I would like to point out that the confederate states constitution, was NEARLY identical to the United states constitution with the EXCEPTION of declaring it a RIGHT to own slaves. So to say that Slavery did NOT play a hand in it at all is nearly as obserd as the indication that it was the sole reason behind the war, or the souths motivations for sessession.
The south didn't fight ONLY for slavery, but that was the primary reason.
"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth...a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization...There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union" --Mississippi CoS
@KayBeeEee1983 There was no legislation on the table to end slavery. The Corwin Amendment which was on the table would have protected it for all time if the South had stayed and passed it. You need to read your history. Illinois ratified it Lincoln's state. It made no sense to secede before any move was made whatsoever if slavery was this important to the South. Lincoln even stated in his presidential speeches that it would not be abolished in the South all we had to do was wait.
@Luigi84289 Of course there wasn't any legislation to end slavery. Lincoln and the Republicans made it clear that they had no power or intention to touch slavery in the southern states. They were determined to keep slavery out of the TERRITORIES though, and that's what angered slave owners.
The Corwin amendment wouldn't have protected slavery for all time. It would have just ensured that ONLY the states themselves could end slavery, not the federal government or any constitutional amendment.
@Luigi84289 You need to read your history. The Mississippi Declaration of Causes details the perceived dangers to slavery.
"There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union...That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove...We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers."
@illman8876 No son states rights means the right of states to be Soveriegn Nations and conduct themselves as such. This is what the Radical Republicans were against. Their whole agenda was aimed at making the US one Nation instead of a Confederation of Sovereign states and this they did with Reconstruction. The EU is doing the same thing to Europe right now if England had slavery would that make it wrong for it to not want to maintain it's Sovereignty and deal with the problem?
@Luigi84289 "Their whole agenda was aimed at making the US one Nation instead of a Confederation of Sovereign states and this they did with Reconstruction."
That's what the CONSTITUTION did. The US stopped being a Confederation and became a nation when the Constitution was ratified.
@illman8876 Slavery hurt the majority of whites in the south because it lowered wages and took that work away from white southerners. It was the same as higher illegals like the big corps do today who will work for nothing and hose up those jobs for life.
"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition." -- Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America, 1861.
@wsmith76us "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people, - there is a physical difference between the black and white races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality"-Abe
@wsmith76us so more from the Tyrant - And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.
"election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery."--The DECLARATION OF CAUSES OF SECESSION.
It's really too bad they couldn't have dumbed down the title of that document a little more for you idiots.
"Only the rich could afford to have slaves"
So the rest were simply easily manipulated, treasonous, immoral, morons?
No argument here.
Fortunately the cowardly traitors resolve matched their morality.
Slavery, God's institution of labor, and the primary political element of our Confederation of Government, state sovereignty...must stand or fall together. To talk of maintaining independence while we abolish slavery is simply to talk folly.
@skywalkerhut Официальная история утверждает что Север якобы за освобождение рабов воевал, хотя всё было совсем наоборот. Янки хотели отобрать у Юга его землю и богатства, душили Юг экономической политикой, пошлинами. Как говорит русская пословица: Драли по три шкуры! А народ Юга ,чёрные и белые южане, сражались против агрессии севера, за свою родину, за свободу, за право самим выбирать свою судьбу как подобает свободным людям.
@skywalkerhut Причины войны кроются в экономике: Не только переработка хлопка, но и весь его вывоз с Юга находились исключительно в руках северян. Решительно всё, начиная с бытовых мелочей, ввозилось с Севера и продавалось в три раза дороже. Янки хотели превратить Юг в сырьевой придаток.
It's funny how you do the whole "The war wasn't about slavery" and then slip into the "slavery wasn't so bad, they treated them well" bit. Go read the secession resolutions very carefully. The entire purpose of the founding of the Confederacy was to protect the institution of "negro slavery" both in the south and in the territories. Don't claim "freedom and liberty" when your whole society is based on bondage. So what if most southern whites didn't own slaves. You don't own a Wal Mart do you?
@Southernjuggalo63 Umm not really no, since slavery had fallen out of favor in the northern states and they had all banned slavery decades before the war, except for delaware. The Constitution was a compromise between northern and southern interests and the south dominated the federal government until the election of 1860. As for blacks fighting for the south, there really weren't that many. The south debated letting slaves fight in the last month of the war and passed it by only one vote.
@wolfpax22 slavery was protected by the united state constitution from 1776-1865 also the american flag flew over all those slave ships you should research black confederates more there u ever heard the name GENERAL BEDFORD FOREST who led his all black calvary into battle against the union from the beginning of the war of course not cause that would make your side look like the traitors they were
@Southernjuggalo63 It's hilarious that you use Nathan Bedford Forrest as an example of how great the Confederacy was for blacks. His whole life revolved around slavery. Before the war, he made his fortune as a SLAVE DEALER. No clue where you got the idea that he had an "all black cavalry" but its BS. We know quite well what he thought of black soldiers from the event at Ft Pillow where he killed 200 Union blacks AFTER they surrendered. He also founded the KKK to stop blacks voting afterwards.
@wolfpax22 he was one of many men who fought along side black people and spoke bravely of them in battle ALSO ALMOST EVERYONE MADE MONEY OF SLAVERY REGARDLESS IF THEY LIKED IT OR NOT DONT BELIEVE ME THOMAS JEFFERSON OWNED OVER 400 SLAVES ALSO RESEARCH WHY THE KKK WAS FOUNDED TO BE THE POLICE FORCE OF THE SOUTH TO KEEP YANKEE SOLDIERS FROM BURNING HOMES AND SUCH AND P.S. IT WAS DISPANDED BY NATHAN BEDFORD FOREST WHEN THE RACISTS STARTED KILLING BLACKS LOL RESEARCH KID
@Southernjuggalo63 I see you're a KKK apologist/revisionist too. The reason those Yankee soldiers were there was to protect the freedmen and insure their rights, something the KKK didn't want. If slavery was so unpopular why did it even exist? Thomas Jefferson owned slaves but he didn't make his money TRADING them, and would have released them on his death if it weren't for his debts which made it illegal. He also tried to get a slavery ban in the Constitution but it was rejected by the SOUTH
@wolfpax22 i mean its like this do gangsters stand on the corner and sell drugs just to make a quick buck? same thing just different in a small way other than killing someone they are callin them property SLAVERY WAS NEVER OVER WHAT RACE YOU WAS IT WAS ABOUT THE ALL MIGHTY GREEN DOLLAR
@Southernjuggalo63 Drug dealers aren't a legal industry and I don't think we'd go to war to protect drug cartels. Slavery was over money AND race. American slavery started to fill a shortage of labor in the new world needed to work plantations. Race and religion provided the justification, and once a social-racial caste system had formed slavery was the means by which that system was maintained. Without slavery a poor white was no better than a n-----. That's why people would die for it.
There were american flags on those ships because the confederacy(or their flag) didn't exist any time before the atlantic slave trade was banned in 1808.
The united states constitution was favorable towards slavery because of the influence of the southern states who got a sweet heart deal of using the slave population for greater representation in the federal government while extending them none of the rights or privileges of free men.
@Southernjuggalo63 Yes let's look at the Constitution. First, slavery is not even explicitly mentioned in the US Constitution until its abolition in Amendment XIII. The US Constitution neither mandates nor bans slavery. This issue is left up to the states as per Article X. Passages on slavery issues use euphamistic terms like "service or labor." In contrast, the CSA Constitution explicitly uses "slave" and "slavery" and bans the CSA Congress as well as states from ever passing anti-slavery laws.
...because of pressure from the slave-owning states,and yes, probably because of the perceived economic benefit that northern states would get from it. The Southern States fought till the end to uphold it and got pissed when the northern states were not vigilante enough in returning their "property". They felt that any interference with their "property" was tyranny...neither side was pure but portraying the south as freedom fighters is pure bullshit.
@Southernjuggalo63 Look I thought we'd been over this. There is no language in the Constitution that says "There must be slavery now and forever" just as there is no prohibition of it. If anything because it bans the slave trade after 1808 it has to be seen as hostile to slavery. Also, the idea at the time of the Revolution was that slavery was a "necessary evil" that we might eventually get rid of. By 1860 this had evolved into an entrenched defense of slavery as a "positive good" in the south.
...the northern state was complicit in the evils of slavery but most of the push for pro-slavery concessions came from the south(the ones that owned most of the slaves.). True, a small minority owned slaves but they played the most prominent role in the southern economy and held most of the political power.
Slavery defined the southern economy regardless of how few people owned slaves and confed victory would only maintain this status quo so they shouldn't be romanticized.
@leeharveyosmosis lol you try to say its ok for the north to have slaves for 90yrs yet blame southerners who went by the U.S. CONSTITUTION lol your very one sided and say that slavery wasnt bad in north but bad in south lol i would like you to go to the state capital and ask for the slave deeds only 1 or 2 states was against slavery since the founding of the state most northern states used slavery also but for some reason you ignore that and dont realize all of america was guilty for it
I'm saying that a lot of the motivation for the confederate cause didn't come from poor farmers but from the plantation elite who wanted to keep their slaves.....it's understandable because Southern wealth lay in the plantation system. Poor whites were fighting for rich slave owners who didn't give a shit about them either.
Both sides were bad, but the slave economy was based in the south, and a southern victory would only uphold a barbaric and disgusting practice.
@leeharveyosmosis wrong again maybe the politicians were but the poor men like my ancestors didnt fight to save slavery why would they fight for something they could never have so your blaming all the men on the battlefield that couldnt even affor a slave they were fighting for states rights but im sure you never thought about the men that actuall fought and died just what the public school system told you YOUR IGNORANT I HAVE JOURNALS OF MY CONFEDERATE ANCESTORS AND THEY WERE AGAINST SLAVERY
@leeharveyosmosis just let me be dont message me ok i understand history from a non one sided view unlike you P.S. THE FACTORIES IN THE NORTH MADE WAY MORE MONEY OFF SLAVERY THAN THE SOUTHERN FARMERS COULD EVER MAKE OFF THE RAW MATERIALS BUT I BET YOU FORGOT ABOUT THAT AND WHY DID THE SOUTH BEING 30% OF THE POPULATION PAY 80% OF ALL FEDERAL TAXES BEFORE CIVIL WAR??? ALSO REMEMBER LINCOLNS QUOTE WHEN A REPORTER ASKED HIM WHY NOT LET THE SOUTH LEAVE "THEN WHO WILL PAY FOR GOVERNMENT"
@wolfpax22 funny thing is how come blacks free and slave fought for the confederacy since the beginning of the war but the north didnt allow them to fight until the last year of the war and saying that blacks couldnt be trusted to fight lol owned
"No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." Confederate States Constitution.
why would anyone secede to protect something that was already protected? You could have mentioned the Corwin Amendment which would have barred the federal govt from EVER banning slavery. All the South had to do was come back in and ratify it. This is the question they cannot answer....so they conveniently claim it was over slavery which so happens to cast them in a good light while ignoring that which causes 99% of all wars. THE MONEY. Don't talk about the money. Must not mention that.
Both Frederick Douglas and Abraham Lincoln would probably be shocked to learn that modern academics use theoretical economics to argue that the Confederate Constitution offered greater protection for freedom then the U.S. Constitution.
Yeah, greater freedom for native born, straight white Protestant Conservative Christian men with short hair is more like it.
Unlike the Confederate Constitution, the U.S. Constitution freely permitted states to abolish slavery. If the day ever came when slavery was eliminated voluntarily throughout the United States, not one word of the U.S. Constitution would need to be changed, whereas slavery could never lawfully be abolished under the Confederate Constitution.
Please read the Confederate Constitution, beginning with Article I, Section 9, Clause 4, which prohibited the Confederate government from restricting slavery in any way. Article IV, Section 2 also prohibited states from interfering with slavery. Perhaps the most menacing provision of the Confederate Constitution was the explicit protection Article IV, Section 3, Clause 3 offered to slavery in all future territories conquered or acquired by the Confederacy.
Why still debate this? The South was a temporary rebellious nation that failed to hold onto its economic system at the time....slavery. It just feared that the north wouldn't expand it to new states and eventually outlaw it everywhere.
Ever read the South Carolina declaration of secession, for example? They mention slavery like 19 FREAKING TIMES!!!!!!
If that's not the reason for secession, then you are obviously a white Southerner trying to revise your history....facts be damned.
@kuwinsitall yes, but also read the Southern Ultimatums, as declared proudly and loudly in Southern newspapers in March of 1861
Seriously -- Five Ultimatums -- all about the SPREAD of slavery by force. Southern scum were demanding, under threat of war, that LIncoln and the NORTH must expland slavery by FORCE! It's as crazy as if Hitler had demanded England invade Poland for the amusement of Germany.
The Southern Ultimatums are really a trip. THey completely shit on state's rights,
Yep. "State's Rights" is just what people cling to these days to cover up the fact that it was the attempt for the states to have the "rights" to preserve slavery.
I understand why they did it at the time, even if I disagree with it.
What I don't understand is morons defending them and saying it wasn't about slavery 150 years later.
You fucking horrid liar the fact it was all about slavery and subjugation was in the declarations of secession. Heres Texas': They(Feds) demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States.' The Feds want to end slavery and Texas wants slavery. Doesnt get any clearer.
Texas: "The States of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, [etc.]...have deliberately...violated the 3rd clause of the 2nd section of the 4th article of the federal constitution [fugitive slave clause], and laws passed in pursuance thereof; thereby annulling a material provision of the compact, designed by its framers to perpetuate the amity between the members of the confederacy and to secure the rights of the slave-holding States in their domestic institutions--."
South Carolina: "Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States."
Ole Miss: "In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world."
Georgia: "Why? Because by their declared principles and policy they have outlawed $3,000,000,000 of our property in the common territories of the Union; put it under the ban of the Republic in the States where it exists and out of the protection of Federal law everywhere..."
im cherokee indian but part black and if people knew i support the confederacy they would call me a racist or a traitor which in fact the confederacy prob did more for blacks and sure as hell did more for the confederacy.
let us understand,"The winners of Wars always write the History books"! it has been this way since the Roman times,they called us "Celtic"people "Barbarians" as they stole our lands,our Gold and raped our women! today they call us Racist,sticks and stones may break our bones but names will tarnish us forever! we have been run out of our European country's because we fought for our freedoms and separate from big Gov's and now look whats goin on in this Country,We again are labeled Racist!
Keep up the great work! "circlecityrabbit2004" I love your work amd your educated debates with those of a doubting nature, God Bless you and the CSA †
Was Slavery the cause or the cause of Secession? Let's ask Alexander Stephens Vicepresident of the CSA: "The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution — African slavery as it exists amongst us — the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution"
Alexander Stephens Vicepresident of the CSA March 21, 1861
Great video and it is absolutely correct about slavery and the South, hell I live in the North and we hate niggers just as much as any Southern did or does.
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
I love when the pro-South assholes resort to arguing that anyone who opposes slavery and racism must be a racist themselves!!! That shit is hilarious!!!
CSA wrong dumb fuck -- the South was founded on slavery you fucking idiot -- its own leaders said so, bragged that it was.
Do you got that yet dumb fuck? At the time - the people who actually FOUNDED the Confederacy SAID it was founded on slavery.
Let me repeat that so your dumb fucking ass gets it. The Confederacy was FOUNDED on slavery -- according to the exact same people who FOUNDED the Confederacy dumb fuck.
Don't you think they would know, dumb fuck? They were there, idiot.
@FilmCriticOneSir I do not apreciate your tone and words. I respectfully disagree on that yes there were leaders who said such but thats not why blacks and whites fought for the south. They fought for self determination and the right of their nations to determine their own issues.
CSA dumb fuck -- what part of "they bragged it was about slavery at the time" don't you fucking grasp?
That's what they said at the time you fucking idiot -- slavery. Got that yet retard - they BRAGGED it was about slavery you fucking idiot.
And by the way you fucking idiot -- no blacks fought for the South. Got that retard? Some mulattoes tried to suck up to owners -- but they were the same niggers who whipped other slaves, and held the women as white men sold the children.
@khanman915 выдающийся негритянский аболиционист Фредерик Дуглас, посвятивший всю жизнь борьбе за права и интересы братьев по расе, с изумлением отметил: «Немало цветных служит в Армии конфедератов! Причем не только поварами, слугами и подсобными рабочими, но — полноправными солдатами. Они горят желанием убивать всех нас, сторонников федерального правительства, и готовы всемерно подрывать его политику».
@khanman915 Его соратник Горацио Грили позже записал: «С первых дней войны негры активно участвуют в военных операциях КША. На Юге из их числа формируют регулярные части мятежной армии, их обучают по общим уставам, а на парадах они маршируют плечом к плечу с подразделениями из белых южан; между тем подобное пока совершенно немыслимо в Вооруженных Силах Севера».
Higher import tarrifs resulted in higher costs for the South; but the South raised their prices to compensate. At worst the result would be inflation. All of America purchase cotton in one form or another (clothing, sheets, etc.). It therefore seems like the burden, to protect Northern industry, was a shared burden.
The Confederate leaders did fight to SPREAD slavery and Nazi like white supremecy.
Read their own words -- in their own "Declarations of Causes" I can send you copies.
Not just to KEEP slavery --but to spread it.
The "average" Confederte soldier deserted -- Davis himself said 2/3 of the soldiers deserted, and this was months before the end. By the end -- 3/4 of the soldiers deserted Those who stayed simply refused to fight anymore.
Even Jesus Christ Himself advised the slaves to obey their master, and advised their master to treat the slaves fairly. He was aware that slavery would not be abolished any time soon, so He gave them advice how to behave in a Christian way, while in this state of life.
Moreover he (General Lee) was in favor of enlisting Blacks to the Confederate army, and grant them and their families freedom in the South when the war would be over. He would grant their families freedom when the enlisted man did not survive. He was in favor of everything good for the Blacks, but not by means of revolution. He was convinced that they had a better life in the CSA then in Africa.
Lith dumb fuck -- Lee the slave rapers and child sellers fed the niggers religion to make them obey - to work hard, bend over to get fucked better, to let the slave owner steal their children and pussy and work.
Lee was a slave raper -- just like his Christian daddy -- these fuckers sold their OWN children from rape into slavery dumb fuck. Did Jesus say that was okay dumb fuck?
lithopoon dumb fuck - -no, idiot, Lee had over 200 slaves idiot. He whipped slaves -- stripped the women naked and w hipped the shit of them. He sold their children.
He said GOD would have to end slavery -- not man. He said the evil ones were the those were trying to undo Gods will for slavery.
Lee's dad was well known for raping slaves and selling his own black children as slaves. Robert had slave brothers and sisters -- probably sold some of his own relatives.
@stormtiger39 don't bother. 12FlyMe, FreeLunchtax and others are clone accounts made to attack any pro-Southern comment. They're robots. You can tell by the mechanical way they keep on using the same f*ckin language.
Southern Confederacy fought against an illegal and unjustful tax, and their act of Secession was legal, so the North attacked them because they wanted to collect their ridiculous tax by force. South fought for everything the United States have stand for.
Litle dumb fuck -- the SOuth paid almost no fucking taxes idiot. The tax you dumb fuck was on IMPORTS of manufactured gbods. The South was all about slavery -- so they didnt' want to protect industry, they wanted to protect slavery. Got that dumb fuck?
No one stopped them from having industry dumb fuck -- they wanted to be slave based dumb fuck.
The Confederacy dumb fuck was based on slavery dumb fuck -- their own leaders bragged about that dumb fuck.
Public -- sorta. The slave masters had to spread slavery -- Toombs said "Expand or perish" -- literally. They were choking to death financially on their own slaves, there were far too many, thet were becoming worthless.
Its not me that said this - Southern leaders said it.
The big push was to spread slavery Dred Scott decision was one part of the push.
Read Lincoln's House Divided Speech.
Its very much about this conspiracy by slave leaders to expland slavery.
The Confederates revolted primarily to preserve their "right" to own other human beings as property. The Civil War was about slavery, and nothing else.
iquiroga -- thats like saying I copied the Declaration of Independence, except I put down that blacks are to be enslaved, raped, their chldren whipped and sold, any men who rebel will be hung or burned to death.
You're right. Funny though, you make no mention of all the Confederate generals and leaders who wished to end slavery. Or of the fact that in 1865 when the Confederate congress authorized the enlistment of any and all black males in exchange for their freedom the Confederacy effectively ended slavery. You can't very well grant one man his freedom and not grant another his.
Circle utter nonsense -- the Act to Draft slaves clearly says THEY WILL STILL BE SLAVES.
"Sec. 5. That nothing in this act shall be construed to authorize a change in the relation of the said slaves"
Got that -- the Act itself said they are STILL slaves. Plus -- it never went into effect, because the South surrenedered before they could actually draft SLAVES.
Got that? IT actually goes out of its way to say - they are still slaves. Here is the quote from the actual bill
1865? LOL!!! The CSA was getting its ass handed to it in 1865! In January of that year, starving soldiers were deserting Lee's army. By February, good ol' Tecumseh was tearin' thru the Carolinas. In April Lee LOST the confederate capital of Richmond and then surrendered. What wouldn't the CSA have proposed at that point to hold on to dear life?
Circle -- sorry dufus I have the act to draft slaves in March of 1865. It specifcally says they will still be slaves.
Got that -- section 5 dufus. "Nothing in this act shall change the slave status of those conscripted". And even that caused more desertions in white trooops -- which is why the war ended.
@circlecityrabbit2004 No slaves were freed to fight for the confederacy,it was proposed in that way but voted down.They did manage to get a company or two together but they were still slaves and they never fought.
Circle - actually the South specificaly said the slaves they DRAFTED would STILL BE slaves. Got that ? Tthey were going to draft slaves -- force them -- to use guns. Why? Because virtually ALL white men were deserting.
But the Bill in COnfederate Congress - that passed - said the blacks would STILL be slaves. Section 5, dumb fuck. Go read it. Learn real history
@BullshipDetector "The idea of enlisting blacks had been debated for some time. Arming slaves was essentially a way of setting them free, since they could not realistically be sent back to the plantation after they had fought". Wrong Dumbfuck. I have exposed your lies yet again.
@BullshipDetector i like how your saying what some coward politician does speaks for the actual man that dangers his life in a cause he believes in thats like saying politicians decide why poor men fight and die kinda dumb to think that way
@iquiroga It ended the slave trade out right. What it basically meant was that it recognized the states as nations like they were erected to be. The north prolongued and profited from it by bringing it into an arena it didn't belong. Congress. Instead of helping the states, going to them offering assistance, really helping institute policies like the northern states compensating the slave owners getting them out of debt so they could free them all we see is fanatics and a want for war.
@iquiroga The slave trade was a northern business look at triangular trade. It didn't hit the US in Charleston. And it went on illegally until 1865 when the last slave ship the NightingGale was seized off the coast of Africa. Northern merchants would not let it end. It was a horrible system. And just to be clear the Yankees unanimously looked at black people as inferior read Lincoln.
@iquiroga That was why they had no problem with the trade. The neo puritans wanted them free to secure their salvation that was it. Southrons recognized the slaves as people. They were taken care of and treated like family. There were over 500,000 free black men down south in 1860. In a few more years with the end to the fugitive slave act and the trade it would have been over. Brazil which had a large slave population ended it in the 1880's.
@Luigi84289 You forget that Southern politicians were actively and openly working to perpetuate slavery into the foreseeable future. By 1860, they had a powerful weapon in the Dred Scott decision, which declared that blacks--free or slave--were not citizens and had no rights. Perhaps slavery would have just gone away without the war, but there would certainly have been much suffering. Also, the South started the war when it fired on Ft. Sumter before the yankees attacked.
@iquiroga Article 1 section 9 of the U.S. constitution says " The migration or importation of such "persons" as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation and no exceeding ten dollars for each "person". Who do you think the person they are talking about. CSA just made it plain unlike the U.S. did.
@101 sorry dumb fuck -- the US Constitution made for FREE SPEECH and NO CRUEL PUNISHMENTS
Got that retard? The South stopped free speech about slavery from 1820 on, even torturing PREACHERS for daring to preach against slavery. Did you know that retard? Or not.
Southern Scum also regularly used torture retard. That's against the Constitution dumb fuck.
The only way you scum sucking pussies could maintain slavery was to shit on the Constitution.
@iquiroga um the original american constitution protected slavery for over 90yrs the 13,14, AND 15TH amendments so saying the south constitution protected slavery and the original american one didnt is very ignorant on your part
Then one hundred MINISTERS OF THE GOSPEL and theological professors of the Confederate States, in an address to Christians throughout the world, adopted at a conference in the city of Richmond, issued their blasphemous manifesto upon slavery:— "The practical plan for benefiting the African race must be the Providential, the Scriptural plan—We adopt that plan in the south—We regard abolitionism as an interference with the plans of Divine Providence."
DR. PALMER, the popular Southern divine, preached:— "The providential Southern trust is to perpetuate the institution of Domestic Slavery as at present existing, with freest scope for its natural development. We should at once lift ourselves intelligently to the highest moral ground, and proclaim to all the world that we hold this trust from God, and in its occupancy are prepared to stand or fall.
iquiroga --you wont find any southern sermon against slavery. IT was illegal to preach against it. IT was illegal to write anything suggestion slavery was not from God.
White men could be -- and were -- whipped and jailed just for owning a book that MIGHT make a black man dissatisfied with being a slave. If a blacked ownted that same book, he could be hung. The state would pay the owner reimbursement for dead punished slaves.
Jefferson Davis: "Our new government is founded upon—its foundations are laid—its corner stone rests upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. Thus our new government is the first in the history of the world, (God grant it might be the last)—based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. It is upon this our social fabrics is firmly planted...
That speech is called the "cornerstone" speech and was made by our dumbass Vice president Stephens, learn your history before you comment on the subject. If you want to have a full debate then send me a pm, there's just not enough room on these comment boxes.
City - -- the cornerstone speech was widely adored in the South. Plus its nothing unusual, except its more specivfic in some details. Many of the Southern speeches and documents were like that -- slavery was from God -- our country is based on God's will for whites to enslave blacks.
The South bragged about this at the time. Funny how you have to deny it was even a part of the Confederacy, when its own leaders say it was the foundation.
@circlecityrabbit2004 Every Ordinance of Secession of every Southern state that had one explicitly names slavery as the primary reason for the rebellion. The current Governor of Virginia recently found himself in hot water for being oblivious to this easily searchable fact. It's fine and good to talk about economic disputes between North and South, but slavery was always the most pressing divider, and everyone was open about that. I say this as a proud Southerner who knows his region's history.
@iquiroga Even if that speech was made by the vice president he was no doubt hand picked by Davis himself and could his political opinions be that much different from a fellow southerner and slave owner?
@iquiroga hey i can show you hundreds of racist comments by lincoln also if u would like me too do you actually think the men that gave their lives always agreed with the politicians cmon dude use a brain
Jefferson Davis: "The belief existing in the northern mind that negroes are, under our government, entitled to political equality with white men, must be dispelled, and northern men and northern states must cease to disturb our domestic tranquillity, or assail our rights of property, and so impair our national interests, or a dissolution of the union must be inevitable."
Lincoln hated the fugative slave law and didnt pass it. .
The South hated states rights dumb fuck -- unless it got them more pussy and power. If some state wanted their own laws about slave trials -- or if a new state was against slavery --the south shit its pants AGAINST states rights.
The onlyl fucking thing the South cared about was slave pussy and power. That's it. Nothing else. Everything else was an excuse for slave pussy and slave power.
when lincoln passed the fugitive slave act of 1850, wana know why the N. didn't like it? it infrenged on there "States Rights" **BUT** when the S. wanted there States Rights.. No, we can't have that!! Now here we are, 21st. cen. and what's going on? the States are looking once again to there Rights. what part of all this don't you ppl get????
how hard is it to understand, in the 19th cen. slavery was a fact of life. I and many of my fellow Confederates don't agree with it. Slavery was brought here by the Yankees, the Yankees made there money off it, got rich.. ex, ex.. both sides hands are dirty with it. like it or not. but, the real issue for the South WAS states rights..
I think with all the slave talk about, one has to ask the question here.. what was billy yank fighting for? after lincoln sighned the emanicpation proclamation, how many yanks went awol? and now, here is all these anti-confederates spouting about the slavery issuse.
States dumb fuck == you got your ass turned around. Typical crap you learn, no wonder.
Fact is the SOUTH was the one that wanted to STOP states rights. By their logic, north states couldnt decide how to run their own trials for run away slaves.
WOrse- the South insisted NO state can STOP slavery in their OWN boundries.
So this shit about South for states rights is a bunch of shit. Its a farce. They hated states rights.
All of those laws againt runaway slaves you're talking about (The fugitive slave act of 1850 for instance) were all... Federal laws. Not States laws. If the Northern states had wanted to change those laws they would have had to take it up with the union not the Southern states.
The South never insisted that, the union did.
And your constant swearing and name calling is really immature. But I wouldn't expect any better from you, typical
@circlecityrabbit2004 Actually, the South insisted on the Fugitive Slave Act as part of the Compromise of 1850. For the North to change those laws, they would have had to take it up with the Southern states precisely because the Southerners in Congress were blocking any repeal. The North refused to actually enforce those laws, which was part of why North-South relations soured rapidly with the election of Lincoln.
Now take a look today. come monday *Oct. 5 2009. the Supreme Court is going to decide .. get this... if the 2nd admendment is .. OK, or the 21st. cen. Ummm yeah!! why, cause it's the Law of the Land. The feds have NO right to tell the STATES how to run there affairs. Once again, this is why the South left the union. you don't it?? I'll say, take the argument up with Thomas Jefferson and James Madison
If you read the 1st. 10 admendments. you'll see where it's a State Gov. set up. but, after the War. it becomes a Fed. run set up.. what part of States Rights do not people get?? It's a Right givin to us by our Forefathers. Lincoln didn't like that cause he wanted more Power. Why? cause he liked the Hamilton style of Gov. He didn't care for States running themselfs
I think something has to be said here, first, the South was Taxed to Death. Sec. ok, the South had slaves, and slavery was in the N. up to mid. 1850's. 3rd. my question is this to all of you yanks and libs. where in the Contitution from our Forefathers.. (not the laws after the war) does the Fed. Gov. have ANY say on what states are to do? This is the reason the South left the union. slavery or no slavery. it WASN'T the gov. job to tell the states how to run there bussiness.
You liberals are pathetic. NOT one Southern state had over 50 % slave owners, even the greatest slave state Miss., was under half at 49 %. Slaves were owned by the RICH, not the majority of Southern people. Jefferson Davis was an aristocrat bitch, who was caught in his own wifes shaw while running instead of FIGHTING, like a good aristocratic bitch boy should cower away. Many myths are still told about slavery, Lincoln NEVER freed any down here, but morons continue to praise the Ceasar.
You're right, but the federals and those who bow to them would prefer it if things kept going the way they are now, with everyone thinking the entire South was some sort of horrible world filled with whips and slaves.
It was then the same as it is now, neo-liberals always resort to bending the truth to better suit their needs and their "story".
It's simple to disprove the entire premise of this video with the words of Confederate VP Stephens and Pres. Davis who claimed that slavery was the cause of succession before the war. In fact, it was the southerners who attempted to use the Federal government to enforce the 'gag rule' and fugitive slave law. I can site many more examples. In fact, REPUBLICAN Lincoln feared for state rights after the Dred Scott decision which prompted his campaign against the spread of slavery.
You guys know that this war was well documented in both southern and northern papers. We aren't debating the meaning of hieroglyphics. Have you ever fact checked the information of this propaganda piece? Only 4.5% of southerners owned slaves? That's wrong by almost anyone's count, but it also downplays white involvement with slavery. As of 1850 the percentage of whites living in families that owned slaves was 43% lower South, 36% upper South. My family owned slaves but was NOT rich.
Have any of you every studied history? South Carolina succeed from the union because of the election of Lincoln. Did they just hate Lincoln that much? No, it was because they feared that Lincoln would band slavery altogether. The only states in the confederacy who didn't fight for slavery were Arkansas, North Carolina, Virginia, and Tennessee. These states refused to succession until Ft. Sumter forced them to choose sides. HUGE MISTAKE! They all should have gone down and whipped SC ass!
WHITEWASH; I live in the south and opposed the Iraqi war, but every redneck with a confederate flag was loving when the US invaded both times. In fact, the population of the red states overwhelming supported every moronic Bush blunder. Look what happened when the Dixie Chicks spoke out against the war. Contrast that with dimwitted Toby Keith. Now that the war predictably cost trillions and 1000's of American lives for Iran's new best buddy, everyone wants to rewrite history. NOT!!!
Do not confuse true Confederates with dumbass neo-cons who like to wave our flag.
And honestly, how mature is it to spam my videos like this, if you wanted to have a conversation then you should have PM'd me.
I'll just answer one point for now.
I dont know where you got your records of families that owned slaves, according to your precious unions own 1860 census records only 4.8% of Southrons owned slaves. Are you saying that your union records can't be trusted?
They did fight for slavery, to have a seperate government ( which would of probably been as corrupt as the current 1 except with racist inbreds) . Have you read the seceding states declarations? They believed in putting blacks in their place. All of them implied to protect the institution of slavery. And spreading it throughout the world. Yes, the south today is a horrible place for blacks to live and will always be.
Go look it up. I think your brainwashed by confederate propaganda.
this would be a great video if it wasn't jammed up with the class warfare stuff. Rich men in the South did fight the damnyankees
stonelifter63 3 weeks ago
I would like to point out that the confederate states constitution, was NEARLY identical to the United states constitution with the EXCEPTION of declaring it a RIGHT to own slaves. So to say that Slavery did NOT play a hand in it at all is nearly as obserd as the indication that it was the sole reason behind the war, or the souths motivations for sessession.
john4knecht 1 month ago
Nice music!
ZePwner350 4 months ago
The south didn't fight ONLY for slavery, but that was the primary reason.
"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth...a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization...There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union" --Mississippi CoS
KayBeeEee1983 6 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 There was no legislation on the table to end slavery. The Corwin Amendment which was on the table would have protected it for all time if the South had stayed and passed it. You need to read your history. Illinois ratified it Lincoln's state. It made no sense to secede before any move was made whatsoever if slavery was this important to the South. Lincoln even stated in his presidential speeches that it would not be abolished in the South all we had to do was wait.
Luigi84289 1 month ago
@Luigi84289 Of course there wasn't any legislation to end slavery. Lincoln and the Republicans made it clear that they had no power or intention to touch slavery in the southern states. They were determined to keep slavery out of the TERRITORIES though, and that's what angered slave owners.
The Corwin amendment wouldn't have protected slavery for all time. It would have just ensured that ONLY the states themselves could end slavery, not the federal government or any constitutional amendment.
KayBeeEee1983 1 month ago
@Luigi84289 You need to read your history. The Mississippi Declaration of Causes details the perceived dangers to slavery.
"There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union...That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove...We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers."
KayBeeEee1983 1 month ago
The maintenance and perpetuation of slavery is the ONLY REASON THAT WAS EVER ARTICULATED PUBLICLY for secession.
States' rights? The right of the states to own slaves.
illman8876 6 months ago
@illman8876 No son states rights means the right of states to be Soveriegn Nations and conduct themselves as such. This is what the Radical Republicans were against. Their whole agenda was aimed at making the US one Nation instead of a Confederation of Sovereign states and this they did with Reconstruction. The EU is doing the same thing to Europe right now if England had slavery would that make it wrong for it to not want to maintain it's Sovereignty and deal with the problem?
Luigi84289 1 month ago
@Luigi84289 "Their whole agenda was aimed at making the US one Nation instead of a Confederation of Sovereign states and this they did with Reconstruction."
That's what the CONSTITUTION did. The US stopped being a Confederation and became a nation when the Constitution was ratified.
KayBeeEee1983 1 month ago
@illman8876 Slavery hurt the majority of whites in the south because it lowered wages and took that work away from white southerners. It was the same as higher illegals like the big corps do today who will work for nothing and hose up those jobs for life.
Luigi84289 1 month ago
@Luigi84289 That's hiring typing fast.
Luigi84289 1 month ago
Let's get it straight from the horse's mouth:
"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition." -- Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America, 1861.
wsmith76us 7 months ago
@wsmith76us "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people, - there is a physical difference between the black and white races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality"-Abe
mugelerm 6 months ago in playlist truth about the {CSA}
@wsmith76us so more from the Tyrant - And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.
mugelerm 6 months ago in playlist truth about the {CSA}
Oh, come on! Most southern leaders claimed they were fighting for "property", ie slaves. You have to be an idiot to believe this schlock.
borbo23 7 months ago
most southerner didn't own slaves but they still fought to keep them, just like most ppl are not rich but conservatives today hate union
FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 7 months ago
"election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery."--The DECLARATION OF CAUSES OF SECESSION.
It's really too bad they couldn't have dumbed down the title of that document a little more for you idiots.
"Only the rich could afford to have slaves"
So the rest were simply easily manipulated, treasonous, immoral, morons?
No argument here.
Fortunately the cowardly traitors resolve matched their morality.
festdir 9 months ago
Slavery, God's institution of labor, and the primary political element of our Confederation of Government, state sovereignty...must stand or fall together. To talk of maintaining independence while we abolish slavery is simply to talk folly.
Charleston Courie
Straight from the horse's mouth
khanman915 9 months ago
Slavery was in the Constitution because the South flat out refused to accept it unless it protected slavery!
khanman915 9 months ago
This is a very moving video deo vindice God Free Dixie
skywalkerhut 10 months ago
@skywalkerhut Официальная история утверждает что Север якобы за освобождение рабов воевал, хотя всё было совсем наоборот. Янки хотели отобрать у Юга его землю и богатства, душили Юг экономической политикой, пошлинами. Как говорит русская пословица: Драли по три шкуры! А народ Юга ,чёрные и белые южане, сражались против агрессии севера, за свою родину, за свободу, за право самим выбирать свою судьбу как подобает свободным людям.
TheBlackSkif 9 months ago
@skywalkerhut Причины войны кроются в экономике: Не только переработка хлопка, но и весь его вывоз с Юга находились исключительно в руках северян. Решительно всё, начиная с бытовых мелочей, ввозилось с Севера и продавалось в три раза дороже. Янки хотели превратить Юг в сырьевой придаток.
TheBlackSkif 9 months ago
@TheBlackSkif amen to that
skywalkerhut 7 months ago
....and did the 95% include the slaves who couldn't own any fucking property in the first place who made up the majority in some states?
leeharveyosmosis 10 months ago
It's funny how you do the whole "The war wasn't about slavery" and then slip into the "slavery wasn't so bad, they treated them well" bit. Go read the secession resolutions very carefully. The entire purpose of the founding of the Confederacy was to protect the institution of "negro slavery" both in the south and in the territories. Don't claim "freedom and liberty" when your whole society is based on bondage. So what if most southern whites didn't own slaves. You don't own a Wal Mart do you?
wolfpax22 10 months ago
@wolfpax22 your fucking retarded kid ALL OF AMERICA PROTECTED SLAVERY FOR OVER 90YRS DIPSHIT YOU
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63 Umm not really no, since slavery had fallen out of favor in the northern states and they had all banned slavery decades before the war, except for delaware. The Constitution was a compromise between northern and southern interests and the south dominated the federal government until the election of 1860. As for blacks fighting for the south, there really weren't that many. The south debated letting slaves fight in the last month of the war and passed it by only one vote.
wolfpax22 10 months ago
@wolfpax22 slavery was protected by the united state constitution from 1776-1865 also the american flag flew over all those slave ships you should research black confederates more there u ever heard the name GENERAL BEDFORD FOREST who led his all black calvary into battle against the union from the beginning of the war of course not cause that would make your side look like the traitors they were
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63 It's hilarious that you use Nathan Bedford Forrest as an example of how great the Confederacy was for blacks. His whole life revolved around slavery. Before the war, he made his fortune as a SLAVE DEALER. No clue where you got the idea that he had an "all black cavalry" but its BS. We know quite well what he thought of black soldiers from the event at Ft Pillow where he killed 200 Union blacks AFTER they surrendered. He also founded the KKK to stop blacks voting afterwards.
wolfpax22 10 months ago
@wolfpax22 he was one of many men who fought along side black people and spoke bravely of them in battle ALSO ALMOST EVERYONE MADE MONEY OF SLAVERY REGARDLESS IF THEY LIKED IT OR NOT DONT BELIEVE ME THOMAS JEFFERSON OWNED OVER 400 SLAVES ALSO RESEARCH WHY THE KKK WAS FOUNDED TO BE THE POLICE FORCE OF THE SOUTH TO KEEP YANKEE SOLDIERS FROM BURNING HOMES AND SUCH AND P.S. IT WAS DISPANDED BY NATHAN BEDFORD FOREST WHEN THE RACISTS STARTED KILLING BLACKS LOL RESEARCH KID
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63 I see you're a KKK apologist/revisionist too. The reason those Yankee soldiers were there was to protect the freedmen and insure their rights, something the KKK didn't want. If slavery was so unpopular why did it even exist? Thomas Jefferson owned slaves but he didn't make his money TRADING them, and would have released them on his death if it weren't for his debts which made it illegal. He also tried to get a slavery ban in the Constitution but it was rejected by the SOUTH
wolfpax22 10 months ago
@wolfpax22 i mean its like this do gangsters stand on the corner and sell drugs just to make a quick buck? same thing just different in a small way other than killing someone they are callin them property SLAVERY WAS NEVER OVER WHAT RACE YOU WAS IT WAS ABOUT THE ALL MIGHTY GREEN DOLLAR
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63 Drug dealers aren't a legal industry and I don't think we'd go to war to protect drug cartels. Slavery was over money AND race. American slavery started to fill a shortage of labor in the new world needed to work plantations. Race and religion provided the justification, and once a social-racial caste system had formed slavery was the means by which that system was maintained. Without slavery a poor white was no better than a n-----. That's why people would die for it.
wolfpax22 10 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63
There were american flags on those ships because the confederacy(or their flag) didn't exist any time before the atlantic slave trade was banned in 1808.
The united states constitution was favorable towards slavery because of the influence of the southern states who got a sweet heart deal of using the slave population for greater representation in the federal government while extending them none of the rights or privileges of free men.
leeharveyosmosis 10 months ago
@wolfpax22 all states originally ratified the U.S. CONSTITUTION protecting slavery dont believe me look it up
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63 Yes let's look at the Constitution. First, slavery is not even explicitly mentioned in the US Constitution until its abolition in Amendment XIII. The US Constitution neither mandates nor bans slavery. This issue is left up to the states as per Article X. Passages on slavery issues use euphamistic terms like "service or labor." In contrast, the CSA Constitution explicitly uses "slave" and "slavery" and bans the CSA Congress as well as states from ever passing anti-slavery laws.
wolfpax22 10 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63 Correction: I meant Amendment X not Article X of the US Constitution.
wolfpax22 10 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63
...because of pressure from the slave-owning states,and yes, probably because of the perceived economic benefit that northern states would get from it. The Southern States fought till the end to uphold it and got pissed when the northern states were not vigilante enough in returning their "property". They felt that any interference with their "property" was tyranny...neither side was pure but portraying the south as freedom fighters is pure bullshit.
leeharveyosmosis 10 months ago
@leeharveyosmosis look north and south signed the constitution making slavery to blame on all america not just one side
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63 Look I thought we'd been over this. There is no language in the Constitution that says "There must be slavery now and forever" just as there is no prohibition of it. If anything because it bans the slave trade after 1808 it has to be seen as hostile to slavery. Also, the idea at the time of the Revolution was that slavery was a "necessary evil" that we might eventually get rid of. By 1860 this had evolved into an entrenched defense of slavery as a "positive good" in the south.
wolfpax22 10 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63
...the northern state was complicit in the evils of slavery but most of the push for pro-slavery concessions came from the south(the ones that owned most of the slaves.). True, a small minority owned slaves but they played the most prominent role in the southern economy and held most of the political power.
Slavery defined the southern economy regardless of how few people owned slaves and confed victory would only maintain this status quo so they shouldn't be romanticized.
leeharveyosmosis 10 months ago
@leeharveyosmosis lol you try to say its ok for the north to have slaves for 90yrs yet blame southerners who went by the U.S. CONSTITUTION lol your very one sided and say that slavery wasnt bad in north but bad in south lol i would like you to go to the state capital and ask for the slave deeds only 1 or 2 states was against slavery since the founding of the state most northern states used slavery also but for some reason you ignore that and dont realize all of america was guilty for it
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63
I'm saying that a lot of the motivation for the confederate cause didn't come from poor farmers but from the plantation elite who wanted to keep their slaves.....it's understandable because Southern wealth lay in the plantation system. Poor whites were fighting for rich slave owners who didn't give a shit about them either.
Both sides were bad, but the slave economy was based in the south, and a southern victory would only uphold a barbaric and disgusting practice.
leeharveyosmosis 10 months ago
@leeharveyosmosis wrong again maybe the politicians were but the poor men like my ancestors didnt fight to save slavery why would they fight for something they could never have so your blaming all the men on the battlefield that couldnt even affor a slave they were fighting for states rights but im sure you never thought about the men that actuall fought and died just what the public school system told you YOUR IGNORANT I HAVE JOURNALS OF MY CONFEDERATE ANCESTORS AND THEY WERE AGAINST SLAVERY
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
@leeharveyosmosis just let me be dont message me ok i understand history from a non one sided view unlike you P.S. THE FACTORIES IN THE NORTH MADE WAY MORE MONEY OFF SLAVERY THAN THE SOUTHERN FARMERS COULD EVER MAKE OFF THE RAW MATERIALS BUT I BET YOU FORGOT ABOUT THAT AND WHY DID THE SOUTH BEING 30% OF THE POPULATION PAY 80% OF ALL FEDERAL TAXES BEFORE CIVIL WAR??? ALSO REMEMBER LINCOLNS QUOTE WHEN A REPORTER ASKED HIM WHY NOT LET THE SOUTH LEAVE "THEN WHO WILL PAY FOR GOVERNMENT"
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63
this is the comments board, people reply to shit here.....but I'll stop.
leeharveyosmosis 10 months ago
@wolfpax22 funny thing is how come blacks free and slave fought for the confederacy since the beginning of the war but the north didnt allow them to fight until the last year of the war and saying that blacks couldnt be trusted to fight lol owned
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
"No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." Confederate States Constitution.
Wintermute01001 11 months ago
why would anyone secede to protect something that was already protected? You could have mentioned the Corwin Amendment which would have barred the federal govt from EVER banning slavery. All the South had to do was come back in and ratify it. This is the question they cannot answer....so they conveniently claim it was over slavery which so happens to cast them in a good light while ignoring that which causes 99% of all wars. THE MONEY. Don't talk about the money. Must not mention that.
hungarygator 1 year ago
@hungarygator Sorry dumb fuck, not what Jefferson Davis said.
Too bad Davis talked so much retard, he said exactly the opposite of this shit you trying to lie about now.
BullshipDetector 1 year ago
@BullshipDetector LOL! Nice try moron, but you fail. Jefferson Davis' inaugural address doesn't mention slavery.
hungarygator 1 year ago
Both Frederick Douglas and Abraham Lincoln would probably be shocked to learn that modern academics use theoretical economics to argue that the Confederate Constitution offered greater protection for freedom then the U.S. Constitution.
Yeah, greater freedom for native born, straight white Protestant Conservative Christian men with short hair is more like it.
Zeeboe 1 year ago
Unlike the Confederate Constitution, the U.S. Constitution freely permitted states to abolish slavery. If the day ever came when slavery was eliminated voluntarily throughout the United States, not one word of the U.S. Constitution would need to be changed, whereas slavery could never lawfully be abolished under the Confederate Constitution.
Zeeboe 1 year ago
Please read the Confederate Constitution, beginning with Article I, Section 9, Clause 4, which prohibited the Confederate government from restricting slavery in any way. Article IV, Section 2 also prohibited states from interfering with slavery. Perhaps the most menacing provision of the Confederate Constitution was the explicit protection Article IV, Section 3, Clause 3 offered to slavery in all future territories conquered or acquired by the Confederacy.
Zeeboe 1 year ago
Why still debate this? The South was a temporary rebellious nation that failed to hold onto its economic system at the time....slavery. It just feared that the north wouldn't expand it to new states and eventually outlaw it everywhere.
Ever read the South Carolina declaration of secession, for example? They mention slavery like 19 FREAKING TIMES!!!!!!
If that's not the reason for secession, then you are obviously a white Southerner trying to revise your history....facts be damned.
kuwinsitall 1 year ago
@kuwinsitall yes, but also read the Southern Ultimatums, as declared proudly and loudly in Southern newspapers in March of 1861
Seriously -- Five Ultimatums -- all about the SPREAD of slavery by force. Southern scum were demanding, under threat of war, that LIncoln and the NORTH must expland slavery by FORCE! It's as crazy as if Hitler had demanded England invade Poland for the amusement of Germany.
The Southern Ultimatums are really a trip. THey completely shit on state's rights,
BullshipDetector 1 year ago
@BullshipDetector
Yep. "State's Rights" is just what people cling to these days to cover up the fact that it was the attempt for the states to have the "rights" to preserve slavery.
I understand why they did it at the time, even if I disagree with it.
What I don't understand is morons defending them and saying it wasn't about slavery 150 years later.
Sugarcoating to the extreme......
kuwinsitall 1 year ago
of all the states in the south florida is probally the least rebel like
because of all the yankee tourists
CM99501 1 year ago
from wich movie are those images? and if you can recomend me some good movies about the confederacy ill apreciate it thanks
skull16cr 1 year ago
You fucking horrid liar the fact it was all about slavery and subjugation was in the declarations of secession. Heres Texas': They(Feds) demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States.' The Feds want to end slavery and Texas wants slavery. Doesnt get any clearer.
Silvertrine 1 year ago
Texas: "The States of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, [etc.]...have deliberately...violated the 3rd clause of the 2nd section of the 4th article of the federal constitution [fugitive slave clause], and laws passed in pursuance thereof; thereby annulling a material provision of the compact, designed by its framers to perpetuate the amity between the members of the confederacy and to secure the rights of the slave-holding States in their domestic institutions--."
slappymcgroundout 1 year ago
South Carolina: "Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States."
slappymcgroundout 1 year ago
Ole Miss: "In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world."
slappymcgroundout 1 year ago
Georgia: "Why? Because by their declared principles and policy they have outlawed $3,000,000,000 of our property in the common territories of the Union; put it under the ban of the Republic in the States where it exists and out of the protection of Federal law everywhere..."
$3,000,000,000 = value to them of their slaves.
slappymcgroundout 1 year ago
great video. all fact, not brainwashing us history they teach in schools
NYredneck17 1 year ago
Bravo! This is all Southern Facts! Not Union Fiction! Member of SCV Camp #1525, SWCWA, and ACWC. Keep up the good work, spreading the TRUTH!
Deo Vindice!
SCV1525ColorSarg 1 year ago
im cherokee indian but part black and if people knew i support the confederacy they would call me a racist or a traitor which in fact the confederacy prob did more for blacks and sure as hell did more for the confederacy.
robisgangsta1 1 year ago
let us understand,"The winners of Wars always write the History books"! it has been this way since the Roman times,they called us "Celtic"people "Barbarians" as they stole our lands,our Gold and raped our women! today they call us Racist,sticks and stones may break our bones but names will tarnish us forever! we have been run out of our European country's because we fought for our freedoms and separate from big Gov's and now look whats goin on in this Country,We again are labeled Racist!
stonecoldcrazee81 1 year ago
Keep up the great work! "circlecityrabbit2004" I love your work amd your educated debates with those of a doubting nature, God Bless you and the CSA †
CNS2 1 year ago
"Black is just another shade of Confederate Gray"! Great quote and awesome video, one of the best on the topic I've seen... Keep up the great work!
CNS2 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Was Slavery the cause or the cause of Secession? Let's ask Alexander Stephens Vicepresident of the CSA: "The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution — African slavery as it exists amongst us — the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution"
Alexander Stephens Vicepresident of the CSA March 21, 1861
DelValle1980 1 year ago
Great video and it is absolutely correct about slavery and the South, hell I live in the North and we hate niggers just as much as any Southern did or does.
mythic89 1 year ago
new york had almost as many slaves as georgia before the war none of whom were freed till after the war
in the south a black soldier was paid the same as a white soldier in the north the men refused to be paid the same as blacks
if you think slavery was the issue you proberly think wmds and osama are the modern issues good luck deluded sheeple
matthewchops 2 years ago
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
garrywenkev 1 year ago
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
garrywenkev 1 year ago
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
garrywenkev 1 year ago
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
garrywenkev 1 year ago
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
garrywenkev 1 year ago
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
garrywenkev 1 year ago
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
garrywenkev 1 year ago
@matthewchops The only time New York had almost as many slaves as georgia was in 1790 in the 1850's and 60 New York had NO slaves while Georgia had nearly half a million ,and as I posted above no blacks were paid anything they were never even freed.The only blacks to serve as a company were on loan from their masters and were to return to slavery if they won.
garrywenkev 1 year ago
@garrywenkev is there some reason you have to post your response 10 times?
stringbenderE2E 11 months ago
I love when the pro-South assholes resort to arguing that anyone who opposes slavery and racism must be a racist themselves!!! That shit is hilarious!!!
RonPaulHatesBlacks 2 years ago
Who the fuck cares who "founded" slavery you idiot?
Who founded rape dumb fuck? WHo founded child molesting dumb fuck?
Who founded theft or murder dumb fuck?
So because others raped children before --or did other shit -- it was fine for the Confederacy to be FOUNDED on it dumb fuck?
Wrong dumb fuck.
What a bunch of dumb fucks.
12FlyMe 2 years ago
@12FlyMe Slavery was not what the Confederacy was founded on. You clearly ignored this to make your opinion.
CSAPolitics 2 years ago 2
CSA wrong dumb fuck -- the South was founded on slavery you fucking idiot -- its own leaders said so, bragged that it was.
Do you got that yet dumb fuck? At the time - the people who actually FOUNDED the Confederacy SAID it was founded on slavery.
Let me repeat that so your dumb fucking ass gets it. The Confederacy was FOUNDED on slavery -- according to the exact same people who FOUNDED the Confederacy dumb fuck.
Don't you think they would know, dumb fuck? They were there, idiot.
FilmCriticOne 2 years ago
@FilmCriticOneSir I do not apreciate your tone and words. I respectfully disagree on that yes there were leaders who said such but thats not why blacks and whites fought for the south. They fought for self determination and the right of their nations to determine their own issues.
CSAPolitics 2 years ago 5
CSA dumb fuck -- what part of "they bragged it was about slavery at the time" don't you fucking grasp?
That's what they said at the time you fucking idiot -- slavery. Got that yet retard - they BRAGGED it was about slavery you fucking idiot.
And by the way you fucking idiot -- no blacks fought for the South. Got that retard? Some mulattoes tried to suck up to owners -- but they were the same niggers who whipped other slaves, and held the women as white men sold the children.
FilmCriticOne 2 years ago
@FilmCriticOne Why do you want slavery so much and white supremacy are you a racist?
CSAPolitics 2 years ago
@CSAPolitics Sorry dumb fuck, google Southern Ultimatums, see what Southern Scum were demanding, upon promise of war.
Go on retard -- go see what Southern scum were demanding. GO on retard, your own Southern leaders issued Ultimatums. GO fucking learn what they were.
Retard.
BullshipDetector 1 year ago
@CSAPolitics
Funny their masters still had to approve then.
Here is the register of black soldiers on both sides officially approved by the respective governments.
Union Black Combat Soldiers: 178,000, a tenth of the total number of Union soldiers
Confederate Black Combat Soldiers: 0
-Confederate government used African American 'Soldiers' for manual labor, nurses, fort construction, servants, propaganda purposes
khanman915 9 months ago
@khanman915 выдающийся негритянский аболиционист Фредерик Дуглас, посвятивший всю жизнь борьбе за права и интересы братьев по расе, с изумлением отметил: «Немало цветных служит в Армии конфедератов! Причем не только поварами, слугами и подсобными рабочими, но — полноправными солдатами. Они горят желанием убивать всех нас, сторонников федерального правительства, и готовы всемерно подрывать его политику».
TheBlackSkif 9 months ago
@khanman915 Его соратник Горацио Грили позже записал: «С первых дней войны негры активно участвуют в военных операциях КША. На Юге из их числа формируют регулярные части мятежной армии, их обучают по общим уставам, а на парадах они маршируют плечом к плечу с подразделениями из белых южан; между тем подобное пока совершенно немыслимо в Вооруженных Силах Севера».
TheBlackSkif 9 months ago
Comment removed
12FlyMe 2 years ago
I don't think the video makes its' intended case.
Higher import tarrifs resulted in higher costs for the South; but the South raised their prices to compensate. At worst the result would be inflation. All of America purchase cotton in one form or another (clothing, sheets, etc.). It therefore seems like the burden, to protect Northern industry, was a shared burden.
Music01230 2 years ago
Music dumb fuck -- wrong idiot/ The South could have produced it's own shit if they wanted you fucking idiot.
They made money on SLAVES dumb fuck. And they demanded total protection for their slave trade you fucking idiot.
No one stopped the slave raping child selling Southern scum from having all the fucking manufacturing it wanted to dumb fuck.
The Morrel Tarriff was only passed AFTER -- AFTER -- 7 Southern States fucking seceded. So it could not be fucking that.
12FlyMe 2 years ago
The Confederate leaders did fight to SPREAD slavery and Nazi like white supremecy.
Read their own words -- in their own "Declarations of Causes" I can send you copies.
Not just to KEEP slavery --but to spread it.
The "average" Confederte soldier deserted -- Davis himself said 2/3 of the soldiers deserted, and this was months before the end. By the end -- 3/4 of the soldiers deserted Those who stayed simply refused to fight anymore.
Something they don't tell you.
TruthMattersToMe 2 years ago
Even Jesus Christ Himself advised the slaves to obey their master, and advised their master to treat the slaves fairly. He was aware that slavery would not be abolished any time soon, so He gave them advice how to behave in a Christian way, while in this state of life.
lithopoonwit 2 years ago
Moreover he (General Lee) was in favor of enlisting Blacks to the Confederate army, and grant them and their families freedom in the South when the war would be over. He would grant their families freedom when the enlisted man did not survive. He was in favor of everything good for the Blacks, but not by means of revolution. He was convinced that they had a better life in the CSA then in Africa.
lithopoonwit 2 years ago
Lith dumb fuck -- Lee the slave rapers and child sellers fed the niggers religion to make them obey - to work hard, bend over to get fucked better, to let the slave owner steal their children and pussy and work.
Lee was a slave raper -- just like his Christian daddy -- these fuckers sold their OWN children from rape into slavery dumb fuck. Did Jesus say that was okay dumb fuck?
FreeLunchTax 2 years ago
Jesus did not say that it was O.K., and also for you it is not O.K. to spread this kind of slander about honest people.
lithopoonwit 2 years ago
Lil -- Lee whipped the shit out of slaves -- stripped the women naked and took them in his barn and participated personally in whipping female slaves.
He also sold children -- how the fuck do you think he got rich? All his wealth came from selling slaves or their labor. Got that dumb fuck?
If he was for "everything good" for slaves you fucking idiot, he wouldnt whip them, sell their children, get rich on their labor dumb fuck.
12FlyMe 2 years ago
@12FlyMe Whats with all your hate against the south?
CSAPolitics 2 years ago
lithopoon dumb fuck - -no, idiot, Lee had over 200 slaves idiot. He whipped slaves -- stripped the women naked and w hipped the shit of them. He sold their children.
He said GOD would have to end slavery -- not man. He said the evil ones were the those were trying to undo Gods will for slavery.
Lee's dad was well known for raping slaves and selling his own black children as slaves. Robert had slave brothers and sisters -- probably sold some of his own relatives.
12FlyMe 2 years ago
lies, he was a Christian man of faith.
lithopoonwit 2 years ago
@12FlyMe ,do you have evidence to support what you're saying.
stormtiger39 2 years ago
@stormtiger39 don't bother. 12FlyMe, FreeLunchtax and others are clone accounts made to attack any pro-Southern comment. They're robots. You can tell by the mechanical way they keep on using the same f*ckin language.
lithopoonwit 2 years ago 2
Southern Confederacy fought against an illegal and unjustful tax, and their act of Secession was legal, so the North attacked them because they wanted to collect their ridiculous tax by force. South fought for everything the United States have stand for.
lithopoonwit 2 years ago
General Lee himself was against slavery.
lithopoonwit 2 years ago
Litle dumb fuck -- the SOuth paid almost no fucking taxes idiot. The tax you dumb fuck was on IMPORTS of manufactured gbods. The South was all about slavery -- so they didnt' want to protect industry, they wanted to protect slavery. Got that dumb fuck?
No one stopped them from having industry dumb fuck -- they wanted to be slave based dumb fuck.
The Confederacy dumb fuck was based on slavery dumb fuck -- their own leaders bragged about that dumb fuck.
12FlyMe 2 years ago
Public -- sorta. The slave masters had to spread slavery -- Toombs said "Expand or perish" -- literally. They were choking to death financially on their own slaves, there were far too many, thet were becoming worthless.
Its not me that said this - Southern leaders said it.
The big push was to spread slavery Dred Scott decision was one part of the push.
Read Lincoln's House Divided Speech.
Its very much about this conspiracy by slave leaders to expland slavery.
12FlyMe 2 years ago
The Confederates revolted primarily to preserve their "right" to own other human beings as property. The Civil War was about slavery, and nothing else.
PublickStews 2 years ago
really??? so seperation of state an federal governments wasnt apart of it ??
codecmgs 2 years ago
iquiroga -- thats like saying I copied the Declaration of Independence, except I put down that blacks are to be enslaved, raped, their chldren whipped and sold, any men who rebel will be hung or burned to death.
Oh wait -- that was the South Constitution.
12FlyMe 2 years ago
The CSA's Constitution copied the existing US Constitution...but added several explicit protections for slavery
iquiroga 2 years ago
You're right. Funny though, you make no mention of all the Confederate generals and leaders who wished to end slavery. Or of the fact that in 1865 when the Confederate congress authorized the enlistment of any and all black males in exchange for their freedom the Confederacy effectively ended slavery. You can't very well grant one man his freedom and not grant another his.
circlecityrabbit2004 2 years ago
Circle utter nonsense -- the Act to Draft slaves clearly says THEY WILL STILL BE SLAVES.
"Sec. 5. That nothing in this act shall be construed to authorize a change in the relation of the said slaves"
Got that -- the Act itself said they are STILL slaves. Plus -- it never went into effect, because the South surrenedered before they could actually draft SLAVES.
Got that? IT actually goes out of its way to say - they are still slaves. Here is the quote from the actual bill
"
12FlyMe 2 years ago
1865? LOL!!! The CSA was getting its ass handed to it in 1865! In January of that year, starving soldiers were deserting Lee's army. By February, good ol' Tecumseh was tearin' thru the Carolinas. In April Lee LOST the confederate capital of Richmond and then surrendered. What wouldn't the CSA have proposed at that point to hold on to dear life?
iquiroga 2 years ago
Circle -- sorry dufus I have the act to draft slaves in March of 1865. It specifcally says they will still be slaves.
Got that -- section 5 dufus. "Nothing in this act shall change the slave status of those conscripted". And even that caused more desertions in white trooops -- which is why the war ended.
12FlyMe 2 years ago
@circlecityrabbit2004 No slaves were freed to fight for the confederacy,it was proposed in that way but voted down.They did manage to get a company or two together but they were still slaves and they never fought.
garrywenkev 1 year ago
Circle - actually the South specificaly said the slaves they DRAFTED would STILL BE slaves. Got that ? Tthey were going to draft slaves -- force them -- to use guns. Why? Because virtually ALL white men were deserting.
But the Bill in COnfederate Congress - that passed - said the blacks would STILL be slaves. Section 5, dumb fuck. Go read it. Learn real history
BullshipDetector 1 year ago 2
@BullshipDetector It also said they would be emancipated upon completion of their military service "dumbfuck".
hungarygator 1 year ago
@hungarygator no stupid shit, I have the bill in front of me. It specifically said they would NOT be freed.
Got that you stupid fuck? GO read the bill. Section 5.
BullshipDetector 1 year ago
@BullshipDetector "The idea of enlisting blacks had been debated for some time. Arming slaves was essentially a way of setting them free, since they could not realistically be sent back to the plantation after they had fought". Wrong Dumbfuck. I have exposed your lies yet again.
hungarygator 1 year ago
@BullshipDetector i like how your saying what some coward politician does speaks for the actual man that dangers his life in a cause he believes in thats like saying politicians decide why poor men fight and die kinda dumb to think that way
Southernjuggalo63 8 months ago
@iquiroga It ended the slave trade out right. What it basically meant was that it recognized the states as nations like they were erected to be. The north prolongued and profited from it by bringing it into an arena it didn't belong. Congress. Instead of helping the states, going to them offering assistance, really helping institute policies like the northern states compensating the slave owners getting them out of debt so they could free them all we see is fanatics and a want for war.
Luigi84289 1 year ago
@iquiroga The slave trade was a northern business look at triangular trade. It didn't hit the US in Charleston. And it went on illegally until 1865 when the last slave ship the NightingGale was seized off the coast of Africa. Northern merchants would not let it end. It was a horrible system. And just to be clear the Yankees unanimously looked at black people as inferior read Lincoln.
Luigi84289 1 year ago
@iquiroga That was why they had no problem with the trade. The neo puritans wanted them free to secure their salvation that was it. Southrons recognized the slaves as people. They were taken care of and treated like family. There were over 500,000 free black men down south in 1860. In a few more years with the end to the fugitive slave act and the trade it would have been over. Brazil which had a large slave population ended it in the 1880's.
Luigi84289 1 year ago
@Luigi84289 You forget that Southern politicians were actively and openly working to perpetuate slavery into the foreseeable future. By 1860, they had a powerful weapon in the Dred Scott decision, which declared that blacks--free or slave--were not citizens and had no rights. Perhaps slavery would have just gone away without the war, but there would certainly have been much suffering. Also, the South started the war when it fired on Ft. Sumter before the yankees attacked.
ShadowRaphael 1 year ago
@ShadowRaphael Far more than that -- google Southern ultimatums.
Seriously, google it.
BullshipDetector 1 year ago
@iquiroga Article 1 section 9 of the U.S. constitution says " The migration or importation of such "persons" as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation and no exceeding ten dollars for each "person". Who do you think the person they are talking about. CSA just made it plain unlike the U.S. did.
101airborne07 1 year ago
@101 sorry dumb fuck -- the US Constitution made for FREE SPEECH and NO CRUEL PUNISHMENTS
Got that retard? The South stopped free speech about slavery from 1820 on, even torturing PREACHERS for daring to preach against slavery. Did you know that retard? Or not.
Southern Scum also regularly used torture retard. That's against the Constitution dumb fuck.
The only way you scum sucking pussies could maintain slavery was to shit on the Constitution.
Get that thru your head.
BullshipDetector 1 year ago
@iquiroga um the original american constitution protected slavery for over 90yrs the 13,14, AND 15TH amendments so saying the south constitution protected slavery and the original american one didnt is very ignorant on your part
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
Then one hundred MINISTERS OF THE GOSPEL and theological professors of the Confederate States, in an address to Christians throughout the world, adopted at a conference in the city of Richmond, issued their blasphemous manifesto upon slavery:— "The practical plan for benefiting the African race must be the Providential, the Scriptural plan—We adopt that plan in the south—We regard abolitionism as an interference with the plans of Divine Providence."
iquiroga 2 years ago
DR. PALMER, the popular Southern divine, preached:— "The providential Southern trust is to perpetuate the institution of Domestic Slavery as at present existing, with freest scope for its natural development. We should at once lift ourselves intelligently to the highest moral ground, and proclaim to all the world that we hold this trust from God, and in its occupancy are prepared to stand or fall.
iquiroga 2 years ago
iquiroga --you wont find any southern sermon against slavery. IT was illegal to preach against it. IT was illegal to write anything suggestion slavery was not from God.
White men could be -- and were -- whipped and jailed just for owning a book that MIGHT make a black man dissatisfied with being a slave. If a blacked ownted that same book, he could be hung. The state would pay the owner reimbursement for dead punished slaves.
12FlyMe 2 years ago
Jefferson Davis: "Our new government is founded upon—its foundations are laid—its corner stone rests upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. Thus our new government is the first in the history of the world, (God grant it might be the last)—based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. It is upon this our social fabrics is firmly planted...
iquiroga 2 years ago
That speech is called the "cornerstone" speech and was made by our dumbass Vice president Stephens, learn your history before you comment on the subject. If you want to have a full debate then send me a pm, there's just not enough room on these comment boxes.
circlecityrabbit2004 2 years ago 2
Fine, I'll concede it was your "dumbass Vice president" as oppossed to your President...
iquiroga 2 years ago
City - -- the cornerstone speech was widely adored in the South. Plus its nothing unusual, except its more specivfic in some details. Many of the Southern speeches and documents were like that -- slavery was from God -- our country is based on God's will for whites to enslave blacks.
The South bragged about this at the time. Funny how you have to deny it was even a part of the Confederacy, when its own leaders say it was the foundation.
12FlyMe 2 years ago
@circlecityrabbit2004 Stephens was a Lincolnite. He was pro Union, a mole. He and Fascist Lincoln were good buddies.
Luigi84289 1 year ago
@circlecityrabbit2004 Every Ordinance of Secession of every Southern state that had one explicitly names slavery as the primary reason for the rebellion. The current Governor of Virginia recently found himself in hot water for being oblivious to this easily searchable fact. It's fine and good to talk about economic disputes between North and South, but slavery was always the most pressing divider, and everyone was open about that. I say this as a proud Southerner who knows his region's history.
ShadowRaphael 1 year ago
@circlecityrabbit2004 Sorry retard, Davis said the same thing. Exactly the same thing.
Got that retard -- Davis said slavery was the cornerstone too. Jan 5, 1863
BullshipDetector 1 year ago
@iquiroga Even if that speech was made by the vice president he was no doubt hand picked by Davis himself and could his political opinions be that much different from a fellow southerner and slave owner?
edavismookie25 1 year ago
@iquiroga hey i can show you hundreds of racist comments by lincoln also if u would like me too do you actually think the men that gave their lives always agreed with the politicians cmon dude use a brain
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
@iquiroga also that was ALEXANDER STEPHENS that said that my 2nd cousin
Southernjuggalo63 10 months ago
Comment removed
iquiroga 2 years ago
Jefferson Davis: "The belief existing in the northern mind that negroes are, under our government, entitled to political equality with white men, must be dispelled, and northern men and northern states must cease to disturb our domestic tranquillity, or assail our rights of property, and so impair our national interests, or a dissolution of the union must be inevitable."
iquiroga 2 years ago
Lincoln hated the fugative slave law and didnt pass it. .
The South hated states rights dumb fuck -- unless it got them more pussy and power. If some state wanted their own laws about slave trials -- or if a new state was against slavery --the south shit its pants AGAINST states rights.
The onlyl fucking thing the South cared about was slave pussy and power. That's it. Nothing else. Everything else was an excuse for slave pussy and slave power.
SteamboatCamp 2 years ago
when lincoln passed the fugitive slave act of 1850, wana know why the N. didn't like it? it infrenged on there "States Rights" **BUT** when the S. wanted there States Rights.. No, we can't have that!! Now here we are, 21st. cen. and what's going on? the States are looking once again to there Rights. what part of all this don't you ppl get????
statesrights01 2 years ago
how hard is it to understand, in the 19th cen. slavery was a fact of life. I and many of my fellow Confederates don't agree with it. Slavery was brought here by the Yankees, the Yankees made there money off it, got rich.. ex, ex.. both sides hands are dirty with it. like it or not. but, the real issue for the South WAS states rights..
statesrights01 2 years ago
I think with all the slave talk about, one has to ask the question here.. what was billy yank fighting for? after lincoln sighned the emanicpation proclamation, how many yanks went awol? and now, here is all these anti-confederates spouting about the slavery issuse.
statesrights01 2 years ago
States dumb fuck == you got your ass turned around. Typical crap you learn, no wonder.
Fact is the SOUTH was the one that wanted to STOP states rights. By their logic, north states couldnt decide how to run their own trials for run away slaves.
WOrse- the South insisted NO state can STOP slavery in their OWN boundries.
So this shit about South for states rights is a bunch of shit. Its a farce. They hated states rights.
SteamboatCamp 2 years ago
All of those laws againt runaway slaves you're talking about (The fugitive slave act of 1850 for instance) were all... Federal laws. Not States laws. If the Northern states had wanted to change those laws they would have had to take it up with the union not the Southern states.
The South never insisted that, the union did.
And your constant swearing and name calling is really immature. But I wouldn't expect any better from you, typical
anti-Confederates.
circlecityrabbit2004 2 years ago 2
@circlecityrabbit2004 Actually, the South insisted on the Fugitive Slave Act as part of the Compromise of 1850. For the North to change those laws, they would have had to take it up with the Southern states precisely because the Southerners in Congress were blocking any repeal. The North refused to actually enforce those laws, which was part of why North-South relations soured rapidly with the election of Lincoln.
ShadowRaphael 1 year ago
Now take a look today. come monday *Oct. 5 2009. the Supreme Court is going to decide .. get this... if the 2nd admendment is .. OK, or the 21st. cen. Ummm yeah!! why, cause it's the Law of the Land. The feds have NO right to tell the STATES how to run there affairs. Once again, this is why the South left the union. you don't it?? I'll say, take the argument up with Thomas Jefferson and James Madison
statesrights01 2 years ago
If you read the 1st. 10 admendments. you'll see where it's a State Gov. set up. but, after the War. it becomes a Fed. run set up.. what part of States Rights do not people get?? It's a Right givin to us by our Forefathers. Lincoln didn't like that cause he wanted more Power. Why? cause he liked the Hamilton style of Gov. He didn't care for States running themselfs
statesrights01 2 years ago
I think something has to be said here, first, the South was Taxed to Death. Sec. ok, the South had slaves, and slavery was in the N. up to mid. 1850's. 3rd. my question is this to all of you yanks and libs. where in the Contitution from our Forefathers.. (not the laws after the war) does the Fed. Gov. have ANY say on what states are to do? This is the reason the South left the union. slavery or no slavery. it WASN'T the gov. job to tell the states how to run there bussiness.
statesrights01 2 years ago
You liberals are pathetic. NOT one Southern state had over 50 % slave owners, even the greatest slave state Miss., was under half at 49 %. Slaves were owned by the RICH, not the majority of Southern people. Jefferson Davis was an aristocrat bitch, who was caught in his own wifes shaw while running instead of FIGHTING, like a good aristocratic bitch boy should cower away. Many myths are still told about slavery, Lincoln NEVER freed any down here, but morons continue to praise the Ceasar.
EducatedRebellion101 2 years ago
You're right, but the federals and those who bow to them would prefer it if things kept going the way they are now, with everyone thinking the entire South was some sort of horrible world filled with whips and slaves.
It was then the same as it is now, neo-liberals always resort to bending the truth to better suit their needs and their "story".
circlecityrabbit2004 2 years ago
It's simple to disprove the entire premise of this video with the words of Confederate VP Stephens and Pres. Davis who claimed that slavery was the cause of succession before the war. In fact, it was the southerners who attempted to use the Federal government to enforce the 'gag rule' and fugitive slave law. I can site many more examples. In fact, REPUBLICAN Lincoln feared for state rights after the Dred Scott decision which prompted his campaign against the spread of slavery.
SithLordRising 2 years ago
You guys know that this war was well documented in both southern and northern papers. We aren't debating the meaning of hieroglyphics. Have you ever fact checked the information of this propaganda piece? Only 4.5% of southerners owned slaves? That's wrong by almost anyone's count, but it also downplays white involvement with slavery. As of 1850 the percentage of whites living in families that owned slaves was 43% lower South, 36% upper South. My family owned slaves but was NOT rich.
SithLordRising 2 years ago
Have any of you every studied history? South Carolina succeed from the union because of the election of Lincoln. Did they just hate Lincoln that much? No, it was because they feared that Lincoln would band slavery altogether. The only states in the confederacy who didn't fight for slavery were Arkansas, North Carolina, Virginia, and Tennessee. These states refused to succession until Ft. Sumter forced them to choose sides. HUGE MISTAKE! They all should have gone down and whipped SC ass!
SithLordRising 2 years ago
WHITEWASH; I live in the south and opposed the Iraqi war, but every redneck with a confederate flag was loving when the US invaded both times. In fact, the population of the red states overwhelming supported every moronic Bush blunder. Look what happened when the Dixie Chicks spoke out against the war. Contrast that with dimwitted Toby Keith. Now that the war predictably cost trillions and 1000's of American lives for Iran's new best buddy, everyone wants to rewrite history. NOT!!!
SithLordRising 2 years ago
Do not confuse true Confederates with dumbass neo-cons who like to wave our flag.
And honestly, how mature is it to spam my videos like this, if you wanted to have a conversation then you should have PM'd me.
I'll just answer one point for now.
I dont know where you got your records of families that owned slaves, according to your precious unions own 1860 census records only 4.8% of Southrons owned slaves. Are you saying that your union records can't be trusted?
circlecityrabbit2004 2 years ago
They did fight for slavery, to have a seperate government ( which would of probably been as corrupt as the current 1 except with racist inbreds) . Have you read the seceding states declarations? They believed in putting blacks in their place. All of them implied to protect the institution of slavery. And spreading it throughout the world. Yes, the south today is a horrible place for blacks to live and will always be.
Go look it up. I think your brainwashed by confederate propaganda.
BleedingRosesRed 2 years ago