Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5860

Well in a few hours actually but yeah on April 12, 1861 the American Civil War started.

Some interesting stuff to kick off the discussion
CNN: 4 ways we're still fighting the Civil War
MSNBC: Hundreds of Civil War photos unearthed| Direct Link
Fox Affiliate: Atlanta Civil War Marker Sparks Controversy

It's probably a myth but do some people in the south really still refer to the Civil War as the War of Northern Aggression?
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6812|Long Island, New York
What's so civil about war anyway?
Superior Mind
(not macbeth)
+1,755|6967
https://lcweb2.loc.gov/service/pnp/cwpb/01800/01881v.jpg
Look at all them horns.
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5533|foggy bottom
i wish the south seceded
Tu Stultus Es
Superior Mind
(not macbeth)
+1,755|6967
I wonder how things would be.
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5533|foggy bottom
bunch of slaves
Tu Stultus Es
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|5748|Ventura, California
I get a strange feeling when I look at the photos of these people who lived so long ago. Thinking of these men and women who've come and gone...and will be remembered through history in these photographs.

Thank you for the interesting articles and photographs. I love these sort of things.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5533|foggy bottom
weirdo
Tu Stultus Es
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5632|London, England
shifty sucks
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6771

eleven bravo wrote:

i wish the south seceded
they did secede . . .
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5533|foggy bottom
but they didnt succeed . . .
Tu Stultus Es
Superior Mind
(not macbeth)
+1,755|6967
But they did sow seed?

I got nothing.
War Man
Australians are hermaphrodites.
+564|6988|Purplicious Wisconsin

eleven bravo wrote:

but they didnt succeed . . .
Because they sucked.
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
RTHKI
mmmf mmmf mmmf
+1,742|7011|Cinncinatti

War Man wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

but they didnt succeed . . .
Because they sucked.
lolol
https://i.imgur.com/tMvdWFG.png
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6925|USA

Macbeth wrote:

Well in a few hours actually but yeah on April 12, 1861 the American Civil War started.

Some interesting stuff to kick off the discussion
CNN: 4 ways we're still fighting the Civil War
MSNBC: Hundreds of Civil War photos unearthed| Direct Link
Fox Affiliate: Atlanta Civil War Marker Sparks Controversy

It's probably a myth but do some people in the south really still refer to the Civil War as the War of Northern Aggression?
yes they do.  If you go on tours with a southern guide, they will refer to the war as a war against northern aggression. and that statement is fair.

It was a war of independence
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6875|132 and Bush

Today is the anniversary of the first human spaceflight. ..far more important.
http://youtu.be/RKs6ikmrLgg
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Shahter
Zee Ruskie
+295|7049|Moscow, Russia

Kmar wrote:

Today is the anniversary of the first human spaceflight. ..far more important.
http://youtu.be/RKs6ikmrLgg
oh, noes! that was done by evil commies. not worth remembering, let alone celebrating.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6875|132 and Bush

lowing wrote:

It was a war of independence
.. and Slavery, which people are trying to right out of the History books. But don't take my word for it. Read what the states wrote themselves.

Kmar wrote:

(the Declarations of Causes of Seceding State).

South Calorlina wrote:

The primary focus of the declaration is the perceived violation of the Constitution by northern states in not extraditing escaped slaves. The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution

These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection. .

Texas wrote:

She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them? For years past this abolition organization has been actively sowing the seeds of discord through the Union, and has rendered the federal congress the arena for spreading firebrands and hatred between the slave-holding and non-slave-holding States.

That in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.

Florida wrote:

It is denied that it is the purpose of the party soon to enter into the possession of the powers of the Federal Government to abolish slavery by any direct legislative act. This has never been charged by any one. But it has been announced by all the leading men and presses of the party that the ultimate accomplishment of this result is its settled purpose and great central principle. That no more slave States shall be admitted into the confederacy and that the slaves from their rapid increase (the highest evidence of the humanity of their owners will become value less. Nothing is more certain than this and at no distant day. What must be the condition of the slaves themselves when their number becomes so large that their labor will be of no value to their owners. Their natural tendency every where shown where the race has existed to idleness vagrancy and crime increased by an inability to procure subsistence. Can any thing be more impudently false than the pretense that this state of things is to be brought about from considerations of humanity to the slaves.

It is in so many words saying to you we will not burn you at the stake but we will torture you to death by a slow fire we will not confiscate your property and consign you to a residence and equality with the african but that destiny certainly awaits your children – and you must quietly submit or we will force you to submission – men who can hesitate to resist such aggressions are slaves already and deserve their destiny. The members of the Republican party has denied that the party will oppose the admission of any new state where slavery shall be tolerated. But on the contrary they declare that on this point they will make no concession or compromise. It is manifest that they will not because to do so would be the dissolution of the party.

Mississippi wrote:

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 the 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.
It doesn't matter whether or not slavery would have "eventually ended" on it's own. Enslavement is enslavement and should always be ended immediately.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,054|7046|PNW

Superior Mind wrote:

I wonder how things would be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EViGaTSnqRw
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6925|USA

Kmar wrote:

lowing wrote:

It was a war of independence
.. and Slavery, which people are trying to right out of the History books. But don't take my word for it. Read what the states wrote themselves.

Kmar wrote:

(the Declarations of Causes of Seceding State).

South Calorlina wrote:

The primary focus of the declaration is the perceived violation of the Constitution by northern states in not extraditing escaped slaves. The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution

These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection. .

Texas wrote:

She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them? For years past this abolition organization has been actively sowing the seeds of discord through the Union, and has rendered the federal congress the arena for spreading firebrands and hatred between the slave-holding and non-slave-holding States.

That in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.

Florida wrote:

It is denied that it is the purpose of the party soon to enter into the possession of the powers of the Federal Government to abolish slavery by any direct legislative act. This has never been charged by any one. But it has been announced by all the leading men and presses of the party that the ultimate accomplishment of this result is its settled purpose and great central principle. That no more slave States shall be admitted into the confederacy and that the slaves from their rapid increase (the highest evidence of the humanity of their owners will become value less. Nothing is more certain than this and at no distant day. What must be the condition of the slaves themselves when their number becomes so large that their labor will be of no value to their owners. Their natural tendency every where shown where the race has existed to idleness vagrancy and crime increased by an inability to procure subsistence. Can any thing be more impudently false than the pretense that this state of things is to be brought about from considerations of humanity to the slaves.

It is in so many words saying to you we will not burn you at the stake but we will torture you to death by a slow fire we will not confiscate your property and consign you to a residence and equality with the african but that destiny certainly awaits your children – and you must quietly submit or we will force you to submission – men who can hesitate to resist such aggressions are slaves already and deserve their destiny. The members of the Republican party has denied that the party will oppose the admission of any new state where slavery shall be tolerated. But on the contrary they declare that on this point they will make no concession or compromise. It is manifest that they will not because to do so would be the dissolution of the party.

Mississippi wrote:

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 the 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.
It doesn't matter whether or not slavery would have "eventually ended" on it's own. Enslavement is enslavement and should always be ended immediately.
Lincoln was not an abolitionist, he did not care about slavery and he felt slavery in the states that already had it was protected by the Constitution.

Slavery was not the issue, be it all slavery or all free he wanted the union to remain intact. It was a war for independence from a tyrannical federal govt. ( in the eyes of the south)
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6925|USA

Kmar wrote:

Today is the anniversary of the first human spaceflight. ..far more important.
http://youtu.be/RKs6ikmrLgg
to date? how so? How is circling the earth more important in the past 150 years, than the impact of the history of the existence of the USA?
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6964|Tampa Bay Florida
I used to subscribe somewhat to the whole "war of northern aggression" theory (like a lot of other southerners), until I actually started reading about it.  Of course there were many other issues, industrialization, cultural differences, etc, and many northerners were racists as well who profited off of slavery.  But slavery WAS the underlying cause of the war, and that is a fact that many have tried to deny. 



Reading a book about old John Brown, got it at the library yesterday.  His truth is marching on.
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6771

Glory, glory, hallelujah!
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6925|USA

Spearhead wrote:

I used to subscribe somewhat to the whole "war of northern aggression" theory (like a lot of other southerners), until I actually started reading about it.  Of course there were many other issues, industrialization, cultural differences, etc, and many northerners were racists as well who profited off of slavery.  But slavery WAS the underlying cause of the war, and that is a fact that many have tried to deny. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSSn3NddwFQ

Reading a book about old John Brown, got it at the library yesterday.  His truth is marching on.
Well you are wrong. Lincoln would have conceded to slavery if it meant keeping the union together. It was not the cause of the war.  Very few on either side fought the war because they were for or against slavery. The underlying cause of the war was an industrial northern federal govt. dictating to an agricultural south. It was states rights that were at issue. anti- slavery was merely one of the examples that the south viewed as a threat from the federal govt. along with many others. Slavery was not the issue, it was on the list of many issues.  I do agree it was probably the most polarized issue of he day however.

In short, the north fought to keep the union together, not to end slavery.
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|6923

Lowing, what state are you from?

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard