RE: White supremacists and counter protesters clash in Charlottesville
August 16, 2017 at 2:00 am
(This post was last modified: August 16, 2017 at 2:33 am by Pat Mustard.)
(August 14, 2017 at 12:45 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:(August 14, 2017 at 12:25 pm)Kosh Wrote: Even if that is true.. Does that matter? It almost makes it worse that he couldn't be bothered to stand up for what he thought was right regarding slavery.
And you think Lincoln declared war on the south to stand up against slavery? You think rescuing the slaves for their own sake was any sort of motivation for him?
I just dont see how it makes sense to take down the statue of a man who opposed slavery (yet didn't fight against it) when we have statues of men who supported it and even owned them.
Quote from President Lincoln:
Quote:“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”
I mean, we may as well take down his statues too if we're gonna be taking down Lee.
So you think Lincoln is the same as Lee because Lincoln once fudge his views to try and win some Democrat votes and in doing so approached nearer to Lee's pro-slavery views. That would be equivalent to calling Bismarck a communist for intoducing the state pension.
(August 14, 2017 at 6:32 pm)Rahul Wrote:(August 14, 2017 at 8:31 am)Tazzycorn Wrote: Well then why did they fire the first shot? The Confederate militia tried to force the US Army out of Fort Sumter as manoeuvring towards securing their sea flanks during what they saw as an inevitable war. They fired at the garrison in a deliberate act of war.
Even their conventions demanding to be alliwed secede were taken in the full knowledge those actions would provoke wae. Guess what? The Confederate leaders didn't care. They wanted war ever since they realised they could no longer control the federal government.
They fired the first shot because Lincoln was a crafty MF and Davis fell right into his trap. Lincoln never intended to let the Southern states leave. However, he also needed more support among the northern populations and the moral highground for starting the war.
Wrong. The constitution never intended for the Southern States to secede. That's why it was a treasonous at. And this was a constitution written by southern slave holders for southern slave holders. The fact of the matter is that by 1850 the leaders of the dixiecrats knew the writing was on the wall for slavery. Southern populations were stagnating, the territories were being populated by nortern abolitionists and Europeans thus potentially swinging the senate and electoral college against them. They were preparing for civil war from that moment on, and they declared it almost from the moment President Lincoln was elected by the will of the people. Once southern slaveholders didn't control tge Presidency they declared war on their country.
The Civil War was the Souths doing. Nobody elses.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Home