Changing history

[Drich]

Has anyone see this you tube video?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tqfLr2XtXf0
Someone posted it on Facebook and the following is my response:

It seems the colonel is not too familiar with lincoln's actual thoughts on the matter:

"As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free.

A. Lincoln"

http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/linc...reeley.htm

Just one month after writing this letter, Lincoln issued his first Emancipation Proclamation, which announced that at the beginning of 1863, he would use his war powers to free all slaves in states still in rebellion (as they came under Union control).

If slavery was a moral issue for the north then why did Lincoln wait till the north was loosing to emancipate them? Why did he fire generals for freeing slaves as they marched on southern bordered states? Why did he write this proclamation giving confederate 100 days to stop fighting OR threaten them with freeing their slaves? Why did Lincoln write this letter?

Wouldn't "morality" mandate that the slaves be free no matter what?

I know people want to spin the southerners who fought for control over slavery (I'm not pretending the southerners didn't want control over slaves) were evil because they wanted to keep and control slaves. While the north did not. The truth is only abolitionist wanted free slaves, not northerners in general. Lincoln by his own words was not an abolitionist.

What I am saying is the battle was not over the "moral issue" of freeing slaves as the colonel seemingly is misinformed on. (Again, if the issue was a moral one why didn't the emancipation proclamation free slaves in the ' non rebellious states? Or on 9-22-1862 warn the confederate states that he would emancipate all of the confederate slaves if they did not end their rebellion. On 1-1-1863 Lincoln freed the southern slaves.)

This war was fought over the control of slavery. But again not as a moral issue. It was fought over who had control of the slaves, and the trigger point to the war was again not abolitionist proposal to free all slaves. but the fact that Lincoln was elected without a single electoral vote cast in his favor by the southern states. That is why the civil war started right after he was elected, not because he promised to free all slaves. The southern states knew they had no say/power in Washington. They lost control in the union, and want to establish a new nation so they could govern themselves.
http://video.pbs.org/video/2365356586/

As per his letter Lincoln was not one to rock the boat on slavery, he just wanted what was good for the nation. Ultimately he was forced to concede to freeing the slaves as it was needed inorder to save the country.

Again 9/22/1862 he tried to put the country back together by not freeing the slaves but failed.

Which means the colonel was absolutely wrong. Because if it was a moral issue for the north, Lincoln would not have offered the south this deal giving 100 days to stop fighting.
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-histo...oclamation

The colonel's message is a perfect example of 'the victors' trying to write history. Those who control history, control how and what people think!!!

LOOK THIS STUFF UP YOURSELF EVERYONE the truth is real freedom! Don't let me or some colonel tell you what to believe, our collective history is out there. Engage it explore it for yourselves, we have awesome tools at our disposal that puts truth at your finger tips.
But, only if you are so inclined to not let someone tell you what to believe or think. Because if we do not accurately remember our past we will be doomed to repeat it.

[Drich]

It's like no one cares about truth anymore. People just want someone who looks smart and is well dressed to tell them what to think and do.

[Napoléon]

It's like no one cares about truth anymore.

Drich:

Putting the "Rich" into Drich since March 2012.

[Iroscato]

People just want someone who looks smart and is well dressed to tell them what to think and do.

Well Morgan Freeman did look extremely dapper in that white suit in Bruce Almighty. I can almost see the appeal in prostrating yourself before such a figure. Almost.

[Drich]

People just want someone who looks smart and is well dressed to tell them what to think and do.

Well Morgan Freeman did look extremely dapper in that white suit in Bruce Almighty. I can almost see the appeal in prostrating yourself before such a figure. Almost.

Maybe that is why they use him to voice over so many educational shows..

[Drich]

It's like no one cares about truth anymore.

Drich:

Putting the "Rich" into Drich since March 2012.

What I was referring to is the comment box on youtube and on face book where just about everything I read was people agreeing with the colonel because of his rank and position. Not one of them for or against him sought a single citation to support his claims. all comments were directed at him or his position.

Again, little concern was about actual truth. It was about who he was and how he was dressed. Maybe that's why hitler always appeared in a military style uniform as well. it demands respect to the point that people abandon common sense and truth.

[Napoléon]

Again, little concern was about actual truth. It was about who he was and how he was dressed. Maybe that's why hitler always appeared in a military style uniform as well. it demands respect to the point that people abandon common sense and truth.

Kind of like how the Pope puts on a fancy robe and everyone bows down to his ultimate wisdom? Or any cardinal, priest or guy with a white collar, for that matter...

[Iroscato]

Again, little concern was about actual truth. It was about who he was and how he was dressed. Maybe that's why hitler always appeared in a military style uniform as well. it demands respect to the point that people abandon common sense and truth.

Kind of like how the Pope puts on a fancy robe and everyone bows down to his ultimate wisdom? Or any cardinal, priest or guy with a white collar, for that matter...

's kinda what I was going for, but yours is more eloquent.

[Nope]

Have your read the Cornerstone Speech by the Vice President of the Confederate States? You might find this interesting, Drich

It is actually a very long boring speech to read but here it is.

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/libra...ne-speech/

There is more to the speech and he touches on things like tariffs but he also discusses slavery's place in their new country.

The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the “rock upon which the old Union would split.” He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the “storm came and the wind blew.”

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us.

Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails.

I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal.

[robvalue]

The only thing you can be sure about is death and taxes. And scientists may soon get rid of death.