintain the
        Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored
        race; a white flag would thus be emblematical of our cause. … As a
        national emblem, it is significant of our higher cause, the cause of a
        superior race. ” The Confederate flag is and was created to be nothing
        more or less than the racist symbol or standard that it is. Flying the
        Confederate flag in America is tantamount to if the NAZI flag was to be
        flown over government buildings in Germany…

        William Tappan Thompson – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

        William
        Tappan Thompson (August 31, 1812 – March 24, 1882) was an American
        humorist and writer, who co-founded the Savannah Morning News newspaper
        in the 1850s, known then as the Daily Morning News. One of his most
        famous works is Major Jones’s Courtship, a novel in epistolar form. As a
        writer, Thom…

        en.wikipedia.org

      • GeorgePurvis

        L LOL Wikipedia really???

        What say I —

        Now, irrespective of the moral aspect of this question as to whether there is a right or wrong in enslaving a negro, I am still in favor of our new Territories being in such a condition that white men may find a home—may find some spot where they can better their condition—where they can settle upon new soil, and better their condition in life_ I am in favor of this not merely (I must say it here as I have elsewhere) for our own people who are born amongst us, but as an outlet for free white people everywhere, the world over—in which Hans, and Baptiste, and Patrick, and all other men from all the world, may find new homes and better their condition in life.

        ********************

        “The whole nation is interested that the best use shall be made of these territories. We want them for the homes of free white people.” ~ Lincoln, on whether blacks – slave or free – should be allowed in the new territories in the west, October 16

        **************************************************

        Charleston, Illinois on September 18, 1858 (Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, vol. 3, pp. 145-146):

        “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”

        And if you want to play the Nazi angle lets go. See my follow-up post.

      • GeorgePurvis

        1. Hitler like Lincoln started their respective war by invading peaceful countries.

        2. Hitler and Lincoln both arrested political enemies and newspapers editors who disagreed with them.

        3. The invasion, murder, rape pillage and burning of civilians and their property by Union soldiers is the same as what Hitler’s army did. The scorched earth policy of Sherman and his views toward blacks are more in tune with Nazi Germany.

        4. The attacks on the Native Americans at Sand creek , killing unarmed men women and children by the Union army is the same thing Hitler’s army did.

        5. The removal of the women at Roswell Georgia is the same type of thing the Nazi army did with the Jews.

        6. Abe Lincoln’s quotes regarding blacks is more in (goose) step with Nazi Germany than that of Davis, Lee, Jackson, Stephens or other southern major players.

        7. The racist attitude of the US Army toward blacks until about 1955 when the US military was integrated is more like Nazi Germany. The USCT were not considered to be on the same level as the white US forces. They were paid less.

        8. The Black slaves and soldiers of the Confederacy were paid equal to that of the white CSA soldiers and were even allowed to draw pensions!!!!

        9. Much like the German soldiers executing American POWs the Union executed surrendering Confederates at Marianna, Florida.

        10. The Germans and The Yankees persecuted the Jews; see Grant’s order to remove Jews from Tennessee.

        11. Lincoln’s policies and ideas of a strong central government (dictator communism socialism) were admired by Lenin, Stalin and Hitler. The Confederacy was exactly what none of them wanted.

        12 The Yankee POW camps were more or less the same as Nazi concentration death camps. The POWs were starved, abused and tortured beyond belief even while medical supplies and clothing was at hand.

        13. It was the Union army who employed Germans within their ranks. This is proven by the German pension information I have already posted. Sorta makes me wonder how many descendants of these German soldiers would later fight against the US or imprison a Jew???

        14. Like the Nazi’s of the 1930’s, for the Yankee sympathizers there is still a hate today for their fellow countryman, even though they are of the same race, state or country. Most Nazi sympathizers have gone quite while most Yankee sympathizers continue to spew their vomit of hate, bigotry and biased ignorance toward anyone who knows more about the War for Southern Independence. They do this while hiding behind a wall of religion or grasping for some other moral high ground. Shame they have no clue the high ground is located in the truth.

        15. The imprisonment of Japanese Americans was the same as Hitler did to the Jewish Germans

        16. At Waco the The United States had no problem in killing women and children, much like Hitler’s Gestapo.

        15. Last but not least, I am not saying there is a family connection, I know this is not the most numerous surname on the planet, but —-

        Adam Hitler (First_Last)
        Regiment Name 16 Massachusetts Infantry
        Side Union
        Company E
        Soldier’s Rank_In Prv.
        Soldier’s Rank_Out Prv.
        Alternate Name
        Notes
        Film Number M544 roll 19

        Christ Hitler (First_Last)
        Regiment Name 1 U.S. Res. Corps Mo. Inf.
        Side Union
        Company G,K
        Soldier’s Rank_In Pvt.
        Soldier’s Rank_Out Pvt.
        Alternate Name Christian/Hittler
        Notes
        Film Number M390 roll 22

      • Adolf Skroatler

        I do believe Lincoln was a terrible person, propped up by the papers and history books to appear like a saint. but Stalin had the scorched earth policy, but I digress, please continue on. Dang it, number 4, the American army was very bad about killing unarmed combatants after they surrendered, but continue.

      • Erdman West

        Purvis is far to UNINTELLIGENT AND BRAINWASHED. to understand your lucid and factual account but others with more intelligence and humanity will read and understand.Thank You!!!!

      • GeorgePurvis

        To bad you are smart enough to post one actual fact.

      • Erdman West

        Lee knew he would fail and hastened the end with mass slaughter of his own rebel soldiers.[ie Gettysburg] The only argument his Pres an VP would hear.
        Then they ran like the COWARDS they were. They were cowards like you are Purvis.
        God Damn you and your ilk for attempting to destroy America again!!!

      • GeorgePurvis

        me a coward? is that why you hide behind a keyboard and make insults? You are an uneducated idiot, just like all those in your family who came before you.
        So why does the truth offend you — BECAUSE YOU A STUPID!!!!!!

      • Erdman West

        Typical RW insult instead of fact or logic!!

      • Erdman West

        Grant knew from the beginning he would fail. I believe he set the massive slaughter because it is the only way the terrorist traitors who ran the south like ISIS would give up.

      • Gary Menten

        You can believe in the tooth fairy if you want to.

        First and foremost, Grant didn’t fail; he succeeded. Second the massive slaughter in the summer of 1864 has more to do with the changing tactics and that Lee who was every bit as aggressive as Grant was usually able to predict with tremendous accuracy what Grant’s next move would be.

        A bit of warning here; Grant accompanied the Army of the Potomac in 1864 and directed its movements but did not command it. It was still commanded by Meade and still suffered the same sort staff work and communications it had since the days of McClellan. Every movement ordered by Grant was sloppily executed such that even when he had a leg up on Lee, some corps or divisional commander would bumble it.

      • Ellen H.

        If you’re referring to the Revolutionary War, the Prussians/Germans actually helped the English.

      • Kipco

        When ad hoc is all you have, you’ve lost the argument just like your side lost the war.

      • John

        You Yankees won a battle not the war; the war is not over
        yet. There will be a rise of the Fourth Reich and America will be divided again by the northern
        and southern states, it is only a matter of time.

      • Erdman West

        You must be ASSHOLE KING!!!

        I am from Taylor County and am one who loves the REAL SOUTH which is the non-racist south.
        You love to hate and you fear retribution [which is coming up our stinking ASS!!!!]

      • GeorgePurvis

        I said nothing about racism. You are not smart enough to even know what you read.!!!!!!!!!!
        No retribution will never get up my ass, your head will be in the way.

      • generalleeme

        Yeah right…you NEVER said anyting about racism. You seem to just revel in it though.

      • Erdman West

        LIKE YOU!! NO you!!!! no YOU! NO you!!!! no YOU! NO you!!!! no YOU! NO you!!!! no YOU! NO you!!!! no YOU! etc HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

      • GeorgePurvis

        Thank you a very good display of your ignorance.

      • Erdman West

        DavidD

        2 days ago

        I’m a third generation Texan and a vet.I honor the Confederate
        soldier as I honor the Federal.Most of my people were Mountain people
        back then that wanted to stay out of it but I had people on both sides.
        The
        flag belongs in the graveyard with the rest of the Confederacy .It
        should be honored only there and only in remembrance of those who gave
        up their lives to defend their community and for no other reason because
        slavery had to go.

      • Erdman West

        Purvis is as fear filled and programmed as they come!!!

      • GeorgePurvis

        but I know the facts. Perhaps you should challenge me .

    • Adolf Skroatler

      Uh oh, Kipco is a commie.

      • Kipco

        If believing that makes you hate me, then good. I welcome your hatred.

      • Adolf Skroatler

        ahhhh Kipco, I never mentioned that I hated you. Not all people hate you. I don’t even know you. Heck, you might be a real swell guy for all I know. Please enjoy the rest of your day, and please continue to post your thoughts.

  • Ruthann Oliver

    Info from my Civil War and Reconstruction Course:
    From 1500 to about 1820, it’s estimated about 12 and a half million
    people crossed the Atlantic from East to West, 12 and a half million people over 3 centuries. Of those 12 and a half million people about 10 million were slaves. Two and a half million were Europeans.

    Slavery in the western hemisphere was plantation slavery, not household slavery. There was all sorts of slavery and there was plenty of household slavery and slaves did all sorts of work but the center of gravity of slavery was the slave plantation.

    The Southern United States, the Caribbean, and Brazil in the 19th century were places where slavery was the foundation of the economy, the
    foundation of the social order, where slaves were a majority or nearly of the
    population, where the presence of slaves was the key economic, political, and social factor in those societies. In these societies, slavery is much more
    brutal, much more heavily disciplined, policed, and much harder to get out of. Pathways from slavery to freedom are far more restricted in slave society — and the US.

    The American South was the most closed of any slave society. Avenues to
    freedom, access to freedom was more difficult for most of American history in this country than in almost any other slave society and also racist ideology, although present in all slave societies, at least in the Western hemisphere there is no slave society in Western hemisphere that did not produce an ideology of racism in order to justify the enslavement of African people. But racism was most intense in the United States.

    At the base of the law of slavery is that the slave is property; that’s number one, completely under the will of the master and more generally of the white community at large. All the original 13 colonies had slavery
    in one form or another, many more in the south than in the north.

    In the 1860 Census, gives you a rundown of all the different property–forms of property in the United States. The slaves were property, right? They’re people, but they’re property. As property, in 1860, the slaves,
    the four million slaves, were worth $3 billion dollars. That’s 1860 billion dollars, not today. The combined value of the railroads, factories and banks, in the United States, was two and a half billion dollars.

    In other words, the slaves, as property, were worth more than
    all the banks, railroads and factories put together. That’s not something
    people are going to give up very easily.

    The South used economics as blackmail to further their political agenda.
    This political/economic power and slavery itself were what the South fought for-nothing more, nothing less.

    Foner, E. (2011). The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery. Great book if you want to learn about the Civil War.

    • GeorgePurvis

      Eric Foner Really??? I could think of better sources

      http://southernheritageadvancementpreservationeducation.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?2009004.post

      How about if I told you, and could provide documents that the South could have kept their slaves simply by rejoining the Union?

      • congero

        You keep pushing this bs. Yes the North and Lincoln were trying to save the Union and at the start of the war at least for the North it was about keeping the Union together but the South included protection of slavery in it’s seceding documents. They most certainly were fighting to protect that institution. Two competing economic systems one industrial and one agricultural based on forced slaved labor were coming to a head. Near the end of the war the fight became one to end slavery and the South had plans to expand it into the west.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Why were they trying to save the Union? Money. Slavery was legal under the United States Constitution, If it were not why did it take the 13th Amendment to free the slaves (1864-1865).
        The secession documents are not war declarations. yes slavery was important to the South but it is not why the war was fought.
        Slavery only became an issue as a war measure. Look at the Emancipation Proclamation. It only freed the slaves not under Union control. Loyal slave-owners could kkeep their slaves. Also there is the fact that West Virginia came into the Union as a slave state.

      • congero

        Money? Yes slaves were a valuable commodity. And this gooblegook…”Slavery only became an issue as a war measure.” You mean the Emancipation Proclamation was issued as a war measure freeing the slaves in rebellious states but later included all slaves. You again affirmm what I’ve been saying all along. Although you are not conscious of it. Lincoln wanted to save the Union he eventually came around to the fact the Union could not be saved without the freeing of the slaves. The 10% of the Blacks that fought for the Union were far ahead of Lincoln they most certainly saw the war as one to end slavery.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Again you are ranting. You are not producing facts. Yes Money. The North didn’t give a rip about the slaves they just wanted the revenue generated by the South. They didn’t care by what means it came from.

        You link doesn’t mean anything. It is the opinion of one man. Besides there was other revenue generated in the South other than cotton. The link doesn’t stand up to original documents I am posting.

        I said that about the EP. I also noted that West Virginia came into the Union as a slave state. The negroes who fought for the North were to be free by their service, those who did not serve and belonged to loyal slave-owners were still slaves. I mentioned the fact that slaves were not freed until the 13th. Adm . was passed and gave dates.. Slow down and read, you don’t have to post immediately.

      • congero

        Hahaha…too funny dude quit while you’re behind.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Why don’t you prove me wrong instead of just being ignorant?

      • congero

        I’ve fried you throughout this thread Sparky.

      • GeorgePurvis

        So since you have no real facts you have to call me names? In that department you won’t even make the JV team.

      • congero

        I’ve kicked your ass all over this thread confederate traitor.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Again you are entitled to your own opinion even though you failed to prove anything except your racism, bigotry and ignorance.

      • He posted a lot of facts and quotes works of history. You ranted generalizations much like you do on your echo chamber.

    • Decent book. I don’t care for Foner’s interpretation of Andrew Johnson, but other than that he definitely dishes out some excellent Reconstruction history.

    • congero

      Great post.

  • DavidD

    I’m a third generation Texan and a vet.I honor the Confederate soldier as I honor the Federal.Most of my people were Mountain people back then that wanted to stay out of it but I had people on both sides.
    The flag belongs in the graveyard with the rest of the Confederacy .It should be honored only there and only in remembrance of those who gave up their lives to defend their community and for no other reason because slavery had to go.
    Most Texans and most Southerners know that.
    We are not a collection of states but one people.
    To the people who want to resurrect old hatreds left or right you are doing a disservice to our common country and hatred is not answer.
    The ones who wave the Confederate flag down here are seen as low class idiots who have a chip on their shoulder and do not represent a state or a region but are just looking for trouble.
    Just like the people who respond with hate and this needs to stop now
    ,Clifton thumping his chest inviting hatred in return is not the answer.It may get him a lot of attention but it is the wrong way to go.
    Our mutual problem is economic inequality.
    Poverty,ignorance and white supremacy comes from that and the sociopathic GOP leadership that uses hatred to achieve their political agenda and the only way to deal with that is unity.
    What would hurt the neo confederates and drive them back to the margins where they belong is that we unite across political,racial and region and work towards resolving the economic issues not refighting a long dead conflict. That only benefits those who keep as all in economic bondage and suffering.

    • Leslie Riegel Cully

      Thank you for that wonderful response.

      • DavidD

        Thank you for your kind reply.

    • I-RIGHT-I

      Our mutual problem are the Transnational Progressives that are one by one removing the freedom Americans at one time cherished. Our other mutual problem is that half the country is on welfare while the other half works two jobs to keep food on the table and pride in the home.
      The South will rise again and if we don’t the entire country will continue this moral decline that we now find ourselves.
      All of the class, talent and love of God and Country was wrapped up in the South. It’s where we as a nation began and it’s where God willing we’ll end up.

      • apostateCourier

        Fun fact, most people on welfare work.

      • I-RIGHT-I

        The White ones.

      • apostateCourier

        Citation needed.

      • I-RIGHT-I

        Why? It’s common sense. Without all those dependent children and set asides for Blacks what choice have they got?

      • apostateCourier

        Provide evidence, with verifiable sources.

      • I-RIGHT-I

        Why bother? It is what it is.

      • apostateCourier

        Without evidence, your claim is only that.

      • congero

        Don’t you know racism is over and so is the civil war. lol. Not!

      • Anandakos

        “It’s where we as a nation began”

        Um, “No, not really”. Yes, Jamestown predated Plymouth by thirteen years and New Amsterdam by seven. But by far the greatest population growth before the Revolutionary War occurred from Pennsylvania north. The Carolinas and Georgia were rather sparsely populated, and when the war actually came, immediately broke into nearly equal Tory and Patriot parties that slaughtered each other well after the British upped stick in 1783.
        After the attempted invasion from Canada in 1777 the British essentially wrote off New England. The ten or twenty percent of the population that was Tory moved to Canada or back to England.

        So your statement is chronologically true, but fails the smell test. Had there been no New England there would have been no Revolution.

      • I-RIGHT-I

        Thanks for the history lesson. The Southern colonies drove the fight for independence. That is where America and Freedom began.

    • GeorgePurvis

      Again slavery was not the cause of the war. The rest of your post is pretty nice. I invite you and anyone who wants to discuss facts in a civil manner to visit

      Cold Southern Steel at https://coldsouthernsteel.wordpress.com/

      • congero

        It may not have been at the start of the conflict for the North. It was to save the Union as Lincoln said but it was most certainly for the South. It was only after LIncoln understood that the Union couldn’t be saved without freeing the slaves that that became the battle cry of the North. In the Confederate constitution they make clear:

        “We, the people of the Confederate States… invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God do ordain and establish this Constitution for the Confederate States of America….

        No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed…

        No slave or other person held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs,. or to whom such service or labor may be due…

        In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected be Congress and by the Territorial government…”

        The South saw slavery important enough to include it’s protection in it’s constitution so don’t try and tell people the war wasn’t about slavery . Since you are suggesting reading let me offer one. “THE HALF HAS NEVER BEEN TOLD…SLAVERY AND THE MAKING OF AMERICAN CAPITALISM” by Edward E. Baptist . Here is a review of the book.
        http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/05/books/review/the-half-has-never-been-told-by-edward-e-baptist.html?_r=0

        Bye now!

      • GeorgePurvis

        US Constitution

        Section 9

        1: The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

        Note slaves may be imported for a “tax’ of ten dollars.

        Article IV (Article 4 – States’ Relations)

        3: No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.
        The Confederacy just repeated the US Constitution.
        ********************************************************

        Now you have posted a fact, I don’t argue with you, but were in the Confederate Constitution is war being declared. It is not.

        Now again if the war was about slavery, and the Confederacy was fighting for slavery, when the 13th Amendment (Look up Ghost Amendment) was passed by Congress, and on the way to being ratified by the states, didn’t the seceded states simply return to the Union? It is simple, slavery wasn’t the main issue.

        Here is a link– http://ghostamendment.com/
        Have a Dixie Day.

      • congero

        Hahaha… you mean the defeated Confederate states. They lost the war and were brought back into the Union but that didn’t stop them from trying to keep slavery. The defeat of reconstruction with the subsequent oppressive laws like the Black Codes and Jim Crow , forced work prisons for petty crimes like having no money and then arrested for being a vagrant along with sharecropping became the new form of slavery.

        I ain’t whistling Dixie no more .

      • GeorgePurvis

        Hahaha… You just got you butt handed to you.

        I never denied the Confederacy lost. I am simply stating why the war was fought and it wasn’t because of SLAVERY.

        The Black codes are a product of the North. They existed before the so called Jim Crow laws. You rants mean nothing, since they also involve whites. My grandfather was a share cropper.

        BTW Dixie was the favorite song of Abe Lincoln.

        http://southernheritageadvancementpreservationeducation.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?2008769.post

      • congero

        Haha…just got my butt handed to me? More proof why debating a bigot is like playing chess with a pigeon. They knock down all the pieces ,shit all over the board and strut around like they won. lol. Yes whites were sharecroppers too but guess what even the poorest white could count on his whiteness and was above the black sharecropper. Your obsession with Lincoln is very telling. I still don’t understand how you can call him racist yet defend the states that fought one of the bloodiest wars in our history for the right to own another human being. That amazes the s##t out of me. Then again I’ve come to learn that neo-confederates can hold two conflicting thoughts in their brain and not bat an eye.

      • GeorgePurvis

        So you need to call people names in order to debate them. I’m not a bigot, I just don’t like people who try to spin history. I have posted nothing but fact, because you can’t counter fact with fact doesn’t say much for you.

        I don’t care if you whistle Dixie or not, it just proves you were wrong about something else.

      • congero

        You’re not even making sense. Repeating yourself is a early sign of dementia. The ACA will cover it though Sparky. Look into it before it’s too late. Lol. Once everything has been said and done there is nothing left to do or say. See ya’around Sparky you are a bore and I ‘ve grown tired of rubbing your face in it.

      • GeorgePurvis

        with some people, like you, a person is forced to repeat themselves because the person just doesn’t get it the first time.

      • congero

        All you are repeating are half truths and a misreading of history.

        The Reasons for Secession

        A DOCUMENTARY STUDY

        http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/secession/

        There is even colorful graphs that should make it easy for you to understand.

        Eat more crow confederate traitor:

        But despite Lincoln’s promises to the Southern States, despite his assurances that he would not touch slavery in the Southern territories, the South disregarded his word and became the Confederate States of America; officially seceding from the United States. Slavery was so important to the South, that they were willing to throw away the word of Lincoln, and dissolve the Union that their forefathers had fought so hard to establish. But beyond the assurances of Lincoln, how do we know that slavery was the main reason for secession? Well, when one reads the secession documents, Confederate Constitution, and the words of Southern leaders, the issue becomes crystal clear.

        Take for example South Carolina, the first state to secede; their declaration of secession makes it clear on multiple accounts that they were separating in order to preserve the use of their slaves:

        “[A]n increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding states to the institution of slavery has led to a disregard of their obligations…[T]hey have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery…They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes…A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the states north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common government because he has declared that “Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,” and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction…The slaveholding states will no longer have the power of self-government or self-protection.” (7)

        South Carolina then called for other slaveholding states to join them in a confederacy, stating:

        “We…[are] dissolving a union with non-slaveholding confederates and seeking a confederation with slaveholding states. Experience has proved that slaveholding states cannot be safe in subjection to non-slaveholding states…The people of the North have not left us in doubt as to their designs and policy. United as a section in the late presidential election, they have elected as the exponent of their policy one who has openly declared that all the states of the United States must be made Free States or Slave States…In spite of all disclaimers and professions, there can be but one end by the submission by the South to the rule of a sectional anti-slavery government at Washington; and that end, directly or indirectly, must be the emancipation of the slaves of the South…The people of the non-slaveholding North are not, and cannot be safe associates of the slaveholding South under a common government…Citizens of the slaveholding states of the United States!…South Carolina desires no destiny separate from yours…We ask you to join us in forming a Confederacy of Slaveholding States.” (8)

        Again, South Carolina makes it painfully clear, that their goal was to preserve slavery in the slaveholding states; they did not trust Lincoln’s promises to leave them be, and feared the “emancipation of the slaves of the South.” It cannot be doubted that South Carolina’s reason for secession was slavery based, as was their call to the other states to join them in a confederacy.

        Mississippi soon joined South Carolina in a slaveholding confederacy, declaring along with them that slavery was their primary cause unto separation:

        “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery – the greatest material interest of the world…[A] blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin. That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove. The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787…It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction…Itadvocates Negro equality, socially and politically…We must either submit to degradation and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers to secure this as well as every other species of property.” (9)

        Mississippi also makes it clear that their position was to identify with slavery, and that they were separating for fear of its abolition by Lincoln and the Republicans. They felt they could not stay connected to a government of a nation who was hostile to the institution of slavery, denied the right of property in slaves, and who advocated Negro equality. Soon after their secession, Mississippi sent a representative to Virginia to inform them that his state had seceded; “setting forth the grievances of the Southern people on the slavery question.” (10)

        When Florida and Alabama seceded, they too explained their main reasons as being involved with slavery:

        “All hope of preserving the Union upon terms consistent with the safety and honor of the Slaveholding States has been finally dissipated by the recent indications of the strength of the anti-slavery sentiment in the Free States. (Florida) (11)

        “…the election of Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin to the offices of President and Vice-President of the United States of America by a sectional party, avowedly hostile to the domestic institutions and to the peace and security of the people of the State of Alabama…” (Alabama) (12)

        As you can see, both Florida and Alabama referenced the North’s hostility to slavery, with Alabama also using Lincoln’s election, as their reason for secession from the Union; and soon, Georgia decided to join the Confederacy. Georgia’s declaration followed the pattern of the other Southern States, listing slavery among their main reasons for departing the Union:

        “A brief history of the rise, progress, and policy of anti-slavery and the political organization into whose hands the administration of the federal government has been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict of the people of Georgia. The party of Lincoln, called the Republican Party under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party…The prohibition of slavery in the territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races, disregard of all constitutional guarantees in its favor, were boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its followers…[T]he abolitionists and their allies in the northern states have been engaged in constant efforts to subvert our institutions.” (13)

        And like Mississippi before her, Georgia also sent a representative named Henry Benning to Virginia, informing that state that Georgia had separated from the Union, explaining:

        “What was the reason that induced George to take the step of secession? That reason may be summed up in one single proposition: it was a conviction – a deep conviction on the part of Georgia – that a separation from the North was the only thing that could prevent the abolition of her slavery. This conviction was the main cause.” (14)

        Louisiana soon followed suit, and while their secession document did not reference slavery as their reason for separation, they did in fact send a representative to Texas urging them to secede. What was Louisiana’s message to the State of Texas? Commissioner George Williamson explained to the Texans:

        “Louisiana looks to the formation of a Southern Confederacy to preserve the blessings of African slavery…Louisiana and Texas have the same language, laws, and institutions…and they are both so deeply interested in African slavery that it may be said to be absolutely necessary to their existence and is the keystone to the arch of their prosperity…The people of Louisiana would consider it a most fatal blow to African slavery if Texas either did not secede or, having seceded, should not join her destinies to theirs in a Southern Confederacy… As a separate republic, Louisiana remembers too well the whisperings of European diplomacy for the abolition of slavery in the times of annexation…not to be apprehensive of bolder demonstrations from the same quarter and the North in this country. The people of the slaveholding states are bound together by the same necessity and determination to preserve African slavery. The isolation of any one of them from the others would make her a theatre for abolition emissaries from the North and from Europe. Her existence would be one of constant peril to herself and of imminent danger to other neighboring slave-holding communities…and taking it as the basis of our new government, we hope to form a slave-holding confederacy.” (15)

        YOU can eat more crow here if you like;https://thebottomlineusa.wordpress.com/2013/11/17/the-civil-war-part-1-why-the-south-seceded/

      • Erdman West

        AAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

      • DavidD

        Thank you for your civil reply. On this point I’m afraid we will have to agree to disagree but it is always even in contradiction a pleasure to deal with a gentleman such as yourself.

    • Anandakos

      Agreed, with one reservation: Nathan Bedford Forrest should have been tried fairly and if found guilty of abetting the slaughter at Fort Pillow, hanged by the neck until dead. Some of his junior officers should have gone with him to the gallows as well.

      But other than he, yes, Southern soldiers should be honored for fighting bravely for that they believed in, even if it was a mistaken cause.

      • Erdman West

        BBBBBBBUUUUUUULLLLLLSSSSSHHHHHIIIIIITTTTT!

      • DavidD

        Wouldn’t hurt my feelings if he had been executed. He did nothing to stop it.
        Also he drafted my Great Great Uncle at gunpoint he was horribly wounded in another brigade, He died of his wounds at a State of Texas Confederate Rest home in Texas after the war.

      • Erdman West

        They South was a TERRORIST GOV FROM THE BEGINNING!!!!

      • Erdman West

        NO!!!!

      • Anandakos

        Well that was certainly a reasoned argument. Thanks for all the light you shone on the topic.

      • Dyathinkso

        Then so should Sherman for his abysmal governing of his troops as they marched across Georgia. He allowed them to do as they pleased, raping, burning, and killing anything in their way. All politely overlooked by Grant and Lincoln. By mistaken cause? If you mean slavery, then you are wrong. The men on either side doing the fighting were not the elite, moneyed folk, but the regular person, sent by their government to do a job. The North even started to institute a draft since so many young men felt it was not up to them to do anything.
        The House of Reps. was in charge of the money in the Fed govt. The North had an overwhelming advantage in population resulting in the South being levied time and again with taxes and tariffs. With negotiations going nowhere, the South felt it had no recourse other than to cut ties. Any references to slavery were made to appease those with money, usually slaveholders, and keep their support. Lincoln was forced to side with abolitionists in order to win his second post.

      • Anandakos

        Has marijuana been legalized down South? Who knew. I thought it was a phenomenon of “blue states”. Your description of Sherman’s march little comports with the facts. Did they burn farms? Absolutely; Georgia was the commissary of the Confederacy; Sherman was a deep flanking attack on the supplies reaching Lee via Petersburg and Weldon. Did they rape and murder? Perhaps individual small units may have done so once or twice, but the standing orders were to lay waste to the countryside, but not to harm the population. There are clear records of soldiers being court-martialed for attacks on the citizenry.

        Forrest on the other hand watched as his troops deliberately ignored signs of surrender from the black troops in Fort Pillow and massacred them.

        The North may have had “an overwhelming advantage in population”, but the Senate had to approve anything the House proposed. And of course the President of the time had to sign a bill. With the exception of John Quincy Adams’ short term, from the election of Jefferson until that of Abraham Lincoln the “Democratic-Republicans” — i.e. the regional party of the South — held the presidency of the United States.

        Yes, there were “border-state” presidents, but they were little different from the true believers in the deep South. So while the Constitution clearly gives the House of Representative the right to originate all bills of taxation, the House isn’t the English Commons; it doesn’t rule in a vacuum. The South and its sympathizers in the border states had a long-term “lock” on the presidency and essentially equal representation in the Senate.

        That Congress passed some pretty radical legislation during and immediately after the Civil War is simply the result of the South throwing a final tantrum when Lincoln broke the lock. If Jefferson Davis had still been in the United States Senate, there never would have been the same 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments.

        So if you segregationists and “sons of slavers” (my ancestors had a few in Georgia too) are unhappy with the changes the Civil War brought to the country, you have only to blame the Secesh.

      • Dyathinkso

        Who said anything about marijuana? I don’t smoke and don’t assume things. How did all those taxes/tariffs pass if the Senate was supposed to be a check on that balance? The South was the North’s cash cow, plain and simple. Any legislation coming after the Civil War was inevitable and not so much in retaliation, but they typical knee-jerk reaction like we see today. I offered no rebuttal for Forrest and am not inclined to do so as I only know the basics of that incident. If I remember correctly, only one survived meaning and his account may or may not be slanted. The Northern troops showed them no concern.
        Once again, you assume. Just because I have my opinion and know more facts than most, does not mean I support certain beliefs or ideals. No one in my family ever owned slaves. Who shouldn’t be unhappy with the outcome of the Civil War? Isn’t it obvious that the slave population was simply put out into society with nothing? Bigotry and racism at the time was not in the South only.

      • Anandakos

        OK, you’re not a rabid seg; I can see that from the knowledge of and compassion for the plight of the freed slaves you noted. So, I apologize.

        But do you really believe that small subsistence farmers in the Piedmont of the Carolinas and southwest Virginia, the Applachians in eastern Tennessee and the region around Chattanooga in Alabama and Georgia gave a rat’s ass about tariffs? Of course they didn’t; but the Cavaliers dominating the Southern state governments did not think about their welfare when they seceded to keep their slaves!

      • Dyathinkso

        There was a lot more of that in the Penn/W. Virginia region. The tariffs were to keep the South from selling their cotton/textiles to Europe and instead supply the North with cheaper goods. The North was far more industrial than the South, which is why the South was much more to negotiating than war. Lincoln’s stated objective was to preserve the Union at any cost. Slavery wasn’t the foremost issue and only became one when the Abolitionists funded Lincoln’s second run. He felt beholden to them and rewarded them with legislation. (sounds like graft to me). Lincoln had even wanted them to colonize Costa Rica.
        Sherman faced no true opposition once he took Atlanta. His slash and burn policy was one of vindictiveness and really only hurt those same subsistence farmers you spoke of. The war was already decided, making his tactic one of creating hatred for the North.
        Slavery was on it’s way out even before the war. Russia had freed its slaves, so the South was watching to see how that played out. The advent of new ag technology was eliminating the need for slaves. If you recall, the South was wanting slaves to be counted as people for representation. A very big stride to admit that they weren’t simply property. Northern electeds offered the 3/5ths rule to keep the South from becoming equal.

      • Anandakos

        Once more: here is the end of Robert Toombs’ long speech to the Georgia legislature outlining the economic roots of the division between North and South. He makes some excellent populist points.

        But then he gives the game away with this:

        “Time, and issues upon slavery were necessary to its completion and final triumph. The feeling of anti-slavery, which it was well known was very general among the people of the North, had been long dormant or passive, — it needed only a question to arouse it into aggressive activity. This question was before us: we had acquired a large territory by successful war with Mexico; Congress had to govern it, how — in relation to slavery — was the question, then demanding solution. This state of facts gave form and shape to the anti-slavery sentiment throughout the North, and the conflict began.

        Northern anti-slavery men of all parties asserted the right to exclude slavery from the territory by Congressional legislation, and demanded the prompt and efficient exercise of this power to that end. THIS INSULTING AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL DEMAND [emphasis added] was met with great moderation and firmness by the South. We had shed our blood and paid our money for its acquisition; we demanded a division of it, on the line of the Missouri restriction, or an equal participation in the whole of it. These propositions were refused, the agitation became general, and the public danger great. The case of the South was impregnable. The price of the acquisition was the blood and treasure of both sections — of all; and therefore it belonged to all, upon the principles of equity and justice.”

        A short version of what he said was “We participated in the subjugation of Mexico so we should get an equal part of the territory won organized the way we do it.”

        It’s a seductive argument until one realizes that by “the way we do it” he meant “by brutality and murder”.

        So regardless of the florid justifications, it all and always came round to wealth founded on the brutal subjugation of black people.

      • Dyathinkso

        Some spinmeisters he had Texas fought for and won it’s own independence. Some time later they petition to become a state and others then seek to impose their will upon them, rather than work towards a solution. Texas was not a heavy slave owning state, nor was the South wealthy by any means. A pitiful percentage were, and of course, they didn’t want to give it up.
        The North was also founded the same way

      • Dyathinkso

        Amazing that this site loves to freeze up at opportune moments. Texas fought for it’s own independence. While supported by Washington, they lent nearly no help. Texas was not a heavy slave state either. Only a small percentage of people were rich off of slaves and probably the same percentage grew their fortunes in the North. Your quote contains quite a bit of spin. The people of the North were not anti-slavery. Even Lincoln knew that, thus his declaration was to preserve the Union. He was not heavily anti-slavery himself.
        If he was, then why offer a bill to make slavery legal?
        In the long run, blacks were not done a great service by the way freedom was accomplished. Mostly uneducated and skill-less, many were forced to move and seek work, which was not easy to find, instead of living in their own homes and provide for themselves. Look at cities like Detroit and Philadelphia. Examples of the legacy. They faced the same discrimination and hatred as in the South. Segregation is obvious, although I would attribute it then, and today, to the notion that people of like cultures tend to cluster together.
        Back to the original story, after our long sidebar. The author compares it to the Nazis, and that is simply a false and slanderous assertion. The flag is not a symbol of anything except what one wants it be. That is not enough to bring about a banishment to make a minority happy. That shooter was mentally ill. He latched onto something and people want to use it to lay blame where blame does not belong. While it is called the Confederate flag, it never was more than Lee’s battle flag that other Southern armies adopted out of respect.

      • Anandakos

        “instead of living in their own homes and provide for themselves”

        They were NOT “living in their own homes”. They were NOT “provid[ing] for themselves.” They were chattel slaves! Why is that so hard for you to understand?

        Yes, there were kind slave owners. There were more slave owners who treated their slaves as valuable property and therefore were not brutal on a daily basis. Many were not stupid.

        But always there was the threat of the whip, or the chains, or outright murder. Because the slaves were property, not people.

        Why is this so hard for you to understand?

      • Dyathinkso

        Neither one of us knows exactly how many of either kind there were. You like to pick quotes and then twist them. On a plantation, slaves had their own quarters and were able to farm some for themselves. While that does not make up for being a slave, being free in that era didn’t seem to be much better, whether North or South. I said they had no formal education, not that they were stupid. What were they to do, especially when they were freed?
        Slavery was on it’s way out, and the war only made it happen sooner.

      • Anandakos

        Being free seemed enough better that thousands of slaves risked the whip or outright execution to ride the Underground Railroad. Why don’t you let them speak for themselves?

        I certainly agree that opportunities for full participation in National life existed only for an extremely rarified few black people at that time. And once the Union soldiers left the south and the sheets went on, many former slaves may have looked back on some aspects of their lives as slaves.

        But nothing can erase the vile evil that was chattel slavery. No amount of curly wool and honeyed phrases and no comparison with the exploitation of workers in the half century from 1880 to 1930 can disguise the vicious wolf that was the economic system of the ante-bellum Cotton South.

        It needs to be apologized for again and again and again, until people quit thinking that was anything noble about it. Were the soldiers of the South brave? Certainly; anyone who could stand in those Napoleonic lines and blast away with .58 caliber rifled long guns at 30 yards is incredibly brave. They should be admired and respected for their willingness to die for whatever each one of them believed to be the Southern cause.

        But that’s it. The cause itself was selfish beyond belief.

      • Dyathinkso

        Since this is a liberal website and my posts disappear. I guess we will have to end the debate. Just keep in mind what started this whole mess had nothing to do with the flag.

    • Erdman West

      BBBBBBBUUUUUUULLLLLLSSSSSHHHHHIIIIITTTTT!

    • Ellen H.

      Well-said.

  • GeorgePurvis

    I have made a comparison between the United States and Nazi Germany. You may view them here —- https://coldsouthernsteel.wordpress.com/2015/04/30/is-honoring-the-confederacy-like-honoring-nazi-germany/

    • congero

      Hahaha…The Nazi’s also bragged that they learned a lot from how to treat the Jews from how Blacks were treated in the South.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Prove it.

      • congero

        OK I’ll be your Huckleberry one more time:

        “Hitler’s Germany
        In 1931, the SS (named for Schutzstaffel, the elite military unit of the Nazi party) formed the Race and Settlement Office to “investigate” the suitability of potential spouses for SS members. When the Nazis came to power in 1933, they passed the Civil Service Law, calling for the purging of Jews from all government agencies, cultural organizations and state positions. Jews were segregated to the back of public buses and restricted entrance to restaurants. The works of leading German writers such as Bertolt Brecht, Lion Feuchtwanger and Alfred Kerr were ceremoniously burned in Berlin. Economic sanctions limited the rights of Jews to practice their trades. The Law for Preventing Overcrowding in German Schools and Schools of Higher Education took effect in April, 1933. Initially restricting the enrollment of Jews, this law soon resulted in the dismissal of Jewish professors.

        While few, if any, could imagine that by 1941 the Germans would begin the systematic slaughter of Jews – a slaughter that over the next four years would take the lives of close to six million souls – many of these scholars realized in the early 1930s that Jews had no future in Germany and fled to the United States. Most of the 1,200 refugee scholars who arrived in the U.S. could not find work in their fields. A small number, however, would end up in the historically Black colleges of the American South. In many ways, these scholars discovered that the American South was not unlike Germany had been in the mid-1930s before mass murder became the policy of the German state.”

        The Jim Crow Laws, strictly segregating Blacks from Whites, were still in effect in the South and racial tension was high.

        Like anti-Semitism abroad, discrimination against Blacks in the U.S. had a long and complex history. After the Southern states were defeated in the Civil War and slavery was abolished, Black codes were enacted in 1865 and 1866. Though the codes granted Blacks certain basic civil rights (to marry, to own personal property and to sue in court), they also called for the segregation of public facilities and restricted the freedman’s rights as a free laborer, to own real estate, and to testify in court. These were soon repealed as the radical Republican governments, led by so-called carpetbaggers (Northerners who settled in the South) and scalawags (Southern Whites in the Republican Party), began to rebuild the Southern economy and society. The civil and political rights of Blacks were guaranteed (on paper), and Blacks were – for a brief time – “free” to participate in the political and economic life of the South.

        Most Southern Whites were very uncomfortable with the former slaves’ new role in society. Social custom persisted, legal obstacles (such as the poll tax and unfair literacy tests) were established, and terrorism was used to keep African Americans and White Republicans from voting. Informal vigilante groups or armed patrols were formed in almost all communities. In Louisiana in 1896 there were 130,334 Blacks registered to vote; by 1905 there were only 1,342. Organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan arose, the radical Republican governments were overthrown, and Reconstruction officially ended in 1877 as all federal troops were withdrawn from the South.

        Between 1889 and 1918, a total of 2,522 Black Americans were lynched, including 50 women. Often the excuse was used that the accused Black man had supposedly raped a White woman, a popular myth at that time, yet in 80 percent of the cases there were no sexual charges alleged, let alone proved. Hanged, burned alive, or hacked to death, people were lynched for petty offenses such as stealing a cow, arguing with a White, or trying to register to vote. Social critic H.L. Mencken explained, “In sheer high spirits, some convenient African is taken at random and lynched, as the newspapers say, ‘on general principles.'” This practice went unpunished until 1918.

        n the late 1800’s segregation laws – the Jim Crow laws – were enacted to codify White dominance. In the case of Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of so-called “separate but equal” accommodations in railway cars. The period from 1900 to 1920 brought full extension of segregation to all public transportation and educational facilities, even churches and jails. Public restrooms, restaurants, hotels and water fountains were labeled “White only” or “Colored.” In hospitals, Blacks could not nurse Whites, nor could Whites nurse Blacks. Blacks were forbidden to sit with Whites in most places of public amusement.

        In 1908, in the aftermath of an especially violent race riot in Springfield, Illinois, a group of Black intellectuals joined forces with a coalition of humanitarian Whites to form the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). At the same time there was an increasing migration of Blacks out of the South and into the North, where they could register, vote and have an impact on state and national politics. Roosevelt was elected in 1932 and offered the economic benefits of his New Deal more-or-less equally to Blacks and Whites, employing one-fifth of the Black labor force on relief projects instituted by the United States Government.”

        YOU CAN READ MORE HERE IF YOU LIKE:
        http://www.pbs.org/itvs/fromswastikatojimcrow/racism.html

      • GeorgePurvis

        A wasted effort. Nowhere in your post does any German official say they used slavery as a way to treat Jews. Please post a reliable source.

        It is however to make the comparison of the two armies, German and yankee by simply visiting this website and reading the documented events.

      • congero

        I didn’t say slavery now did I but I’ll add that to the list.I foolishly thought showing the similarities was enough but you go ahead and hold onto that tidbit but here’s a clue the post I made clearly shows the similiarities and even YOU can’t deny it. You could but…lol. Really all my effort is wasted on you bigot. I knew that from the start. I just wasn’t going to let your Neo-Confederate bigotry and attempt to whitewash history go unchallenged.

      • GeorgePurvis

        You did say “Blacks treated in the South” then that being the case that could be under the US Flag after 1865. In that case it has nothing to do with the Confederacy You just destroyed your own argument.
        Your posts are nothing. You can’t even present facts that relate to the subject.
        You can’t stop me from posting facts and the truth is you are to ignorant to counter with fact. You are the real bigot.
        Post some real facts.

      • congero

        You’re a clown. I just chewed you up and spit you out.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Really you must be a legend in your own mind. Give us something the Germans said to prove your point—— if you can.

      • congero

        You still itching for more you bigot. I gave you something just as good. I gave you their actions and showed the similiarities between the Nazi’s treatment of the Jews and how blacks are treated here and particularly in the south. Your lack of response to that fact shows you cannot refute anything I posted. You are laughable. Not one single post have you refuted what i said and linked. Tell me was it hard for you to go from calling black people “colored” to negro? I haven’t heard that term since the 60’s. No one but history deniers and traitors to the Republic would belittle the role slavery played in the civil war. No one with any sense is buying what your selling.

      • GeorgePurvis

        but you did not prove that was in any way connected to negroes in the Confederacy. I see only the US flag in your post.

        No It wasn’t hard to make that move. Don’t care when you last .ad the term “negro,” it is the correct therm to use.

        Prove treason.

        Prove slavery was a cause of the war. I think we can agree “freeing” the slaves was nothing but a war measure

      • congero

        Let me inform you bigot we are no longer called negroes. You don’t get to name us any longer confederate white supremacist. We are not slaves any longer and we don’t have to succumb to your tags . You are not our masters.
        You’re too funny . You’re like a punch drunk boxer, a Jake LaMotta fighting Sugar Ray getting his ass kicked,jaw broken ,eye hanging out of your head and barely able to walk mumbling “You never got me down Ray.” with your prove it rants. I have. The Jefferson Davis quotes I supplied should’ve have been enough but if you think the slaves were not segregated ,whipped,lynched and punished and worked and treated like the Jews in Germany I refer you back to my Jake La Motta analogy. You’re punch drunk and flailing. You have no legs to stand on, so you repeat what I’ve already proven .I’m tired of educating you.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Just ranting huh??? You do realize everything you are posted happened under the US Flag and was LEGAL under the US Constitution???
        Negros is the correct term like it or not. Yes I posted the same thing from Lincoln. Whipping in the US Navy was also legal at this time.

  • Cemetery Girl

    While I don’t care for celebrating the Confederate flag, I don’t condone wiping it off the face of the planet either. I have visited cemeteries for Conferderates with each grave decorated with small Confederate flags. Treating their graves with respect isn’t wrong. I did US Civil War reenacting for several years; I met many nice Confederate reenactors. Historic representation isn’t wrong. (And it is actually not uncommon for a reenactor to have gear for both sides.)
    It is ridiculous to boil our history down to Union is good and Confederate is evil. First of all, it greatly generalizes the time period. Individuals had there own reasons for enlisting. Hate to burst the bubble of idolized history, but there were plenty of racist Northerners. Reality is that there were quite a few in the North that did not care about the plight of the slaves. Secondly, holding onto this attitude doesn’t help. Why encourage division? Not every Southerner has ancestors that owned and beat dozens of slaves. Actually, only a small percentage were the plantation owning slave holders that we imagine. Not every Northerner has ancestors that enlisted for the desire to end slavery. Actually, slavery could be found in the North (but Northern states that had allowed it individually abolished the practice) and the North generally did not have an attitude much warmer than the South towards African Americans.

    • congero

      While it most certainly is true that the meme North good and south bad is too simplistic to explain attitudes as many African Americans found escaping the brutal exploitation and oppression after the defeat of reconstruction that led to what is called the great migration that lasted into the 1970’s there is no doubt the history of the south and treatment of blacks is nothing to brag about. Lynchings et .al and we saw what happened during the civil right movement and today in almost every social category the south lags behind the rest of the country. This doesn’t excuse the North as MLK said marching through Cicero in Ill., that the racist their matched any he saw in the South . One thing though, those today who want to roll back civil and voting rights use the confederate flag as their symbol and that is undeniable.

      • GeorgePurvis

        …. and that friends is why there are more Negroes in the South than in the North.
        Most of your post is just another rant. It doesn’t mean anything. Not one person mention rolling back anything. We are discussing the War For Southern Independence, can’t you stay on topic?
        .

      • congero

        So now it’s the war for Southern Independence? lol. You’re just another Neo-Confederate sore that you lost the war to propagate slavery. You got beat.

      • GeorgePurvis

        It was nothing more than an independence thing. keep reading my websites and you will see. http://southernheritageadvancementpreservationeducation.com/page.php?4

        Again I encourage you to correct, with facts or documents, anything you believe is wrong. Remember being civil is the key to your posts showing up.

        https://coldsouthernsteel.wordpress.com/2015/05/02/jefferson-davis-on-why-the-confederate-states-were-fighting-part-1/

      • congero

        No thank you. Visiting your website was all the filth and whitewashing of history I could stomach.

      • GeorgePurvis

        yes I know you can’t stomach the truth. It is a sure sign of ignorance and bigotry.

      • congero

        I am not the one defending the white supremacist Jefferson Davis.

      • GeorgePurvis

        I am not the one defending the racist Abe Lincoln.

      • congero

        So you admit you are defending a white supremacist. Good 1st step. Saying Lincolns actions helped bring about the end of slavery in this Republic, that’s right traitor , this Republic is not a defense of Lincoln it’s a historical fact. You should learn some. All you’ve done with your Lincoln quotes is highlight what a racist country this is . Thanks for that.

      • GeorgePurvis

        So you admit you are defending a known racist? So Lincoln was forced to free the slaves. Who forced him to start removing them from the US?
        Still you offer no proof the War was about slavery.

      • Cemetery Girl

        I don’t condone the us to support fighting against civil rights, but I can’t agree with demonising all uses of the Confederate flag. For example, a t-shirt showing battle flags from the North and South with “It’s a reenactor thing” on it being called racist because of the Confederate flag is wrong, but some would view it as racist regardless of context. We like heroes and villains but in history it just isn’t that cut and dry.

      • congero

        The context is racist. The symbol it represented was one of upholding slavery regardless of the reasons many others who fought under it say. It is in the confederate constitution and if the confederacy had won slavery would have expanded into the west. Today it has/is used by those who want to turn back the clock to a darker period in our history. That is why I and many black folk are against it.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Prove racism. Did you read my Lincoln post?

      • congero

        Haahaha…yes I read your Lincoln quote and how do you think states that fought and included in their constitution the right to own another human being are any better? My God dude that was just stupid

      • GeorgePurvis

        Well it was included in the US Constitution. I have provided that document already. To say “we were fighting for the Union is to say they were fighting for slavery.

        I have also provided the link to the 13th or Ghost Amendment, did you read it? That is absolute proof the war was about slavery. I posted that fact and you come back to this? Stupid!!!!

        Crittenden Resolution

        John J. Crittenden, Congressman (KY)

        1861

        Resolved by the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States, That the present deplorable civil war has been forced upon the country by the disunionists of the Southern States now in revolt against the constitutional Government and in arms around the capital; that in this national emergency Congress, banishing all feelings of mere passion or resentment, will recollect only its duty to the whole country; that this war is not waged upon our part in any spirit of oppression, nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, nor purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of those States, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution and to preserve the Union, with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several States unimpaired; and that as soon as these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease.

        FROM James D. Richardson; A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, vol. 6 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1907), p. 430.

      • congero

        Thanks you finally admitted the war ended up being about slavery. Read what you post before you rush to post clown.

      • GeorgePurvis

        well it was a typo. They happen. You can look up the 13th and see for yourself. Everyone else will.

      • congero

        Listen you neo-confederate traitor i am a 63 yr. Afro-American man with ancestors who were slaves. I know better than you ever will about the 13th,14th, and 15th amendments and what they meant to not only my ancestors but me today. So take your bs and peddle it on Stormfront. I ain’t buying.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Prove I am a traitor.

        Apparently you don’t know squat about the 13th Adm. or really anything else you won’t argue.

        Really I don’t care if you are buying or not. People like you will never face the truth, You had rather believe your street corner history. For that reason you ARE NOT my target. My target is those people who are opened minded and seek factual history. You are nothing than a person who opens a door for me to post more information.

        BTW go to the top and see my latest link.

        Have a Dixie day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • congero

        Street corner? You couldn’t be more transparent traitor with your dog whistles. You wouldn’t know truth if it smacked you in your face as evidenced by your denial of the truth i have posted to your whitewashing of history. All you are doing is showing what a traitor to the Republic and a supporter of white supremacy you are.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Well I guess you are entitled to you opinion, but proving these charges will be just as hard as you proving slavery was the cause of the war.

      • Cemetery Girl

        Living history exhibitions showing the time period are racist? Shall we just purge our history, or should we remember what transpired? I favor remembering history, even the ugly sides, over whitewashing history. And “Its a reenactor thing” refers to the lifestyle, which involves spending weekends living as closely as possible in an era accurate fashion (including clothing which is hot and camping methods that are primitive compared to modern camping) to make history come to life for the public. It defies the concept that history is boring.

      • congero

        Who is ignoring history?

  • GeorgePurvis

    Mr. Lincoln’s Reply in the Alton Joint Debate.

    If you go to the Territory opposed to slavery, and another man comes upon t e same ground with his slave, upon the assum tion that the things are equal, it turns out that he has the equal rig t all his way, and you have no part of it your way. If he goes in and makes it a slave Territory, and by consequence a slave State, is it not time that those who desire to have it a free State were on equal ground? Let me suggest it in a different way. How many Democrats are there about here [“A thousand”] who have left slave States and come into the free State of Illinois to get rid of the institution of slavery? [Another voice: “A thousand and one.”] I reckon there are a thousand and one. I will ask you, if the policy you are now advocating had prevailed when this country was in a territorial condition, where would you have gone to get rid of it? Where would you have found your free State or Territory to go to? And when hereafter, for any cause, the people in this place shall desire to find new homes, if they wish to be rid of the institution, where will they find the place to go to?

    Now, irrespective of the moral aspect of this question as to whether there is a right or wrong in enslaving a negro, I am still in favor of our new Territories being in such a condition that white men may find a home—may find some spot where they can better their condition—where they can settle upon new soil, and better their condition in life_ I am in favor of this not merely (I must say it here as I have elsewhere) for our own people who are born amongst us, but as an outlet for free white people everywhere, the world over—in which Hans, and Baptiste, and Patrick, and all other men from all the world, may find new homes and better their condition in life.

    ********************

    “The whole nation is interested that the best use shall be made of these territories. We want them for the homes of free white people.” ~ Lincoln, on whether blacks – slave or free – should be allowed in the new territories in the west, October 16

    • congero

      In Vol. 1 pp. 458, Jefferson Davis quotes a speech as the U.S.

      Reconstruction and Fusion Jefferson Davis’s white supremacist and pro-slavery views in his memoirs published in 1881

      Senator for Mississippi in the Senate, Feb. 13 and 14, 1850. In 1881,Davis still endorses the assertion of this speech. I quote a part of it.

      … They see that the slaves in their present condition in the South are comfortable and happy; they see them advancing in intelligence; they see the kindest relations existing between them and their masters; they see them provided for in age and sickness, in infancy and in disability; they see them in useful employment, restrained from the vicious indulgences to which their inferior nature inclines them; they see our penitentiaries never filled, and our poor-houses usually empty. let them turn to the other hand, and they see the same race in a state of freedom in the North; but instead of the comfort and kindness they receive at the South, instead of being happy and useful, they are, with few exceptions, miserable, degraded, filling the penitentiaries and poor-houses, objects of scorn, excluded in some places from the schools, and deprived of many other privileges and benefits which attach to the white men among whom they live. And yet, they insist that elsewhere an institution which has proved beneficial to this race shall be abolished, that it may be substituted by a state of things which is fraught with so many evils to the race which they claim to be the object of the solicitude! Do they find in the history of St. Domingo, and in the present condition of Jamaica, under the recent experiments which have been made upon the institution of slavery in the liberation of the blacks, before God, in his wisdom designed it should be done―do they there find anything to stimulate them to further exertions in the cause of abolition? Or should they not find there satisfactory evidence that their past course was founded in error?

      Sounds like Cliven Bundy telling us what he knows about the Neeegrow

      In Vol. 2 pp. 161-162, in anger at Abraham Lincoln’s joy at the enlistment of African Americans into the U.S. Army.

      Let the reader pause for a moment and look calmly at the facts presented in this statement. The forefathers of these negro soldiers were gathered from the torrid plains and malarial swamps of inhospitable Africa. Generally they were born the slaves of barbarian masters, untaught in all the useful arts and occupations, reared in heathen darkness, they were transferred to shores enlightened by the rays of Christianity. There, put to servitude, they were trained in the gentle arts of peace and order and civilization; they increased from a few unprofitable savages to millions of efficient Christian laborers. Their servile instincts rendered them contented with their lot, and their patient toil blessed the land of their abode with unmeasured riches. Their strong local and personal attachment secured faithful service to those to whom their service or labor was due. A strong mutual affection was the natural result of this lifelong relation, a feeling best if not only understood by those who have grown from childhood under its influence. Never was there happier dependence of labor and capitol on each other. The tempter came, like the serpent in Eden, and decoyed them with the magic word “freedom.” Too many were allured by the uncomprehended and unfilled promises, until the highways of the these wanderers were marked by corpses of infants and the aged. He put arms in their hands, and trained their humble but emotional natures to deeds of violence and bloodshed, and sent them out to devastate their benefactors. …

      In Vol. 2 pp. 600, in his condemnation of the Emancipation Proclamation, Jefferson Davis in his book reprints his proclamation of January 1863.:

      A proclamation, dated on January 1, 1863, signed and issued by the President of the United States, orders and declares all slaves within ten of the States of the Confederacy to be free, except as are found in certain districts now occupied in part by the armed forces of the enemy. We may well leave it to the instinct of that common humanity, which a beneficent Creator has implanted in the breasts of our fellow-men of all countries, to pass judgment on a measure by which several millions of human beings of an inferior race―peaceful, contented laborers in their sphere―are doomed to extermination, while at the same time they are encouraged to a general assassination of their masters by the insidious recommendation “to abstain from violence, unless in necessary self-defense.”

      http://www.confederatepastpresent.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=131:jefferson-daviss-white-supremacy-and-pro-slavery-in-his-memoirs-published-in-1881&catid=38:reconstruction-and-fusion

      Reminds me of this Randy Newman satirical song

      “Sail Away”

      In America you’ll get food to eat
      Won’t have to run through the jungle
      And scuff up your feet
      You’ll just sing about Jesus and drink wine all day
      It’s great to be an American

      Ain’t no lions or tigers
      Ain’t no mamba snake
      Just the sweet watermelon and the buckwheat cake
      Ev’rybody is as happy as a man can be
      Climb aboard, little wog
      Sail away with me

      Sail away
      Sail away
      We will cross the mighty ocean into Charleston Bay
      Sail away
      Sail away
      We will cross the mighty ocean into Charleston Bay

      In America every man is free
      To take care of his home and his family
      You’ll be as happy as a monkey in a monkey tree
      You’re all gonna be an American

      Sail away
      Sail away
      We will cross the mighty ocean into Charleston Bay
      Sail away
      Sail away
      We will cross the mighty ocean into Charleston Bay

      • GeorgePurvis

        Yes except as found in certain districts. Thank you for verfing my point.
        All of that and you still haven’t proved slavery was the cause of the war.
        Newly freed slave doesn’t hardly qualify for a juror.
        Lincoln also had newspaper editors, and elected officials arrested if they disagreed with him. So what is your point?
        keep reading Cold Southern Steel you will actually learn something.

      • congero

        Your blog is as confused as your post. Lol.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Seems you are the only one who has problems.

      • congero

        Yes I do have problems with neo-confederate traitors. You finally got something right for once.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Prove treason.

        Ah yes the link. The whole transcript. yes it was two days as noted at the top of the page. Gee isn’t it a shame I proved you just cherry-picked a portion to use???

        Just another rant. There were several reason for secession, Indian raids was one.

        Slavery was not the cause of the war, slavery was still legal under the US Constitution, your Great Emancipator let a slave state in the Union, the seceded states could have rejoined the Union and kept their slaves, the EP did not free all of the slaves. Those are facts.

        When are you going to prove the war was about slavery. When are you going to prove the Confederacy was like Nazi Germany?
        Your street corner history doesn’t hold up. Go ahead call me names, it just proves your lack of historical knowledge.

      • congero

        The more you post the more you look like a fool. It wasn’t two days fool those were excerpts from his memoir that he himself wrote if you had gone to the link I provided before hastily posting you would have saved yourself some embarassment. You see the 2 days you misread was referring only to this section:

        In Vol. 1 pp. 458, Jefferson Davis quotes a speech as the U.S. Senator for Mississippi in the Senate, Feb. 13 and 14, 1850. In 1881,Davis still endorses the assertion of this speech. I quote a part of it.
        ————————————————

        These are not part of the section referenced above . Dummy learn to read.

        In Vol. 1, pp. 3 Jefferson Davis condemns Abolitionists.

        In Vol. 1, pp. 29, Jefferson Davis feels Abolitionists misuse the word “Liberty” in wanting it for slaves.

        In Vol. 1 pp. 66, Davis on slavery.

        In Vol. 1, pp. 70-71 Jefferson Davis praises the notorious Chief Justice Taney and his infamous Dred Scott decision and condemns those who condemned the Dred Scott decision. .

        In Vol. 1 pp. 262-263, Jefferson Davis again defends slavery.

        In Vol. 2 pp. 161-162, in anger at Abraham Lincoln’s joy at the enlistment of African Americans into the U.S. Army.

        http://www.confederatepastpresent.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=131:jefferson-daviss-white-supremacy-and-pro-slavery-in-his-memoirs-published-in-1881&catid=38:reconstruction-and-fusion

        ———————————–

        I’ve made my the point they were talking about different days not 2 and different pages that is clear.

        Now back to your assertion. The civil war was a culmination of the initial fight to form the Union.

        “The Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union was a proclamation issued on December 24, 1860, by the government of South Carolina to explain its reasons for seceding from the United States. It followed the brief Ordinance of Secession that had been issued on December 20. The declaration is a product of a convention organized by the state’s government in the month following the election of Abraham Lincoln as U.S. President, where it was drafted in a committee headed by Christopher Memminger. The declaration stated the primary reasoning behind South Carolina’s declaring of secession from the U.S., which was described as “increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the Institution of Slavery”.[1]”

        “The next section asserts that the government of the United States and of states within that government had failed to uphold their obligations to South Carolina. The specific issue stated was the refusal of some states to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act and clauses in the U.S. Constitution protecting slavery and the federal government’s perceived role in attempting to abolish slavery.”

        “While later claims have been made after the war’s end that the South Carolinian decision to secede was prompted by other issues such as tariffs and taxes, these issues were not mentioned at all in the declaration. The primary focus of the declaration is the perceived violation of the Constitution by northern states in not extraditing escaped slaves (as the U.S. Constitution required in Article IV, Section 2) and actively working to abolish slavery (which South Carolinian secessionists saw as Constitutionally guaranteed and protected). The main thrust of the argument was that since the U.S. Constitution, being a contract, had been violated by some parties (the northern abolitionist states), the other parties (the southern slave-holding states) were no longer bound by it. Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas offered similar declarations when they seceded, following South Carolina’s example.

        The declaration does not make a simple declaration of states’ rights. It asserts that South Carolina was a sovereign state that had delegated only particular powers to the federal government by means of the U.S. Constitution. It furthermore protests other states’ failure to uphold their obligations under the Constitution. The declaration emphasizes that the Constitution explicitly requires states to deliver “person(s) held in service or labor” back to their state of origin.”

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Immediate_Causes_Which_Induce_and_Justify_the_Secession_of_South_Carolina_from_the_Federal_Union

        This was even mentioned by Jefferson Davis in his memoir speaking and defending the Dred Scott decision that I linked to above.Go back to school Sparky you are wrong.

      • GeorgePurvis

        Rest assured I can read, I can also understand history.
        Let me absolutely clear wuith you. Again what you are posting does not amount to squat. These documents do not trump the 13th or Ghost amendment, they do not trump the 1860s documents I have posted. You are wasting web space post meaningless quotes and documents.
        PLEASE POST JUST ONE DOCUMENT FROM THE CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT OR A HIGH RANKING CSA GOVERNMET OFFICIAL, THAT STATES THE CONFEDERACY WAS FIGHTING FOR THE PRESERVATION OF SLAVERY.

        You are wasting a lot of time ranting. First of all Davis’s speech, which was 11 years before the war, as well as the secession documents mention other issues besides slavery. South Carolina’s secession document lists grievances against the United States, it is a good US history lesson and a good lesson regarding slavery. Read the entire document and don’t be selective about what you read. Mississippi secession document also states this — “It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.” You never made it down to that part did you???

  • GeorgePurvis
  • GeorgePurvis
  • GeorgePurvis
  • GeorgePurvis

    Was the war fought to free the slaves? Here is what Lincoln had to say about freeing the slaves—

    I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be “the Union as it was.” If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.

    Letter to Horace Greely–

  • GeorgePurvis

    Treason. My Confederate ancestors have been called traitors, I have been called a traitor, yet that point has yet to be proven.

    Clifton made the statement above, yet did offered no evidence to support his statement. In fact Clifton has gone into hiding rather than come here and support his asinine blog post. I shall show you that at least South Carolina and possibly other Confederate States petitioned the Congress of the United States for the right of secession. I do agree that possibly war interfered with this process as I have yet to find the results of this petition.

    Mr. Buchanan’s Administration on the Eve of the Rebellion. Contributors: James Buchanan – author. Publisher: D. Appleton. Place of Publication: New York. Publication Year: 1866.

    Page 171–

    Very different must have been his opinion on the 3d March following, when he penned his famous letter to Secretary Seward. In this he exclaims: “Conquer the seceded [cotton] States by invading armies. No doubt this might be done in two or three years by a young and able general–a Wolfe, a Dessaix, a Hoche, with three hundred thousand disciplined men, estimating a third for garrisons, and the loss of a yet greater number by skirmishes, sieges, battles and Southern fevers. The destruction of life and property on the other side would be frightful, however perfect the moral discipline of the invaders. The conquest completed, at that enormous waste of human life to the North and the Northwest, with at least $250,000,000 added thereto, and cui bono? Fifteen devastated provinces! not to be brought into harmony with their conquerors, but to be held for generations by heavy garrisons, at an expense quadruple the net duties or taxes it would be possible to extort from them, followed by a protector or an emperor.” In view of these fearful forebodings, we are not surprised that he should have despaired of the Union, and been willing to say to the cotton States, “Wayward sisters, depart in peace.” Nor that he should have fallen back

    page 173–

    on his opinion expressed in the “Views” ( 29th October, 1860), that “a smaller evil [than such a civil war] would be to allow the fragments of the great Republic to form themselves into now Confederacies.”

    Page 175–

    It would seem from the report that the President confined his observations at their interview exclusively to the reënforce-
    ment of the forts in Charleston harbor, for which General Scott, according to his own statement, in the letter to the ” National Intelligencer,” could spare but two hundred men, the remaining eight hundred being required for the, other fortifications. The President having expressed the opinion, according to the report, “that there was at the moment no danger of an early secession

    Page 176–

    beyond South Carolina,” he proceeded to state, “in reply to my [ General Scott’s] arguments for immediately reënforcing Fort Moultrie, and sending a garrison to Fort Sumter,” that “the time has not arrived for doing so; that he should wait the action of the Convention of South Carolina, in the expectation that a commission would be appointed and sent to negotiate with him and Congress, respecting the secession of the State and the property of the United States held within its limits; and that if Congress should decide against the secession, then he would send a reënforcement, and telegraph the commanding officer ( Major Anderson) of Fort Moultrie to hold the forts (Moultrie and Sumter) against attack.”

    Page 178

    December, 1860, they were unanimous, and the other cotton States were preparing to follow her into secession, should their rights in the Territories be denied by Congress. Besides, the President had already declared his purpose to collect the revenue by the employment of vessels of war stationed outside of the port of Charleston, whenever its collection at the custom house should be resisted. He hoped thereby to avoid actual collision; but, whether or not, he had resolved at every hazard to collect the revenue. Such was the state of affairs on the 15th December, 1860. Meanwhile the forts and all other public property were unmolested, and Major Anderson and his troops continued to be supplied and treated in the kindest manner.

    So now if Buchannan was willing to let the secession issue go before Congress for a vote, then it appears the Southern states did meet their obligation for withdrawing from the union.

    Full Transcription here —- http://southernheritageadvancementpreservationeducation.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?2009189.post

  • GeorgePurvis

    Buchanan Bound to Collect Revenue

    Edited for length
    War of the Rebellion: Serial 001 Page 0117 Chapter I. CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. – UNION.

    These were the last instructions transmitted to Major Anderson before his removal to Fort Sumter, with a single exception, in regard to a particular which does not in any degree affect the present question. Under these circumstances it is clear that Major Anderson acted upon his own responsibility, and without authority, unless, indeed, he had “tangible

    Page 118

    evidence of a design to proceed to a hostile act” on the part of the authorities of South Carolina, which as not yet been alleged. Still, he is a brave and honorable officer, and justice requires that he should not be condemned without a fair hearing.

    ————–On the very day, the 27th instant, that possession of these two forts was taken the palmetto flag was raised over the Federal custom-house and post-office in Charleston; and on the same day every officer of the customs, collector, naval officer, surveyor, and appraisers, resigned their offices. And this, although it was well known from the language of my message that, as an executive officer, I felt myself bound to collect the revenue at the port of Charleston under the existing laws.

    With great personal regard, I remain, yours, very respectfully,

    JAMES BUCHANAN.

  • GeorgePurvis

    Three from Lincoln. No mention of slavery —

    War of the Rebellion: Serial 122 Page 0311 UNION AUTHORITIES.

    FELLOW-CITIZENS OF THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
    ———
    At the beginning of the present Presidential term, four months ago, the functions of the Federal Government were found to be generally suspended within the several States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Florida, excepting only those of the Post-Office Department.

    Page 312
    In accordance with this purpose an ordinance had been adopted in each of these States declaring the States, respectively, to be separated from the National Union. A formula for instituting a combined government of these States had been promulgated, and this illegal organization, in the character of Confederate States, was already invoking recognition, aid, and intervention from foreign powers. ————-

    It sought only to hold the public places and property not already wrested from the Government and to collect the revenue, relying for the rest on time,

    Page 319
    Again, if one State may secede, so may another; and when all shall have seceded none is left to pay the debts. Is this quite just to creditors? Did we notify them of this sage view of ours when we borrowed their money? If we now recognize this doctrine by allowing the seceders to go in peace, it is difficult to see what we can do if others choose to go, or to extort terms upon which they will promise to remain.

    Page 321

    It was with the deepest regret that the Executive found the duty of employing the war power, in defense of the Government, forced upon him. (Yeah right, we have already proven that to be a lie.)

    Page 322
    ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
    JULY 4, 1861.

    ******************************************************************************

    War of the Rebellion: Serial 122 Page 0122 CORRESPONDENCE, ETC.

    BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

    A PROCLAMATION.

    Whereas, for the reasons assigned in my proclamation if the 19th instant, a blockade of the ports of the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas was ordered to be established;

    And whereas since that date public property of the United States has been seized, the collection of the revenue obstructed, and duly commissioned officers of the United States while engaged in executing the orders of their superiors have been arrested and held in custody as prisoners, or have been impeded in the discharge of their official duties without due legal process by persons claiming to act under authorities of the States of Virginia and North Carolina:

    An efficient blockade of the ports of those States will also be established.

    It witness whereof I have hereupon set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

    Done at the city of Washington this twenty-seventh day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-fifth.

    ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

    ****************************************************************************

    War of the Rebellion: Serial 123 Page 0185 UNION AUTHORITIES.

    BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

    Whereas, in and by the second section of an act of Congress passed on the seventh day of June, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and sixty-two, entitled “An act for the collection of direct taxes in insurrectionary districts within the United States, and for other purposes,” it is made the duty of the President to declare, on or before the first day of July then next following, by his proclamation in what States and parts of States insurrection exists:

    Now, therefore, be it known that I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States of America, do hereby declare and proclaim that the States of South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, North Carolina, and the State of Virginia – except the following counties: Hancock, Brooke, Ohio, Marshall, Wetzel, Marion, Monongalia, Preston, Taylor, Pleasants, Tyler, Ritchie, Doddridge, Harrison, Wood, Jackson, Wirt, Roane, Calhoun, Gilmer, Barbour, Tucker, Lewis, Braxton, Upshur, Randolph, Mason, Putnam, Kanawha, Clay, Nicholas, Cabell, Wayne, Boone, Logan, Wyoming, Webster, Fayette, and Raleigh – are now in insurrection and rebellion, and by reason thereof the civil authority of the United States is obstructed, so that the provisions of the “Act to provide increased revenue from imports to pay the interest on the public debt, and for other purposes,” approved August five, eighteen hundred and sixty-one, cannot be peaceably executed, and that the taxes legally chargeable upon real estate under the act last aforesaid lying within the States and parts of States as aforesaid, together with a penalty of fifty per centrum of said taxes, shall be a lien upon the tracts or lots of the same, severally charged, till paid.

    In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

    Done at the city of Washington this first day of July, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and sixty-two, and of the Independence of the United States of America the eighty-sixth.

    ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

  • GeorgePurvis

    Andrew Johnson became president after the war. One of his first actions was to set up collection points for revenue in a devastated South.

    Andrew Johnson’s Proclamations—-

    War of the Rebellion: Serial 126 Page 0013 UNION AUTHORITIES.

    EXECUTIVE CHAMBER,

    Washington City, May 9, 1865.

    Ordered:

    1. That all acts and proceedings of the political, military, and civil organizations which have been in a state of insurrection and rebellion

    Page 14

    3. That the Secretary of the Treasury proceed without delay to nominate for appointment assessors of taxes and collectors of customs and internal revenue, and such other officers of the Treasury Department as are authorized by law, and shall put in execution the revenue laws of the United States within the geographical limits aforesaid.

    Page 15

    In testimony whereof I have hereunto set any hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

    [L. S.] ANDREW JOHNSON.

    By the President:

    W. HUNTER,

    Acting Secretary of State.

    ***************************************

    War of the Rebellion: Serial 126 Page 0037 UNION AUTHORITIES.

    BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

    A PROCLAMATION.

    Whereas, the fourth section of the fourth article of the Constitution of the United States declares that the United States shall guarantee

    Page 38

    And I do hereby direct–

    Page 39

    Third. That the Secretary of the Treasury proceed to nominate for appointment assessors of taxes, and collectors of customs and internal revenue, and such other officers of the Treasury Department as are authorized by law, and put in execution the revenue laws of the United States within the geographical limits aforesaid.

    L. S.] ANDREW JOHNSON.

    By the President:

    WILLIAM H. SEWARD,

    Secretary of State.

    (Same, mutatis mutandis, issued for the State of Mississippi, June 13, 1865; for the States of Georgia and Texas (separate proclamations) June 17, 1865; for the State of Alabama, June 21, 1865; for the State of South Carolina, June 30, 1865, and for the State of Florida, July 13, 1865.

    William L. Sharkey was appointed Provisional Governor of Mississippi, James Johnson for Georgia, Andrew J. Hamilton for Texas, Lewis E. Parsons for Alabama, Benjamin F. Perry for South Carolina, and William Marvin for Florida.)

  • GeorgePurvis

    This will be my last post here because I have thoroughly destroyed this blog entry. I would like to thank Mr. Clifton for allowing my posts to remain here, If anyone wishing to debate me I will be at one of the links posted below.

    Have a Dixie Day.

    George Purvis

    ************************************************************************

    “No, I cannot. I desire peace as much as you do. I deplore bloodshed as much as you do; but I feel that not one drop of the blood shed in this war is on my hands,—I can look up to my God and say this. I tried all in my power to avert this war. I saw it coming, and for twelve years I worked night and day to prevent it, but I could not. The North was mad and blind; it would not let us gov1864.] 0ur Visit to Richmond. 379

    ern ourselves; and so the war came, and now it must go on till the last man of this generation falls in his tracks, and his children seize his musket and fight his battle, unless you acknowledge our right to self – government. We are not fighting for slavery. We are fighting for Independence,–and that, or extermination, we will have.”

    Jefferson Davis
    source and complete transcription posted at Cold Southern Steel

  • Jeffery Barmann

    If you study history the Civil War was over thr rights of states vs. the rights of the federal government. Slavery was to be abolished regardless of the Civil War. Lincoln brought the issue into the War in desperation. Read and study History and you will see there were dozens of very good reasons this War started. Slavery was not one of them. So the confederate battle flag to me represents Jeffersonian Politcs. Home Government.

  • Concerned Citizen….

    If the south is so ignorant and racist why are all the shootings and killings of African Americans taking place in “Blue States” that are mostly run and governed by democrats??? Chicago, Baltimore, NYC, Detroit…the list goes on and on…

  • Tony Firenze

    Your a moronic Mongoloid bastard.
    You poor ignorant “patriots”, the south didn’t want to have anything else to do with the so called union because the “union” wanted to make things just like it was when the Brits were in control. The British enslaved the Chinese & the native American Indian & impose unjust taxes to benefit a tyrannical patriarchal nation That had no interest in nothing but greed & theft of resources off of this continent. (Sound familiar)
    All of the capital was coming from the south, tobacco, alcohol, textiles (which wasn’t just cotton fir those racist pigs reading this, it was hemp & leather too), & firearms. What did the union democracy have to offer besides being thieves? They wanted to steal what the south had & without even attempting to give nothing worth anything in return. If Lincoln hadn’t been justly killed, this nation would be even more of a tyrannical hierarchy than it already is. The union wants you to believe that the reason he was shot by Booth was because he was trying to free the slaves. You’d be wrong in thinking that. Booth was a mason, he was a TRUE PATRIOT of America. After Lincoln freed the black slaves, his next step was to abolish EVERY individual that had African heritage in their ancestry to South America. After he had exiled them & made it illegal to be black & have a single toe in America, he was going to make it illegal to own property in America if you were Native American, Asian, Hispanic, or Jewish. I’d you don’t believe me, do some research. Get a real education & not what our government wants you to have for an education. All those people out there that believe this malarkey, I really feel for our once great nation, because they are the problem, they are the disease that is a cancer to our society.

  • ohioanon

    So the fact that I’ve done Civil War reenacting most of my adult life means I’m a Nazi? What about the fact that I’ve been part of raising thousands of dollars for preservation and remembrance, or helped to educate thousands of individuals? Oh well, if that makes me equal to a Nazi then so be it. I’d rather be equated to a Nazi than be an ignorant piece of liberal trash like the author of this fluff piece.

  • #odorBabyIsAwesome

  • chris968

    I am proud to say I had family fight in the Civil War… for the NORTH. The good guys, so to speak. I have seen Confederate flags here in Pennsylvania and it scares the crap out of me. I was talking with a friend who is a historian, and she was telling me about a book she read about people from the south who legitimately believe the Civil War is just “on pause” for the time being and they are waiting for it to start up again. How sick is that?

  • Republicae

    I wonder if those willing to destroy portions of our history, such as the Confederate Battle Flag and memorials, will also call for the destruction of all images and references to Abraham Lincoln? Lincoln, after all, was a White Supremacist, even his own words make that plain, so why all the hoopla over a flag when one of the most onerous character’s in our history is also lauded as one of the most honored?

    “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.” Lincoln, Sept 18, 1858.

    Few people know their own history, it is so obvious by what is being written about it, but did you know that there was a man who assisted in the election of Lincoln that was awarded a high office by Lincoln for his efforts, that man was Hilton Helper. Hilton Helper wrote a book entitled The Negro in Negroland, in that book Helper called for the complete genocide of the black race, not just in this country, but around the world. Now, Lincoln didn’t want to go quite that far, but did set into motion efforts for the complete deportation of the entire black population of this country in order to colonize them in other countries, such as Liberia. We don’t read about things like these in our sterilized history books in school because those who write such books don’t want the American students to understand just what type of man Lincoln really was; of course, his “friends” knew him very well and spoke of him not in shining accolades, but in terms of him being a liar, a base and crass man, one who would do anything for power and indeed he did. So, why are you guys only going after a piece of cloth that means so little, when the fact that Lincoln was far more a threat to the black race, despised them and wanted to deport them?

  • jmwhala

    Freedom of speech I guess but WHOEVER WROTE THOSE ARTICLES ARE DUMBASSES!!!!!!

  • Smilin’ Bob

    You, Sir, are an idiot.

  • oyvay1959

    I agree the Confederate flag is a symbol of racism,Oligarchy, and slavery; however the stars and stripes also symbolize the same thing.
    All the post civil war racist atrocities were done under the stars and stripes, including Jim Crow, lynching and the segregated military.
    Until the USA comes to term with current racism then focusing on the confederate flag is merely a distraction.

  • Chad Mcswain

    General Sherman was a sadistic and evil piece of $hit. For those of you who are true idiots and believe the Confederacy was only about slavery, I urge you to get off your @ss and go find a library that has a historical law section. Sherman did not like the black race. His documents are on file for anyone to see. He clearly states that the black race was extremely unintelligent and could not fit in with normal society and theirfore would not be beneficial to the Norths fast progression except to work as laborers. He also threatened slaves who refused to help burn the plantations and homes of many southern families and Confederate soldiers. Shermin was known to execute boys as young as 12 years old if he thought they would put on a Confederate uniform or help the Confederacy in anyway shape or form. And to here Lincons name makes me want to puke. While he pretended to be fightin to free slaves he was hidding the fact that the north had become overpopulated, rampant with diseases in the large cities, needed mass quantities of cotton for their factories and also crops because the north had suffered 3 extreme brutal winters. At first he started a type of taxing system that got out of hand on goods shipped to the south and the southern goverment officals could see he had secretive agenda. That is how the war first started building up. At the same time your beloved Lincon was sending union calvery far west into the great plains confiscating land from indians and killing them off like flies. He hide this fact for a long time but the documents are there if you care to pull them up. Most all our lives we have been taught that Lincoln and shermin were great men. Yes the were great in the sense they cut off the supply lines of weapons and ammunition to the south and other things the south needed to fight, but dont think these men were honorable. They were evil killers that hide the truth. Nothing more. They were terrorist…period..

  • Anandakos

    Basically it all comes down to “We wish you had won.” You’d be a racist, agricultural cesspool of jealous crackers: the North Korea of North America.

  • Brent Leatherman

    Well, to be fair, the average German is much better educated than the average southerner.

  • generalleeme

    Ed Bond… Do you have a source for your assertion and a time frame when “thousands of blacks served as armed troops in the Confederate Army?” Or was this one of those my pappy’s pappy told me kind of sources.

  • ZeBigT

    Somehow, “you lost, get over it” seems like the perfect retort.