What an idiot! Virginia Governor Notes 'Major Omission' on Slavery in Dixie Month Dec

#51
#51
OrangeEmpire said:
I'll pretty much go along with this, though you have to acknowledge the social hierarchy of the confederate gov't were the rich plantation owners wanting to keep their holdings and using the poor to fight their war.

The civil war is sad no matter how you look at it.
Click to expand...


The main point is the governor had nothing to gain and it was a dumb move.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#52
#52
99% of soldiers may not have owned slaves, but they were fighting for the side that wanted to continue with slavery.

They may have had some good reasons, but the fact is they wil always be on the wrong side of history.

gasguy98 said:
Actually the two have nothing in common. I wrote that the average Confederate soldier had no interest in protecting SLAVERY, I never wrote they were blacks best friends (of course neither were 99% of Northerners). It was in their best interest not to have free labor on the plantations (you know, so they could work the fields for income). If you knew anything about the antebellum South you would know that a fraction of the population actually owned slaves and cared about protecting it. Those were the wealthy POLITICAL DONERS.


I don't know as much about the Nazis and Jews but the Nazi party philosophy was about getting Jews out of Europe so yes, the Nazis did in fact have something against the Jews. Germans as a whole? Not so much.
Click to expand...
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#53
#53
"Nothing fills me with deeper sadness than to see a Southern man apologizing for the defense we made of our inheritance. Our cause was so just, so sacred, that had I known all that has come to pass, had I known what was to be inflicted upon me, all that my country was to suffer, all that our posterity was to endure, I would do it all over again.''
Jefferson Davis

"All that the South has ever desired was that the Union as established by our forefathers should be preserved and that the government as originally organized should be administered in purity and truth."
Robert E. Lee

"The Northern onslaught upon slavery was no more than a piece of specious humbug designed to conceal its desire for economic control of the Southern states."
Charles Dickens, 1862
 
Last edited:
#55
#55
CountVolcula said:
"Nothing fills me with deeper sadness than to see a Southern man apologizing for the defense we made of our inheritance. Our cause was so just, so sacred, that had I known all that has come to pass, had I known what was to be inflicted upon me, all that my country was to suffer, all that our posterity was to endure, I would do it all over again.''
Jefferson Davis

"All that the South has ever desired was that the Union as established by our forefathers should be preserved and that the government as originally organized should be administered in purity and truth."
Robert E. Lee

"The Northern onslaught upon slavery was no more than a piece of specious humbug designed to conceal its desire for economic control of the Southern states."
Charles Dickens, 1862
Click to expand...

:blink:

Don't follow......
 
#58
#58
gasguy98 said:
Actually the two have nothing in common. I wrote that the average Confederate soldier had no interest in protecting SLAVERY, I never wrote they were blacks best friends (of course neither were 99% of Northerners). It was in their best interest not to have free labor on the plantations (you know, so they could work the fields for income). If you knew anything about the antebellum South you would know that a fraction of the population actually owned slaves and cared about protecting it. Those were the wealthy POLITICAL DONERS.


I don't know as much about the Nazis and Jews but the Nazi party philosophy was about getting Jews out of Europe so yes, the Nazis did in fact have something against the Jews. Germans as a whole? Not so much.
Click to expand...
He should have said German soldiers... He makes a good point, too.
 
#59
#59
CountVolcula said:
"Nothing fills me with deeper sadness than to see a Southern man apologizing for the defense we made of our inheritance. Our cause was so just, so sacred, that had I known all that has come to pass, had I known what was to be inflicted upon me, all that my country was to suffer, all that our posterity was to endure, I would do it all over again.''
Jefferson Davis

"All that the South has ever desired was that the Union as established by our forefathers should be preserved and that the government as originally organized should be administered in purity and truth."
Robert E. Lee

"The Northern onslaught upon slavery was no more than a piece of specious humbug designed to conceal its desire for economic control of the Southern states."
Charles Dickens, 1862
Click to expand...
I don't know or care what everyone said. It's a war, so obviously people will have different opinions. All I know that is that the North won and slavery is gone. I'll consider that a good thing.

Is that too simplistic of a view? Maybe. But I'm not buying the "It was all about states rights and protecting our freedom!" argument, either.
 
Last edited:
#61
#61
Vols520 said:
99% of soldiers may not have owned slaves, but they were fighting for the side that wanted to continue with slavery.

They may have had some good reasons, but the fact is they wil always be on the wrong side of history.


Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Slavery was not the reason the Southern soldier fought. For that matter, it certainly was not why the Union soldier fought either.
You probably don't know this but the Emancipation Proclamation was not signed until 2 years AFTER the war started.

The wrong side of history. I have always thought this is a ridiculous phrase. If the American revolution had not been a success, would WE have been on the wrong side of history?
 
#62
#62
OrangeEmpire said:
I'll pretty much go along with this, though you have to acknowledge the social hierarchy of the confederate gov't were the rich plantation owners wanting to keep their holdings and using the poor to fight their war.

The civil war is sad no matter how you look at it.
Click to expand...

I thought I was clear in my post. Yes, you are right. The super wealthy wanted to protect their interest.
For what it is worth, the threat to slavery was not in current slave holding states but to the expansion of slavery in the south west.

Again, the poor rank and file Southern foot soldier was not fighting for a rich mans economic advantages. He was fighting because a foreign army was marching on his home.
 
#63
#63
Vols520 said:
The main point is the governor had nothing to gain and it was a dumb move.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I disagree. He gained the advantage of character in the eyes of many Virginians on a topic that by its very nature is controversial.
Not to mention that the poor bastard Southern foot soldier, the guys that marched without a pair of shoes on his feet in defense of their homes, doesn't get the recognition he is due.
More often than not they get accused of the ridiculous "wong side of history" garbage from the likes of people like you.
 
#64
#64
gasguy98 said:
I disagree. He gained the advantage of character in the eyes of many Virginians on a topic that by its very nature is controversial.
Not to mention that the poor bastard Southern foot soldier, the guys that marched without a pair of shoes on his feet in defense of their homes, doesn't get the recognition he is due.
More often than not they get accused of the ridiculous "wong side of history" garbage from the likes of people like you.
Click to expand...

people like me who realize the concept o risk reward?

Yeah he has gotten a lot of positive pub from this, he clearly made the right choice.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#65
#65
gasguy98 said:
I thought I was clear in my post. Yes, you are right. The super wealthy wanted to protect their interest.
For what it is worth, the threat to slavery was not in current slave holding states but to the expansion of slavery in the south west.

Again, the poor rank and file Southern foot soldier was not fighting for a rich mans economic advantages. He was fighting because a foreign army was marching on his home.
Click to expand...

it was a foreign army after the soujth committed treason.

There were obviously other reasons for the war besides slavery. Either way you slice it, the southern men fought for that side.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#66
#66
Vols520 said:
it was a foreign army after the soujth committed treason.

There were obviously other reasons for the war besides slavery. Either way you slice it, the southern men fought for that side.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

King George and the Crown considered the colonies to be treasonous
 
#68
#68
CountVolcula said:
King George and the Crown considered the colonies to be treasonous
Click to expand...

And I seriously doubt that the current parliament would issue a proclamation 'praising' the american rebels of the revolution.

The main point is that there was little to gain politically so why even do it.
 
#71
#71
I was watching CNN news and a colored man was saying that Confederate Soldiers were like Nazi's!?!?!..WHAT A JERK!
 
#73
#73
Its not a joke my friend..that's what the man said why in hell would I make up something like that..c'mon
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top