Rust, your steeped in modern history. Sure I know of the Dixiecrats, you ever wonder why such a thing would come about
in the South, where prejudice was recognized as being less than in the North prior to the Invasion and subsequent fix
from the invaders. (Read de Tocqueville's "Democracy in America" for an unbiased view of that).
Racial tension was manufactured by the North to insure a need for government intervention.
A few other facts for you,
less than 10% of Southerners owned slaves. Do you think the other 90% fought to preserve an institution that
did not benefit them?
Free Blacks and Indians owned slaves within that 10%, so we've cut white ownership % down a bit more.
Lincoln said, "Let the South go, where would we get our revenues."
The South exported more cotton than the gnp of the North in 1860.
Several Northern States banned free negroes from moving into their States prior to the war.
Where Northern Officers anti-slavery...hardly.
The following quotes are from northern contemporaries of Lincoln.
from John Sherman, "I hear from all sources that nearly all of the officers in Buell's army, and that Buell himself, are pro-slavery in the last degree"
General Stanton to Secretary Stanton, 20 Sept. 1862, "I find a feeling prevailing among the officers and soldiers of prejudice against the
blacks"
I could go on. Suffice to say, the War of Northern Aggression was not fought to free blacks.
Did Lincoln deserve shooting?
From Gen. Donn Piatt on Lincoln, "Fictitious heroes are being reared to the memories of men whose real histories, when they come to be known, will make this bronze and marble the monuments of our ignorance and folly."
"With us when a leader dies, all good men go to lying about him, and, from the monument that covers his remains to the last echo of the rural press, in speeches, sermons, eulogies and reminiscences, we have naught but pious lies."
Colonel Theodore Roosevelt, in a speech at Grand Rapids, 8 Sept. 1900, said that in 1864 "on every hand Lincoln was denounced as a tyrant, a shedder of blood, a foe to liberty, a would-be dictator, a founder of an empire--one orator saying, "We also have our emperor, Lincoln, who can tell stale jokes while the land is running red with the blood of brothers."
Should you like to examine the "real" Lincoln here are a couple good reads.
http://rexcurry.net/pledgeofallegiance-abraham-lincoln-nazism.html(clearly shows he should have been shot as a war criminal)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/574028/postsI disagree Bobby, this forced union will split again. Which States do it is up for grabs. As stated in the other article
we are no different than the Soviet Union prior to it's split up. As to Texas, isn't it interesting that a State which joined
the Union with the added emphasis that it could redraw at anytime was force back in less than 20 years later.
I would add that not only did NY and Texas state this right in their constitutions but also Virginia's clearly stated
the right to do so. This right, and inalienable right to self-government was understood by every State that voluntarily joined
the union. Some State's saw the need to make sure it was found in their constitutions as they joined because they
knew that down the road a few years clear rights would be clouded by men who seek power.
What I find most disheartening is that Southerners see the need to try and convince yankees of their patriotism by what is
in fact faux patriotism. Patriotism has nothing to do with supporting the government in unjust wars. Southerners need to examine their history themselves and not the yankee victors history.
