So This Fucking Moron Is On The School Board In Colorado

[Minimalist]

No wonder our kids don't have a chance.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/10/conse...luntarily/

Conservative CO school board member: AP history is wrong, US ended slavery ‘voluntarily’

“The idea that the United States voluntarily gave up slavery is an outright misrepresentation of history. The United States engaged in a civil war to end slavery. There was nothing voluntary about it,” Rossi said. “I’m just flabbergasted at anyone who would make that claim. Flabbergasted.”

[Endo]

Both views points are wrong. The freeing of the slaves was a tactical move by Lincoln to destabilize the South in order to win the Civil War, started by farmers who were being crushed by tariffs on imported industrial goods.

[Minimalist]

Lincoln's "Emancipation Proclamation" said:

"That on the 1st day of January, A.D. 1863, all persons held as
slaves within any State or designated part of a State the people
whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States shall
be then, thenceforward, and forever free;

Thus, it did not "free" a single slave. That was left to the army.

And that means there was nothing 'voluntary' about it.

[Endo]

Lincoln's "Emancipation Proclamation" said:

"That on the 1st day of January, A.D. 1863, all persons held as
slaves within any State or designated part of a State the people
whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States shall
be then, thenceforward, and forever free;

Thus, it did not "free" a single slave. That was left to the army.

And that means there was nothing 'voluntary' about it.

I'm certainly NOT arguing that point. What I'm presenting as my understanding of the historical context is that the Civil War was not started for the purpose of freeing the slaves.

[Minimalist]

WWII was not started to end the holocaust, either. It was merely a happy result.

The cause of the Civil War was secession.

Entire Union Regiments deserted in the aftermath of the Emancipation Proclamation as many northerners had not signed up to fight to free the slaves; the signed up to preserve the union. Nonetheless, the war did end slavery for all practical purposes.

The odds that slavery could have survived the Industrial Revolution into the modern world are slim and as a nation we might have been better off if it had just withered away as a no longer useful economic model. We'll never know.

But it sure as fuck wasn't 'voluntary.'

[Anomalocaris]

Lincoln's "Emancipation Proclamation" said:



Thus, it did not "free" a single slave. That was left to the army.

And that means there was nothing 'voluntary' about it.

I'm certainly NOT arguing that point. What I'm presenting as my understanding of the historical context is that the Civil War was not started for the purpose of freeing the slaves.

No, civil war was started by those who hitched their wagen to the slavery horse for the purpose of trying to preemptively checkmate any attempts to free slaves by those who weren't even, on average, all that eager to free slaves.

[Zidneya]

Yeah sure. All the Americans wake up one morning and decided to end slavery. And the last one hundred and fifty years of racial discrimination are just been a series of misunderstanding.




“Congress must not declare equal those whom God has created unequal.”
Fernando Wood

[Anomalocaris]

But it sure as fuck wasn't 'voluntary.'

Yeah, just like the Lee voluntarily allowed 3 Union armies to surround his army at Appomattox Courthouse.

In fact Jefferson Davis even tried to claim emencipation would make restroation of union impossible.

---

Both views points are wrong. The freeing of the slaves was a tactical move by Lincoln to destabilize the South in order to win the Civil War, started by farmers who were being crushed by tariffs on imported industrial goods.

No, the timing of the emencipation was after the South had suffered the two defeats that decided its fate. In fact Lincoln delayed freeing slave because he did not want it perceived that emencipation was purely a tactical move in the war against the south. Freeing slaves eliminated only the possibility that Great Britain or France would come into the war on the side of the South at save it in the eleventh hour.

Some time before this Lincoln had already come around to become a genuine abolitionist. It was only a foregone conclusion the slaves would be freed unless the Union was defeated. The only question was when was the best time to do it.

[Heywood]

What outside country or actor forced the United States to end slavery? Sure there was a conflict to end slavery....but it was an internal conflict. From a certain perspective she is correct.

[Esquilax]

What outside country or actor forced the United States to end slavery? Sure there was a conflict to end slavery....but it was an internal conflict. From a certain perspective she is correct.

Considering that the claim is that the current history curriculum is incorrect, and somehow I doubt that curriculum is itself reinventing history so that the civil war was an international one, I doubt that that's the perspective she was taking, however.