Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,222
|
Post by Paleocon on May 18, 2023 13:11:40 GMT
To be a Lost Causer you have to disregard a lot of rational evidence and believe in some pretty delusional things. Of course the Lost Cause narrative has been around for a fairly long time and I find it as silly now as it was was way back then. It's always been a losing proposition when placed against the consensus of professional historians. Strictly speaking, the slaveowner had to provide his human possessions with at least a minimum of support so that they could work productively. That doesn't say very much for the slave owner, but what does? To be a Cultist of the Northern Lies, you have to disregard logic, common sense, human nature and the actual historical record. That's why these zealots have to hide behind the consensus of historians who have as little evidence of slavery as the cause as do these "Righteous Myth" fanatics that are triggered by the word slavery.
Right is right, even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it. - William Penn
The South was right, as am I. Slavery was not the cause, nor would men fight, starve and die to defend it. It's a stupid dismissal of our own human nature to assume that slavery was the cause.
You've provided no rational evidence nor an objective evaluation of history while I have provided both. For a guy who claims to have the "consensus" at his back, you've provided little to nothing from this cabal of historians that you worship.
This is forever the tactic of these leftists....no evidence, just a claim that it's "settled" because the mob says so. And we're branded as heretics for daring to speak the uncomfortable truth.
I don't give a sh*t if this goes a thousand pages, I will not tolerate the Northern lies to go unchallenged.
|
|
Fiddler
Legend
Wasted again ..
Posts: 13,802
|
Post by Fiddler on May 18, 2023 15:38:42 GMT
Don't post here for a minute .. I gotta run get more popcorn..
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,222
|
Post by Paleocon on May 18, 2023 18:40:59 GMT
You and I both know that "pro-choice" is Goebbels style propaganda designed to hide the fact that a human being is butchered during every abortion, without exception. That innocent unborn human being slaughtered during that abortion gets no choice, no rights, no voice and no life. I'm sure that Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Hitler would be proud of abortionists since they are the natural heirs to the genocidal tendencies of those 20th century monsters. Likely they saw their dehumanized victims as just a “statistic” as well.
So your tactic is to make up stuff instead of posting facts? That’s why you lost this argument long ago. Calling Southerners dumb just makes you look dumb; that’s just your worthless fantasy that’s not based in the facts (which describes most of your liberal philosophy as well). Fingerprints? For a guy claiming that there are "fingerprints all over the place", you sure as hell can’t seem to find more than a thin few to support your concocted fairy tale based on the Northern lies.
I dislike that majority of historians because they have lied to us and have so little evidence to support their lies. You certainly haven’t provided any of their alleged scholarship here, yet you claim to revere and worship what those “experts” have to say. Those propagandists masquerading as “historians” are dependent on gullible lemmings to swallow their garbage, but they can’t tolerate any scrutiny of their shallow, cartoonish narrative. YOUR shallow, cartoonish narrative.
The only thing “fairly simple” in this conversation is you. The North was never fighting to end slavery; they allowed slave ownership by their “loyalists” until the end of the war. And I’ve already proven that it’s stupid and factually wrong to claim that the South was fighting to preserve slavery.
Such a statement from Mencken mirrors what Abraham Lincoln said before and during the war. That quote is nothing more than a red herring fallacy that shows us that you don’t have the intelligence to address the original Mencken quote rather than add this kind of “let’s smear the messenger” digression. Mencken didn’t mention slavery because he knew that the fight wasn’t about slavery. And he was far more current to the War Between the States than you or I or those vaunted historians that you forever hide behind. Mencken frequently dismissed Southerners almost as brutally as he dismissed blacks in your quote above, and he tended to dislike lots of people. He also fought to end lynchings of blacks in his home state in the 1930s…..a complex man indeed. More from the great man:
“No doubt the Confederates, victorious, would have abolished slavery by the middle of the 80s. They were headed that way before the war, and the more sagacious of them were all in favor of it. But they were in favor of it on sound economic grounds, and not on the brummagem moral grounds which persuaded the North.”
Your current crop of modern historians are piss poor amateurs compared to giants like Mencken who were not bound by today’s political correctness, wokeness and the forced idolization of the perverted race pimp narrative. Based on your cluelessness about history, it’s likely you lack the self-awareness to see the ruination that is happening right before our eyes. I should have known you’d be in the “Trump Tried to Overturn the Election” Cult….which explains why you were drawn to the Cult of Northern Lies. Democrats stood up in the U.S House and tried to dispute the 2016 election and peddled Russia-Trump collusion lies in an attempt to damage Trump’s future re-election chances. The left has done far more to interfere with elections, yet I see no condemnation from the likes of you.
You’ve had to learn a hard lesson on this thread….if you choose to engage me in a discussion on this forum, you’ll lose. No exceptions. Get used to it, especially on this subject. You may know, but I don't. Pro-choice is just what it sounds life--giving women the choice whether to have an abortion or not. Trying to bring in Hitler, Stalin, et al isjust the usual wingnut hyperbole. It should be clear that most folks don't think that the unborn are equivalent to a baby or a child. If that was so, then 63 million women would be in jail for first-degree murder, but they aren't. Hitler and the others killed children and adults, not the unborn. The fingerprints are all over the secession documents and the comments made by the southern elite. Them are the facts. I can understand why Lost Causers can't admit that. It destroys their entire narrative. No, you dislike the majority of historians because they don't agree with your opinions. It has nothing to do with Northern "lies" or "peer pressure." It's that they disagree withthe Lost Cause idiocy. Read the scholarship yourself, not that it will make any difference to a Lost Causer. They don't believe in objective scholarship, they believe in their century old Lost Cause, something not based on facts, but based on some kind of bizarre heritage belief that cannot admit that slavery was the reason for secession. There were many complications and details about the Battle of Waterloo. But the simple bottom line fact is that Napoleon lost. It's the same with the Civil War and slavery. Sure, Mencken and Lincoln were both white supremacists. No kidding. Mencken was a very talented writer, but he was not a historian of the Civil War. Of course he doesn't mention slavery. He was a racist who didn't really care about slavery, as the quote I provided shows. We don't really know when slavery would have been abolished if the south had won the war. And I don't see much evidence that they were considering abolishing it before the war. Hell, they seceded and fought the war to preserve slavery, not to abolish it. I guess Mencken wouldn't have minded if slavery lasted into the mid 1880s; after all he wasn't a slave. I'm sure the slaves would have minded greatly. Mencken is a midget as a Civil War historian who shouldn't be taken seriously as a Civil War historian, mainly because he wasn't one. He should have stuck to topics he knew about, like the habits of the American Booboisie I've been listening for the last thirty years to nutjobs talk about the "ruination" of the country and it never seems to quite happen, so I don't may much attention to their Chicken Little garbage about the sky is falling when it never falls. Donny did try to overturn the election, despite the fact that his efforts were so ham-handed and futile, but he was trying to do just that. Another thing that has nothing to do with your ridiculous notion of a "cult," but of what actually happened. I just need 4,000 odd votes. What an imbecile. The left never did anything close to what Donny did in trying to reverse the election. I haven't learned any new lessons here, just the same old Lost Cause garbage, which I've heard before on many occasions. It wasn't close to convincing then justas it isn't now. The only place I lose is in your own mind, which I don't care about, since you're just one more dumb wingnut. You're like a pitcher who calls his own strikes and thinks that means he's won the game. It's a kind of an hilarious egotism that at least is entertaining. Sadly, you poor loser, you never even had a chance on this thread and this subject, but it's been fun to watch you squirm, all the while committing farcical mistakes and fallacies by the bushel. I’ve got to give these shallow leftists credit for their consistency….they are utter failures at the complexities of history and critical thinking, but their illogical contortions and cartoonish drivel are a hoot! Sixty three million women who made the choice to have their unborn offspring slaughtered have enabled murderers by every practical measure, except murder is a legal term. And, ironically for you, pretending that the unborn aren't "equivalent" is exactly the kind of dehumanization tactics practiced by those 20th century tyrants as they tried to excuse the extermination an entire class of people. But, the larger lesson that you're evidently too stupid to learn is that the controversial and conflicting attitudes toward abortion today are exactly the kind of opinions about slavery in the 19th century. With “evidence” so thin that it consists of just three measly fire eater documents that weren't even 100% about slavery (other causes, oh my!) and a few Zuckerburg style pontifications from a small number of Southern one percenters , your narrative, like its author, is a joke. What you peddle is not history at all, but a demonstration of how a snowflake is triggered by the word slavery. And look at this atheist troll whine when I skewer the priests of his little "Righteous Myth" Cult, his progressive idols that pretend to be historians. While capable of objective scholarship, these propagandists have abandoned that noble idea, instead preferring to reinforce existing biases and hatred against a Southern cause that mirrored the American Patriots struggle in 1775-1783. These “historians”, if required to be objective, would be faced with the reality that Lincoln was King George III and the Union effort was just as evil as the Mad King’s invasion and attempted subjugation. Those alleged historians that you use as a crutch would rather be popular than precise. Of course, you’d need more intelligence than you’ve displayed here to grasp these truths of history. All you have left is a lemming’s empty smear: “Lost Causer!!!”. Would slavery ended if the South had won? Ownership was top heavy already by 1860, with a decline in the number of families owning slaves. Eventually, with more and more folks out of slave-ownership and more slaves in the hands of the elitists , the rest would have peacefully ended the practice when the cotton market began to dry up (India and Egypt were gaining fast even before 1860) and mechanization made the slaveless farmer efficient: Within the South, slave ownership was becoming concentrated into a smaller number of hands. The proportion of southern families owning slaves declined from 36 percent in 1830 to 25 percent in 1860. At the same time, slavery was sharply declining in the upper South. Between 1830 and 1860, the proportion of slaves in Missouri's population fell from 18 to 10 percent; in Kentucky, from 24 to 19 percent; in Maryland, from 23 to 13 percent.www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3046As far as Mencken, he was far more reliable as a judge of the Southern cause for one simple reason....he didn’t give a sh*t what others thought and had no trouble angering everyone else around him equally. He was not beholden to peer pressures or subject to the barbs of peers in academia; he didn’t have to broach the subject at all, but he did and had a reputation for brilliance and intelligence that makes today’s historians look like children. You dislike Mencken because he got it exactly right when he said that Southerners were fighting for self-determination. Finally, it takes someone who is truly clueless to claim that we are not in severe decline as a nations and a society. If you actually knew history, you’d know that, absent revolution or war, the ruination of an empire is a slow incremental death, not “poof! It’s over!”. And Trump did not try to overturn the election any more than Democrats did in years past. Trump hatred has made you blind and stupid. You’ve demonstrated a childish and shallow view of history and politics here….that qualifies you to be called liberal and other ugly names. As I said, I engage, you lose. I can keep demonstrating as long as you want to keep losing.
|
|
|
Post by johnnybgood on May 18, 2023 19:03:25 GMT
As I said, I engage, you lose. I can keep demonstrating as long as you want to keep losing. Thats what Grant said to Lee when he sat his ass down at the table and handed a pen.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,222
|
Post by Paleocon on May 18, 2023 19:04:08 GMT
Don't post here for a minute .. I gotta run get more popcorn..
Just ask the zookeeper to bring you more and hand it through the bars of your cage. Try not to throw your feces at the nice man, please.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,222
|
Post by Paleocon on May 18, 2023 19:10:57 GMT
As I said, I engage, you lose. I can keep demonstrating as long as you want to keep losing. Thats what Grant said to Lee when he sat his ass down at the table and handed a pen. Such eloquence! Such profound prose to make us all swoon! A fine addition to the scholarly discussion!
Whatever happened in that war, you lost in the discussion here, as did all of the other dumbasses that are stupid enough to think that the war was about slavery. Thanks for proving my point, Yankee.
|
|
|
Post by johnnybgood on May 18, 2023 19:14:21 GMT
Thats what Grant said to Lee when he sat his ass down at the table and handed a pen. Such eloquence! Such profound prose to make us all swoon! A fine addition to the scholarly discussion!
Whatever happened in that war, you lost in the discussion here, as did all of the other dumbasses that are stupid enough to think that the war was about slavery. Thanks for proving my point, Yankee.
When was this loss? We're still waiting to see it. Ever wonder why your rebel buddies don't get involved?
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,514
|
Post by thor on May 18, 2023 20:56:39 GMT
But wait....there's more.... John Tyler Morgan, Dallas County, Alabama; speaking to the Alabama Secession Convention on January 25, 1861:"The Ordinance of Secession rests, in a great measure, upon our assertion of a right to enslave the African race, or, what amounts to the same thing, to hold them in slavery."The Black Hand of Truth comes for you.... Your. Ass. Kicked. To. Andromeda. Again. Oh my! Meaningless cherry picked anecdotal evidence posted by a leftist animal! I'm wounded to the core! How shall I ever recover from these excessively damp spitballs hurled by our resident penis fetishist! But wait....there's more.... Jefferson Buford, Barbour County, Alabama, speaking to the Alabama Secession Convention, on March 4, 1861:"Now, Mr. President, I submit that while our commission is of much higher import and dignity, it is, in one respect, by no means so broad. We are sent to protect, not so much property, as white supremacy, and the great political right of internal self-control---but only against one specified and single danger alone, i.e. the danger of Abolition rule."The Black Hand of Truth comes for you.... Your. Ass. Kicked. To. Andromeda. Again. Tell us again, moral degenerate, how it was totally OK for slavery to exist because 'it would have undoubtedly ended in the 1880s', scumbag. Think the enslaved would have been OK with that?
|
|
|
Post by HolyMoly on May 18, 2023 21:04:57 GMT
To be a Cultist of the Northern Lies, you have to disregard logic, common sense, human nature and the actual historical record. That's why these zealots have to hide behind the consensus of historians who have as little evidence of slavery as the cause as do these "Righteous Myth" fanatics that are triggered by the word slavery.
Right is right, even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it. - William Penn
The South was right, as am I. Slavery was not the cause, nor would men fight, starve and die to defend it. It's a stupid dismissal of our own human nature to assume that slavery was the cause.
You've provided no rational evidence nor an objective evaluation of history while I have provided both. For a guy who claims to have the "consensus" at his back, you've provided little to nothing from this cabal of historians that you worship.
This is forever the tactic of these leftists....no evidence, just a claim that it's "settled" because the mob says so. And we're branded as heretics for daring to speak the uncomfortable truth.
I don't give a sh*t if this goes a thousand pages, I will not tolerate the Northern lies to go unchallenged.
It's the actual historical record that demonstrates slavery was the cause of secession. Lost Causers will find any excuse to disregard that record so they can pretend slavery wasn't the cause, even when it's right before their eyes. That's what makes them look so foolish. Maybe Penn meant that slavery was a-okay, even if some of his co-religionists thought otherwise. Penn was a slaver owner himself, though with a modest number of human possessions. Look at the documents and the timeline, it's right there. You just don't want to see it. That's not the fault of Civil War historians, it's yours. The things you've provided are weak and unconvincing, just the usual Lost Cause junk repeated over and over again and convincing no one. Read the books if you want, or don't. You don't like the conclusions of the Civil War historians so they become a "mob" in your imagination. More wingnuttery and hyperbole. No one has called you a "heretic." That's just more of the Lost Cause martyrdom mentality. Whining endlessly is part of the theme.
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,514
|
Post by thor on May 18, 2023 21:14:15 GMT
To be a Lost Causer you have to disregard a lot of rational evidence and believe in some pretty delusional things. Of course the Lost Cause narrative has been around for a fairly long time and I find it as silly now as it was was way back then. It's always been a losing proposition when placed against the consensus of professional historians. Strictly speaking, the slaveowner had to provide his human possessions with at least a minimum of support so that they could work productively. That doesn't say very much for the slave owner, but what does? To be a Cultist of the Northern Lies, you have to disregard logic, common sense, human nature and the actual historical record. That's why these zealots have to hide behind the consensus of historians who have as little evidence of slavery as the cause as do these "Righteous Myth" fanatics that are triggered by the word slavery.
Right is right, even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it. - William Penn
The South was right, as am I. Slavery was not the cause, nor would men fight, starve and die to defend it. It's a stupid dismissal of our own human nature to assume that slavery was the cause.
You've provided no rational evidence nor an objective evaluation of history while I have provided both. For a guy who claims to have the "consensus" at his back, you've provided little to nothing from this cabal of historians that you worship.
This is forever the tactic of these leftists....no evidence, just a claim that it's "settled" because the mob says so. And we're branded as heretics for daring to speak the uncomfortable truth.
I don't give a sh*t if this goes a thousand pages, I will not tolerate the Northern lies to go unchallenged.
Paleo comes out in favor of slavery, human trafficking and the breeding and selling other humans for fun and profit. Film at 11.
|
|
|
Post by HolyMoly on May 18, 2023 21:47:47 GMT
Sadly, you poor loser, you never even had a chance on this thread and this subject, but it's been fun to watch you squirm, all the while committing farcical mistakes and fallacies by the bushel. I’ve got to give these shallow leftists credit for their consistency….they are utter failures at the complexities of history and critical thinking, but their illogical contortions and cartoonish drivel are a hoot! Sixty three million women who made the choice to have their unborn offspring slaughtered have enabled murderers by every practical measure, except murder is a legal term. And, ironically for you, pretending that the unborn aren't "equivalent" is exactly the kind of dehumanization tactics practiced by those 20th century tyrants as they tried to excuse the extermination an entire class of people. But, the larger lesson that you're evidently too stupid to learn is that the controversial and conflicting attitudes toward abortion today are exactly the kind of opinions about slavery in the 19th century. With “evidence” so thin that it consists of just three measly fire eater documents that weren't even 100% about slavery (other causes, oh my!) and a few Zuckerburg style pontifications from a small number of Southern one percenters , your narrative, like its author, is a joke. What you peddle is not history at all, but a demonstration of how a snowflake is triggered by the word slavery. And look at this atheist troll whine when I skewer the priests of his little "Righteous Myth" Cult, his progressive idols that pretend to be historians. While capable of objective scholarship, these propagandists have abandoned that noble idea, instead preferring to reinforce existing biases and hatred against a Southern cause that mirrored the American Patriots struggle in 1775-1783. These “historians”, if required to be objective, would be faced with the reality that Lincoln was King George III and the Union effort was just as evil as the Mad King’s invasion and attempted subjugation. Those alleged historians that you use as a crutch would rather be popular than precise. Of course, you’d need more intelligence than you’ve displayed here to grasp these truths of history. All you have left is a lemming’s empty smear: “Lost Causer!!!”. Would slavery ended if the South had won? Ownership was top heavy already by 1860, with a decline in the number of families owning slaves. Eventually, with more and more folks out of slave-ownership and more slaves in the hands of the elitists , the rest would have peacefully ended the practice when the cotton market began to dry up (India and Egypt were gaining fast even before 1860) and mechanization made the slaveless farmer efficient: Within the South, slave ownership was becoming concentrated into a smaller number of hands. The proportion of southern families owning slaves declined from 36 percent in 1830 to 25 percent in 1860. At the same time, slavery was sharply declining in the upper South. Between 1830 and 1860, the proportion of slaves in Missouri's population fell from 18 to 10 percent; in Kentucky, from 24 to 19 percent; in Maryland, from 23 to 13 percent.www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3046As far as Mencken, he was far more reliable as a judge of the Southern cause for one simple reason....he didn’t give a sh*t what others thought and had no trouble angering everyone else around him equally. He was not beholden to peer pressures or subject to the barbs of peers in academia; he didn’t have to broach the subject at all, but he did and had a reputation for brilliance and intelligence that makes today’s historians look like children. You dislike Mencken because he got it exactly right when he said that Southerners were fighting for self-determination. Finally, it takes someone who is truly clueless to claim that we are not in severe decline as a nations and a society. If you actually knew history, you’d know that, absent revolution or war, the ruination of an empire is a slow incremental death, not “poof! It’s over!”. And Trump did not try to overturn the election any more than Democrats did in years past. Trump hatred has made you blind and stupid. You’ve demonstrated a childish and shallow view of history and politics here….that qualifies you to be called liberal and other ugly names. As I said, I engage, you lose. I can keep demonstrating as long as you want to keep losing. Critical thinking=People who agree with me. How stupid your definition is. Almost as dumb as proclaiming victory all the time and believing that people are squirming due to your nonsensical "history." I'm not squirming, I'm laughing. But why haven't states passed laws to make abortion murder? If the unborn are the same as a person then abortion is murder. The reason there are no such laws is because, for whatever reasons, most people don't equate the unborn with persons. The mass killers of the 20th century killed people, not the unborn. So there are conflicting attitudes about both abortion and slavery. Big deal. There are conflicting attitudes about dozens of things. That doesn't mean they are similar. They're actual historians who look at the evidence, not wingnuts who will never accept that evidence, not because it's wrong but because they have to stick to their Lost Cause narrative no matter what. They can't accept the documents, they can't accept what the leaders said about slavery being the cause, they can't accept any objective facts about slavery because all these things ruin their crazy narrative. The Lost Cause narrative is not the invention of northern historians, it's the invention of southerners who couldn't accept defeat and came up with their own absurd alternative history. A history that very few people believe in today. And the comparison between Lincoln and George III is just as silly as the rest of your recitation. Mencken, whatever his other talents, was not a Civil War historian. Sure, southerners wanted self-determination, just as they wanted states rights; the self-determination to preserve slavery and their human possessions and the right of the states to support it. No doubt about it. I like Menken's take on some subjects, but I don't like his racism. So, how many centuries we will have to wait for this "ruination?" Yes, no empire lasts forever, but that implies a lessening of power, not "ruination." The British and French empires of the past are long gone, but they seem to be doing okay as countries. So I'm not worrying very much about this. I leave that to the Chicken Littles and their constantly falling sky. Trump called the Secretary of State of Florida asking him to find enough votes to win the state, and that was just one of his maneuvers. What other president of either party had done that before? You're as blind about Trump as you are about the Civil War. Yes, you've said. That's because most of this stuff is in your fantasy world where you always win and everybody else always loses. Reality is a different thing. Keep demonstrating you're a clueless wingnut. I'm getting a big kick out of it.
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,514
|
Post by thor on May 18, 2023 22:09:31 GMT
Sadly, you poor loser, you never even had a chance on this thread and this subject, but it's been fun to watch you squirm, all the while committing farcical mistakes and fallacies by the bushel. I’ve got to give these shallow leftists credit for their consistency….they are utter failures at the complexities of history and critical thinking, but their illogical contortions and cartoonish drivel are a hoot! Sixty three million women who made the choice to have their unborn offspring slaughtered have enabled murderers by every practical measure, except murder is a legal term. And, ironically for you, pretending that the unborn aren't "equivalent" is exactly the kind of dehumanization tactics practiced by those 20th century tyrants as they tried to excuse the extermination an entire class of people. But, the larger lesson that you're evidently too stupid to learn is that the controversial and conflicting attitudes toward abortion today are exactly the kind of opinions about slavery in the 19th century. With “evidence” so thin that it consists of just three measly fire eater documents that weren't even 100% about slavery (other causes, oh my!) and a few Zuckerburg style pontifications from a small number of Southern one percenters , your narrative, like its author, is a joke. What you peddle is not history at all, but a demonstration of how a snowflake is triggered by the word slavery. And look at this atheist troll whine when I skewer the priests of his little "Righteous Myth" Cult, his progressive idols that pretend to be historians. While capable of objective scholarship, these propagandists have abandoned that noble idea, instead preferring to reinforce existing biases and hatred against a Southern cause that mirrored the American Patriots struggle in 1775-1783. These “historians”, if required to be objective, would be faced with the reality that Lincoln was King George III and the Union effort was just as evil as the Mad King’s invasion and attempted subjugation. Those alleged historians that you use as a crutch would rather be popular than precise. Of course, you’d need more intelligence than you’ve displayed here to grasp these truths of history. All you have left is a lemming’s empty smear: “Lost Causer!!!”. Would slavery ended if the South had won? Ownership was top heavy already by 1860, with a decline in the number of families owning slaves. Eventually, with more and more folks out of slave-ownership and more slaves in the hands of the elitists , the rest would have peacefully ended the practice when the cotton market began to dry up (India and Egypt were gaining fast even before 1860) and mechanization made the slaveless farmer efficient: Within the South, slave ownership was becoming concentrated into a smaller number of hands. The proportion of southern families owning slaves declined from 36 percent in 1830 to 25 percent in 1860. At the same time, slavery was sharply declining in the upper South. Between 1830 and 1860, the proportion of slaves in Missouri's population fell from 18 to 10 percent; in Kentucky, from 24 to 19 percent; in Maryland, from 23 to 13 percent.www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3046As far as Mencken, he was far more reliable as a judge of the Southern cause for one simple reason....he didn’t give a sh*t what others thought and had no trouble angering everyone else around him equally. He was not beholden to peer pressures or subject to the barbs of peers in academia; he didn’t have to broach the subject at all, but he did and had a reputation for brilliance and intelligence that makes today’s historians look like children. You dislike Mencken because he got it exactly right when he said that Southerners were fighting for self-determination. Finally, it takes someone who is truly clueless to claim that we are not in severe decline as a nations and a society. If you actually knew history, you’d know that, absent revolution or war, the ruination of an empire is a slow incremental death, not “poof! It’s over!”. And Trump did not try to overturn the election any more than Democrats did in years past. Trump hatred has made you blind and stupid. You’ve demonstrated a childish and shallow view of history and politics here….that qualifies you to be called liberal and other ugly names. As I said, I engage, you lose. I can keep demonstrating as long as you want to keep losing. Critical thinking=People who agree with me. How stupid your definition is. Almost as dumb as proclaiming victory all the time and believing that people are squirming due to your nonsensical "history." I'm not squirming, I'm laughing. But why haven't states passed laws to make abortion murder? If the unborn are the same as a person then abortion is murder. The reason there are no such laws is because, for whatever reasons, most people don't equate the unborn with persons. The mass killers of the 20th century killed people, not the unborn. So there are conflicting attitudes about both abortion and slavery. Big deal. There are conflicting attitudes about dozens of things. That doesn't mean they are similar. They're actual historians who look at the evidence, not wingnuts who will never accept that evidence, not because it's wrong but because they have to stick to their Lost Cause narrative no matter what. They can't accept the documents, they can't accept what the leaders said about slavery being the cause, they can't accept any objective facts about slavery because all these things ruin their crazy narrative. The Lost Cause narrative is not the invention of northern historians, it's the invention of southerners who couldn't accept defeat and came up with their own absurd alternative history. A history that very few people believe in today. And the comparison between Lincoln and George III is just as silly as the rest of your recitation. Mencken, whatever his other talents, was not a Civil War historian. Sure, southerners wanted self-determination, just as they wanted states rights; the self-determination to preserve slavery and their human possessions and the right of the states to support it. No doubt about it. I like Menken's take on some subjects, but I don't like his racism. So, how many centuries we will have to wait for this "ruination?" Yes, no empire lasts forever, but that implies a lessening of power, not "ruination." The British and French empires of the past are long gone, but they seem to be doing okay as countries. So I'm not worrying very much about this. I leave that to the Chicken Littles and their constantly falling sky. Trump called the Secretary of State of Florida asking him to find enough votes to win the state, and that was just one of his maneuvers. What other president of either party had done that before? You're as blind about Trump as you are about the Civil War. Yes, you've said. That's because most of this stuff is in your fantasy world where you always win and everybody else always loses. Reality is a different thing. Keep demonstrating you're a clueless wingnut. I'm getting a big kick out of it. Paleo does this shit every 6 months or so. He gets his ass kicked, and waddles off eventually. Once thing - Trump called the SoS of GA, not FL.
|
|
|
Post by johnnybgood on May 18, 2023 22:29:50 GMT
Paleo does this shit every 6 months or so. He gets his ass kicked, and waddles off eventually. Once thing - Trump called the SoS of GA, not FL. I wouldn't compare intelligent speaking between the two. Thats like comparing Gov Lew Wallace and Lee. Actually, I don't know if put Lee at the bottom of the sh*t hole with Wallace.
|
|
|
Post by HolyMoly on May 19, 2023 0:22:53 GMT
Paleo does this shit every 6 months or so. He gets his ass kicked, and waddles off eventually. Once thing - Trump called the SoS of GA, not FL. Nobody will ever accuse him of self-awareness or modesty. My error, and I used to live in Georgia. I also underestimated the number of votes ol' Donny asked for. He called Georgia SOS Raffensperger asking him to find 11,780 votes so he could win Georgia's electoral votes. I doubt any other president has done that. Trump, the gift that never stops giving.
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 17,514
|
Post by thor on May 19, 2023 5:16:24 GMT
Paleo does this shit every 6 months or so. He gets his ass kicked, and waddles off eventually. Once thing - Trump called the SoS of GA, not FL. Nobody will ever accuse him of self-awareness or modesty. My error, and I used to live in Georgia. I also underestimated the number of votes ol' Donny asked for. He called Georgia SOS Raffensperger asking him to find 11,780 votes so he could win Georgia's electoral votes. I doubt any other president has done that. Trump, the gift that never stops giving. Yes. Hopefully there will be some indictments in GA soon. I found it typical of Republican bullshit that after the GA election was declared to be secure, GA passed or tried to pass a bunch of shit to make voting more difficult. It's almost as if they were pissed off about losing. Also, I wasn't trying to be an ass about the GA/FL thing - just
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,222
|
Post by Paleocon on May 19, 2023 12:23:13 GMT
Such eloquence! Such profound prose to make us all swoon! A fine addition to the scholarly discussion!
Whatever happened in that war, you lost in the discussion here, as did all of the other dumbasses that are stupid enough to think that the war was about slavery. Thanks for proving my point, Yankee.
When was this loss? We're still waiting to see it. Ever wonder why your rebel buddies don't get involved? When your blowhole opens, you lose. Didn't someone send you that memo? What "rebel buddies" do you think I have here? We're not exactly overflowing with members here, just as we don't have a flock of idiots from Maine, just one.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 6,222
|
Post by Paleocon on May 19, 2023 12:34:02 GMT
Oh my! Meaningless cherry picked anecdotal evidence posted by a leftist animal! I'm wounded to the core! How shall I ever recover from these excessively damp spitballs hurled by our resident penis fetishist! But wait....there's more.... Jefferson Buford, Barbour County, Alabama, speaking to the Alabama Secession Convention, on March 4, 1861:"Now, Mr. President, I submit that while our commission is of much higher import and dignity, it is, in one respect, by no means so broad. We are sent to protect, not so much property, as white supremacy, and the great political right of internal self-control---but only against one specified and single danger alone, i.e. the danger of Abolition rule."The Black Hand of Truth comes for you.... Your. Ass. Kicked. To. Andromeda. Again. Tell us again, moral degenerate, how it was totally OK for slavery to exist because 'it would have undoubtedly ended in the 1880s', scumbag. Think the enslaved would have been OK with that? You are a dumbass IRL, aren't you? If the South had never seceded, or if they had accepted the Corwin Amendment and returned to the fold, slavery would have probably lasted even longer than if the South had won the war and become independent. Once the UK and the North found other sources for cotton and other Southern exports, an independent South would have been isolated and pressured globally to end the institution earlier if it wanted to be recognized in the world
None of that makes slavery "OK", but it reflects the reality that the preservation of slavery was wounded mortally by secession and Southerners knew that, but they seceded anyway....why? Because that war was not about slavery.
Why do you think it is OK to slaughter 620,000 people in order to end slavery when it could have been done peacefully?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2023 12:34:03 GMT
Thats what Grant said to Lee when he sat his ass down at the table and handed a pen. Such eloquence! Such profound prose to make us all swoon! A fine addition to the scholarly discussion!
Whatever happened in that war, you lost in the discussion here, as did all of the other dumbasses that are stupid enough to think that the war was about slavery. Thanks for proving my point, Yankee.
Pale con arguing with Little John and losing it! How the "mighty" have fallen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2023 12:39:45 GMT
But wait....there's more.... Jefferson Buford, Barbour County, Alabama, speaking to the Alabama Secession Convention, on March 4, 1861:"Now, Mr. President, I submit that while our commission is of much higher import and dignity, it is, in one respect, by no means so broad. We are sent to protect, not so much property, as white supremacy, and the great political right of internal self-control---but only against one specified and single danger alone, i.e. the danger of Abolition rule."The Black Hand of Truth comes for you.... Your. Ass. Kicked. To. Andromeda. Again. Tell us again, moral degenerate, how it was totally OK for slavery to exist because 'it would have undoubtedly ended in the 1880s', scumbag. Think the enslaved would have been OK with that? You are a dumbass IRL, aren't you? If the South had never seceded, or if they had accepted the Corwin Amendment and returned to the fold, slavery would have probably lasted even longer than if the South had won the war and become independent. Once the UK and the North found other sources for cotton and other Southern exports, an independent South would have been isolated and pressured globally to end the institution earlier if it wanted to be recognized in the world
None of that makes slavery "OK", but it reflects the reality that the preservation of slavery was wounded mortally by secession and Southerners knew that, but they seceded anyway....why? Because that war was not about slavery.
Why do you think it is OK to slaughter 620,000 people in order to end slavery when it could have been done peacefully? So the slavers would have ended slavery by themselves, right? Like we know that thieves just stop robbing people if the cops leave them alone. Or diseases stop killing people if the doctors stay away.
|
|
|
Post by runswithscissors on May 19, 2023 12:47:13 GMT
I can't believe there's 22 pages of this. Maybe 23 once I post this. I just find it amazing that anyone would discount the value of tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars in free labor, with an unlimited supply being self generated, as being nothing to fight for. As if they'd just give that up for nothing. Hilarious. I find it amazing that anyone would be stupid enough to believe that the wealth of the one percenters was a motivation to the hundreds of thousands of Southerners made poor and marginalized by that "free labor". The vast majority of Southerners had no stake in slavery and never would. Slaves were valued in the ten of thousands and even over a hundred thousand dollars EACH in today's dollars. No one is denying that many of the elitists fought for slavery, just as industrialists today want war to line their pockets.
Sort of like how it currently is? How the greatest part of the US military isn't the officer corps, but the lowly foot soldier? Those couple million soldiers who are not members of the one percent of US society in any way? Like the several hundred thousand who are currently serving solely because they could find no jobs or educational opportunities where they live? Do you not understand that the soldiers now, as then, did what they were told to do? And that the top echelons of the military work FOR the civilian leaders of the nation? And that in very many cases those civilians leaders ARE beholden to the influence of the one percenters? Same as it ever was.
|
|