- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: LeVar Burton shocked to discover he's descended from a Confederate soldier
Posted on 1/22/24 at 12:44 pm to QJenk
Posted on 1/22/24 at 12:44 pm to QJenk
quote:
Well, yea. This isn't exactly shocking. Slave owners raped their slaves. We knew this already.
Re-read it. While trying to be as inflammatory as possible with the "woman born into slavery", they conspicuously left out if she was still a slave or a free woman at the time of the deed. I'm guessing since his great-grandpappy was off fighting a war up to the age of 18, it likely was a consensual pairing with a free woman.
This country has a long history of mixed-raced affairs. I'd bet that almost every black American outside the deep South (and not from Africa) and more than 85% in the south has partial white ancestry.
This post was edited on 1/22/24 at 12:53 pm
0
Posted on 1/22/24 at 12:45 pm to Privateer 2007
Are there any good books regarding the motivations for the war? Something not driven by propaganda.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 12:50 pm to Darth_Vader
I always wonder if an independent CSA would have been similar to other western nations, or more like Apartheid South Africa. I always assumed there would be a splintering, with Texas going its own way, possible taking Louisiana with it. New England was always itching to secede. Maybe you end up with 7 or 8 different countries with a similar feel to Europe. There is plenty of fiction about just such an occurrence.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 12:57 pm to Locoguan0
quote:
I always wonder if an independent CSA would have been similar to other western nations, or more like Apartheid South Africa.
Slavery was on its way out either way. With the onset of the Industrial Revolution, the need for large numbers of workers in the fields was diminishing and would all but be gone within a couple of decades. The only question is what would be the status of blacks in a post-slavery CSA. I’m highly doubtful they’d be allowed rights and citizenship. Instead I’d imagine they would do something similar as the Liberia experiment where they sent blacks back to Africa or encouraged them to settle in other countries like Mexico or the US. But we can only guess about such matters.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 12:59 pm to Rouge
quote:
when you weren't counting the black skin and red skin folks, you can make stats looks pretty good.
Commanders.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:01 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:that's the stupidest thing i have ever heard. the vast majority of people could not read or write past 4th grade.
Literacy rates in the US were higher in 1850, over 90%, than they are today, 79%.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:03 pm to mdomingue
quote:I agree.
Just thought that site was cool to share.
quote:I agree.
I kind of took what you said to be more of an affirmation than anything else. I believe we are in agreement here and if we have any disagreements it would be minimal.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:03 pm to Locoguan0
quote:
I always wonder if an independent CSA would have been similar to other western nations, or more like Apartheid South Africa. I always assumed there would be a splintering, with Texas going its own way, possible taking Louisiana with it. New England was always itching to secede. Maybe you end up with 7 or 8 different countries with a similar feel to Europe. There is plenty of fiction about just such an occurrence.
This, but like 4-5 different countries. Texas would fight and I think win for Louisiana because of ports. Other states would eventually combine.
I could see Texas/Louisiana, a huge country in the SE from Kentucky to Mississippi to Florida, East coast South Carolina to Virgnia, then Everything West of Texas would eventually become it's own country.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:09 pm to CatfishJohn
This story just don't fit the narrative, man
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:12 pm to Privateer 2007
quote:
But, do people really believe...
1) war was over solely slavery
2)hundreds of thousands of men in a nation of what 20-30 million would take up arms over slavery?
You may want to read the Articles of Secession from MS, GA, TX, VA and SC. Slavery was main reason listed by the (at least) those states.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:14 pm to EnglebertHumperdink
quote:Bear in mind that there are two separate matters.
Are there any good books regarding the motivations for the war? Something not driven by propaganda.
(1) Motivations for secession, and
(2) Motivations for war.
Preservation of slavery was clearly the cause for secession. The Articles of Secession are remarkably clear, and they are written by the people who decided to secede. There's no hidden agenda or propaganda.
Preservation of the Confederacy was clearly the cause for the war. Confederate troops fired on Fort Sumter to remove Union troops from property owned by the Union.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:20 pm to EnglebertHumperdink
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/16/24 at 7:08 pm
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:22 pm to DarthRebel
quote:
My Dad's side has has a few African
Grandma had a phrase to describe that
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:25 pm to Salviati
quote:
Preservation of slavery was clearly the cause for secession. The Articles of Secession are remarkably clear, and they are written by the people who decided to secede. There's no hidden agenda or propaganda.
i'll never defend the idea of slavery but "preservation of slavery" is always a broad scope and dog whistling for the North saying "we'd like to take a major part of your income and (ill begotten via the 3/5 compromise) political power so that the north has power financially and politically over the south."
slavery was terrible full stop and i'm glad it's gone, but the north wanted to to cripple the south for politics and that's fairly well documented more than their concern for slaves.
This post was edited on 1/22/24 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:41 pm to 3nOut
quote:This looks like reasons why slaveholding states wanted to keep slavery intact. I don't disagree that these are reasons why southern states chose secession. But it does mean slavery caused secession. BTW - Slaves were 3/5 but freed slaves are 5/5; thus, more political power if slaves were free.
"preservation of slavery" is always a broad scope and dog whistling for the North saying "we'd like to take a major part of your income and (ill begotten via the 3/5 compromise) political power so that the north has power financially and politically over the south."
quote:Assuming without conceding that this is true, the Articles of Secession make barely any reference to it. What they do reference, and clearly do so, is preservation of slavery.
the north wanted to to cripple the south for politics and that's fairly well documented more than their concern for slaves.
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:55 pm to Salviati
i wasn't saying slavery didn't cause secession. going down that line of reasoning is always stupid to me. of course it's always over slavery.
i'm saying that the north wanting to take away slavery via the federal route without the south having any say in it is why they did secede.
not directing this at you, but people spend too much time arguing the morality of slavery for the reason as opposed to somebody in NYC getting to tell somebody in Alabama what they can do.
if the south had all the voting power now and managed to outlaw public transportation and multitenant housing, the north would be in an uproar, rightfully so.
we are ok with the outcome because we mostly agree with the moral results
i'm saying that the north wanting to take away slavery via the federal route without the south having any say in it is why they did secede.
not directing this at you, but people spend too much time arguing the morality of slavery for the reason as opposed to somebody in NYC getting to tell somebody in Alabama what they can do.
if the south had all the voting power now and managed to outlaw public transportation and multitenant housing, the north would be in an uproar, rightfully so.
we are ok with the outcome because we mostly agree with the moral results
This post was edited on 1/22/24 at 2:00 pm
Posted on 1/22/24 at 1:58 pm to 3nOut
New plate on LaVar's caddy
Posted on 1/22/24 at 2:00 pm to Darth_Vader
Posted on 1/22/24 at 2:01 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
This is a myth that won’t die. Literacy rates in the US were higher in 1850, over 90%, than they are today, 79%.
Really? Where do you get that data from? Literacy in the US now is in the 99% range. You may be thinking of proficiency. Though I doubt it was better then than now as well. Heck, world literacy is in the 87% range.
Here is what I found
https://nces.ed.gov/naal/lit_history.asp
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cross-country-literacy-rates?country=USA~OWID_WRL~MEX~CAN~GBR
Posted on 1/22/24 at 3:15 pm to EnglebertHumperdink
quote:
good books on war motivation
Lincoln and the first shot
Basically, assertion that Lincoln desperately wanted south to fire first and goaded them into fort Sumpter.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News