I meant Ancient and Modern Britons by David McRitchie in that last one. He is a white European and he will even tell you this stuff. If you visit some places in Europe, other people even know this stuff. They just don't talk about it too often.
Unfortunately this stuff is true but it started in Europe when the Moors abused their powers and Europeans came to what we call North America to set up commerce and declare independence under the Moroccan Empire. Basically what you have is Blackamoors in Europe and America fighting with each other and white people just got caught up in the mix. Whites endured slavery in Europe and that's why it happened to so called Blacks. What goes around comes around. Read "Read ancient and modern britons"
@woma0neater, Niger is black in latin. The word originated from niger, a good ole southern master couldn't say niger without a little drawl! Nigeria, the Niger River, etc.
Negro is spanish, simply means black, El Negro. I have lived through it all niger, nigger, negro, colored, black, black panther, african american. It will be something else in the future, I think the NAACP has a convention and changes the name routinely. Hell, I am african american and white, my ancestors left South Africa.
@Trumblebee, "YES". There are Arabs, Whites, Blacks, Mixed, Spanish in Africa. Blacks can't claim to be the only African Americans. North Africa has a majority of Arabs. South Africa has a large number of whites. You have to overcome your government education conditioning and find facts for yourself.
@brainerdrebel LOL, that's not even what i meant, i don't even know why you're assuming this has to do with your race. i AM african, i know all about the different peoples and ethnic groups that live there, thank you very much.
anyway, i've never ever heard of an african immigrant (even the "black ones") claiming to be african amerian, ever. may have to do with the negative image africans have of AAs but regardless we see them as a separate ethnic group..cnt'd...
@Trumblebee and continue to identify with our tribe and nationality even in the states and other foreign countries. THAT'S why i'm surprised. some africans i know will even cuss you out for mistaking them for african americans.
@brainerdrebel AA = African American. i don't think you understand what i'm saying - africans in america (most anyway) identify as nigerian-american, egyptian-american, ethiopian-american, and so on, i've never met or heard of an african that calls him or herself an african american. african american is like an ethnic group, they are the blacks descended from african slaves brought here hundreds of years ago.
@Trumblebee you are getting deep. I qualify as an AA then, My ancestors where brought to North America from South Africa as bond slaves. Not on slave ships but on death ships, that is a ship were over 50% were expected to died before reaching North America.
@brainerdrebel my bad, i assumed you were a recent immigrant but huh? south africans were not enslaved and sent to the americas...those were west/central africans. and a very small number of slaves came from mozambique and madagascar but that's about it
1. Why is it that Pro C.S people always rant on the Corwin Amendment, when in the C.S Constitution has the same thing as the Corwin Amendment.
2. If States' Rights was the cause why did the Declaration of Causes of Secession state they did not what Northern States nullifying the Fugitive Slave Act?
3. States' Rights for what?
4. Why rant on Lincoln suspending Habeas corpus when the C.S Constitution allows that, in fact Davis did it too!
P.S-I was once 110% pro C.S these and more added doubt
1. Why is it that Pro C.S people always rant on the Corwin Amendment, when in the C.S Constitution has the same thing as the Corwin Amendment.
2. If States' Rights was the cause why did the Declaration of Causes of Secession state they did not what Northern States nullifying the Fugitive Slave Act?
3. States' Rights for what?
4. Why rant on Lincoln suspending Habeas corpus when the C.S Constitution allows that, in fact Davis did it too!
P.S-I was once 110% pro C.S these and more added doubt
In the 21st century we still talk about race. There are no races we're talking about a chemical that is about the size of a dime that varies from person to person. We are all human and should have the same rights and freedoms, that's important the rest is ignorance.
@KayBeeEee1983 no its not that they lost the election its that there vote counted for nothing. that president Lincoln was elected with not one southern vote so they had no power at all the north could do what ever they wanted so they separated.
during slavery if you were lucky enough to gain your freedom the only way that you could free your family would be to BUY them which would technically make them your slaves
To return to the census figures quoted above, this 28 percent is certainly impressive when compared to less than 1.4 percent of all American whites and less than 4.8 percent of southern whites. The statistics show that, when free, blacks disproportionately became slave masters
Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. The country's leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves, or 28 percent of the free Negroes in that city.
To return to the census figures quoted above, this 28 percent is certainly impressive when compared to less than 1.4 percent of all American whites and less than 4.8 percent of southern whites.
According to federal census reports, on June 1, 1860 there were nearly 4.5 million Negroes in the United States, with fewer than four million of them living in the southern slaveholding states. Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves. Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. The country's leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves,
who owned slaves. These include individuals such as Justus Angel and Mistress L. Horry, of Colleton District, South Carolina, who each owned 84 slaves in 1830. In fact, in 1830 a fourth of the free Negro slave masters in South Carolina owned 10 or more slaves; eight owning 30 or more (2).
According to federal census reports, on June 1, 1860 there were nearly 4.5 million Negroes in the United States, with fewer than four million of them living in the southern
The fact is large numbers of free Negroes owned black slaves; in fact, in numbers disproportionate to their representation in society at large. In 1860 only a small minority of whites owned slaves. According to the U.S. census report for that last year before the Civil War, there were nearly 27 million whites in the country. Some eight million of them lived in the slaveholding states.
The census also determined that there were fewer than 385,000 individuals who owned (more to post)
@civilwarcow I was always taught at school that he had a neutral opinion. But nice quote, you are one of the few people that I have talked to here that knows what (s)he is talking about. So kudos to you and I'm sorry if I might have gotten the information wrong.
@civilwarcow Oh crap. I'm sorry, let me rephrase. The Union came first for Lincoln. Freeing the slaves was secondary. Lincoln never actually mentioned whether he was for or against slavery.
By the way, nice quote in the first comment. :D. It's nice to find a history person here. :D
@DonMeaker Of course. Slavery was the Southern way of life. Southerners had most of their money invested in slaves and their property. That's why they left the Union.
@BreakingxBenjamin217 Except the south didn't leave the Union. Their attempts to do so were null and void, as ruled by the Supreme Court in Texas v. White. They could have left legally by amendment, by successful federal case with SCOTUS as original jurisdiction, or perhaps by legislation, or by treaty. They did none of those things. They attempted unilateral secession backed up by theft and armed force. they failed.
The point is, if we want to understand where we are, we have to take an honest look at how we got here. The current, politically-correct version of history we were taught has numerous, demonstrable holes in it. Much of it is nothing but the propoganda of that day. Fortunately, 150 years is not so far distant that "original source" history is unavailable. Anyone who really WANTS to know the truth can find it. I encourage everyone to study for yourself and not rely on what you've been told.
@xxDogsoldierxx"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."
So a few blacks owned slaves themselves. How horrible of them. But what does this prove?! That there wasn't any racism in the south?! Shoot, there was racism in the north too! The free-soiler and abolitionists were sure as hell racist, but also sure as hell against the "institution" of slavery, which by 1860 only existed in the South and border states, which is the main point, which is what this video misses. And btw, this was in my Northern history book.
@wutdaFU3K Shit abolishionists probably hated blacks more than anyone else! Lincoln had an obsession with moving every african american to Liberia. White supremacy was just the thinking of the era
these assertions are, at most, factoids - incomplete bits of information taken out of context - slaves were expensive, not everyone could own one; slavery as an institution was cruel and unjust, whether or not any blacks in the US held other blacks as slaves - West Virginia split into mountain & flatland sections, being free & slave respectively - the South maintained Jim Crow laws, lynching, voting inequities long into the 20th century - men of the South are no angels, or only a few rare ones -
Seems to me after reading all the comments that what was set out to be done worked and still is working. Divide, seperate, us,BROTHERS, AMERICAN BROTHERS & SISTERS.have us so preoccupied with all this me vs you, north and south, color vs color, we are all missing the big picture. THEY WANT US FIGHTING LIKE THIS SO NO ONE REALIZES THAT BOTH SIDES, ALL EVERYDAY / NON RICH AMERICANS NO MATTER WHAT SIDE YOUR ON OR COLOR YOU ARE ARE GETTING FUCKED EQUALLY.
What i'd like to know is how these blacks mentioned here became slave owners themselves, i thought all blacks back then were slaves and if not wouldn't be in a financial position to own slaves. This is an intersting fact that i've never heard about before, even though i'm Australian and into the military exploits of the likes of Horatio Nelson etc i have had a look into a bit of the American civil war
@73mandala Well, most of the freed slaves had been free way before the war. This way they could have a job and save up some money of some sort. Some people in the South payed some freed slaves to work for them. Anyone could get what they might call, a weak slave for very cheap. Some slaves even fought for the South more so than the North. You look at Port Hudson,LA and a unit of slaves fought very valiant and were a tough group of soldiers. They felt the Union were invading their homes as well.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You're all over the net Reichsministerium für Volksaufklärung Keith olbermann wanna-be.If you're white,then make a clip how sorry you are for what your ansestors did.May you live interesting times.Again,thanks for the laughs,money in the bank,tax free money at that,please come back,and thank you for shopping at youareadumbass(doy)com
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Thank you for the night of fun,and being paid for it to boot.Your multiple you tube accounts,or your trolling wing men (don't tell me again you don't know what a "wing man" is),access your WWII data banks,maybe "Tuskegee Airmen" will help."SouthernFriedHoney","12FlyMe".All the same person,or at least a group with the same mental disorder.Humorous that it's so obvious.
"White as a marshmallow"---what the fuck are you talking about, fat boy? Are you high right now? It's obvious why you refuse to answer whether you graduated college, but did you even graduate high school?
Plenty of my Founding Fathers owned slaves. Charles Manson wasn't the first serial killer in history. Plenty of Allied troops and commanders in WWII were anti-Semitic. Does that justify murder or the Holocaust? Or are the actions of other people no excuse for your own?
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Your multiple you tube accounts,or your trolling wing men (don't tell me again you don't know what a "wing man" is),access your WWII data banks,maybe "Tuskegee Airmen" will help."SouthernFriedHoney","12FlyMe".All the same person,or at least a group with the same mental disorder.Humorous that it's so obvious.You're all over the net Reichsministerium für Volksaufklärung Keith olbermann wanna-be.You're white,then make a clip how sorry you are for being so,Cha-ching!!
@RonPaulHatesBlacks They make Charles Manson like he was so horrible,he never killed anyone we know of.To put him with people like JWGacy,Boston Strangler and others is wrong.Just like the shows about cults that compare other cults to his.Drugged up hippie Manson Family compared to Jim Jones or the Branch Davidians.To use High hippies killing people for fun as the foremost example for serial killers and death cults is wrong.
@RonPaulHatesBlacks.... take that giant cock out of your ass hole, then the opther onw out of your motuh and fuckin piss off... your seriously gonna get stabbed cunt if you keep up this harassment shit over youtube.
These are the same fellows to trotted out the so-called abused slaves. I don’t make a habit of arguing with NAACP types since they are almost always BLACK racists. Nor do I listen to Southern apologists who explain away slavery.
These Neo historians are made up of left-wing academics, and that very small segment of the African-American community, which clutches slavery to their bosom like the Holy Grail,as a passport to a lifetime of free indugences and greased careers.
Fuck yeah! It's long past time that you stopped FLAT OUT LYING about being a "Historian" and trying to argue facts and evidence that you've never studied in your entire life. It's long past time you dropped the act and argued the REAL reason you wish the racist South had won and subjected blacks to MORE years of slavery and segregation!!! So get on that high horse and rant some more that black people are evil racists who "clutch" onto slavery because they can't succeed in life on their own!!!
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Very weak response,sociopaths are known to resort to name calling when they can't get their facts straight.And again,I'm getting paid for having fun with you.If you want to debate,bring up historical facts,not conjecture.If profanity is the only language you understand,shall I undulge?
You started with the name-calling, boy, after I figured out you are uneducated and destroyed you with the facts. You had nothing left, so you attacked the me out of the blue as a "juvenile who has a low self image,and probably is psychologically unstable." And now you're just spamming the board like a crybaby. This could NOT have gone worse for you, Mr. Know-It-All Historian. You should drop the act and argue the REAL reason you support slavery. Argue what you KNOW, not what you don't.
It warms my heart that I'm getting paid to do this.I’m amused by these reparation for lunch bunch types who want to correct history, yet ignore a good part of it.Anytime anyone uses the term Neo Confederate you know exactly where they’re coming from. When I see the war crimes of the North investigated and illuminated as vigorously as the condemnation of Southern slavery then I will start to believe there is something beyond an anti southern agenda to their remarks.
Nor is their mention of the fact that the noble Yankees offered a compromise in the form of a ratified 13th amendment signed by Lincoln which would grant the South slavery in perpetuity, in return for a return to the union and accepting the odious tariffs on Southern agriculture, such as the Morill tariff.
The same people who spend hours bashing General Lee never mention the fact that Abraham Lincoln was an avowed racist who believed in apartheid, was president of the Illinois colonial society, whose goal was to send all Blacks back to Africa. Lincoln also stated unequivocally that he felt Negroes were inferior to whites and should never be allowed to hold office and or vote.
"SouthernFriedHoney","RonPaulHatesBlacks","12FlyMe".All the same person with an unhealthy obsession not only to slander historical figures,but use profanity like a juvenile who has a low self image,and probably is psychologically unstable.Your ridiculous claims with no proof that R.E. Lee was a child molester.Robert E Lee will keep his place in history as one of America's Greatest General Officer,your claims however,will be lost with the rubbish
I only have one account, and I'm not either of those two people. That should be pretty obvious from our posts. Sorry.
I can certainly understand why you'd want to change the subject and attack the messenger, though. You don't seem capable of defending your beloved confederacy and its "cornerstone" of racism and slavery on the merits. You claimed to be a "Historian," but you don't seem to have any History degrees at all. All you have are strawmen, moral relativism, and Nirvana fallacies.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@RonPaulHatesBlacks "fallacy",a great name for your next account."God intends for slavery to be cruel and painful to blacks "for their instruction".Ok,I got that,you go on to say,"Which explains why he could torture children" Your mother has a vagina,therefore,she "could" be a hooker.You have failed to produce sufficient evidence in support of of your claims.Yawn,can't you better than that?You're really starting to bore me with your juvenile antics
I only have one account, retard. I've never had more than one account. I never said anything about torturing children. Were you drunk when you posted that horseshit? It's really hard to follow.
You claim to be a Historian. Where did you get your degrees? Harvard? Yale? I can't remember.
@RonPaulHatesBlacks One account my ass.You did say it,and you did post it.Funny that you should bring up Harvard and Yale.Such universities as at Harvard and Yale were built as much on the blood of slaves as the plantations of the South.
Sorry, slappy. I only have one account. Turns out more than one person disagrees with your love and devotion to the racist South and its cornerstone of slavery.
Lincoln abandoned colonization during his lifetime, Mr. Historian. He didn't start the war, and was a hell of a lot better than the alternative. What's next---you going to defend Hitler by criticizing FDR and Churchill?
Seriously spammer, did you even graduate college? Are you a "Historian" or just another LIAR?
@RonPaulHatesBlacks I'll speak in your terms asshole,lets talk about Winston Churchill.He viewed Lee as “one of the noblest Americans who ever lived,” why British Field Marshall Viscount Wolseley called him, “the most perfect man I ever met,” and why Theodore Roosevelt honored him as, “the very greatest of all the great captains that the English-speaking peoples have brought forth. Lord Acton also felt Lee was a man among men.
Yeah, the cult of Lee. Yawn. You think the NAACP is racist, and black people are evil and succeed only when they "clutch[] slavery" as a passport. That's why you support the racist South and its Cornerstone of slavery. Everything else is a dodge.
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Wow,you really are so easy.Your not a "black" person,or anyone of "color",your "white as a marshmallow",yet you have an obsession about General Lee.Strange,not one of any of the founding fathers,who also owned slaves.Yet,you're consumed with debating someone who's shared a brotherhood with blacks you'll never know,how sad for you
@RonPaulHatesBlacks its amazing how stupid you are some times. The NAACP is racist ! They divide Americans. The root problem in racism is establishing a difference between races. instead of saying "stop making fun of that black guy" say "stop making fun of that AMERICAN"
you know where the KKK started INDIANA A YANKEE STATE. The south isn't racist and that is not what the war was fought for.
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "The root problem in racism is establishing a difference between races. instead of saying "stop making fun of that black guy" say "stop making fun of that AMERICAN""
That's fascist. Cultural diversity is a good thing. The root problem in racism is that people think one ethnicity is inherently superior to others.
"you know where the KKK started INDIANA A YANKEE STATE."
Where did you learn that? It started in Tennessee.
LOL that's fascist. Cultural diversity isn't always a good thing it starts racism because people don't like to change their way of life because a bunch of foreigners come imposing their culture on them. I dont mind it if its small but once they start becoming a majority it jeopardizes the native culture just like what the U.S did to the Indians
and That was the first KKK which really was more of a insurgence of the CSA then a racist group
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "Cultural diversity isn't always a good thing it starts racism because people don't like to change their way of life because a bunch of foreigners come imposing their culture on them."
Cultural diversity means people AREN'T changing their way of life. Have you ever been to the big city?
You're the one imposing YOUR culture onto people. THAT'S what causes racism. Your mentality is completely ass backwards. You should get out of the woods once in a while and visit America.
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "The south isn't racist and that is not what the war was fought for."
The people who literally fought in the civil war weren't fighting for or against slavery, but the southern politicians definitely seceded because of slavery. To realize that, one just has to read the declaration of causes for secession written by the various southern states. Southerners claim secession was about taxes but South Carolina, the secession leader, never even mentions taxes.
The people who literally fought in the Civil War did so for a variety of reasons. That's been true of every war fought in the history of mankind. Many of the people who fought fought for or against slavery. That's certainly true of the 180,000 to 200,000 black men who fought for the United States of America.
You've been reduced to arguing that although 3.5 to 4 million people fought in the Civil War, not a single one of them---not one!!!---fought over slavery. Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
@RonPaulHatesBlacks "not a single one of them---not one!!!---fought over slavery."
You need to work on your reading comprehension skills. I obviously meant the vast majority of the people who fought didn't fight for/against slavery. I didn't say no one fought for/against slavery.
@KayBeeEee1983 You didn't "obviously mean" anything of the sort. You've been reduced to arguing that "The people who literally fought in the civil war weren't fighting for or against slavery." Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!
@RonPaulHatesBlacks You're a pathetically ignorant troll, and, judging by other people's comments on other civil war/slavery videos, that's a common conception of you.
@KayBeeEee1983 You're lying. Which race(s) does the NAACP consider inherently inferior to others? It's a simple question, liar---why do you keep ducking it like a coward?
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Learn to read english, then go over all the comments I've posted here, you ignorant cowardly little bitch. I never said the NAACP considered any race inferior.
@KayBeeEee1983 You said the NAACP is racist, you cowardly little bitch. Racism is "the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race." So which race(s) does the NAACP consider inherently inferior to others?
It's a simple question, you pathetic coward. Why do you keep ducking it like a little bitch?
@RonPaulHatesBlacks "What's next---you going to defend Hitler by criticizing FDR and Churchill?"
Ah, okay, now I get it. If a person criticizes one point, you assume that means they support the polar opposite point. If one criticizes capitalism, you assume they are communist. If I criticize Lincoln, you assume I support slavery. This is what I mean when I say you are irrational and lack the ability to reason.
@RonPaulHatesBlacks You believe anyone who criticizes Lincoln is pro-slavery. You believe anyone who criticizes FDR is pro-Nazi. You believe the NAACP is a black supremacist group. You believe everyone who fought for the south in the civil war was fighting for slavery. You believe everyone who fought for the north was fighting against slavery. You believe Native Americans deserve to be enslaved. The list goes on and on. All of these things show your obscene level of ignorance.
@KayBeeEee1983 I don't believe a single one of those things. Not one. You've become unglued. I've dismantled all your horseshit and rationalizations, and reduced you to hyperbolic strawmen and flat out lies. Wow. What a complete victory!!! There's nothing left but for you to delete your account and swallow a gun.
Which race(s) does the NAACP consider inherently inferior to others?
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Bullshit. You believe all those things. You admitted all of them! You're just taking it back because you realize how hypocritical it is to wish slavery on Native Americans while opposing African slavery. That's pretty pathetic.
@RonPaulHatesBlacks However, you are definitely inferior. You totally lack reading comprehension, you lack the ability to think rationally, and you have no reasoning skills. That explains why you spend so much time trolling.
@KayBeeEee1983 When I said the south wasn't racist i was talking about modern days. They didn't secede because of slavery, they seceded because the Federal government was telling them not to while giving them high taxes . It effected their economy greatly so they had to do what any state should do ... Secede .
Instead of shoving regulation down their throats they should have waited for slavery to die off ... which it would have ... but instead the fed throw fuel in the fire
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "they seceded because the Federal government was telling them not to while giving them high taxes."
Read South Carolina's declaration of the causes of secession. There is no mention of taxes at all. It's all about slavery.
"It effected their economy greatly"
Read "The Impending Crisis of the South" by Hilton Rowan Helper. It's a book written by a southern white supremacist arguing that slavery was HURTING the south economically, and it was BANNED in many southern states.
@KayBeeEee1983 Yeah which the government shouldn't be regulating .... but after Lincoln was elected he push moral tariff and cause other states to secede
LOL slavery hurting the southern economy ... that is ridicules their economy relied on cotton and at that time it was cheaper having slaves then paying them but over time it would flip flop and it may have started in 1860 ... but the fed wanted to push regulations and anger the states
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "slavery hurting the southern economy ... that is ridicules their economy relied on cotton"
Slavery hurt economic development in the South. Since the economy relied on cotton, and all the work on plantations went to slaves, there weren't any jobs for poor southerners, so they moved to the North & West. The South's population was increasing at a much lower rate than the North & West for that reason. More than half the population of South Carolina and Mississippi were slaves.
@KayBeeEee1983 I guess i was thinking about the total GDP not how much jobs would be lost .... But to me this would have been solved if the fed keep out of it eventually people and land would get tired of it and slavery probably would have ended sooner if the fed kept out of state business.
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "But to me this would have been solved if the fed keep out of it eventually people and land would get tired of it and slavery probably would have ended sooner if the fed kept out of state business. "
Slavery would've ended only when industry took its place, but slavery supporters were hampering industrialization in the South. The south was INVESTED in their slaves. If a mechanical cotton picker came out, the value of slaves would be almost zero, so they tried to prevent it.
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 Between 1800 and 1860, the free population of the Free States increased by 308%, compared to an increase of only 194% in the Slave States. (This is only counting the 16 states that were states in 1800. States that joined the union after 1800, Ohio, Alabama, Maine, Missouri, for example, aren't counted at all).
@RonPaulHatesBlacks The NAACP is intrinsically racist...it stands for the "National Association for the ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE" It's not a black supremacist group like the Nation of Islam, but it's still racist by definition.
@RonPaulHatesBlacks LOL your Idiot .... you think STARTING a war is better then waiting a few decades for slavery to be obsolete. The north was just as racist .... After they freed the slaves ( for political reason) they passed that black codes and started 100 years more of racism.
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "you think STARTING a war is better then waiting a few decades for slavery to be obsolete."
Yes, he thinks the death and maiming of nearly 2 million white boys who had nothing to do with slavery is better than allowing slavery to go on a few more years.
@KayBeeEee1983 Um, yeah. You oppose the Civil War and think slavery never should have ended unless and until each racist slaveowner voluntarily decided to end it. If some racist slaveowners never agreed to free their slaves, well, too bad. You've decided to devote your life to crying over Southern "white boys" who died in a war they started, and you don't give a shit about any of the millions of innocent black people they held as slaves. You're a sick, inhuman monster. Let's hope you die soon!!!
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Once again, I don't oppose the civil war. I think slavery should have been abolished any way possible, as quickly as possible. ALL slavery, not just African slavery. You're the sick inhuman monster hypocrite who supports Native American slavery and genocide. It's obvious you're just trying to divert attention away from your blatant racism...
@RonPaulHatesBlacks "Now I'm a racist? Awesome!!! Which race(s) do I consider inherently inferior to others?"
Native Americans
"Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! You have NOTHING but lies and the "racist" card!!! How utterly pathetic!!!"
Jeez, try to keep SOME dignity. I know you didn't start with much but at least try. I'd actually feel bad for you if you weren't such a hypocritical little prick. XD
@KayBeeEee1983 I consider Native Americans inherently inferior to other races? Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! What race do you think I AM, retard!!! Ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! Oh, holy shit!!! What a fucking moron!!!
@RonPaulHatesBlacks "I consider Native Americans inherently inferior to other races? Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! What race do you think I AM, retard!!! Ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! Oh, holy shit!!! What a fucking moron!!!"
Whatever you say, psycho....What makes you think anyone would believe a word you say? Almost every comment you post has a lie in it.
@don2768 My post never even mentioned the "race card," you pathetic piece of shit. And I'll talk about whatever I want to talk about, fuckhead. Get back to your Klan rally, boy.
@RonPaulHatesBlacks You're the biggest racist and race baitor on YouTube today. Oh.... you think Ahahahahahah is funny. Well, it's not funny at all but actually pretty stupid.... just like you. No surprise.
@RonPaulHatesBlacks you are a complete PRICK .... the north was just as racist and they didn't cling on to their slaves when slavery was banned up north. Your the one who is the monster ... you would rather let 600000 Americans ( 5 million in today's standards) get SLAUGHTERED because of slavery that would die out in a few decades .... every other nation gave up slavery with peace .... but we cant because we cant ride it out 10 - 30 more years.
@RonPaulHatesBlacks What does the War of Northern Aggression have to do with slavery? Additionally, the war you're referring to started when the treasonous US government refused to remove their military from sovereign territory... the CSA did not start the war, it merely defended itself from foreign colonial invaders.
Actually, one-third of Southern families owned slaves in 1861, rising to one-half in states like Mississippi. And plenty more "rank and file" Southerners owned slaves before 1861, rented them in 1861, and/or aspired that they or their children would own them in the future. And you don't have to own slaves to support slavery in principle and believe it to be God's will. Thank goodness they lost and weren't able to impose even MORE years of slavery and segregation.
@RonPaulHatesBlacks exactly -- one half of the families in SC owned slaves, The half that decided everything Virtually EVERY leader, every judge, every newspaper owner, every rich or moderately rich person, every politician, every congressman, every mayor, etc. had slaves, or came from families that owned or prospered from slaves. Slaves were rented out to the state governments, and busnesses regularly
Read Debow bragging about that fact -- slavery was everything to the South.
Where is your documentation that 1/3rd of Southern families owned slaves in 1861, and where is your proof that one half of Mississippi had slaves? In 1860, only 8% of all American families owned slaves "According to the 1860 U.S. census, 393,975 individuals, representing 8 percent of all US families, owned 3,950,528 slaves." But of course RPHB is unable to be honest, especially when it comes to saying things about the south.
If you want to know why the south lost the war, it wasn't for trying it was shear numbers (the population of the North was 25 million, and the south was 2.5 million). That's why general Lee said we may not win, but we are going to give them HELL!!
@4man321 The South had more men involved in the war, than the north, especially at first dumb ass. Count the million or so slaves you used.
The pussy South should have been able to put 2 million men in the fiedl but never could get over 300,000 men at one time--because of massive desertions.
Did you know that you stupid shit? Desertions were massive as early as 63, and were the reasons you pussies lost.
Learn real history, not the excuses you fucks slide up each other's ass.
MYTH - The War of 1861 - 1865 was fought over slavery.
FACT - Terribly untrue. The North fought the war over money. Plain and simple. When the South started Secession, Lincoln was asked, "Why not let the South go in peace?" To which he replied, "I can't let them go. Who would pay for the government?" Sensing total financial ruin for the North, Lincoln waged war on the South. The South fought the War to repel Northern aggression and invasion.
@Trent33424 Just read the inaugural address by the Vice President of the CSA and some of the declarations of secession by those states that seceded slavery was no myth. The south fought the war over money also terrible but true. The rich plantation owners needed slaves to maintain their life style the North was pushing to have it abolished. The South started the war by firing of Ft. Sumter and might I remind you that the South invaded the North on two occasions. Two sides to every story right.
@686204 Lincoln started the war by deliberately provoking attack on Ft Sumter by trying to reinforce it in spite of agreement not to. Slavery was not the cause of the war. Patrick Henry at the foundation of our country proposed a "southern Confederacy" because of the difference in ideas between the northern colonies and the southern ones in the form the government should take. First threat of southern secession was in 1831 as a result of the "Tariff of Abominations".
Nope. You started the war over slavery. You said so at the time, in your Cornerstone Speech and Mississippi, Texas, Georgia, and South Carolina declarations of secession that you've obviously never even read. The tariff helps prove the point---it was so bad you called it the "Tariff of Abominations," but it STILL didn't cause secession. You only seceded and began killing American troops because We the People elected a Free Soil president who threatened your beloved slavery. What a sick fuck!
@RonPaulHatesBlacks The Tariff of Abominations had nothing to do with slavery. As I see it, you are the only sick one on the site. I would say God Bless you, but I guess I would doubt that with the language and lack of intelligence that you dispay, you do not have faith. Our communication is at an end!
I know the Tariff of Abominations had nothing to do with slavery. That's why you didn't secede or start a war over it. The election of a Free Soil president and abolitionist Republican Party had everything to do with slavery. That's why you seceded and started a war over it. You said "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery---the greatest material interest in the world." And you DEFEND and CELEBRATE that! You support MORE years of slavery! You're a sick, evil fuck.
The Dred Scott decision had already answered the question of slavery, also 7 states seceded peacefully before the war even started. These states formed their own government, and were free from the union a full month before Lincoln even took office. Slavery was not the issue at the beginning, plain and simple. Could you also explain the slave population in NY,NJ, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut, all the way up until 1865?
If slavery was the issue for the war then why wasn't slavery abolished in the union states before the start of the war? Answer, Lincoln and all of those who were with him didn't care about the slave owners. The northern states were already in the union why should he care? That was his entire reason behind the war anyway. He needed to reunite the country. The south was paying the governments bills after all. Lincoln only wanted his sugar daddies back.
@TigerRifle Slavery was not the cause of the war. I don't know how many times I have to tell you guys to look up the declarations of secession by southern states that joined the CSA. Also read the Vice President of the CSA's inaugural address on the issue of slavery. The south seceded as soon as President Lincoln was elected because his party was opposed to the expansion of slavery into new territories.
@686204 Then I suggest that you read Lincoln's inaugural address in which he made it clear that he would not touch slavery and was in favor of a 13th amendment guarenteeing it under the constitution. He did promise high tariffs, which would have destroyed the south economically. Yes, expansion was an issue because it would forbidding it would guarentee the norht control of the southern economy. Stephen's address was meant to appease slave holders, a small minority of southerners.
@TigerRifle As far as Ft Sumter was concerned it was a Federal Fort located on Federal property legally purchased from SC. Why wouldn't he be allowed to provide supplies to the soldiers occupying it and/or reinforce it. There was a difference of opinion on secession which the south could have resolved by taking it to the Supreme Court and thus preventing the war and the death of over 600,000 troops.
@686204 Which Lincoln could have prevented by not provoking war... If slavery had been the issue, it could have been resolved as it had in every other civilized country..by government compensation to those holding them. I do want to say, that I appreciate your civil tone and I think that our positons are honest interpretations, rather than the dogma and hatred espoused by someone else on this site. Thank you for your input.
@TigerRifle Look my position is that I am against slavery it was a black mark on this Nations history. The North had taken steps to abolish it the South not only whated to keep it but expand it. I am also against war and in the case of the civil war it was an unnecessary war that should have been resolved through legal/political channels. You say the North provoked the war I disagree the South was prepared to go to war when it seceded, It fired on Ft Sumter and strated it.
@686204 You stupid fuck -- the war SHOULD have ben resolved through political channels? Honestly, how fucking stupid can you be?
Do you have any fucking idea of the history of 1820-1860? Apparently not. Did you know about anti-incendiary laws? The South passed them, so it became a CRIME, punishable by torture and death, to even own a book or pamphlet questioning slavery.
@SouthernFriedHoney Well son all I know is that you have a filthy mouth. First off rather than go to war the South could have taken their perceived belief that the Constitution allowed secession to the Supreme court for a ruling was what I was talking about. You obviously did not properly read what I was saying because I also believe the war was about slavery and I am against it and war as well. Clean up your fowl mouth and pay attention to what people are saying maybe you will learn something.
@686204 Are you fucking kidding? The South BELIEVED the Constitution allowed secession? They didn't believe ANYTHING you retard. Do you know the difference between an excuse and a reason?
They wanted slave power, slave pussy, and slave prestige. That is what they believed -- getting and keeping power, prestige, and pussy. Everything else was bullshit, and they knew it.
The claimed they believed God told them to enslave and torture blacks too. They knew that was bullshit too.
@SouthernFriedHoney Learn how to read you stupid imbecile and you will understand that I agree with you minus your filthy language. I know the South believed the Constitution allowed secession you idiot. What I said was if they went to the Supreme court for a ruling they would have legally proved their point if the court had ruled in their favor. They then could have justified secession and possibly averted a war. Like I said learn to read before you go spouting off your mouth.
@686204 Learn how to think you stupid fuck. YOu say the South "believed" this or that.
You dumb fuck. The SOuth didn't believe their own bullshit. IT was all an excuse you dumb fuck. THey could care less what was true. They only "believed" in what got them more power, pussy and prestige. They didn't "believe" the Constitution said this or that retard. The Constitution said free speech, and no cruel punishments, and all men are created equal retard. THey shit on all that.
@SouthernFriedHoney Another rant of filth from a person who thinks he knows it all. Your rant is not worth answering except for correcting you on two points you made. 1st off the all men are created equal stuff comes from the declaration of independence not the Constitution. 2nd on that point, it was an outright lie and a black mark on this countries history. It applied to white men only but not blacks.
@686204 You stupid fuck, the Declaration and Constutiion were both documents by the Founders. Naturally, the scum sucking pigs in the South shit on both.
They of course shit of Declaration -- but they shit on free speech, no cruel punishment, real elections, free press, and freedom of religion. They shit on states rights, they shit on EVERY part of the Constitution and Declaration.
@SouthernFriedHoney Boy you are a hypocrite what makes you think that the slaves in the North when they had them were treated any different than those in the South. You do know that the North had slaves at one time right. Do you know that there was no mention of slavery in the Constitution just property which of course that's what slaves were right. Guess what both Northern and Southern states agreed on this cover up. So much for every man being created equal.
@686204 you stupid fuck -- the USA was founded on "all men are created equal", and consent of governed, free speech, no cruel punishment.
Now, if you are too fucking stupid to see the difference, let me show it to you. THe South bragged they were just the OPPOSITE you retard. They bragged God ordained them to enslave the black race. They had no free speech, they were based on cruel punishment, etc.
@SouthernFriedHoney The USA was founded on "all men are created equal" that is a lie. It did not apply to the black slave now did it. Do you see anything in the Bill of rights or the Constitution applying to slavery, no. It was covered up by the use of the word property. The forefathers were either to embarrassed or did not want to address the problem of slavery at that time. It was a black mark on the history of this nation. The real push to abolish slavery in the North came in the early 1800.
What is the song in the video? Where can I find a copy?
CSAGunboat 2 weeks ago
I meant Ancient and Modern Britons by David McRitchie in that last one. He is a white European and he will even tell you this stuff. If you visit some places in Europe, other people even know this stuff. They just don't talk about it too often.
1985dctp 1 month ago
Unfortunately this stuff is true but it started in Europe when the Moors abused their powers and Europeans came to what we call North America to set up commerce and declare independence under the Moroccan Empire. Basically what you have is Blackamoors in Europe and America fighting with each other and white people just got caught up in the mix. Whites endured slavery in Europe and that's why it happened to so called Blacks. What goes around comes around. Read "Read ancient and modern britons"
1985dctp 1 month ago
why do black people assume the whites cant say nigger when they indeed created the word
woma0neater 1 month ago
@woma0neater, Niger is black in latin. The word originated from niger, a good ole southern master couldn't say niger without a little drawl! Nigeria, the Niger River, etc.
Negro is spanish, simply means black, El Negro. I have lived through it all niger, nigger, negro, colored, black, black panther, african american. It will be something else in the future, I think the NAACP has a convention and changes the name routinely. Hell, I am african american and white, my ancestors left South Africa.
brainerdrebel 1 month ago
@brainerdrebel you seriously identify as an african american? this is the first time i've heard of something like this.
Trumblebee 1 month ago
@Trumblebee, "YES". There are Arabs, Whites, Blacks, Mixed, Spanish in Africa. Blacks can't claim to be the only African Americans. North Africa has a majority of Arabs. South Africa has a large number of whites. You have to overcome your government education conditioning and find facts for yourself.
brainerdrebel 1 month ago
@brainerdrebel LOL, that's not even what i meant, i don't even know why you're assuming this has to do with your race. i AM african, i know all about the different peoples and ethnic groups that live there, thank you very much.
anyway, i've never ever heard of an african immigrant (even the "black ones") claiming to be african amerian, ever. may have to do with the negative image africans have of AAs but regardless we see them as a separate ethnic group..cnt'd...
Trumblebee 1 month ago
@Trumblebee and continue to identify with our tribe and nationality even in the states and other foreign countries. THAT'S why i'm surprised. some africans i know will even cuss you out for mistaking them for african americans.
Trumblebee 1 month ago
@Trumblebee, AAs? Sorry, every black in american claims to be african american. They can be 5th or 6th generation americans and claim african roots.
brainerdrebel 1 month ago
@brainerdrebel AA = African American. i don't think you understand what i'm saying - africans in america (most anyway) identify as nigerian-american, egyptian-american, ethiopian-american, and so on, i've never met or heard of an african that calls him or herself an african american. african american is like an ethnic group, they are the blacks descended from african slaves brought here hundreds of years ago.
Trumblebee 1 month ago
@Trumblebee you are getting deep. I qualify as an AA then, My ancestors where brought to North America from South Africa as bond slaves. Not on slave ships but on death ships, that is a ship were over 50% were expected to died before reaching North America.
brainerdrebel 1 month ago
@brainerdrebel my bad, i assumed you were a recent immigrant but huh? south africans were not enslaved and sent to the americas...those were west/central africans. and a very small number of slaves came from mozambique and madagascar but that's about it
Trumblebee 1 month ago
what's your point?
there were jews who did business with nazis-- how is either relevant to the indictment of the underlying crime and who was the primary beneficiary?
androydnyc 2 months ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
BAGGERS TRYING TO CHANGE HISTORY
kell4809 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This video tells the truth .
carnut476 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1. Why is it that Pro C.S people always rant on the Corwin Amendment, when in the C.S Constitution has the same thing as the Corwin Amendment.
2. If States' Rights was the cause why did the Declaration of Causes of Secession state they did not what Northern States nullifying the Fugitive Slave Act?
3. States' Rights for what?
4. Why rant on Lincoln suspending Habeas corpus when the C.S Constitution allows that, in fact Davis did it too!
P.S-I was once 110% pro C.S these and more added doubt
SunofAusterlitz1805 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1. Why is it that Pro C.S people always rant on the Corwin Amendment, when in the C.S Constitution has the same thing as the Corwin Amendment.
2. If States' Rights was the cause why did the Declaration of Causes of Secession state they did not what Northern States nullifying the Fugitive Slave Act?
3. States' Rights for what?
4. Why rant on Lincoln suspending Habeas corpus when the C.S Constitution allows that, in fact Davis did it too!
P.S-I was once 110% pro C.S these and more added doubt
SunofAusterlitz1805 4 months ago
In the 21st century we still talk about race. There are no races we're talking about a chemical that is about the size of a dime that varies from person to person. We are all human and should have the same rights and freedoms, that's important the rest is ignorance.
Oldchef51 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Oldchef51
And voila! .... the perfect Commun-ist clone.
2 more generations and America will be flying her Communist colours in public.
You must be a white man... only the white man has been brainwashed into hating himself by the Idumeans to such a degree.
Your Comment is not only scientifically unsound.. even on the surface it is borderline lunacy.... akin to believing in the easter bunny.
mrtruthify 4 months ago in playlist More videos from usna68
@KayBeeEee1983 no its not that they lost the election its that there vote counted for nothing. that president Lincoln was elected with not one southern vote so they had no power at all the north could do what ever they wanted so they separated.
irondun5620 5 months ago
during slavery if you were lucky enough to gain your freedom the only way that you could free your family would be to BUY them which would technically make them your slaves
osiris6364 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
To return to the census figures quoted above, this 28 percent is certainly impressive when compared to less than 1.4 percent of all American whites and less than 4.8 percent of southern whites. The statistics show that, when free, blacks disproportionately became slave masters
Yizlanu 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. The country's leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves, or 28 percent of the free Negroes in that city.
To return to the census figures quoted above, this 28 percent is certainly impressive when compared to less than 1.4 percent of all American whites and less than 4.8 percent of southern whites.
Yizlanu 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
According to federal census reports, on June 1, 1860 there were nearly 4.5 million Negroes in the United States, with fewer than four million of them living in the southern slaveholding states. Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves. Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. The country's leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves,
Yizlanu 7 months ago
@Yizlanu why are you being spammed ?
RonPaulLovesBlacks1 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
who owned slaves. These include individuals such as Justus Angel and Mistress L. Horry, of Colleton District, South Carolina, who each owned 84 slaves in 1830. In fact, in 1830 a fourth of the free Negro slave masters in South Carolina owned 10 or more slaves; eight owning 30 or more (2).
According to federal census reports, on June 1, 1860 there were nearly 4.5 million Negroes in the United States, with fewer than four million of them living in the southern
Yizlanu 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The fact is large numbers of free Negroes owned black slaves; in fact, in numbers disproportionate to their representation in society at large. In 1860 only a small minority of whites owned slaves. According to the U.S. census report for that last year before the Civil War, there were nearly 27 million whites in the country. Some eight million of them lived in the slaveholding states.
The census also determined that there were fewer than 385,000 individuals who owned (more to post)
Yizlanu 7 months ago
wow I'm from the south and I didn't know tihs stufff !! thanks for the information
Yizlanu 7 months ago
im from n.y and i say god bliss the the confederate battle flag i have had all i can take
nintoolfan85 7 months ago
Bonnie Blue
timothydheath 8 months ago
@civilwarcow I was always taught at school that he had a neutral opinion. But nice quote, you are one of the few people that I have talked to here that knows what (s)he is talking about. So kudos to you and I'm sorry if I might have gotten the information wrong.
BreakingxBenjamin217 8 months ago
@civilwarcow Oh crap. I'm sorry, let me rephrase. The Union came first for Lincoln. Freeing the slaves was secondary. Lincoln never actually mentioned whether he was for or against slavery.
By the way, nice quote in the first comment. :D. It's nice to find a history person here. :D
BreakingxBenjamin217 8 months ago
@BreakingxBenjamin217 By contrast, for the southrons, slavery came first, breaking the union was secondary
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@DonMeaker Of course. Slavery was the Southern way of life. Southerners had most of their money invested in slaves and their property. That's why they left the Union.
BreakingxBenjamin217 7 months ago
@BreakingxBenjamin217 Except the south didn't leave the Union. Their attempts to do so were null and void, as ruled by the Supreme Court in Texas v. White. They could have left legally by amendment, by successful federal case with SCOTUS as original jurisdiction, or perhaps by legislation, or by treaty. They did none of those things. They attempted unilateral secession backed up by theft and armed force. they failed.
DonMeaker 7 months ago
@civilwarcow I know that Lincoln didn't care about freeing the slaves.
BreakingxBenjamin217 8 months ago
this sound like more false history.
1980vince 8 months ago
The point is, if we want to understand where we are, we have to take an honest look at how we got here. The current, politically-correct version of history we were taught has numerous, demonstrable holes in it. Much of it is nothing but the propoganda of that day. Fortunately, 150 years is not so far distant that "original source" history is unavailable. Anyone who really WANTS to know the truth can find it. I encourage everyone to study for yourself and not rely on what you've been told.
jrebjr 8 months ago
The war was about money.Not freeing slaves.
xxDogsoldierxx 9 months ago
@xxDogsoldierxx"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."
-Abraham Lincoln
He fought to keep the Union together.
BreakingxBenjamin217 8 months ago
So a few blacks owned slaves themselves. How horrible of them. But what does this prove?! That there wasn't any racism in the south?! Shoot, there was racism in the north too! The free-soiler and abolitionists were sure as hell racist, but also sure as hell against the "institution" of slavery, which by 1860 only existed in the South and border states, which is the main point, which is what this video misses. And btw, this was in my Northern history book.
wutdaFU3K 9 months ago
@wutdaFU3K Shit abolishionists probably hated blacks more than anyone else! Lincoln had an obsession with moving every african american to Liberia. White supremacy was just the thinking of the era
xtremejohnny69 9 months ago
nice try you white mother fuckers aint gettn off the hook what a hoot.
samir3323 9 months ago
people need to stop fucking arguing over everything and watch the goddamn fucking video
Gettysburg20thMaine 9 months ago
This was pretty cool i liked it
db260332 9 months ago
What the hell? He's telling you FACTS ok? He's not saying "I hate black people". Stop saying that he's stupid and racist.
Owliganka 10 months ago
This shit is old why make videos about it LOL fucking stupid.
TeeJayB420 11 months ago
these assertions are, at most, factoids - incomplete bits of information taken out of context - slaves were expensive, not everyone could own one; slavery as an institution was cruel and unjust, whether or not any blacks in the US held other blacks as slaves - West Virginia split into mountain & flatland sections, being free & slave respectively - the South maintained Jim Crow laws, lynching, voting inequities long into the 20th century - men of the South are no angels, or only a few rare ones -
SupernalOne 1 year ago
Seems to me after reading all the comments that what was set out to be done worked and still is working. Divide, seperate, us,BROTHERS, AMERICAN BROTHERS & SISTERS.have us so preoccupied with all this me vs you, north and south, color vs color, we are all missing the big picture. THEY WANT US FIGHTING LIKE THIS SO NO ONE REALIZES THAT BOTH SIDES, ALL EVERYDAY / NON RICH AMERICANS NO MATTER WHAT SIDE YOUR ON OR COLOR YOU ARE ARE GETTING FUCKED EQUALLY.
CplTez 1 year ago
What i'd like to know is how these blacks mentioned here became slave owners themselves, i thought all blacks back then were slaves and if not wouldn't be in a financial position to own slaves. This is an intersting fact that i've never heard about before, even though i'm Australian and into the military exploits of the likes of Horatio Nelson etc i have had a look into a bit of the American civil war
73mandala 1 year ago
@73mandala Well, most of the freed slaves had been free way before the war. This way they could have a job and save up some money of some sort. Some people in the South payed some freed slaves to work for them. Anyone could get what they might call, a weak slave for very cheap. Some slaves even fought for the South more so than the North. You look at Port Hudson,LA and a unit of slaves fought very valiant and were a tough group of soldiers. They felt the Union were invading their homes as well.
jesusboii77 9 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You're all over the net Reichsministerium für Volksaufklärung Keith olbermann wanna-be.If you're white,then make a clip how sorry you are for what your ansestors did.May you live interesting times.Again,thanks for the laughs,money in the bank,tax free money at that,please come back,and thank you for shopping at youareadumbass(doy)com
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Thank you for the night of fun,and being paid for it to boot.Your multiple you tube accounts,or your trolling wing men (don't tell me again you don't know what a "wing man" is),access your WWII data banks,maybe "Tuskegee Airmen" will help."SouthernFriedHoney","12FlyMe".All the same person,or at least a group with the same mental disorder.Humorous that it's so obvious.
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Yeah. You're just repeating the same lies and moral relativism. You've run out of new things to say. You're done here, spammer.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"White as a marshmallow"---what the fuck are you talking about, fat boy? Are you high right now? It's obvious why you refuse to answer whether you graduated college, but did you even graduate high school?
Plenty of my Founding Fathers owned slaves. Charles Manson wasn't the first serial killer in history. Plenty of Allied troops and commanders in WWII were anti-Semitic. Does that justify murder or the Holocaust? Or are the actions of other people no excuse for your own?
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago 8
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Your multiple you tube accounts,or your trolling wing men (don't tell me again you don't know what a "wing man" is),access your WWII data banks,maybe "Tuskegee Airmen" will help."SouthernFriedHoney","12FlyMe".All the same person,or at least a group with the same mental disorder.Humorous that it's so obvious.You're all over the net Reichsministerium für Volksaufklärung Keith olbermann wanna-be.You're white,then make a clip how sorry you are for being so,Cha-ching!!
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks They make Charles Manson like he was so horrible,he never killed anyone we know of.To put him with people like JWGacy,Boston Strangler and others is wrong.Just like the shows about cults that compare other cults to his.Drugged up hippie Manson Family compared to Jim Jones or the Branch Davidians.To use High hippies killing people for fun as the foremost example for serial killers and death cults is wrong.
garnerdonnie 1 year ago
Wow, a Charles Manson defender!!! One meets a lot of weird, sick fucks on Youtube, but an actual Charles Manson slurper takes the cake!!!
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks You're stupid because you didn't understand my comment.
garnerdonnie 1 year ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks.... take that giant cock out of your ass hole, then the opther onw out of your motuh and fuckin piss off... your seriously gonna get stabbed cunt if you keep up this harassment shit over youtube.
iown5fags 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
These are the same fellows to trotted out the so-called abused slaves. I don’t make a habit of arguing with NAACP types since they are almost always BLACK racists. Nor do I listen to Southern apologists who explain away slavery.
These Neo historians are made up of left-wing academics, and that very small segment of the African-American community, which clutches slavery to their bosom like the Holy Grail,as a passport to a lifetime of free indugences and greased careers.
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
Fuck yeah! It's long past time that you stopped FLAT OUT LYING about being a "Historian" and trying to argue facts and evidence that you've never studied in your entire life. It's long past time you dropped the act and argued the REAL reason you wish the racist South had won and subjected blacks to MORE years of slavery and segregation!!! So get on that high horse and rant some more that black people are evil racists who "clutch" onto slavery because they can't succeed in life on their own!!!
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Very weak response,sociopaths are known to resort to name calling when they can't get their facts straight.And again,I'm getting paid for having fun with you.If you want to debate,bring up historical facts,not conjecture.If profanity is the only language you understand,shall I undulge?
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
You started with the name-calling, boy, after I figured out you are uneducated and destroyed you with the facts. You had nothing left, so you attacked the me out of the blue as a "juvenile who has a low self image,and probably is psychologically unstable." And now you're just spamming the board like a crybaby. This could NOT have gone worse for you, Mr. Know-It-All Historian. You should drop the act and argue the REAL reason you support slavery. Argue what you KNOW, not what you don't.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago
It warms my heart that I'm getting paid to do this.I’m amused by these reparation for lunch bunch types who want to correct history, yet ignore a good part of it.Anytime anyone uses the term Neo Confederate you know exactly where they’re coming from. When I see the war crimes of the North investigated and illuminated as vigorously as the condemnation of Southern slavery then I will start to believe there is something beyond an anti southern agenda to their remarks.
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nor is their mention of the fact that the noble Yankees offered a compromise in the form of a ratified 13th amendment signed by Lincoln which would grant the South slavery in perpetuity, in return for a return to the union and accepting the odious tariffs on Southern agriculture, such as the Morill tariff.
So much for the WAR TO END SLAVERY NONSENSE.
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The same people who spend hours bashing General Lee never mention the fact that Abraham Lincoln was an avowed racist who believed in apartheid, was president of the Illinois colonial society, whose goal was to send all Blacks back to Africa. Lincoln also stated unequivocally that he felt Negroes were inferior to whites and should never be allowed to hold office and or vote.
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
"SouthernFriedHoney","RonPaulHatesBlacks","12FlyMe".All the same person with an unhealthy obsession not only to slander historical figures,but use profanity like a juvenile who has a low self image,and probably is psychologically unstable.Your ridiculous claims with no proof that R.E. Lee was a child molester.Robert E Lee will keep his place in history as one of America's Greatest General Officer,your claims however,will be lost with the rubbish
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
I only have one account, and I'm not either of those two people. That should be pretty obvious from our posts. Sorry.
I can certainly understand why you'd want to change the subject and attack the messenger, though. You don't seem capable of defending your beloved confederacy and its "cornerstone" of racism and slavery on the merits. You claimed to be a "Historian," but you don't seem to have any History degrees at all. All you have are strawmen, moral relativism, and Nirvana fallacies.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@RonPaulHatesBlacks "fallacy",a great name for your next account."God intends for slavery to be cruel and painful to blacks "for their instruction".Ok,I got that,you go on to say,"Which explains why he could torture children" Your mother has a vagina,therefore,she "could" be a hooker.You have failed to produce sufficient evidence in support of of your claims.Yawn,can't you better than that?You're really starting to bore me with your juvenile antics
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
I only have one account, retard. I've never had more than one account. I never said anything about torturing children. Were you drunk when you posted that horseshit? It's really hard to follow.
You claim to be a Historian. Where did you get your degrees? Harvard? Yale? I can't remember.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulHatesBlacks One account my ass.You did say it,and you did post it.Funny that you should bring up Harvard and Yale.Such universities as at Harvard and Yale were built as much on the blood of slaves as the plantations of the South.
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
Sorry, slappy. I only have one account. Turns out more than one person disagrees with your love and devotion to the racist South and its cornerstone of slavery.
Lincoln abandoned colonization during his lifetime, Mr. Historian. He didn't start the war, and was a hell of a lot better than the alternative. What's next---you going to defend Hitler by criticizing FDR and Churchill?
Seriously spammer, did you even graduate college? Are you a "Historian" or just another LIAR?
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulHatesBlacks I'll speak in your terms asshole,lets talk about Winston Churchill.He viewed Lee as “one of the noblest Americans who ever lived,” why British Field Marshall Viscount Wolseley called him, “the most perfect man I ever met,” and why Theodore Roosevelt honored him as, “the very greatest of all the great captains that the English-speaking peoples have brought forth. Lord Acton also felt Lee was a man among men.
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
Yeah, the cult of Lee. Yawn. You think the NAACP is racist, and black people are evil and succeed only when they "clutch[] slavery" as a passport. That's why you support the racist South and its Cornerstone of slavery. Everything else is a dodge.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Wow,you really are so easy.Your not a "black" person,or anyone of "color",your "white as a marshmallow",yet you have an obsession about General Lee.Strange,not one of any of the founding fathers,who also owned slaves.Yet,you're consumed with debating someone who's shared a brotherhood with blacks you'll never know,how sad for you
OakIslandBandit 1 year ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Your one sensitive crazy ass liberal man.
Owliganka 10 months ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks its amazing how stupid you are some times. The NAACP is racist ! They divide Americans. The root problem in racism is establishing a difference between races. instead of saying "stop making fun of that black guy" say "stop making fun of that AMERICAN"
you know where the KKK started INDIANA A YANKEE STATE. The south isn't racist and that is not what the war was fought for.
RonPaulLovesBlacks1 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "The root problem in racism is establishing a difference between races. instead of saying "stop making fun of that black guy" say "stop making fun of that AMERICAN""
That's fascist. Cultural diversity is a good thing. The root problem in racism is that people think one ethnicity is inherently superior to others.
"you know where the KKK started INDIANA A YANKEE STATE."
Where did you learn that? It started in Tennessee.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LOL that's fascist. Cultural diversity isn't always a good thing it starts racism because people don't like to change their way of life because a bunch of foreigners come imposing their culture on them. I dont mind it if its small but once they start becoming a majority it jeopardizes the native culture just like what the U.S did to the Indians
and That was the first KKK which really was more of a insurgence of the CSA then a racist group
The KKK as you know it now started in Indiana
RonPaulLovesBlacks1 7 months ago
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "Cultural diversity isn't always a good thing it starts racism because people don't like to change their way of life because a bunch of foreigners come imposing their culture on them."
Cultural diversity means people AREN'T changing their way of life. Have you ever been to the big city?
You're the one imposing YOUR culture onto people. THAT'S what causes racism. Your mentality is completely ass backwards. You should get out of the woods once in a while and visit America.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "The south isn't racist and that is not what the war was fought for."
The people who literally fought in the civil war weren't fighting for or against slavery, but the southern politicians definitely seceded because of slavery. To realize that, one just has to read the declaration of causes for secession written by the various southern states. Southerners claim secession was about taxes but South Carolina, the secession leader, never even mentions taxes.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
The people who literally fought in the Civil War did so for a variety of reasons. That's been true of every war fought in the history of mankind. Many of the people who fought fought for or against slavery. That's certainly true of the 180,000 to 200,000 black men who fought for the United States of America.
You've been reduced to arguing that although 3.5 to 4 million people fought in the Civil War, not a single one of them---not one!!!---fought over slavery. Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 months ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks "not a single one of them---not one!!!---fought over slavery."
You need to work on your reading comprehension skills. I obviously meant the vast majority of the people who fought didn't fight for/against slavery. I didn't say no one fought for/against slavery.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 You didn't "obviously mean" anything of the sort. You've been reduced to arguing that "The people who literally fought in the civil war weren't fighting for or against slavery." Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!
RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 months ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks You're a pathetically ignorant troll, and, judging by other people's comments on other civil war/slavery videos, that's a common conception of you.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 Still waiting. Which race(s) does the NAACP consider inherently inferior to others? It's a simple question, boy.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 months ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks I already answered that question.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 You're lying. Which race(s) does the NAACP consider inherently inferior to others? It's a simple question, liar---why do you keep ducking it like a coward?
RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 months ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Learn to read english, then go over all the comments I've posted here, you ignorant cowardly little bitch. I never said the NAACP considered any race inferior.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KayBeeEee1983 You said the NAACP is racist, you cowardly little bitch. Racism is "the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race." So which race(s) does the NAACP consider inherently inferior to others?
It's a simple question, you pathetic coward. Why do you keep ducking it like a little bitch?
RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 months ago 3
@RonPaulHatesBlacks "What's next---you going to defend Hitler by criticizing FDR and Churchill?"
Ah, okay, now I get it. If a person criticizes one point, you assume that means they support the polar opposite point. If one criticizes capitalism, you assume they are communist. If I criticize Lincoln, you assume I support slavery. This is what I mean when I say you are irrational and lack the ability to reason.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
Lots of people criticize Lincoln without supporting slavery. You're a fucking moron.
Which race(s) does the NAACP consider inherently inferior to others?
RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 months ago 2
@RonPaulHatesBlacks You believe anyone who criticizes Lincoln is pro-slavery. You believe anyone who criticizes FDR is pro-Nazi. You believe the NAACP is a black supremacist group. You believe everyone who fought for the south in the civil war was fighting for slavery. You believe everyone who fought for the north was fighting against slavery. You believe Native Americans deserve to be enslaved. The list goes on and on. All of these things show your obscene level of ignorance.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 I don't believe a single one of those things. Not one. You've become unglued. I've dismantled all your horseshit and rationalizations, and reduced you to hyperbolic strawmen and flat out lies. Wow. What a complete victory!!! There's nothing left but for you to delete your account and swallow a gun.
Which race(s) does the NAACP consider inherently inferior to others?
RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 months ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Bullshit. You believe all those things. You admitted all of them! You're just taking it back because you realize how hypocritical it is to wish slavery on Native Americans while opposing African slavery. That's pretty pathetic.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 I've never admitted a single one of them. Not once. You've really hit rock bottom. You're a complete and total liar.
Which race(s) does the NAACP consider inherently inferior to others?
RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulHatesBlacks "I've never admitted a single one of them. Not once. You've really hit rock bottom. You're a complete and total liar."
You're either psychotic or just really stupid, or maybe both.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulHatesBlacks RON PAUL 2012!!
SomeRandomFeller 4 months ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks However, you are definitely inferior. You totally lack reading comprehension, you lack the ability to think rationally, and you have no reasoning skills. That explains why you spend so much time trolling.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KayBeeEee1983 When I said the south wasn't racist i was talking about modern days. They didn't secede because of slavery, they seceded because the Federal government was telling them not to while giving them high taxes . It effected their economy greatly so they had to do what any state should do ... Secede .
Instead of shoving regulation down their throats they should have waited for slavery to die off ... which it would have ... but instead the fed throw fuel in the fire
RonPaulLovesBlacks1 7 months ago
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "they seceded because the Federal government was telling them not to while giving them high taxes."
Read South Carolina's declaration of the causes of secession. There is no mention of taxes at all. It's all about slavery.
"It effected their economy greatly"
Read "The Impending Crisis of the South" by Hilton Rowan Helper. It's a book written by a southern white supremacist arguing that slavery was HURTING the south economically, and it was BANNED in many southern states.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KayBeeEee1983 Yeah which the government shouldn't be regulating .... but after Lincoln was elected he push moral tariff and cause other states to secede
LOL slavery hurting the southern economy ... that is ridicules their economy relied on cotton and at that time it was cheaper having slaves then paying them but over time it would flip flop and it may have started in 1860 ... but the fed wanted to push regulations and anger the states
RonPaulLovesBlacks1 7 months ago
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "slavery hurting the southern economy ... that is ridicules their economy relied on cotton"
Slavery hurt economic development in the South. Since the economy relied on cotton, and all the work on plantations went to slaves, there weren't any jobs for poor southerners, so they moved to the North & West. The South's population was increasing at a much lower rate than the North & West for that reason. More than half the population of South Carolina and Mississippi were slaves.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 I guess i was thinking about the total GDP not how much jobs would be lost .... But to me this would have been solved if the fed keep out of it eventually people and land would get tired of it and slavery probably would have ended sooner if the fed kept out of state business.
RonPaulLovesBlacks1 7 months ago
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "But to me this would have been solved if the fed keep out of it eventually people and land would get tired of it and slavery probably would have ended sooner if the fed kept out of state business. "
Slavery would've ended only when industry took its place, but slavery supporters were hampering industrialization in the South. The south was INVESTED in their slaves. If a mechanical cotton picker came out, the value of slaves would be almost zero, so they tried to prevent it.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 did you make your account to give the finger to RPHB? Nice!
REALbigWHITEdog 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "Yeah which the government shouldn't be regulating"
Are you referring to taxes? The government shouldn't regulate taxes?
"after Lincoln was elected he push moral tariff and cause other states to secede"
What's a "moral tariff"?
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 Between 1800 and 1860, the free population of the Free States increased by 308%, compared to an increase of only 194% in the Slave States. (This is only counting the 16 states that were states in 1800. States that joined the union after 1800, Ohio, Alabama, Maine, Missouri, for example, aren't counted at all).
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 no they succeded when they realised there vote counted for nothing
irondun5620 6 months ago
@irondun5620 And by "there vote counted for nothing", you mean they lost an election....
KayBeeEee1983 6 months ago 3
@RonPaulHatesBlacks The NAACP is intrinsically racist...it stands for the "National Association for the ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE" It's not a black supremacist group like the Nation of Islam, but it's still racist by definition.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 Which race(s) does the NAACP consider inherently inferior to others?
RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulHatesBlacks "Which race(s) does the NAACP consider inherently inferior to others?"
Can you read? I said "It's not a black supremacist group"
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulHatesBlacks LOL your Idiot .... you think STARTING a war is better then waiting a few decades for slavery to be obsolete. The north was just as racist .... After they freed the slaves ( for political reason) they passed that black codes and started 100 years more of racism.
RonPaulLovesBlacks1 7 months ago
@RonPaulLovesBlacks1 "you think STARTING a war is better then waiting a few decades for slavery to be obsolete."
Yes, he thinks the death and maiming of nearly 2 million white boys who had nothing to do with slavery is better than allowing slavery to go on a few more years.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KayBeeEee1983 Um, yeah. You oppose the Civil War and think slavery never should have ended unless and until each racist slaveowner voluntarily decided to end it. If some racist slaveowners never agreed to free their slaves, well, too bad. You've decided to devote your life to crying over Southern "white boys" who died in a war they started, and you don't give a shit about any of the millions of innocent black people they held as slaves. You're a sick, inhuman monster. Let's hope you die soon!!!
RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 months ago 3
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Once again, I don't oppose the civil war. I think slavery should have been abolished any way possible, as quickly as possible. ALL slavery, not just African slavery. You're the sick inhuman monster hypocrite who supports Native American slavery and genocide. It's obvious you're just trying to divert attention away from your blatant racism...
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KayBeeEee1983 I don't support anything of the sort. I've never in my entire life said anything of the sort. You're lying. You're a liar.
Now I'm a racist? Awesome!!! Which race(s) do I consider inherently inferior to others?
Which race(s) does the NAACP consider inherently inferior to others?
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! You have NOTHING but lies and the "racist" card!!! How utterly pathetic!!!
RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 months ago 3
@RonPaulHatesBlacks "Now I'm a racist? Awesome!!! Which race(s) do I consider inherently inferior to others?"
Native Americans
"Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! You have NOTHING but lies and the "racist" card!!! How utterly pathetic!!!"
Jeez, try to keep SOME dignity. I know you didn't start with much but at least try. I'd actually feel bad for you if you weren't such a hypocritical little prick. XD
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 I consider Native Americans inherently inferior to other races? Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! What race do you think I AM, retard!!! Ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! Oh, holy shit!!! What a fucking moron!!!
RonPaulHatesBlacks 7 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulHatesBlacks "I consider Native Americans inherently inferior to other races? Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! What race do you think I AM, retard!!! Ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! Oh, holy shit!!! What a fucking moron!!!"
Whatever you say, psycho....What makes you think anyone would believe a word you say? Almost every comment you post has a lie in it.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks You have no room to talk about someone playing the race card. Your sign on alone says that.
don2768 5 months ago
@don2768 My post never even mentioned the "race card," you pathetic piece of shit. And I'll talk about whatever I want to talk about, fuckhead. Get back to your Klan rally, boy.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 5 months ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks What's a matter boy? Is a white man fucking yo sister?
don2768 5 months ago
@don2768 Don't mind him he's an insecure loser who thinks all white people want to waste their time worrying about him.
Luigi84289 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulHatesBlacks You're the biggest racist and race baitor on YouTube today. Oh.... you think Ahahahahahah is funny. Well, it's not funny at all but actually pretty stupid.... just like you. No surprise.
FastPonyGT 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RonPaulHatesBlacks you are a complete PRICK .... the north was just as racist and they didn't cling on to their slaves when slavery was banned up north. Your the one who is the monster ... you would rather let 600000 Americans ( 5 million in today's standards) get SLAUGHTERED because of slavery that would die out in a few decades .... every other nation gave up slavery with peace .... but we cant because we cant ride it out 10 - 30 more years.
RonPaulLovesBlacks1 7 months ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks What does the War of Northern Aggression have to do with slavery? Additionally, the war you're referring to started when the treasonous US government refused to remove their military from sovereign territory... the CSA did not start the war, it merely defended itself from foreign colonial invaders.
VileIntentionsUS 6 months ago
@VileIntentionsUS The War of Southern Aggression had everything to do with slavery. The racist confederacy proudly said so when they started it.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 6 months ago
@VileIntentionsUS "What does the War of Northern Aggression have to do with slavery?"
The south seceded primarily because of their fear of what the Republicans would do about slavery. Read their Declaration of Causes of Secession.
sonofthesouth[DOT]net/leefoundation/Confederate_states_America.htm
KayBeeEee1983 6 months ago
Actually, one-third of Southern families owned slaves in 1861, rising to one-half in states like Mississippi. And plenty more "rank and file" Southerners owned slaves before 1861, rented them in 1861, and/or aspired that they or their children would own them in the future. And you don't have to own slaves to support slavery in principle and believe it to be God's will. Thank goodness they lost and weren't able to impose even MORE years of slavery and segregation.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks exactly -- one half of the families in SC owned slaves, The half that decided everything Virtually EVERY leader, every judge, every newspaper owner, every rich or moderately rich person, every politician, every congressman, every mayor, etc. had slaves, or came from families that owned or prospered from slaves. Slaves were rented out to the state governments, and busnesses regularly
Read Debow bragging about that fact -- slavery was everything to the South.
SouthernFriedHoney 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Where is your documentation that 1/3rd of Southern families owned slaves in 1861, and where is your proof that one half of Mississippi had slaves? In 1860, only 8% of all American families owned slaves "According to the 1860 U.S. census, 393,975 individuals, representing 8 percent of all US families, owned 3,950,528 slaves." But of course RPHB is unable to be honest, especially when it comes to saying things about the south.
SamWayne83 8 months ago
I hate trolls like SFH and RPHB
CWScott24 1 year ago
If you want to know why the south lost the war, it wasn't for trying it was shear numbers (the population of the North was 25 million, and the south was 2.5 million). That's why general Lee said we may not win, but we are going to give them HELL!!
4man321 1 year ago
@4man321 The South had more men involved in the war, than the north, especially at first dumb ass. Count the million or so slaves you used.
The pussy South should have been able to put 2 million men in the fiedl but never could get over 300,000 men at one time--because of massive desertions.
Did you know that you stupid shit? Desertions were massive as early as 63, and were the reasons you pussies lost.
Learn real history, not the excuses you fucks slide up each other's ass.
SouthernFriedHoney 1 year ago
BIG thanks for posting this!
PROUD of You, man!
2serveand2protect 1 year ago
Comment removed
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
MYTH - The War of 1861 - 1865 was fought over slavery.
FACT - Terribly untrue. The North fought the war over money. Plain and simple. When the South started Secession, Lincoln was asked, "Why not let the South go in peace?" To which he replied, "I can't let them go. Who would pay for the government?" Sensing total financial ruin for the North, Lincoln waged war on the South. The South fought the War to repel Northern aggression and invasion.
Trent33424 1 year ago
@Trent33424 Just read the inaugural address by the Vice President of the CSA and some of the declarations of secession by those states that seceded slavery was no myth. The south fought the war over money also terrible but true. The rich plantation owners needed slaves to maintain their life style the North was pushing to have it abolished. The South started the war by firing of Ft. Sumter and might I remind you that the South invaded the North on two occasions. Two sides to every story right.
686204 1 year ago 2
@686204 Lincoln started the war by deliberately provoking attack on Ft Sumter by trying to reinforce it in spite of agreement not to. Slavery was not the cause of the war. Patrick Henry at the foundation of our country proposed a "southern Confederacy" because of the difference in ideas between the northern colonies and the southern ones in the form the government should take. First threat of southern secession was in 1831 as a result of the "Tariff of Abominations".
TigerRifle 1 year ago
Nope. You started the war over slavery. You said so at the time, in your Cornerstone Speech and Mississippi, Texas, Georgia, and South Carolina declarations of secession that you've obviously never even read. The tariff helps prove the point---it was so bad you called it the "Tariff of Abominations," but it STILL didn't cause secession. You only seceded and began killing American troops because We the People elected a Free Soil president who threatened your beloved slavery. What a sick fuck!
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago 2
@RonPaulHatesBlacks The Tariff of Abominations had nothing to do with slavery. As I see it, you are the only sick one on the site. I would say God Bless you, but I guess I would doubt that with the language and lack of intelligence that you dispay, you do not have faith. Our communication is at an end!
TigerRifle 1 year ago
I know the Tariff of Abominations had nothing to do with slavery. That's why you didn't secede or start a war over it. The election of a Free Soil president and abolitionist Republican Party had everything to do with slavery. That's why you seceded and started a war over it. You said "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery---the greatest material interest in the world." And you DEFEND and CELEBRATE that! You support MORE years of slavery! You're a sick, evil fuck.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Dred Scott decision had already answered the question of slavery, also 7 states seceded peacefully before the war even started. These states formed their own government, and were free from the union a full month before Lincoln even took office. Slavery was not the issue at the beginning, plain and simple. Could you also explain the slave population in NY,NJ, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut, all the way up until 1865?
SamWayne83 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If slavery was the issue for the war then why wasn't slavery abolished in the union states before the start of the war? Answer, Lincoln and all of those who were with him didn't care about the slave owners. The northern states were already in the union why should he care? That was his entire reason behind the war anyway. He needed to reunite the country. The south was paying the governments bills after all. Lincoln only wanted his sugar daddies back.
SamWayne83 8 months ago
@TigerRifle Slavery was not the cause of the war. I don't know how many times I have to tell you guys to look up the declarations of secession by southern states that joined the CSA. Also read the Vice President of the CSA's inaugural address on the issue of slavery. The south seceded as soon as President Lincoln was elected because his party was opposed to the expansion of slavery into new territories.
686204 1 year ago
@686204 Then I suggest that you read Lincoln's inaugural address in which he made it clear that he would not touch slavery and was in favor of a 13th amendment guarenteeing it under the constitution. He did promise high tariffs, which would have destroyed the south economically. Yes, expansion was an issue because it would forbidding it would guarentee the norht control of the southern economy. Stephen's address was meant to appease slave holders, a small minority of southerners.
TigerRifle 1 year ago
@TigerRifle As far as Ft Sumter was concerned it was a Federal Fort located on Federal property legally purchased from SC. Why wouldn't he be allowed to provide supplies to the soldiers occupying it and/or reinforce it. There was a difference of opinion on secession which the south could have resolved by taking it to the Supreme Court and thus preventing the war and the death of over 600,000 troops.
686204 1 year ago
@686204 Which Lincoln could have prevented by not provoking war... If slavery had been the issue, it could have been resolved as it had in every other civilized country..by government compensation to those holding them. I do want to say, that I appreciate your civil tone and I think that our positons are honest interpretations, rather than the dogma and hatred espoused by someone else on this site. Thank you for your input.
TigerRifle 1 year ago
@TigerRifle Look my position is that I am against slavery it was a black mark on this Nations history. The North had taken steps to abolish it the South not only whated to keep it but expand it. I am also against war and in the case of the civil war it was an unnecessary war that should have been resolved through legal/political channels. You say the North provoked the war I disagree the South was prepared to go to war when it seceded, It fired on Ft Sumter and strated it.
686204 1 year ago
@686204 You stupid fuck -- the war SHOULD have ben resolved through political channels? Honestly, how fucking stupid can you be?
Do you have any fucking idea of the history of 1820-1860? Apparently not. Did you know about anti-incendiary laws? The South passed them, so it became a CRIME, punishable by torture and death, to even own a book or pamphlet questioning slavery.
There is a lot of shit you don't know.
SouthernFriedHoney 1 year ago
@SouthernFriedHoney Well son all I know is that you have a filthy mouth. First off rather than go to war the South could have taken their perceived belief that the Constitution allowed secession to the Supreme court for a ruling was what I was talking about. You obviously did not properly read what I was saying because I also believe the war was about slavery and I am against it and war as well. Clean up your fowl mouth and pay attention to what people are saying maybe you will learn something.
686204 1 year ago
@686204 Are you fucking kidding? The South BELIEVED the Constitution allowed secession? They didn't believe ANYTHING you retard. Do you know the difference between an excuse and a reason?
They wanted slave power, slave pussy, and slave prestige. That is what they believed -- getting and keeping power, prestige, and pussy. Everything else was bullshit, and they knew it.
The claimed they believed God told them to enslave and torture blacks too. They knew that was bullshit too.
SouthernFriedHoney 1 year ago
@SouthernFriedHoney Learn how to read you stupid imbecile and you will understand that I agree with you minus your filthy language. I know the South believed the Constitution allowed secession you idiot. What I said was if they went to the Supreme court for a ruling they would have legally proved their point if the court had ruled in their favor. They then could have justified secession and possibly averted a war. Like I said learn to read before you go spouting off your mouth.
686204 1 year ago 11
@686204 Learn how to think you stupid fuck. YOu say the South "believed" this or that.
You dumb fuck. The SOuth didn't believe their own bullshit. IT was all an excuse you dumb fuck. THey could care less what was true. They only "believed" in what got them more power, pussy and prestige. They didn't "believe" the Constitution said this or that retard. The Constitution said free speech, and no cruel punishments, and all men are created equal retard. THey shit on all that.
SouthernFriedHoney 1 year ago
@SouthernFriedHoney Another rant of filth from a person who thinks he knows it all. Your rant is not worth answering except for correcting you on two points you made. 1st off the all men are created equal stuff comes from the declaration of independence not the Constitution. 2nd on that point, it was an outright lie and a black mark on this countries history. It applied to white men only but not blacks.
686204 1 year ago
@686204 You stupid fuck, the Declaration and Constutiion were both documents by the Founders. Naturally, the scum sucking pigs in the South shit on both.
They of course shit of Declaration -- but they shit on free speech, no cruel punishment, real elections, free press, and freedom of religion. They shit on states rights, they shit on EVERY part of the Constitution and Declaration.
SouthernFriedHoney 1 year ago
@SouthernFriedHoney Boy you are a hypocrite what makes you think that the slaves in the North when they had them were treated any different than those in the South. You do know that the North had slaves at one time right. Do you know that there was no mention of slavery in the Constitution just property which of course that's what slaves were right. Guess what both Northern and Southern states agreed on this cover up. So much for every man being created equal.
686204 1 year ago
@686204 you stupid fuck -- the USA was founded on "all men are created equal", and consent of governed, free speech, no cruel punishment.
Now, if you are too fucking stupid to see the difference, let me show it to you. THe South bragged they were just the OPPOSITE you retard. They bragged God ordained them to enslave the black race. They had no free speech, they were based on cruel punishment, etc.
Starting to see the difference yet dumb fuck?
SouthernFriedHoney 1 year ago
@SouthernFriedHoney The USA was founded on "all men are created equal" that is a lie. It did not apply to the black slave now did it. Do you see anything in the Bill of rights or the Constitution applying to slavery, no. It was covered up by the use of the word property. The forefathers were either to embarrassed or did not want to address the problem of slavery at that time. It was a black mark on the history of this nation. The real push to abolish slavery in the North came in the early 1800.
686204 1 year ago