UPTDATE UPDATE UPDATE
In the comment section of this post, you can find Corey Meyer's perfect illustration of the evilize-white-southerners mindset, which proves without a doubt that it's not history with him, it's about stirring up hate for white Southerners.
He totally defineS them by slavery and slave ownership. These weren't people with families and homes they loved, they weren't people with a religious faith, they weren't farmers, workers, merchants or anything else. They had no human characteristics beyond slave owning (which most of them did not do) and fighting for slavery (which most of them did not do).
It's another example of focusing on one small aspect and trying to palm it off as the whole. When you're that willingly blind, when you are that willing to assassinate your own intellect for the sake of demonizing others, your "history" is just so much sewage.
Only except for the fact that they were willing to fight a war to preserve slavery.
ReplyDeleteThey didn't fight a war to preserve slavery, because nobody was fighting a war to end it. But even if they had, that doesn't make them any worse than the people who made it government policy to kill off the buffalo and thus starve the Plains Indians so their lands could be settled by whites.
ReplyDeleteYes, but the wars against the Indians included Southerners...
ReplyDeleteI didn't say anything about wars against Indians. I was talking about the policy of some in the US government of killing off the buffalo. Millions of bison originally made up the herds. They were hunted ruthlessly, and after the yankee war in the South, they were hunted to near-extinction to starve out the Indians who lived primarily on buffalo. This occurred during the Grant Admin. Grant created a "peace process" with the Indians, which meant making them live and act like white folks, and basically imprisoning them on reservations (for their "protection" from white settlers, don'tcha know) while allowing the slaughter to near extinction of their primary food supply.
ReplyDeleteAnd...what is your point? The US government also moved thousands of American Indians from their homelands in the south in the 1830's....so again what is your point.
ReplyDeleteThe south still fought a war to preserve slavery did so without the North having to fight to kill slavery.
My point, Corey, is that the Confederates were no worse than any other people who have ever lived -- including, most assuredly, the people who came down here and made war on them.
ReplyDeleteWell lets me look at this again...yep...both northerner and southerner made war on the Indians. But ONLY southerners fought to preserve slavery.
ReplyDeleteAs I see it...the south still loses. They are worse for this than the North...by just a little.
So was a person from the North any different in terms of those things you listed in your update?
ReplyDeleteNo...
So, what was the difference in the south?
I will let you guess.
But "by this" is not the only yardstick with which to measure, Corey. That is where you foul up. There are a multitude of human evils; there is a multitude of human good. But those whose aim is to evilize Southern white people ignore everything, both good and evil, except slavery. It's dishonest, and it reveals their true agenda -- and it ain't "history."
ReplyDeleteThe north's major sin was greed -- compounded by hypocrisy/double standards and fake righteousness. Pretending that they were a "city on the hill." Condemning Southerners for slavery when they were the ones brought slaves (and thus slavery) here, financed it, insured it and profited from it. We're not supposed to pay any attention to that; we're supposed to see only that they abolished slavery in their states (but did not free all of their slaves) and that they invaded the South to fight for freedom of the slaves, which is pure hogwash. The very fact that they made war on thie South makes them no better than those they warred on.
ReplyDeleteConnie,
ReplyDeleteI have no problem with anything you have said about the North...yes the North is complicite in slavery just as much as the south...but the North did not fight a war to preserve it...do you understand the difference there?
The North was fighting the war to preserve its profits.
ReplyDeleteAll the South had to do to preserve slavery was run back to the Union. Remember the Corwin amendment?
Yes, I understand the difference. That doesn't disprove my statement.
ReplyDeleteYes, I think it does!
ReplyDelete