Slavery

I'm reading this thread with... let's say "shocked interest." First this statement I quoted... Yankees had slaves, too, (but not many by the time the Civil War started... it was mostly earlier in time) and I've not heard anyone in all my history studies over the years state differently. But this statement of "overwhelming majority"... well that's just not true. I'm not sure where that idea came from, but it didn't happen and wishing it were so isn't going to make it happen. "Overwhelming majority?!" The slave holders in the south, while some were probably Yanks, were mostly... yeah, southerners.

There were a few regiments of black soldiers, yep. (Although the ones that are coming to mind were from the north i.e. Massachusetts, so not sure about a whole regiment from the south... seems I read about one regiment at some point.)

Some of the higher number you quoted claimed to be "soldier" for their pensions, but in truth, sometimes they claimed the occupation of soldier when they had other jobs while serving. The 1890 census lists just over 3,000 African Americans claiming to be vets of the confederacy but not necessarily soldiers. (Of course some had died between '65 and '90.)

Oh, and for the record... your statement of "racially integrated Southern Army"... well, that made me chuckle, but I looked for a smiley face to show you were teasing, but there wasn't any. The southern army was far from racially integrated. Still not sure if you meant that as a serious statement or were teasing without a smiley icon?

 

Wow, what an insight! I had no idea that deporting the slaves was an option, but I can't believe that a serious one, I can't even imagine the expense and the lack of labor that the ones owning slaves and the state would have with that action.

 

Like so many racists, you only look at interpretations of data which support the view that African Americans are all mired in poverty and unable to do anything but live on handouts from white people. Did you notice who our president is? Many people took the colononization of Liberia seriously, and the Liberians still wonder why we abandoned them. Stop living in your white supremicist fantasy world.

look up the utube version of "Lorena" by John Hartford. There are two, and one has video and a lot of still photos. One of these is of three Confederate soldiers standing around a campfire. One of the three is clearly African-American. Check out the black sons of the Confederacy website.

 

I SINCERELY hope this wasn't directed at me. Because that would prove you didn't read what I said at all... and may point to a bit of trolling?

There was possibly one regiment of black Confederate soldiers in the Civil War. You can't rewrite history. And I didn't see anyone in this thread say anything negative about African Americans except... hmmm... maybe you.

And if you feel like answering a question there, Thomas, how would you possibly know what color *I* am, huh? Or other people here that have only an avatar?

But anyhow, your statements like "overwhelming majority" and "racially integrated" are the problem here... and some rewriting history but I tend to overlook that because I know not everyone is a scholar in Civil War history.

I hope you're not a racist, Thomas... there really isn't much place in society for them in today's world.

 

As I said, there was a small number of black Confederate soldiers. I've known this since my 8th grade history lessons. Lorena is a beautiful song enjoyed by the boys in both blue and gray.

I probably won't be looking that up, though... there's something not right about using uTube to get facts about history.

I've seen thousands and thousands of Civil War photographs and LOC holdings of the same. You won't be telling me about any photos I haven't already seen.

If you'd like to talk about where this anger of yours is coming from in a forum thread where people are simply discussing facts about an ugly part of our nation's history, I have a good listening ear.

 

One photo = 70,000 Black Confederates. To disagree is to be racist? I don't think so. To disagree is to use factual information to discern the past. It exists on its own terms, not the ones you set for it. The fact that there were no black confederates is not racist in the sense you are trying to make it. The fact that there were no black confederates under arms, but as forced laborers via Confederate laws conscripting their services says a lot. It also says a lot when we have documented proof of 180,000 black men serving under arms in the Union armies.

Stick to the past here. I have no idea where your modern ideas are and you definitely do not know mine. What I do see is that you are willfully distorting the past to make up a history that never existed.

 

I don't know where you got the idea that I live in a white supremacy fantasy world, but that is happening only in your head because I believe in equality. I know who the US president is, I was just interpreting what you said regarding the causes and consequences of the war.

 

I wouldn't worry about it, @Peninha ... I'm not even sure to whom that poster was talking, and I answered it, too. Fact is that I read this whole thread and no one (except that poster) said anything that was out of line. offensive, or disturbing.

I really wouldn't sweat it. I've enjoyed reading your thoughts and views in the threads here, so keep 'em coming!

 

Thanks Kate, as English is not my native language I thought I might have expressed myself incorrectly, but I am glad to see it just might have been some misunderstanding...

As for slavery itself I am glad to see that it belongs to the past, it's really something with no space in our days.

 

To say that

Unfortunately, slavery is still alive and thriving in some parts of the world. Have you heard of Boko Haram? Although slavery is not confined to Africa, it is still a major problem there.

To insist that African Americans are not capable of thriving in America or elsewhere without white (or black) overseers is racist. Despite the obstacles that "black" Americans have faced as long as they have been here, many have thrived (besides the criminals) . They did and do by hard work. Stop looking at half-truths.

 

Sure, slavery still exists and human traffic as well, but it's not something generalized and accepted as it used to be. I think whether we like it or not there are still many racist people, but in most countries in the world there is equality in the color of the skin more than in gender in some cases.

 

There is certainly less slavery in the world than there useed to be, but there is a great deal of it. Earlier today I heard one authorty state that over 40,000 people are held in illegal slavery in the US, and worldwide the number is over 20 million.

There is at least one Christian group who buys child slaves from their families in Africa, educates and cares for them, and then helps them to be free people. Slavery is ever right. Southernors were often shocked by how worse the conditions for factory workers in the North was than the conditions for most slaves in the South. Think Triangle Shirtwaist factory.

 

It's enough to go to China or to watch a documentary on TV about the working conditions there to see that those people are totally slaves, they live in the factories and they work 14-16 hours per day, what sort of life is this? Modern slavery...

 

The workers in China have better conditions than those in many other nations. Actual chattel slavery exists in the world today. Slavery is more than economic slavery. Africa may be the main culprit in the slave trade, but slavery is not limited to Africa and Africans. Prison labor in China sometimes qualifies as slavery, but factory workers in China go home to their homes, and live better than people in many countries, and their standard of living continues to improve.

 

What do you mean by chattel slavery thomas?

I am not saying that there aren't people living worse than the Chinese, in fact in African and other Asian countries the situation might be even worse, so slavery continues to exist indeed.

 

Chattel slavery is what you probably think of when you think of the legal slavery in America prior to the War Between the States. A chattel slave has the legal status of cattle and is the property of the owner for life, as is their offspring. The various states had limitations on that and gauranteed limited benefits and rights to the slaves, but that was not true of many nations outside the U.S. Actual slavery is far more than low wages. Best estimates are that there are about 40,000 chattel slaves illegally held in the U.S., while several million Americans besides illegal immigrants are living in poverty and perhaps economic slavery. There are no chattel slaves legally held in the U.S., unless in foreign embassies.

 

Wow, a lively discussion. Let me see if I can add to it.

Going back to causes of the ACW: Slavery did not cause the ACW, but was, in fact, behind many of the factors which did cause the ACW. The war was caused by the cessession of the South from the union because a Republican was elected POTUS, without even being on the ballot in most of the South. They feared the unknown; the Orators of the South painted him as a huge boogie-man using many falsehoods.

But the Republican Party was formed in 1854 in responce to the Missouri Compromise of 1850. And behind this was the institute of Slavery.

And as someone pointed out, Lincoln was NOT a hard-core abolitionist. But to listen to the South's Orators one would believe otherwise.

Another cause as espounded upon by these Orators was the economic explotation of the South by the North. It was crops of the South (cotton, tobacco) which created at least a plurality of the nation's wealth, but it was stolen from them by Northern Bankers and Northern Shippers.

One thing which I did not see mentioned in the discussion so far was how slavery continued in the South even after the war. Through corrupt practises associated with sharecropping but moreso through the "legal slaves" -- emprisoned laborers. Poor folks, especially poor black men, were all-too-often given long sentences for petty "crimes" just to create a labor-pool of virtual slaves (or worse-than-slaves).

 

Yes, slavery continued after the war because it's hard for the authorities to control everything. It's such a big country that it's hard to change habits and even more to change mentalities, even today the south is a little more racist than the north I believe.

 

Racism in the South tends to be overt, whereas racism in the North is covert but more prevalent. More racial violence exists in the North. Years ago my ex-wife went with a Christian group to observe a KKK rally and was surprised to find that it was catered by a local black BBQ vendor. I have known Klansmen who had black friends, they came to the back door when they visited. I am not defended the Klan, just commenting on the hypocrisy. Seems to be a human trait.

 

Yes, we are hypocrites by nature and we are entitled to have our own beliefs, but we should not act as superior or pretend that other people are inferior to us because that is simply not true and slavery is of course against the law...